HomeMy WebLinkAbout1957-11-19MINUTES
OF THE
HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION
Council Chambers, City Hall
Huntington Beach, California
Tuesday, November 19, 1957
Early Session Prior
to Public Hearines An early session was called to order from 6:30 P.M.
to 7:30 P. M. to act upon matters not requiring a
Public hearing.
Commissioners Present: Bazil, Stang, Bardwell, Presson, Liles, Davis, and
Schryer.
Commissioners_ Absent: None.
Minutes On motion by Davis and seconded by Stang, the minutes
of the Huntington Beach Planning Commission of Tuesday, October 29, 1957 and
Tuesday, November 5, 1957, as transcribed and mailed by the Secretary, were
accepted as mailed.
Ocean View School
Conditional Permit Chairman Bazil.opened the hearing for -Ocean View
School District request for a conditional permit.to construct a new elemen-
tary school at the NE corner of "B" Street and Wintersburg Avenue.
The Secretary gave the report which requested offers for dedication
from the School District for the "B" Street and Wintersburg Avenue widening.
It was pointed out that the request was not new, it being imposed by the
Planning Commission of the County of Orange prior to the School Boards acquistion
of the site. 'It was further explained that interior streets of the Tract
whereupon the school site lies were abandoned by the County in good faith that
other requirements would be met. The amount of land from abandoned streets
is approximately equal to the area requested for street widening. The Commissioners
were informed that the School Board could not be held by law to enforce the
request, however it was pointed out that the Commission's request should be
made a matter of record to facilitate bargaining power with the School Board
at a later date and also to prove the Commission's desires for good planning.
The report elaborated that the street widening was necessary for "B" Street
at the present time, and for Wintersburg Avenue at a later date; for fire pro-
tection reasons and for the safety and welfare of the children attending the
school.
Page 2
On motion by Stang and seconded by Davis -
RECOYIEND APPROVAL WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. That all the school property required for the widening of Wintersburg
Avenue to 95 feet north of existing centerline and east of the present
City Limits be offered for dedication for street purposes.
2. That all that school property required for the widening of "B" Street
to 15 feet east of existing property line be offered for dedication for
street purposes.
Motion carried.
Resolution No. 46 A resolution of the Planning Commission of the
Change By -Laws
City of Huntington Beach adopting a revision of
policy to be inserted in the By -Laws to establish the first and third
Tuesday of every month as a day scheduled for the regular meeting of the
Planning Commission.
A motion was made by Schryer and seconded by Liles.to pass a
resolution adopting the above declaration.
Roll call vote was taken as follows:
AYES: Bazil, Presson, Babdwell, Stang, Davis, Schryer and Liles.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
Motion was carried.
Informal Discussion Until 7:30 P.M. an informal discussion was held
on the following subjects: Parking district boundaries, fire protection
in the north annexation, Master Land Use Plan progress, and progress report
_`$'om W. L. Weybright, Planning Consultant Associate.
Variance: Custom Chairman Bazil opened the public hearing for a Use
Drilling Company
Variance for Custom Drilling Company to permit a
moved -in structure to be used as a business office and to permit the premises
to be used for storage of oil drilling equipment. The premises are located
approximately 1150 feet north of.Garfield Avenue on the east side of Highway 39•
Howard Trabant, 8501 Yorktown Street, Huntington Beach, addressed
the Commission and pointed out that property owners in his section had built
many good homes fronting the highway and that although it was some distance
from his property he requested the Commission to follow through with their
original intentions of creating residential districts in the area under con-
sideration.
Page 3
Upon lengthy discussion of the problems involved, the Commissioners
ruled that the area must be brought up to higher standards.
Motion was made by Schryer and seconded by Stang to
RECOMMEND DENIAL. -
Motion was carried.
Conditional Exception A public hearing was held for a conditional exception
William W. Grant
request of William W. Grant following a report by
the Secretary. Property is located at 930 Tenth Street and described as
Lots 30 and 31, Block 805, Wesley Park Tract.
