Council continues hearing on proposed boat-sales site at 12347 E. Carson St.; applicant, neighbors and tenants clash over use

Hawaiian Gardens, Calif. — The City Council on Oct. 22 paused a de novo public hearing on a minor use permit application for a proposed boat-sales business at 12347 East Carson Street and continued the item to a council meeting in December so members can review materials and follow up with staff.

City Attorney (unnamed) opened the hearing by explaining the procedural standard: “you’re operating under a clean slate. You’re the impartial decision makers today.” The application, filed by Surf City Boats Inc. (operating as a Freedom Boat Club franchise), was denied by staff and later approved by the Planning Commission by a 3-2 vote; the council must either affirm that decision or overturn it.

The hearing centered on whether the proposed operation is a retail boat-sales business—requiring certain conditions and site improvements—or effectively a storage yard that is incompatible with the site’s General Commercial (C-4) designation. Planning staff told council the property is an unimproved roughly half-acre lot on the northwest corner of Cloretta and Tilbury, one block north of Carson Street, that currently contains a mobile home office, chain-link fencing (installed without permits in February 2025), construction materials and contractor equipment. Staff said the site plan showed 13 boat/trailer parking spaces and 10 customer parking spaces and noted existing nearby residential zoning and nonconforming industrial uses across the street.

Applicant Andrew Hart, owner of Surf City Boats Inc., told the council his operation is a legitimate boat-sales business tied to the Freedom Boat Club franchise and that the Planning Commission’s March 5 resolution approving the minor use permit correctly found the use consistent with the general plan. “This isn’t confrontation. It’s an effort to restore fairness, transparency, and confidence in the city’s process,” Hart said, telling council he had relied on six initial conditions prepared by a planner and that staff subsequently expanded those to dozens of new conditions that he said would impose hundreds of thousands of dollars in unanticipated costs.

Tenants and neighbors gave contrasting accounts. Ramon Chavez, who said he has operated Chavez Unlimited Construction at the site for about 10 years, said his activity is an administrative office used to manage off-site construction work and that he was surprised when the city classified his use as a contractor yard and denied his business license. “I applied for my business license in good faith… I am not a big developer or corporation. I’m just a small business owner trying to make an honest living,” Chavez said.

Elizabeth Vasquez, owner of Precision Roofing, said her company moved its administrative office to the address in July and that the office is “clean, quiet and organized.” She said the city’s denial—characterizing the business as a contractor yard and citing low tax revenue—was deeply offensive and has disrupted operations. Neighbor David Morrow said the site had been an “eyesore” for decades and that Hart’s investments have improved the block: “What used to be an eyesore is now a clean, well kept property that adds value to our block.”

Planning staff detailed the timeline: the application and notice process, the Planning Commission hearing and resolution, and outstanding code-enforcement issues on the property (unpermitted fencing and possible unpermitted businesses). Staff recommended that, if council finds the use compatible with the C-4 zone and the General Plan goals for commercial retail that serve residents and visitors, it may affirm the Planning Commission decision subject to conditions; staff also said a continuance might be necessary to resolve outstanding enforcement and permit questions with the applicant.

Council asked for additional time to review the materials and directed staff to return with answers to the questions raised during the hearing. Councilmember motioned to reopen the public hearing and continue the item to the first December meeting (referred to in the record as December 10). The motion carried. City staff told the council they will return with written responses and that continued deliberations and any additional public comment will occur in an open public hearing.

The item joins two separate appeal tracks: (1) the minor use permit appeal for Surf City Boats, which the Planning Commission had approved; and (2) pending appeals of business-license denials for Chavez Unlimited Construction and Precision Roofing. Staff said the business-license appeals will be scheduled for a meeting in December and that approvals for a minor use permit are valid for one year, with conditions and timelines for compliance specified in the approval.

Next steps: council will receive staff responses to the questions raised, reopen the public hearing at the continued meeting and allow further public comment before making a final decision to affirm or overturn the Planning Commission’s March 5 approval.