Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976-09-211 APPROVED 10/19/76 MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Council Chambers, Civic Center Huntington Beach, California TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 1976 - 7 P.M. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Parkinson, Finley, Gibson, Slates, Shea, Newman, Boyle COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None NOTE: A TAPE RECORDING OF THIS MEETING IS ON FILE IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT OFFICE. CONSENT CALENDAR ON MOTION BY BOYLE AND SECOND BY NEWMAN THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 31, 1976, WERE APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Parkinson, Finley, Gibson, Slates, Shea, Newman, Boyle NOES: None ABSENT: None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None SCHEDULED ITEMS USE PERMIT NO. 74-17 - APPEAL OF CONDITION OF APPROVAL C-1 DECISION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS FOR SPECIFIC MATERIAL Applicant: Alpine Civil Engineers, Inc. Appellant: Michael Chiavetta, Gregory Cover, and Wallace Mitchell representing Huntington Viewpoint, Seabreeze Estates and Harper Estates The original request was to permit the construction of a 145 space mobile home park located at the southwest corner of Ellis Avenue and Newland Street in the MH District. This request was filed on April 10, 1974. On April 30, 1975, the Board of Zoning Adjustments conditionally approved Use Permit 74-17 and placed on the project the condition which is the subject of this pending appeal. The condition regarding the roof was as :follows: The mobile home units and attached structures, including carports, shall only have roof material consisting of shake, cedar, or composition." After requests for clarification of roofing materials were received from both Mr. Mitchell, the appellant, and Mr. Shelton, applicant, the staff responded with the following clarification: The mobile home units and attached structures, including carports and patio covers, shall only have roofing materials consisting of shake, - cedar or composition asphalt shingle. Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, September 21, 1976 Page 2 However, due to a number of technical problems, primarily the weight load factors that are generated by the composition shingles, the Board considered a modification to this condition. It provided for a granular textured aluminum interlocking panel to satisfy the compo- sition shingle alternative. This modification is the specific appeal before the,Planning Commission. John Cope stated that he had no information to add to that contained in the staff report. He presented to the Commission a sample of the aluminum interlocking panel with granular texture proposed to be used on the carportsand patio covers. Chairman Slates advised the Commission that he had received a letter from the Director of Planning in the City of Fountain Valley requesting a continuance to allow the Planning Director to receive notice from the City Council before responding to the legal notice. He further requested that a member of the Huntington Beach Planning Staff attend their September 22, 1976 Planning Commission meeting to explain the proposal. The public hearing was opened. Steve Calvillo, representing Huntington Viewpoint, Seabreeze and Harper Estates, addressed the Commission and stated that original condition imposed was to be of shake, cedar or composition shingles for both coach and carports. He stated that in 1976 the condition was modified and no rationale given for the modification. He requested that the Planning Commission impose the original condition with a preference for shake material or shake shingle type and a modification of the original condition. Mike Economakos spoke on the material proposed to be used stating that it was designed to meet Title 25 of the State Mobilehome Code. Dennis Olson, representing the City of Fountain Valley, addressed the Commission and stated that the City*had not received all of. the in- formation until after September 13th. He requested that the Commission consider a continuance so that their Commission could have an oppor- tunity to meet on September 22 to discuss it. Ms. Bessie Levy, a resident of the bluff area, addressed the Com- mission and stated that the roofs look very nice but that she would prefer that the carports and patio covers match the color of the coach roofs. Vicky Derieg, representing the mobilehome manufacturer's association, presented photographs which showed the aluminum interlocking panels with granular texture and the proposed material for the attached carports and patios. She further explained the restrictions placed on Mobile homes by Title 25 of the State Mobilehome Code. -2- 9/21/76 - PC u Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission ,Tuesday, September 21, 1976 Page 3 Tom Shelton stated that he felt that when the project is complete it will be a fine mobile home park. A resident of Seabreeze stated that he had understood the colors of the roofs were to be earth tones but that no less than ten mobile homes had a chalky white tone roof. Pat Spencer, Building Department representative, stated that was correct and that those roofs have to be modified to comply with that condition. Louis Graziadio stated that mobile home parks are tending more and more to become permanent type structures because