Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1965-08-25MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS Conference Room, City Hall Huntington Beach, California Wednesday, August 25, 1965 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: John Mandrell, Herbert Day, Kenneth Reynolds. BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: None. MINUTES: The Minutes of August 11, 1965 and August 18, 1965 were accepted as transcribed. AREA VARIANCE NO. 65-65 Avvlicant• Dovle & Shields Development Co., Inc. To allow a 60 ft. lot width on a corner lot in deviation to the required 65 ft. minimum lot width in the R-1 Single Family Residence District. Located on the southeast corner of Glenroy Drive and Greenleaf Lane. Legally described as Lot 83, Tract No. 5792. The hearing was opened to the audience. John Sullivan, representing the applicant, answered questions presented by the Board. It was noted that the lot will measure 65 ft. at the 20 ft. setback line. Ken Reynolds stated that it was the Commission's feeling that 60 ft. lots were permissable as long as they measured 65 ft. at the 20 ft. setback line. There being no further comment, the hearing was closed. - . ` Board discussion followed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY REYNOLDS AND SECONDED BY MANDRELL TO APPROVE AV NO. 65-65 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION: 1. The lot shall have a width of 65 ft. at the 20 ft. setback line. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Mandrell, Day,,Reynolds. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. - DIV.ISION OF LAND NO._ 65-17 62R licant: Huntington Beach Company To allow a Division of Land into 2 separate parcels. Located on the east side of Beach Boulevard, 660 ft. south of Newman Avenue. Legally described as the N 1/29 W 3/45 S 1/29 SW 1/4, Section 25-5-11. Further legal description on file in the Planning Department Office. The Conditions of Approval were given out. Fred Kober, representing the applicant, stated that the Huntington Beach Company had sold the property to Powers Inc. and the Catholic Church. -1- 8/25/65 Page No. 2 Minutes: H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments Wednesday, August 25, 1965 CP Ken Reynolds pointed out that he had talked with the architect for Powers Inc. and was told that they intend to improve both Beach Blvd. and Newman Avenue during their first stage ofdevelopment. John Mandrell,. Chairman, said that he had talked with the other property owner and,that their feelings were the same. It was noted that the Covenant and Agreement to be filed with the City will be between two owners. -Mr. McAdams, representing the Good Shephe3d Cemetery, found the conditions'of approval agreeable but fuurther'added�that he was not familiar with the application. Mr. McAdams said that he could not represent the Cemete-ry or.speak fof them at this time. John Mandrell asked if the applicant and Mr. McAdams would like to continue the case until September 1, 1965, so that Mr. McAdams'could'look over'the Conditions of Approval. Mr. Mandrell further stated that the conditions would have to,,be complied with by the time the development is finished. Fred Kober recommended a continuance of Division of Land No. 65-17 until September 1, 1965. A MOTION WAS MADE BY DAY AND SECONDED BY REYNOLDS TO CONTINUE DIVISION OF LAND NO..65-17•UNTIL SEPTEMBER 1, 19659 AT THE APPLICANTIS REQUEST. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Mandrell, Day, Reynolds. NOES: None. ABSENT:_ None. THE MOTION CARRIED. USE PERMIT NO. 65-17 Auylicant:• - . Phillip J. Schumaker w . r.rrr + . To allow the construction of retail -stores and office space in the C-4 Highway Commercial District. Located. -.-on the North side of McFadden Avenud''and West of Edwards Street. Legally described as the SW45 NW4, Section 15-5-11. Further legal description on file'in-the Planning Department Office.: The hearing was opened to the:audience. Harold Smith and the applicant were present. •. The Conditions of Approval were given out and explained to both gentlemen.' Herbert'Day stated that landscaping in the parking lot was not to City Standards. Ken Reynolds added that the plans for the parking lot should be revised. A lengthy discussion.'followed. 0 -2- 8/25/65 Page No. 3 Minutes: H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments Wednesday, August 25,"1965 It was the consensus that the parking lot should be redesigned with -space size and landscaping brought' up to standards of the new ordinance No. 979.--It_was'noted that the -applicant needs approximately L,600 ft. of landscaping. Ken Reynolds asked various questions concerning grading and' f ill for the project. Mr. Schumaker stated that the fence surrounding the rear and side of the property was owned and constructed by property owners in the abutting tract. ' John Mandrell,.explained that the wall can not be used for retaining purposes. Ken Reynolds pointed out that a Division of Land must be filed by the previous property owner. Herbert Day stated -that the wall must be 6 feet high on the commercial side of the property and that a 10 ft. X 10 ft. corner cut-off must -be provided at the_ driveway entrance. Ken Reynolds.said that the driveway to the -rear -of the- property' should be no less than 20 ft. wide. It was the consensus of f-he'"Board to continue Use Permit No. 65-17 until the applicant could submit new plans.` The applicant preferred a 1 week continuance. There being 'no further comment, the hearing was closed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY REYNOLDS AND SECONDED BY DAY TO CONTINUE UP NO. 65-17 UNTIL SEPTEMBER 1, 1965. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Mandrell, Day, Reynolds. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. AREA VARIANCE NO. 6542 Auulicant: Doyle & Shields Development Co.. Inc. To allow the construction of a wall in a tract to exceed the maximum height limit in the front and side yard setbacks as per plot plan submitted. Located on the southwest corner of Edinger Avenue and Ballantine Lane and on the southwest corner of Edwards Street and Flint Drive. Legally described as Lots 77 and 18 of Tract 5929. The hearing was opened to the audience. John Mandrell explained_ that this request was continued from the August 18, 1965 Board of Zoning Adjust- ments Meeting. It was noted that the applicant was to submit architectural plans to the Board at this meeting. John Sullivan, representing the -3- 8/25/65 Page No. 4 Minutes: H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments Wednesday, August 25, 1965 applicant, explained the reasons behind the request. He further stated that the wall was aesthetically beneficial to the tract. Ken Reynolds felt that the wall did not really contribute to the appearance of the tract. .1 Considerable discussion followed. There being no further comment, the hearing was closed. Board discussion followed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY DAY AND SECONDED BY MANDRELL TO APPROVE AV NO. 65-62 FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. There will be sufficient sight clearance,' -thus creating no traffic hazzard. 2. The request involves a local.street'entering onto an arterial highway. 3. They., are -the: entry •streets -to a tract. 4. It will provide'for a better appearing entrance to'the subdivision from an arterial highway which has always been the desire of the City. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Mandrell, Day, Reynolds. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE',,.THE BOARD, A MOTION WAS MADE BY MANDRELL AND SECONDED BY DAY TO ADJOURN. K. A. Reynolds-' Secretary -4- 8/25/65