Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-07-01MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Council Chambers, Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, Calif. TUESDAY JULY 1 1980 - 7:00 P.M. C'OMMISSTONLRS PRESENT: Winchell, Kenefick, Porter, Schumacher, Greer COMMISSIONER$ ABSENT: Bauer Secretary Spencer called the meeting to order. ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON AND CHAIRPERSON PRO TEMPORE Secretary Spencer entertained a motion for Chairperson. ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY WINCHELL COMMISSIONER PORTER WAS NOMINATED AS CHAIRMAN OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. THERE BEING NO FURTHER NOMINATIONS, SECRETARY SPENCER CLOSED THE NOMINATIONS. VOTF : AYE.'-'): Winc bel] , Kenefick, Schumacher, Greer N0 E.-,: None AlISI NT: Bauer ABSTAIN: Porter Chairman Porter assumed the Chair and entertained a motion for Chairperson Pro Tempore. ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY PORTER, COMMISSIONER WINCHELL WAS NOMINATED AS CHAIRPERSON PRO TEMPORE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. THERE BEING NO FURTHER NOMINATIONS, CHAIRMAN PORTER CLOSED THE NOMINATIONS. VOTE: AYES: Winchell, Kenefick, Porter, Schumacher, Greer NOES: None ABSENT: Bauer ABSTAIN: None CONSENT AGENDA ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY WINCHELL THE CONFORMANCE WITH GENERAL PLAN 80-10 (SURPLUS PROPERTY ON PITCAIRN LANE) WAS FOUND IN CONFORMANCE BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission July 1, 1980 Page Two DISCUSSION Commissioner Greer questioned whether the surplus property on Pttoairn Lane was doing up for bid or whether the property was ori.ly offered to the adjacent property owners. Jim Georges of the City Attorney's Office stated that since the property was not an easement but was dedicated to the City, it will'be goiIng out for bid. VOTE: AYES: Winchell, Kenefick, Porter, Schumacher, Greer NOES: None ABSENT: Bauer ABSTAIN: None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Stan Cohen addressed the Commission congratulating Commissioners Porter, Winchell, and Schumacher on their new appointments. He thanked the Commission for personally touring Huntington Central Park. He requested the Commission to review the General Plan in order to bring non -conforming areas into conformance. He requested Commission to review signs carefully and protested against a 10 ft. by 15 ft. existing sign at the corner of Brookhurst and Bushard. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: C.OND_ITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 80-13/TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 11104/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 80-27 To permit the construction of 102 condominium units on 5.7 gross acres of land located on the south side of Warner Avenue between Sims and Lynn Streets. Savoy Bellavia stated that he had no additional comments to the staff report as presented to the Commission. The public hearing was opened on Conditional Use Permit No. 80-13. Eleanor Forster addressed the Commission citing her opposition to the proposal because of an oil lease she is holding on subject property. She stated that the production of this well would help the energy crisis and also produce needed tax revenue to the City. She further stated that the well will be her only source of income and therefore opposes the proposed condominiums. There being no other parties present to speak on the applications, the public hearing was closed. 1 Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission July 1, 1980 Page Three Commission discussion followed. Jim Georges of the Attorney's Office stated that the oil lease is a dispute between the lessee and property owner and that the City does not become involved in this type of situation. The public hearing was reopened. Robert Curtis, the applicant, addressed the Commission and stated that he was not aware of an oil lease on the property. He said that the City had removed the well head because of taxes that had not been paid on the well. He further stated that all oil leases on the subject well had expired and that the well had been abandoned. Mrs. Forster again addressed the Commission stating that the well in question is a good well, approximately 7,900 feet deep. Jim Georges noted that the property is not zoned for oil pro- duction. Discussion ensued regarding Section 9682.1 of the Ordinance Code, and Commissioner Greer requested an interpretation of this code section. In answer to Commissioner Winchell's question to staff as to what action would be appropriate at this meeting regarding the oil well operation, Savoy Bellavia stated that the oil pump meets the require- ments of the Fire Department as far as distance to adjoining oil operations, however, the applicant would have to file for an 110" desic_tniit.ion to place the well head on the pump, and the department does not have an application at this time for the "O" designation to be placed on the subject property. Further discussion ensued regarding the existing oil well. Commissioner Porter questioned whether the existing sewage facilities were adequate to support the proposed project. George Tindall of the Public Works Department assured the Commission that adequate facilities would be available upon completion of the project. Commissioner Porter questioned the setbacks of the proposed project, noting that adequate setbacks have not been met by the applicant in conjunction with the proposed building height. Dave Lorenzini, the architect, addressed the Commission stating that he had worked with the staff to produce the best possible plan, and requested that the Commission state their concerns about the project. Commissioner Porter then outlined the concerns about the setbacks stating that the Code was designed to alleviate excessive building bulk in relation to adjacent property. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Greer cited concern regarding the Negative Declaration. He felt that the Negative Declaration had not been adequately addressed in regards to traffic volume, existing trees and sewer capacity. Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission July 1, 1980 Page Four Commissioner Schumacher requested further clarification on what storage space is allocated for each unit, drainage, possibility of subterranean parking flooding. Commissioner Greer would like more detail on distance of existing oil tanks. Commissioner Porter requested staff to investigate what provisions are made for oil operations. Mr. Georges will render an oral opinion on the interpretation of Section 9682.1 of the Ordinance Code at the next Planning Commission meeting. ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY WINCHELL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 80-13, TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 11104, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 80-27 WERE CONTINUED TO JULY 15, 1980 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Winchell, Kenefick, Porter, Schumacher, Greer NOES: None ABSENT: Bauer ABSTAIN: None CONI)TTIONAI, USE PERMIT NO. 80-18 Applicant: Patricia Young To permit a day care center/day nursery within an existing building located on the northwest corner of Knoxville and Beach Boulevard on 1.60 acres of property. Savoy Bellavia stated that he had no additional input to the staff report presented to the Planning Commission. The public hearing was opened. Patty Young addressed the Commission and stated that she was available to answer any questions the Commission may have. There being no questions from the Commission, and no other people present to speak on the application, the public hearing was closed. ON MOTION BY WINCHELL AND SECOND BY KENEFICK CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 80-18 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS: 1. The day care/day nursery has adequate parking to accommodate the proposed use. 2. The day care/day nursery exceeds the outdoor play area required by the Ordinance Code. Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission July 1, 1980 Page Five 3. The proposed day care/day nursery is generally compatible with surrounding land uses. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan received and dated May 12, 1980 shall be the approved layout. 2. Hours of operation shall be limited to the following: 5:30 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Sunday through Saturday. 3. The Planning Commission reserves the right to rescind this Conditional Use Permit approval in the event of any violation of the terms of this approval or violation of the applicable zoning laws; any such zoning laws; any such decision shall be precedent by notice to the applicant, a public hearing, and shall be based on specific findings. AYES: Winchell, Kenefick, Porter, Schumacher, Greer NOES: None ABSENT: Bauer ABSTAIN: None CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 80-18 - APPEAL Applicant: Robert E. & Mary Mizer To permit an encroachment of five feet (51) into the ten foot (101) required sideyard setback located on the east side of Adrian Circle, approximately 435 ft. north of Hazelbrook Drive on .14 acres of property. ,Savoy Bellavia stated that he had no further input into the staff report presented to the Commission. The public hearing was opened. Mrs. Mizer addressed the Commission stating that they would like to expand their home's dining area. She further stated that the plan as proposed was the most logical way to expand and that even though there is ample room to expand towards the front of the house, that this was the most workable plan to suit their needs. She further said that the Board of Zoning Adjustments had suggested that the addition be made as a second story, however, the Homeowner's Association would not allow for a two-story expansion on their particular floor plan and lot location. She then read a letter from the Homeowner's Association citing approval of the plan as proposed by the applicants. Mrs. Mizer cited the objection the Board of Zoning Adjustments had in that a precedent would be established, however, she could see no harm would be done in that each case must be judged upon its own merit. Minutes:: H.B. Planning Commission July 1, 1980 Page Six Mr. Phil Sessna, adjacent property owner, addressed the Commission citing his concurrence with the proposed addition. Commissioner Kenefick stated that she visited the site in question and saw that the proposed addition would not be infringing on air spare or privacy and that the proposed plan was a better solution than the two story proposal as suggested by the Board of Zoning Adjustments. She further felt that a precedent would not be set by approval of this application. Jim Georges cited the Code that in order to grant a conditional exception, the Commission must find proper findings for such an approval. Findings of approval for the conditional exception were discussed by the Commission. Commissioner Greer stated that although he was sympathetic with the applicants, he could not find a justifiable hardship for approval of the application, ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY WINCHELL, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 80-18 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: 1. The granting of this application is found not to constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent upon other properties in the vicinity. 2. Because of special circumstances in the form of private restrictions applicable to subject property, the strict application of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive subject property of privileges en- joyed by other properties under identical zone classifications. 3. The granting of a conditional exception is necessary in order to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. 4. The granting of this conditional exception is found not to be materially detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to properties in the same zone classification. 