of the cost of housing, and that the permanency of the coaches should be considered. Commissioner Parkinson inquired of staff as to why the applicant was requesting the substitution of the aluminum panel with the granular texture. John Cope stated that a number of technical problems had occurred and with new information received from the State Mobilehome Code con- cerning the weight of attached structures a modification was in order. Pat Spencer stated that the State preempted the City insofar as mobile home restrictions are concerned. Commissioner Shea stated that she would have preferred wood shingles as roofing material, and that she was in favor of first class structures. At this point there was a lengthy and detailed discussion on continuing this appeal to allow Fountain Valley time to study the proposed roofing for the attached structures to the mobile homes. Commissioner Boyle stated that he felt if the Commission denied the appeal there would probably be an appeal at which time the City of Fountain Valley could voice their opinion at the City Council meeting. A MOTION WAS MADE BY GIBSON TO CONTINUE TO SEPTEMBER 28, 1976 TO ALLOW FOUNTAIN VALLEY TO STUDY THE APPEAL. There was a discussion on the continuance and the delay it would cause those persons planning to move into the mobile home park. It was noted that the citizens of Fountain Valley would have an opportunity to speak at a public hearing of City Council if it were denied and then appealed. THE MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. -3- 9/21/76 - PC Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, September 21, 1976 Page 4 A MOTION WAS MADE BY SHEA AND SECONDED BY NEWMAN TO.OVERRULE THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS AND REQUIRE PATIO COVERS AND CARPORT COVERS TO BE CONSTRUCTED WITH A ROOF OF SHAKE, CEDAR OR COMPOSITION SHINGLE FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. It would add to the health, safety and welfare of'the occupants. 2. It would add to the aesthetics of the neighborhood. 3. Heavier weight material is more substantial and would be sturdier. VOTE: AYES: Slates,,Shea, Newman NOES: Parkinson, Finley, Gibson, Boyle ABSENT: .None Commissioner Finley stated that from what she had determined the pro- posed aluminum interlocking panel would satisfy the elimination of glare, prevent further delay from occupancy, and would prevent a cost increase, and satisfy the appearance standards. ON MOTION BY PARKINSON AND SECOND BY FINLEY THE APPEAL WAS DENIED AND THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS WERE STIPULATED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: 1. The materials shall be of a similar earthen color as that which is being used on the coach roofs to assure continuity in design and appearance. 2. The materials shall -be a-gran'ul•ar mixture adhered to an aluminum interlocking panel. 3. The Department of Building and Community Development shall assure that the materials carry the'same guarantee.as the roofing material on the coaches. AYES: Parkinson, Finley, Gibson, Boyle. NOES: Slates, Shea, Newman ABSENT: None Chairman Slates called a recess at 8:15 p.m. CODE AMENDMENT NO. 76-12 - "OLDTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN"- RESOLUTION NO. 1180 Code Amendment No. 76-12 will establish a specific plan consisting of residential development provisions and standards applicable to a large portion of an area known as Oldtown. Generally, the area referred to as Oldtown is bounded by Garfield Avenue on the north, Beach Boulevard on the east, Atlanta Avenue on the south, and Lake Street on the west. -4- 9/21/76 - PC Minutes; H,B, Planning Commission Tuesday, September 21, 1976 Page 5 The Oldtown Specific Plan encompasses only a portion of the above described area and divides the specific plan area into two districts. District One will allow development of one (1) unit on a lot having a size of at least 3000 square feet but less than 6000 square feet. This density enables construction of a single family home on a typical 25 or 27 ft. wide lot within the Oldtown Area. (Where property is consolidated beyond 6000 square feet a density equivalent to one unit per lot sizes ranging between 3000 to 6000 square feet shall govern.) Under the development provisions of District Two, construction of triplexes on lots having a size of at least 6000 but less than 9000 square feet shall be permitted or the option of developing under District One standards shall be allowed. Again, where property is consolidated beyond 9000 square feet, a density equivalent to three' (3) units per lot sizes ranging between 6000 to 9000 square feet shall be set forth. District Two densities are equivalent to development of a triplex on a typical 50 or 54 foot wide lot. The context of the proposed Code Amendment was generally reviewed in concept by the Planning Commission at its study session of August 31, 1976. Since the Planning Commission's last review, a few changes were made to the previously submitted code amendment. The changes were made in an effort to further refine the code amendment. Al Montes displayed a vugraph and gave a brief summary of the Code Amendment. The public hearing was opened. David Bergland, 10111 Cuttysark Drive, addressed the Commission and stated that he had just closed escrow on property located at 207 Alabama which is a single family residence. He spoke in oppo- sition to the plan