HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/19/1956DRAFT MINUTES, PLANNING COMMISSION MELTING, January 19, 1956, 7 :30 P.M.
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Roll Call: Briggs, Smith, Rudd, Reed, Longmoor, Lind, Keene, Hayton
Copelin
Cc mnissioners Absent: Briggs, Keene
Minutes of the meeting on December 15, 1955 were approved on
motion of Com. Rudd, seconded by Com. Copelin, and carried.
1. COIT, Glenn P., 1401 W. Balboa Blvd., Newport Beach V
2. Lot 27, Block 14, Tract 234, R-3 zone #262
4.. The roquost is for a 1' 6+' side yard; requirement is 31.
5. Applicant states a need for additional room on the interior
of the new proposed construction.
6. Mr. Colt mentioned a hardship in designing the interior of
new construction were he denied an exception from the 3'
requirement.
7. Can. Lind's report showed a bad side setback condition in
this whole neighborhood, and if granted would encourage addi-
tional non - conformity.
8. Com. Lind moved that the Commission Deny the variance.
Com. Lind recommended a suitable design showing the new
construction contiguous with the old be submitted to the
Building Department. Seconded by Com. Rudd, and carried by
the following roll call vote, to -wit: ALL AYES
1. RAY, Richard B., 311 Amethyst St., Balboa Island
2. Lot 31, Block 17, Section 3, an R-2 zone #E264
4. The request is for a 1' 14" sideyard; requirement is 31.
In addition an excessive frontyard of 54' is proposed.
5;. The applicant wishes to establish off - street parking,.by
raising the present non - conforming structure and installing
a two car garage on the first story.
6. No opposition present.
7. Com. Reed's report stated the proposed addition was in accord
with Commission's desire to improve area.
8. Com. Reed moved that the Commission Grant the variance,
seconded by Com. Copelin, and carried by the following roll
call vote, to -wit: ALL AYES
•
•
page -2-
1. SMITH, Dargin W., 928 W. Balboa Blvd., Newport Beach.
2. Lots 15, 16, Block 109, Section 'B', and R.-3 zone.
4. The request is for a 3' side yard; requirement is 41.
5. The applicant expresses a need for additional area on the
interior of the new dwelling.
6. Applicant stated agreement to Commission modification of
request.
7. Committee report showed a patio area in excess of 9' along
one of the sideyards for more than 3/4 of the 1001 depth.
8. Com. Lind moved that this variance be Approved on condition
that 3' sideyards be maintained along the garage sides of
the rear portion of the site only; 4' shall be maintained
along dwelling portion of lot. Motion seconded by Com. Hayton,
and carried by the following roll call vote, to -wit: ALL AYES
VARIANCES
#265
1. CARLSON, Phill4p I., 4304 West Seashore Drive, Newport Beach.
2. Lots 3 & 4, Block 43, River Section, 3rd Addition, R-2 zone.
4. The request is for a 3' sideyard; requirement is 41.
5. The required sideyards on either side of this lot are only 31.
The applicant feels he is entitled to the same setback. The
proposed dwelling requires this additional area.
6. Applicant stated a desire to improve area.
7. Similar setbacks exist in the whole area.
8. Com. Rudd moved that the application be Granted, seconded by
Com. Copelin, and carried by the following roll call vote, to -wit;
ALL AYES
1. MACCO Corp., 721 Patolita Drive, Newport Beach.
2. Lot 73, Tract #1700, Irvine Terrace, R-1 Zone.
4. The request is for a detached garage on the front half of the
building site.
5. This would aid in keeping the architectural motif, as estab-
lished by the previous variances granted.
6. No opposition from the floor or commission.
7. Found to be in accord with planned development.
#266.
#267
8. Com. Reed moved that the application be Granted, seconded by
Com. Copelin, and carried by the following roll call vote, to -wit;
ALL AYES.
page -3-
4. Request a detached garage on the front half of site.
5. To keep architectural motif established by .previous variances.
6. No opposition from the floor or commission.
7. In accord with planned development.
8. Came. Reed moved that the application be Granted, seconded by
Com. Copelin, and carried by the followini call vote,
to -wit: ALL AYES
RESUBDIVISIONS
1. LUTHERAN CHURCH, Newport Harbor, 2501 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach.
2. Portion Lot A, Tract 919, Book 29, Pages 31 to 34• #21
Site #1 - SWly 1001± measured at right angles to the SWly line
of the SEly 244'+ of the NEly 362'± of Lot A, Tract 919.
