Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutConditional Use Permit 76-14 - FRANK J. MOLA - Racquetball c Affidavit of Publication State of California County of Orange x3 City of Huntington Beach George Farquhar, being duly sworn on oath, says: That lie is a citizen of the United States, over the age of twenty-one years. 'That he is the p hi.er and publisher of the Huntington Beach News, a weekly newspaper of general circulation printed and pub- lished in Huntington Beach, California and circulated in the said County of Orange and elsewhere and published for the dissemination f �� of 2oct;1 end other news of a general character, and has i! bona fide V subscription list of paying subscribers, and said paper has been established, printed and published in the State of California, and County of Orange, for at lent one year n-ixt before the publication of the first insertion of this notice: and the said newspaper is not devoted to the interest ri, or published for the entertainment of nny particular class, profession, trade, calling, race or denomination, or ;R,0,1hod t4uhti;ngfrt+€`a+ :x:�'-VVF. anyTumber themf. heHun won Beach New was adjudicated a legal ncnvsl)aper 'Aq'�tt.- t�CNtl1L•,of�CGM40ttlt;11�1�►k' of general circulation by Judge G. K- Scovel in the Superior Court , of Orange County, California August 27th, 1937 by order No. A-5931. 466E is "ENEMY., an thM tr; R�itk li+st+'ir� wilt''ti! lHkt:!"y.tbM ghat the !� _SL__S S� R�_4I�AL_ Cati4Ktt trie iC►e»'aE.Hv�u wl.at - APPEAL T D�ENwAL F tl ZTI In•;tt+s'.Casnct cte+ne.r:':+ ',pie.= : tinl+k: t•lerttr►Rtor► t!kich,-st ttari�-how: USE PENHIT # 7 ] N •71aa l:.�+., oi:ss saai•ei+arsl4>wr.s, j of which the annexed is a printed copy, wns ublished In said ne>x's- it"w't'• Ili7i 't:r the pu+pw".d. P sWrir� let spot*,-fa'!1�'.ttoi+lit ttet3 Cltt. riiRinine. C6f fivw atop ld,.;-corkW., t A .Ul�ir.�hb' yonrl'.Uye.1Ftrmi Nat'7i"»1 to . Paper at least ..n1w jam!ae� �,o�+ttructten� wW.q„rrritlan:cat r,6 tom? 'tPsi4!rledliti"u, club,wo" iipprMt*+�Myi., commencing from the lb.th day of __- �CQRI�P�_ ;twtee S�trO sq.:it.'+>lrice;�+Mir.ln.tM; j:t5 tgft4au• Tr��owM. .�tr�i,.::OYf=� ity�tpwi�t�chjCKCt�(ff���tlw'fHu�tta 19-7-6— and ending on the day of Lis t,-e1-Rb&r__ Ttrr'=pYbitCt �r�ipibt►:lt laKrlw '•O+th� at WiMilt`MOh1et: sad WRt.'OF 192�, both days inclusive, and as often during said period and {}{t' t times of publication as said paper was regularly issued, and In the M++ trrtrnt�0t►i}t:':;- "''='. f regular and entire issue of said pewspaper proper, and not in a ` A14 Aft"04W "�' ' >ttl"'. Mid':Orrtat'ire-OtPNW••that supplement, ana said notice was published therein on the follinving j0inw49f-*"ilfoh":184-MlntWi. �;�'F dates„ to-wit: ► f t4+ir4'iniWlnMiMi-may tier a l!wF (rriri+'tdt�:CMt� .� 1�4Rtfl't"N<fk;:.i De`+� . 197 e -_.16-,,_.• E` � `• .�i l r Atktai illl:;^ilwinl+l!M►g1 cf_,.. i Publisher Subscribed and sworn to before me this 17-t 1># - day of 1J C a mbe r 19_7k_. Notary Public c Orange County. California ------------- HOM4S o. WYLLIE i ' Nn/pry r .Llit•Cit�i�leZa i f � .► !►iy Cos- sloe Grpletl � ,1 �` r The City Council. December 9, 1976 rage Two remembered that it was the Planning Commission on July 27 , 1976 , that initially requested the FAA to review t1te ;project. After a very lengthy review process the FAA declared that the project, as proposed, would not constitute a hazard to air traffic and yet the Conditional Use Permit was denied. The State Aeronautics Division and the Orange County Airport Commission opposed the � project although they had no jurisdiction over the matter whatso- ever. The Orange County Airport Land Use Commission approved the project on July 16 , 1.976 , "so long as it complies with FAA j criteria" . To the best of my knowledge this decision was never superceded. The applicant., as well as the present owners of the property, desire to live in harmonywitn the pilots at Meadowlard Airport. PI However, we do not feel the decision of the Planning Commission was just under the circumstances . We respectfully request the City Council to review and overturn the decision of the Planning Commission to deny the application for Conditional Use Permit No. 76-14 . The applicant, as well as the present owners of the property, de- sire that this appeal be scheduled for an oral presentation before the City Council at the earliest possible date. At that time a complete presentation will be made by the applicant and owner substantiating their position . If additional written information is desired prior to the hearing, please so advise. Very truly yours, Peter E. 'von Elten, Esq . General Counsel jt CC: Gordon Young Hestcr - Brown & Associates , Inc. 1401 Dove Street Newport Beach, CA 92660 huntrngtan b��arnrtrng ce'partm�nt U . TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: December. 7, 1976 CONDITIONAL USE PE1011T NO. 76-14 I ppy1C&": Frank J . Mola D TE FILE June 2 , 1976 419 Main Street Suite A ` Huntington Beach , 92648 MANDATORY PROCESSING QATE July 22 , 1976 LOCATION: Northwest corner of Warner and Roosevelt Sts. ZONE. R5 R.E- ,QUEST: Racquetball club in GENERAL, PLAN : Office- Professional j conjuncf:ion with office complex. 1. 