Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1971-05-04MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Council Chambers, Civic Center Huntington Beach, California - TUESDAY, MAY 4, 1971 NOTE: A TAPE RECORDING OF THIS FETING IS ON FILE IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT OFFICE i COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Higgins, Bazil, Porter, Miller, Kerins COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Slates, Duke ZONE CASE NO, 70-13 - Continued Applicant: Gulf Oil Corporation To permit a change of zone from R1 Single Family Residence District and C4 Highway Commercial District,to R1 Single Family Residence District and R3 Limited Multiple Family Residence District, R4 Multiple Family Residence District and C4 Highway Commercial District with a 50 ft. setback from the ultimate right-of-way line. The subject property is located on the north- westerly corner of Pacific Coast Highway and Admiralty Drive. The Vice Chairman read the request. The Acting Secretary advised that this item had been continued from the Planning Commission meeting of April 6, 1971, at the request of the City Attorney's office to allow -time for the court to reader a decision on the pending law suit. He advised that a decision had not been rendered, therefore, the Staff recommends continuance until June 1, 1971. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BAZIL AND SECONDED BY MILLER TO CONTINUE ZONE CASE NO. 70-13 TO JUNE 19-1971, TO ALLOW TIME FOR THE COURT TO RENDER A DECISION ON THE PENDING LAW SUIT. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Miller, Porter, Higgins NOES: None ABSENT: Slates, Duke, Kerins THE MOTION CARRIED. CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 71-1 - Continued Applicant: Fredricks Development Corp. To permit the construction of a 250 unit apart- ment complex on approximately 8 ac. parcel of land with the following exception: 1. Averaging of density between the R2 and R3 portion of subject parcel; 2. Construction of carports at zero setback along the south and west property line in lieu of the required 5 ft. setback along the south and 10 ft. setback along the west property lines; 3. Open carports in lieu of garages within the R2 portion of said development. -1- 5/4/71 - PC s Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, May 4, 1971 Page No. 2 The subject property is located on the southwest corner of Atlanta Avenue and Newland Street in the R2 Two Family Residence District, R3 Limited Multiple Family Residence District and R3-0 Limited Multiple Family Residence District Combined with oil production. The Vice Chairman read the request. The Acting Secretary advised that this item had been continued for decision only. He also advised that the applicant has submitted revised plot plans. Jim Palin, Associate Planner, reviewed the revised plans with the Commission, and advised that 234 units are pro- posed, 184 units in the R3 portion and 50 units in the R2 portion. COMMISSIONER KERINS: Commilssioner Kerins arrived at 7:20 P.M. and assumed his duties. Commissioner Porter stated he felt the proposed open space is insufficient and that each zone should stand on its own with no averaging of the densities. Commissioner Bazil stated he felt the Commission could not require the applicant to meet the present apartment standards since this development has been under way for approximately one year. The Acting Secretary aavisea that the aeveloper is not asking for averaging of densities on this new plan. Commissioner Bazil stated he felt there is sufficient open space in the R2 zone. Commissioner Bazil. Commissioner Miller concurred with Discussion was held. A MOTION WAS MADE BY HIGGINS AND SECONDED BY MILLER TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 71-1 SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. The plot plan received April 30, 1971, shall be the approved layout. 2. Elevations shall be'substantially as shown on renderings submitted by the developer on May 4, 1971. 3. The developer shall work with the City in an attempt to include the private street along the west property line within the project as open space. 4. The plot plan shall be referred to the Board of Zoning Adjustments to establish conditions of approval as deemed necessary. FOR THE REASONS: 1. As this complex will be developed as one project, there is no need for garage doors on one street and not on the other. 2. The applicant is no•longer requesting averaging of density between the R2 `and R3 portions of the project. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Miller, Higgins, Kerins NOES: Porter ABSENT: Slates, Duke THE MOTION CARRIED. r -2- 5/4/71 - PC Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, May 4, 1971 Page No. ,3 MINORITY REPORT SUBMITTED BY COMMISSIONER PORTER: When the applicant appeared before the Commission he was informed that his request for density averaging under Conditional Exception No. 71-1 as requested would allow an R3 density in excess of the current citywide average of 26 units per acre and that averaging was en- couraged on split zone properties to make better use of the land and provide continuity in development, open space and recreational area, not just allow higher density as he had requested. This contention was borne out by the - - staff figures on open space in the project which worked out to just over'the absolute minimum for the units projected. (This was determined using the established calculation method which excludes the 10 feet adjacent to dwelling units.) The applicant was informed by the Commission that a lower overall density reflecting the averages we were experiencing citywide was more acceptable and would provide a better distributed development with respect to open space and reduce current objections to unduly high density in apart- ment projects. It was suggested that to take advantage of density averaging to the mutual benefit of both the city and the applicant, the project should contain no more than 210 units rather than the 246 units as proposed. The applicant indicated he would rather develop the project within the current zoning limitations than having to reduce the density to the amount indicated (210 The Commission continued the matter to allow the applicant time to revise his plot plan and present renderings of the exterior of the project. The matter was continued to the meeting of May 4, 1971. At the May 4th meeting the applicant displayed a plot plan reflecting a reduction of 10 units in the R2 portion and 2 units in the R3 portion of the development. The plot plan reflected very little change in building: location or improved utilization of open space. Staff was questioned about open space as calculated for the two separate zone parcels. Their response indicated that the applicant was short 2000 square feet in the R3 portion of the project which bore out the earlier contention that open space in the project was poorly distributed. (There was considerable excess in the R2 portion). In view of the past concerns of the Commission with relation to density averaging and open space provided thereby, as in the Macco apartment pro- ject, it is felt that this project does not reflect the intent of that provision. Furthermore, as the applicant has chosen to proceed with his development along present zoning guidelines, he should meet the minimum standards as they are currently applied to all developments. This has not been done. It will re- quire a major revision of the plot plan to accomplish this, or the reduction of a minimum of 10 additional units in the R3 portion of the property to comply with minimum open space requirements. Averaging would produce a better development but not just as an excuse to get R3 yield:on R2 property. This can only be accomplished with a more evenly distributed building plan. Finally, in view of the density and development recommendations of the Multi - Density Study Committee of this city, this project is not consistent with those recommendations or the pending ordinance governing those standards. To continue to make exception to those standards only serves to nullify the efforts made to bring them about and diminishes the confidence the public has placed with the city in resolving a serious problem. Developers should begin to realize this. -3- 5/4/71 - PC Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, May 4, 1971 Page No. 4 CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 71-21 (Continued) Applicant: Marvin R. Haney DBA Scrubby Bear To permit a travel trailer and re- creational vehicle park to be established on the total block. i ' The subject property is located at and bounded by 13th Street on the north, 12th Street on the south, Walnut Avenue on the east and Pacific Coast Highway on the west. The property is zoned C3 General Business District and R4 Multiple Family Residence District. This item had been continued to allow the Commission time to review similar facilities. - The Vice Chairman read the request. The Acting Secretary advised the Planning Commission -that he and Commissioner Duke had reviewed several similar facilities with the applicant. He advised that the average densities for these facilities was 28 units per acre and that the applicant is proposing 49 units per acre. -The City of Anaheim requires 800 sq. ft. plus 50 sq. ft. of recreational area per -space, or 28 units per acre. The Acting Secretary further stated that the Staff feels this is not the best_ location for this use and recommends -a reduction in density. The Commission was advised that the public hearing had been closed and this item was continued for decision only. He stated that the Staff feels the lot should be paved, planter areas provided at each space, and the perimeter wall should be of more substantial material than wood._ Also, that the use if approved, should be granted for a period of less than 10 years. Commissioner Bazil stated that he feels the applicant may not be able to afford to construct a first line park for a period of less than 10 years. Commissioner Miller stated he feels the proposed location is not suitable for this use and concurs with the Staff that the use should be approved for a lesser period of time than 10-years.