Site #2 - that irregular parcel of land being the 3Ely 481t of
the NWly 1704 of the SWly 310.40' of Lot 'A', Tract #919.
4. The church would like the privilege of selling off the above
described SWly 100' to the owner of the site now occupied by
• the Malone Electric.
5. The Malone Electric required additional land to the rear of their
property for more efficient operation (storage & auto parking.)
Access shall be off the Coast Highway.
6. Mr. McCardle stated Church had no access to property in question,
and the Malone Electric has ingress- egress facilities from the
Coast Highway.
7. The Commission concurred with the applicant's views.
8. Com. Lind moved that the application be Granted, on condition
that land above described shall be contiguous with and become
an integral part of property adjacent to the Coast Highway,
and described above as Site #2. Motion seconded by Com.
Smith, and carried by the following roll call vote, to -wit:
ALL AYES
L
1.
MACCO Corp.,
1530 Dolphin Terrace, Newport Beach.
VA CFS
.
2.
Lot 48, Tract
#1701, Irvine Terrace, R-2 zone.
;8268
4. Request a detached garage on the front half of site.
5. To keep architectural motif established by .previous variances.
6. No opposition from the floor or commission.
7. In accord with planned development.
8. Came. Reed moved that the application be Granted, seconded by
Com. Copelin, and carried by the followini call vote,
to -wit: ALL AYES
RESUBDIVISIONS
1. LUTHERAN CHURCH, Newport Harbor, 2501 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach.
2. Portion Lot A, Tract 919, Book 29, Pages 31 to 34• #21
Site #1 - SWly 1001± measured at right angles to the SWly line
of the SEly 244'+ of the NEly 362'± of Lot A, Tract 919.
Site #2 - that irregular parcel of land being the 3Ely 481t of
the NWly 1704 of the SWly 310.40' of Lot 'A', Tract #919.
4. The church would like the privilege of selling off the above
described SWly 100' to the owner of the site now occupied by
• the Malone Electric.
5. The Malone Electric required additional land to the rear of their
property for more efficient operation (storage & auto parking.)
Access shall be off the Coast Highway.
6. Mr. McCardle stated Church had no access to property in question,
and the Malone Electric has ingress- egress facilities from the
Coast Highway.
7. The Commission concurred with the applicant's views.
8. Com. Lind moved that the application be Granted, on condition
that land above described shall be contiguous with and become
an integral part of property adjacent to the Coast Highway,
and described above as Site #2. Motion seconded by Com.
Smith, and carried by the following roll call vote, to -wit:
ALL AYES
L
0
•
•
page -4-
1. IRVINE CO., Box 37, Tustin, Calif. AUU.MLV IONS
2. (old) Lots 12 to 16 inclusive, Tract #2094, &
(new) Lots 1 to 4 inclusive, Tract #2984, #27
as recorded in Book 57, Page 50, Miscellaneous Maps of
Orange s
ge
4. The Irving Co. wishes to increase the size of these building �-
sites.
5. Economically unwise to develop these lots as they now exist.
(Notes This application concerns the submission by the Irvine
Co., for approval of a Tentative and Final Map of Tract #2984,
which is a resubdivision of Lots 12 to 16, inclusive, Tract #2094.
6. No opposition from floor or the Commission.
7. The Commission desires larger building sites whenever possible.
8. Cam:. Hayton moved that the application be Approved on the Ten-
tative Map, seconded by Coin. Rudd, and carried.
Com. Hayton moved that the application be Approved on the Final
Map, seconded tV Cam. Rudd, and earried3 by the the following roll
call vote, to -wit; ALL AYES
1. MASTERS, 0 - W., 14, Fernleaf Ave., Corona del Mar.
2. Lots 1, 3, and -j Lot 5, Block 7r335, C.D.M. Tract.
Site All of Lot 1 and the Sally 121 of Lot 3.
Site , NEly 18' of Lot 3 and the Sally * of Lot 5. ,
4. The request is for the legal establishment of two building
sites as described above.
5. Wishes to improve the building area by adding square footage.
6. NO opposition from the floor or Commission.
7. Mr. Threlkeld, representing Mr. Masters mentioned the creation
of larger building sites, to the advantage of the City.. The
Commission concurred.
rM
8. Com. Reed moved that the application be Granted, seconded by
Com. Copelin, and carried by the following roll call vote, to -wit:
ALL AYES
!'
