Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1958-05-20I VOIRMOM OF THE HUNTINGTON BEACH PLAIvIM COMMISSION Council Chambers Huntington Beach, California Tuesday, I'l.ay 20th, 1958 Commissioners Present: Liles, Davis, Schryer, Bazil, Stang, Presson, Sork. Commissioners Absent: None. Minutes: On motion by Stang and seconded by Davis, the minutes of the Huntington Beach Planning Commission of Tuesday, May 6th, 1958, and Wednesday, May 14th, 1958, as transcribed and mailed by the Secretary were accepted as mailed. C010ITICNAL EXCEPTION: UV 119 The -resubmitted petition requested Arnlicant - Assembly of God Church: permission to construct a Sunday School Education building in variance to R-2 Zoning District regulations of Article 933. Located at 611 - llth Street, and legally described as Lots 13 & 15, Block 611, H. B. Tract. The Secretary read the report -recommendations, prior to opening the hearing to the audience. Chris King, 617 - llth Street, Huntington Beach, addressed the Commission and advised them that he vigorously opposed the variance request. He stated that the interior of the block was not the proper location for a church because of the noise and inadequate -parking. He stated that he would suffer a three thousand dollar property valuation loss if it is granted. C. R. Minear, 209 Quincy, Huntington Beach, addressed the Comm- ission and stated that he owned 2 lots in the next block, and that he per- sonally was -in favor of the variance. He stated that he had no grievance concerning the location of the applicant church. W. M. Roberts, 624 - llth Street, Huntington Beach, addressed the Commission and stated that he ovmed his home directly across the street. Prior to listing his arguments, he informed the Commission that he was one of the organizers of his own church, and that he has supported church activities throughout his life. He vigorously opposed the variance, although he had no personal grievance against the Church itself. He said that his church had provided ample off-street parking, and that it was proving out to be wotthwhile. He felt that the applicant's desire to expand on an interior lot would prove fruitless without the necessary off-street parking, and that 2 Page 2. Minutes - H. B. Planning Commission May 20th, 1958 6 spaces would be inadequate as a solution to the problem. He asked for denial of the petition because the parking problem was devaluating neigh- borhood property. Mrs. Theo. Miles, 607 - llth Street, Huntington Beach, addressed the Commission and stated she vigorously opposed the proposed variance. She elaborated by saying that the congregation should have the right to worship and in the manner in which they see fit, but she said she did not believe the congregation had the right to disturb the peace of the neighborhood or to create the general nuisance that currently exists. She pointed out park- ing as being a problem also. She felt that a noisy congregation did not belong in the nieghborhood. She cited specific grievances. Birdie L. Bunnell, 620 - llth Street, Huntington Beach, addressed the Commission and complained of the parking problems and told of instances where he could only park at a great distance from his own property. He objected to the granting of the variance. Rev. Walter Barnard, Pastor of the applicant Church, addressed Ovals the Commission and told of the efforts of his congregation making to fix up the old Church building, and that it was his desire and that of the congre- gation to cooperate with residents of the neighborhood. He asked for con- sideration for the Sunday School education building, an item urgently needed for the children in the church. Mrs. W. M. Roberts, 624 - llth Street, Huntington Beach, addressed the Commission and asked Rev. Barnard if painting only one wall of the Church was an example of the effort he was speaking of. Rev. Barnard stated that it was only temporary, and that it would be finished shortly. Further debate was heard from Chris King, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Bazil argued that although parking problem currently exists, the addition of a sunday school classroom would not greatly affect the situation, especially with the provision for the six new parking spaces. Commissioner Schryer argued that recommending approval of the proposed variance would not be contrary to the Master Planning for the area, because the new zoning regulations are slated to have parking requirements equal to that which are currently being requested. He further argued that the new zoning regulations if adopted would allow the church building into I EC Page 3. I•iinutes _ H. B. Planning Commission ' Dray 20th, 1958 the area under a use permit, and that it is likely that the same conditions would be attached. The Commission recommended that a lawn be included among the conditions, it being agreeable to the church. A motion was made by Liles and seconded by Davis to RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH THE FOLL010 NG CONDITIONS: SIDE YARD WALL 1. There shall be a concrete block or other type of masonry wall built to a height of five feet along the northeasterly side of Lot 15, Block 611, H. B. Tr., excepting in the front yard area where the wall shall be 3 feet in height. RETAINING WALL 2. There shall be a concrete retaining wall of equivalent specifications and a continuation of that retaining wall which presently exists on Lots 9 and 11 of the same block, except that steps may be provided where the applicant deems appropriate. RELOCATION OF EDISON POLE 3. The existing Edison Co. power line pole shall be relocated from its present position on Lot 13 to another location which is not within the area described as the rear 30 feet of Lots 13 and 15 of Block 611, H. B. Tract. The expense of the power pole relocation shall not be borne by the City. PARKING FACILITIES 4. There shall be paved parking facilities provided on the rear 30 feet of Lots 13 and 15, Block 611, H. B. Tract, requiring a changing of the site plan to locate the structure 5 feet closer to the front of the lot. LANDSCAPING 5. There shall be a lawn planted and maintained in the front yard area of Lot 13 and 15, Block 611, H. B. Tract. FINAL INSPECTION 6. The Building Inspector shall not place approval on final building inspection, nor shall the structure be occupied, until all conditions of this variance are complied with to the fullest extent. Roll Call Vote: AYES: Liles, Davis, Schryer, Bazil, Stang, Presson, Sork. