Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1962-01-16L 'MINUTES OF THE HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Council Chambers, City Hall Huntington Beach, California TUESDAY, JANUARY 16th,-1962 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Welch, Letson, Bazil, Kaufman,.Worthy, Miller, Chairman Stang. COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None. MINUTES: On motion by Worthy and seconded by Letson, the Minutes of the Huntington Beach Planning Commission of January 3rd, 1962,.were•accepted as transcribed and mailed by the Secretary. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO 4392 No of Lots: 365 Subdivider: Pacific Sands -Total'Acreage: 120 --Engineer: Jennings-Halderman, Inc. Located at the -northwest corner of Atlanta Avenue and Newland Street and legally.described as a portion of the W z of Section 12-6-11. The Secretary read a letter submitted by Jennings, Halderman, Inc., representing the subdivider, requesting an ,additional- thirty days extension for Commission action on Tentative .Tract -.No. 4392. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LETSON AND SECONDED BY KAUFMAN TO APPROVE THE REQUEST TO CONTINUE THE HEARING UNTIL FEBRUARY 20TH, 1962.. ROLL CALL VOTE: Welch, Letson, Bazil, Kaufman, Worthy, Miller, AYES: Chairman Stang. NOES None. ABSENT: None. THE MOTION CARRIEDi ZONE CASE NO 223 CHANGE OF ZONE, relative Applicant' ­'House & Home Dev. Co. to proposed district boundary and use classifica- tion from: Al-X General Agricultural District as adopted by 15 Pale #2 Minutes - H. B. Plannin- Commission Tuesday, January 16, 1962 Interim Ordinance.No'668 to Rl Single Family Residence Dis- trict and C4 Highway Commercial District with setback pro- visions. The following parcels of real property as submitted on -the applicant's petition are described herewith: CHANGE OF ZONE to R1: Being a portion of the EZ of the SE 4.of Section 21-5-11 SBB & M. Further legal description on file in the Planning Department .Office. Located south of Heil Avenue, west of Springdale Street, north of Warner Avenue and east of the Meadowlark Country Club. CHANGE OF ZONE to C4 Highway Commercial: A portion of the Ez of the SE 4 of Section 21-5-11 SBB & M. Further legal description on file in the Planning Department Office. Located at the southwest corner of Heil Avenue and Springdale Street. The staff report was read by the Secretary. The hearing was opened to the audience. Don Conklin, 4531 Hamden Drive, Corona Del Mar, addressed the Commission and stated the reason for the request of a C4 zone was that R1 Single Family Residence use could not be developed on this particular part of the property because it contained a considerable amount of peat, Mr. Conklin further stated' that for commercial use, it would be economically feasible to remove the peat and thus create a usable building site. There being no further comment, the. hearing was closed. Commission discussion was held at length. , The Planning Director pointed out that this case involved two different changes. The first is an Rl zone for the area approved for subdivision as Tracts No. 4243 and 4419. The second part of the petition is for a C4 zone on a parcel roughly 300 ft by 800 ft at the immediate - 2 - Page Y13. Minutes - H. B. Planning Commission Tuesday, January 16, 1962 corner of Heil Avenue and Springdale Street. The Planning Director further pointed out that across the street at the northwest corner of Heil Avenue and Springdale Street, a change of zone for commercial development on several acres was re- quested. The result on the matter was that a parcel 200 sq. ft., measured from centerline, was zoned C2 rather -than the several acres requested, therefore, the proposed zone change to C4 might receive similar consideration. RESOLUTION NO 223 A Resolution of the City Planning Commission Makin- Recommendation for Approval of_a portion of Zone Case No 223 and further Makin, - Recommendation for Denial of a portion of Zone Case No 223. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BAZIL AND SECONDED BY WORTHY TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE Rl ZONE TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE SPECIFIED REASONS: 1� Under the present zoning regulations, the property can be subdivided and dwellings constructed. 2. The rezoning of the area will eliminate any uses that are not compatible with single family residential development. FURTHER A MOTION WAS MADE BY BAZIL AND SECONDED BY WORTHY TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF C4 ZONE TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE SPECIFIED REASONS, SUCH DENIAL IS WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND WITH WAIVER OF FEES FOR REFILING AT A FUTURE DATE: 1. That the proposed zone change is not sound planning in terms of ,present need. 2. That undeveloped areas surrounding the proposed zoning indi- cate the premature nature of the proposal. