Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-04-17MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Council Chambers - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California TUESDAY, APRIL'17-, 1979 - 7:00 PM COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Higgins, Russell, Stern, Finley, Cohen, Paone (Note: Commissioner Stern arrived part way through the meeting) COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Bazil CONSENT CALENDAR: Item,A-3 on the Consent_ Calendar, request for extension of time for Tentative Tract Map 10169, was deferred to the meeting of May 1, 1979. .- ON MOTION BY HIGGINS AND -SECOND BY COHEN THE CONSENT CALENDAR (CON- SISTING OF -THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 3, 1979, AND A REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 9653) WAS APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Russell, Finley, Cohen, Paone NOES: None ABSENT: Stern, Bazil ABSTAIN: None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 79-01 Applicant:- Lortie/Jarrard To permit a reduction in the minimum perimeter setback area for a church located at.the southwest corner of Florida and Main Streets. Savoy Bellavia explained the extent of the encroachment and distri- buted the applicant's justification for the encroachment to the Commission members.. -In -response to questioning from Commissioner Finley, Jim Palin informed the_Commission that there were no provi- sions in the.Pacifica-Specific Plan, within which said project is .located, for -special permits to cover the encroachment. The public hearing Iwas opened. There being no one present to speak in regard to the request, the public hearing was closed. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission April 17, 1979 Page 2 Commission.discussion-considered-the intent of the"original set- back provisions -of the specific plan and the applicability of the variance procedure to the subject request. Counsel Georges in- formed the Commission that the request was appropriate for the encroachment proposed, -as long.'as�-no claim of economic hardship was put forward as justification'. ON`MOTION BY'HIGGINS AND SECOND BY,RUSSELL CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO.-79-01 WAS"APPROVED'WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING'VOTE: FINDINGS: 1. The proposal: -presents exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the land, buildings, or premises involved that do not` generally apply to -the property or class of uses in the same'district. 2. The conditional-exceptionis"necessary-for the preservation and enjoyment of''substantial_property-rights. 3. Granting `of this conditional exception will not be materially detrimental`to the public health, safety; and welfare or injuri- ous"to"the conforming land ;'property, orimprovementsin the neighborhood of the property for which said conditional excep- tion .is sought. 4. The applicant is willirig'and-able to carry out the purposes "fox -which the .'conditional exception 'is sought. CONDITION•'OF APPROVAL: 1." The conceptual"-site'plan received and dated March 23, 1979, shall, bethe approved • layout' AYES: -Higgins, Russell, Finley," Cohen, Paone NOES:" - None ABSENT:'= Stern,"Bazil" ABSTAIN: None" CONDITIONAL -USE PERMIT NO.-7-9-9- Applicant: Mike Hilander- To permit an amusement center -:"to be"located within an existing shopping center at the northwest corner of Atlanta Avenue and Mag- nolia'Street. Savoy-Bell'avia"informed the Commission that a petition was received on Friday," April 13, 197,9 in the•Planning Department signed by over 400 residents'of, adjacent properties in opposition to the subject use. The petition states -that the use -is out of character with the existing shopping center; -.will -not be compatible with the neigh- borhood; will constitute a menace to the safety, security, and -2- 4-17-79 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission April 17, 1979 Page 3 tranquility of the area; and would result in degradation of prop- erty values. Staff submitted the petition to the Commission for review. In response to questioning from Commissioners Cohen and Paone, Mr. Bellavia indicated that no music system has been proposed by the applicant at this time and the Commission could condition the request to prohibit installation of such a system in the future. He also reported that the Police Department had been contacted in regard to existing uses of a similar nature in a similar location within the City, and no problems or complaints have been encountered as a result of such uses. The public hearing was opened. The following persons addressed the Commission in opposition to the granting of the subject request: Herbert Blakeman - 8877 Lauderdale Court, E-212 John Brawley - 21011 Kausch Circle Russell Stromquist - 8877 Lauderdale Court, D-211 r._ Mr. Sorrell - 8877 Lauderdale Court, B-213 Ralph Hanford--_8866-Van Ness Court, D-14 Mrs. Edith Elkins - 8877 Lauderdale Court, F-214 These persons spoke as representatives for a