0 ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS : The Environmental Review Hoard at its meeting of June 22 , 1976 granted Negative Declaration No. 76-51 having found that the proposed project will not have a substantial adverse effect upon the environment. 2. 0 GENERAL INFORMATION: Conditional Use Permit No, 76-14 is a request for the construction of a handball/racquetball club in conjunction with an office/professional complex. The overall facilities will consist of four (4) handball/ racquetball courts , an exercise room, locker and spa areas, and 5400 square feet of office/professional floor area. i 3. 0 SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING: i The subject property is presently .vacant . The properties to the south are zoned K5 and developed with office/professional uses . The properties to the north are zoned R2 and developed with airport related S uses. To the east is the airport property whz:__i is zoned R1. The property to the west is zoned R5 and developed with: an existing office/ professional development. • ii l*419 .^. r CUP 7 6--14 Page Two 4 . 0 ANALYSIS : The proposed project was originally reviewed by the Planning Commission at its meeting of July 22, 1976 . During the public hearing at this meeting there were a number of property owners and users of the adjacent airport who expressed their opposition to the proposed 1 development. There was also a petition submitted, containing approxi- mately 430 names , which stated its opposition to the project because of safety impacts that would result to airport and its pilots . The Planning Commission therefore expressed a desire that the proposed project have a review and approval status by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) prior to final action by the City. The FAA held a public hearing on the proposal in October of 1976 and concluded that the project would not create an aviation hazard if the structure was relocated ten (10) feet southerly toward Warner Avenue. This condition was subsequently eliminated in an amended statement of determination of no hazard to air navigation received by the Planning Department on November 25, 11076 . (Please refer to the attached notice of determination. ) The State Division of Aeronautics was also requested by the staff to review and comment on the proposed structure. it was their determination that the proposed facility is .in compliance with the standard mathematical slope setback formula and would therefore not normally create a hazard to the users of the airport. However, the Division of Aeronautics felt that because the building site was to be located in a potential_ crash hazard area and because the occupants of the structure would be subjected to potentially high noise levels , they did not recommend approval. of the project. Additionally, they added that because Meadowlark Airport was a privately owned facility, the State would be unable to provide financial assistance to protect or improve the facility . (Refer to attached communication. ) The Orange County Airport Land Use Commission reviewed the project' on two different occasions . At its meeting of July 15, 1976 , the Commission moved to recommend approval of the building as long as it complied with j the r7UN criteria. However, at its meeting of August 10 , 1976 , the Commission rescinded its previous action and moved to recommend dis- approval of the proposed project because of the hazard to air navigation and because operation of the facility would place people in one of the most hazardous areas surrounding the airport . (Refer to attached communications . ) The Planning Department staff has reviewed ..he project and has determined that the physical layout is in conformE.nce with the applicable require- ments such as parking, landscaping, yard setbacks , etc. The site is zoned R5 (Office Professional) which allows office uses and unclassified uses as approved by the Planning Commission. The fact that the project proposea racquetball facilities in conjunction with the office areas , has mandated the requirement for a public hearing before the Planning Cbmmiss.ton. If the project was for an office complcx only , there would be no publ+.c hearing , only ar Administrative Review hearing before the ,Hoard of zoning Adjustments. Therefore, the staff feels that the proposed CUP 7t;-la Page Three land uses (i.e. , offices and an enclosed recreational use) are suitable for the site and. that the real issue is the physical impact oil the surrounding uses. The subject property is located on the west side of Roosevelt 'Street north of Warner Avenue and extends to the southerly boundary of the airport, more specifically, approximately 230 feet from Runway 01. The proposed maximtun height of the structure is 26 feet . (The R5 -.one allows a height of 35 feet plus 14 feet for mechanical equipment for overall maximum height of 49 feet. ) The proposed height as ci.ted by the FAA is well below the 20: 1 slope to the displaced threshold of the runway, a factor which in the opinion of the FAA is permanent because of existing structures to the west of the site as well as utility poles : trees, the right-of-way of the public road, etc. There- fore, the staff concurs that the project will not hazard visual oper- ations of the airport. The staff does however, share concern of the crash impact potential as outlined by the State Division of Aeronautics and Orange County Airport Land Use Commission. The staff suggests , therefore , that the location of the proposed office professional floor area be relocated to the westerly side of the property by flip--flopping the structure . This would mitigate the orientation of the office areas toward take-off direction of the aircraft. Additionally, the staff feels that the building, If moved forward toward Werner. Avenue, would afford a greater margin of safety even though such a relocation is not technically required by the FAA requirements. This would also effectuate a place- ment of theparking area at the rear of ttie building and increase the aesthetics of the project. 