Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1959-05-19152 MINUTES e OF THE HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Council Chambers, City Hall Huntington Beach, California Tuesday, May 19th, 1959 Commissioners Present: Liles, Davis, Presson, Stang, Schryer,Sork, Chairman Bazil. Commissioners Absent: None. Minutes: On motion by Stang.and seconded by Presson, the Minutes of the Huntington Beach Planning Commission Meeting of Tuesday, May 5th, 1959, as transcribed and mailed by the Secretary were accepted as mailed. CONDITIONAL PEM1IT: CP 107 A continued hearing was held Applicant - Southern Baptist Church, to consider a petition for By Rev. Dale Aycock a Conditional Permit to re- gulations of the Districting Ordinance No 668 adopting Orange County Land Use Ordinance 351 as an Interim Ordinance. To permit a Sunday School and Church Services to be held in a single family dwelling. Located approximately 1200 feet west of Highway #39, on the south side of Newman Street and legally described as the V1 50 feet of the E 1320 feet of S 184 feet of the N 2 of the SE 4 of the SE 4 of Section 26, T. 5. S., R. 11. Vl. , S. B. B. & M. Chairman Bazil opened the hearing to the audience. Sam D. Lawler, 7792 Liberty Street, addressed the Commission to protest the request for a Church permit on the grounds there was an existing traffic hazard which would be aggravated. He further protested the use of the home as a Church, the lack of proper parking facil- ities and requested the reading of the names on the submitted 158 Page #2 Minutes - H. B. Planning Commission Tuesday, May 19th, 1959 petition: There were 26 property owners signed in protest along the Newman Street area, 12 property owners were signed in favor of the church permit. Six property owners previously signed against the permit also signed later for the permit. Rev Aycock, Pastor representing the Southern Baptist Church, addressed the Commission and estimated the total proposed congregation of the Church as approximately 1209 84 of which would be in the class- rooms. He re-emphasized that six persons of the original 26 protestants had signed his petition. F. A. Moore,7812 Newman Street, protested the Church permit because the building was not up to code. He argued that the house was not a suitable place for a Church. Edward Phillips, 7772 Newman Street, protested the Church permit. He argued that there was no parking on Newman Street available. He also stated his -belief that the building was not suitable. H. L. Guy, 7802 Newman Street, protested the Church Permit - parking traffic conditions were deplorable. He did not object to Church if parking was provided on Ronald Road. Opal Phillips, 7772 Newman Street, to/ protested the Church Permit - she objected the Church being held in a home. Robert Wright, 7892 Newman Street, objected entirely to the Church Permit. He emphasized traffic safety and the parking problem which could not be solved immediately even if the lot was located on Ronald Road. 2. 154. Page #3 Minutes - H. B. Planning Commission Tuesday - May 19th, 1959 Edward Phillips, protested to the'.Commission that to allow one application was going to result in another church application immediately by others who are trying to organize a Church on Newman Street. Patricia Aycock, representing the applicant, spoke out in favor of the Church Permit on the basis of a need for a Church in the neighborhood. Rev. Aycock - stated to the Commission that in -his opinion a Church had the constitut- ional right of assembly any place. Planning Consultant, Lawrence Wise, reported to the Commission, that the right of assembly at any place irregardless of zoning was not true, and that the Supreme Court in recent decisions had upheld the right of the City to impose reasonable limitations upon any public,assembly and that the zoning regulations are upheld. Two cases were cited as examples. Robert Wright, Newman Street, re- iterated his strong protest. The hearing was closed. A staff report indicated that the proposed Church -hall was an illegally constructed red- wood addition to the house that was located within one foot of the property line. Rev. Aycock stated that the previous ovrner had done the construction. Commission discussion was held. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LILES AND SECONDED BY SORK.TO RE--' COMMEND DENIAL WITHOUT PREiJUDICE.., FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. The proposed parking has no validity until such time as_a fully improved street is completed. At the present time the parking lot is entirely in- accessible with no guarantee of future full 3• El 155 Page 14 Minutes - H. B. Planning Commission Tuesday, May 19th, 1959 improvements for Ronald Road. 2. The present structure does not comply with either the fire code or building code. ROLL, CALL VOTE: AYES: Liles, Davis, Presson, Stang, Schryer, Sork, Chairman Bazil. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. CONDITIONAL PERMIT: CP 108 Applicant - Southern California Edison Co. To permit certain additions and changes to the existing Ocean View Electric Utility Substation without further expansion of the site. Located at the northwest corner of "B" Street and Wintersburg Avenue, Huntington Beach and legally described as Lots 2, 41 6, 89 10, 12, 14, and 16 in Block "B" of Tract 528. public. The hearing was opened to the Robert R. Downs, Edison re- presentative, addressed the Commission and explained the relatively minor additions to be made to the existing utility station -equipment. Fred R. Swartz, 17022 "A" Street, stated his opinion in favor of the Conditional Permit. The hearing was closed. A MOTION WAS HARE BY STANG AND SECONDED BY DAVIS TO RECOLMEND APPROVAL WITHOUT CONDI- TIONS. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Liles, Davis, Presson, Stang, Schryer, Sork, Chairman Bazil. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. 4. 156 Page rr`•5 Minutes - H. B. Planning Commission Tuesday, May 19th, 1959 THE MOTION.CARRIED. USE VARIANCE: UV 151 To allow a 28 unit apartment to Applicant - Clement Fearns be constructed in an R-4 Suburban Residential District where only 9 units would be allowed. Located at 18092 Huntington Beach Blvd., and legally described as the S 94 feet in the N 567.71 feet of W 330 feet of NW 4 of NW 4 of NW 4 of Section 36, T. 5. S., R. 11. W., S. B. B. & M. The hearing was opened to the public. Clement Fearns, 12691 Dale Street, Garden Grove, California, applicant told the Commission that a new plot plan would be submitted if need be. Sebastian Bottari, 18072 Huntington Beach Blvd., an adjoining land owner, expressed an opinion to the Commission that he was entirely opposed to the planned 28 unit apartment. He stated that he did not object to the presently allowed 9 units. Chairman Bazil ordered the hearing continued as was requested by the Commission in order that a more suitable plot plan could be submitted. CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION: DV 133 Applicant - J. Ben Yffiite DIVISION I: Lot 17 and the East 15 feet of Lot 18, Block 602, Vista Del Mar Tract. DIVISION II: Lots 19, 20 and the west 10 feet of Lot 18, Block 602, Vista Del Mar Tract UPON GROUNDS THAT THE APPLICANT DID NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT FRONTAGE OR AREA;A MOTION WAS MADE BY SCHRYER AND SECONDED BY STANG TO DENY DV 133. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Liles, Davis, Presson, Stang, Schryer, Sork, Chairman Bazil. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. 5. 157 Page #6 , Minutes — H. B. Planning Commission Tuesday, May 19th, 1959 THE MOTION CARRIED. CONDITIONAL EXCEPTIONT: DV 132 Applicant — Fred Hensel DIVISION I: N 40 feet of S 1192 feet of E 192 feet of W 280 feet of NW oof Section 1-6-11. DIVISION II: N 50 feet of S 1202 feet of E 442 feet of W 530 feet of NW oof Section 1-6-11, EXCEPT: the SWIly portion of 50 feet by 192 thereof. UPON GROUNDS THAT THE APPLICANT DID NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT FRONTAGE, A MOTION WAS MADE BY SCHRYER AND SECONDED BY LILES TO DENY DV 132. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Liles, Davis, Presson, Stang, Schryer, Sork, Chairman Bazil. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION: DV 129 and DV 130 Applicant — John F. Thompson DV 129 DIVISION I: E 50 ft of W 350 ft of E 1170 ft of S 214 ft of N 428 ft of N 2 of SE 4 of SE i of Section 26, T.5.S., R.11. W., S. B. B. & M. DIVISION II: W 50 ft of E 100 ft of W 350 ft of E 1170 ft of S 214 ft of N 428 ft of N 2 of the SE 4 of SE oof Section 26, T.5.S.7 R.11-W-, S. B. B. & M. DIVISION III: W 50 ft of E 150 ft of `'T 350 ft of E 1170 ft of S 214 ft of N 428 ft of N 2 of SE 4 of SE 4 of Section 26, T.5.S.9 R.11.W., S. B. B. & M. DIVISION IV: W 200 ft of E 1170 ft of S 214 ft of N 428 ft of N a of SE 4 of Section 26, T.5. S. , R.11.W. , S. B. B. & M. DV 130 DIVISION I: E 50 ft of W 100 ft of E 820 ft of S 214 ft of N 428 ft of N 2 of SE 4 of SE I of Section 26, T.5.S., R.11. W. , S. B. B. & M. DIVISION II: W 50 ft of E 820 ft of S 214 ft of N214ftofN428ftofN2of SE4 of SE oof Section 26, T.5.S., R.11. W.$ S.-B. B. & M. 6. 