Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-03-06Approved March 20, 1979 MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, MARCH 6, 1979 - 7:00 PM COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Council Chambers, Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 Higgins, Russell, Stern, Finley, Cohen, Bazil, Paone COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None CONSENT ITEMS: At the request of Commissioner Stern Item A-3 on the consent agenda, Resolution of Intent 1244, was taken off the consent agenda to be discussed as a separate item. ON MOTION BY HIGGINS AND SECOND BY RUSSELL THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 21, 1979, AND THE REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR TRACT 9081 WERE APPROVED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Higgins,.Russell, Stern, Finley, Cohen, Bazil, Paone NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None RESOLUTION OF 'INTENT NO. '1244 Commissioner Stern questioned whether the 50-foot setback require- ment for commercial construction on an arterial could be reduced in order to reduce the amount of paving in front of a project, add to the depth of the landscaping, and provide more of the parking to the rear of a commercial use. Staff explained the setback encroachment provisions, which at present allow a foot -for -foot landscaping encroachment into that 50 feet up to a maximum of 25 feet. The Commission discussed the possibility that changing the setback without also changing the encroachment ratio might result in very shallow setbacks, thereby defeating the intended purpose of additional landscaping on the arterials. ON MOTION BY STERN AND SECOND BY RUSSELL RESOLUTION OF INTENT NO. 1244 WAS ADOPTED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Russell, Stern, Finley, Cohen, Bazil, Paone NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Minutes,, H..B. Planning Commission March 6, 1979 Page 2 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: TENTATIVE TRACT 10440/TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 79-555/NEGATIVE DECLARA- TION NO. 79-11 Applicant: G. F. Goeden Company The public hearing was opened. John Michler of Hunsaker & Associates addressed the Commission to des- cribe the history of the project and explain the purpose of the parcel map. Bill Darnell, traffic consultant, addressed the Commission in regard to the traffic report for the proposed project. He discussed distan- ces from the intersections at Five Points and Taylor Avenue, possible future access to Steep Lane, and traffic generation to be expected from the commercial and residential proposed to be developed. Mr. Goeden also addressed the Commission in support of the project, saying that he feels the proposal and design as submitted meets the constraints of the site and is compatible with surrounding uses. There being no other persons to speak in regard to the project, the public hearing was closed. The Commission discussed the amount of traffic to be generated from the site, the effect of the traffic configuration for Ellis Avenue upon the traffic flow analysis presented by the consultant, the possi- bility of commercial access from A Street rather than from Beach Boulevard, and the treatment of the existing muffler shop. Appropri- ateness of residential construction along Beach was also reviewed; and Jim Palin informed the Commission that, in order to create a 66 foot commercial parcel, a layout of all the remaining commercial should be available to allow review of inner circulation and ingress/egress. A motion was made by Russell and seconded by Cohen to continue these requests to the next regular meeting to allow traffic and access fig- ures to be generated and possible impacts of the future alignment on Ellis Street and Steep Lane to be investigated. This investigation should also include numbers on accident rates on Beach between Five Points and Taylor Avenue for the past three years. Discussion followed. In response to questioning from Commissioner Finley, Mel Ott of the Fire Department indicated that the one entry drive to this small number of residential units is acceptable to the Fire Department, but that entry from one direction only (south on Beach Boulevard) would pose some problems in response time. Savoy Bellavia informed the Commission that access through to Steep Lane is not possible in the near future because of the refusal of the abutting property line to sell or grant an easement. -2- 3-6-79 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission March 6, 1979 Page 3 Commissioner Bazil noted that any approval of these requests should contain a condition requiring an offer of dedication on the subject property from the cul-de-sac on A Street to the adjacent property line for any future extension of the street. The vote was called for and the motion failed by the following vote: AYES: Russell NOES: Higgins, Stern, Finley, Cohen, Bazil, Paone ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None The Commission discussed at length the configuration and history of Parcel 1 as delineated on the parcel map, the access points existing and planned, and the uses proposed for the commercial sites. The applicant agreed to incorporate the two accesses on Parcel 2 into one drive when the development plans are prepared for that parcel, and said he would try to negotiate reciprocal easements with the owners of Parcel 1 in the future. Commissioner Higgins expressed continuing concern with the front- age of Parcel 1, saying that it is extremely narrow (even though it may be a legally constituted lot) and not conducive to proper commercial development on Beach Boulevard. John O'Connor pointed out that there were issues which needed clarification on the map; namely, the possibility that some modi- fication has occurred on Parcel 1, the ambiguous references to an easement, and the possibility that approval of the map would result in creation of a non -conforming structure. He suggested a continuance to permit staff to research these items. ON MOTION BY HIGGINS AND SECOND BY BAZIL TENTATIVE TRACT 10440, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 79-555, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO.-79-11 WERE CONTINUED TO THE MEETING OF MARCH 20, 1979, TO PERMIT STAFF INVESTIGATION AND TO PERMIT APPLICANT TO PURSUE WITH THE OWNER OF PARCEL 1 THE CLOSURE OF THE DRIVE ON THAT LOT TO BEACH BOULE- VARD WITH ACCESS TO A STREET AND/OR RECIPROCAL DRIVES, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Russell, Stern, Finley, Cohen, Bazil, Paone NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None The public hearings were reopened and continued to March 20 meeting. ZONE CHANGE NO. 78-24 (Cont. from 2-6-79) Applicant: William L. Anderson The public hearing was opened. No one was present to represent the application or to address the Commission on the requested change of zoning, and the public hearing was closed. -3- 3-6-79 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission March 6, 1979 Page 4 The Commission reviewed the zone change request in light of its prior action on General Plan Amendment No.'79-1A and the additional financial data provided by staff. 1 ON MOTION BY S`PERN AND SECOND BY RUSSELL ZONE CHANGE NO. 78-24 WAS DENIED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS FOR DENIAL: 1. The proposed R2 zoning for the subject site is not compatible with the existing surrounding land uses. 2. R2.zoning is not the only zoning that is consistent with the Medium Density designation of the General Plan. The information contained in the recommended General Plan Amendment No.•79-1A, as well as the revenue vs. expenditures information presented in the staff report, makes the requested change of zoning an undesirable land use designation for the subject property. AY�S: Higgins, Russell, Stern, Finley, Cohen, Bazil, Paone NOES: None ABS�NT: None ABSTAIN: None APPEAL: USE PERMIT NO. 78-74/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 79-4/TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 79-554.� Applicant and Appellant: James L. Foxx Commissioner Paone announced that he would abstain from discussion and voting on these appeals. Acting Secretary Palin outlined the history of the project and Pat Spencer made a presentation of the applicant's site layout and the ex- ception to code he is requesting, as well as the change in lot line between the two separate parcels which comprise the proposal area. The public hearing on the appeals was opened. Warren James, representative -of the -applicant, addressed the Commis- sion in favor of overruling the Board of zoning Adjustments..and granting the proponent approval of these applications. There being no other persons to address the Commission in regard to the matter, the public hearing was closed. The'Commission reviewed the layout, with Mr. Palin pointing out that it has been revised since original approval of the zone change by addition of square footage of the new proposed structure on Lot 16 (from 900 to 1600 square feet with corresponding addition in parking requirements) and by the shifting of the lot line proposed in the tentative parcel map application. Parking layout has also been re- vised. -4- 3-6-79 - P,C, Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission March 6, 1979 Page 5 Considered were the intent of the Commission when the zone change was approved, the tandem parking on Lot 15 and possible alternative layouts to alleviate the parking problem, and the lot line adjustment which, it was the consensus of the Commission, has contributed to the problems on the site. Reciprocal ease- ment for parking and reduction of the new building to its orig- inally proposed square footage were two suggested methods of resolving the matter. Commissioner Bazil stated that he could endorse the tandem parking on the existing structure without the lot line adjustment, since it would be improving the situation and since the front parking had been been made inaccessible by the City's action on the zone change, but not as the lots are constituted in the request. ON MOTION BY STERN AND SECOND BY COHEN THE APPEALS OF USE PERMIT NO. 78-74, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 79-4 AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 79-554 WERE DENIED AND THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS ACTION UPHELD FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS FOR DENIAL: - Conditional Exception: 1. Approval of the conditional exception would constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent upon other properties in the vicinity and under an identical zone classification. 2. There are no special circumstances applicable to the property that strict application of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classifi- cation. 3. The granting of the conditional exception would conflict with the requirements of Article 964 of the Huntington Beach Ordin- ance Code, which require full compliance with all limitations and standards set forth in Division 9 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Tentative Parcel Map: 1. The sites are not physically suitable for the proposed in- tensity of development. 