5. The granting of this conditional exception is found not to adversely affect the City's General Plan. REASON FOR APPROVAL: 1. Proposed one story addition is needed in order to provide standard of living necessary for the enjoyment of property owner. AYES: Winchell, Kenefick, Porter, Schumacher NOES: Greer ABSENT: Bauer ABSTAIN: None Minutes: H.R. Planning Commission July 1, 1980 Page Seven MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE An update of the City's Master Plan of Drainage. This update, pre- pared by L.D. King, identifies drainage areas within the City and the relationship of these areas to regional flood control facilities. This study also proposes a new set of drainage fees for the City's 34 drainage districts. George Tindall addressed the Commission and reviewed the L.D. King Report and discussed the drainage system providing flood protection for the residents of the City. He also discussed the federal flood insurance program and its correlation with the City's flood control system. He indicated that the staff is currently working on a Community Facilities Element which will provide an update to the Master Plan of Storm Drains. He then stated that the L.D. King study established design criteria for storm drains, established the list of improvements, and recommended increases in the current City drainage fees. He also discussed briefly the financing for storm drains and indicated that approximately $30,000,000 worth of capital improvements are needed, however, the current drainage acreage fees are not able to finance the improvements and that other methods of financing would have to be sought. In conclusion Mr. Tindall stated that the Department of Public Works recommends that the Commission approve the L.D. King Study as a technical appendix to the current Master Plan approved by the City in 1975. The public hearing was opened. There being no parties present to speak on the Master Plan of Drainage, the public hearing was closed. Commission discussion included funding of the proposal and the difficulty in forming assessment districts. ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY GREER COMMISSION ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 1265, RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF THE L.D. KING STUDY, INCLUDING THE PROPOSED NEW DRAINAGE DISTRICT FEES TO THE CITY COUNCIL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Winchell, NOES: None ABSENT: Bauer ABSTAIN: None DISCUSSION ITEMS: Kenefick, Porter, Schumacher, Greer REVISED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 78-18 Savoy Bellavia stated that a problem with visual intrusion and water seepage from planting along the church's south property line came up several months ago upon completion of the church. He stated neighbors have been complaining that an excess of water drains onto their property and that the wall height is such that the neighbors could see over the wall with ease. Mr. Bellavia Minutes; H.B. Planning Commission July 1, 1980 Page Eight then gave a brief history of the problems in that subsequent to the approval, on November 21, 1978, the Planning Commission approved an intensified landscaping treatment along the south property line of the church site adjacent to the abutting single family dwellings. This lnte.nsified landscape treatment was an effort to provide privacy For the adjacent single family dwellings without constructing a second wall along said property line. This intensified landscaping was to be located adjacent to the property line in a 10 ft. wide planter buffering the parking area for the church facility from the adjacent dwellings. After the construction of the church and the finished grades of the parking lot, this intensified landscaping treatment has become an unsatisfactory means of screening the parking facilities from the adjacent property owners. Therefore, the architect and representa- tives of the church are proposing that the landscaping be removed and a new wall be placed adjacent to the existing wall and measuring a minimum of 6 ft. above the finished grade on the church side. The landscape area will then be removed and the privacy will be provided the homeowners via the new screening wall. This solution will solve two major problems existing at this location; one, the wall. will provide maximum privacy for the residential units from the church parking lot and, two, will eliminate the watering of this landscape strip and the possible deterioration of the existing garden walls from the excess moisture created by the sprinkler system and rainfall. Following are the three suggested additional requirements to be added to the wall detail for the south property line. 1. Tree wells be provided along this property line at 30-35 ft. increments. 2. The gap between the existing garden walls and the proposed wall be sealed off in a manner which will provide for weed and rodent control. 3. The portion of the new wall extending over the existing garden walls and facing the abutting residential dwellings be constructed with finished grout joints. Chairman Porter stated that although this was not a public hearing, he was willing to receive testimony from the public. George Spowart addressed the Commission and felt that staff's pro- posal would solve most problems, but questioned how the wall would be sealed. He also requested that the wall be capped the entire length of the five lots in question, that the entire wall be finished in stucco as to match the existing walls, and to make sure that proposed drainage will solve the existing drainage problem. Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission July 1, 1980 Page Nine Joe Losa addressed the Commission stated that his property was located next to a tool shed and observed children climbing on top of the shed which is located two (2) feet from his wall. He stated concern over children being able to jump from the tool shed to his yard where his swimming pool is located. :.terry Placket addressed the Commission objecting to the low wall presently existing. He would like the new wall to be of the same stucco material that the present walls are constructed of. In answer to Commissioner Schumacher's question regarding the drainage situation, Pat Spencer outlined the grade differential for drainage to the Commission. Janet Wilson addressed the Commission and outlined the drainage problem she has had, whereby several inches of water would assemble in her yard from adjacent drainage runoff. The Commission discussed the problems as outlined by the adjacent property owners. Don Peart, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission and stated that the storage building had been constructed to Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, and that steps were being taken to alleviate the drainage problem. A MOTION WAS MADE BY WINCHELL AND SECONDED BY PORTER TO APPROVE THE REVISED CONDITION AS DEPICTED ON THE SITE PLAN WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Tree wells shall be placed six (6) feet from property line along this property at 30.