Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1958-08-19i 1 1 TES OF THE HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Council Chambers, City Hall Huntington Beach, California Tuesday, August 19th, 1958 Commissioners Present: Liles, Schryer, Stang, Sork, Presson. Commissioners Absent: Bazil, Davis. Actinjz Chairman: On motion by Stang and seconded by Liles, W. L. Schryer was apponted acting Chairman of this meeting. Minutes: On motion by Liles and seconded by Stang, the minutes of the Huntington Beach Planning Commission of Tuesday, July 22nd, and August 5th, 1958, as transcribed and mailed by the Secretary were accepted as mailed. CONDITIONAL PERMIT: CP 106 The petition request was to allow the Meadow- Annlicant - So. Calif. Edison: lark heating station to be built and landscaped on an approximately120 ft. by 200 feet site in an A-1 Zoning District as was adopted by Interim Ord. No. 668. Located approximately 1202ft. west of Springdale Street on the north side of Wintersburg Avenue, and legally described as the south 237 feet of the west 120 feet of the east half of the southeast quarter of Section 21, Township 5, South, Range 11 West, in the Rancho Bolsa Chica. EXCEPT the South-30-feet thereof. The Secretary was asked by the Chairman to read the application and then the report and recommendations. The Chairman opened the hearing to the audience. Ralph Kiser, District Manager, Edison Company, addressed the Commission and stated that although another site had been previously considered, it was found to be entirely inadequate in size and location. He submitted additional maps to substantiate his conclusion. He pointed out that the pumps must be located at the Alamitos end of thelineand that it was an absolute necessity to heat the oil as close to the midway point as was possible. Edward Ruoff, Jr.,.13881 Cardillo Dr., Westminster, California addressed the Commission and made a vigorous protest to the proposed heating installation. He elaborated in detail his reasons for protest, based primarily upon the following two arguments. 35 Page 2. Minutes - H. B. Plannin;, Commission Tuesday, August 19th, 1958 1. Ruoff stated that he personally knew of at least two available sites within a quarter of a mile of the presently proposed site. 2. He argued that he and the other large land owners were attempting to preserve the area for high class type of residential development and that the proposed heating station would detract immeasurably from the land values for this reason. Ruoff further argued that engineering wise, the heating station could be located within a quarter of one Nile from the present Edison proposed location. He declared that the Edison Company wds in business like any other big company and just because it would cost more to locate on an alternate site was not a justification for the present site. Ruoff also questioned the ethics of the method the Utility used when acquiring the option to purchase. Ralph Kiser proposed to let the firm's Engineer, 'Mr. Randall argue the question of proper engineering location of the site. In the matter of acquiring the land he stated it would have been the perogative of the Public Utility to condemn the necessary land in the event that land negotiations had failed. He further added that a fair and equitable arrangment had been made with the present owners. Mr. Randall, Engineering representative for Edison, addressed the Commission and stated that to his best knowledge, it was questior_able whether a heating station ,S could be built on the location which had once been designated as a possible alternate site, and that the alternate site would necessitate special built equipment rather than standard. The using of special equipment, it was argued, would make the cost prohibitive. Norman Kuch, Edison legal representative, stated that an attempt to force the firm to choose an alternate site would weaken the very basis for a condemnation suit. By so doing, he argued, the situation would remain unresolved. Ruoff argued that irregardless of the unusual circumstances or hard- ship placed upon the utility, the surrounding property owners should not arbitrarily be subjected to needless property devaluation. Kiser pointed out to the Commission that a wide channel proposed flood control ditch will soon be constructed directly behind the proposed heating facility. And the channel, it was pointed out, would be constructed on the golf course dividing the golf course from the installation. Preceded by a few remarks from protestant Edward Ruoff, the hearing was closed to the public. 36 Page 3. Minutes - H. B. Planning Commission Tuesday, August 19th, 1958 Chairman Schryer, then pointed out to Ruoff that although he was in sympathy with the landowners and the situation they were confronted with, the question of ethics used to acuqire land can be of no concern to the Planning Commission. He stated that the welfare of the community in regards to electrical distribution is of paramount importance, and should be considered as a factor. Other Commission comments.were that with the flood control channel dividing up the golf couree anyway, the establishment of the heating station* would not be a s severe a handicap to the area if it was landscaped as proposed. It was brought out that the ulatmate height of the eucalyptus trees would be suffictAnt to cover the height of the stacks in the event they were limited to 43 feet in height, which was agreeable to the Edison representatives. Further it was pointed out that although the 3 major landowners were properly notified, only one of them showed up at the hearing to protest. A motion was made by Stang and seconded by Liles to RECO:IIE1D APPROVAL WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. All appurtenant accessory features of the main structures, such as tovTers and exhaust stacks shall not be greater than 43 feet in height. 2. All landscaping as indicated in the submitted plot plans, shall be planted as a fulfillment of this conditions. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Schryer, Stang, Liles, NOES: Sork. ABSENT: Bazil, Presson ; Davis. The motion carried. Presentation of Proposed Clifford E. Tripp, Planning Commission Boning & Districting Regulation: Secretary, made a formal brief report and presentation'of Sectional Districting Maps 1-6-11 and•2-6-11. Public Hearing, There was no comment from the audience. The Secretary an - Map 1-6-11 szrered a question from,the Commission asking why the M-1 zone did not include an entire parcel instead of one half. It was pointed out that a proposed sub -division had been prepared for 21 acres adjoining, and that there was need for a residential buffer strip,- 9 Page 4. rinutes - H. B. Planning Commission Tuesday, August 19th, 1958 37 Public Hearing Ivan Hooker, Municipal Trailer Coutt, addressed the Commission Map 2-6-11: and asked for C-3 zoning for the front of his property at the SW corner of Yorktown and Highway 39. He asked for Y 1 to the rear where his industrial tract now lies. W. L. Weybright answered the request by stating that C-3 zoning usage would cover the needs as were required by his tract, because a use permit would only have to be obtained once for light industry. As for the highway frontage, it was argued that there was no planned commercial development, only thoughts of speculation. It was suggested by the Commission that the time was perhaps too premature to zone the corner commercial. There being no further comment, the zoning hearing was adjourned to the next date set for public zoning hearing on September 16th, 1958• September 3rd was set as the next Planning Commission hearing date. W. L. Weybright presents W. L. Weybright, Planning Consultant representative, Master Plan of Parks & Recreation: formally presented the Master Plan of Parks and Recreation to the Planning Commission and answered the several questions asked. The meeting adjourned. W. L. Schryer Acting Chairman Clifford E. Tripp Secretary