158 Page T7 Minutes— H. B. Planning Commission Tuesday, May 19th, 1959 THE CASE IT WAS NOTED, WAS REFERRED BACK TO THE COMMISSION BY THE CITY COUNCIL. audience. The hearing was opened to the John F. Thompson, applicant, addressed the Commission and stated that he was willing to install the curbs and gutters, and other requirements for his share -of the land. He also asked for a ruling on the 50 foot lot frontages. Tim Talbert, representative of the applicant, requested assistance in setting up a 1911 Improvement District for Ronald Road. Informal Commission vote indicated that they did object to the proposed 50 foot lot front— ages. However lengthy discussion centered on the question of allowing the Division of Land, where the City had no authority to require curbs and gutters on undedicated land. It was emphasized that the City could not accept offers to dedicate landlocked or unimproved streets. Consultant Lawrence Vise was asked to give an opinion on the problem. He stated that he considered it an obvious attempt to circumvent the state subdivision map act and that if the applicant were to carry through with the project, then the case should be reported to the State Real Estate Commissioner. Mr. Wise advised the Commission that steps -should be -taken to discourage this type of development, because if it occurs in any great quantity, it will be -the surest way -to bankrupt a City. This type of development, it was explained carries very little -assessed valuation, yet the multiple units will be occupied by a high density of school children which could financially overwhelm a school district in short order. A - MOTION WAS MADE BY SORK AND 7. 159 Page yr8 Minutes - H. B. Planning Commission Tuesday, May 19th, 1959 SECONDED BY PRESSON TO DENY DV 129 and DV 130. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Liles, Davis, Presson, Stang, Schryer, Sork, Chairman Bazil. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION: TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS 3429 and 3431 Applicant - Continental 11anagement Co. Request was made to allow Cul de Sac streets with a minimum of 56 feet in width instead of the required 60 feet in width required for all cul-de-sac streets over 350 feet in length. The following streets are included within the request: Wilsey, Hebard, Wheeler, Tripp, Higgins, Howard, Arnett, Merle, and Glascow Circles. TENTATIVE MAP 3429 and 3431 being a portion of the N 2 of the SW a of SECTION 24, T. 5. S., R. 11. 17. , S. B. B. & M. Upon discussion with the applicant's Engineer, the Planning Commission reviewed the problem and made the following finding of facts in respect thereto: (a) That the layout of the tracts are of good quality and that the extended 80 ft of Cul-deSac Street beyond that allowable for a 56 ft right-of-way was to in- crease drainage advantages and to provide a pedestrian sidewalk to the adjoining arterial highway. (b) That the exception is necessary in order to preserve the basic design of the proposed tract which the Commission feels has been worked out to best ad- vantages in terms of good planning. (c) That the granting of this exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the vicinity in which said property is located. A MOTION WAS MADE BY PRESSON AND SECONDED BY DAVIS TO RECON1MEND APPROVAL WITHOUT CONDITIONS. 160 Page #9 Minutes - H. B. Planning Commission Tuesday, May 19th, 1959 ROLL, CALL VOTE: AYES: Liles, Davis, Presson, Stang, Schryer, Sork, Chairman Bazil. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 3430 Applicant - Continental Management Co. 1 thru 40 Tract 3430. Request was made to allow substandard lots for the following designated lots: Regulation size lots are Interior lots - 6000 sq ft and 60 ft frontage. Corner lots - 7000 sq ft and 70 ft frontage. TENTATIVE MAP 3430 being a portion of the N 2 of the SW 4 of SECTION 24, T. 5. S., R. 11. W., S. B. B. & M. Upon discussion with the applicant's Engineer, the Planning Commibsion reviewed the problem and made the following finding of facts in respect thereto: (a) That the applicant has offered to dedicate more than one acre of land for flood control purposes, and that the flood control channel has placed limitations on design of the subdivision. (b) That the applicant has proposed lots of greater than minimum area, but is confronted with the unique position of finding it difficult to provide standard size frontage. (c) That the granting of this exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the vicinity in which said property is located. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LILES AND SECONDED BY DAVIS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITHOUT CONDITIONS. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Liles, Davis, Presson, Stang, Schryer, Sork, Chairman Bazil. 9. 161 Page ;t10 Minutes - H. B. Planning Commission Tuesday, May 19th, 1959 NOES: None. ABSENT: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. Clifford E. Tripp Secretary THE MEETING ADJOURNED. c2EZI-�— ga-,�,Y Robert Bazil 6/1 Chairman 10.