Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1975-12-16MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Council Chambers, Civic Center Huntington Beach, California TUESDAY, DECEMBER 16, 1975 - 7:00 P.M. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Parkinson, Bazil, Finley, Shea, Boyle, Kerins Chairman Slates arrived at 7:20 P.M. COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None NOTE: A TAPE RECORDING OF THIS MEETING IS ON FILE IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT OFFICE. CONSENT CALENDAR: Minutes of December 2, 1975. ON MOTION BY BOYLE AND SECOND BY PARKINSON THE MINUTES OF DECEMBER 2, 1975 WERE APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Parkinson, NOES: None, ABSENT: Slates ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None SCHEDULED ITEMS: Bazil, Finley, Shea, Boyle, Kerins USE PERMIT NO. 75-58 - APPEAL TO APPROVAL APPLICANT: Standard Oil Company of California APPELLANT NO. 1 - G. A. Nixon, et al APPELLANT NO. 2 - Standard Oil Company of California The original request was to permit the construction of a gas treat- ment plant on an approximate one acre plot of land within an existing oil field located at the southwest corner of Garfield and Goldenwest Street. The first Appeal was filed by property owners within the Seacliff Residential Area. The second Appeal was filed by the applicant and represents an appeal to Conditions 1, 9, and 10 imposed by the Board of Zoning Adjustments in its approval action. Jim Palin addressed the Commission and briefly reviewed the back- ground information, noting that the attorney's office had submitted an opinion at the request of Planning Staff on certain legal questions. A vugraph was presented and Mr. Palin clarified the acreage involved. Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, December 16, 1975 Page 2 Chairman Slates stated that the first Appeal, filed by the home- owners in Seacliff Residential Area, would be heard first. He then opened the public hearing. Commissioner Finley requested that it be made a matter of record that she, Chairman Slates, and Bill Foster, Huntington Beach Company, had made a tour of the site on Friday, December 12, 1975. Mr. G. A. Nixon addressed the Commission and spoke against the use of the property, stating that he and other residents feared potential uses of heavy manufacturing in the area in the future, with possible increased expansion of oil operations. He further stated that the Oil Code needs updating. Chairman Slates in- formed him that this is being done at the present time. Mr. Tom Welch addressed the Commission and spoke against the use. He complained of odors presently emanating from the oil operations. He further discussed the need for more landscaping around oil operations and the need for painting the tanks. He stated that 55 dba was fine insofar as noise level is concerned. Chairman Slates requested that representatives of Standard Oil speak on their Appeal to the three conditions. Mr. Ed Scott addressed the Commission and stated that this was a diminishing oil field. He also stated that the site of the gas treatment plant was a 135 ft. by 135 ft. piece of property. He stated that they had no plans to build a refinery in Huntington Beach. He stated that the plant would not have any harmful effects on the area; it won't be seen or smelled, or heard off property line. Jane Carpenter, representing Seacliff property owners, stated that although only four persons signed the Appeal, the other property owners were in support of their action. A resident of 6702 Lawn Haven Drive spoke on problems of enforce- ment of noise level. Chairman Slates closed the public hearing on the two Appeals. There was discussion by the Planning Commission on the conditions of approval. ON MOTION BY BOYLE AND SECOND BY BAZIL THE APPEAL FILED BY G. A. NIXON ET AL ON USE PERMIT NO. 75-58 WAS DENIED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Parkinson, Bazil, Finley, Slates, Boyle, Kerins NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Shea -2- 12/16/75 - PC Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, December 16, 1975 Page 3 ON MOTION BY FINLEY AND SECOND BY BOYLE STANDARD OIL COMPANY'S APPEAL TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1, 9 and 10 FOR USE PERMIT NO. 75-58 WAS DENIED FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: Condition No. 1 - It is necessary to establish existing noise conditions along the property lines to determine at some later date whether the gas processing plant would have a detrimental effect upon this noise level. Condition No. 9 - This condition does respond to concerns