•
page -5-
USE PERMITS
#207
1, PETERS, GEORGE, F. NE corner of Irvine & Clay
2. Lot 22„ Tr. 1220, R-3 Zone
3. Posted T 9-56.. 2nd Hearing.
4. A Use Permit under Sec. 9103.32(a) -8 Units -.
5. To supply more adequate accommodations.
6. Findings on which Planning Commission based its decision to
deny this application:
1. This lot #23, Tr. #1220 is located in R -3 Residential
Zone in which number of residential family units is
limited to three per building site. Under the code a
property owner may apply to the Planning Commission for
a Use Permit to build residential family _units in excess
of three per building site. This application is for
such a Use Permit. The action of the Planning Commiss-
ion on this application is based on Section 9106.23(A)
of the City Code.
2. This lot contains approximately 9157 square feet of ground
area within its property lines. It is located at northeast
corner of Irvine and Clay Streets.
3. Lots 2 to 30 inclusive and lots 36 to 46 inclusive of Tract
1220 in this area after annexation to the City of Newport
Beach were zoned R-3. Mr. Earl W. Stanley applied to the
Planning Commission by letter under date of October 13th,
1953 requesting that the above lots of Tract 1220 be zoned
R -3.
4. The buildings so far constructed on these lots have not been
in excess of three family units per building site and are all
one story in height.
�. A plea was made in behalf of the applicant to the effect that
before annexation to the City -of Newp t Beach, this tract
was in the County under the jurisdiction' of'the County Zoning
Ordinance and zoned R-2 thereunder. Also this tract ;was planned
for developments under the permissive provisions,6f the County
Ordinance and that the City of Newport Beach should permit thew
to carry out this plan. Uses permitted under the County Ordin-
ance areas follows:-
Section 11 R -2
".Group Dwellings - District Regulations.
A. Uses; Permitted
Il. All uses permitted in the R -1 District
i2. Two family dwellings
3. Dwelling groups, Bungalow courts, and multiple
page -5a-
USE PERMITS
#207 con8d.
• family dwellings.
4. Schools, colleges, churches, libraries:
and museums.
Section 2 "Definitions" provides that multiple family dwellings
occupied by three or more families may not exceed one story
in height.
The developers have followed this pattern to the extent that all
the buildings are one story in height and do not contain more than
three family units.
6. The interior lots 23 to 27 inclusive contain an average ground
area of approximately 7353 square feet each with three family
units on each lot yields approximately 2676 square feet per
family unit.
Lot #22 under consideration in this application contains
approximately 9157 square feet with a three family building
it would yield 3052 square feet per family. If eight units
were permitted in accordance with this application., the ground
area would be reduced to 1144 square feet.
Any family units in excess of three on Lot 22 would provide a '
• smaller ground area per family than exists on the adjacent lots.
The Commission concludes that approximately the same ground area
per family unit should be maintained on Lot 22 as established and
provided on the adjacent lots.
7. The Commission concludes that the R-3 zoning of these lots under
:.the City of Newport Beach code is sufficiently similar to the
County Zoning Code regarding Uses permitted and restrictions im-
posed any hardships that may result are -not extensive enough to
warrant permitting family units in excess of three on Lot 22.
$. Many Protestants appeared at the Public Hearing conducted by the
Planning Commission on this application.
These Protestants contended that any increase of family units
over three per lot would:
1. Increase traffic hazards.
2. Increase number cars parking on streets.
3. Impair values of adjacent properties now improved with
3 family units per lot.
• 4. This tract is located between an elementary school and
a high school and any increase in the density of population
therein would aggravate problems already existing.
page 5b-
. USE PERMITS
#207 con +d.
5. The residential areas bordering Irvine Avenue on the
west and bordering St. Andrews, Road on the East are
developed as single family homes and excessive number
of families on single lots affects the happiness and
welfare of these home owners.
On the basis of these findings the Commission denied the application.
7. Comm. Hayton moved the Commission DENY this application, seconded
by Comm. Smith and carried by the following roll call vote,; to wit:
AYES: Longmoor, Lind, Smith, Hayton, Rudd, Reed
NOES: none
NOT VOTING: Copelin
ABSENT: Briggs, Keene
1. PETERS, GEORGE F., SW corner of St. Andrews & Clay #208
2. Lot 12, Tract 1220 an R-3 Zone.
• 3. Posted 1 -9 -56. 2nd Hearing
4. The request is for 8 units, under Sec. 9103.32(a)
5. To supply dwelling accomodation for the Newport Heights area.
6. Findings on which Planning Commission based its decision to deny
this application:
1. This Lot #12 Tract 1220 is located in R-3 Residential Zone
in which the number of residential family units is limited
to three per building site. Under the code a property
owner may apply to the Planning Commission for a Use Permit
to build residential family units in excess of three per
building site. This application is for such a Use Permit.