stating that it is in effect downzoning. He stated that the small lot single family residences will not be developable. He felt the higher density should be next to the beach. He stated that he had contacted several people and 88% of those he had con- tacted opposed this modification. He felt that district one and district two should be reversed. Nova Kinzey, 305 California, spoke in opposition to the plan stating that it had not attracted residential development recently, but that when a residence is demolished it is generally replaced by apartments. She stated that she had planned to build units on property which would not be allowed under the proposed zone change. She felt the zoning should remain unchanged since there will be a need for much medium density housing near downtown. -5- 9/21/76 - PC Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, September 21, 1976 Page 6 Albert Watkins stated that he had lived in Huntington Beach since.1931 and that the zoning should remain as is. He stated that an incentive should be provided'if the City wishes to upgrade the older homes. Ed Farber, property owner in district one, was opposed to the plan, stating that the property is within two blocks of the new commercial area proposed for the downtown area and within two blocks of medium density property. He felt the value of the property would go down instead of up with the proposed plan. Sandra Oldfield, 1816 Park Street, spoke on -4he noise factor and over- crowding of schools that increased density would bring. Leonard Wright, while in support of the plans, stated that he was not a resident of either area and felt that the residents should be listened to. Rose Watkins felt that district one and district two should be reversed in plans. She stated that many people would tear down their single family homes and build apartments if permitted to, stating that their tax burden would be'lightened. A resident of the area stated that she would like to see a plan which would limit buildings to two stories. She further stated that she would like to see the contemplated plan for the area surrounding these two areas. Ken Titus stated he had just bought property on Chicago with intentions of upgrading and now he feels'it will be downgraded. Deborah Crane, a student, spoke against high density. Mike Condor stated that he was in favor of the proposed plan and had plans for building a home. Judy Axxe spoke in opposition to the plan. Bob Rigby, who lives in district one, spoke in opposition to it. Commission discussion ensued. ON MOTION BY SLATES AND SECOND BY BOYLE CODE AMENDMENT NO. 76-12 WAS CONTINUED TO OCTOBER 19, 1976, AND ADDED TO STUDY SESSION AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION ONLY AT THE SEPTEMBER 28, 1976, MEETING BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Parkinson, Finley, Gibson, Slates, Shea, Newman, Boyle NOES: None ABSENT: None A two minute recess was called at 9:15 P.M. 0 9/21/76 - PC Minutes: H.B. Planning'Commission Tuesday, September 21, 1976 Page 7 COMMERCIAL HORSE STABLES STATUS REPORT This report was prepared by John Cope and was used in discussion on the following two items. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 76-17 Applicant: T. J. Hennes IN CONJUNCTION WITH CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 76-08 Applicant: T. J. Hennes Conditional Use Permit No. 76-17 is a request to permit the con- tinuance of an existing commercial horse stable located on the southwest corner of Goldenwest Street and Ellis Avenue. Conditional Exception No. 76-08 is a request to permit encroach- ments into the required front, exterior side, interior side, and rear yard setbacks. John Cope stated that he had no information to add to that con- tained in the staff report. He stated that the applicant had met with the Planning Department and Fire Department and could comply with the necessary requirements. There was a discussion on the suggested conditions of approval. The public hearing was reopened on Conditional Use -Permit No. 76-17 and Conditional Exception No. 76-08. T. J. Hennes, applicant, addressed the Commission and stated he would be willing to answer any questions. Marie Buckland addressed the Commission and stated that a con- - siderable amount of time had been spent on the new ordinance and questioned when the City is going forward with it, and not make exceptions. She inquired if the Regional Water Quality Control Board had approved the application. Mr. Hennes stated that he had filed the application. The public hearing was closed. ON MOTION BY BOYLE AND SECOND BY NEWMAN CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 76-08 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: 1. The granting of the above exception will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare or injurious to the conforming uses or improvements in the sur- rounding horse stables. -7- 9/21/76 - PC Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, September 21, 1976 Page 8 2. The recommended exception will allow the continuationg of a previously city approved stable and therefore insure the preserv- ation and use of substantial property rights. 