of home- owners and the potential impact of the oil resource use on adjoin- ing residential area. Condition No. 10 - This condition also responds to homeowners' concerns on the impact on residential area. AYES: Parkinson, Bazil, Finley, Slates, Boyle, Kerins NOES: None ABSTAIN: Shea ABSENT: None There was a discussion on the recommendation by the Board of Zoning Adjustments to study the possible rezoning of the approximate 38 acre base industrial zone (M2) of this oil operation site. Possible future rezoning of the property should not remove the 0-2 designation under which the oil facilities are currently operating. ON MOTION BY KERINS AND SECOND BY FINLEY THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO STUDY THE POSSIBILITY OF REZONING THE APPROXIMATE 38 ACRE BASE INDUSTRIAL ZONE (M2) OF OIL OPERATION SITE WITHOUT REMOVING THE 0-2 DESIGNATION UNDER WHICH OIL FACILITIES ARE CURRENTLY OPERATING BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Parkinson, Bazil, Finley, Slates, Boyle, Kerins NOES: None ABSTAIN: Shea ABSENT: None The Chairman called a five minute recess at 8:30 P.M. USE PERMIT NO. 75-61 - APPEAL TO APPROVAL APPLICANT: Business Properties APPELLANT: Meredith Gardens Homeowners Association Use Permit No. 75-61 is a request to permit the construction of a 125,000 sq. f t. shopping center pursuant to Section 9472 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. The property is located at the southeast intersection of Adams and Brookhurst and is zoned C4. At the public hearing of the Board of Zoning Adjustments at their. November 12, 1975 meeting the plans were discussed and two rep- resentatives from Meredith Gardens were present and questioned aspects of the project. Mr. Ball, representing Business Properties, -3- 12/16/75 - PC Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, December 16, 1975 Page 4 explained that the economic constraints were such that it made it extremely difficult to develop the total parcel all at once. The Board of Zoning Adjustments then conditionally approved Use Permit No. 75-61. A photograph of the site was presented on the screen. John Cope stated he had no information to add to the Staff Report. He discussed the'JHK'traffic study made in 1974. There was a lengthy aiscuss'ion'' ori''traffic 'at Harbor and Adams among Commission and Staff concerning inconsistences in traffic reports. There was further discussion on excess commercial zoning in the City in some areas. Chairman Slates opened the public hearing. Bob Riedesel, representing Meredi'th'Gardens Homeowners Association, addressed the Commission and stated that his objections were based on the fact that the approved plan was not a total plan. He stated that approximately'4'6f the'16+ acres are being reserved for future development which'land locks it. He stated that they did not want apartments in the area. It was also of concern to Mr. Riedesel that Albertson's, the largest tenant, has a policy of staying open 24, hours per day which he'felt would have a detrimental effect on property owners in the Meredith Gardens area. He also discussed the appre- hension that a speedway could occur without proper planning or possible use of speed bumps.. He also felt that a 10 foot median divider should be provided on both sides of the property. Mr. Leon Alta discussed the present traffic problems at this inter- section and the creation of additional traffic which would be generated from this development. Mr. Ted Denny inquired about underground utilities and was advised that some utility poles will have to remain but those backing on to residential areas will be'underground. Mr. Dale Menke addressed the Commission and stated that he was in agreement with Mr. Riedesel on all issues except the request that 10 feet of landscaped median be provided. It was his feeling that at least 20 feet should be'provided. Mr. Holland Robinson stated that he was not opposed to development in that area but he agreed with the statement Commissioner Boyle made concerning the bad traffic situation at the intersection, particularly between 5 and 6 in the afternoon.' Mr. Charles Ball, representing Business Properties, addressed the Commission and stated that he had studied the property for 2 1/2 years and had discussed with the Staff during that time his develop- ment plans. He stated that before he could develop the approximate 4 acres to be included in Phase II it would be necessary to develop 9 -4- 12/16/75 - PC Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, December 16, 1975 Page 5 the valuable frontage property which would place a higher value on the 4 acres. He discussed the