The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1969-01-07MINUTES OF THE HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Council Chambers, Civic Center Huntington Beach, California NOTE: A TAPE RECORDING OF THIS MEETING IS ON FILE IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT OFFICE. TUESDAY, JANUARY 7, 1969 COMMISSIONERSPRESENT: Bazil, Lane, Bokor, Miller, Duke COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Slates, Tom MINUTES: On motion by Bokor and seconded by Duke, the Minutes of the Huntington Beach Planning Commission of November 5, 19, 26, 1968, and October 22, 1968, were accepted as transcribed and mailed by the Secretary. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO 6800 - Continued Subdivider: Covington Bros. The Acting Secretary informed the Commission that the City Council at their January 6, 1969 meeting, denied the applicant's Zone Change request to rezone this property Cl; therefore, the Staff recommends denial of Tentative Tract Map 6800. A MOTION WAS MADE BY DUKE AND SECONDED BY MILLER TO DENY TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO 6800 FOR THE FOLLOWING REASON: 1. Zone Case No 68-48, requesting a C1 Zone of the subject prop- erty by the City Council. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Lane, Bokor, Miller, Duke NOES: None ABSENT: Slates, Tom THE MOTION CARRIED. CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION 68-61 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO 6675 Subdivider: B. A. Berkus To permit certain R-1 lots with water frontage to have a reduction of lot width from the required 60 ft. to 50 ft. and a reduction of the required area from 6000 sq. ft. to 5000 sq. ft. and to permit the area accumulated by this proposed reduction in lot size to be used as a recreation lot of .85+ acre in lots 1 and 30 for the home owners in this development. The Staff Report and the Subdivi- sion Committee Report were read by the Acting Secretary. The hearing was opened to the audience. B. A. Berkus, applicant, addressed the Commission and asked for withdrawal of Conditional Exception No 68-61. Mr. Berkus stated that he will average 6000 sq. ft. per lot area over each six (6) contiguous lots with an average frontage of 60 ft. He also -stated that said revised map has a reduction to 61 total lots with 40 of such lots on the water. 1/7/69 Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, January 7, 1969 Page No. 2 There being no other comment, the hearing was closed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY MILLER AND SECONDED BY BOKOR TO ACCEPT THE WITHDRAWAL OF CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO 68-61 AS PER APPLICANTS REQUEST. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES-. Bazil, Lane, Bokor, Miller, Duke NOES: None ABSENT: Slates, Tom THE MOTION CARRIED, A MOTION WAS MADE BY MILLER AND SECONDED BY BOKOR TO APPROVE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO 6675 UPON THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: la The Tentative Map received January 7, 1969, shall be the approved layout. 2. The water and fire hydrant systems shall be approved by the Department of Public Works and the Fire Department. 3, Street widths and design shall comply with City Standards and Section 9941.3 (Street and Highway widths) of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 4. All utilities shall be installed underground, 5. All waterways shall be deeded in fee to the City, 6, All property within Tentative Tract Map No 6675 shall annex to the Harbor Maintenance District when it is formed. 7. Telephone conduit shall be installed from a telephone vault to the northeast corner of Admiralty Drive and Pacific Coast Highway and to the northwest corner of Parcel B at the Pacific Coast Highway to facilitate the installation of fire alarm boxes. 8. The existing water line within the tract boundary shall be relocated and a water line shall be extended to the bulkhead in Parcel C to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. 