The action of the Planning Commission on this application
is based on Section 9106.23 (A) of the City Code which is
as follows: -
(a)In order to grant any Use Permit the findings of the Plan-
ning Commission shall be that the establishment, maintenance
or operation of the use or building applied for will not,
under the circumstances of the particular case, be detri-
mental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort and
general welfare of persons residing or working in the
neighborhood of such proposed use or be detrimental or
injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood
• or to the general welfare of the City.
page -5c-
USE PERMITS
• #208 cont'd.
2. This lot contains approximately 9358 square feet of ground
area within its property lines. It is located at northeast
corner of Irvine and Clay Streets.
3. Lots 2 to 30 inclusive and Lots 36 to 46 inclusive of Tract
#1220 in this area after annexation to the City of Newport
Beach were zoned R -3. Mr. Earl W. Stanley applied to the
Planning Commission by letter under date of October 13th,
1953 requesting that the above lots of Tract #1220 be
zoned R =3.
4. The buildings so far constructed on these lots have not been
in excess of three family units per building site and are all
one story in height. A majority of these lots have been
improved with these three family buildings.
5. A plea was made in behalf of the applicant to the effect that
before annexation to the City of Newport Beach, this tract
was in the County under the jurisdiction of the County zoning
ordinance and zoned R-2 thereunder. Also that this tract
was planned for development under the permissive provisions
of the County Ordinance and that the City of Newport Beach
should permit them to carry out this plan.
• 6. The Commission finds that the &-3 zoning of these lots under
the City of Newport Beach code is sufficiently similar to
the County Zoning Code regarding uses permitted and restric-
tions imposed whereby any hardships that may result are not
extensive enough to warrant permitting family units in
excess of three on Lot 12.
7. The interior Lots 13 to 14 inclusive contain an average ground
area of approximately 8488 square feet each. Three family
units on each lot yields approximately 2829 square feet
ground area per family unit. Lot #12 under consideration in
this application contains approximately 9358 square feet ground
area. A three family building would yield 3062 square feet
per family. If 8 units were permitted in accordance with
this application, the ground area would be reduced to 1169
square feet.
Any family units in excess of three on Lot 12 would provide
a smaller ground area per family than exists on the adjacent
lots as now developed.
The Commission concludes that approximately the same ground
area per family unit should be maintained on Lot 12 as estab-
lished and provided on the adjacent lots. .
8. Many protestants appeared at the Public Hearing conducted by.
. the Planning Commission on this application. Also four
petitions signed by a total of 92 property owners in the area
protested the approval of this application.
page —5d-
• USE PERMITS
#208 cont'd.
These protestants contended that any increase of family
units over three per lot would:
1. Increase traffic hazards.
2. Increase number of cars parking on streets.
3. Impair values of adjacent properties now improved
with 3 family units per lot.
4. This tract is located between an elementary school
and a high school and any increase in the density
of population therein would aggravate problems
already existing.
5. The residential areas bordering Irvine Ave. on the
west and bordering St. Andrews Road on the east are
developed as single family homes and excessive
numbers of families on single lots affects the
happiness and welfare of these home owners.
On the basis of these findings the Commission denied the application.
7. Com. Hayton moved the Commission'DENY this application, seconded
• by Com. Lind and carried by the following roll call vote, to —wit:
AYES: Longmoor, Lind, Smith, Hayton, Rudd, Reed
NOES: none
NOT VOTING: Copelin
ASSENT: Briggs, Keene
•
page -6-
USE PERMIT
I.KRAMER, Charles, 1327 E. Balboa Blvd., Balboa Pen. #212
2. Lot Portion of #9, Tract... Balboa... an R -3 Zone.
3. Posted 1- 10 -56. 2nd Hearing.
4. A use permit under Sec. 9103.32(a) -4 units -.
5. To more adequately support development.
6. Many home owners of the area were present to oppose
multiple development of units in this neighborhood.
7. The Commission mentioned the lack of square footage
evidenced for a corner lot. However, it was also
noted there was a prior permit issued without oppo-
sition, and which had elapsed.