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. The motion carried. Page 4. Minutes - H. B. Planning Commission May 20th, 1958 USE VARIANCE UV 118 The petition requests permission for a Applicant - Fred C. Gonzales: duplex dwelling unit to be constructed in an A-1 General Agricultural District in variance to Orange County Land Use Ord. No. 351: Located approximately 200 feet west of Highway 39 on the south side of Stark Street, and legally described as Lot 87, Tract 417. The report -recommendations were read by the Secretary prior to opening the public hearing. Michael Grejada,acting agent for the applicant, addressed the Commission, described the property, and the surrounding conditions. He asked for consideration. Wm. H. Guilliams, 401 Montana, Monrovia, Calif., addressed the Commission and explained that he owned the lots on the NW corner of Highway 39 and Stark Street. He wanted to go on record as being in favor of the duplex. Following a short debate, a motion was made by Schryer and seconded by Stang to RECO12END APPROVAL WITHOUT CONDITIONS. Roll Call Vote: AYES: Liles, Davis, Schryer, Dazil, Stang, Presson, Sork. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. The motion was carried. CO11PLETE REVIEW PROPOSED ZONING REGULATIONS: W. L. Weybright, Planning Consultant representative, addressed the Commission and proceeded on a three hour study session which was high- lighted by the following topics: A. Creating a new district called OF District (Oil Field District). B. Creating a new type of Industrial District particularly suited to the needs of'the Town of Wintersburg. C. Creating a U District (Unclassified District) for the Tidelands. D. Creation of a 300 ft. set -back Plan Line on the West and East side of Highway 39, preventing surface oil drilling within these limits. The entire set of proposed regulations were reviewed, and %bright stated that he intended to make several changes and improvements on the original proposal. cJ Page 5. Minutes _ H. B. Planning Conmi.ssion May 20th, 1958 ANNOUNCEI-ENT OF APPOINTT•ENT: The Secretary made a formal announcement: that both Commissioners Presson and Bazil were reappointed for another four year term to fill their own vacancies, their new expiration date being . September 20, 1961. RECOMMENDATION FOR PLANNING DIRECTOR: A debate was held ooncerning the appointment for Planning Director. W. L. Weybright addressed the Commission and stated that he was in favor of appointing the present Secretary -Planning -Technician to the job at Range 37, Step C. He elaborated by pointing out the extreme shortage of qualified planners in the field. And that the present Planning Technician has had 5 years of training at the University of California at Berkeley in the field of City Planning. He said the college education and his two years experience would qualify him for a large number of available positions throughout the state. It was pointed out that there are only two qualified schools in the state which train city and regional planners, and to find another person equally qualified would be difficult even with the salary increase. The ��e. pos,�ion only alternative would be to fill with a person of less qualifications. Commissioner Schryer stated that he personally felt the salary was too high, especially in view of the fact that the Secretary -Planning Technician could change jobs as soon as he could find a higher paid position. The Sec -Plan Tech pointed out that he was born in Newport Beach and has resided in the area his entire life. He expressed his preference for the area, but only if he could get a salary equivalent to that which was being paid throughout the field. The Planning Technician was asked if he would move into the city if he received the appointment. He replied that he could not do as good a job for the city if he resided in the city and subconsciously acquired pre6judices involving local citizenry. He pointed out the fact that it was the custom in the Planning field to not reside in the city in which they worked. He stated that the Planning Technician for the Newport Commission lived in Huntington Beach, that the situation was similar thooughout the county. Also he argued that there were no provisions in the Charter, nor the Ordinance Code, nor written or unwritten policy to that effect. He pointed out that there were several other employees who lived outside the 9 Page 6. Nlingtes - H. B. Planning Commission May 20th, 1958 city. A motion was made by Stang and seconded by Davis to RECOMMEND THE APPOINTMENT OF Clifford E. Tripp TO THE JOB POSITION OF PLANNING DIRECTOR AT RANGE 37, STEP C, EFFECTIVE DATE July 1st, 1958. Roll Call Vote: AYES: Liles, Davis, Schryer, Bazil, Stang, Presson, Sork. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. The motion carried. . The meeting adjourned. Clifford E. Tripp Secretary Bob Bazi.l a c Chairman