Protests from the following property owners' were heard:
Jack Robertson, 931 Tenth Street Robert Long, 925 Tenth Street
Al Greer, 922 Tenth Street Anna Grable, 950 Tenth Street
The above owners indicated that because of the newer homes across
the street and because of the integrity of the well kept neighborhood, they
feared the erection of multiple type small bungalows which would generally -
lower surrounding property values.
Schryer expressed -the opinion that since the applicant had not
furnished the Commission with any concrete plans except a sketch of the
property, approval should not be recommended as it would loave the property
owners unprotected.
Bazil observed that it was a higher type of neighborhood that should
be protected until such time as the new zoning comes into effect. It was
pointed out that the zoning was tentatively planned as R-2 on the Master
Land Use Plan which would give the applicant possibly another by later when
the new zoning requirements would be more stringent.
Motion was made by Stang and seconded by Schryer to
7
REC=-TEND DENIAL. Roll Call Vote - AYES 5, NOES, :2..n, ABSENT, none.
Motion carried.
Conditional Permit Chairman Bazil asked for the Secretary's report.
Southern California Edison
Ocean View Sub -Station The Secretary pointed out that the Sub -station had
been there for many years and was now anon -conforming use. The School.
Authorities of the new Ocean View School at "B" Street were aware of the
Edison facilities and should expect an increase in power equipment from time 11
to time.
Page 4
1
1
,1
The report recommended a condition attached requiring the Edison
Company to dedicate 5 feet along their east boundary property line for the
widening of."B" Street. Preliminary reports from the City Engineer's office
and the Fire Department indicated the advisability of widening "B" Street
for safety reasons explained by W. L. Weybright, Planning Consultant rep-
resentative.
A public hearing was held. There was no comment from the audience
except the representative for the applicant.
Norman Kuch, representative for Southern California Edison on zoning
matters, addressed the Commission and stated that he was not previously in-
formed that 5 feet would be requested from the property for dedication. He
elaborated by stating that they were opposed to relinquishing the property
in conjunction with the granting of a conditional permit. And that there was
no objection to widening "B" Street, but that there was objection to the
manner in which it is to -be accomplished. He further challenged the legality
of the condition imposed.
The Commission after some discussion expressed an opinion that if
it is within legal limits, it is a reasonable request.
Bazil pointed out his own case where the City of Fullerton required
dedication of both land and improvements.
Motion by Stang and seconded by Davis to
RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH THE FOLL dING CONDITIONS:
1. That the Southern California Edison Company be required to offer
for dedication to the City of Huntington Beach a 5 foot strip of land legally
described as the east 5 feet of lots 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16 for right-
of-way purposes without improvements. And that said fence enclosing this five
feet be reinstalled five feet west of its present location. This condition
shall only be included with the recommendation for approval if it is deemed
to be a legally imposed condition in the opinion of the City Attorney.
Use Variance A report was read by the Secretary which declared
Joseph Alliano
the existing site too small for two proposed uses
of Barber Shop and Hardware store. The existing site being located at the
SW corner of Aldrich and Highway 39 is dimensioned 50 feet by 100 feet for
a total of 5000 square feet. It was further stated that the site lies
M
Page 5
adjacent to the perimeter of a planned commercial zoning area. It was also
noted that houses were in close proximity to the site and each other.
Mrs. Del K. Niederhiser, 1077 West lst Street, Santa Ana, California
wrote a letter to the Planning Commission stating that she owned the house
adjacent to the site and that she wished to protest the use of the lot for
two stores,.because of the size of the premises. She had no objections to
one use or the other.
Chairman Bazil opened the hearing to the public. There were no
protests heard. There were the following property owners who spoke atainst
the letter of protest and in favor of the petition for hardware and barber
shop business:
Ray Murray, 17411 Huntington Beach Blvd.
William H. Guilliams, 401 Montana, Monrovia, California
Roderick F. Nagle, 7942 Aldrich
Others not identified.
It was the consensus of the Commission, that the proposed businesses
were too extensive for the property in question.
Joseph Alliano, the applicant, addressed the Commission and explained
that his hardware store would mostly consist of gardening equipment and that
he was aware of the improvements which had to be made. He asked the Commission
for permission to submit an alternate plan if this did not meet approval with
the Commission.
