Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-06-16Approved July 7, 1981 1 MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Council Chambers - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California TUESDAY, JUNE 16, 1981 - 7:00 PM _COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Schumacher, Mahaffey COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Bannister, Paone Chairman Porter led the Commission and staff in welcoming Planning Commissioner Dan Mahaffey, recently appointed to fill a vacancy on the Commission. CONSENT CALENDAR: ON MOTION BY WINCHELL AND SECOND BY KENEFICK THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 19, 1981 WERE APPROVED AS TRANSCRIBED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: Bannister, Paone ABSTAIN: Mahaffey ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY WINCHELL A ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 77-23, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 78-37, AND TENTATIVE TRACTS 10067, 10068, AND 10069 WAS GRANTED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Schumacher, Mahaffey NOES: None ABSENT: Bannister, Paone ABSTAIN: None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-14 Applicant: Lindborg/Dahl Investors, Inc. To permit an office condominium complex to be constructed on 8.5 acres located at the west side of Magnolia north of Warner Avenue. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission June 16, 1981 Page 2 Savoy Bellavia reported that the applicant has requested a continu- ance to the first meeting in July in order to allow time to make revisions to the plan. There were persons in the audience, however, who wished to comment on the proposal, and the public hearing was opened. Michael Franzon, resident of O'Connor Drive, addressed the Commission to discuss the matter of possible street connection between the subject project and the adjoining residential tract to the west. A woman in the audience also discussed the question of a possible signal at Asari and Magnolia, citing the difficulty residents already have in leaving or entering the tract from that arterial. There were no other persons present to speak in regard to the pro- posal, and the public hearing was continued to July 21, 1981. The Commission reviewed the tentative agenda for the first meeting in July. ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-14 WAS CONTINUED TO THE MEETING OF JULY 21, 1981, BY THE FOL- LOWING VOTE: AYES: Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Schumacher, Mahaffey NOES: None ABSENT: Bannister, Paone ABSTAIN: None CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-17 Applicant: Ronald Kaufman To permit establishment of an amusement center to be located on the south side of Edinger Avenue approximately 100 feet west of Newland Street in an existing shopping center. The public hearing was opened and closed when no one was present to speak for or against the proposal. Commissioner Mahaffey reported that he had visited the site and in his opinion it would be a good location for the subject business, with adequate parking to accommodate patrons. The Commission reviewed the project, considering the distance to the nearest residential units (a minimum distance of 25 feet). ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY WINCHELL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-17 WAS DENIED FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS FOR DENIAL: 1. The proposed use has a detrimental effect upon the general health, safety and welfare, and convenience of persons residing or working -2- 6-16-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission June 16, 1981 Page 3 in the neighborhood, or is detrimental to the value of the prop- erty and improvements in the neighborhood (9841.4(a)) based on the following facts: The proposed amusement arcade is not compatible with the apartment complex located to the south and west of the subject site because of additional pedestrian and bicycle traffic which could be generated by the amusement arcade. 2. The proposed use is not compatible with existing or other proposed uses in the neighborhood (9841.4(d)) based on the following facts: The proposed amusement arcade is not compatible with the apartments located to the west of the subject site because of the noise that would be generated by patrons visiting the amusement arcade. AYES: Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Schumacher NOES: Mahaffey ABSENT: Bannister, Paone ABSTAIN: None AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 73-1 Initiated by the City of Huntington Beach Amendment to explore the possibility of deleting the closure of Taylor Drive from the Taylor/Beach Specific Plan. George Tindall, City Engineer, informed the Commission that this item is before them at the request of the City Council in response to petitions and complaints received as a result of the temporary closure of Taylor Drive. He reviewed the history of the specific plan, noting that when it was adopted in 1973 the property to the north was zoned industrial and the closure of Taylor was included in the specific plan in order to prevent a mix of industrial, commercial, and residential traffic in the area. Since that time, however, the area to the north has been rezoned and the need to separate the traffic is no longer a problem. Mr. Tindall cited the inconvenience which has resulted to the residents of the area and the difficulty of getting onto Main Street at either Ellis or Delaware as reasons for Public Works recommendation that the street be reopened. He also said that a traffic signal at