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Welch, Letson, Bazil, Kaufman, Worthy, Miller, Chairman Stang. NOES: None. ABSENT: None, . THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED. ZONE CASE NO 224 INITIATED BY RESOLUTION -OF INTENT CHANGE OF ZONE, relative to proposed change of district boundaries and use classifications as follows: - 3 - 17 Pale #4 Minutes - H. E. Planning Commission Tuesday, January 16, 1962 From M1 Light Industrial District to C2 Community Business District with -setback provisions. Property on the south side _of Edinger Avenue -approximately 1300 ft-west of Beach Blvd., described as the N 2 NW 4 NE 4 of Section 23-5-11. From Al-X General Agricultural District as adopted by Interim Ordinance No 668 to C2 Community Business -District with setback pro- . r, visions, property on the -south side of Edinger Avenue and the north side of Aldrich Street described as Lots 14, 17 thru 20, 24 thru 30, 32 and'33, Tract No. 417. - From Cl Neighborhood Business District to C4 Highway'Commercial District with setback provisions, pro- perty located south of Edinger Avenue and west of Beach Blvd. described as Lots 1 'thru 13, 34 and 35, Tract No. 417. From Al-X General Agricultural District as adopted by Interim Ordinance No 668 to R3 Limited Multiple Family District, property located south of Aldrich Street and north of Holt Street, described as Lots 50 thru 69, 86 thru 105, Tract No. 417. !From Al-X General Agricultural District as adopted by Interim Ordinance No 668 to-R2 Two -Family Residence District, property located south of Holt Street, north of -Heil Avenue and 150 ft west of Beach Blvd., described as Lots 122 thru 141, 148 thru 157, Tract No 417; Lots 1 thru 10, Block A, Tract 522; Lots 1 thru 10, 21 thru 30, Block B, Tract 522; Lots 1 thru 10, Block C, Tract 522. From Al-X General Agricultural District as adopted by Interim Ordinance No 668 to C4 Highway Commercial District with setback provisions, property located west of Beach Blvd. and between Aldrich Street and Heil Avenue, des- cribed as Lots 36 thru•49, 70 thru 85, 106 thru 121, 142 thru 147, Tract 417; Lots 11 thru 15, Block A, Tract 522; Lots 11 thru 20, Block B, Tract 522; Lots 11 thru 14, Block C, Tract 522. Further notice is given that the City Planning - 4 - Pale #5 Minutes - H..-B. Planning Commission Tuesday, January 16, 1962 Commission of the City of, Huntington Beach intends to recommend that a 50 ft setback, measured from property line, be placed on Beach Blvd. extending from Edinger Avenue south to Heil Avenue and that a 100 ft setback be placed along Edinger Avenue measured from the centerline of Edinger Avenue extending from Pacific Electric Railroad R/W east to Beach Blvd. Further .legal description on file in the Planning Department.Office. The Secretary read a petition sub- mitted by ten property owners opposing the proposed change of zone from Al-X General Agricultural District to R3 Limited Mul- tip.le Family District on the south side of Aldrich Street and requesting a commercial zone. Also a written communication was read by the Secretary submitted by Sydney & Saul -Sher suggesting the change of the Huntington Beach Zoning Code pertaining to the elimination of setback requirements for identification signs, service station pump islands and parking light poles. The hearing was opened to the audience. Mrs. Charles L. Applebury,, Box 56, Westminster, Calif., addressed the Commission, and vehemently opposed the zone change to R2. It was her suggestion that more area be included in the R3 Zone to encourage building and betterment of the neighborhood. Wm. G. Potts, 7932 Aldrich Street, Huntington Beach, addressed the Commission and stated that C2 zoning on only one side of Aldrich Street would be detrimental to the neighborhood, unless a 6 ft block wall could be constructed between the properties to eliminate noise of delivery trucks. He requested that the commercial zoning include both sides of Aldrich Street. Roderick F. Nagle, 7942 Aldrich Street, Huntington Beach, addressed the Commission and stated he would prefer a C2 zone on both the north and the south sides of Aldrich Street. - 5 - M Pa-e #6 Minutes - H. B. Planning Commission Tuesday, January 16, 1962 Fire Chief -Higgins stated that there is no fire protection in the Boulevard Gardens area because of lack of water. The area is served by two water wells and two pres- sure tanks which do not provide sufficient supply. Therefore, it would be hazardous to develop the proposed property commercially. There being•no further comment, the hearing was closed. Commission discussion was held at length. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BAZIL AND SECONDED BY MILLER TO INSTRUCT THE SECRETARY"TO READVERTISE ZONE CASE NO 224 FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON FEBRUARY 6, 1962, WITH THE SPECIFIED REVISIONS: 1. From Al-X General Agricultural District to C4 Highway Com- mercial District with setback provisions, location being the south side of Aldrich Street and legally described as Lots 50 thru 59, Tract No 417. 2. From Al-X General Agricultural District to R3 Limited Multiple Family Residence property located on both sides of Stark Street and Holt Street and the north side of McDonald Street, described -as Lots 60 thru 69, 86 thru 105, 122 thru 141, Tract No 417. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Welch, Letson, Bazil, Kaufman, Worthy, Miller, Chairman Stang; NOES: None. ABSENT: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. ZONE CASE NO 225 CHANGE OF ZONE, relative to proposed Applicant - Ed?ar H. Mueller change of district boundary and use classification from: Al-X General Agricultural District as adopted by Interim Ordinance No 668 to C4 Highway Commercial District with setback provisions. The following parcel of real property as submitted on the applicant's petition is described herewith: Located at the southwest corner of Heil Avenue and Goldenwest Street and legally described as being a portion of the E 2 of the SE 4 of Section 20 Page #7 Minutes - H. B. Planning Commission , Tuesday, January 16, 1962 22-5-11 SBB & M. Further legal description on file in the Plan- ning Department Office. The Secretary read a written com- munication submitted by Lon E. Peek opposing the zone change. The staff report was read by the Secretary and the hearing was opened to the audience. George Hart, attorney representing Lon E. Peek, addressed the Commission and vigorously opposed the proposed change. A lady from the Goldenwest Estates tract opposed the request on the basis that business development was more properly -located farther to the north. Mr. Lon E. Peek, addressed the Commission and stated that spot zoning was not good planning in any sense, therefore, he opposed the -zone change., There being no further comment,,the hearing was closed.` Commission discussion was held. The Planning Director pointed out that the property involved in this case is situated at the intersection of a Secondary and a Primary Arterial, which is generally not considered as the pre- ferred location for business development, RESOLUTION NO 225 A Resolution of the City Planning Commission Recommending Denial of Zone Case No 225 to the City Council. A MOTION WAS MADE BY WELCH AND SECONDED BY BAZIL TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF ZONE CASE,NO 225 TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR THE SPECIFIED REASONS: 1. That the proposed change of zone is not sound planning in terms of present need. 2. That undeveloped areas surrounding the proposed zoning indi- cate the premature nature of the proposal. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Welch, Letson, Bazil, Kaufman, Worthy, Miller, Chairman Stang. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED. 7 21 Ah Pa-e #U' I�iinutes - H. F. Planninl- Commission Tuesday, January 16, 1962 AREA VARIANCE: AV #367 Ali licant - Merkle �Q . Williams' To allow the construction of a patio with aluminum awning to encroach to within 5 ft of the rear property line in deviation to the required 20 ft rear yard setback in the R1 Single Family Residence District. Located at 8651 Wagers Circle, Huntington Beach and legally described as Lot 15, Tract No 3506 (Moore Homes). The staff report was read by the Secretary. The hearing was opened to the audience; there being no comment, it was closed. Commission discussion was held. The Planning Director pointed out that the property involved is located at the end of a cul-de-sac and is an irregularly shaped lot. He stated that the house is located at an angle to the rear property line which creates a tri- angular rear yard. The rear of the property abuts a wide right-of-way for powerlines, which assures considerable open area to the rear. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LETSON AND SECONDED BY WORTHY TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE AV #367 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION: 1. The covered area never be enclosed to create a•room. _. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Welch., Letson, Bazil, Kaufman, Worthy, Miller, Chairman Stang. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. AREA.VARIANCE: AV y360 To allow the construction Applicant - Homer F. Calhoun of aluminum patio canopy to encroach to within 4 ft of the rear property line in deviation to the required 20 ft rear yard setback. Located at the southwest corner of Page #9 Minutes - H. B. Plannin- Commission Tuesday, January 16, 19�2 Manitoba Drive and Alberta Drive, known as 7702 Alberta Drive, Huntington Beach;'and legally described as Lot No. 76, Tract No 3563 (Huntington Riviera). The Secretary read the staff report. The hearing'was opened to the audience;'there being no comment, the hearing was closed. The Planning Director stated that the property involved is a corner lot which is at a considerably higher -elevation than the lot adjoining to the rear. The proposed patio cover is 15 ft x 21 ft and will extend to about 5 ft from the "rear line. It was further pointed out be- cause of the difference in elevation between the two adjoining lots, it would'appear that a conjested situation will not be created. ' A MOTION WAS MADE BY WELCH AND SECONDED BY MILLER TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE AV #368 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION: C, ' 1. That the covered area never be enclosed to create a room. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Welch, Letson, Bazil, Kaufman, Worthy, Miller, Chairman Stang. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. - t USE VARIANCE: UV #369 Applicant - Lon E. Peek To allow the construction of a single face sign 12 ft x 24 ft-in the Al-X General Agricultural District. Located at the NW corner of Heil Avenue and Goldenwest Street and legally described as follows: PARCEL I: The SE 4 of the NE 4 of Section 22-5-11 SBB & M. PARCEL II: The E 2 of the E 2 of the SW k of the NE 4 of Section 22-5-11 SBB & M. - 9 23 Pa-e #10 Tlinutes - H. B. Plannin- Commission Tuesday, January 16, 19�2 The Secretary read a letter sub- mitted by the.applicant requesting that his application be withdrawn. A MOTION WAS MADE BY WORTHY AND SECONDED BY LETSON TO GRANT THE REQUEST. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Welch, Letson,• Bazil, Kaufman, Worthy, Miller, Chairman Stang. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. AREA VARIANCE: AV iJ370 To allow a 10 ft front yard setback Applicant - for garages entered from side; to Huntin;�ton Harbour Corp, , allow 10 ft front yard setback for dwelling and 20 ft front yard setback for garage entered from front yard in deviation to the required 20 ft front yard set- back in the R1 Single Family Residence District and to allow 10 ft rear yard setback on lots abutting waterways in devi- ation to the required 15 ft rear yard setback. Located north of Pacific Coast Highway 101A and west.of Broadway Street, and legally described as Lots 1 thru 77 of Tentative Tract No 4499, being a portion of Section 19-5-11 (Huntington Harbour Corp.). The staff report was read by the Secretary. The Chairman opened the public hearing to the audience; there being no comment, the hearing was closed. Commission discussion was held. It was noted that,in general this request is to establish the limits within which the developers can construct dwellings in the proposed Huntington Harbour project. There are three parts to the request. 1. 10 ft rear yards. In all but.four cases the rear yards would be on the waterways which, under the Code, would allow rear yards to be reduced from 20 ft to 15 ft. Therefore, this modification amounts to a 5 ft reduction. 2. 10 ft front yards for garages entered from the side. This would apply only where a right angle turn is necessary on - 10 24 Page #11 Minutes - H. B. Planning Commission Tuesday, January 16, 1962 the lot to enter the garage. The garage and side yard would take at least 25 ft and the remainder of the front part of the lot would be driveway. This type of driveway actually provides three parking spaces off the street. The main portion of the house would be at least 30 ft from the property line. 3. 10 ft front yard for the dwelling and 20 ft for the garage entered from the front. In this case of entering a garage directly from the street, no variance is -requested for the ` garage, thus providing two parking spaces in the driveway. The variance is for the dwelling itself to come to within 10 ft of the property line. The garage and side yards will occupy about one-half the width of the lot, thus allowing, at most, about 30 ft of dwelling 10 ft from the line. A MOTION WAS MADE BY WORTHY AND SECONDED BY MILLER TO APPROVE AREA VARIANCE AV #370. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Welch, Letson, Bazil, Kaufman, Worthy, Miller, Chairman Stang. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION: UV #371 To allow the construction Applicant - Shurley M. Hirshberg of an office building in the Al-X General Agricul- tural District'.'