Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-06-02Approved July 7, 1981 MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Council Chambers - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California TUESDAY, JUNE 2, 1981 - 7:00 PM _COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Paone, Schumacher COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None CONSENT CALENDAR: TENTATIVE TRACT 10557 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 79-17 Request for Extension of Time Staff informed the Commission that this item had been removed from the agenda. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: Connie Mandic addressed the Commission on behalf of Equestrian Trails to offer to arrange tours of equestrian estate and condo- minium facilities in the area. She noted that these tours can be arranged on either an individual or group basis. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 81-12 (Appeal - Cont. from 5-19-81) Applicant: Jerry Janowski Request to permit a six (6) foot high block wall to encroach five (5) feet into the required front yard setback on property located on the west side of Marina View Street north of Los Patos. Staff reported that no further information had been received on this request. The public hearing was reopened, and closed when no one was present to speak for or against the proposal. The Commission discussed the lack of unusual circumstances on the property which could justify granting the exception request. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission June 2, 1981 Page 2 ON MOTION BY PAONE AND SECOND BY KENEFICK CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 81-12 WAS DENIED AND THE DECISION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING AD- JUSTMENTS UPHELD WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS FOR DENIAL: 1. Approval of this request would be a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the adjacent properties. In addition, the in- sufficiency of justifiable hardship as specified by the Hunt- ington Beach Ordinance Code supports the Planning Commission's denial of this request. 2. Insofar as the subject property is larger than a normal R1 lot, such conditional exception is not necessary for the preserva- tion or enjoyment of substantial property rights. AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Paone, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 81-05/TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 81-562 (Cont Applicant: Billy Neal Lavinger (Cont. from May 19, 1981) To permit a reduction in lot width from the required 60 feet to 58.5 feet and a reduction in lot area from the required 6000 square feet to 2676 square feet in order to create one lot from two existing parcels of land located on the east side of Pacific Coast Highway approximately 425 feet southeast of Admiralty Drive. Savoy Bellavia reported that a letter has been submitted from the Bank of America indicating that they would not sell a portion of their property adjacent to the subject parcel. The public hearing was reopened. Mr. Lavinger. addressed the Commission to state that he has, as dir- ected at the prior meeting, again contacted the Bank of America and they have said that they are not interested in either selling him a sufficient square footage of their property to enlarge his lot to legal size or in acquiring his parcel to add to their property. He again described the number of surrounding properties of similar size developed as residential, and urged the approval of his request. There were no other persons to speak for or against the proposal, and the public hearing was closed. The Commission discussed the size and shape of the subject property, the uses surrounding the parcel, and the access off the highway which would be required. -2- 6-2-81 - P.C. 1 Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission June 2, 1981 Page 3 ON MOTION BY WINCHELL AND SECOND BY PAONE CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 81-05 AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 81-562 WERE DENIED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS: C.E. NO. 81-05 1. Approval of this conditional exception would constitute a grant of special privilege not consistent with other proper- ties in the same zoning district. FINDINGS: TPM No. 81-562 1. The lot size (2676 square feet) does not conform to general and specific plans, and the specific plans set forth require- ments for a minimum 6000 square foot size for a standard R1 lot within the City. 2. Development of subject property would require that access to this one small lot of 2676 square feet be taken directly from a major highway through the community (Pacific Coast Highway) which carries an average of 39,000 vehicle trips per day and which is at this location on a horizontal curve with a posted speed of 45 miles per hour. Such location would subject residents on the site to excessive traffic hazard and traffic noise. AYES: Bannister, NOES: Kenefick, ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Winchell, Porter, Paone Schumacher CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-13/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 81-08/ NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 81-19 Applicant: Fred W. Burkett To permit the establishment of a horse stable and to permit re- lief from sections of the ordinance code pertaining to temporary horse stables for property located at the east side of the termin- us of Bolsa Chica Street. The public hearing was opened. Mr. Burkett, the applicant, indicated to the Commission that he was present to answer any questions they might have on the pro- posed operation. Connie Mandic reported that the Environmental Review Board had been concerned with this project because of its proximity to the Bolsa Chica Ecological Preserve, and had visited the site to investigate. The Board unanimously recommends approval of -the project, as it poses no detrimental effect to the environment -3- 6-2-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission June 2, 1981 Page 4 and offers a unique recreational opportunity in