5 . 0 RECOMENDATION: The staff recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 76-14 based on the following findings and subject to the following suggested con- ditions: FINDINGS: 1 . The proposed structure complies with or exceeds the setback slope requi.:ements for structures adjacent to an airport complex and therefore will not be detrimental to the health, welfare , and safety of citizens residing or working in the area . 2 . The proposed layout .is in conformance with the appliable requirements, including the height restrictions of the 115 zone . i 3 . The proposed land uses are consistent with the of ficu/conunercial designation of they General Plan. ! SUGGESTED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1 . Prior Vs the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall. submit a revisers plan to the Pltaining Commission for review and approval. which shall indicate a reverse orientation of the designated floor areas and relocation of the parking area to the roar of the building . CUP 76-lA Page Four 2. Warner Avenue and Roosevelt Street shall be dedicated and fully improved to the centerlines of such rights-of-way as required by City Ordinances . 3. Prior to issuance of building permits, a landscape plan shall be submitted to the Department of Building and Community Development } for review and approval. 4 . The developer shall participate in the local. drainage , sewer, and water assessment districts. S. if the developer proposes to provide air conditioning, the in- sulation in ceilings and exterior walls shLl1. be a minimum of R-19 and R-11, respectively. If no air conditioning is to be provided, the insulation in ceilings and exterior walls shall be a minimum of R--13 and R-7 , repsectively. In commercial and industrial projects the "U" value of the structure shall offer the equivalent thermal insualtion charat^ter- istics and may be calculated using ASHRAE methods. I 6. All building spoils , such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material shall be deposited at an offsite facility equipped to handle them. I JMC:gc I i J1 ' City of Huntington Beach I OWN*~ P.O. box in CALWOOMIA SOM OFFICE OF THE C1.TY CLERK January 4, 1977 Mr. Frank J. Mola 419 Fain Street, Suite A Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Dear Mr. Mola: i The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at its regular meeting held Monday, January 3, 1977, denied the appeal filed to the denial by the Planning Comi,ision of Conditional Use Permit No. 76-14. Pease contact our office if we may be of assistance to you. Very truly y urs, Alicia H. Wentworth AMW:CB:wm Huntington Beach Planning commission P.O. BOX 190 CALIF•- 3RNIA 92646 Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Planning Commission DATE: December 28, 1976 .ATTN: Floyd G. Belsito, City Administrator RE: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 76-14 .. APPEAL TO DENIAL APPELLANT: Frank J. Mola 419 Main Street, Suite A Huntington Beach, California 92648 APPLICANT: Frank J. Mola f LOCATION: Northwest corner of Warner and Roosevelt Sts . REQUEST: Racquetball club in conjunction with office complex PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: ON MOTION BY GIBSON AND SECOND BY SHEA CONDITIONAL USE PEP-MIT NO. 76--14 WAS DENIED FOR THE FOLLOWING REASON BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: The granting of this Conditional Use Permit would have a detrimental effect on the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood. AYES: Parkinson, Gibson, Shea, Foyle NOES: None ABSENT: Finley, Slates , Newman PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends denial of Conditional Use Permit No. 76-14 based on the above finding which implies that tlke proposed structure would significantly impact the safe operation of the existing private airport. 'SU14MARY ANALYSIS: 'Conditional .Use Permit No. 76-14 is a request for the construction of a handball/racquetball club .