3. The applicant has requested an eighteen (18) month permit in order to complete his lease obligations and amortization of the existing facilities that were established when standards for this type of development did not exist.. Therefore, compliance with all of the present standards would necessitate a virtual redevelopment of the complex. AYES: Gibson, Slates, Shea, Newman, Boyle NOES: Parkinson, Finley ABSENT: None ON MOTION BY PARKINSON AND SECOND BY FINLEY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 76-17 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS AND FINDINGS BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS: 1. The proposed use is compatible with existing land uses of the surrounding areas. 2. The proposed use is consistent with and carries out the objectives of stated City policy relating to the encouragement of active private recreational uses within close proximity to Huntington Central Park. 3. The proposed use is substantially in conformance with the intent and objectives of Article 939 "Temporary Commercial Horse Standards." CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan dated September 15, 1976 shall be the approved layout with the maximum horse density not to exceed 104 horses. 2. Conditional Use Permit No. 76-17 and Conditional Exception No. 76-08 shall become null and void on February 1, 1978. The applicant is put on notice that any requests for future use of the subject property for a horse stable will require conformance with the development standards in effect at that time. 3. Ellis Avenue and Goldenwest Street shall be dedicated for street purposes prior to December 1, 1976. 4. No structures other than those shown on the modified site plan shall be constructed. 11 -8- 9/21/76 - PC Minutes: H.B. Planning -Commission Tuesday, September 21, 1976 Page 9 5. Fire protection systems shall be subject to approval by -the Fire Department. This system may include determinations as the appropriate fire safety access and level of water source that will service the facilities. 6. The applicant shall submit a landscape plan showing a six (6) foot wide landscape planter on Ellis Avenue and Goldenwest Street to the Department.of Building and Community Development for review and approval. Said landscaping shall be completed prior to December 1, 1976. 7. The developer shall participate in the local drainage assess- ment district as required by local ordinance. 8. Temporary placement of waste materials shall not exceed forty-eight (48) hours in an all -concrete, three -walled open storage bin, with removal to on -or off -site ranch use or destruction on a schedule subject -to -approval of the Orange County Health Department. Size of storage bin shall depend on projected daily volume of waste material.' 9. All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus and unusable materials shall be disposed of at an off site facility equipped to handle them. 10. The subject use shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission at its meeting of December 7, 1976 for the purpose of reviewing the facilities for conformance with the conditions of approval. Should it be determined that the applicant has failed to comply with all of the required modifications and conditions, Conditional Use Permit No. 76-17 and Conditional Exception 76-08 shall become null and void. AYES: Gibson, Slates, Shea, Newman, Boyle NOES: Parkinson, Finley ABSENT: None CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 76-16 Applicant: A. C. Marion IN CONJUNCTION WITH CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 76-34 Applicant: A. C. M&,Tion Conditional Use Permit No. 76-16 is a request to permit the con- tinued operation of a commercial horse stable located on the north- west corner of Goldenwest and Ellis. -9- 9/21/76 - PC Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, September 21, 1976 Page 10 Conditional Use Permit No. 76-16 and Conditional Exception No. 76-34 were conditionally approved by the Planning Commission on August 3, 1976. Subsequently, an appeal to the approval of the Conditional Exception was filed by Councilman Siebert and a public hearing was scheduled for the Council meeting of September 7, 1976. The appellant during the public hearing before the City Council requested a withdrawal of the appeal because the staff had indicated that the street dedication would have to be made immediately and not postponed to a future date as conditioned by the Planning Commission. Since this issue was the basis of the appeal, the appellant indicated a desire for withdrawal. The Council was advised that the dedication requirement would impact the conditions of approval imposed by the Commission and therefore referred the matter back to the Commission for review and'po_ssible-clarification of the conditions. A. C. Marion addressed the Commission and stated that he had submitted, an application to the Regional Water Quality Control Board. There was a discussion on the amended conditions of.approval,. with Mr. Marion agreeing to them. ON MOTION BY BOYLE AND SECOND BY NEWMAN.THE FOLLOWING AMENDED CONDITIONS ON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 76-16 WERE APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:. AMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan dated June 14, 1976 shall be the approved layout with the maximum horse density not to exceed 60 horses. 2. Ellis Avenue and Goldenwest Street shall be dedicated for 'street purposes prior to December 1, 1976. 3. No structures other than those shown on the modified site plan shall be constructed. 