Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/19/1942August 199 1942 THE NEWPORT BEACH CITY PLANNING CCMMISSION met in regular session on Wed. eve. Aug. 19, 1942 in the Council Chambers, City Hall, Newport Beach, California, Chr. Hopkins presiding. Commissioners presents Johnson, Hopkins, Seeger. Nelson & Patterson " absents Allen, Findlay, Finch & Campbell - 71 BOLL CALL The Chairman called for-consideration of the minutes of the meeting of Jul MINUTES 15, 1942. Com..Johnson requested that the minutes be amended to read as folL. lows in the matter of the Boll Call vote in the second hearing on the appli- cation of the Lido Sea Food Company. BOLL CALLS Ayes: Allen, Findlay, Finch, Hopkins, Campbell, Johnson, Seeger, Nelson & Patterson Noes: None. Cam. Johnson then moved that these minutes be adopted as corrected. Motion seconded by Cam. Nelson. Motion carried and so ordered. Chr. Hopkins called for consideration of the special meeting minutes of Avg. 40 1942. Cam. Nelson moved they be accepted as written, motion being seconded - by Cam. Johnson, carried and so ordered, Seely. Seeger read the application of Lester B. Kelly of 3033 Elliott Street, San Diego, which read as follows August 9, 1942. Secretary of Planning Commission, Mr. Harold Seeger, Balboa Island, Calif. APPLIC&TIOB OF LESSTER B MM FM 9AffiINCS Dear Mr. Seeger: i BLACK 5, We submit herewith two prints of proposed plan of buildings for Mr. and Mrs.330TION 5, L. B. Kelly in Block 50 Sec. 5, Balboa Island and request application for var- Bijam lance of regulations covering then ISLAND "Location of North wall of Double garage three feet (3' -00) South CALIFORNIA of North property line in lieu of the five foot (51 -00) distance required by the city ordinances We request this variance be granted for the following reasons: (a) This will permit the installation of a badminton court of playing dimexh-- aione without.sacrifice of floor space in residence or income property bnLld- ine. (b) The North property line does not face on an alley and could be elasseA as a side property line. (c) Granting of this variance would allow us the enjoyment of recreational area along with the benefit of income property. Enclosed herewith check in the amount of $10.00 as payment on application for variance. Very truly yours, ' (Signed) Lester R. Kelly . 3033 Elliott Street, San Diego, California. Segy Seeger advised the matter had been properly advertised.on Aug. 110 Iwo adding that Mr. Kelly asks for a rear yard variance. He advised there is 7=2 alley there and no alley will ever be there. Com. Nelson explained the blue Prints and the Commissionere discussed the matter. It was Chr. Hopkins' opinion that the granting of the application would establish a bad precedent. Cam. Patterson suggested that Mr. Kelly make a new application requesting a 50% variance at which Chr. Hopkins stated it would be possible to deny the ' application with the proviso that a 50% variance would be granted, thus making a new application unnocessary. After some discussion, Cam. Johnson moved the adoption of Resolution No. 203 denying the request but advising the Commission would allow a 5CO variance, giving Mr. Kelly.51, if he so desires and that this recommendation be transmitted to the City Council by the Sears - tary and a copy filed as part of the minutes of tbia meeting. Cost. Nelson seconded. Motion carried and so ordered, . - APnICATIQN The Secretary read the advertisement published Aug. 11, 1942, Chr. Hopkins OF stated that at a previous meeting, a committee composed of Cosm..Piuch, D. W. EIJ,IOTT Campbell and Dr. Seeger were appointed to meet with the Cif Attorney in FOR A order to iron out legal technicalities. Sealy. Seeger advised that Com. PERMIT TO 0- Finch bad phoned him that he was unable to attend the meeting of the Planning TER INTO A Commission and had requests& Dr. Seeger to make a report on the meeting of COyMCT WITH the Committee in.his stead. Socy. Seeger stated the meeting bad been held THE CITY 08 with the City Attorney, mach discussion indulged in and mach information im- NEWPORT RCH. parted by the City Attorney resulting in the City Attorney. requesting to be gOR present in order to explain the matter to the entire commission, SUN DRILLING City Attorney Thompson stated in starting that the matter of the lease bad been referred to the Planning Commission only for the purpose of learning their recommendation in so far only as-charge of sane was concerned. He said the lease itself could not be worked out by either this body or the City Council until the zoning ordinance bad been amended. He stated that the only matter in which the Planning Commission should be interested was ' the question of a change in the ordinance. Chr. Hopkins stated that the committee was to discuss the legality of whether, under the ordinance, slant drilling is permitted. Atty. Thompson said there was no dispute that the ordinance takes in slant, that it made no difference as long as at covers drilling for oil within the city limits. He said that the committee appoint - ed by the City Council came to that conclusion; then added that the matter was not properly before the Commission. Cam. Patterson stated that it was the intention of the Committee appointed by Chr. Hopkins to learn if it was necessary to change the soning ordinance and-did not intend to hold hearings on the matter until a few more facts were clarified. City Attorney Thompson desired to know why the advertisement was published then, since It really meant nothing and was told by Chr. Hopkins that it was merely a notice to the public that the matter was being considered so they would be present to discuss the matter if at all interested. Chr. Hopkins inquired of Atty. Thompson if our ordinance would permit slant drilling but not permit drilling where the start of the well is within the city limits. To this, Attorney Thompson replied that there was no question about it as It had been done and could be done legally. He then cited the points the committee had agreed on: 1. There is no difference, from a mnisance standpoint, between drilling at the city's edge and within the city limits. 