-In conjunction with an office/professional com- plex. The overall facilities will consist of four (4) handball/racquetball courts, an exercise room, locker and spa areas , and 5400 square feet of office/professional floor area . The proposed project was originally reviewed by the Planning Commission at its meeting of July 22 , 1976 . During the public hearing at this meeting there were a number of property owners and users of the adjacent airport who expressed their opposition to the proposed development. There was also a petition submitted, containing approximately 430 names , which stated CUP 7 6-1.4 Page Two its opposition to the project because of safety impacts that would rsoult to the airport and its pilots. The Planning Commission therefore expressed a 'desire that the proposed project have a review and approval status by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) prior to final action by the City. The staff therefore contacted all of the app:;-c:riate agencies for rev?.ew and analysis of the proposal. The FAA and the Orange County Airport Land Use Conunission ultimately r :commended approval of the. project ?paving found that no safety hazard would be created by the proposed development. However, the State Division of Aeronautics and the Orange County Airport Commission both recommended deiiial of the project because of the potential hazard to air navigation. (Please refer to the attached communications for additional information. ) w staff s reviewed he project and has determined The Planning Department sta has re e t p 3 that the physical layout is in conformance with the applicable require- ments such as parking, landscaping, yard setbacks, etc. The site is zoned R5 (Office Professional) which allows office uses and unclassified uses as approved by the Planning Cowuission. The fact that the project proposes re.::quetball facilities in conjunction with the office areas ha mandated the requirement for a public hearin7 before the Planning Commission. The staff felt that the proposed use was suitable for the � site and that the real issue was the ptiysic3l impact on the surrounding uses. The subject property is located on the west side of Roosevelt Street P P Y north of Warner Avenue and extends to the southerly boundary of the airport, more specifically, approximately 230 feet from Runway 01. The proposed maximum height of the structure is 26 feet. (The R5 zone allows a heights of 35 feet plus 14 feet for mechanical equipment for overall maximum height of 49 feet. ) The proposed height as cited by the FAA is well below the 20 : 1 slope to the displaced threshold of the runway, a factor which in the opinion of the FAA is permanent because of existing structures to the west of the site as well as utility poles , treets, the right-of-way of the public road, etc. There- fore, the staff concurred that the project would not hazard visual operations of the airport. P P The staff, however, shared the concern of the crash impact potential as outlined by the State Division of Aeronautics and Orange County Airport Land Use Commission. The staff suggested, therefore, that the location of the proposed office professional floor area be relocated to the westerly side of the property by flip-flopping the structure . This would mitigate the orientation of the office areas toward take-off direction of the aircraft. Additionally, the staff felt that the building, if moved forward toward Warner Avenue, would afford a greater margin of safety even though such a relocation is not technically required by the FAA requirements. This would also effectuate a place- ment of the parking area at the rear of the building and increase the aesthetics of the project. The staff recommended approval based on the findings contained in the staff report and subject to the conditions as outlined therein. 'fir CUP 76-14 Page Three ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposal at its meeting on December 7, 1976. Mr. David Hanst, Pr. . Art Nerio, owner . of Meadowlark Airport, Mr. Olan Atherton, Mr. Neal Watts, Mr. Tom Paul , all spoke in opposition to the proposed development. Mr. Peter . Von Elten representing the applicant, and Mr. Gordon Young, representing the property owner, spoke in favor of the project. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The Environmental Review Board at its meeting of June 22 , 1976 granted Negative Declaration No. 76-51 having found that the proposed project will riot. have a substantial adverse effect upon the environment. SUPPORTING INFORMATION: 1. Area Map 2. Staff Report 3. FAA Letter 4. Airport Land Use Commission Letter 5. State Division of Aeronautics Letter 6. Orange County Airport Commission Letter Respe tfully submitted, and ti eilich, Acting Secretary EDS:JMC:gc LJ f FLAGG Lfi- ME CR � � ,.' %bQA•iZt. D C2 R1 - t o -C2 ;C14; R5 v ' r - -- 1 N C�4 C7 i EL aoRAao _ 1 z 1 " 1 crcr I T —: / f �r z sLZI 0 1000 SO SCALE 1N ffCT . -- \i.�' Gam--T'E-1�-` T . . . COH I T I OVAL USE PERMIT 110. 15-14 - ZONE R5 • M1f:TriG1o%SIACM HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING DEPT. �'. 31 ' ' � t" ►. - - - -- ::.i_ r-.-.71 IF;i; ta- It •�` . , � ��. _ !r\ •,( •• • ••f'f{� /I- � • •_1 1. � ,� • -•, •.'� • ••. '�•�.•'�+ iT 7 1 z _ i Opt' 4N s +Yt � w►iCI rhjs h. � � • e • wir+ww�� �rwr��� • iJ�� o•ta. "mow`VAN ftows a". �rr1p�A��M 01� 14 f37 o1a..' .,.,. bevd10PM6ht 417 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 (714) 536.2547 STATE LICENSE NO.311.888 December 91 1976 The City Council CERTIFIED MAID, - c/o City Clerk _ RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED City of .Huntington Beach .2000 Main. Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Re: Appeal to the City Council from Unanimous Decision of the Planning Commission on December 7 , 1976, denying Conditional Use Permit No. 76� (Ap2lricant - Frank J. Mola) . Honorable Council Members : This appeal is being taken pursuant to the Huntington Beach Ordinance CoJe relative to the unanimous denial by the Huntington Beach Planning Commission on December 7 , 1976 , of Conditional Use Permit No. 76-14. The Conditional Use Permit requested was for the construction of an office/racquet ball facility, containing approximately 20: 000 square feet and to be built to a maximum of 26 feet in height. The proposed project was to be built on an approximate one acre parcel a short distance easterly of the northeast corner of Warner Avenue and Bolsa Chica Street. The applicant has been in escrow to purchase the subject property since February of 1976. A considerable sum of money has been re- leased to the Sellers of the property and the applicant has ex- pended substantial sums of money, including extensive time and effort, in furtherance of the development objectives. The staff report dated December 7 , 1976 , accurately and concisely sets forth the background surrounding the request for :he Condi- tional Use Permit. The basis of this appeal is t-hat in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, the Planning Commission denied the Con- ditional Use Permit based upon the fact that the proposed con- struction would be a hazard to the genera?. Public. It should be 0 envi" 1i I "AL REVIEW BOARD CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH•CALIFORNIA P.O. BOX 190. 92648 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Fnvironmental Review Board DATE: June 22 , 1976 SUBJECT: Negative Declaration No. 76-51 (C.U.P. 76--14) APPLICANT: Rolly Pulaski & Associates PROJECT: Athletic Club with appurtenant facilities I LOCATION: property ertY is located at Warner Avenue f P and Roosevelt The Environmental Review Board at its meeting of June 22 , 1976 , ranted the above negative declaration, having found that the proposed project will not have a significant adverse effect upon the physical environment. No environmental impact report has been prepared for this project. Findings are based upon the preliminary environmental description, discussion by this Board , and the following recommendations : 1. All building spoils , such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe , and other surplus or unusable material, shall be disposed of at an offsite facility equipped to handle them. Me1� vin A. Tooker-t'Acting ecretary Environmental. Review Board :df DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION IN REPLY REFER To « AERONAUTICAL STUDY No. 76-WE-401-OE SON DETERMINATION OF NO HAZARD TO AIR NAVIGATION _ AMENDED TRUCTION LOCATION Mola Davel opment PLACE K" 419 Main Street Huntington Beach, Ca Huntington Beach, Calif 92648 LAW AM 1 OMtrMo¢ ATTN: Peter Von Elten General Counsel o ' 33°42' S8" ll$ 021120" OESGRtPTtai HEIGHT ira racy) CONSTRUCTION Two story racquet ball and commercial facility Mir, snou�s aa0vc MSL Pt GPOSSil 21' - 26' 53.61 - 59.6' An aeronautical study of the proposed construction described hove has been completed under the provisions of fart 77 of the Federal Aviation Regulations. Based on the study it is found that the construction would have no substantial tdvcrse effTct on the safe and efficient utilization of the navigable airspace by aircraft or on the operation 4f sir navigation facititivs. There- ' fore, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, it ICE hereby determined that the construction would not be a hazard to air navi- gation provided the following conditions are met: Conditions: The structure shall be obstruction lighted at each of its five coxner>s per FAA Advisory Circular 70.7460-1, Chapters 4 and 5. Supplemental notice of constructi on In requIrrd any time the project is abandoned (use the cncloaed FAA form). or ( x ) At least 48 hours before the start of construction (use the enclosed FAA form). ( x Within five days after the construction reaches Its grectest heignt (use the enclosed FAA fora,). ( ) Not required. This determination expires on June 25, 1978 unless: x (a) extended, revised or terminated by the isauing office; (b) the construction is subject to the licensing authority of the Federal Communications Commission and an application for a construction permit =a made to the FCC on or before the above expiration date. to sw--h case the determination zxpires on the ante pn.acribed by the FCC for completion of construction,or on the data the FCC denies the application. This determination is subject to review if an interested party tiles a petition on or before December 15, 1976 - In the event a petition for review is filet, it should be submitted in triplicate to the Chief.Atrarr ce Obstruction and Airports Branch, AT-240, Federal Aviation AdmWatration, Washington, b.C. 20590, and contain a full statement of the basis upoA which it Is made. This determination becomes final on December 25, 1976 unless a petition for review is timely filed, in which case the determination will not become final pending disposition of the petition. Interested parties will be notified of the gr"t of any review. An ae"ount of the study findings, aeronautical objections, If any, registered with the FAA diving the study, and the basis for the FAA's decinion in this matter will be found on the following page(s). It the structure is subject to the licensing suthority of the FCC, a copy of thla determinatiun will be sera to that Agency. This sm ndment rescinds one of the two conditions issued in our .