larger number of people present in the -audience. The speakers cited past assurances of,the quality of the shopping center which they said they had re- ceived from both Signal-.;4andmark and the firm which had actually constructed the center,-,W-&_.D Builders, assurances which they felt had.not been carried-,out-:as.promised. They cited noise, traffic, and -light intrusion from,the.center, but stressed the problems of safety and security for:;the surrounding residents, saying that trespass, vandalism, robbery, and violent incidents have resulted from the proximity of. -the center to their homes. Mr. Brawley ques- tioned the accuracy of the information received from the Police_ Department, saying that"he has personally called the police to the Area twenty-five times:withi3 the last year for late -night noise and traffic problems.' It was the unanimous opinion of those addressing the Commission that the use would provide no convenience t6 any persons in the.neighborhood, would attract an undesirable element to the area,;and would further adversely affect the safety of -those residents of--the-Signal Landmark development. Mike Hilander, applicant,'addressed the Commission in favor of his proposed use. He described the types of equipment he is pro- posing, which will consist of electronic games no noisier than a calculator with no music system proposed now or in the future. Most of.his customers he expects -to use bicycles as transportation, causing no'further traffic ,noise problems; he also indicated -that he -,would provide no customer, access through the back door of the building. Mr. Hilander'added that he has investigated and found no police problems have resulted from existing arcades of this nature within the City. -3- 4-17-79 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission April 17, 1979 Page 4 The public hearing -;was closed., Commission discussion followed. Commissioner Russell pointed out that the use is requested for a properly zoned -shopping center, but that the congregation of teenagers which.might be expected from the use is a valid concern of the residents. He noted, how- ever, that with the information at hand no conclusion can be drawn as to, whether, or, not- the .shopping center has added to the crime rate -in "the ---area and' -suggested - a 'continuance to allow further in- vestigation-,:into police records., Commissioner Cohen expressed -reservations ;in regard to the proposal, saying that its proximity to an adult community should be taken into consideration•-as_regards;the safety and security of senior citizens. Commissioner;;Paone said that in his opinion the problems cited are not-necessarily"relevant to the subject application but relate instead_to;the.shopping,centerjas,a whole, and no action on this proposal,- will -change the,situatioW as it presently exists. He suggested.conditions on noise and sound attenuation which could be applied to lessen the possible impacts of the amusement center. Mr. Paone,also,discussed the, -zoning throughout the City which per- mits shopping centers_-to•be,-lpcated within residential 'areas and put•- forward,: the,- poss,ibi-lity. ; of: ' some sort of special zoning to allow special- •districts; in" -the ,City: for. amusement and recreational uses exclusively. CommissionerHiggins agreed that the application could be conditioned to-forestall"problems of noise and trespass by restriction on hours-of;operation, curtailment of alley entrance, and prohibition of any music system; he based this opinion on the several such uses existing in.the City at the present time apparently with no police problems -. Commissioner Finley pointed out that the proposed use might be a differ6nt circumstance due to its proximity to Edison High School and the adult Landmark community. A MOTION -WAS --MADE- AND SECOND BY COHEN TO DENY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 79-9. MOTION FAILED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Russell,"Finley, Cohen NOES: Higgins, Paone ABSENT: -=Stern,;Bdiil ABSTAIN: None The`application-is automatically continued to the next Planning Commission 'meeting -on May.1, 1979. Commissioner Russell extended an invitation to those present to call and -leave a,telephone number where they can be reached so that he may -contact them for further discussion. Staff was instructed -4- 4-17-79 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning'Commission April 17, 1979 Page 7 Acting Secretary Palin informed the Commission that the revocation of Precise Plan of Street Alignment No. 70-4 is pending before the City Council awating the Commission's recommendation on a lay- out to replace it, and outlined the alternatives -available for Precise Plan of Street Alignment No. 79-2. The new Alternative 4A was prepared in the Department of Public Works and submitted to the Planning Department; it is the configuration presently recom- mended in the staff report. It provides island separations and free flow lanes to expedite the interchange of traffic from Atlanta