8. Comm. Lind moved that the Commission recommend the
GRANTING of this application with the provislo that
the parcel of land in 4uestion, be resubdivided to
create not less than a 451 wide lot, seconded by
Comm. Smith, and carried by the following roll call
vote, to wit: ALL AYES
• 1. LIDO PeninsularYacht Anchorage, PO B ox 158, Nwprt Bch.
#213
2. Lot Portion of #2, (Nally), Lido Penin. Tr., Sec. 28. IC-21
3. Posted 1 -10 -56 lst Hearing.
4. The request is for the privelege of operating pri-
vate garage type locker units for the storage of
marine gear.
5. Boat owners in the area require; more storage room.
6. DuB to the proximity of living units the Commission
expressed doubt that the plot plan submitted would be
satisfactory, as to set- backs.Dwell. are prop. on 2nd story.
7. The Committee reported no construction, in the immed-
iate area, closer than 15' to the bulkhead. The City
Attorney was asked to assist in estgblishing a standard
set -back.
6. Comm. Rudd moved that this matter be continued until
the next regular meeting, seconded by Comm. Copelin
and carried by the following roll call vote, to wit: ALL AYES
•
•
page -7-
USE PERMITS
1. BARRETT, J. S., 2200 W. Coast Highway, Nwpt. Bch. #214
2. Lot 'A', Adjacent to Coast Hgwy., Tr. #919, Zone C -1H.
3. Posted 1- 10 -56. 1st Hearing...
4. The request is for permission to erect and use a new
type and designed Cabana unit for sales demonstre tion
purposes.
5. The area and business firm selected, is the only suit-
able location found by the applicm t,in Newport Beach.
6. No opposition was present.
7. The Committee reported this, a suitable location.
8. Comm. Rudd moved the Commission recommend the GRANTING.
of this application for a one year period, .seconded
C6mhi:=- Copelin ana'cartle y- %•'following roll call vote,
to wit, ALL AYES.
• 1. STAATS, R. V., 770 West Coast Hwy., Nwprt Bch. #215
2. Lot 24, Tract 1210...a C -1H Zone.
3. Posted 1 -9 -56. 1st Hearing ...
4. The request is for an extension of Use Permit #167,
which is limited to a one year period, and expires 3 -4 -56.
5. The applicmt has not been able to find another suit-
able location, and states no opposition in the past
year.
6. No opposition present.
7. The Committee reported an attractive operation had
taken place for the past year.
8. Comm. Rudd . moved the Commission recommend
the GRANTING of this application for a one year period,
secon ed=yy Comm. Copelin and carried by the following
roll call vote, to wit: ALL AYES.
1]
page -8-
• USE PERMITS
1. SMITH, Dargin W., 928 West Balboa Blvd., Nwprt Bch#216
2. hots 15, 16. Block 109, Section 'B' Tract - Nwprt Bch.
an R -3 Zone.
3. Posted 1 -9 -56. 1st Hearing.
4. The request is for 5 units on a building site in excess
of 5,000 sq. ft.
5. Several non - conforming structures exist on this site;
the applicant cannot profitably operate these rentals.
6. No opposition was present.
7. Proposed structure was not considered detrimental to
the area.
8. Comm. Lind moved the Commission recommend the GRANTING
of this application, seconded by Comm. Hayton an& —
carried by the following roll call vote, to wit: ALL AYES.
• 1. ROBERDS, H. L., 428 Orchid St., Corona del Mar. #217
2. Lots 22 & j of 20. Blk 442...Tract CDM. an R -2 Zone.
3. Posted 1 -5 -56. 1st Hearing.
4. The request is to permit an existing dwelling be
raised and a two car garage be constructed beneath.
The property is now non - conforming as to front set
back;
5. The applicant wishes to improve a non- conforming
condition.
6. No opposition was present.
7. The committee felt this improvement would compliment
the neighborhood.
8- ;Comm. Hayton moved the Commission recommend the GRANT-
ING of this application, seconded by Comm. Reed and
carried by the following roll call vote, to wit: ALL AYES
page -9-
USE PERMITS
1. NEILSEN, David I., 413 Holmwood Ave., N.Hghts. #218
• withdrawn... (applicant shall re- submit, on recommendation
of the Planning Commission).
1. CHAPMAN, Henry B., 1657 Venice Ave., L.A. #2I9
522 So. Bay Front ... B. Is.
2. Lot 6, Blk. 11, Sec. 1, B.Is. an R -2 Zone.
3. Posted 1- 12 -56. 1st Hearing.
4. The request is for an additional rental unit to
be installed in the front of the existing non-
conforming structure. (no -side yards)
5. To create more satisfactory living area, and provide
a community need for additional rental units and
off - street parking.