-35 ft. increments and consideration shall be given to future drainage problems. 2. The stucco and color of the new wall shall match the walls of existing residents. 3. The height of the wall adjacent to storage building shall be the same height as the finished wall. Further discussion ensued. Mr. Palmer, an official of the church, addressed the Commission and suggested that the entire landscape strip be covered with asphalt to avoid any future drainage and/or seepage problems. Commissioner Porter suggested staff look into the problems further, and withdrew his second to the motion until the meeting of July 15, 1980. Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission July 1, 1980 Page Ten Commissioner Schumacher seconded the original motion with the followin amendments to the conditions. 1. The tree wells and trees to be located six (6) feet from the property line. 2. The gap between the existing garden walls and the proposed wall be sealed off in a manner which will provide for weed and rodent control. 3. That the color and material of the proposed wall match the existing wall. Further discussion ensued. Savoy Bellavia stated that a Plot Plan Amendment has been approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustments for construction of a second storage unit. Commissioner Schumacher withdrew her second to the motion. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF SECOND. ON MOTION 13Y PORTER AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER REVISED CONDITION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 78-18 WAS CONTINUED TO JULY 15, 1980 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Kenefick, Schumacher, Greer NOES: Winchell, Porter ABSENT: Bauer ABSTAIN: None Staff was directed to present a revised set of conditions and additional information on grading, storage sheds, etc. for the July 15, 1980 Planning Commission meeting. GAS STATION IDENTIFICATION SIGN LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF GOLDENWEST AND YORKTOWN Savoy Bellavia transmitted the following information to the Commission. At the March 18, 1980 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission reviewed a request by the developers of a gas station located at the northeast corner of Goldenwest Street and Yorktown Avenue to erect an identification and price sign at the immediate corner of the sub- ject property. This sign has previously been depicted on the approved site plan as being located along the Goldenwest Street frontage. The Planning Commission reviewed this revised location and denied the applicant's request. However, after further investi- gation of the approved sign program for the entire Seacliff Village, it was determined that the approved gas station identification sign was to be located at the immediate corner in the same location that it is presently located at. Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission July 1, 1980 Page Eleven Since the original approval of the service station site did not dis- cuss sign location it was the staff's determination that the approved sign program regulated the sign size and location. Because of staff error, this information has not been transmitted to the Planning Commission before this time. P1ANINTNO._COMMISSIONICITY COUNCIL JOINT MEETING REGARDING UPDATE ON STATE PLANNING AND ZONING LAWS - JUOY 22, 1980 June Catalano addressed the Commission and suggested that due to vacation schedules, a definite date for the joint study session be set the first meeting in August. APPOINTMENT OF COMMISSIONERS TO THE HCD ADVISORY COMMITTEE, DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, AND SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE Chairman Porter appointed the following Commissioners to the following Committees: HCD Advisory Committee Schumacher Downtown Development Committee - Schumacher Subdivision Committee - Porter, Winchell ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None M-WELOPMENT SERVICE ITEMS June Catalano stated that at the August Study Session, both the Fiscal Impact Model and new State Laws on Planning and Zoning will be presented to the Commission. COMMISSION ITEMS: Commissioner Greer cited concerns about General Plan discrepancies and felt that these problems should be resolved. Commissioner Greer questioned the mobile sales office by Sam's Seafood Restaurant. Savoy Bellavia stated that the sales office was for five individual lots to be sold at that location. Commissioner Winchell stated concern over code description of the 30-35 ft. height limitation on buildings. She felt the code should be amended to require a certain type of roof whereby a special permit is not necessary to grant an aesthetically pleasing roof. Commissioner Schumacher expressed concern over present code require- ment relating to building bulk. Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission July 1, 1980 Page Twelve Commissioner Kenefick expressed concern over the abundance of non -conforming signs throughout the City and felt that greater enforcement should occur. ON MOTION BY WINCHELL AND SECOND BY KENEFICK, STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO INVESTIGATE THE 30' AND 351 HEIGHT LIMITATION BY CHANGING TO NUMBER OF STORIES. AYES: Winchell, NOES: None ABSENT: Bauer ABSTAIN: None STAFF ITEMS: Kenefick, Porter, Schumacher, Greer George Tindall stated that he would present a brief Water Study Report on the entire water system to the Commission at their next meeting. ADJOURNMENT: Meeting was adjourned at 11:30 P.M. arles P. Spen r, Secretary :gc Marcus Porter, C rma 1