to Orange Avenues and vice versa, and will provide the beach traffic dispersal which is the concern of Director Moorhouse as well as the,east/west circulation which is the objective of the Fire and Police Departments. He noted, however, that since the staff report was prepared Public Works has informed the Planning Department that they do not feel 4A is a viable solution primarily because of the costs incurred. The Commission discussed the objectives of the,precise plan and con- sidered which alternative would most nearly fit those objectives while remaining feasible to construct and cost effective. Commis- sioner Higgins expressed the opinion that Alternative 4A seemed an overly elaborate layout, and Commissioner Russell asked for input from the Department of Public Works. Ron Lacher indicated that in his opinion traffic volumes at that intersection did not warrant such a sophisticated configuration and Alternative 4 would be the most desirable layout. He also questioned the accuracy of the cost estimates for the various alternatives. The public hearing was opened. Jim VanderHyden, 201 Huntington Street, asked that the Commission make some decision at this meeting, saying that he felt Alterna- tives 4, 5, or 10 would be acceptable as improving the existing situation and remaining cost effective. John Parnakian, resident of the area, addressed the Commission to state that there is really no existing problem in the flow pattern at the intersection, and any change would just result in an elabor- ate system with no place for the traffic to go from there: Cecil Wheat, 239 Lake Street, addressed the Commission to agree that there is no need for realignment of the intersection. Alice Parnakian questioned the need for the east/west access on Orange Avenue since the City Hall and other city services are no longer in the downtown area. She also said that the new configura- tion could result in -excessive speeds which would add to the exist- ing accident problem in the residential area, and suggested instead an overpass to funnel traffic across Pacific Coast Highway from Beach Boulevard. Commissioner Higgins explained to Mrs. Parnakian the steps under consideration to ease the traffic situation on Pacific Coast Highway and Beach Boulevard in relation to the State park access. -7- 4-17-79 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning-'Commission --April;17, 1979 Page-8 Chalmer Wylei,'residen_t of -80 Huntington Street, addressed the -Commission to"recquest,that'the`_dislocation of residents be taken into consideration when any decision is madelon the alignment. He also said that islands in a street would impede emergency ve- hicles'rather than help. - Mr. VanderHyden again'spoke-to the'Commission to'ask that in any case -the -existing -precise plan (P.P.S.A. 70-4) be deleted to allow property holders in the area to proceed with their plans. The public hearing -was closed -.,,Extensive Commission discussion followed: --_--Costs --were reviewed "6nd `it was pointed out that the pre- cise_plan would, not necessarily_be.built at this time but would only, serve;tppreserve=the right-of-way for possible future con- struction-(which:.would'be funded by developers as the adjoining property developed). The prior recommendation for Alternative 10 was discussed:; -'with Secretary Palin reporting that no actual recom- mendation for that alternative had gone up to the City Council. Instead,,.-.the._-repeal:of PreciseiPlan:of,-Street Alignment No. 70-4 had been recommended with no,replacement until after the traffic model had been--,completed..-Commissioner Russell expressed concern that the Commission -is -being asked to choose an alignment without being , sure- that. -its,; selected,, alignment will fit the purposes of all the affected_-City•-departments,,;e,g.,- :fire and -police, as well as the,needs of the Department of Harbors and Beaches. A MOTION WAS MADE BY PAONE-.AND SECONDED,BY FINLEY THAT THE COMMIS- SION -RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF ALTERNATIVE 10 TO THE CITY COUNCIL. MOTION FAILED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES:,-, Finleyr Paone NOES: Higgins, Cohen ABSENT: --z Stern,= Bazil -ABSTAIN:- Russell- 1 Commissioner-Paone presented -his reasons for supporting Alternative 10: It diverts the direct flow of traffic away from Lake Street, and it appears_to-present a reasonable cost alternative. He noted that,, although -Alternative 4A is -the only -alternative which attempts to meet- all- three- objectives of the realignment, it is a far too grandiose and expensive alternative to be considered. Mr. - VanderHyden, with the permission of the Chair, again addressed the Commission -to -state that -further inaction on this matter would almost force him torbring suit against the City in order to develop his property. Commissioner -Russell made a motion to continue Precise Plan of Street Alignment No. 79-2 to the next meeting to permit both the Traffic Engineer -and any other person in Public Works who has added information