-- The hearing was reopened to the audience. Mr. Willard Harris, partner in pro- posed park, submitted an elevation of the proposed use as viewed from 12th Street and stated that the same would be a combination of wood and stone. Mr. Henry Hastings, Walters and Son, Inc. representing the applicant, stated they did not propose a recreational area in the park as people would be using the beach area. Commissioner Higgins questioned the dimensions of the spaces in the proposed park. - Mr. Hastings stated that whereas Vaca- tionland'has 22 ft. wide spaces, they are proposing 14 ft. wide spaces since they will not have patios and side yards because of the nearby beach. Commissioner Miller asked the applicant if he would agree with approval for less than 10 years. Mr. Harris stated that they have a five year lease with 5 one-year options and preferred to have approval for 10 years. and spaces would be paved. be more landscaping provided. Mr. Hastings stated that the drives Commissioner Bazil felt there should -4- 5/4/71 - PC Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, May 4, 1971 Page No. 5 Mr. Tom Mills addressed the Commission and stated he is opposed to the proposed location, that it should not be in a residential area. He feels this use will attract undesirable elements in the off seasons. Charlene Bauer, nearby property owner, stated that she concurs with Mr. Mills and she feels that if the park is approved re- quirements should be made which would result in a nicer park. She also stated that people not accustomed to the beach sun cannot stay in the sun and wind all day, therefore, recreational areas are needed in the park. The park also needs eating areas and an area in which to rinse out sandy clothes and swim suits. Mr. Painter addressed the Commission and stated he is opposed to a temporary use as this area is presently in transition and this use would retard the development. Mr. John A. Galkin, nearby property owner, stated he is opposed as undesirable elements would be attracted, and traffic hazard would arise with children crossing Pacific Coast Highway where there are no crosswalks. Doris L. Brown, addressed the Commission and stated she is opposed as the use will attract undesirable people. Barbara Simond addressed the Commission and stated she is opposed to the location of the use, and the traffic hazard which it would create. There being no other comment, the hearing was closed. Commissioner Kerins stated he feels this location is not suitable for this use and that allowing this temporary use at that location would retard the development of the surrounding area. Commissioner Higgins stated he feels this location improper as it is not compatible with the surrounding residential area. Commissioner Bazil stated he feels this use would be an asset to the City if at a more suitable location as there is insufficient room to provide recreational areas, landscaping and improvements. Commissioner Miller stated he feels the location is unsuitable but feels the subject property owner would require any develop- ment on the property to be first rate. Vice -Chairman Porter stated he feels a recrea- tional area is needed within the'confines of the facility, and that the location should be near signal controls to cross Pacific Coast Highway. A MOTION WAS MADE BY KERINS AND SECONDED BY BAZIL TO DENY CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 71-21 FOR THE REASONS: 1. The location is not suitable due to the close proximity of residential uses. 2. The facility lacks recreational areas. 3. The number of spaces per acre is too high. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Higgins, Porter, Miller, Kerins NOES: None ABSENT: Duke, Slates THE MOTION CARRIED. -5- 5/4/71 - PC Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, May 4, 1971 Page No. 6 ZONE CASE NO. 71-8 Applicant: Frank M. Doyle To permit a change of zone from RA Residential Agricultural District to C2 Community Business District with a 50 ft. setback from the ultimate right-of-way line. The subject property is located on the southeast corner of Edinger Avenue and Goldenwest Street. The Vice -Chairman read the request. The Staff showed vu-graphs of the subject area. The Acting Secretary advised the Commission that the Staff recommends approval for a change of zone to C4 rather than the requested C2. He advised that for C4, a use permit is needed and due to the close proximity to Goldenwest College this procedure is advisable. The hearing was opened to the audience. Mr. Glen Busby, applicant, addressed the Commission and explained the request. There being no other comment, the � - hearing was closed. Commissioner Kerins stated he would like a Use Permit application to be required in conjunction with the zone change. Commissioner Higgins stated he concurs with Commissioner Kerins. He stated that he feels C4 is not necessarily the best zone and that whatever use is permitted, it should be under very stringent review. Mr. Ken Reynolds, Planning Director, stated that the applicant applied for this zone change under his suggestion that the applicant develope the entire area at one time rather than parcel, by parcel. Commissioner Bazil stated that requir- ing the applicant to file for a use permit prior to the zone change may present a hardship on the applicant as financers usually require the pro-, perty to be properly zoned before they will talk to a developer.- __ - Commissioner Miller stated he concurs with Commissioner Bazil, however, the City could hold up the second reading of the zone change until such time the use is established. - Commissioner Porter felt additional information was needed as to the demand for commercial uses in this area. Mr. Reynolds advised that the applicant does not have users for the entire parcel at this time, and there is some difficulty in measuring the demand for uses because of the proposed freeway, college, etc. Commissioner Porter stated he feels the Commission should have assurance of need before they approve rezoning for large areas of land and that insufficient justification has been shown by the applicant at this time. The applicant addressed the Commission and withdrew his request for zone change. -6- 5/4/71 - PC Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, May 4, 1971 Page No. 7 A MOTION WAS MADE BY BAZIL AND SECONDED BY KERINS TO APPROVE THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO WITHDRAW ZONE CASE NO. 71-8. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Bazil, Porter, Miller, Kerins NOES: None ABSENT: Slates, Duke THE MOTION CARRIED, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION N0. 71-18 - APPEAL Applicant: Berthold Starr and Marie Anna Starr To permit a 10 ft. x 10 ft. kiosk to be used as part of a sign in lieu of a pole sign and a chain link fence with landscaping in lieu of the required 6 ft. high decorative masonry wall. The subject property is located on the west side of Brookhurst Street, approximately 600 ft. south of Garfield Avenue. The Vice -Chairman read the request. The Staff showed view -graphs of the subject area. Jim Palin, Associate Planner, reviewed the area in question and the Board of Zoning Adjustments' action of March 31, 1971, meeting to conditionally approve that portion of the request for the chain link fence along the side property lines and to deny that portion of the request for the 10 ft. by 10 ft. kiosk structure. Commission discussion was held. The hearing was opened to the audience. Mr. Dave Kirschner, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission and explained the request. request. was closed. There was no one to speak in opposition of the As there were no other comments, the hearing Commission discussion was held. Commissioner Porter questioned the reason for waiving the block wall and allowing a chain link fence. Mr. Patin, Staff member, advised that the adjoining property owner preferred a chain link fence as it would allow a view of the landscaping along the fence. Mr. Kirschner explained that ivy plantings would screen storage of sacked materials. A MOTION WAS MADE BY KERINS AND SECONDED BY MILLER TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 71-18 SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING i CONDITIONS: 1. Chain link fence may be used from the trellis portion to rear boundary along the south property line only. 2. Foliage screening shall be provided on the chain link fence where there storage of sacked materials. 3. No additional sign area shall be permitted. FOR THE REASONS: 1. The kiosk structure is an asset to the City. 2. The request is not harmful to neighboring properties. -7- 5/4/71 - PC Minutes: N.