2. The committee feels that while we could permit drilling in specified ' areas, and do so legally, if oil were found a great deal of excitement would be created and what is done here could be undone by future Planting Candse- ions and future City Councils. 30 That there.. is a bill now pending before the U. S. Congress-to make this a Naval Oil Reserve. If passed, before private concessions are made and oil obtained by these, the Navy will come in and the city will derive absolutely 73 no financial gain. Also that possibly if this concession is given, the compsnsam tion derived will not compensate for the damage done to the residential property of the city. -1 1 4. The.last point was that this must originate in the Planning Commission ' and the Ordinance discourages certain classes of industry within the city and this happens to be one of those prohibited industries. Chr. Hopkins inqu8red if it would be possible to allow a permit for slant drilling which would enter the city at some point below the surface of the bity, provided that point of entry is roughly 1/2 mile away from the city limits.) The reply was that it is possible but not probable because the lease runs 4 to the city limits. Atty. Thompson added that Mr. Elliott was agreeable to writing a contract iu.which he will meet any reasonable conditions. Be could not break those provisions because he would break his contract. Mr. Elliott said Attorney Thompson, could answer the question better than he could but it was his belief that Mr. Elliott hadjo get as close.as possible to the boundary in order to get into the Pacific Ocean. Atty. Thompson then said he brought out the above points without comment . and it was his purpose to males a report on the ideas.of the committee. He said he wanted to stress again that what had been done here, could be undone by others in the future. He also wanted to reiterate that the excitement of oil brings perhaps many undesirable situations. He said that the committee made no recommendation to this commission. It was Com. Johnson's cement that if an ordinance was passed permitting, Mr. Elliott to drill, the Strowbridge people could do the same thing. City Attorney Thompson advised that Mr. Elliott will take another piece of property that lies very close.to the city an d we have asked him not to drill it and he has agreed to pat that in his lease. As far as the other properties are concerned, they could drill but not come into out city limits. He added. that ' it was thought by some of the members of the canmittes that if oil were dispov- ered, a great many straight wells would be sunk, as close to the boundary lines as they could come in the hope they would hit the outside of the pool It was Cam. Johnson's cement that regardless of the income derived, if residential property were damaged, it would not compensate. Having gone thru' the agony -of other drilling -days, he could realize the result. .Atty. Thompson said he well remembered the difficulty the city had in getting rid of wells that were bringing no money into the city; that they had -kept back the West Newport district. - Because of a refinery 1- 1 /2.miles away,. the smell was unr bearable but that the city finally rid itself of the situation, goimlg to the extent of- sending a crew out and having them clean up the premises. The oil was running into the bevy and as a result it asst the city mwW hundred dollars before Mr. Patterson was able to control the situation. Mrs. Lee of the Seashore ColwW wan present and when asked for her comments on the situation stated that it was not only her opinion -but that of all res- idents in the district who were decidedly up in arms, that they did not.went the wells out - there. She stated that if the district were canvassed, she ksew everyone would concur in her protest. ✓ Mr. Elliott then took the floor and stated that he would like to ram ovee the points brought out by Atty. Thompson. He said he did not believe it quite fair to compare -what he requested the city to do with past experiences because the whole thing would be under direct city supervision; nothing be-, ing done without the approval of some city. representative, Regarding the bill pending before Congress, Mr. Elliott said that if the, ' Navy decided oil was there, they would not ask permission to whipstock north of the highway and outside the city limits; that they would just drill it. He said that if the land were being operated, he did not believe the Navy would come in. If they decided to come in and went into court to secure it, the city would not lose a thing but that he would take the licking. He said he; knew the situation previously experienced in Newport Beach as he bad seen the situation and that he would keep his lease clean. -It would be under City sup- ervision. Odors arise from oil lying around on the ground; a certain amount of gas coming from the oil. 7 4 He said that he understood that aryy committee would desire to point oat the hazards to the city. The people living in that area might find con - ditiona a great deal woose sooner or later unless a deal of this kind is made. He said he believed that there would be drilling on the edge -of the city regardless of whether this lease is made or net and that it was his intention to drill it whether or not the leases goes through. The way oil is being drawn oat of- reserve at this time, it is very possible that ' the same situation will exist that the city previously experienced. He . added that when a lease is drilled, such as he suggests, no excitement exists. Mary good wells have been brought in at Huntington Beach without comment in the papers. He said it would not be practical to start back 1/2 mile. It was his intention to concentrate the drilling in an area of 200 feet and tanks could not be set back 1/4 mile.evea, the unfortunate thing about it being that the drilling would be close to the city bounder - lee. odors uauslly come from vapors which arise from oil on the ground, refineries or gas plants. At this