arid_expertise to answer the questions placed before him to be present before the Commission to respond. Motion failed for lack of a,second. -8- 4-17-79 - P.C. 1 Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission April 17, 1979 Page 9 Ron Lacher again spoke to explain the Traffic Engineer's memo in which he recommends adoption of either Alternative 5 or 10. Commissioner Higgins clarified his previous position, saying that he is not unalterably against Alternative 10, but in his opin- ion it constitutes too large a take of property and could be refined. A motion was made by Commissioner Cohen that Precise Plan of Street Alignment No. 79-2 be deferred until after the Circulation Element is seen by this Commission. Motion failed for lack of a second. Further discussion included consideration of a possible study session on the subject, the timing required to get the project up to the City Council, and possible revisions to Alternative 10. Commissioner Paone urged that action be taken on No. 10, saying that the Commission now knows that it is approved by the Traffic Engineer, and if there are departments in the City which have serious objections they can make those objections known at the Council level. Commissioner Higgins agreed to approving Alternative 10 in concept only, with the Commission's concerns expressed in any transmittal to the Council. ON MOTION BY HIGGINS AND SECOND BY PAONE THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDED PRECISE PLAN OF STREET ALIGNMENT NO. 79-2 TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION, WITH ALTERNATIVE LAYOUT NO. 10 BEING THE RECOMMENDED CONFIGURATION IN CONCEPT ONLY, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Russell, Finley, Cohen, Paone NOES: None ABSENT: Stern, Bazil ABSTAIN: None ON MOTION BY COHEN AND SECOND BY HIGGINS NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 79-29 WAS ADOPTED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Russell, Finley, Cohen, Paone NOES: None ABSENT: Stern, Bazil ABSTAIN: None ON MOTION BY PAONE AND SECOND BY COHEN RESOLUTION 1246 AS AMENDED TO REFLECT ALTERNATIVE 10 AS A CONCEPTUAL ALIGNMENT WAS ADOPTED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Russell, Finley, Cohen, Paone NOES: None ABSENT: Stern, Bazil ABSTAIN: None The Commission by consensus determined to request that any depart- ment of the City having an interest in any item pending before the Planning Commission provide a representative to the meeting at which such item is being reviewed. -9- 4-17-79 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission April 17, 1979 Page 10 DISCUSSION ITEMS: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 77-14 (TENTATIVE TRACT 8197) Applicant: Foxx Development Corporation A request for waiver of a previously imposed condition on an approved application. Savoy Bellavia--=reported that Condition 18, for which the waiver is requested;'--had,required that:.buildings situated at zero setback on a property -line or an easement line within the subject project should be -constructed of masonry, -maintenance -free materials. This has been -a standard condition on Rl developments at zero lot lines, but in the subject planned residential development there is no -real' -nee& -for the condition and.staff is recommending its deletion.- It:is, however, -felt that restrictions on landscaping and irrigation should be placed in the CC&R's to protect such zero lot line walls: ON MOTION BY.RUSSELL AND SECOND BY-,COHEN THE,CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR CONDITIONAL USE.PERMIT NO. 77-14.-.WERE AMENDED AS FOLLOWS, BY THE -FOLLOWING -VOTE:---., AMENDED CONDITIONS: 1. Original.Condition No. 18 deleted. 2. New. -Condition No. 18-added-as follows: "The CC&R's shall con- tain a provision for monitoring any irrigation system placed next to the walls constructed on the zero lot line or any ease- ment line in order to prevent continuous watering of these walls and restrict the landscaping abutting these walls to landscaping.-that.will.not:be.structurally damaging and to limit the construction of any structures abutting these walls to patio -.covers only. " AYES: Higgins, Russell, Finley, Cohen, Bazil NOES: None ABSENT: - . Stern;. Bazil ABSTAIN: - None. _ CONFORMANCE WITH GENERAL PLAN NO. 79-4 Applicant: Department of"Public' Works Acting Secretary_Pafin reported -that this area was previously be- fore the Planning -Commission on CGP 79-2, when it was denied. However,'research has determined that the ten -foot area formerly referred tb-as an "easement" is in fact a fee lot established when the original map -was recorded. No intended purpose for the strip has been determined and the Department is recommending that it be found surplus.