4. Fire protection systems shall be subject to.approval.by the Fire Department. This system may include determinations as to the appropriate fire safety access and level of water source that will service the facilities. 5. The developer shall participate in the localtdrainage assess-.,- ; ment district as required by local ordinance. 6. Temporary placement of waste materials shall not exceed forty eight (48) hours in an all -concrete, three -walled open storage bin, with removal to on- or off -site ranch use or destruction on a schedule subject to approval of the Orange County Health Department. Size of storage bin shall depend on projected daily volume of waste material. Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, September 21, 1976 Page 11 7. The subject use shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission at its meeting of December 7, 1976 for the purpose of reviewing the facilities for conformance with the conditions of approval. Should it be determined that the applicant has failed to comply with all of the required modifications and conditions, Con- ditional Use Permit No. 76-16 and Conditional Exception 76-34 shall become null and void. AYES: Gibson, Saltes, Shea, Newman, Boyle NOES: Parkinson ABSTAIN: Finley ABSENT: None ,Commissioner Finley stated that she had abstained since she had been absent when the application had originally been before the Commission, and that there was no tape available from that meeting. ZONE CHANGE NO. 76-21 Applicant: Ronald Montgomery Zone Change No. 76-21 is a request for a change of zone on an approximate 3/4 acre site, located on the southeast corner of Warner Avenue and Leslie Drive. The request is for a low density residential zoning (R-1). The staff recommended that if the Commission approved the zone change in concept it should be continued to the October 5, 1976 meeting to allow advertising additional property that would be recommended to incorporate into this zone change. The public hearing was opened and there being no one present to speak on this zone change the public hearing was closed. ON MOTION BY PARKINSON AND SECOND BY SHEA ZONE CHANGE NO. 76-21 WAS CONTINUED TO OCTOBER15, 1976, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Parkinson, Finley, Gibson, Slates, Shea, Newman, Boyle NOES: None ABSENT: None ZONE CHANGE NO. 76-22 Applicant: Ronald Montgomery This is a request for a change of zone from C4 to R2 located at the southeast corner of Florida and Utica. The change of zone is a request by the applicant to implement the General Plan land use designation through the appropriate district zoning. The change in the land use designation was recently approved by the Planning Commission. -11- 9/21/76 - PC Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, September 21, 1976 Page 12 The public hearing was opened and there being no one present to speak on this zone change, the public hearing was closed. Commission discussion ensued. 1. ON MOTION BY BOYLE AND SECOND BY PARKINSON ZONE CHANGE NO. 76-22'WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: 1. The requested change of zone implements the previously adopted land use designation, and therefore is in conformance with the General Plan. 2. The resultant land uses are enumerated in the Land Use Element and provide for the highest compatibility with the existing adjacent uses. AYES: Parkinson, Finley, Gibson, Slates, Shea, Newman, Boyle NOES: None ABSENT: None TENTATIVE TRACT 9188 Applicant: Frank J. Mola Tentative Tract Map 9188, filed on December 17, 1975, is a request to subdivide approximately 2.5 acre parcel of land into a 7 lot medium density subdivision. Subject property is located on the northeast corner of Delaware Street and Utica Avenue. Chairman Slates stated that the Subdivision Committee had reviewed the proposal and suggested certain revisions which the subdivider has incorporated into the proposed layout. ON MOTION BY SHEA AND SECOND BY BOYLE TENTATIVE TRACT 9188 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: 1. The tentative map received and dated August 30, 1976, shall be the approved layout for a 7 lot subdivision only. 2. The sewer, water, and fire.hydrants systems shall be designed to City standards. 3. The water system shall be through the City of Huntington Beach's water system. 4. The sewage disposal shall be,through the City of Huntington Beach's sewer system. 5. The property shall be subject to the local drainage and assess- ment district requirements and fees. Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, September 21, 1976 Page 13 6. Drainage for the subdivision shall be approved by the Depart- ment of Public Works prior to the recordation of a final map. This system shall be designed to provide for siltation and erosion control both during and after construction of the project. 7. The design and configuration of the retention basin on Lot No. 7 shall be approved by the Department of Public Works prior to the recordation of final map. This retention basin shall remain unaltered after construction and the capacity of the area shall be predicated upon a water surface elevation as required by the Department of Public Works. 8. The retention basin to be constructed by the developer on Lot No. 7 shall be graded in such a manner that it will retain a minimum of 2.5 acre feet of water and that the basin shall contain a low point at its southwesterly corner located on Lot No. 7. The design of the facilities upstream and down- stream from the retention basin shall be subject to the Depart- ment of Public Works' approval prior to the recordation of the final map on this subdivision. 