point, Com. Patterson inquired if oil were found in quantity, would it be piped off or how would it be disposed of. To this, Mr. Elliott stated that there would be no refinery or gas- plant near the city at all. He said if oil is needed badly a rough, der- ricks would be put up but that if the property were being produced on slant holes, there would be no necessity of the Navy ta]dng ever. It was Atty. Thompsents comment that it would be just as well to have the wells within the City limits as on the edge of the city limits. To this, Mr. Elliott said that he believed everyone would agree that .they would rather have those wells north of the highway than south. The amount of city owned property was discussed and Cam. Patterson advised . the city owned about 400 acres or over 82% of the contiguous property there. Chr. Hoy4ne said the whole problem boiled down to whether the com- mission wished to initiate a move to amend the ordinance or not. This is just an informal sort of hearing to start the ball rolling: to see if aWthing could be done and just what would be advisable. Cwt. Pat- ' terson stated that all of the findinge of the committee were against It. Chr. Hopkins said that if we had only Mr. Elliott to deal with from now to doomsday, he was sure it could be worked oat. However,, we coa- not be sure that ewe other fellow will came along and be willing is abide by the ordinance. The ordinance is ironclad as against it now and -in order to grant. the permit, It - clearly must be amended. -The mat- ter of the financial gain to Huntington Beech from their wells was brought out and the matter of how they secured their 2% was discussed. After this, Chr. Hopkins asked for a motion. Cam. Johnson moved the Planning Commission notify the City Council that the Planning Com- mission has no desire to initiate action to amend the present ordinance . to permit oil drilling. There was no second to the motion. Mr. Elliott stated that.it had cost him $600 per no. for some 8 or 9 months and that he had tried to be as calm as possible about it. It was some 3 or 4 months ago that be first approached the City of Newport Beach regarding the lease and he would like to have some action on the matter at the earliest possible time. He said he would lave to start soon in order to get sane return for his investment. Cam. Seeger read the application, stating that it had been referred to the Commission in that meaner. Atty. Thompson stated that the gist of the matter was whether or not it was the Commissionls recommendation to amend the ordinance and that the agreement was submitted in order for the Planning Commission to get the complete picture.' Seely. Seater made the following motions That the Newport Beach. City ' Planning Commission return to the City Council the report of the committee appointed by the Mayor and the letter of transmittal with the suggestion that the Planning Commission desires to make no recommendation. There was no second on this motion. 75 Atty. Thompson stated that it was only fair to Mr. Elliott that some action. be taken on the matter. Com. Johnson stated he believed his original motion! was in order. Seely. Sanger said that it was the same as his motion in ef- i 'fect and inquired if Mr. Elliott understood it and wondered if the City .Council would understand the reason. Mr. Elliott explained that the City of Newport Beach has title to property that no other city in California, has. Atty. Thompson explained that at the time California was admitted as a state to the United States, by virtue of their sovereign capacity, the tidelands were to be forever held in trust for the people of California for fishing, navigation and all other titles remain with the United States Government which reserved the mineral rights. By two acts of legislature we acquired the rights to all tidelands within the city limits of Newport Beach. That action gave us the same title the State had required from the Government. After oil was discovr Bred in Huntington Beach, they tried to acquire their title and were not Saar cossful. Chr. Hopkins inquired that if we should drill.for oil in these tidelands to which we hold title and find it, does the City of Newport Beach then perfect) title to the mineral rights. Atty. Thompson replied by stating that Mr. Elliott's point was that having discovered oil and needing it, they would nop take it away from the city. He said that it was Mr. Elliott's point also that the Goverment would do the same thing, the State did at Huntington Beach. They had no right to drill but they did and stood the suit afterwards and paid a royalty for it. Cam. Johnson stated he had the temerity, in the face of having no second on his motion to put the same motion Before the Commission again. The motion was seconded by Com. Nelson. Chr. Hopkins called for a roll call vote. BALL CALL: ' Ayess. Johnson. Hopkins, Nelson and Patterson Noes& Sanger Motion carried and so ordered. Secy. Seeger stated that Mr. Elliott had the right under the ordinance tee make a formal request which would require that the matter be heard formally.! It was Chr. HopkinsIzesplsnt that if the City Council had sent a request &It we hold hearings for an amendment, we could have held our legal hearings 82A then made a recommendation to the Council as to whether or not this COMniseiau desired an amendment be made but that we had gone as far as the Commission could under the manner in which the application was transmitted to the Commission. It was decided that Mr. Elliott make written formal application to the Planning Cammtiesion to amend the ordinance to permit slant drilling. Cam. Patterson then moved the Sscreta4y advertise a special hearing on the applicP- tion of Mr. D. A. Elliott for an amendment to the ordinance to permit slant drilling in specified areas and that the hearing be held Sept. 4. 1848 and qhs second hearing to be hold an Sept. 160 1942. Motion seconded by Cam. N91804. Motion carried and So ordered. Cam. Patterson moved for adjournment. Motion seconded by Cam. Nelson; carried AWCUMMM and so ordered. H4RAHD 11. SE►�IGE @, ISe tart'.