There being no objections, Chairman Bazil continued the hearing
until next meeting on December 3. 1957, for futher study.
Master Parking Plan W.L. Weybright, Planning Consultant Representative,
Review of Alternatives
was asked by the Chairman to make a presentation of
possible alternatives for the original Master Parking Plan.
Weybright pointed out to the Commission that two complete and
separate studies with the resulting Master Parking Plan and Alternate Master
Plan have been made.
He emphasized that his first chioce and preference would be for the
original Master Parking Plan. It was explained that the first alternate
plan,would in his estimation be a bare minimum. Even though the Council
has not attempted to act on either plan, he expressed the opinion that there
was strong possibility of enacting a major portion of Original Master Plan "A".
Page 6
After exhaustive and thorough re-evaluation of previous studies, he stated
that he has completed a final research study with additional information and
concludes that any major deviation from Master Parking Plan "A" would handi-
cap the necessary financing program. lie reiterated the necessity of having
a sound financing program.
At this point Weybright conducted a blackboard review to make com-
parative computations of a plan suggested by the Planning Commission recently,
and Original Plan "A" with only one change. The Planning Commission had
suggested the possibility of excluding the -lot composed of Section A of the
Trailer Park in their proposal. The one change that Weybright advocated for
original plan "A" was a change of lot D to the SEly corner of 5th Street and
Olive Avenue.
By use of the calculations demonstrated on the blackboard, Weybright
concluded that the Planning Commission proposal was not a sound financial risk
compared to his advocated plan. He advised that Section A of the Trailer Park
was a virtual necessity to secure sound financing.
A long and detailed discussion followed Weybright's review. It was
expressed by opinion of the Commissioner's that it would be expedient to have
an alternate lot on the SEly corner of 3rd and Walnut in the event one of the
lots near the beach were rejected. Weybright said that he felt the alternate
lot would be too close to the main lot on the Nwly corner of 3rd and Walnut,
however he said he would be willing to leave it up to the bonding firm's
decision, acting in advisory capacity to the Parking District Authority.
On the basis of this opinion, a motion was made by Schryer and
seconded by Davis to recommend a.resoULtion for following described Master
Parking Plan hereinafter described as Master Parking Plan "A".amended.
Master Parking Shall consist of Lots A. B, C, D and Beach Pad. Section
Plan "A" Amended.
A of the Municipal Trailer Park as was described in
original Master Parking Plan "A", except that Lot D shall be relocated to the
SEly corner of 5th and Olive. Thereshall also be included within Master
Parking Plan "A" an alternate lot X located at the SEly corner of 3rd and
Walnut, which may be used to supplant any lot or lots in the plan if so directed
by the Parking District Authority. A member of the bonding firm shall be
represented in the Parking District Authority.
Page 7
Roll call vote AYES: 7, NOES: None, ABSENT: None
Commissioner
Abstains Commissioner Presson refrained from participation in
Edison request for Ocean View Conditional Permit previonaly
considered during this meeting and was dismissed entirely preceding an Edison
petition considered for reclassification of zoning on Garfield Avenue.
Southern California Edison Chairman Bazil opened the hearing for Edison
Petition for Rezoning
S. Garfield, E-Hwy 39 petition requesting a change of zone from R-4
to 11-1-0 with the M-1-0 classification amended to permit public utility service
yards. The property under consideration is situated approximately 560 feet
east of Highway 39 on the south side of Garfield with frontage of 330 feet,
depth 660 feet.
It will be noted that a Planning Commission proposal for possible
rezoning of property surrounding the Edison Company premises was considered
simultaneously with the Edison petition and that the entire northwest quarter
of SEC 1, T.6.S., R.U.W. was posted for public hearing. -
The Secretary read a letter ff'om Charles H. Thatcher, trustee of
Aldrich R. Peck, large property holding group in the Garfield Street area,
which includes the Edison property. Thatcher went on record as being in
favor of rezoning to light industrial for the Garfield block.
