Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1969-08-05MINUTES OF THE HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Council Chambers, Civic Center Huntington Beach, California TUESDAY, AUGUST 5, 1969 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Bazil, Bokor, Slates, Miller, Duke COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Tom, Porter NOTE: A TAPE RECORDING OF THIS MEETING IS ON FILE IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT OFFICE. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 7019 (Continued) Subdivider: S & S Construction Co. 196 lots on 40 acres, located at the northwest corner of Atlanta Ave. and Brookhurst St. The Subdivision Committee Report was read by the Secretary. Commission discussion followed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BOKOR AND SECONDED BY BAZIL TO APPROVE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 7019 UPON THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. The tentative map received July 8, 1969, shall be the approved map. 2. A 10 ft. by 10 ft. corner cut-off shall be provided on all reverse corner lots. 3. All "Standard Conditions of Approval" for tentative tracts that are applicable shall be complied with. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Bokor, Slates, Miller, Duke NOES: None ABSENT: Tom, Porter THE MOTION CARRIED. CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 69-16 (Continued) Applicant: So. California Edison Co. To permit construction, operation and maintenance of an electric distribution substation in excess of one acre in size. Located on the west side of Golden West St., approximately 320 ft. north of Ellis Ave. The Secretary read a letter submitted by Ralph C. Kiser, District Manager, So. California Edison Co., requesting withdrawal of Conditional Exception No. 69-16. A MOTION WAS MADE BY DUKE AND SECONDED BY BOKOR TO GRANT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Bokor, Slates, Miller, Duke NOES: None ABSENT: Tom, Porter THE MOTION CARRIED. -1- 8/5/69-PC Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, August 5, 1969 Page 2 CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 69-19 (Continued) Applicant: The Buccola Co. To permit a private frontage road 28 ft. in width, the area of which is to be included in the lot areas for density, parking and ingress and egress purposes; 24 ft. turning radii; a reduction in the minimum rear yard setback to a minimum of 5 ft. on lots 7 through 10; a reduction in the mini- mum open space requirements on lots 9 and 10; relief in the screen wall and planting requirements of Section 979 of the Ordinance, by allowing a screen wall to be constructed within the parkway area with planter areas at 46 feet on center along the Brookhurst frontage. Located on the east side of Brookhurst St. 500f ft. south of Hamilton Ave. The Secretary read a letter submitted by John K. Mandrell, engineer for the applicant, requesting with- drawal of Conditional Exception No. 69-19. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BAZIL AND SECONDED BY DUKE TO GRANT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Bokor, Slates, Miller, Duke NOES: None ABSENT: Tom, Porter THE MOTION CARRIED. COMMISSIONER PORTER: ZONE CASE NO. 69-22 Commissioner Porter arrived at 7:10 P.M. and assumed his duties. In Conjunction With CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 69-26 Applicant: VTN Orange County for Gordon and Faye Talbert Zone Change Request: Change of zone from R5 Office -Professional, R-')-U 0 ice- rofessional combined with Oil and C3 General Business District to R4 Multiple Family Resi- dence District and C4 Highway Commercial District with a 50 ft. setback from ultimate right-of-way. C. E. Request: To permit an 828 unit apart- ment complex on approximately 29.52 acres of land in the R5 Office - Professional and R5-0 Office -Professional combined with Oil Dis- tricts with a zone change request on file for R4 Multiple Family Residence District. Approximately 9% of the units within this development are to be 4 stories in height. Such development to be developed under the density as permitted within the R3 Limited Multiple Family District. Located on the southwest corner of Atlanta Ave. and Beach Blvd. The Staff Report was read by the Secretary. The hearing was opened to the audience. Paul Lower, representing the Superior Oil Co., addressed the Commission and asked if the zone change would effect Superior Oil Company's property, located north of the subject property across Atlanta Ave. Ralph Van Buskirk, VTN Co., and the architect representing the applicant, displayed exhibits of the proposed project and explained the request. Forrest Plunket, adjacent property owner, asked about the drainage problem. Louis Laramore, House and Country, Inc., the developer, addressed the Commission and spoke in favor of the request. -2- 8/5/69-PC Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, August 5, 1969 Page 3 There being no other comment, the hearing was closed. Commissioner Bokor asked if the staff had received any information from the Huntington Beach Elementary School District on this project. He was informed that no com- munication had been received. The Commission held a lengthy discussion. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BOKOR AND SECONDED BY BAZIL TO CONTINUE ZONE CASE NO. 69-22 TO AUGUST 19, 1969. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Bokor, Slates NOES: Porter, Miller, Duke ABSENT: Tom THE MOTION FAILED. A FURTHER MOTION WAS MADE BY DUKE AND SECONDED BY BOKOR TO CONTINUE ZONE CASE NO. 69-22 TO FEBRUARY 3, 1970. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Bokor, Slates, Porter, Miller, Duke NOES: None ABSENT: Tom THE MOTION CARRIED. A MOTION WAS MADE BY MILLER AND SECONDED BY DUKE TO APPROVE PHASE 1 AND 4 OF CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION 69-26 AND WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. A precise plan shall be submitted to the Board of Zoning Adjustments for conditions of approval. Such plan shall delineate all structures within the apartment development. Also, such plan shall conform to all applicable provisions for apartment development. 2. Atlanta Ave. shall be dedicated and fully improved to City standards at the time each parcel is developed. Improvements shall include street trees, street signs, street lights, fire hydrants, sewer and water main extensions. 3. Water supply shall be through the City of Huntington Beach's water -system. 4. Sewage disposal shall be through the City of Huntington Beach's sewage system. 5. The water, sewer, and fire hydrant system shall be approved by the Department of Public Works and Fire Department. 6. A drainage plan shall be provided to Department of Public Works specifications. 7. The property shall participate in the local drainage assess- ment district. 8. Soil reports, as required by the Building Department and De- partment of Public Works shall be submitted to the City prior to issuance of building permits. 9. All utilities shall be installed underground. 10. Fire alarm system conduit and appurtenances shall be installed by the developer at locations and to specifications provided by the Fire Department. 11. A lighting system shall be installed within the project equal in illumination to lighting on public streets. A lighting plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for ap- proval. 12. All private streets shall meet the minimum standards for planned residential developments as adopted by the Planning Commission. 13. The structural street section of all private drives shall be -3- 8/5/69-PC Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, August 5, 1969 Page 4 approved by ,the Department of Public Works. 14. Off-street parking facilities shall conform to Article 979. 15. A masonry wall shall be constructed along east, west and south property lines. The height of said wall shall be such that the top will be 6 ft. above the highest ground sur- face within 20 ft. of the common property line. 16. There shall be no fence, structure, or landscaping construc- ted or maintained over 32 ft. high within a 10 ft. by 10 ft. triangular area at the intersection of driveways and streets or within a 25 ft. by 25 ft. triangular area at the inter- section of streets. 17. No structures, other than those shown on the plot plan, as approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustments shall be construc- ted within the apartment project. 18. All applicable City Ordinances shall be complied with. 19. If the project is developed in increments, a Division of Land application, separating this parcel from the remaining pro- perty held under the same ownership, shall be filed with the City, approved and recorded prior to any framing inspection. 20. After freeway right-of-way acquisition, the plan shall be re- submitted to the Board of Zoning Adjustments for review and conditions. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Bokor, Porter, Miller, Duke NOES: Slates ABSENT: Tom THE MOTION CARRIED. ZONE CASE NO. 69-23 Applicant: Victor Terr Change of zone from R2 Two Family Residence District to C4 Highway Commercial District. Located on the south side of William St., approximately 125 ft. west of Beach Blvd. The Staff Report was read by the Secretary. A letter, signed by two property owners, ob- jecting to the zone case was submitted. The hearing was opened to the audience. Joe Evans, representing the applicant, ad- dressed the Commission and explained the reasons for this request. There being no other comment, the hearing was closed. Commission Discussion followed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BAZIL AND SECONDED BY PORTER TO APPROVE ZONE CASE NO. 69-23 FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. If this property is developed in conjunction with a commer- cial use on the applicant's property.with frontage on Beach Blvd*, the project will be enhanced by offering greater com- mercial depth and greater potential parking areas. 2. Approval of this zone case will not significantly effect the master plan of the area and will be more compatible with ulti- mate freeway developement. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Porter, Bokor, Duke, Miller, Slates NOES: None ABSENT: Tom THE MOTION CARRIED. -4- 8/5/69-PC Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, August 5, 1969 Page 5 CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 69-27 Applicant: Albert N. Dureau To permit an office professional building by remodeling exterior frontage of an existing single family resi- dence on Adams Ave. in the R1 Single Family Residence District. Located on the southwest corner of Adams Ave. and Sherwood Circle. The Secretary read a letter submitted by the applicant, requesting a two -week continuance. The hearing was opened to the audience. Robert Windecker, 20031 Shorewood Circle, Huntington Beach, addressed the Commission and opposed the request. Mr. Windecker also submitted a petition signed by 14 property owners, objecting to the request. John Moore, 9162 Crawford Circle, Huntington Beach, addressed the Commission and spoke in opposition. There being no other comment, the hearing was closed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY MILLER AND SECONDED BY BOKOR TO CONTINUE CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 69-27 TO AUGUST 19, 1969, MEETING AT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Bokor, Slates, Duke, Porter, Miller NOES: None ABSENT: Tom THE MOTION CARRIED. CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 