Ellis and Main should be under construction late this fall and discus- sions are under way in regard to a traffic signal at Taylor and Beach Boulevard, with the possibility that it may go in in approxi- mately two years. The justification for this signal would obviously have to be re-evaluated in the event that Taylor is closed permanently. The public hearing was opened. -3- 6-16-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission June 16, 1981 Page 4 The following persons addressed the Commission in support of remov- ing the barricades and leaving Taylor Drive open to Beach Boulevard: Kurt Luebke, 18321 Delaware Street Dawn Kalbo, 18202 Sharon Lane Clare Tomkin, 7731 Ontario Drive Trudy Adams, 7671 Alberta Drive Barbara Horowitz, 18312 Pammy Lane Mr. Vascari, No address given Fred Gruenbaum, No address given Jack Grimes, No address given Resident of 18156 Taylor Drive Terry Growelle; 7731 Ontario Drive John Bartok, 18196 Sharon Lane Phillip Gentry, No address given Jane Morris, 7672 Alberta Crive Michael King, 7841 Taylor Drive David Campbell, No address given Carol Elston, 7702 Alberta Drive Those who asked that Taylor be left open cited the inconvenience of having to drive extra distances to get out of the tract, the difficult and unsafe conditions on Ellis Avenue and Delaware Street at their intersections with Main Street, and increased response time for emer- gency vehicles which is caused by the closure. The consensus of these speakers was that the closure benefited only a few and incon- venienced many, and that a better approach would be to try to find some way to control the traffic from the auto dealerships and to in- stall safety features such as stop signs, traffic bumps, etc., to slow down the traffic on Taylor. The following persons addressed the Commission in support of leaving Taylor Drive closed, as originally required by the Taylor/Beach Specific Plan: Ed Blumenstock, 7708 Taylor Drive Verne Williams, 18352 Delaware Street Beverly Lawson, 7672 Taylor Drive Craig Kaleff, 7712 Talyor Drive Brenda-McLurie, Resident on Taylor Drive Elena Smith, 7762 Taylor Drive Those who favored the closure of Taylor Drive pointed out that it is much safer now -for children to use the park than it was before the street was closed and that the traffic situation within the tract has been improved. It was the consensus of those favoring closure that the inconvenience of longer trips was made up for by ■ the increased quiet and -safety benefits to the neighborhood. The public hearing was closed. -4- 6-16-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission June 16, 1981 Page 5 In its discussion of the proposal, the Commission reviewed the history of the specific plan, the uniqueness of the situation with two auto dealers using a small neighborhood collector street for access to their lots and as a testing ground for their automobiles, and the apparently changed attitude of the majority of the residents of the area since the closure was originally approved in 1973 as part of the Taylor/Beach Specific Plan. Commissioner Porter conceded that there have been changing condi- tions in the area surrounding Taylor Drive since the prior action was taken, but noted that there remains a traffic problem on Taylor and discussed the possibility that some location could be found to close the street to through traffic while still allowing access from Beach Boulevard to the housing tract to the north. Various suggestions were put forward to attempt to control the traffic problem, including prohibition of heavy trucks and auto carriers, extra police surveillance and enforcement in the area, speed bumps or rumble strips installed in the street, stop signs placed to slow auto traffic on Taylor, a median to narrow the street and discourage speeders, and the possibility of using the funds which would be necessary to spend for permanent closure and allocating them instead to enforcement efforts. Legal counsel Art Folger informed the Commission that there is no legal way to stop the use of the streets by the auto dealers and discussed the liability the City might incur through the use of the speed bumps in a public street. City Engineer Tindall concurred that these speed bumps were an unsafe method by which to try to control traffic and could result in tremendous liability to the community. Mr. Tindall also said that the Department of Public Works has been considering and would recommend three-way stop signs at the intersections of Taylor and Huntington and Taylor and Delaware and a one-way stop sign at Taylor and Franklin; he noted that the judicious use of stop signs is a viable option to reduce traffic speeds. The timing on a possible removal of the barricades was extensively reviewed. ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY PORTER THE PLANNING COMMISSION DETERMINED TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE AMENDMENT OF SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 73-1 TO DELETE THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE CLOSURE OF TAYLOR DRIVE UPON APPROVAL OF A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO CONTROL THE SPEED AND TRAFFIC ON TAYLOR DRIVE, SAID PLAN TO CONTAIN THE FOLLOWING; MOTION CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: Consideration should be given to a variety of methods whereby the opening of Taylor Drive can be accomplished; for instance, stop signs at Huntington, Delaware, and Pammy Lane, small rumble strips in the street to caution drivers, crosswalks, allocation of budget funds for -5- 6-16-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission June 16, 