9, A division of land application separating this property from the remaining property held under the same ownership shall be filed with the City, approved and the condition of approval complied with, 10. All "Standard Conditions of Approval" for tentative tracts that are applicable shall be complied with, 11. A petition for rezoning the strip of land adjacent to parcel B from C-4 to R-1 shall be filed prior to submitting a final map to the City Council, 12. Common areas, including private streets shall not be dedicated separate and apart from the individual parcel, 13. Provisions for perpetual maintenance of the common area shall be approved by the Planning Department and Legal Department, 1/7/69 Minutes: H. B. Planning Commission Tuesday, January 7, 1969 Page No. 3 14a The CC&R°s, Article of Incorporation, By -Laws and Management Contract shall be submitted to the Planning Department and Legal Department for approval, 15, The CC&R°s shall contain at least the following provisions-. ao The Recreation area shall be reserved for the exclusive use of residents within the project and their non- paying guests. bo Owners and/or tenants shall be required to abide by association rules and there shall be penalties for violation of said rules. c. Any interest in the common area held by the individual parcel owner-s can not be devised, conveyed or dedicated separate and apart from the devise conveyance, and/or dedication of the individual parcel for a life in being plus 21 years, excepting this may be accomplished under the same conditions or grounds as are available under judicial partition. 16, A precise plan for development of Lot 6 (the recreation area) shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval prior to issuance of building permits. 17. All applicable provisions of Code Amendment 68-9 shall be complied with, ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Lane, Bokor, Miller, Duke NOES: None ABSENT-. Slates, Tom THE MOTION CARRIED. CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO 68-59 Applicant m Dutch Haven Homes, Inc, To permit: la 46 foot, 50 foot, 52 foot and 54 foot right of way streets as indicated on accompanying map of T. T. 6528. Subject streets to be in compliance with standards proposed by the Deputy Director of Public Works, and approved by both the Planning Commission (August 3, 1965) and City Council (September 7, 1965). 2, 10 foot minimum front yard setbacks for fences not over six feet in height, for garages with side -on -to -street approach and for other portions of a residence, (Note: Front set- back requirements for garages entered directly from the street to b.e 22 ft. min.). 3, 10 foot minimum rear yard setback on irregular shaped lots, providing an average rear yard depth of 20 ft. is maintained, On other lots 10 ft. minimum rear yard setback for a portion of a house provided the remaining rear yard has 900 square ft. minimum of area with the minimum rear yard depth being 20 ft. 4. Every 6 consecutive lots to average 60 feet in width (at a 20 foot setback from front property line) with an average 6,000 square feet of lot area for said 6 consecutive lots. (The minimum rectilinear lot shall not be less than 50 feet in width with 5,000 square feet of lot area, including corner lots). 1/7/69 Minutes: H. B. Planning Commission Tuesday, January 7, 1969 Page No. 4 The Staff Report was read by the Acting Secretary. The hearing was opened to the audience. John King, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission and stated that there were no objections to the conditions suggested by the Staff. There being no other comment the hearing was closed. Commission discussion followed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BOKOR AND SECONDED BY MILLER TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO 68-59. THE MOTION WAS WITHDRAWN. Further discussion was held. ANOTHER MOTION WAS MADE BY LANE AND SECONDED BY MILLER TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO 68-59 UPON THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONSAS AMENDED: 1. All provisions of Section 9941.4 (Street and Highway widths) and Code Amendment No 68-9 shall be complied with. 2. Open space requirements shall also conform to the requirements of Code Amendment No 68-9. 3. Approval of Conditional Exception No 68-59 shall not be effective -until Code Amendment No 68-9 has had second reading by the City Council. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Lane, Bokor, Miller, Duke NOES: None ABSENT: Slates, Tom THE MOTION CARRIED. ZONE CASE NO 68-31 - Continued RESOLUTION OF INTENT To allow a change of zone from: 1) R-2-0 Two Family Residence District combined with oil production to R-2 Two Family Residence District; 2) R-3-0 Limited Multiple Family Residence District combined with oil producthn to R-3 Limited Multiple Family Residence District; 3) R-4-0 Multiple Family Residence District combined with oil production to R-4 Multiple Family Residence District; 4) C-3-0 General Business District combined with oil production to C-3 General Business District 5) M-2-0 to Industrial District combined with oil pro- duction to M-2 Industrial District, excepting those parcels containing actively producing wells. The Acting Secretary informed the Commission that this item was originally heard on September 4, 1968, and continued to October 1, 1968, to allow the Oil Committee to review the proposal. Mr. Harlow stated that the Oil Committee reaffirmed their position as previously stated on July 1967, agreeing to the removal of the 110" zone pertaining to idle wells. 