9. The drainage basin covering Lot No. 7 shall be fenced with material and design subject to approval by the Department of Public Works. 10. The developer shall be responsible for weed control and main- tenance within the fence and the drainage basin area. 11. "A" Street and the public alley, as shown upon the map re- ceived and dated August 30, 1976, shall be dedicated to the City of Huntington Beach with the exception of the triangular area at the north and south side of the north/south leg of the public alley which shall be eliminated and dedication shall be in a rectangular shape only. 12. The developer shall participate in the Orange County Annexation Sanitation District No. 3 requirements and fees. 13. Vehicular access rights along Delaware Street shall be dedi- cated to the City of Huntington Beach. 14. All utilities shall be installed underground. 15. If the developer proposes ro provide air conditioning, the insulation in the ceilings and exterior walls shall be a minimum of R-19 and R-11 respectively. If no air conditioning is to be provided in the ceiling and exterior walls, insulation in the ceiling and exterior walls shall be a minimum of R-13 and R-7, respectively. -13- 9/21/76 - ''• Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, September 21, 1976 Page 14 16. All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and = other surplus and unusable materials, shall be disposed of at an off site facility equipped to handle them. 17. Natural gas and 220 V electrical shall be stubbed in at location of clothes dryers. Natural gas shall be stubbed in at location of surface units for cooking facilities, water heaters, and central heating units. 18. The structures on subject property whether attached or de- tached shall be constructed in compliance with state acoustical standards set forth for all units that lie within the 60 CNEL contour on subject property. 19. The fire alarm system, conduit and appurtenances shall be installed by the developer at locations and to specifications provided by the Fire Department. 20. No development of residential units shall take place upon Lot No. 7 until the downstream portion of the drainage district has been constructed to accommodate the surface drainage for this area. AYES: Parkinson, Finley, Gibson, Slates, Shea, Newman, Boyle NOES: None ABSENT: None CODE AMENDMENT NO. 76-13 The intent of this code amendment is to establish an application process for review of proposals to conduct a special event within the City. The public hearing was opened. There was no one present to speak on this code amendment and the public hearing was closed. Commission discussion ensued. ON MOTION BY PARKINSON AND SECOND BY SHEA CODE AMENDMENT NO. 76-13 WAS APPROVED AS DEFINED'IN THE DRAFT ORDINANCE BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Parkinson, Finley, Gibson, Slates, Shea, Newman, Boyle NOES: None ABSENT: None TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 8875 Applicant: Standard -Pacific Corporation This is a request for a one year extension of time on a previously approved 10 lot residential subdivision located on the southerly portion of North New Britain Lane and west of Newland Street. -14- 9/21/76 - PC I Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, September 21, 1976 Page 15. There was a discussion on the conditions of approval and it was determined that the original conditions have not changed and still apply to this application. ON MOTION BY BOYLE AND SECOND BY FINLEY A ONE YEAR EXTENSION WAS GRANTED ON TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 8875 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Parkinson, Finley, Gibson, Slates, Shea, Newman, Boyle NOES: None ABSENT: None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Communication from Buccella Builders regarding four acre parcel at the northwest corner of Beach Boulevard and Memphis Mr. Buccella addressed the Commission and stated that he would like to determine if they had any strong objections to the above parcel of land being rezoned to R2. He was advised by the Commission that he would have to file a Zone Change application and go through the process of a hearing before this matter could be discussed. Donna Colbert addressed the Commission concerning a single family residence on the property with horse facilities. Acting Secretary Selich stated thut a Code -Amendment will be on the agenda for the meeting of September 28. If Commission concurs with this Amendment it will be set for public hearing and processed according to the established legal procedure. Commissioners Newman and Gibson were presented "Planner" awards by Chairman Slates. He requested that these same awards be prepared for Commissioners Parkinson, Finley and Shea. STAFFIS COMMENTS: Acting Secretary Selich stated that the City Council will have a joint study session with the Planning Commission on Monday, September 27, 1976 to discuss the industrial land use study at 7:00 p.m. in Room B8. Acting Secretary Selich then recapped the City Council meeting of September 20, 1976. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 11:00 p.m. to the meeting of September 27, 1976, in Room B8 at 7:00 p.m. with the City Council. Edward D:` Selich Acting Secretary Charles T. Gibson --Vice Chairman