1981 Page 6 police enforcement which would otherwise have been used for the permanent closure of Taylor Drive, a median to narrow the street, and/or a combination of the above to effect traffic control on Taylor Drive. AYES: Kenefick, Winchell, Porter NOES: Schumacher, Mahaffey ABSENT: Bannister, Paone ABSTAIN: None Commissioners Schumacher and Mahaffey directed that the minute action show that their "no" votes do not indicate an opposition to the opening of Taylor Drive, but rather that they wanted Taylor to be opened immediately without the condition for a prior traffic plan to be submitted. It was their feeling that this plan could be formulated and put into effect after the opening had been accomplished. The Commission recessed at 9:05 p.m. and reconvened at 9:20 p.m. Chairman Porter brought to the attention of the Commission the resolution which had accompanied the amendment to the specific plan, Resolution 1275. The resolution was reviewed and amended to reflect the Commission's motion on the specific plan. ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY WINCHELL AMENDED RESOLUTION NO. 1275 WAS ADOPTED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Kenefick, NOES: Schumacher ABSENT: Bannister, ABSTAIN: None DISCUSSION ITEMS: Winchell, Porter, Mahaffey Paone STATUS OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS June Catalano reported that the City Council has directed a change in procedure for handling general plan amendments after review by the Commission - in the future, instead of deleting an item from a proposed general plan amendment the Council wishes it to be denied and forwarded to the City Council with the amendment for its action. This will assure that the Council will be able to review every item within a general plan amendment without the necessity of an appeal. Staff will initiate this procedure on the upcoming General Plan Amendment 81-2. UPDATE ON ELECTRONIC GAME MACHINE REPORT Jeanine Frank reported that the game machine report is being revised to include locational criteria, to define the permitted number of machines per business, and to investigate the legality of prohibiting such machines in establishments where liquor is sold. Chairman 1 -6- 6-16-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission June 16, 1981 Page 7 Porter said that the 20 foot frontage of the building in which such a use was denied earlier in the evening was not sufficient to provide room for bicycle parking and avoid congestion and suggested that staff might like to consider front footage as another criterion for amusement machines. Staff hopes to have the revised report for Commission review at its July 7, 1981 meeting. Commissioner Mahaffey expressed his disagreement with the con- cept of preparing a regulatory ordinance specifically directed at a particular type of business in the community, saying that in his opinion these businesses should be allowed to operate and provide the public with an obviously popular entertainment. Discussion ensued on the impacts on adjacent properties which might result from establishment of such uses. UPDATE ON ELLIS/GOLDENWEST STUDY Staff reviewed the information contained in the staff report with the Commission and asked for further direction on the densities and types of uses the Commission would like to see incorporated into the area and for guidance on the implementa- tion measures to effect those uses. The Commission discussed the planned community designation, the estate zoning, possible use of clustered housing in conjunction with the estate zoning to provide larger amounts of open space, the fiscal impact report submitted on possible land uses, and a proposal by the City Administrator that nodes of commercial be included in the area as specialty shops of a nature to serve the resi- dential development and Central Park. Staff is proposing to include a precise plan of street alignments as one of the implementation measures; this is a very important step because many of the substandard lots in the area have at present legal access onto Goldenwest Street and development with access of this type would be counterproductive to the total planning for the entire area. After extensive review it was the consensus of the Commission that it would be very desirable to tour developments of a nature similar to those being considered in order to obtain a clearer idea of what is being proposed. Staff was directed to accept Mrs. Mandic's offer made at the June 2, 1981 meeting on behalf of Equestrian Trails to arrange a tour of equestrian estate and condominium facilities. This tour will be scheduled for Saturday, June 27 at 9:00 a.m. ANALYSIS OF REVISION TO OPEN SPACE IN THE TOWNLOT AREA Staff discussed the building bulk and setback problems being encountered in the three-story construction in the Townlot area, -7- 6-16-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission June 16, 1981 Page 8 informing the Commission that a proposed "volume open space" solu- tion has, after investigation, been found to be infeasible. Use of a vertical setback line for three-story buildings was proposed. The Commission concurred and by consensus directed staff to pursue this approach. REVIEW OF JUNE 15, 1981, CITY COUNCIL AGENDA: June catalano reviewed the actions taken at the City Council meet- ing of June 15, 1981, for the Commission's information. The Commission adjourned at 10:15 p.m. to a study session to be held Saturday, June 27, 1981 at 9:00 a.m. Study session will con- sist of a tour of equestrian facilities and will start from the City Hall parking lot. : df , I IF W2 N W, N, 1 -8- 6-16-81 - P.C.