2. The proposed parcel map would impose further physical restraints upon the development of the properties under the current quali- fied zoning designation. Use Permit: 1. The development as proposed relies upon approval of the condi- tional exception and the tentative parcel map. -5- 3-6-79 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission March 6, 1979 Page 6 2. Adequate parking is not provided to accommodate employees and/or customers of the proposed uses. The requested change in the lot line, the increase of the square footage of the new structure on Lot 16 from the-900 square feet shown on the conceptual layout presented when the zone change was reviewed to approximately 1600 square feet, and the deletion of what appeared on that conceptual layout to be reciprocal access to parking on both lots have con- tributed to this parking deficiency and created in effect a self- imposed hardship. 3. The intent of the Commission in approving the applicant's request for a change of zone of the property and creating what was tanta- mount to "spot zoning" for the parcels was to obtain a quality commercial development on the site, and to allow a parking problem to be built into the project would not accomplish this intent. 4. The intent of the Commission upon approval of the rezone was also to obtain a commercial development that would serve a community need; the applicant's suggested uses for the buildings do not seem to accomplish this end. 5. Approval of the request would set an undesirable precedent for other commercial areas within the community. AYES: Higgins, Russell, Stern, Finley, Cohen, Bazil NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Paone GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 79-1B Initiated by the Planning Department This- portion of the General Plan Amendment includes the following areas of concern: 2.1 - Lake Street between Garfield Avenue and Yorktown Avenue; 2.2 - Talbert -Avenue between Gothard Street and Goldenwest Street; and 2.3 - Ellis Avenue between Goldenwest and Edwards Streets. Chairman Finley noted that the public hearing on this portion of the General Plan Amendment remains open. Bruce Greer addressed the Commission urging the retention of the extension of Lake Street as a part of the Circulation Element at this time. He cited the upcoming Transportation Model and the future determination of land uses in the downtown as support of his position. Mr. and Mrs. Rodgers spoke against extending Lake from Yorktown to Garfield Avenue. There were no other persons to speak on the General Plan Amendment and the public hearing was closed. Acting Secretary Palin informed the Commission that Commissioner Bazil has requested further discussion and information on the realign- -6- 3-6-79 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission March 6, 1979 Page 7 ment of Ellis Avenue in regard to the amount to be affected by the new configuration. Mr. maps delineating the boundary of the park and which are owned by the City. of City -owned property Palin presented the lots in the area Commissioner Bazil said that he feels the realignment would be premature, inasmuch as the City does not have a precise plan for the ultimate route of Bolsa Chica around the park; the costs of installing the realigned Ellis Avenue would have to be borne for the most part by the City at this time, whereas if it were delayed a portion of those costs would be borne by developers of adjacent properties; and the option would still remain of precise planning this alignment at a later date if desired. He conceded that the realignment would produce a smoother traffic flow, but said ultimate development of the area is probably several years away and no difficulty should be encountered in holding off a deci- sion until more information is available about Edwards Street,and Bolsa Chica. In response to a request for staff input from Commissioner Paone, James Palin outlined some of the issues involved in the proposed realignment. These included the need for crosstown circulation to serve both citizens of the community and the Fire and other emergency needs; the desire of the Parks Department to have a final firm southerly boundary to the Central Park; and the need for positive action in order to retain some $2 million set aside by the Board of Supervisors for lineal park acquisition and development. He noted that this proposed alignment had come out of studies conducted in cooperation with other governmental agencies and he would hesitate to concur with any delay. Commissioner Higgins expressed the opinion that both Edwards and Bolsa Chica would also require designated routes to implement the park development program, and that comparative costs should be studied for the existing and proposed alignments of Ellis. Commissioner Bazil added that because of the capital outlay re- quired the realignment would remain a "paper street" for some time to come, in any case. Commissioner Stern discussed the negative declaration filed for the Lake Street area of concern, noting that in his opinion it had failed to properly address the effects of the deletion of Lake upon the overall circulation pattern in the affected area of the City and the future development of the downtown Main Street and beach areas. A MOTION WAS MADE BY STERN AND SECONDED BY COHEN THAT NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 79-12 BE REJECTED AS INADEQUATE AND AN ENVIRON- MENTAL IMPACT REPORT REQUIRED FOR AREA OF CONCERN 2.1 OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 79-1B. MOTION FAILED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Stern, Cohen NOES: Higgins, Russell, Finley, Bazil, Paone ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None -7- 3-6-79 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission March 6, 1979 Page 8 ON MOTION BY RUSSELL AND SECOND BY FINLEY NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 79-12 WAS ADOPTED FOR AREA OF CONCERN 2.1, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: �1YE5: Higgins, Russell, Finley, Bazil, Paone NOES: Stern, Cohen ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ON MOTION BY COHEN AND SECOND BY RUSSELL NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 79-3 WAS ADOPTED FOR AREA OF CONCERN 2.2, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Higgins; Russell, Stern, Finley, Cohen, Bazil, Paone NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ON MOTION BY HIGGINS AND SECOND BY RUSSELL NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 78-13 WAS ADOPTED FOR AREA OF CONCERN 2.3, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Russell, Stern, Finley, Cohen, Bazil, Paone NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ON MOTION BY BAZIL AND SECOND BY HIGGINS AREA OF CONCERN 2.3, REALIGN- MENT OF ELLIS AVENUE BETWEEN GOLDENWEST AND GOTHARD STREETS, WAS DELETED FROM GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 79-1B FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS: 1. Action on this realignment is premature until information is avail- able on other streets, i.e., Bolsa Chica and Edwards. 2. The option of precise planning_a realignment will remain available to the City at a future date. AYES: Higgins, Russell, Bazil, Paone NOES: Stern, Finley, Cohen ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None A MOTION WAS MADE BY STERN AND SECONDED BY COHEN THAT AREA OF CONCERN 2.1, DELETION OF THE LAKE STREET EXTENSION BETWEEN YORKTOWN AND GAR - FIELD AVENUES, BE DELETED FROM GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 79-1B FOR TIIE FOLLOWING REASONS. MOTION FAILED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: REASONS FOR DELETION OF AREA OF CONCERN 2.1: 1. Extension of Lake Street would more evenly distribute traffic flow through the affected area. 2. More even traffic distribution could aid in reducing the number of traffic accidents on Beach Boulevard. -8- 3-8-79 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission March 6, 1979 Page 9 3. The extension of Lake Street would help to bring Main Street back down to a neighborhood street status. 4. It would be more appropriate to have Lake Street on the Cir- culation Element as a secondary arterial, thereby removing the necessity for widening the southerly segment of that street. AYES: Stern, Cohen NOES: Higgins, Russell, Finley, Bazil, Paone ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ON MOTION BY BAZIL AND SECOND BY RUSSELL THE COMMISSION ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 1243 AS AMENDED BY THE DELETION THEREFROM OF AREA OF CONCERN 2.3, ELLIS AVENUE REALIGNMENT, AND RECO14MENDED A LIKE ACTION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Russell, Stern, Finley, Cohen, Bazil, Paone NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ON MOTION BY RUSSELL AND SECOND BY HIGGINS THE COMMISSION ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 1242, FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 79-1A AS AMENDED ON FEBRUARY 21, 1979, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Russell, Stern, Finley, Cohen, Bazil, Paone NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None DISCUSSION ITEMS: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 79-1 Initiated by the Planning Department Savoy Bellavia explained the two portions of the code amendment, one of which deals with service station signs and the other with a'permitting process for health clubs within existing shopping centers. He noted that the present sign code now requires that two signs be installed at each service station site and staff is requesting that pricing information be allowed on the identifica- tion signs. Commissioner Stern suggested that some method of inducing service station owners to avail themselves of that option might be appropriate and would result in an overall decrease in the number of signs per station. The health center portions of the code amendment will define those uses, remove health centers and clubs under 2500 square feet from the requirement for a conditional use permit in the C2 District, and add such facilities over 2500 square feet as an unclassified use requiring the conditional use permit entitlement. -9- 3-6-79 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission March 6, 1979 Page 10 After review and discussion, the Commission directed staff to provide incentives to service station operators to combine the pricing and identification signs (perhaps by allowing some measure of extra square footage for the one sign) and set the code amendment for public hearing. Acting Secretary Palin reviewed the City Council meeting of March 5, 1979, for the information of the Commission. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: Commissioner Russell requested that the Department of Public Works investigate signs, speed bumps, or other methods of traffic control within shopping center parking lots. Commissioner Paone discussed alternatives for the property on the west side of Beach Boulevard and Taylor Avenue, and staff was directed to have available information on a possible zone change or moratorium in that area for the meeting of March 20, 1979. Mr. Paone also requested an update on the progress of the Local Coastal Program and information on the progress of standard plans and specifications for scenic highway corridors. ON MOTION BY STERN AND SECOND BY FINLEY THE C014MISSION ADJOURNED TO A JOINT MEETING WITH THE REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION ON TUESDAY, MARCH 13, 1979, AT 7:00 PM, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Russell, Stern, Finley, Cohen, Bazil, Paone NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Meeting was adjourned at 16:20 p.m. /JZA�esW. Palin Ruth Finley, Chairman ing Secretary :df 1 I -10- 3-6-79 - P.C.