HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-11-18Approved December 2, 1980
MINUTES
HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION
Council Chambers - Civic Center
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, alifornia
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 1980 - 7:00 PM
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter,
Greer, Schumacher, Bauer
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Commissioner Greer asked that Item A-5, concerning the water well
at Sunview Park, be pulled from the consent agenda for separate
consideration.
ON MOTION BY BAUER AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER THE REMAINDER OF
THE CONSENT AGENDA, CONSISTING OF THE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 21 AND
NOVEMBER 4, 1980 REGULAR MEETINGS AND CONFORMANCE WITH THE
GENERAL PLAN NOS. 80-16 AND 80-17, WAS APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING
VOTE:
AYES: Bannister, Kenefick*,Winchell, Porter, Greer,
Schumacher, Bauer
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: Kenefick*
*Commissioner Kenefick's abstention applied only to the approval
of the minutes of October 21, 1980 because she had not been
present at that meeting.
CONSENT ITEM A-5: Conformance with General Plan No. 80-18
Water Well at Sunview Park
Commissioner Greer noted that another City well is to be aban-
doned in Murdy Park because of the high sulphur content of the
water and questioned what assurances there would be that this
could not occur again. George Tindall, City Engineer, discussed
the depths of the aquifers into which the wells will be drilled
and said that the geographical location in the City has an effect
on the quality of the water obtained. He added that a test well
will be put down before the permanent well is drilled, and the
,,k-ater sampled periodically while drillinc is going on. Commis-
sioner Winchell di cu;;sed hog; well operations will be buffered
from the adjacent residential units.
Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission
November 18, 1980
Page 2
ON MOTION BY BAUER AND SECOND BY GREER CONFORMANCE WITH THE GENERAL
PLAN NO. 80-18 WAS APPROVED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Greer, Schumacher,
Bauer
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS:
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 11245/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 80-56
Applicant: Mansion Properties, Inc.
To permit a 29-lot subdivision of 2.8 acres of property located on
the east side of Lake Street between Yorktown and Utica Avenues.
Savoy Bellavia called the Commission's attention to a letter from
the applicants requesting vacation of a portion of the Yorktown
Avenue right-of-way and to revised findings which had been submitted
to them at this meeting. The Commission briefly discussed the
future alignment of Yorktown and its possible effect to the subject
proposal.
The meeting was opened to public testimony.
Dave Eadie, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission in
support of the proposed subdivision. He addressed certain points
presented in the staff report concerning the ownership of the rail-
road right-of-way and the alignment of Yorktown Avenue. He des-
cribed the history of the right-of-way ownership, noting that the
City Attorney has categorically stated that her analysis of the
title report submitted by the Huntington Beach Company indicates
that the Huntington Beach Company is the property owner. H.B. Company as
property owner has authorized Mansion Properties to file on the site.
In regard to the question of the blue border of the map not going
to centerline on Lake Street, Mr. Eadie noted that this is in fact
a resubdivision of the original subdivision of the property in 1914
when street dedication was made, and in the company's view no further
dedication is required.
In response to the prior requirement placed on other maps on Lake
Street to quitclaim any interest in the right-of-way, if any, to the
City, he said that this is the first map to be filed which encumbers
any of that right-of-way.
He addressed the revised findings in regard to the bicycle trails
and the abandonment of Yorktown by saying that the width of a
Class 1 bike trail could be accommodated on the remainder of the
right-of-way and the abandonment adequately covered by conditions of
approval. fie added, however, that the applicants would be amenable
-2- 11-18-80 - P.C.
Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission
November 18, 1980
Page 3
to a continuance on the map to reconcile the question of York-
town Avenue and to allow the Trails Committee to begin its
deliberation on what configuration the bicycle trail might take
south of Yorktown Avenue.
Members of the Commission questioned Mr. Eadie in regard to
the matter of ownership and possible alternatives for a trans-
portation corridor in the event that approval of this map
should preclude future use of the old right-of-way for that pur-
pose. Mr. Eadie quoted a letter from the Orange County Trans—
portation Committee which had outlined the need for a future
transportation corridor to be within two or three miles of
Beach Boulevard. He stated his opinion that the old right-of-
way is not a proper place for such a corridor because of
insufficient setback from existing and planned residential dev-
elopments and the difficulty of providing noise mitigation
measures. On the question of ownership, he again pointed out
that the question of ownership has been adjudicated by the City
Attorney and the Huntington Beach Company is not willing to
consider any reservation of that right-of-way.
Legal counsel Jim Georges pointed out that ownership of the
corridor is not relevant to consideration of the tract map,
and that the Commission should consider only whether or not the
proposed subdivision conforms to the General Plan and/or any
specific plans of the City.
Commissioner Winchell asked about how ingress/egress and main-
tenance would be provided in relation to the existing oil wells
on the property, to which Mr. Eadie replied that no construc-
tion would take place at all on Lot 1 and possibly not on Lot 2
until the wells had either been relocated or abandoned. Access
is planned from the to -be -vacated right-of-way of Utica Avenue.
Connie Mandic, 119 17th Street, discussed the ownership, saying
that sufficient cloud existed on the title in 1977 when the
Trails Study was made that the Planning staff at that time recom-
mended that a legal report be done; the City Council, however,
did not authorize the expenditure of the estimated $20,000 to
cover such a report. The Council did on three separate occasions
state that its intent for the corridor was to use it as an
interim bikeway and future mass transit facility. Mrs. Mandic
also informed the Commission that the Huntington Beach Company
is not carried on the tax rolls as the owner of the property and
does not pay taxes on it. In response to a statement by Mrs.