the community. The public hearing was closed. In the ensuing discussion, the Commission considered the -uniqueness of the site (i.e., its remoteness from other development, the lack of a paved street access, and the lack of visual intrusion upon other development); the temporary nature of the use; and the provision for five-year review of all approvals for temporary horse stables of this nature. ON MOTION BY BANNISTER AND SECOND BY KENEFICK NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 81-19 WAS ADOPTED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Paone, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ON MOTION BY BANNISTER AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-13 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDI- TIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS: 1. Operation of the use will not create a detrimental effect upon the general health, welfare, and safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood, inasmuch as the use is compatible with the surrounding area and in conformance with'the City's General Plan. 2. The use is compatible with existing uses in the surrounding area and does not detract from the rural environment in the area. 3. The site plan and design of the proposed new facilities are har- monious with adjacent structures and uses in that they conform with the existing facilities. 4. The arrangement, access, and parking for the use have not created an undue traffic problem. However, the Traffic Division of the Department of Public Works recommends that the parking area be expanded to accommodate 50 vehicles. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan received and dated March 23, 1981 shall be the approved layout. 2. The parking area shall be expanded to accommodate 50 vehicles in accordance with Public Works Department standards. 3. This conditional use permit approval shall be valid only for a five-year period from the date of approval. -4- 6-2-81 - P.C. 1 Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission June 2, 1981 Page 5 4. During the five-year period for which this approval is in force, the Planning Commission reserves the right to rescind said approval in the event of any violation of the terms of this approval or violation of the applicable zoning laws. Any such decision to rescind shall be preceded by notice to the applicant and a public hearing, and shall be based upon specific findings. AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Paone, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ON MOTION BY BAN14ISTER AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER CONDITIONAL EX- CEPTION NO. 81-08 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS• 1. The granting of Conditional Exception No. 81-08 will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare or injurious to the surrounding uses in the neighbor- hood, since exceptional circumstances apply to the land which preclude detrimental effects. 2. The requested exception will allow the continuation of a pre- viously established stable which is compatible with surround- ing properties and which does not detract from the general environment of the area, and therefore the exception ensures the.preservation and use of substantial property rights. 3. Because of the location of the site upon which the use is pro- posed, exceptional circumstances exist that do not generally apply to other properties or classes of uses in the same dis- trict due to the remoteness of the site. AYES: Bannister, Winchell, Porter, Paone, Schumacher NOES: Kenefick ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-9/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 81-07 Applicant: John D. Lusk & Son To permit the establishment of a medical care facility in an ex- isting industrial tract and to permit parking on neighboring prop- erty to satisfy parking requirements for said facility. The subject property is located at the southwest corner of Springdale and Engineer and the proposed parking is located on the south side of Transistor Lane and on the east and west sides of Connector Lane. Savoy-Bellavia reported that a letter has been received from the applicant requesting withdrawal of the above requests. -5- 6-2-81 - P.C. Minutes,-H.B. Planning Commission June 2,-1981 Page 6 ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY BANNISTER THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACCEPTED THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR WITHDRAWAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-9 AND CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 81-07,'BY THE FOLLOW- ING VOTE: AYES: ---.Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Paone, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None PRECISE PLAN OF STREET ALIGNMENT NO. 81-1 (Cont. from 5-19-81) Applicant: Initiated by Department of Development Services A request to align a private street in a 12-acre site located on the south side of Talbert Avenue approximately 450 feet west of Beach Boulevard, for the purpose of providing access to said site. The public hearing was opened. George Wood of Woodtree Development, one of the major property owners of the acreage, addressed the Commission to concur with the staff's recommendations on the precise plan. There were no other persons to speak in regard to the matter, and the public hearing was closed. Savoy Bellavia reviewed the history of this parcel. One of the orig- inal conditions of approval for the "Q" zoning designation had been that a plan be submitted for the total area; however, one of the major owners has attempted consolidation without success, nor has he been able to obtain concurrence from the other owners for any configura- tion of development. He has submitted -a design which divides the area into four distinct parcels, each of which is capable of being dev- eloped independently as'long each conforms to the precise plan of alignment for the private street, if it is adopted. He is asking approval of this approach in lieu of the original requirement for con- solidation. The Commission reviewed the proposal. Commissioner Winchell asked what mechanism could assure that the important issues pointed out by staff are addressed in review of future applications on the property, and was informed by,staff required research of the precise plan as well as the need to comply with the planned development ordinances will guarantee that these issues are considered. ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY WINCHELL THE COMMISSION APPROVED PRECISE PLAN OF STREET ALIGNMENT NO. 81-1, BY THE ADOPTION OF RESOLU- TION -NO. 1274, FOR RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter,_Paone, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None -6- 6-2-81 - P.C. 1 r�111 Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission June 2, 1981 Page 7 CODE AMENDMENT NO. 81-2 (Cont. from May 19, 1981) Initiated by Development Services An amendment to Article 953 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code which will allow outside storage and special criteria for establishing said uses within the industrial district. Savoy Bellavia outlined the purpose of the ordinance change, which spells out criteria and the permitting process for outside uses in the industrial district and contains other minor modifi- cations and clean-up items to clarify the code requirements. The Commission reviewed and discussed the proposed amendment. ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER CODE AMENDMENT NO. 81-2, IN THE FORM DATED MARCH 15, 1981, WAS APPROVED FOR RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION, BY THE FOLLOW- ING VOTE: AYES: Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Paone, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: Bannister ABSTAIN: None CODE AMENDMENT NO. 81-5 (Cont. from May 19, 1981) Initiated by Development Services An amendment to Article 915 and Article 935 to clarify and illus- trate specific zoning requirements pertaining to street visibility, sight angle, setback and yard requirements for the Oldtown Specific Plan and the Townlot Specific Plan, respectively. Secretary Palin outlined the general intent of the code amendment and noted that 81-5b will also be written and inserted into the appropriate code sections; this addition will deal with the double zero side yard concept proposed earlier by a developer. He noted that it is the staff's feeling that the double zero should re- quire entitlement under an administrative review and described some of the features that staff has proposed to incorporate into the amendment, such as variations in front yard setback to compen- sate for the zero construction on both property lines. He empha- sized that the code amendment does not propose to change the present percentage of allowed lot coverage nor the method of det- ermining that coverage. The public hearing was opened. Fleetwood Joiner addressed the Commission to concur with staff's proposals with the exception of site coverage. He proposed a "volume of air" criterion which he said would provide a developer with more flexibility in siting a house on the small downtown lots, would allow construction of the type of dwelling which is -7- 6-2-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission June 2, 1981 Page 8 in demand, and would provide more variation in front setback and roofline for the three-story units which are being built in the area. Robert Corona also spoke to the Commission to urge consideration of the proposal presented by Mr. Joiner. There were no other persons present to speak to the matter, and the public hearing was closed. = Staff and Commission discussed the proposal. Secretary Palin informed the Commission that proposals have been made before to increase the lot coverage in the specific plan areas; however, the increase in open space requirements in direct ratio to square footage of construction makes it impossible -to meet code requirements if larger houses are allowed. In regard to the plan submitted by Mr. Joiner, staff would need to test and research the "air volume" concept before endorsing it. Commissioners reviewed the open space square footage and dimen- sion requirements, and suggested the possibility of tying recreation space requirements to the number of bedrooms instead of the square footage of the building, gearing the requirements to the number or people who would be inhabiting the house instead of its size. Com- missioner Paone noted that perhaps calculating a percentage up to a 2,000 square foot house size and adding open space square footage after that only if the dwelling exceeded three bedrooms might be a workable alternative, providing a better living environment while not provid- ing occupancy for a greater number of people. 'He added -that in -his view the vertical dimension for'the partially enclosed open space as proposed by Mr. Joiner at 7 feet 6 inches was not adequate and should be increased to 8 or 8 and one-half feet. secretary Palin said that the staff will -investigate the Newport - Beach Code (referred to by Mr. Joiner -'as an example of a city -using" the "volume -of air" -concept) and return to the Commission with an analysis of it and Mr. Joiner's proposal at the June 16, 1981 meeting. Development Services staff and the office of the City Attorney should be ready with precise code language at the first meeting in July if the Commission makes a determination on the 16th of how this amend- ment should be written. Commissioner Winchell asked that staff prepare a list of similar projects,for the Commission to investigate. ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY BANNISTER CODE AMENDMENT NO. 81-5 WAS CONTINUED TO THE MEETING OF JULY 7, 1981, TO ALLOW STAFF TO PRESENT ITS ANALYSIS AT THE JUNE 16, 1981 MEETING, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Kenefick-, Winchell,.Porter, Paone, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None -8- 6-2-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission June 2, 1981 Page 9 CODE AMENDMENT NO. 81-6 (Cont. from May 19, 1981 Initiated by Development Services An amendment to Article 979, Off -Street Parking, to propose establishment of a provision to allow compact parking spaces as a portion of the required offstreet parking. Savoy Bellavia briefly outlined the proposal, which would apply to residential, commercial, and industrial complexes in the City with the number of parking spaces as the criterion for its application (100 spaces in a residential complex, 25 or more in a commercial or an industrial complex). Commissioner Porter noted that nothing seems to indicate that these compact spaces should be identified as such and suggested that they be marked. The public hearing was opened. James Troxel, representing the ownership of Huntington Center, addressed the provisions of the amendment, saying that a maximum of 25 percent is inadequate in light of the number of compact cars on the highways at present and that perhaps a higher maxi- mum percentage could be -allowed and adjusted depending on indi- vidual project evaluation. He also questioned the wording which seemed to allocate the compact spaces only to employees and asked for clarification on that point, as well as question- ing the need for three feet of additional landscaping for com- pact spaces. Staff replied that the "employee parking" wording had been in response to Public Works concerns about aisle widths and the change -over through a working day in the compact parking spaces; it had been inserted to aim at long-term vs. short-term use of such spaces. Wendell Sparks, Vice President of Property Management for the Huntington Beach Company, also spoke in regard to the percent- ages of compact parking allowed by other cities in California and recommended a 40 percent ratio for the proposed code amend- ment. There were no other persons to speak for or against the code amendment, and the public hearing was closed. Commission discussion ensued. Staff was asked to revise the language in the amendment in regard to the landscaping to reflect the purpose of making sure that no individual driveway would have a portion of its stalls compact and a portion standard size. It, was suggested that perhaps designated employee parking could be permitted at a much higher ratio (perhaps even 50 percent) because of the much lower rate of turnover during a working day, with a lesser ratio permitted for customer parking. Commissioners Schumacher and Kenefick discussed the discrimin- atory nature of the amendment and indicated a preference that the percentage be left at the staff -suggested 25 percent. -9- 6-2-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission June 2, 1981 Page 10 After further intensive review, it was the consensus of the Commission that further study was needed and the following areas of research were outlined for staff's direction: 1) Information on how the park- ing structure at South Coast Plaza is working; 2) Experiences of other cities on results obtained from the use of compact parking spaces in industrial/commercial as well as residential complexes; 3) Information on the percentage of compact cars actually on the high- ways at this time; 4) Research on the width needed for compact park- ing stalls. Analysis of the Commission's suggestions on the parking ratio to be permitted for compact stalls and the change in the lang- uage on landscaping is also required. ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY BANNISTER CODE AMENDMENT NO. 81-6 WAS CONTINUED TO THE MEETING OF JULY 7, 1981, TO PERMIT SUBMITTAL OF THE REQUESTED INFORMATION, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Paone, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None CODE AMENDMENT NO. 81-7 Initiated by Development Services An amendment to Articles 951 and 953 proposing to modify the "Construc- tion by Phase" provision to reduce the 25 percent requirement to a smaller percentage for larger projects. Savoy Bellavia outlined the code change proposal for the Commission, pointing out that it will give the staff and the developer more flexibility under the mixed use development standards. The amendment also proposes to delete the provision which had allowed the owners of existing industrial complexes to apply for a mixed use project. The public hearing was opened. Merle Pautsch, representing McDonnel Douglas, addressed the Commission to concur with the recommendations of staff. There were no other persons present to speak to the Commission on this matter, and the public hearing was closed. Commission discussion ensued. ON MOTION BY SCHUMACHER AND SECOND BY KENEFICK CODE AMENDMENT NO. 81-7 WAS APPROVED FOR RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, BY THE FOL- LOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Paone, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None -10- 6-2-81 - P.C. �J 1 Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission June 2, 1981 Page 11 CODE AMENDMENT NO. 81-8 Initiated by Development Services An amendment to Article 943, Community Business District, and Article 947, Highway Commercial District, of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code proposing to allow gasoline dispensing in con- junction with mini -markets. Savoy Bellavia reviewed the proposed amendment, pointing out that it will allow the mini -market use to operate in conjunction only with the gas -dispensing function of a station; none of the other uses normally found at a service station will be permitted. The amendment also will require a conditional use permit for each such use proposed. The public hearing was opened. Sam Blick, representing Atlantic Richfield, addressed the Commis- sion to concur with staff's recommendations with the exception of the requirement for a service window, which he felt was not necessary to the operation of the facility. There were no other persons to speak in regard to the matter, and the public hearing was closed. Staff reported that the convenience window had been included to make it easier for gas buyers to pay without waiting in line in- side the store. The Commission reviewed the signing provisions. ON MOTION BY BANNISTER AND SECOND BY KENEFICK CODE AMENDMENT NO. 81-8 WAS APPROVED AS SUBMITTED FOR RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Paone, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None DISCUSSION ITEMS: ZONE CHANGE 78-14 Review