Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/06/19431:31 The Newport Beach City Planning Commission met in special session at the Palisades Tavern, Corona del Mar, California, October 6, 1943, at 7:30 P.M., for the purpose of conduct- ing the first public hearing having to rid with a proposed amendment to Ordinance #525, altering and reducing certain setback requirements pertaining to certain properties,more particularly those of "Properties Incorporated." Chairman Hopkins presided. ROIL 4AU Commissioners present: Hopkins, Seager, Johnson, Nelson, Baltz, Allen, Patterson, Isbell and Campbell absent: None Chairman Hopkins called upon the Secretary to state the purpose of the meeting. Secretary Seeger declared that under the provisions of, Ordinance #525 a proposed amendment to such Ordinance may be initiated by hhe City Council, the Planning Commission or the property owners. In this instance, he said, the proceedings were institdxt.ed by the Newport Beach City Council which requested the Planning Com- mission to hold this hearing. He. stated that the hearing had been regularly and legally advertised, and t&9t he had the affidavit ' of publication, together with copy of advertisement, which ap- peared in the September 23rd, 1943, issue of the Newport - Balboa News Times. Chairman Hopkins stated that recently Ordinance #525,taking the place of Ordinance #440, was passed, and that as part of that Ordinance, as in Ordinance #440, there is a setback requirement of 10 feet on Ocean Boulevard, Corona. del Mar. He said that the question before the Planning Commission is: Should the Ordinance be amended insofar as it affects the 10 foot setback requirement. He explained that it was the function of the Planning Commission to hold public hearings, and in accordance with the findings resulting therefrom, make its recommendations to the City Council, which would thereafter take action. He asked if Mr. Harris, or any representative of " Properties Incorporated" was present. There was no response. At this juncture, Commissioner Patterson said that before the hear- ing got under way, he would like to make a statement. He said there had been a great deal of controversy over the 10 foot set- back requirement on Ccean� Baulevard: Rather than hold up the Ordinance, the City Council thought it best to pass it, and there- after this particular question could be settled by public hearings. He said that since Mr. Harris or "Properties Incorporated" had not asked for a public hearing, the City Council thought it only fair ' to initiate these proceedings so that the dissatisfied parties could have an opportunity to present their case. He said it was unfortunate Mr. Harris was not present. The Chairman inquired if there were any other members of the City Council present who wished to be heard. There being no response, 13'2 he declared. the hearing officially open., He asked anyone who wished to be heard at this time to give names and addresses and state whether or not they were property owners. He cant ioned that the fact they were present at the hearing would have no bearing on the Commission, but that they must state their position - for or against the proposed amendment. Mrs. M. Everett Burton arose and stated that she represented Mrs. Mary N. Everett, property owner at 1002 Ocean Boulevard, Corona del Mar. She read a letter from Mrs. Everett addressed to the City Council of Newport Beach, in which she protested the amendment. Mrs. Burton said she had examined the Orange County Records and had ascertained as to Lots 1,2, and 3, in Book 174, Page 384 of Deeds, Records of Orange County, a statement to the effect that "no build- ings other than observation or summer houses to be erected between Ocean Boulevard and the top of the bluff." Also, in Book 193, Page of Deeds, Records of Orange County - "It is hereby further stipulat- ed and agreed that parties of the first part will not sell any por- tion of the land on the Mesa fronting said lots 7 and 8 Block 35 or allow any buildings to be constructed thereon." (Memorandum of Statement" as made by Mrs. Burton to the Planning Commission dated October 5, 1943, filed with City Council. On the conclusion of Mrs. Burton's remarks, the following property owners recorded objections to proposed amendment to Ordinance #525: 227 Jay Putter, 215 Orchid Ave; D.Y. Martin, 214 Carnation; A. D.White, 231 Iris Street; B. Van