C. D. Shedenhelm, District Manager for Edison Company, addressed
the Commission and explained that his firm was only interested in rezoning
their specific parcel 330 x 660 feet. He stated that the site was chosen be-
cause it was desirable from the traffic standpoint to have the Edison yard
located on the east side of Highway 39, and that it is reasonably close Co.
existing M-2-0 located on the west side of Highway 39. He outlined the
problems involved in the land acquisition and indicated that a conditional
permit would not be suitable for his firm as it was not considered to be
sufficiently controlled. He exhibited a large neat appearing architectural
perspective of the proposed building.
Mrs. Dabney, 8081 Garfield, addressed the Commission to state that
she had no objection to the Edison proposal,'except that she would definitely
oppose any other attemt to resone to M-1 in that area. She felt that it was
primarily residential and any major change would be detrimental to those" who
have invested in newer homes.
Page 8
Howard Trabant, 8051 Yorktown, addressed the Commission and
expressed only slight objection to the Edison installation. He asked for
protection for those hones situated at the rear where the Edison would have
pole yard with unlandscaped chain link fence.
Mrs. Trask, property owner on Yorktown, expressed sentiments
similar to Howard Trabant.-
Carl Steverson, 19172 H. B. Blvd. (office) contended that while
there may be no strong objection to the Edison facilities as such, they
should be controlled to protect the surrounding individuals.
Joe Capocciama, 19232 H. B. Blvd., stated that he had no objection
to the Edison facility as it is shown, however he declafed himself to be
violently opposed to.any further industrial or other uses in the neighborhood
which would be detrimental to the new residences that many of the property
owners have recently built.
C. S.-Johnson, 19362 H. B. Blvd., explained to the Commission that
-he had built a new home in good faith. He proceeded to inform the Commission
that he and the adjoining property owners had opposed a proposal in recent
years made by the Orange County Planning Commission to rezone the area from
residential uses. He said that he nor his neighbor's viewpoints have not
changed.
Weybright Renders
Joint Opinion Chairman Bazil upon hearing all arguments given from the
audience, questioned Weybright in regards to the obstacles to rezoning the
Edison parcel.
Weybright reported that he, the City Attorney and the Planning
Technician had held a conference at Bauer's office the morning of the Planning
Commission meeting to discuss all possiblities for rezoning. A visiting
lawyer was also asked to give his legal viewpoint during the conference.
Three possibilities were considered.
1. Spot zone Edison parcel only: This could be legally challenged in a
coutt of law, because it would demonstrate arbitrary discrimination without
justification for the applicant.
2. The entire surrounding area could be rezoned without partiality: How—
ever this would require support from the surrounding property owners and
would involve a long and incumbersome legal maneuver to accomplish.
Page 9
3. A conditional permit could be granted: This could easily be accomplished
without endangering the Interim Zoning Ordinance.
Weybright stated that he wqs entirely in favor of Edison's proposed _
facilities. However he argued that the third possibility, a conditional
permit, was the only logical, solution to the problem. He emphasized the
illegality of the first possibility, and the public sentiment against the
second possibility.
He elaborated further by explaindng that a conditional permitwas
designed specifically for use in such casys, and that the undertaking of
removing the existing emergency zoning ordinance would be sheer folly under
the circumstances. He then asked Mr. Kuch, Edison representative, if he
could explain his objections to a conditional permit.
Mr. Kuch said that his firm opposed'a conditional permit for an
expensive installation of this type. He estimated that the cost would be
around a quarter of a million dollars. He further added that while the site
would not be added to in the future•, they had planned expansion within the
fenced premises. He said that the firm wished to be free to develop the
premises as would be required in the future.
There being no further comment from the audience, the Chairman
closed the hearing to the public. He added his opinion that to grant a zone
change in this specific location would pave the way for the granting of zone
changes in specific locations in other areas.
There was lengthy discussion among the Commissioners and it was
1
1
noted that strong public sentiment was not in essence against the Edison facilities
but against general, industry within the area.
A motion made by Davis and seconded by Bardwell to recommend denial
of the Edison petition to rezone, with the stipulation that_a conditional
permit would be favorably considered.
Roll Call Vote AYES: six, NOES: none, ABSTAINED: one, ABSENT: none
The meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
Clifford E. Tripp r
Secretary