6. There was no opposition present.
7. The Committee felt the improvement would be for
the better.
.
B. Comm. Hayton moved that the Commission recommend
the GRANTING of this application with stipulation
that the overhang into the alley be removed, and
all encroaching plumbing and equipment (water
softener and heater be removed) now encroaching
into side yards, be installed in an acceptable
location, motion seconded by Comm. Rudd and carr-
ied by tbs following roll call vote, to wit: ALL AYES
RE- ZONING
1. certain CITY OWNED LAND ... r solution
4415
amendment
2. Lots 11 to 16, inclusive, Blk...117 Sec. "B' NB #18...
3. The request coneerns a need to broaden the usage
of the land in question.
4. There was opposition present on the floor.
5. First hearing, second hearing scheduled Feb. 16th,156.
S. Comm. Copelin moved that the Commission CONTINUE
this matter until the scheduled second Hearing,
seconded by Comm. Hayton and carried by the follow-
ing roll call vote, to wit: ALL AYES.
6.
No action was
taken by
the commission.
.
7.
There were no
Committee
reports at this time.
S. Comm. Copelin moved that the Commission CONTINUE
this matter until the scheduled second Hearing,
seconded by Comm. Hayton and carried by the follow-
ing roll call vote, to wit: ALL AYES.
p49e 10=
RE- ZONING
• 1. STURTEVANT, Austin D., 576 Deborah St. C.Mesa, amendment
#19
2. Lots 164 & 165 (Portion of) Blk 53 Irvine subd. ( approx. 60
as shown in MM book 1, Pg. 88 ... from 'U' to an R -1 ., acres)
3. Published Jan. 9th, 1956. (Harbor News - Press) 1st
Hearing. Posted Jan. 9th, 1956.
4. The request is for the establishment of a definite
restricted Zoning fcr the real property described
ab ove .
5. The applicant wishes to secure Commission approv-
al fcr residntial development of the land in question,
bef6re making additional expenditures.
6. No action was taken by the Commission.
7.There were no Committee reports at this time.
8.Comm. Reed moved that the Commission CONTINUE
this matter until the scheduled 2nd Hearing,
seconded by. Comm. Lind and carried by the follow-
ing roll call vote, to wit: ALL AYES ...
•
1. SMITH, E. Morrie, 3049 Coast Highway, CdM. #20
2. Lots 4 & 5. Bik 'H' Tract #323 C -1 to C -1H
3. Posted Jan. 9th, 156. Published Jan. 9th, 156.
(Harbor -News- Press) lst Hearing.
4. The request is to complete the Zoning of Block W.
5. The area now occupied by the All American Market
was inadvertently left out of the original application
and subsequent applications for re- zoning.
6. No action was taken by the Commission.
7. There was no Committee reports at this time.
8. Comm. Smith moved that the Commission CONTINUE
this application until the next scheduled meeting
and 2nd Hearing, seconded by Comm. Rudd and carried
by the following roll call vote, to wit: ALL AYES
•
r
\ M
page -11-
. RESOLUTION OF INTENTION #597 ..
amendment
1. City of Newport Beach, PLANNING COMMISSION. #17
2. Amend Ord. #650 concerning Re- Subdivisions.
3. Published Jan. 9th, 1956. (Harbor News - Press)
lst Hearing.
4: To amend the Re- Subdivision ordinance in accord with
current needs.
5. Ord. #650 is inadequate in regards to the problems
mentioned below.
6. It is recommended the Ordinance shall read:
Section 9255.24 -- Sidewalks. Sidewalks shall be in-
stalled to grades, location, widths, and cross- sections
approved by-the City Engineer.
Section 9255.28 -- Street Lighting. Underground lighting
systems with ornamental light standards shall be
installed, with design, layout, and location being
• approved by the City Engineer.
add section ...
Utilities. Underground
telephone and utility systems may be required by the
Planning Commission, and the design, layout, and location
shall be approved by the City Engineer.
7. There was no Committee reports at this time.
8. Comm. Lind moved that the Commission set -over this
matter until the next regular meeting and 2nd
Hearing, seconded by Comm. Rudd and carried by the
following roll call vote, to wit: ALL AYES.
Business at hand being declared completed, the Commission meeting was
adjourned on motion of Com. Lind, seconded by Com. Rudd, and carried.
Ray Vl 46pMetlin
Secretary
0
V