- However, it should be also recommended that if the City Council wishes to retain the property it should be precise -10- 4-17-79 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission April 17, 1979 Page 11 planned to provide alley access serving the small lots fronting on Garfield Avenue. ON MOTION BY PAONE AND SECOND BY RUSSELL THE COMMISSION FOUND THE SALE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN AND RECOMMENDED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DIRECT THE COMMISSION TO INITIATE A PRECISE PLAN OF STREET ALIGNMENT IF IT IS THE DESIRE OF THE COUNCIL TO HAVE ALLEY ACCESS TO THE SMALL LOTS FRONT- ING ONTO GARFIELD AVENUE, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Russell, Finley, Cohen, Paone NOES: None ABSENT: Stern, Bazil ABSTAIN: None PLANNING DEPARTMENT ITEMS: Savoy Bellavia announced that a tour of Casa Del Sol at Brookhurst Street and Hamilton Avenue is scheduled for 9:00 a.m. on Saturday, April 21. This project is the subject of a pending condominium conversion request before the Commission. It was also announced that a study session will be scheduled for May 8, 1979 to review condominium conversion policy and procedures within the City. The Planning staff and the office of the City Attorney have been,instructed to submit information on the subject matter at that time. REVIEW OF CITY COUNCIL AGENDA: Acting Secretary Palin briefly reviewed the action of the City Council at its April 16, 1979 meeting for the information of the Commission. Bolsa Chica was discussed, and Mr. Palin reported the suggestion of Supervisor Harriett Wieder that an Intergovernmental Task Force be formed to plan the Bolsa Chica. Ruth Finley announced that the Council had approved reactivation of the Transportation Committee at the April 16 meeting and requested that two members of the Planning Commission be recommended to -the Council for appointment to that committee. After discussion, Ruth Finley and Stanley Cohen were designated to represent the Planning Commission on the committee. COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS: Chairman Finley discussed letters she has been receiving from per- sons wanting a new marina; she advised the Commission that she would assemble them and make them available for individual commis- sioners for their information. She also discussed the construction of warehousing/storage facilities in the industrial districts and a request from a citizen that a portion of the area north of Talbert recently redesignated Ml in General Plan Amendment 79-1 be -11- 4-17-79 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission April 17, 1979 Page 12 reconsidered in the next general plan amendment. The Commission discussed the feasibility of such action with staff and directed that the petitioner be advised to file an application to that effect. Commissioner Paone discussed the conditional use permit for the amusement arcade which had been continued earlier in this meet- ing and suggested that,the City should reassess placement of such uses in existing shopping centers and consider the estab- lishment of a separate amusement district for such facilities and others of a similar nature and purpose. This concept was reviewed and discussed by the Commission. ON MOTION BY PAONE AND -SECOND BY RUSSELL THE COMMISSION DETERMINED TO PURSUE AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A LARGER, MORE COMPLEX DEVELOP- MENT DISTRICT TO PROVIDE A VARIETY OF RECREATIONAL USES AND AT THE SAME TIME TAKE APPROPRIATE MEASURES TO PROHIBIT SUCH USES IN AREAS NOT SO DESIGNATED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Russell, Finley, Cohen, Paone NOES: Stern ABSENT: Bazil ABSTAIN: None Mr. Paone also suggested that zoning in respect to shopping centers within residential areas should be reviewed and reevaluated. STAFF ITEMS: Counsel James Georges reported as requested on two recent State Supreme Court decisions with regard to billboards and inverse con- demnation actions. After discussion, the Commission directed the Planning staff and the Attorney's office to report back regarding the City's ability to enforce its existing billboard ordinance regulations in light of the decision of the Supreme Court, or the adoption of a new ordinance regarding billboards specifically on Pacific Coast Highway and Beach Boulevard. Counsel Georges also reported that a member of the Commission pre- viously abstaining on a matter may vote to break a tie provided he votes prior to the result being announced or with the unanimous permission of the assembly, which can be given by unanimous vote or by the adoption of a motion to grant permission which is not debatable. In the opinion of Mr. Georges this ruling applies to any vote, even one on which a member has previously abstained because of announced conflict of interest. 77 J 1 -12- 4-17-79 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission April 17, 1979 Page 13 ON MOTION BY HIGGINS AND SECOND BY COHEN THE COMMISSION ADJOURNED TO A MEETING ON SATURDAY, APRIL 21, 1979 AT 9:00 AM, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Russell, Stern, Finley, Cohen, Paone NOES: None ABSENT: Bazil ABSTAIN: None Meeting adjourned at 11:30 p.m. 2s�y--- - Z-z 7'i"" - 0 James W. Palin Rut1f Finley, Chairman Acting Secretary 611, :df -13- 4-17-79 - P.C.