Dusen, representing O.A.Smith,.Pres. Pacifio Electric, residing at Jasmine and Ocean;- O.A. Smith, 816 Ocean Blvd; F. B. Pooley, Poinsettia and Ocean; Gordon Thomas, 220 Goldenrood; Katherine Burton, representing Alice W. Alden, 1000 Ocean Boulevard; Mrs. Florence Woolley, 219 Iris; Albert J. Bowen, 218 Goldenrood; Ed Chapman, 1308 Ocean Boulevard; Mabel Thomas, 1208 Bayview; J.S. White, 416 Hazel Drive; Warren Fletcher, 214 Orchid; Mrs. H. A. Stauch215 Marigold; N. 0. Wenden, 234 Goldenrod; Ruth Simpson, 235 Helitrope; Mrs. Harold Wilson, 219 Poppy; Irwin Spicer, 208 Dallia; Col. F. C.Venn, 230 Larkspur; J. L. Steffenson, 209 Marigold; Dr. Earl M. Brady, 409 Poinsettia Ave; Mrs.George E. Lewis, 304 Marigold; Mrs. C. E. Chapman, Iris Ave; Mr, E.A.Wright, 306 Hazel Street; Mrs. Kathleen Kirk, 305 Larkspur Avenue; H. Ross King, 234 ?oppy; H. L. Allen, 500 Ocean Boulevard; Mrs. B.Z. McKinney, 220 Roppy Avenue; Hubbard C. Howe, 604 Avocado Avenue; Burton Proctor, 402 Goldenrod; Mrs. Florence Anderson, 428 Marguerite Ave; Miss Ruth V. Stoever, 426 Dahlia; Mrs. C. H. Droege, 300 Fearnleaf; Mrs. Thomas Minford, 225 Poppy Street; Mr. W.T. Jefferson, 212 Ocean Boulevard; Mrs. A.M. Scharle 367 Goldenrod; Mrs. Margaret Scharle,307 Goldenrod; Mrs. Maynard, 314 Seaview; B. E. Lahart, 209 Dahlia Avenue; Mrs. C. Wayne Powell Poppy ; Theo. Harrington; Geo.C.Wandrey, 411 Dahlia Ave; Edwin Holmberg, -411 Fernleaf Ave; Mrs. C. W. Harrison, 416 Ocean Blvd; and Mrs. 0, M. Campbell. Mr. John Sherrod Harris, who arrived after the hearing was declared open, was called upon by the Chairman to take the floor, if he so desired. Mr. Harris asked permission of the Commission to read his prepared statement, prefacing his request by the remark th4t he did not wish to be misquoted - hence the prepared statement. The Chairman acceded to his request. Mr. Harris read a lengthy state- ment. When he was asked for the written statement for the purpose n U 1,33 of the Minutes, he refused, saying he would first have,to get permission from his Company. The Chairman reminded him that ' he had requested permission to read his statement and that by hit refusal to furnish the Commission with a copy It would appear that he did not wish to make his remarks a matter of record. Mr. Harris said that was not the case. He must first secure.permission from his Company. The Chairman declared that since Mr. Harris refused to record his statement it could not be considered as part of the proceedings. The Chairman asked Commissioner Patterson when the setback ordinance was first adopted. Commissioner Patterson said it yeas adopted in 1936. The Chairman then asked Mr. Harris whether the .setback requirement was adopted after the purchase of the property by his Company. Mr. Harris replied the bank had made a loan on the property in 1927. Commissioner Patterson stated that he thought in the original subdivision.. the lots between Narcissus and Heliotrope paralled Ocean Boulevard and that the other properties owned by the Company west of Heliotrope and east of Narcissus were never sub- divided into lots. He said he was not familiar as to when the Company made the loan on the property. He said the original subdivision paralled the bluff line and that in the portion east of Iris, the city abandoned the streets and reverted them back to acreage this upon agreement worked out with the Bank. ' He said that was one of the things requested by the Bank. In return, Commissioner Patterson said, the Bank granted a right - of -way to the City connecting Bayside Drive with Fernleaf. He said there was also a settlement of beach frontage between Narcissus and the Jetty. The Chairman inquired as to when the Ordinance became effective as to the subdivision. Commissioner Patterson replied that Zoning Ordinance #440 was adopted in 1936 and that the resubdividion was made subsequent to that time - that the setback ordinance was in effect when the pro- perty was resubdivided. He said that his office located the top of the bluff line with reference to the street lines, as shown by the Map he had with him. He stated that the stakes set along there were put there by Mr. Harris' engineers, and that he, personally, saw his surveyors setting stakes there as long as eight years ago, and that for any practical purpose, the stakes set by Mr. Harris were sufficient. Mr. Harris said he wished to speak on the question of