possibility of using this area for a nursery operation with plants to be contained both inside and outside. This proposed use would be retail only. He discussed the landscaping to be provided on the rear The public hearing was closed. Commission discussion ensued. ON MOTION BY SHEA AND SECOND BY KERINS APPEAL TO APPROVAL OF USE PERMIT NO. 75-61 WAS APPROVED AND USE PERMIT NO. 75-61 WAS DENIED FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS AND BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: Partial development is not the most desirable for the property and contributes to the detrimental effect on the adjacent properties. Also, traffic problems are engendered by the proposed plan as it exists. AYES: Parkinson, Finley, Shea, Boyle, Kerins NOES: Bazil, Slates ABSENT: None Commissioner Bazil stated that he did not feel the Commission had the right to demand that the parcel be entirely developed, although he would have preferred the 4 acre parcel to be located somewhere else on the property. He further stated that if the streets will not maintain the traffic the property should not have been zoned commercial, and that it should not be denied on the basis of traffic problems. Also he stated that the plan could be amended to reflect different curb cuts. Also he pointed out that when the 4 acre parcel is developed it will have to be through filing of a Use Permit which the Planning Commission will have the opportunity to review and approve or disapprove. Commissioner Kerins stated that perhaps the applicant, Charles Ball, could revise the plans and bring back to the Commission at their January 6, 1975 meeting and request reconsideration at that time. Commissioner Finley expressed concern of probable excess of com- mercial zoning in the City. ZONE CASE NO. 75-10 APPLICANT: Allen Klingensmith and James Lange Zone Change No. 75-10 is a request for a change of zone from R2 (Medium Density Residential) to C4 (Highway Commercial). The subject property is intended to be utilized in conjunction with existing commercial properties to the east. It is located on the north side of Ronald Road and is the second lot west of Beach Boulevard. John Cope stated that the Staff is in agreement with the proposed rezoning and believes it will result in the best use of the sub- -5- 12/16/75 - PC Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, December 16, 1975 Page 6 ject site. He recommended that the Planning Commission approve the Zone Change and recommended that the second reading of the Ordinance be held up until the Zone Change can be processed. The Chairman opened the public hearing. Mr. Klingensmith expressed appreciation for Staff's recommendations for saving time on the Zone Change. The public hearing was closed. ON MOTION BY BAZIL AND SECOND BY PARKINSON ZONE CHANGE NO. 75-10 WAS. APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: 1. The close proximity of the subject site to the high traffic volume state highway indicates that the parcel's best use would be commercial versus residential. 2. The orientation of the subject site to the commercial properties to the east will provide for additional commercial development alternatives resulting in the highest and best use of the properties. 3. The General Plan designation on the site is an area providing transition from residential to commercial land uses, and since commercial related uses have been determined as the most appropriate for the,site, the request is in conformance with the General Plan. AYES: Parkinson, Bazil,`Finley, Slates,.Shea, Boyle, Kerins NOES: None ABSENT: None CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.NO. 74-18 Applicant: James C. Nye This is a request for a one year extension of time subject to the previous conditions of approval imposed on this application. ON MOTION BY PARKINSON AND SECOND BY BOYLE THE REQUEST FOR A ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME ON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 74-18 WAS APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Parkinson, Bazil, Finley, Slates, Shea, Boyle, Kerins NOES: None ABSENT: None CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 75-16 Applicant: B & B Developers The applicant requested a reconsideration in Condition No. 5 which was imposed as one of the conditions of approval at the December 2, 1975 meeting. The basis of disagreement concerns the specific requirement for elimination of the oil well and equipment prior to conveyance of any of the units as condominiums. - I,- 7 /'I r /7 C ... -0 r, Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, December 16, 1975 Page 7 ON MOTION BY SLATES AND