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, May 4, 1971 Page No. 8 ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Bazil, Miller, Porter, Kerins NOES: None ABSENT: Slates, Duke THE MOT10N CARRIEU. CODE AMENDMENT NO. 71-9 Said amendment proposes to add to Division 9 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, Article 932 Apartment Standards. Said Article sets forth standards for apartment developments in non -ocean oriented properties in Huntington Beach which may generally be referred to as being north of Ellis Avenue and east of Beach Boulevard. The intent is to encourage better land planning, consideration of aesthetics through application of appearance standards, sets forth minimum floor areas and proposes to reduce the density. The Vice -Chairman read the request. The Acting Secretary advised that in addition to -advertising this proposal in the newspaper, more than 20 developers within the City were notified of the hearing by letter. _ The hearing was opened to the audience. Mr. Bryan Parkinson, Vice -President of Home Council, stated that the Home Council endorses this amendment to the Code. Mr. John Murphy, representing Huntington Harbour Property Owners Association, stated they are in favor of the amend- ment and would like Huntington Harbour area to be included. The Acting Secretary advised that ad- vertisement of this proposed amendment did not specifically include Hunt- ington Harbour. Mr. Reynolds, Planning Director, ad- vised that Signal Properties may be involved in the future. Mr. Mevis, City Attorney, advised that the portion of Huntington Harbour which is not ocean oriented, could be in- cluded in the code amendment without readvertising the request. Mr. Sterling Clayton addressed the Commission and requested a staff report on how boundaries were ascertained and population studies. He also requested a one month continuance for further study. There being no further comment, the hearing was closed. Commission discussion was held. It was the consensus of the Commission that more specific boundaries should be established. A MOTION WAS MADE BY KERINS AND SECONDED BY BAZIL'TO CONTINUE CODE AMENDMENT NO. 71-9 TO THE STUDY SESSION OF MAY 119 19710 FOR DECISION ONLY, TO ALLOW TIME FOR THE STAFF TO INCORPORATE MORE PRECISE BOUNDARIES. CIVIC DISTRICT CONFIGURATION Discussion was held regarding several -8- 5/4/71 - PC Minutes: H.B. Planning CommiSSLon Tuesday, May 4, 1971 - Page No. 9 proposals for the Civic -District configuration around the Civic Center and Central Park. Discussion was also held pertaining to a proposal submitted by the Huntington Beach Homeowners' Association for a green belt along Main Street north of Adams Avenue. The Staff reviewed various plans and layouts for the Civic District. Discussion was held pertaining to green belts leading into the Civic District. Commissioner Bazil felt that since Main Street will become a minor street in the future due,to freeway turnoffs, that Mansion Avenue should have green belt. It was noted that Goldenwest Street presently has a landscaped median. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BAZIL AND SECONDED BY PORTER TO SET THE CIVIC DISTRICT CONFIGURATION FOR PUBLIC HEARING AND TO INCLUDE THE AREA SHOWN AS ALTERNATE B BY THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD PLUS ALL PROPERTY ABUTTING THE CENTRAL PARK. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Bazil, Miller, Porter NOES: Kerins ABSENT: Slates, Duke THE MOTION CARRIED. Minority Report: Commissioner Kerins stated he feels the civic district should be the Alternate C so that all vistas to the civic facility comes under civic district criteria and that Alternate B as proposed does not include all vistas. PARKING STANDARDS Discussion was held pertaining to driveway en- trances. The Staff reviewed slides of various layouts for parking lots. Mr. Palin, Associate Planner, advised the Planning Commission that studies have shown that 90° parking should be used only where long term parking was in effect due to the difficulties encountered in negotiating the turn into a stall. Discussion was held. A MOTION WAS MADE BY MILLER AND SECONDED BY BAZIL TO SET THE PARKING STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC HEARING. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Bazil, Miller, Porter, Kerins NOES: None ABSENT: Slates, Duke THE MOTION CARRIED. DISCUSSION: The Commission discussed methods by which the appearance of highways in the vicinity of the Civic Center and Huntington Central Park could be improved. It was the consensus of the Commission that this could be achieved by installing a landscape median along the primary highways in the area; specifically, Main Street from Adams Avenue north to Garfield Avenue along Mansion and Yorktown Avenues, between Beach Boulevard and Goldenwest Street. However, it was noted by the Commission that numerous demands are being placed on the city funds to beautify various sections of the City. THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, MEETING ADJOURNED. R'fthard A. Harlow Marcus M. Porter Acting Secretary -9- Vice -Chairman