sub- division of the bluff property when his Company took it over. He said it was not practicable to develop it that way, and that the question was discussed with the City Council and arran #e - ments made to make it possible for the Bank to divide it. He said he thought he could get affidavits to that effect from former city councilmen. Chairman Hopkins declared that he thought'the present line of Hearing procedure should be discontinued, and if there was no one who wished to be heard further, he would ask the Planning Commission if they had any questions. Secretary Seager said that he would like to asnwer some of the remarks which were made at the hearing, as he thought it 134 important that the Commission inform those present that it is not within the Commission's power to adjourn this meeting and call it off. He said the statutes provide in cases of this kind that the Commission hold two public hearings. He said this was ' the first public hearing, and that he thought the next public hearing would be held on the 20th of October of this year. He said he wanted to bring out this point because there were many present who did not understand that the proceedings were govern- ed entirely by statutes, and that in order to make it legal the Commission was going to follow them to the letter - notwithstand- ing misrepresentations made by others. Commissioner Allen suggested that Mrs. Burton furnish the Com mission with more particulars - as to when the Bank acquired the property, as that would have considerable weight with the Com- mission, particularly if the Bank was not in any way damaged by its use of that particular property. Mrs. Burton said she would b e glad t o f ur ni sh , the Commis sion wit h thi s data. Mr. Ed. Chapman, one of the property owners present, said he thought that before the City Council or the Planning Commission attempted to settle the matter, it was up to the City Attorney to give an opinion. Pairs. Burton objected to the present City Attorney giving a legal opinion on the ground he also represented "Pro- perties Incorporated ". Also, according to Mrs. Burton, the City Attorney is in the employ of the Citizens Trust & Savings Bank, and that, consequently, he would hardly be the proper person to give an opinion. Mr. Harris took exception to Mrs.Burton's statement, saying that the City Attorney was not so employed , so far as the bluff property was concerned. Mrs. Burton con- tended that that was "splitting hairs." Commissioner Allen suggested that when the hearing was con- cluded, the property owners present have their own meeting and appoint a representative. The Chairman stated that if there was no one else present who wished to be heard, he would declare the hearing closed. He said that the proper action to be taken by the Commis siom was to adjourn this hearing and set the time and place for the second public hearing,. He suggested that meantime those present give this matter constructive thought so that they could present the facts before the Commission at the second ?ablic hearing. Commissioner Allen moved tlDt the second public hearing be held in the Council Chambers, City Hall, Newport Beach, California, at 4 P.M., October 29, 1943, when the Planning Commission would hold its regular monthly meeting. Motion seconded by Commission- er Johnson. It appeared that the hour and place would not be convenient to the majority of those present at the hearing. After some dis- cussion, it was decided to fix an hour and place more convenient. I The Chairman suggested a motion rescinding the action taken by Commissioner Allen. Commissioner Allen moved that the motion as to time and place of the second public hearing be rescinded, and that another motion be made as to the time and place of the second public hearing. Motion seconded by Secretary Seager. Carried and so ordered. ' Commissioner Allen moved that in lieu of the next regular month- ly meeting of the Newport Beach City Planning Commission, a second public hearing on the proposed amendment to Ordinance #525 be held at a special meeting in the Palisades Tavern, Corona del Mar, California, October 20, 1943, at 7:30 P.M. Motion seconded by Commissioner Baltz. Carried and so ordered. Commissioner Isbell moved that the hearing be adjourned. Motion seconded by Commissioner Johnson. Carried and sc ordered. Res ctfully au7bm�itt , HO- ARE W. SEAGER Secretary (f 135 ADJOURNMENT