Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-08-19Approved September 3, 1980 MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Council Chambers - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California TUESDAY, AUGUST 19, 1980 - 7:00 PM COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Greer Schumacher COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Bauer CONSENT CALENDAR: ON MOTION BY BANNISTER AND SECOND BY KENEFICK THE CONSENT CALENDAR, CONSISTING OF THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF AUGUST 5, 1980, WAS APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, NOES: None ABSENT: Bauer ABSTAIN: Winchell, ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None Kenefick, Porter, Schumacher Greer REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: ZONE CHANGE NO. 80-13 (A - E) Applicant: Initiated by the City of Huntington Beach To request a change of zoning from R2-0, R3-0, and R2-0-CD to R2, R3, and R2-CD by dropping the "0" (Oil) suffix therefrom on prop- erty located at 515 22nd Street (Lot 15, Block 522); 2208 Pecan Avenue (west one-half Lot 3, Block 522); 2614 Alabama Street (Lot 17, Tract 77); 325 22nd Street (Lots 25 and 27, Block 322); and 513 22nd Street (Lot 13, Block 522). Savoy Bellavia showed slides of the subject locations and described the status of the properties as former oil -producing sites. The public hearing was opened. There being no persons present to address the Commission in regard to the proposal, the public hear- ing was closed. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission August 19, 1980 Page 2 Commissioner Greer made a motion that the subject zone change request be tabled and referred to the newly formed Oil Committee for review. Motion failed for lack of a second. Mr. Greer noted that the Oil Committee will be looking at all old wellheads in the City as potential energy producing sources. He also indicated that the Commission should be in possession of all available information prior to making a rezoning decision - possibly some of the properties may be tied up in an estate, which would explain their non - producing status. He further pointed out that one of the wells shown by staff looks as if it might be in pumping condition and the well might be salvageable. Rick Grunbaum of the Fire Department reviewed the steps taken by his department to try to give the oil operator on one of the properties time to bring his wells up to the quarterly production required by code to classify them as active wells. Secretary Palin outlined the purpose and goals of the new Oil Committee and suggested that the Commission might wish to recommend a deferral of final action on this zone change until the committee had an oppor- tunity to finish its investigation and make a report to the City Council. He also indicated that the code as predently constituted seems to dis- criminate among properties which contain only one well as opposed to properties with multiple wells, in that the one idle well is required to be abandoned while one producing well on the multiple -well property is all that is required to allow all the others to be retained in an idle condition without the requirement for abandonment. The Oil Committee may also wish to review this provision of the code for possible amend- ment. The Commission discussed the legality of such discrimination and was informed by legal counsel Matheis that different treatment under the law is not unconsitutional if there is a rational basis for the appar- ently unequal treatment. ON MOTION BY BANNISTER AND SECOND BY PORTER ZONE CHANGE NO. 80-13 (A-E) WAS APPROVED FOR RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND ADDED RECOMMENDATION, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS: 1. Removal of the "0" suffix complies with the intent of Title 15 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code. 2. The deletion of the "0" suffix is consistent with the City's General Plan. ADDED RECOMMENDATION: Commission recommends that the Council should withhold final action on the zone change until the Oil Committee has had an opportunity to -2- 8-19-80 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission August 19, 1980 Page 3 analyze the problem of the "0" suffix and energy production in Huntington Beach. AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Greer, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: Bauer ABSTAIN: None CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 80-24 Applicant: Huntington Beach Industrial Park To permit a mixed use development to be constructed on property located on the west side of Springdale Street and east side of Transistor Lane, between Engineer and Machine Drives. Savoy Bellavia reported that a request has been received from the applicant for a continuance. No persons were present in the audi- ence in response to the public notification on the project, and the public hearing was not opened. ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY WINCHELL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 80-24 WAS CONTINUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF SPETEMBER 3, 1980, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Kenef ick, Winchell, Porter, Greer, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: Bauer ABSTAIN: None CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 80-29 (APPEAL FROM BZA ACTION) Applicant and Appellant: Webb Morrow To permit a six (6) foot high wall to encroach three feet eight inches (318") into a required front yard setback on property loc- ated on the east end of Ragtime Circle. The public hearing was opened. Roger Cole, 3772 Ragtime Circle, addressed the Commission in opposi- tion to the conditional exception. He stated that everyone else has to set back the legal distance and he sees no reason for grant- ing the exception in this instance. He also informed the Commission that he has seen the plans approved by the City and in his opinion the construction in the field does not conform to those plans. Mr. Cole cited reasons of aesthetics and safety as the grounds for his opposition, stating that the reduced setback would result in a blocked view for neighbors' drives as well as the applicant's own and would create a hazard for traffic and children in the area. He closed his statements by saying that he has no objection to the fountain the applicant has planned to construct in his front yard provided the wall is of legal height and is set back the legal distance. -3- 8-19-80 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission August 19, 1980 Page 4 Chairman Porter left the public hearing open. He requested that, since Mr. Cole would be unable to attend the next meeting on which this pro- posal will be heard, the staff include a summary of his remarks in the staff report for the conditional exception at that meeting. ON MOTION BY BANNISTER AND SECOND