Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-01-06Approved January 20, 1981 MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Council Chambers - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California TUESDAY, JANUARY 6, 1981 - 7:00 PM COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Greer, Schumacher COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Bauer CONSENT CALENDAR: ON MOTION BY WINCHELL AND SECOND BY KENEFICK THE CONSENT CALEN- DAR, CONSISTING OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF DECEMBER 16, 1980, A REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME ON TENTATIVE TRACT 5419, AND A REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 74-18, WAS APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Greer, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: Bauer ABSTAIN: None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Lorraine Faber, speaking for the Amigos de Bolsa Chica, addressed the Commission in regard to the steps in the County's planning for the Bolsa Chica. These include the removal of the present "reserve" designation, the Local Coastal Plan, and a General Plan Amendment to put specific zoning on various portions of the area. Although happening concurrently, Ms. Faber indicated that these three processes must be participated in separately, with the "reserve" removal being the necessary first step. She urged that the City make every effort to participate in the process during its formative stages to make sure that its input is considered and a dialogue established between the City and the County. June Catalano reported on the consultation that has been taking place between City staff and the County's local coastal planners. The Commission discussed ..how, a procedure could best be set up to maintain continuing contact between the two agencies. Secretary Palin indicated that staff can summarize what has al- Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission January 6, 1981 Page 2 ready happened, a schedule of proposed meetings can be submitted to the Commission, and several copies of the County's Local Coastal Plan EIR made available to the Commission for review. Chairman Porter emphasized that the Commission wishes all points of conflict which may exist between what the County is planning in the area and what the City has set forth.in its own Local Coastal Plan to be made clear to the County Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 80-28/TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 11272 Applicant: Donald B. Ayres Jr./Roger DeYoung (Cont. from 12-2-80) A request for construction of a 76-unit condominium development on 5.24 acres located at the northwest corner of Atlanta Avenue and Delaware Street. Savoy Bellavia reported that the applicants have requested a further continuance to allow additional review of this project., ON MOTION BY BANNISTER AND SECOND BY KENEFICK CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 80-28 AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 11272 WERE CONTINUED, AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT, FOR A 90-DAY PERIOD AND STAFF DIRECTED TO READVERTISE THE NEXT HEARING, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Greer, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: Bauer ABSTAIN: None ZONE CHANGE NO. 80-18 Applicant: Lindborg/Dahl Investors To permit a change of zone from R1 and Al to R5 on 10.13'acres loc- ated on the west side of Magnolia Street approximately 500 feet north of Warner Avenue. Savoy Bellavia informed the Commission that the applicants intend to develop the property as office/professional. He also noted that the staff is recommending that a condition be included to require a 50- foot setback off Magnolia Street, as this setback has already been established on the commercial property directly to the south. The public hearing was opened. George Ruis spoke to the Commission to state that in his opinion there is sufficient commercial and industrial area already existing in the city. -2- 1-6-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission January 6, 1981 Page 3 Bob Davis, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission to describe the project and explain the reasons for deciding to build a condo/office development. He discussed the status of the negotiations between his company and the County of Orange on the covering of the flood control channel to provide another access to the site, saying that the preliminary plans have been agreed to and an agreement is to go to the City Council at its January 19, 1981 meeting. Janet Twynam, resident of the neighboring residential tract, asked that no access take place between the proposed project and the adjacent R1 area. She also questioned the need for more office space when buildings in the area are vacant at the pre- sent time. There were no other persons to speak for or against the matter, and the public hearing was closed. Chairman Porter suggested that a conditional zoning be applied to the property to cover the setback and to provide some kind of mitigation of the traffic flow problem. He added that coordina- tion with the City of Fountain Valley appeared to be desirable. After Commission discussion, Secretary Palin suggested that the staff be directed to readvertise for a "Q" zoning to cover setbacks from both Magnolia and the R1 property, to resolve the ingress/ingress to the project with a restriction on access to or from the residential area, to provide reciprocal easements on existing drive, to restrict the use to office/professional, and to require a conditional use permit application for the ultimate construction phase. The Commission concurred. ON MOTION BY WINCHELL AND SECOND BY BANNISTER ZONE CHANGE NO. 80-18 WAS CONTINUED TO THE FIRST MEETING IN FEBRUARY AND STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO READVERTISE FOR APPLICATION OF THE "Q" SUFFIX AS OUTLINED BY THE SECRETARY ABOVE, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Greer, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: Bauer ABSTAIN: None ZONE CHANGE NO. 80-19 Applicant: Mola Development Corporation To add a multi -story suffix to an existing C4 zoning designation on 10.18 acres of property located on the southwest corner of Beach Boulevard -and Warner Avenue. The public hearing was opened, and closed when no persons were present to speak for or against the proposal. -3- 1-6-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission January 6, 1981 Page 4 Brief discussion ensued. ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY BANNISTER ZONE CHANGE NO. 80-19 WAS APPROVED FOR RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCI. WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS: 1. The proposed zone change is consistent with surrounding land uses because they are generally commercial. 2. The proposed zone change is consistent with the General Plan, which is general commercial combined with multi -story suffix. AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Greer, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: Bauer ABSTAIN: None CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 80-7/TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 80-579 Applicant: Dorothy Higginbotham To permit the creation of two 25 foot wide lots in lieu of the code - required 30 foot wide lots on property located on the northeast corner of 12th Street and Pecan Avenue. Savoy Bellavia outlined the history of the subject parcels, noting that applicant is requesting that the property be allowed to go back to its original 25-foot configuration. He also added that the lot split will not increase the allowed density of construction. The public hearing was opened. Leo Merritt, property owner in the area, inquired if every 50-foot lot owner will be required to go through this process in order to subdivide his lot. He also questioned the legality of the advertis- ing process for the action which placed these properties in the Townlot district. Savoy Bellavia explained that each individual lot would be required to file separately under existing regulations and that the advertising had been legally done through two half - page newspaper ads in 1977 at the time the Townlot-District.desig- nation was imposed. The public hearing was closed. Commission discussion included the comparative desirability of duplexes set side -by -side on a 50-foot lot as opposed to single- family residences constructed on two 25-foot lots and the question of fairness to property owners whose property constitutes a four block enclave in an area developed on small lots. Commissioner Schumacher noted that although a precedent had been set in the area the Commission should not compound it by repeating a process which -4- 1-6-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission January 6, 1981 Page 5 she described as rezoning through exception. Richard Cook and Gary Brown, representing the applicants in this and the following application, addressed the Commission to ask for parity with the surrounding area. A MOTION WAS MADE BY KENEFICK AND SECONDED BY WINCHELL TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 80-7 AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 80-579 SUBJECT TO THE FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS SUGGESTED BY STAFF. MOTION FAILED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell NOES: Porter, Greer, Schumacher ABSENT: Bauer ABSTAIN: None Further discussion took place, with Chairman Porter suggest- ing that a more general solution should be reached because in his opinion the conditional exception approach is inappro- priate. After review, the staff was directed to pursue a general plan amendment to bring the properties in this four - block area into consistency between the zoning and the General Plan designations. ON MOTION BY SCHUMACHER AND SECOND BY GREER CONDITIONAL EX- CEPTION NO. 80-7 AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 80-579 WERE DENIED FOR THE FOLLOWING REASON, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDING FOR DENIAL: The proposed division of property is inconsistent with Gen- eral Plans for the area. AYES: Winchell, Porter, Greer, Schumacher NOES: Bannister, Kenefick ABSENT: Bauer ABSTAIN: None CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 80-09/TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 80-582 Applicant: Jack and Shirley Rogers To permit a subdivision of a 50-foot lot into two 25-foot lots in lieu of the code -required 30 foot width on property located on the southwest corner of Eleventh Street and Acacia Avenue. The public hearing was opened. Dick Hall, engineer, expressed the opinion that not allowing the lot split in this instance and the previous one would penalize the property owners and would result in rental hous- ing in the area as opposed to owner -occupied dwellings. -5- 1-6-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission January 6,--1981 Page 6 Gary Brown addressed the Commission to urge approval of ,the request. There were no other persons,to speak for or against,.the proposal, and the public hearing was closed. Commission discussion ensued. Legal counsel Jim Georges informed the Commission that only the tentative parcel map must be found in conformance with the General Plan - the conditional exception can be granted on a finding of hardship. The possibility of,amending the General Plan was reviewed. - A MOTION WAS MADE BY KENEFICK AND SECONDED BY BANNISTER TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 80-09 AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 80-582 WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS AS SUGGESTED BY STAFF. MOTION FAILED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: - AYES: Bannister, Kenefick NOES: Winchell, Porter, Greer, Schumacher ABSENT:- Bauer ABSTAIN: None ON MOTION BY SCHUMACHER AND SECOND BY GREER CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 80-09 AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 80-582 WERE DENIED FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: REASONS FOR DENIAL: 1. The proposed division of property is, -inconsistent with General Plans for the area. - 2. No hardship has been demonstrated.' AYES: Winchell, Porter, -Greer, Schumacher NOES: Bannister, Kenefick ABSENT: Bauer ABSTAIN: None ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY GREER THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO PURSUE A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO BRING THE FOUR -BLOCK AREA IN WHICH THESE PROPERTIES ARE LOCATED INTO CONSISTENCY BETWEEN ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Greer, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: Bauer ABSTAIN: None DISCUSSION ITEMS: CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 80-29 (Request for Reconsideration) - Applicant: Webb Morrow Francis Mitchell, attorney for the applicant, addressed the Commission to discuss the accuracy of the information which had been presented -6- 1-6-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission January 6, 1981 Page 7 at the previous meeting on this matter, to review other excep- tions which he alleged have been granted on Trinidad Island, and to request a reopening of the public hearing.because of the fact that the applicant had not had an equal opportunity to present his case. The Commission discussed its previous action and the reasons it had been taken, the history of the hearings, and the informa- tion submitted by the City Attorney's office in regard to the City's options in correcting the violation. Commissioner Kenefick reported on her personal observations at the site of the subject dwelling saying that the conditions on the site justified the Commission's denial of the exception. A motion was made by Winchell and seconded by Kenefick that the Commis- sion not reconsider the conditional exception; this motion was withdrawn when it was determined that no motion was needed. By general consensus, the Commission decided not to reconsider the request. Mr. Morrow subsequently asked for and was denied permission to address the Commission in regard to his project. GENERAL PLAN INTERPRETATION: Applicability of Multi -Story Designation to a Parcel at Beach Boulevard and Stark Avenue Applicant: Greenwich Development June Catalano outlined the history of the adoption of the Multi - Story Policy Plan and described the locations of the multi -story nodes within the community. The applicants are requesting con- sideration for inclusion of their property at Beach and Stark into one of these nodes, the boundaries of which are not precisely fixed on the locational map. Ms. Catalano said that the intent of the policy plan had not been to include or exclude specific properties; this would be accomplished by zoning to implement multi -story within specific property lines as determined by the Commission. In the discussion which followed, the Commission's principal concern was with the possible "domino" effect which could result from the indefinite boundaries of the nodes. Commissioner Kenefick pointed out that if the node is enlarged to include the subject property there would be no reason not to include also other properties in the same general area whose owners ap- plied for multi -story, and this could result in a much higher percentage of multi -story construction in the city than had originally been the intent. ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO INFORM THE GREENWICH DEVELOPMENT COMPANY TO MAKE A FORMAL APPLICATION FOR A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THEIR PROP- ERTY; STAFF WAS ALSO DIRECTED TO REVIEW THE MULTI -STORY POLICY PLAN WITH A VIEW TO PROVIDING MORE SPECIFIC BOUNDARIES TO THE MULTI -STORY NODES, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: -7- 1-6-80 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission January 6, 1981 Page 8 AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Greer, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: Bauer ABSTAIN: None CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Secretary Palin reviewed the actions taken at the Council meeting of January 5, 1981, for the information of the Commission. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 79-22 (Request for Revision to Condition) Applicant: Jerwel Development The applicant has requested that the condition of approval which requires that a planned sign program be submitted prior to the issu- ance of building permits be modified to require submittal of this program prior to occupancy of the first building within an office/ commercial complex within the North Huntington Beach Specific Plan. After brief review it was the consensus of the Commission that it did not wish to act upon this request at this meeting, having received the information so late. Staff was directed to bring the matter up again at the next regular meeting.and in the interim discuss with the applicants the possibility of providing a preliminary signing plan dealing with sizes and locations of signs only, with a subsequent signing program to cover the other issues. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ITEMS: Savoy Bellavia announced a Subdivision Committee meeting on Wednes- day, January 7, at 8:30 a.m. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Tim Paone discussed the multi -story node concept. COMMISSION ITEMS: Commissioner Kenefick described the hazardous traffic situation on Warner Avenue between Goldenwest and Edwards Streets. Bruce Gilmer of the Department of Public Works discussed the recent restriping of Warner Avenue which had been intended to partly alleviate the problems; he noted, however, that the ultimate solution would be a raised median to control traffic turning movements. The meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m. rcus M. orte hai an 1-6-80 - P.C. t