SECOND BY SHEA THE COMMISSION VOTED TO RECONSIDER CONDITION NO. 5 OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 75-16 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Parkinson, Bazil, Finley, Slates, Shea, Boyle, Kerins NOES: None ABSENT: None Mr. Clemens, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission and explained that while the applicant owned the land, the oil operation was controlled by another person. Under their agreement there is no way to determine how long the oil operation will continue but that when it does cease the property will be converted to open space. Mr. Clemens suggested that the CC&R's could contain a condition that at such time as the oil operation is abandoned the area would be maintained as open space. Mr. Vaughn, representing the applicant, stated that he had a Quit Claim Deed on the surface rights. He further stated that the oil company has acted in good faith on their responsibility for cleaning up any spillage and have agreed to restore anything they do which might cause damage. There was a discussion on changing the wording of Condition 5 and obtain the agreement of the oil company as well as B & B Developers on such revised Condition, which would require a continuance. ON MOTION BY KERINS AND SECOND BY PARKINSON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 75-16 WAS CONTINUED TO JANUARY 6, 1975 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Parkinson, Bazil, Finley, Slates, Shea, Boyle, Kerins NOES: None ABSENT: None MISCELLANEOUS REQUEST BY CITY COUNCIL FOR PLANNING COMMISSION TO RECONSIDER TOWNLOT AREA ONE BOUNDARY INSOFAR AS DELETION OF BLOCK 421 IS CONCERNED. ON MOTION BY BOYLE AND SECOND BY SHEA THE PLANNING COMMISSION VOTED TO APPROVE TOWNLOT AREA ONE AS PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED TO CITY COUNCIL WITH NO CHANGES IN BOUNDARIES BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Parkinson, Bazil, Finley, Slates, Shea, Boyle, Kerins NOES: None ABSENT: None Secretary Harlow and Chairman Slates will plan a dinner meeting to honor the former Commissioner, Bill Geiger, for either December 29th or 30th. -7- 12/16/75 - PC Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, December 16, 1975 Page 8 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Bob Jarrard spoke against changing any boundaries in Townlot Area One. He also requested that a Concept,of Approval letter be prepared by the Planning Staff for use in getting a hearing date with the Coastal Commission. ON MOTION BY'FINLEY AND SECOND BY PARKINSON STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO PREPARE LETTERS OF CONCEPT OF APPROVAL FOR APPLICANTS TO PRESENT TO THE COASTAL COMMISSION PENDING APPROVAL OF THEIR APPLICATIONS WITH THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Parkinson, Bazil, Finley, Slates, Shea, Boyle, Kerins NOES: None ABSENT: None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS: Commissioner Kerins requested that Staff put on a Study Session Agenda the suggested Ordinance amendments so that an Ordinance can be pre- pared for adequate driveway widths for commercial developments. Commissioner Parkinson requested that a review be made of commercial and residential ratios. BOLSA CHICA ANNEXATION Commissioner Parkinson discussed the proposed Bolsa Chica Annexation and the City Council formation of an Ad Hoc Committee on the pro- posal. It was then the consensus of the Commission to reaffirm their majority recommendation on'the annexation. ON MOTION BY PARKINSON AND SECOND BY BOYLE COMMISSIONER FINLEY WAS APPOINTED TO REPRESENT THE COMMISSION IN WORKING_WITH STAFF ON DRAFTING A TRANSMITTAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDING THAT TIIE AD HOC COMMITTEE -NOT -BE -FORMED AND -COUNCIL RESOLVE THE ISSUE ON THE BASIS OF INPUT-ALREADY-BUSMITTED-BYJTHE"FOLLOWING-VOTE: AYES: Parkinson, Bazil, Finley, Slates, Shea, Boyle, Kerins NOES: None ABSENT: None STAFF'S COMMENTS: Andy Vanderlaan introduced Mel Ott, Fire Department representative, announcing that he would be representing the Fire Department at Planning Commission meetings effective in January, 1976 when Mr. Vanderlaan terminates his employment with the City.. i Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, December 16, 1975 Page 9 Secretary Harlow reviewed the action of City Council meeting of December 15, 1975. ON MOTION BY SHEA AND SECOND BY KERINS THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:20 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Parkinson, Bazil, Finley, Slates, Shea, Boyle, Kerins NOES: None ABSENT: None Richard A. Harlow Ro—ger D Slates Secretary Chairman -9- 12/16/75 - PC