of information submitted from the law firm of Virtue and Scheck and the City Attorney's office regarding the subject zone change. Commissioner Paone announced that he would abstain from the dis- cussion and determination on this item. -11- 6-2-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission June 2, 1981 Page 12 Chairman Porter noted that the requested memorandum opinion had been received from the City Attorney's-office. The Commission, staff, and the proponent's legal counsel discussed the history of the site, the alternative actions available, and the compliance or lack thereof with the originally imposed conditions of approval. A MOTION WAS MADE BY PORTER AND SECONDED BY KENEFICK TO DIRECT STAFF TO ACCEPT USE PERMIT NO. 81-9 FOR PROCESSING AND INCLUDE A CONDITION FOR REQUIRING DEDICATION OF VEHICULAR ACCESSS ON 17TH STREET TO THE CITY. Legal counsel Art Folger assured the Commission that requiring dedi- cation of vehicular access was a proper condition to apply to a use permit. Secretary Palin pointed out that no tentative parcel map has been recorded to separate the two lots covered by Use Permit 81-9 from the other two corner lots which were also a part of Zone Change No. 78-14, and a motion would be necessary to extend the Q zoning on all the property involved in that zone change. He also explained the staff's position that the conditions of approval have not been com- plied with and the qualified zoning should not, therefore, be removed. The motion was withdrawn by both the maker and the second. A MOTION WAS MADE BY WINCHELL AND SECONDED BY KENEFICK TO EXTEND THE "Q"C-3 ZONING FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR. Extensive discussion took place on the non-compliance with the orig- inal zoning. Chairman Porter discussed the events which have led to the present impasse on the property and expressed the opinion -that the problems are self-imposed by the original owner through the sale of part of a parcel he had presented as an integrated development and through other failures to comply with the conditions of the qualified zoning. Commissioner Winchell withdrew her motion. ON MOTION BY WINCHELL AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO PREPARE THE NECESSARY ORDINANCE CHANGE TO REVERT THE PROPERTIES COVERED BY ZONE CHANGE NO. 78-14 BACK TO TOWNLOT SPECIFIC PLAN, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Schumacher NOES: Bannister ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Paone SMALL LOT PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT REPORT Savoy Bellavia briefly outlined the three areas the staff feels should be amended in a small lot PRD: Common open space, main recreation areas, and private accessway width. It is the.staff's intention to -12- 6-2-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission June 2, 1981 Page 13 retain the existing planned residential development ordinance and add separate standards for the small developments in these sections. Upon questioning from the Commission, he said that no change to the present requirements as far as private open space is contemplated. The concept was reviewed by the Commission. Commissioner Paone asked if some proposal could be included involving the provi- sion of affordable housing as a trade-off for reduction of the PRD standards for these small developments. Also requested by the Commission were a fiscal impact report for the small lot condos, if possible; a chart comparing the requirements of Articles 932 and 936 to provide an idea of the differences in the requirements for apartments and condos; and a graph of the remaining areas of the City where a small lot condo ordinance might apply. Staff reported that this information will be sub- mitted as soon as possible, and the ordinance will be before the Commission at the second meeting in July. REVIEW OF CITY COUNCIL AGENDA: Secretary Palin reviewed the action taken at the City Council meeting of June 1, 1981, for the Commission's information. CONDITIONAL EXCEPTIONS 81-17 AND 81-18 Staff reported that these applications, referred back to the Commission by the City Council, will be continued to be heard at -the -same meeting at which the code amendment pertaining to the zero setback is heard. PRELIMINARY REPORT ON GAME MACHINES WITHIN THE CITY: Jeanine Frank reviewed the report with the Commission. Staff was asked to expand the report to include information on the possibility of licensing all machines no matter who owns them, a provision to regulate their numbers by available public area inside a store instead of the actual store square footage, the possibility of requiring supervision for all machines, and information on the legality of prohibiting placement of such machines in businesses which sell liquor. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ITEMS: Savoy Bel'lavia reported that the Subdivision Committee meeting has been changed to Friday, June S at 8:30 a.m. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: Commissioner Kenefick asked that staff investigate a use in a mixed development project. She also discussed the appointment -13- 6-2-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission June 2, 1981 Page 14 of a seventh member to the Commission. ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY PAONE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO DRAFT A LETTER FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO THE CITY COUNCIL REQUESTING THAT A NEW COMMISSIONER BE APPOINTED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Paone, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Upon the suggestion of Commissioner Schumacher, the Commission dir- ected that a letter be transmitted to Mrs. Mandic's Equestrian Trails Organization expressing interest in the proposed tours of horse facilities. She also discussed the requirement for street trees in residential developments. Commissioner Porter asked that staff investigate the proliferation of "sandwich shops" in the industrial area at Graham and McFadden. The Commission adjourned at 12:00 midnight. -..,o q) = ames W. Palin, Secretary Marcus M. �Prter, air an :df -14- 6-2-81 - P.C.