-Determination of No Hazard dated October 20, 1976. ttn( Chief, Airspace A.'d Procedures Branch DON M. DAVIS Air Traffic Division +T to rtr s A gsld$v California November, 15 1976 This amendment is being issued as a rasult of additional data not considered when the initial Determination was issued. This informAt'ion Was derived from an on-site inspection of the airport and its immediate environment and a check with the Engineering Department of the City of Huntington Beach. It was learned that the site elevation is 32.5' MSL rather than 38' MSL as used in our previous application of FAR 77 standards. It was also learned that poles, trees, other structures, and the right-of-way of a public road have enured permanence of the well marked displaced threshold of Runway 01. The structure, sited as proposed by Mola Development will be well below the 20:1 slope to the displaced threshold. It will not, therefore, hazard visual operations of the airport. Obstruction lighting of the structure will increase conspicuity for night operations thereby enhancing safety for users of tLe ^irport and the zecreational facility. The relocation site recommended in the October 20, 1976 Determination is shown on enclosed Plate 2. The initially proposed site, the one considered in thin amended Determination, is shown on enclosed Plate 1. 1 f . I i ,• � r 0 / A4L LAW 7 � o Sil � a f i 1 L ,01>d►O4Wjl!"& IgWrt"'_ i t i . h t �tis� C Jrw l rOOVO I jV4 V VCR PO � q Q f �l• -AIRPORT SE:.C"ISSION FOR ORANGE C0 41• north.ai rpoi t Way" Santa Ana, California 9&' 7 Phone 833--1505 HuKnN=N SEA-.H. PLANNINQ OEPAMMENT llJf 191g76 P. o, aax 190 • Huntln�ran Rapti, �al3f. „."�!64f? July 16, 1976 City of Huntington Beach I Planning Department P. 0. Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Attention: Mr. Mel Tooker Subject: Proposed Athletic Club Near Meadowlark Airport Dear Sir: 1 At its regular meeting of July 15, 1976, the Airport land Use Commission moved to: "Recommend approval of the building so long as it complies with FAA criteria." For the Commission, KJD/es Kenneth J. Del ino Secretary and Planning Supervisor STATk Of CAWCRNIA—GUSINESS AND TRANSMMATION AGENCY 10MUND G. "OWN X. Govw*" aarr DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPMTATION DIVISION OF AERONAUTICS EXECUTIVE AIRPORT SACRAMENTO,CALIFORNIA 95822 1916) 322.3090 HUNTINGTON BEACH August 13, 1976 PLANNING DEPT. AUG 18 1976 P. 0. Box 190 Mr. Richard A. Harlot: Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Director of Planning City of Huntington Beach i P. O. Box 1.90 Huntington Beach, CA 926.4E Dear Mr. Harlow: This is in reply to your, latter of August 3, 1976, concerning a proposal to construct a Racquet-Ball Club (conditional tonal use permit no. 76-14) adjacent to the Meadowlark Airport in Huntington Brach. 14e have reviewed the data you provided and that obtained during a j meeting of interested persons field at the al.rport; on August; 5, 1976. A physical inspection of the site and mathematical computations confirm that the top of the proposed building would be approxi- mately one foot above the 0-0: 1 approach surface that Is standard to this category airport. The approach surface at 1,1eadowlark terminates at the displaced threshold Mark, 5001 from the south end of the runway. This dls,placement was established to cause the approach surface to clear the power poles along Warner Avenue. The Division of Aeronautics has determined that the construction of the building would not normally create a hazarO, to the users of the al.rport if the top of the building remained below the ap- proach surface. This could be accomplished by constructing the building at least 201 closer to Warner Avenue, as pruponed in the variance request. Your request; was for us to comment on the effect the construction would have on the users of the airport,. Cone-1dP.r 1 rig the loca- tion of the building site with reference to the airport runway, we feel it appropriate to also comment on the possible effect on the people utilizing the building and facilities. The build- ing will be located in a potential crash hazard area that is al- ready noise impacted. If the building was constructed at the proposed site, the ocuupa:its could be exposed to aircraft crash hazards and the noise complaints currently being received by the city would possibly increase. We would be remiss If we recommended approval of the use pool mi.t Mr. Richard -A. Hax•1cW .Page. 2. August 13, 1976 We are aware of the vital need Meadowlark Airport satisfies ror the' general aviation opera-tor, and that it would be virtually im- possible to establish another airport in the area if Meadowlark ceased to exist. Because it is a privately ovined facility, the State is unable to offer financial assistance to protect or im- prove the facility, 'Hank you for offering us the opportunity to comment. Sincerely, E. J. MIKE NEY, Chief Division of Aeronautics Earl A. Tucker Area Chief c c: FAA AWE 536 I ' ApOLPN U. MOLiNA �} SANTA A.vA f IRST DISTRICT VINCENT S. CELANO Los 02 U N� 01 sccoNO DISTRICT i JAMES P. IRVING rULL[RTON THIRD DISTRICT `¢ ^N CA ! ORA GCOT7 rOURT14 DISTRICT EDWARD w. LIIARP NEWF TCHAIRPCRT COMMISSICN rIFT" DISTRICT ORANGE COUNTY AIRPORT 19741 AIRPORT WAY NORTH SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 02707 j TELEPHONEt 634-2400 l