1/7/69 Minutes: He B. Planning Commission Tuesday, January 7, 1969 Page No, 5 The hearing was re -opened to the audience, Fred Kalenborn, member of the Oil Advisory Committee, addressed the Commission, and spoke in favor. Mr. Kalenborn said the oil committee would like to review the map of area before it goes to the City Council for first reading. the hearing was closed. RESOLUTION NO 68-31 There being no other comment, Commission discussion followed. A Resolution of the City Planning Commission Recommending Approval of Zone Case No 68-31 to the City Council. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BAZIL AND SECONDED BY BOKOR TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO 68-31 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ZONE CASE NO 68-31 TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: le An extensive land use study has been made of the area. 2. Removal of the 110" zone should be implemented except on parcels containing actively producing wells. 3. Removal of the 110" zone will allow for orderly development of this area. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Lane, Bokor, Miller, Duke NOES: None ABSENT: S,lates, Tom THE MOTION CARRIED° ZONE CASE NO 68-49 Applicant - Associated Southern Investment Company_ Change of zone from R-1 Single Family Residence District to R-5 Office -Professional District, Staff report was read by the Acting Secretary, A letter signed by six property owners opposing the zone case was submitted. Commission viewed a video tape of subject property and surrounding area, Dale Bush, attorney for the applicant addressed the Commission and explained the request. John Griffith and Phil Nider, addressed the Commission and spoke in opposition. There being no other comment, the hearing was closed, 1/7/69 Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, January 7, 1969 Page No. 6 Commission discussion followed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LANE AND' SECONDED BY MILLER TO APPROVE ZONE CASE NO 68-59 FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1, The subject property is adjacent to the Santa Ana River, Edison power line right-of-way and the Edison Relay Station. 20 The proposed use will not increase the density of the area over the density found in a standard Rml development. 3. The parcel is sufficiently separated from adjacent R-1 develop- ment; therefore, the use of property as a trailer park will not cause an incompatible relationship between uses. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Lane, NOES: None ABSENT: Slates, Tom THE MOTION CARRIED. Bokor, Miller, Duke ZONE CASE NO 68-50 Applicant - Joseph Ferm and Rollo McClellan Change of zone from R-A Residential Agricultural District and M-1 Light Industrial District to R-5 Office Professional District. Staff report was read by the Acting Secretary, The Commission viewed a video tape of the subject property and surrounding area. The hearing was opened to the audience. Joseph Ferm, applicant, addressed the Commission and gave his reasons for the request. Mr. Ferm stated this park would have a 5 star rating and the density would not exceed seven spaces per acre with space width up to 751 and depth of 7010 There being no other comment the hearing was'closedo Commission discussion followed. It was the consensus of the Commission to continue Zone Case No 68-50 to February 4, 1969, to allow time for the city to determine the boundaries of the Central City Park and for the applicant to submit evidence of the poor soil condition, ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Lane, Bokor, Miller, Duke NOES: None ABSENT: Slates, Tom THE MOTION CARRIED° 1/7/69 Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, January 7, 1969 Page No. 7 ZONE CASE NO 68-51 Applicant - Wm Lyon Development Co Change of zone from C-2 Community Business District to R-3 Limited Multiple Family Residence District. The Staff Report was read by the Acting Secretary. The Commission viewed a video tape of the Subject property and surrounding area. The hearing was opened to the audience. Al Bergum and John Horner, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission and stated their reasons for the request. There being no other comment the hearing was closed. Commission discussion was held. It was noted that the applicant has not submitted a market analysis to support his statement that there is a weak or marginal need for commercial in this area. A MOTION WAS MADE BY DUKE AND SECONDED BY BOKOR TO CONTINUE ZONE CASE NO 68-51 TO JANUARY 21, 19699 TO GIVE THE APPLICANT SUFFICIENT TIME TO SUBMIT INFORMATION TO SUBSTANTIATE THE REQUESTS. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Lane, Bokor, Miller, Duke NOES: None ABSENT: Slates, Tom THE MOTION CARRIED. ZONE CASE NO 67-32 - Continued Applicant - A & B Street Property Owners Change of zone from R-3 Limited Multiple Family Residence District to C-4 Highway Commercial District with a 50 ft. setback from the ultimate right of way. The Acting Secretary informed the Commission that this case was originally heard on November 7, 1967, then continued to February 20, 1968, in order to allow time for the property owners to consolidate their lots into a larger commercial parcel. Mr. Harlow further stated that on February20, 1968, this item was continued to May 21, 1968, to allow more time for the property owners to consolidate their lots into a larger parcel. On May 21, 1968, this case was continued again to November 19th for the same reason. The request was left off the November 19th agenda and readvertised for January 7, 1969. Commission viewed a video tape of thesubject property and surrounding area. The hearing was opened to the audience, there being no comment the hearing was closed. 1/7/69 Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, January 7, 1969 Page No. 8 Commission discussion followed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LANE AND SECONDED BY BOKOR TO DENY ZONE CASE NO 67-32 FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. Due to lack of interest by people in the area, it was the consensus to deny said request. 2. The property owners were not able to consolidate their lots into larger commercial parcels. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Lane, Bokor, Miller, Duke NOES: None ABSENT: Slates, Tom THE MOTION CARRIED. RECESS CALLED: The Chairman called a recess at 9:00 PM. COMMISSION RECONVENED: The Commission reconvened at 9:20 PM. ZONE CASE NO 68-52 Applicant - Elks Lodge #1959 Change of zone from R-3 Limited Multiple Family Residence District to R-5 Office -Professional District. The Staff Report was read by the Acting Secretary. The bearing was opened to the audience. Charles Spirazzo, member of the Elks Lodge, Building Committee, addressed the Commission and explained the request. Stan Cammer, Trustee of Elks Lodge, addressed the Commission and spoke in favor.of the request. There being no other comment the hearing was closed. Commission discussion followed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY DUKE AND SECONDED BY LANE TO APPROVE ZONE CASE NO 68-52 FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. The Elks Lodge will benefit the area. 2. This application was filed because the applicant's request to permit this use by conditional exception was denied. At that time it was indicated to the applicant that a proper procedure lias:: to rezone the-, property to R-5. 3. The R-5 zoning will be compatible with surrounding uses. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Lane, Bokor, Miller,Duke NOES: None ABSENT: Slates, Tom THE MOTION CARRIED. 1/7/69 Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, January 7, 1969 Page No. 9 ZONE CASE NO 68-53 Applicant - Wm Lyon Development Co. Change of zone from C-4 Highway Commercial District and R-5 Office -Professional District to R-3 Limited Multiple Family Residence District. The Staff Report was read by the Acting Secretary. Commission viewed a video tape of the property and surrounding area. The.hearing was opened to the audience. Al Bergum, and.John Horner, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission, and.explained the reasons for the request. The following property owners addressed the Commission and spoke in opposition: Vincent Graicello, John Hadley, Roger Gahry, Mrs. Robert Conrad, Henry Seafkun, Robert Evans, Don Rittman, William Lowe and William Arledge. There being no other comment the hearing was closed. A lengthy discussion was held by the Commission. A MOTION WAS MADE BY MILLER AND SECONDED BY DUKE TO CONTINUE ZONE CASE NO 68-53 TO JANUARY 21, 19699 FOR DECISION ONLY WITH ONE SPOKESMAN FOR THE GROUP OF HOMEOWNERS AND ONE PERSON REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT. ALSO THAT THE STAFF MAKE -A STUDY OF THE ZONING PATTERNS IN THE AREA. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Lane, Bokor,- Miller, Duke NOES: None ABSENT: Slates, Tom THE MOTION CARRIED. ZONE CASE NO 68-54 Applicant - Donald Jones Change of zone from R-1 Single Family Residence District to R-2 Two Family Residence District. The Staff Report was read by the Acting Secretary. Commission viewed a video tape of the property. The hearing was opened,to_the audience. Donald Jones, applicant, addressed the Commission and explained the proposal. Ronald Hill, 7812 Franklin Drive, Huntington Beach, addressed the Commission and submitted a petition signed by 17 persons opposing the change of zone. 1/7/69 Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, January 7, 1969 Page No, 10 There being no other comment the hearing was closed. Commission discussion was held. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BOKOR AND SECONDED BY MILLER TO APPROVE ZONE CASE NO 68-54 FOR THE FOLLOWING REASON: 1, The subject property can be developed in a manner that will be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood, ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Lane, Bokor, Miller, Duke NOES: None ABSENT: Slates, Tom THE MOTION CARRIED, MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT NO 68-4 Amendment to the Master Plan of Arterial Streets and Highways. Said amendment will: 1) Eliminate Saybrook Lane between Heil and Edinger Avenue as a secondary highway; 2) Eliminate Heil Avenue between Algonquin Street and Saybrook Lane as a secondary highway; 3) Add Algonquin Street between Heil and Edinger Avenue as a secondary highway; and 4) More accurately depict the Route 1 and Route 39 Freeway locations, The Acting Secretary made a presentation on the proposed amendment. The hearing was opened to the audience, there being no comment the hearing was closed, A MOTION WAS MADE BY MILLER AND SECONDED BY LANE TO RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT NO 68-4 BY THE CITY COUNCIL. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Lane, Bokor, Miller, Duke NOES: None ABSENT: Slates, Tom THE MOTION CARRIED° CODE AMENDMENT NO 68-11 Said proposal will amend Section 9410 (Intent and Purpose) by rewording and reducing the area of such developments in the C-1 neighborhood Commercial District, The Acting Secretary reviewed said amendment for the commission. The.hearing was opened to the audience, there being no comment the hearing was closed. Commission discussion followed, 1/7/69 Minutes-.. H, B. Planning Commission _ Tuesday, January 7, 1969 Page No, 11 A MOTION WA$ MADE BY BOKOR AND SECONDED BY MILLER TO RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF CODE AMENDMENT NO 68-11 BY THE CITY COUNCIL, ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES:-_Bazil, Lane, Bokor, Miller, Duke NOES: None ABSENT: Slates, Tom THE MOTION CARRIED. ,CODE AMENDMENT NO 68-12 Proposed code amendment: Chapter-98 ` ADMINISTRATION 1) Referral to Board applications to the Planning Commission; 2 The form of posted notices for public hearings; 3) The mailing of notices in lien of posting; 4) The addition of'a-new section to Chapter 98 eliminating the filing of multiple applications, The Acting Secretary reviewed said amendment for the commission. The hearing was opened to the audience, there being no comment the hearing was closed. Commission discussion -followed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LANE AND SECONDED BY MILLER TO RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF CODE AMENDMENT NO 68.�12 BY THE CITY COUNCIL, ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Lane, Bokor, Miller, Duke NOES: None ABSENT: Slates, -Tom THE MOTION CARRIED, BEAUTIFICATION AWARDS It was the consensus of the _Commission to consider this matter at the January 28, 1969, Study Session, PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT NO 69-1 The Acting Secretary distributed copies of a proposed code amendment pertaining to on site sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages in the R-5 District. The Commission reviewed the proposed amendment, A MOTION WAS MADE BY DUKE AND SECONDED BY LANE TO INSTRUCT THE SECRETARY TO SET SAID CODE AMEND- MENT FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON JANUARY 219 1969, ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Lane, Bokor, Miller, Duke NOES: None ABSENT: Slates, Tom THE MOTION CARRIED. 1./ 7/69 Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, January 7, 1969 Page No, 12 DISCUSSION: The Commission held a discussion pertaining to reduction of rear yard setbacks on lots abutting permanent open space. It was the consensus of the Commission to set this item aside; therefore, no action was taken, INFORMATION: The Acting Secretary informed the Commission that the City Council will have a joint meeting with Planning Commission and Park and Recreation Commission on June 29, 1969, at 7:30 PM to discuss the Park Bond Issue. THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, THE MEETING ADJOURNED. eyno s Robert-D. Bazil Secretary Chairman