BY GREER CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 80-29 (APPEAL) WAS CONTINUED TO THE MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 16, 1980, AT THE REQUEST OF APPLICANT/APPELLANT, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Greer, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: Bauer ABSTAIN: None DISCUSSION ITEMS: TRACT 10658 Applicant: Hermansen/Woolsey Review of proposed fencing for a previously approved tract on Heil Avenue and Green Street. Savoy Bellavia explained that no fences had been proposed when the tract was originally approved. The fencing will consist of intermixed wood and wrought iron to be constructed within the private portion of the project and not upon public right-of-way; it will be maintained by the homeowners association. Planning staff find no problem with the construction of such fencing; however, the Fire Department has asked that they be given access approval. Frank Woolsey, developer, addressed the Commission to further outline his request. Commission discussion included consideration of architectural compat- ibility with the project and durability of the proposed fence materials. ON MOTION BY WINCHELL AND SECOND BY KENEFICK THE PROPOSED FENCING FOR TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 10658 WAS APPROVED SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE HUNTINGTON BEACH FIRE DEPARTMENT FOR ACCESS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Greer, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: Bauer ABSTAIN: None GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 80-2 June Catalano presented a general outline of the proposed amendment. She stated that the staff report will function as an environmental im- pact report which will be modified to reflect the Commission's concerns -4- 8-19-80 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission August 19, 1980 Page 5 and distributed through the State Clearinghouse for review. Staff hopes to have the amendment for public hearing for the second meeting in October. Chuck Clark reviewed the five areas of concern, describing the area, the issues involved, and the land use alternatives which are available. The sixth item is an administrative item which will be used as a means of implementing policies contained in the Housing Element for the provision of affordable housing; this item addresses density provisions in the residential districts and various approaches to density bonuses for developers. The fiscal impact is considered as an issue in all areas of concern, and the fiscal impact model is being run for all land use alternatives contained in the general plan amendment. The Commission discussed the areas of concern individually and at length. The following points were requested to be addressed in the report: 1) The future alignment of Gothard Street should be shown on any map of the area; 2) traffic on Goldenwest Street should be calculated to include projected traffic generated by the Seacliff IV project; 3) another alternative for Area of Concern 2.2 should be addressed to reflect medium density residential fronting on Beach Boulevard; 4) economic impacts of varying residential densities as opposed to impacts of other uses on a per capita basis should be included; 5) another alternative for the Adams/Beach area should be considered to block out the southeast corner so that portion abutting the stubbed -in feeder streets from other tracts would become low density residential with the portion to the north becoming medium density residential (with split land use designa- tion); 6) discussion of how traffic generated by the highrise pro- ject proposed at Warner and Beach (Area of Concern 2.3) should be integrated into the existing traffic flow; 7) all maps included in the amendment should be dated; and 8) clarification on adequacy of the sewer capacity in the Adams/Beach area should be provided. Commissioner Winchell added that she would like to see continued affordability addressed in regard to any density bonuses or developer's agreements and a report submitted on how affordable housing provisions are working out in other cities which have im- plemented them. COMPUTER MODEL OF CITY WATER SYSTEM ON MOTION BY WINCHELL AND SECOND BY KENEFICK THE COMMISSION RECEIVED AND FILED THE INFORMATION ON THE COMPUTER MODEL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Kenefick,Winchell, Porter, Greer, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: Bauer ABSTAIN: None -5- 8-19-80 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission August 19, 1980 Page 6 APPOINTMENTS TO PLANNING COMMISSION SUBCOMMITTEES Chairman Porter made the following appointments to Commission subcom- mittees: Subdivision Committee - Jean Schumacher Transportation Com- mittee - Beverly Kenefick Fire Station Master Plan Committee - Wes Bannister Industrial Com- mittee - Wes Bannister Ad Hoc Design Review - Mark Porter Ad Hoc Downtown Committee - Wes Bannister Oil Committee - Mark Porter, Bruce Greer DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ITEMS: Secretary Palin reviewed action at the City Council meeting of August 18, 1980, for the Commission's information. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: Commissioner Kenefick discussed the possibility of a Commission "retreat" to discuss broad areas of concern and policy. The Commission concurred and a date will be set later. Commissioner Greer requested that the Commission proceed to resolve the discrepancies between General Plan and zoning designations within the City. Commissioner Porter asked that certain provisions adopted in the Sub- division Map Act be incorporated into the City's ordinance codes. Mr. Porter also questioned the status of a proposed stock cooperative conversion in the City. After discussion, the Commission by unanimous vote on a motion by Porter and second by Greer directed staff to contact the State of California in an attempt to ascertain dates on which appli- cations or possible authorizations for this project had taken place. Commissioner Bannister discussed violations on parking space use in the M-1 developments. Staff will research. Commissioner Greer directed that the status of an oil well at Acacia Avenue and 22nd Street be investigated and a report brought back to the Commission. -6- 8-19-80 - P.C. 1 Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission August 19, 1980 Page 7 Commissioner Porter asked that the Attorney's representative at the meeting research the provision that the Planning Commis- sion is obligated to review the City's Capital Improvement Program. Legal counsel Matheis read Code Section 65101 which calls for periodic review of capital expenditures by the Plan- ning Commission. He noted, however, the "periodic" is not defined by that section of the code. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:05 p.m. Marcus M. Porter, ai an -7- 8-19-80 - P.C.