AVEA COCA; 7t.4 1 August 11, 1976 Planning Commission City of Huntington Beach P.O. Bo:: 190 Huntington Beach, California 92648 Attention: Mr . Mel Tooker Gentlemen: The proposal to build an athletic club 300 feet directly off the end of the Meadowlark Airport runway was brought before the Orange County Airport Commission during its regular meeting of August 10 , 197•. . All particulars relative to the proposed project were care- fully reviewed. Thereafter it was duly moved , seconded and unanimously carried, that the Airport Commission urges disapproval of the proposed project because of a hazard to air navigation, and more importantly because operation of a club at this location would place people in one of the most hazardous areas surrounding an airport, The Commission recognizes that it is taking a position on a matter outside its jurisdiction . The Conunission, nevertheless , feels its action is appropriate in the interests of safety of airport operations within the g,,punty of Orange. Pober dvVtt J. Xesan Secretary RJB: l.n • y l .. Publish 12/16/76 PI17 Postcards 45 NOTICE or M3LIC =MING APPEAL TO DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL L'SE PERMLT 4� 6- NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held by the City Council of the City of Huntington beach, in the Council Chamber of the Civic Center, Mwtington Beach, at the hour of .j.L3o . P. M. , or ate soon thereafter ns poasible, on mOndAy the ,Lrd., day of januury , 19 Now, for the purpose of considering an appeal to tre denial by Um city Planna.ng Commission of Conditional Us:i Peru No. 76-14 to allow the construction and operation of a handball/racquetball club with appurtenant facilitiou in conjunction with a proposed 5400 Eq. ft. office complex In the R5 (Office Professional District) pursuant to Section 9332(f) of the Hunt9ngton Haach Ordinance Cride. The subject property is located north of Warrve Avenue and west of Roosevelt Street. A legal description is on file in the Planning Dapartment Office. All intereo tied perame are invited ,to attaud said hearing +end Appeal.to-Qa*4 �� express their a leionq for or 4641Ot •aid , 7urther information may be obtalw4 fro, the Office of the City Clark lD014f l4.4 76 t ZTT OF. MWINMN SUCH &Y` Alicia X* 'Werantworth City Clark '7 moola DevelopmIlint 417 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 (714) 536.2547 5-PAW UCENSE 140.311.888 ti December 1976 The City Council CERTIFIED MAIL c/o C3.ty Clerk RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED City of Huntington Beach 2000 %Mairs Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Re: Appeal to the City Council from Unanimous Decision of the Finning Commission on December 7 , 1976 , denying Conditional Use Permit No. 76•-2.4 (Applicant - Frank J. Mola) . Honorable Council Members : This appeal is being taken pursuant to the Huntington Beach Ordinance, Code relative to th,� unanimous denial by the Huntington Beach Planning Commission on December 7 , 1976 , of Conditional Use Permit No. 76-14 . The Conditional. Use Permit requested was for the construction of an office/racquet ball facility, containing approximately 20, 000 square feet and to be built to a maximum of 26 feet -1.n height. The proposed project was to be built on an approximate one acre parcel a short distance easterly of the northeast corner of Warner Avenue and Bo-sa Chica Street. The applicant has been in escrow to purchase the subject property since February of 1976 . A considerable sum of money has been re- leased to the Sellers of the property and the applicant has ex- pended substantial sums of money , including extensive time and effort, in furtherance of the development objectives . The staff report dated Decemb�•r 7 , 1976 , accurately and concisely sets forth the background surrounding the request for the Condi- tional Use Permit. The basis of this appeal is that in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary , the Planning Commission denied the Con- ditional Use Permit; based upon the fact that the proposed con- struction would be a hazard to the general public. It should be The City Council December 9, 1976 Page Two remembered that it was the Planning Commission on July 27, 1976, that initially requested the FAA to review the project. After a very lengthy review process the FAA declared that the project, as proposed, would not constitute a hazard to air traffic and yet the Conditional Use Permit was denied. The State Aeronautics Division and the Orange County Airport Commission opposed the project although they had no jurisdiction over the matter whatso- ever . The Orange County Airport Land Use Commission approved the project on July 16, 1976, "so long as it complies with FAA criteria" . To the best of my knowledge this decision was never superceded. f The applicant, as well as the present owners of the propertyr desire to live in harmony with the pilots at Meadowlard Airport. However, w,? do not feel the decision of the Planning Commission was juct tinder the circumstances. We respectfully reque3t the City Coun-i1 to review and overturn the decision of the Planning Commission to deny the application for Conditional Use Permit No. 76-14 . The applicant , as well as the resent owners of th3 property, de- sire P P �' �' sire that this appeal be scheduled