*Lotated on the west side of Beach Blvd. 150 ft north of Stark Street and legally described as Lots 42 and 43, Tract No. 417. The staff report was read by the Secretary. ' The hearing was opened to the audience; there being no comment, it was closed. Commission discussion was held. The Planning Director pointed out that the property involved is in the area proposed for C4'zoni.ng, which allows the proposed use of the building. It'was pointed out that the plot plan in- dicates adequate area for parking and a building setback equal to that proposed on the change of zone. A MOTION WAS MADE BY KAUFMAN AND SECONDED BY WELCH TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION UV #371 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 25 Page #12 Minutes - H. B. Plannin- Commission Tuesday, January 16, 1962 1. Construction of a 6 ft masonry wall at the rear of the pro- -perty. . 2. Installation of curb, gutter, and paving on Beach Blvd. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Welch, Letson, Kaufman, Bazil, Worthy, Miller, Chairman Stang. NOES: None. ABSENT:' None . • THE MOTION CARRIED. REQUEST OF SCHOOL SITE APPROVAL - SITE #15, REVISED OCEAN VIEW SCHOOL DISTRICT The Secretary read a letter sub- mitted by the Ocean View School District requesting an approval of School Site #15.' Located west of Goldenwest Street and South of Edinger Avenue. A lengthy legal description is on file in the Planning Department Office. Jeff Millet, 1518 West Commonwealth Avenue, Fullerton, Engineer for Tract No 4324, representing the subdivider, addressed the Commission and requested that the proposed approval of School Site #15 be continued, thus giving the opportunity to have a meeting with the Ocean View School District prior to the regular Planning Commission meeting of February 6th, 1962. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LETS ON AND SECONDED BY KAUFMAN TO CONTINUE THE HEARING ON SCHOOL SITE #15 TO FEBRUARY 6th, 1962... ROLL;CALL VOTE: AYES: Welch, Letson, Bazil, Kaufman, Worthy, Miller, Chairman Stang.. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. 26 Page V Minutes - H. B. Planning Commission Tuesday, January 16, 19n2 REQUEST OF SCHOOL SITE APPROVAL = SITE #13, REVISED - OCEAN VIEW SCHOOL DISTRICT The Secretary read the re- quest of the Ocean View School District for approval of the revised location of Site #13, described as follows: Parcel 1: The Southeast quarter of the Northwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 15, Township-5 South, Range 11 West, in the.Rancho La Bolsa Chica, as shown on a Map recorded in Book 51, page 13-of Miscellaneous Maps, records of Orange County, California. Parcel 2: The East 250 feet of the Southwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of the Southeast quarter.of Section 15, Township 5 South, Range 11 West in -the Rancho'La Bolsa Chica, as shown on a Map recorded in Book 51, page 13 of Miscellaneous Maps, records of Orange County, California. The Secretary read a letter of protest submitted by Wm. Miles, 2143 W. 20th Street, Los Angeles, California, owner of the property involved. The staff report was read by the Secretary. Commission discussion was held at length. The Planning Director pointed out.that in view of the serious problems which would be created by a change in the site at this late date, the recommendation of the Engineering and Planning Departments is that the request be denied for the following reasons: 1. The original site was designed as an integral part of two sub- divisions, Tract No 4138 and•Tract No 4210. Tract No 4138 has been recorded setting aside their part of the site. Tract No 4210 will soon be recorded,•also setting aside their part of the site. The revised site does not propose to use these areas provided on the tract maps.. 2. The revised site will completely block the planned extension of two. streets which are necessary for future traffic circu- lation. Water mains will also be dead -ended resulting in poorer water service to homes on the streets., 3. The dead end streets will have no provision for a turn around area. 4. The streets that would be blocked are planned to be a vital link in the drainage from property to the north. To revise the drainage pattern would overload other streets beyond their capacity. 5. The school -site would have access to only 30 ft of a dead end street. Presumably, the school would extend the half street along the site which would mean that the only access to the school would be that half street until such time as - 13 - 27 Page #14 Minutes - 11. B. Plannin', Commission Tuesday, January 16, 1962 the adjoining property develops. How soon that might be is very questionable. Developers have been trying to buy the adjoining property for quite some time,.but the owner does not want to sell. A MOTION VAS MADE BY BAZIL AND SECONDED BY WORTHY TO DENY SCHOOL SITE #13 - REVISED FOR THE ABOVE STATED REASONS AND THE SECRETARY TO'BE INSTRUCTED TO NOTIFY OCEAN VIEW SCHOOL DISTRICT OF SUCH ACTION. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Welch, Letson, Bazil, Kaufman, Worthy, Miller, Chairman Stang. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, THE MEETING ADJOURNED TO JANUARY 30th, 1962, at THE HOUR OF 7:30 P.M. W. C. Warner Secretary - 14 - Edward Stang Chairman