Mandic that the right-of-way had been "sold" for transportation
purposes, Mr. Eadie responded that an easement was granted by
Colonel Northam for the railroad but that the property had never
been sold by him.
Frank Mola, 808 Adams Avenue, commented that opposition to the
use of this corridor for any type of mass transit would in all
-3- 11-18-80 - P.C.
Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission
November 18, 1980
Page 4
likelihood come from the people living adjacent to the strip, who
could not be expected to favor the construction of such a facility
so close to their homes.
Commissioner Kenefick noted that no one knows what the st-te of the
art for transportation facilities may be at some time in the future,
and the City should preserve its options.
Commissioner Bannister stressed the need for the Commission to know
who owns the land. He said that the ownership of property does not
carry with it the inherent right of ar owner to build on that land,
but if research shows that the Huntington Beach Company does indeed
own the subject strip and the City tells them they cannot use it
the City should reimburse them for that property and the surrounding
land.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BANNISTER AND SECONDED BY KENEFICK TO POSTPONE
TENTATIVE TRACT 11245 TO THE NEXT MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.r
In the discussion which followed the motion, Commissioner Schumacher
expressed the opinion that the Commission is not qualified to make
a legal judgment as to who owns the property. She said the decision
the Commission should be considering is whether it wishes to main-
tain the City's past position for retention of the corridor.
Commissioner Winchell said that staff indicates the map is not con-
sistent with the General Plan which Mr. Georges has said is the
criterion which should be applied; however, she would be willing
to agree to a continuance to discuss the findings if that is the in-
tent of the continuance, but she did not want to get into the own-
ership question.
Commissioner Bannister clarified his motion by stating that it was made
specifically so the Planning Department would have time to determine
the actual ownership of the property. Further discussion took place
on the possibility of establishing ownership; Secretary Palin outlined
the City's prior efforts to obtain state funding for title search
and informed the Commission that he did not believe any more informa-
tion could be provided within the two weeks continuance.
THE MOTION TO CONTINUE WAS PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES:
Bannister,
NOES:
Schumacher,
ABSL;NT:
None
ABSTAIN:
None
DISCUSSION ITEMS:
Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Greer
Bauer
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 10853/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 79-23
Applicant: Mola Development Company
Savoy Bellavia informed the Commission that this review is for the
purpose of giving the developer some preliminary direction on his lay-
out for this 224-unit condominium project prior to its upcoming
-4- 11-18-80 - P.C.
Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission
November 18, 1980
Page 5
public hearing on December 16, 1980, when the final Environmental
Impact Report will be available.
The Commission reviewed the proposal, considering heights above
grade, building bulk, parking provisions, open space, security
systems, building separation, and circulation. Frank '-iola,
developer, pointed out the changes made to the plan to bring it
into conformance with parking requirements and to lessen the
height of certain structures. Staff explained to the Commission
the methods used for calculating building height.
CITY COUNCIL REVIEW
Secretary Palin reviewed the City Council action of November 17,
1980 for the Commission's information, including the Land Use
and Open Space Amendments and the Local Coastal Plan. He in-
formed the Commission that the Council had directed staff to
analyze Mr. Chalabian's request for residential designation on
his property in Huntington Harbour and submit a recommendation.
The Commission was also informed that the appeal filed by Commis-
sioner Schumacher on two tentative parcel maps had been found
invalid and the maps accepted by the City Council.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ITEMS:
Savoy Bellavia called attention to communications from Housing
and Community Development which have been handed out at this
meeting in regard to mortgage bonds and the Seventh Year Grant
Program. By consensus, the Commission agreed to a joint study
session with the Housing and Community Development Committee on
December 9, 1980, for review of the grant program.
COMMISSION ITEMS:
Commissioner Bannister announced that he would be absent from
the December 9 meeting. He also informed the Commission that he
has received complaints in regard to Wycliffe Towers which allege
that it does not comply with approved building plans. Staff was
directed to investigate this matter.
Commissioner Greer discussed what is apparently an illegal out-
side storage use on Systems Drive; staff advised the Commission
that a request for prosecution is pending on the problem.
Mr. Greer also requested information on Monterey Lane. Staff in-
formed him of the decision by the City Council not to pursue
public ownership of that right-of-way and the release of the re-
quirements for dedication.
Commissioner Porter discussed the recent problem with dust and
dirt control for a project in the City and also discussed means
of assuring that the problem does not reoccur.
-5- 11-18-80 - P.C.
Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission
November 18, 1980
Page 6
Commissioner Schumacher requested an explanation of the Council's
action in regard to her filed appeal. Extensive discussion took
place between the Commission and legal counsel on the reasons and
procedures the Council had relied upon in determining to override
the appeal. Staff was requested to supply the Commission with copies
of the appeal and of all other pertinent correspondence o;, the matter,
and it was decided that Commissioners Schumacher and Kenefick will
draft a letter to City Council asking for clarification.
ON MOTION BY WINCHELL AND SECOND BY BANNISTER THE COMMISSION AD-
JOURNED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE AT 9:10 P.M.
Marcus M. Porter, Cha-1-fffan
1
-6- 11-18-80 - P.C.