for an oral presentation before the City Council at the earliest possible date. At that time a complete presentation will be trade by the applicant and owner substantiating their position. if additional written information is desired prior to the hearing, ;,Lease so advise. Very truly yours, rr / 7 Peter E. von Elten, Esq. General Counsel jt CC: Gordon Young Hester Brown & Associates, Inc. 1401 Dove Street Newport Seach, CA 92660 NOTICE' TO CLERK TO SCHEDULE PUBLIC HEARING Tot CITY CLERK'S OF'FI E DATE: FROM: 4 PLEASE SCHEDULE A PUBLIC NEARING USING THE, ATTACHED LEGAL NOTICE: FOR THE DAY OF , 197 AP's are attached - AP's w+.11 follow No AP's I I Initiated hyt Planning Commission Planning Department Other Adoption of Environmental Status # YES NO ///,P. 7d Nuir.belef Excerpts 46 Publish Once LEGAL NOTiLE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT No. 76-14 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held cry the City Planning Commission of the City of Huntington Beach , California , for the purpose of considering Conditional Use Permit No. 76-14 to allow the construction and operation of a handball/racquetball club with appurtenant facilities in con- junction with a proposed 5400 sq. ft. office complex in the R5 (office Professional District) pursuant to Section 9332 (f) of the Huntington Beach ordinance Code. The subject property is located north of Warner Avenue and west of Roosevelt Street. A legal description is on file in the Planning Department office. Said hearing will be held at the hour of 7. 00 P .M. , on July 20, 1976 , in the Council Chamber Building of the Civic Center , 2000 14ain Strcet , Huntington Beach, California . All interested persons are invited to attend said hearing and express their opinions for or against the proposed Conditional Use Permit Further information may be obtained from tho City Planning Department . Telephone No . (714) 536-5271 DATED this 8th day of_ July, 1.9*76 CITY PLANNING COKMISSION Richard A. Harlow Secretary r _ • : CUP 76-14 AP ' s typed by Jana ►� 163--121�-1a 163--].21-z1 Frank J ola dm A Crulkshank Jr 419 Mair, Street 0383 Wilshire Blvd John D Tokarvk Suite f, Suite 1040 P.O. Box 1657 tluntingt:nn beach, Calif: Beverly hills , Calif 90211 Huntington Be-ich, Calif 92648 92648 163-12.112.1-G ! 163-•121-11 163�-121.--2^t. f 163tatioa,:� Inc Harriett E. McFedters Rodolfo Espin .:a Uouglas P.O. FHax 500 5132 Warner Avenue 5121 Dunbar A -•nue Costa Mesa , Calif Huntington Beach, Calif Runti.ngton ©(--. . h, Calif 92626 92648 92649 j 163-,i:Z.J._ ,o2 163-121--12 163-121-22 Los r h'. Kuehne Hugh Seeds Larry L Twombley 170 � ��olsa Chian 1693.1 Bolsa Chica Street 600 Marina }iun nyt ton Beach, Calif Huntington Beach, Calif Seal Deach, 9?. 6�3 . - 92649 90740 163%-1.21wu3 163--121--15 163•-121-24 Richard t•: rwot:; Joe A 0 Campo mill e C 5anri"f D L gln• D & J Investments Inc 2236 F Broadw.iy %Herbert Kirk Long Beach , ('•s l i f � 527�! llc�i t ���;luE� 9 liitnL n;� 2228 N Main Strut 90803 163,. -0-1 Santa Ana, Clai£ 163-',121-25 it i ^f�arcl �; :+, , ►f. 92706 Werner F 0 Ruch t i �11075 W,-irnei kverwe 6536 Falcon Avenue 'S11ita',C Long Beach, Calif 'FiuA-i.tt:rtiyn :ic•:.C'h ; Cot l i f" 90805 1.63-•121-I6 163--12I-26 r H Honecutter Michael Sekin ►;1 :'6 ;,c:nj:i Cf. 4173 Larwi.n Avenue 600 Marina Drive I..as V�!tr.��: , ;ttvaci;2 fital0.t Cypress, Calif Seal Beach, Calif 90630 90740 i k'P3-121 163--'12i--27 Charlea F Funsch -,C George Kachick.ay 5051 Dunbar Avenue ,At:. 1 a c.,:.� 1 r 15604 Gaymcnt Drive .. ;tlr� !,a Mirada , Calif Huntington Beach, Calif :u'�'u7 90630 92649 3-•1,21 1.63-121-19 163--121-20 +spher, Royal T Treater Martin B Slutta • 092 Wat w.-i f!vc--nue 14622 Monroe Street 5041. Dunbar Aire 1hjnLinq t.v.ai nuach, ca l � f Midway City, Calif Huntington beach, Calif 649 92655 92649 163-121--20 163.,121--29 e ii i r ti Margarat: E St Onge Plul H Penrod Is7 aC1 !*Yt, lt;tlor' River "A r . 24001 Mtxirlands Blvd, 5021. Dunbar Ave 'fount'.11 n V,s► ley , 0'1 i r space )63 Huntington Idach, Calif ) 'f06 E1 'Toror Calif' 92630 92749 iti.J - L 2.i .. •.11 ..r.✓..�w�n++r' '+r..w-.+w.r.w++ww+....�w.+.«..r+.r...rww.fw.wr.rn+..w�.. � An r'� • 1 .163••z �1-- �G 146-241--38 11arbcara E Baker Breuer-Harrison Inc _ 1.70421 Bol.sa Chica Street 2545 E Chapman Ave aunt•ington Beach, Calif Suite 107 92649 Fullarton, Calif 92631 i 63--121-3.1 146-241-06 Joan M Anderson, Robert S Butts '1.7062 Holsa Chica Street 1. 171 Rpundhill Drive Huntington Bench, Calif Huntington machwncyal.if 92649 92649 Dept-,--of ;[ransportation 146-241.-05 120i5p: Spring Street £ t Russell Load Angeles, Calif 90052 Rt 3 Box 219 Attn,: Staff Assistant San Luis Obispo, Calif Tesign B 93401 Ocean View Scholl 146--241w:.4 797 ---Warner Avenue Jan Alw riun jgton Beach, Calif 16811 Roosevelt Rd At": lqis r iet Supt. . Huntington Beach, Calif 921649 1.46T; 4�i-25 Masai tier io 779,5_.,-Westminster Avenue westa,r� , ster, Calif 9 2 3- 14$ 241-11 Wiiant B 'x3 den IFtaio Operation School : 07,. arner Avenue Nuri yton Beach, Calif winch ca community Water Dolki .Ckiica Water Company j 11 .0. --Box 103 Sunset Beach, Ca . 907 4:1 146-241-•43 virgi e M Tackaberry 5061 Warner Avenue Bunting ton Beach, Calif 91647 146-241. -40 S.i`d Crossley y.05a Rose Avenue vi&m Springs , Calif g2262 14f- 4ir� ltxa�u -,�ia�ts , fMon Inc