69-25 Applicant: Isei Sakioka To permit a horticultural use for the purpose of growing nursery stock in cans within the Edison easement line in the RI Single Family Residence District. and Heil Ave. Located east of Newland St. between Warner Ave. The Staff Report was read by the Secretary. The hearing was opened to the audience. The following property owners addressed the Commission and opposed the request: Michael Burns, Lenn Spencer, Paul Perrault, Clarence Bart and Cris C. Cris. Speaking in favor were Miss Sakioka and Robert Burbank, Edison Company. A petition signed by 66 property owners endorsing the request was submitted by Miss Sakioka and read by the Secretary. There being no other comment, the hearing was closed. The Secretary informed the Commission that the Recreation and Parks Department has indicated that the southerly 22 acres of this property is considered high priority for park site acquisition because the City is unable to arrive at a work- ing agreement with the Ocean View School,District on a neighbor- hood facility at the Rancho View School site. Mr. Reynolds stated that the Recreation and Parks Department indicated that the priority for development of this property will be discussed at their August 19th Commission meeting. A MOTION WAS MADE BY DUKE AND SECONDED BY PORTER TO CONTINUE CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 69-25 TO AUGUST 19, 1969, FOR DECISION ONLY IN ORDER TO OBTAIN MORE INFORMATION FROM THE RECREATION AND PARKS DEPARTMENT. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Bokor, Slates, Miller, Tom, Duke, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Tom THE MOTION CARRIED. -5- 8/5/69-PC Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, August 5, 1969 Page 6 CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 69-23 Applicant: Fun Masters, Inc. To permit a temporary amusement facility in- cluding a concrete slab, temporary office and watchman's quarters in the C3 General Business District and R5 Office -Professional District. Located on the west side of Beach Blvd. approxi- mately 400 ft. north of Pacific Coast Highway. The Staff Report was read by the Secretary. A video tape of subject property was shown. The hearing was opened to the audience, there being no comment the hearing was closed. Commission discussion was held. A MOTION WAS MADE BY PORTER AND SECONDED BY BOKOR TO DENY CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 69-23 FOR THE FOLLOWING REASON: 1. The applicant failed to show sufficient hardship on subject property. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Bokor, Slates, Duke, Porter, Miller NOES: None ABSENT: Tom THE MOTION CARRIED. CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 69-24 Applicant: City of Huntington Beach To permit the construction of a steel building with a metal chain link fence and blacktop surfacing surrounding said building for the purpose of a sub -surface pump repair facility in the R3 Limited Multiple Family Residence District. Located on the southeast corner of Pecan St. and 20th St. The Staff Report was read by the Secretary. A video tape was shown of subject property. Commissioner Bazil informed the chairman that he would abstain from participating in this case. The hearing was opened to the audience. Robert Bazil, 1836 Pine St., Huntington Beach, addressed the Commission and stated that he does not want this decision to set a precedent and that if the City feels that ap- proval of this request is necessary for a limited time only, he does not object. C. D. Howe, 4238 Locust St., Long Beach, ad- dressed the Commission and stated that he was owner of 6 lots in the surrounding area and that this request will set a precedent, also, this property is desirable for better development. Commissioner Bokor stated that this is a unique situation and will not be duplicated. There being no other comment, the hearing was closed. Commission discussion followed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY, MILLER AND SECONDED BY BOKOR TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 69-24 WITH THE FOLLOW- ING CONDITIONS: 1. Conditional Exception No. 69-24 shall become null and void August 5, 1974. 2. The application shall be referred to the Board of Zoning Adjustments for review and conditions. 3. The site shall be improved in such a manner that it will be attractive and not a detriment to future development. -6- 8/5/69-pC Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, August 5, 1969 Page 7. AND FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. There are many installations in the immediate area of an oil nature. 2. This request will not set a precedent for future requests. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Miller, Bokor, Duke, Slates NOES: Porter ABSENT: Tom ABSTAINED: Bazil THE MOTION CARRIED. CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 69-22 (Continued) Applicant: Ethan M. Johnson To permit the construction of a mobile home park in the MI Light Industrial District. Located on the south side of Slater Ave. and approximately 660 ft. east of Gothard St. The Secretary informed the Commission this request had been continued from the July 15, 1969, meeting to allow time for the staff to study the subject property and sur- rounding area. Mr. Reynolds stated that a preliminary study has been made and will be presented later in the meeting. Commission discussion followed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY DUKE AND SECONDED BY BAZIL TO CONTINUE CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 69-22 TO AUGUST 19, 19699 FOR THE FOLLOWING REASON: 1. The staff's study of this area is not complete. William Lollan, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission and requested that a decision be reached this evening either for approval or denial. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BAZIL AND SECONDED BY PORTER TO DENY CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 69-22 FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. The motion to continue the hearing to allow time for the staff to complete their study on the surrounding area was with- drawn because the applicant requested a decision for either approval or denial. Thus, the decision to deny based on in- sufficient information. 2. The fact that peat exists on the subject property does not constitute a hardship. ROLL CALL VOTE: "AYES: Bazil, Bokor, Slates, Miller, Porter, Duke NOES: None ABSENT: Tom THE MOTION CARRIED. RECESS CALLED: Chairman Slates called a recess at 9:30 P.M. COMMISSION RECONVENED: The Commission reconvened at 9:45 P.M. DISCUSSION: The Secretary made a presentation pertaining to Site #1 - Small Lot Consolidation Analysis on lots located east of Golden West St. and north of Warner Ave. Mr. Reynolds reviewed the existing zoning and the master plan of Site #1 with the Commission and made a presentation to bring them up to date with the study being made on the subject property. Commission discussion followed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY PORTER AND SECONDED BY DUKE TO INSTRUCT THE STAFF TO PROCEED WITH THE STUDY AND TO RE- VIEW POSSIBLE ZONING ALTERNATES. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Bokor, Slates, Miller, Porter, Duke NOES: None ABSENT: Tom THE MOTION CARRIED. -7- 8/5/69-PC Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, August 5, 1969 Page 8 ZONE CASE NO. 69-17 (R3 Portion) Applicant: John D. Lusk & Son The Secretary informed the Commission that the City Council requested that the Commission reconsider their decision to deny that portion of Zone Case No. 69-17 to change the zone on property located on the north side of Edinger Ave., west of the Marina High School Site, from M1-A to R3 and spe- cifically the rezoning of Phase #1 of the apartment development to R3. The Commission held a lengthy discussion. A MOTION WAS MADE BY DUKE AND SECONDED BY PORTER TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF PHASE #1 TO R3 BECAUSE THE HIGH- EST AND BEST USE OF THE PROPERTY IS INDUSTRIAL. The question before the Planning Commission as a result of the amendment to the original motion was to re- commend denial of Zone Case No. 69-17 for the following reasons: 1. The highest and best use of the property is industrial. 2. The best use for the subject property is industrial, but if the Council chooses to proceed with an apartment complex, then Phase #2 or #5 should be considered rather than Phase #1 because either Phase #2 or #5 will allow the development of the remaining property for industrial, if this developer is not successful with the project. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Duke, Porter, Slates, Bokor, Bazil NOES: Miller ABSENT: Tom THE MOTION CARRIED. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS BY THE COMMISSION: 1. This Planning Commission action will fulfill the legal re- quirements and allow the City Council to take whatever action they see fit. 2. The Planning Commission intends to meet with members of the Ocean View School District to discuss planning matters and establish a closer working relationship. Dr. R. Bauer, representing the Ocean View School District, addressed the Commission and stated that he is very much opposed to the request for apartments on grounds that such a project would cost the Ocean View School District $36,000 per.year in a loss of taxes. DISCUSSION: Jim Palin, Assistant Planner, informed the Planning Commission that the Board of Zoning Adjustments has had numerous requests to reduce the front yard setback for fences in established residential areas and due to this, the Board has asked if the Commission would consider a code amendment to permit fences to be constructed closer to the front property line in residential areas. It was the consensus of the Commission not to amend the ordinance code to allow such a reduction within de- veloped residential subdivisions as this reduction was only to be allowed at the time of initial construction on 5 or more lots. PRESENTATION: Robert Vasquez, Assistant Planner, made a presen- tation of the central industrial study and soil composition of the area bounded by Warner Ave. on the north, Gar- field Ave. on the south, Nichols and Huntington Streets on the east and Golden West St. on the west. The presentation proceeded with an orientation to the industrially zoned area and explanation of the mechanics which the Planning Staff followed in assessing 9 parcels. The study continued with a soil composition report of the area. Grades and textures.were defined and a con- cluding statement read, "This soil study must be considered to -8- 18/5/69-PC Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, August 5, 1969 Page 9 be of a general nature in that each industrially developed parcel would require a special study as to its application." The presentation included a 9 parcel sampling which attempted to assess the potential of the industrial zone and indicated that 14% of the 652 acres had been developed. In addition, 31% had been developed with encroachments leaving 55% to be developed as the Commission might encourage. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Bazil asked if anything was being done to protect screen walls around commercial parking lots. Chairman Slates appointed Mr. Bazil to work with the staff to recommend to the Building Department the type of protection for masonry walls around parking lots. THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED. K. A. Reynoldl Roger Slates Secretary Chairman -9- 8/5/69-PC