Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1971-10-12MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Council Chambers, Civic Center Huntington Beach, California TUESDAY. OCTOBER 12. 1971 - STUDY SESSION COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Higgins, Bazil, Porter, Slates, Kerins, Boyle, Duke COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None CODE AMENDMENT NO. 71-22 - Continued from October 5, 1971 (Public hearing was closed.) A proposed code amendment to decrease the density provisions in Article 931 (Planned Residential Development) and not permit an exception thereto. Planned residential developments are also to be subject to the minimum standards setforth in the Apartment Standards. It was noted by the Acting Secretary that this Code Amendment had been discussed by the Planning Commission on several prior meetings and that the primary area of concern was whether or not the density should be reduced below the present 7.25 units per acre in the R1 zone and whether or not an exception should be granted to the densities set forth. The Acting Secretary further noted that rather than adopting the apartment standards by reference, the code amendment had been modified to incorporate those provisions of the apartment standards that are applicable. Commission discussion followed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY DUKE AND SECONDED BY KERINS TO APPROVE THE CODE AMENDMENT AS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED FOR 6.25 UNITS PER ACRE IN THE R1 ZONE AND NOT ALLOW ANY EXCEPTIONS TO THE DENSITIES SET FORTH. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Kerins, Duke, Porter NOES: Higgins, Bazil, Slates, Boyle ABSENT: None THE MOTION DID NOT CARRY. A FURTHER MOTION WAS MADE BY BAZIL AND SECONDED BY BOYLE TO ADOPT '-CODE AMENDMENT NO. 71-22 WITH THE AMENDMENT THAT THE DENSITY IN THE R1 ZONE WILL BE 7 UNITS PER ACRE AND THAT NO EXCEPTION WILL BE GRANTED TO ANY OF THE DENSITIES SET FORTH FOR THE FOLLOWING REASON: 1. The Ri-PD5 District has been in effect for a number of years and has never been used, primarily because the density did not provide enough incentive to use this method of development. Also, a tour of planned develop- ments in the area show that 7 dwelling units per acre is _not an excessive density and that it made the project economically feasible. Also it provided a great diversity for home ownership and amenities can be provided with this _density. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Boyle, Slates, Higgins, Porter NOES: Duke, Kerins ABSENT: None THE MOTION CARRIED. -1- 10/12/71 - PC Minutes: H. B. Planning Commission Tuesday, October 12, 1971 Page No. 2 MINORITY REPORT: F A density of 6.25 units per acre is a satisfactory density for property in the R1 zone. MASTER PLAN OF LAND USE - STUDY AREA "B" - Discussion A. Properties on the north side of Slater Avenue between Goldenwest Street and Gothard Street. Jere Murphy, Associate Planner, reviewed with the Commission alternative land use plans for the property located on the north side of Slater Avenue between Goldenwest Street and Gothard Street. F It was the consensus of the Commission that the vacant property immediately south of the existing single family subdivision north of Slater Avenue should be master planned for low'density residential and rezoned R1 and that the property to the east of this parcel should remain in the M1 Light Industrial classification. B. Properties north of the Huntington Center. Jere Murphy, Associate Planner, reviewed with the Commission various alternative plans for the property located north of the Huntington Center. It was the consensus of the Commission that the property should be master planned for commercial purposes. However, the existing Rl and M1 properties should be rezoned RA. The Commission also directed the staff to proceed with the investigation to determine whether or not an off -ramp from the San Diego Freeway could be constructed to provide access to the Huntington Center. C. Property located on the north side of Slater Avenue approximately 200 ft. east of Beach Boulevard. Mrs. Margaret Premninger, the owner of subject property addressed the - Commission and stated that her property had been rezoned from Cl to R5 several years ago without her being aware of this change. She objected to this action and requested that the Planning Commission consider zoning her property for commercial purposes. It was the consensus of the Commission that this matter would be discussed at a later time. D. Property on the north side of Ellis Avenue approximately 600 ft. west of Beach Boulevard. Jere Murphy, Associate Planner, discussed with the Planning Commission the zoning of the subject property. It was the consensus of the Commission the the frontage on Ellis Avenue should be master planned for commercial purposes with the remaining property being master planned for medium -high density residential use. -2- 10/12/71 - PC 11 Minutes: H. B. Planning Commission Tuesday, October 12, 1971 Page No. 3 TOWN LOT STUDIES - DENSITIES - The Intensity of Use and People Generated The Acting Secretary discussed the land use intensities for the town lot area and reviewed with the Commission various proposals to limit the land use intensity. A MOTION WAS MADE BY HIGGINS AND SECONDED BY KERINS TO ESTABLISH A 4-STORY HEIGHT LIMIT WITHIN THE AREA OF THE CITY AND THAT ANY REQUESTS TO PERMIT A BUILDING TO EXCEED THE 4-STORIES WOULD BE SUBJECT TO SPECIFIC PLAN APPROVAL BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Kerins, Boyle, Duke, Higgins, Porter, Bazil NOES: Slates ABSENT: None THE MOTION CARRIED. A FURTHER MOTION WAS MADE BY DUKE AND SECONDED BY HIGGINS TO REQUIRE THE SAME OFF-STREET PARKING WITHIN THE TOWN LOT AREA AS REQUIRED BY THE NEW STANDARDS FOR OTHER AREAS OF THE CITY. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Duke, Higgins NOES: Kerins, Boyle, Porter, Bazil, Slates ABSENT: None THE MOTION DID NOT CARRY. DISCUSSION - CODE AMENDMENT NO. 71-2 A proposed code amendment to y amend nonconforming uses and yard provisions of S. 9716 and S. 9719'respectively. The intent of said code amendment is to establish conditions whereby a non -conforming use may be altered or enlarged subject to all provisions of Division 9 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code or be resolution of the Planning Commission. Further,to permit non -conforming buildings to be altered or enlarged when yard requirements are all that are non -conforming subject to a Use Permit application before the Board of Zoning Adjustments. The Acting Secretary discussed the proposed code amendment with the Planning Commission. A MOTION WAS MADE BY KERINS AND SECONDED BY BOYLE TO SET CODE AMENDMENT NO. 71-2 FOR PUBLIC HEARING. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Kerins, Boyle, Porter, Bazil, Slates, Duke, Higgins NOES: None ABSENT: None THE MOTION CARRIED. PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT NO. 71-25 A proposed code amendment to renumber and amend street and highway width provisions of S. 9941.3 et sequentia. The intent of said proposed code amendment is to increase the right-of-way with dedication proyisions of the subdivision code. -3- 10/12/71 - PC Minutes: H. B. Planning Commission Tuesday, October 12, 1971 Page No. 4 The Acting Secretary reviewed the proposed code amendment with the Commission. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BOYLE AND SECONDED BY KERINS TO SET CODE AMENDMENT NO. 71-25 FOR PUBLIC HEARING. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Bazil, Porter, Duke, Kerins, Slates, Boyle NOES: None ABSENT: None THE MOTION CARRIED. CODE AMENDMENT NO. 71-27 A proposed code amendment to add a beach, recreation and development district (BRD). The intent of said district is to provide standards for reasonable public access to the coastline or shoreline, to protect the ocean beaches and to control developments at or near the ocean. The Acting Secretary reviewed with the Commission the proposed code amendment. A MOTION WAS MADE BY DUKE AND SECONDED BY BOYLE TO SET CODE AMENDMENT NO. 71-27 FOR PUBLIC HEARING. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Bazil, Porter, Duke, Kerins, Slates, Boyle NOES: None ABSENT: None THE MOTION CARRIED. DISCUSSION: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 71-12 - Definitions Jim Palin, Associate Planner, reviewed with the Commission several changes that have been made to the original draft of Code Amendment No. 71-10 pertaining to Definitions. He pointed out that these revisions occured as a result of the ordinance being prepared in final form by the City Attorney's office. THE MOTION WAS MADE BY DUKE AND SECONDED BY KERINS TO HAVE THE PLANNING STAFF WORK WITH A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO RESOLVE ANY CONFLICT. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Bazil, Porter, Duke, Kerins, Slates, Boyle NOES: None ABSENT: None THE MOTION CARRIED. DISCUSSION: City of Westminster (ZC R-206) Jim Palin, Associate Planner, advised the Commission that a communication had been received from the City of Westminster outlining a proposed zone change to rezone approximately 24.9 acres of land to C2, R4 and R5 on property located on the east side of Beach Boulevard approximately 80 ft. north of Heil Avenue: -4- 10/12/71 - PC Minutes:' H. B. Planning Commission Tuesday, October 12, 1971 Page No. 5„ The Commission discussed the proposed zone change. It was the consensus of the Commission that the staff should contact the Ocean View School District to determine their position on the matter and that it should be discussed with the Planning Commission at the next regular meeting. DISCUSSION: Conditions underwhich the Commission would consider reapplying the 110" suffix to base zone. Chairman Porter advised the Commission that he had conversation with a representative of Standard Oil Company and had agreed to ask the Commission to state the conditions under which they would consider reapplying the "0" suffix to the base district. Commission discussion followed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY DUKE AND SECONDED BY KERINS TO ADOPT THE FOLLOWING: THE PLANNING COMMISSION POLICY REGARDING REAPPLYING THE "0" SUFFIX TO A BASE ZONE SHOULD BE NOT TO REAPPLY THE "0" ZONE TO LAND FORMERLY ZONED FOR OIL PRODUCTION AND THAT THE STAFF IS TO INFORM THE APPLICANT THAT A CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION IS NOT THE PROPER PROCEDURE TO REACTIVATE AN OIL WELL. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Bazil, Porter, Duke, Kerins, Boyle, Slates NOES: None ABSENT: None THE MOTION CARRIED. DISCUSSION: Landscaping and wall design along arterial highways The Acting Secretary reviewed with the Commission the various proposals for landscaping and wall design along arterial highways. Mr. Harlow pointed out that the presentation is a"preview of the presentation to be made to the City Council at the joint Planning Commission, City Council Study Session to be held on October 26, 1971. The Commission reviewed the presentation and it was the consensus that the slides and vu-graphs were acceptable. DISCUSSION: PROGRESS REPORT - PARKING Circulation study southwest of Beach Boulevard and Edinger Avenue. Jere Murphy, Associate Planner, discussed with the Commission the proposed parking lot and circulation study in the area located southwest of Beach Boulevard and Ed''nger Avenue. He advised the Commission that the State Divisi n of Highways was proposing to modify the traffic signal a that the city was also proposing to provide improvements in a area. Mr. Murphy stated that the staff recommends that his matter be postponed until such time as the work by the State and the City have been completed. Mr. Murphy informed the Commission that the staff would review the area once again to determine whether or not further action should be taken after said construction. The Planning Commission adjourned to an informal study session at 0e Fis4erman Restaurant at 6:30 P.M. -5- 10/12,1- 1 - PC Minutes: H. B. Planning Commission Tuesday, October 12, 1971 Page No. 6 , K. A. Reynol Marcus M. Porter Secretary Chairman -6- 10/12/71 - PC