Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-07-21Approved August 4, 1981 MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Council Chambers - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California TUESDAY, JULY 21, 1981 - 7:00 PM COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Kenefick, Paone, Schumacher, Mahaffey COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Bannister, Winchell, Porter CONSENT CALENDAR: Staff reported that Consent Calendar Item A-2 had been pulled from the agenda. Commissioner Paone requested that Consent Calendar Item A-1 (min- utes of the July 7, 1981 meeting) be pulled for separate consid- eration. ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA, CONSISTING OF A REQUEST FOR A YEAR'S EXTEN- SION OF TIME FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 80-23, WAS APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Kenefick, Paone, Schumacher, Mahaffey NOES: None ABSENT: Bannister, Winchell, Porter ABSTAIN: None Commissioner Paone reviewed items in the minutes relating to the compact parking standards and the electronic game machine pro- posed ordinance and asked that these items be checked against the tape of the meeting for accuracy. ON MOTION BY SCHUMACHER AND SECOND BY KENEFICK THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF JULY 7, 1981, WERE CONTINUED TO THE MEETING OF AUGUST 4, 1981, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Kenefick, Paone, Schumacher, Mahaffey NOES: None ABSENT: Bannister, Winchell, Porter ABSTAIN: None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission July 21, 1981 Page 2 REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-15/TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 11498 Applicant: Robert D. Mickelson (Cont. from May 19, 1981) To permit a condominium conversion of 120 apartment units into condominiums on 4.35 acres of property located on the east side of Magnolia Street approximately 520 feet south of Garfield Avenue. James Barnes reported that the applicant is requesting a further continuance of these items pending development of the condominium conversion ordinance. The public hearing on the request continues open from the prior meeting. ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 18-15 AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 11498 WERE CONTINUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF AUGUST 18, 1981, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Kenefick, Paone, Schumacher, Mahaffey NOES: None ABSENT: Bannister, Winchell, Porter ABSTAIN: None CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-19/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 81-012 Applicant: Fox Meadow Inc. - To permit a temporary horse facility and to allow certain devia- tions from the code requirements for that,facility on property loc- ated on the south side of Ellis Avenue west of Goldenwest Street. Michael Strange described the conditional exception request, which consists of a reduction in the parking standards and the deletion of two code -required fully enclosed parking spaces. He described the history of the facility on this site, noting that it had previously been approved as a temporary facility in 1976. The public hearing was opened. There were no persons present to speak for or against the proposal, and the public hearing was closed. The Commission discussed what effect further approvals of uses such as the one under consideration would have on implementation of the specific plan which is being developed at present for the Ellis/ Goldenwest area. The option of approving for a lesser period'of time than five years was reviewed, with -an annual reassessment after expiration of whatever time was granted. Commissioner Mahaffey questioned the payment of drainage fees for this one use in the area. Bruce Gilmer of Public Works explained the requirements for payment of fees upon development, further in- forming the Commission that there is an agreement with the subject -2- 7-21-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission July 21, 1981 Page 3 developer to pay the fees in a deferred fashion. Ten percent has been paid and the department is now requesting further funds per agreement. A motion was made by Mahaffey to approve the subject requests for a five-year term and defer payment of further drainage fees until such time as all the properties in the area are assessed. Motion failed for lack of a second. A MOTION WAS MADE BY KENEFICK AND SECONDED BY PAONE TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 81-19 AND CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 81-012 FOR A TWO YEAR PERIOD OF TIME WITH AN ANNUAL RENEWAL AFTER THAT TIME, WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS AS OUTLINED IN THE STAFF REPORT. Secretary Palin questioned the use of the term "renewal" and asked if the intention might have been to provide for an annual review for a possible year's extension. Commissioner Kenefick said that her motion had meant just an automatic renewal. Both the maker and the second withdrew the motion. A MOTION WAS MADE BY KENEFICK AND SECONDED BY PAONE TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 81-19 AND CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 81-012 FOR A PERIOD OF TWO YEARS WITH A REVIEW EVERY YEAR THEREAFTER, WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS AS OUTLINED IN THE STAFF REPORT. In the ensuing discussion consideration was given to how much notice an operator would be given in the event the Commission decided after review not to renew the approval for the use. Roberta Peterson, owner of Fox Meadow, stated that any period shorter than five years would impose a hardship on her, given the investment in the operation and the difficulty of finding another site. Legal counsel Art Folger, quoting from the ordinance code, expressed the opinion that the original five-year period has expired and what is under consideration at this time is merely a request for a one-year extension of that original approval. Both the maker and the second then withdrew the motion. A MOTION WAS MADE BY KENEFICK AND SECONDED BY MAHAFFEY TO RENEW THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE PROJECT AND APPROVE CONDI- TIONAL EXCEPTION 81-012 WITH THE FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OUTLINED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND AMENDED PER LEGAL COUNSEL'S DIRECTION. Mr. Folger pointed out that the prior conditions are not in- cluded in the staff report and it would be best to approve the conditional use permit with the conditions as they are now ex- isting on the site. Both the maker and the second agreed to amend the motion to that effect. -3- 7-21-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission July 21, 1981 Page 4 Stating that it was unclear upon which -conditional use permit the action was being taken, as well as the procedure required by code for the action, Secretary Palin suggested a continuance -to permit research into the matter. Concern was -expressed -that in the interim the applicant might find herself with an expired permit; staff re- plied that to its knowledge the permit has not expired, and Mr. Palin said that even if it had no citations would be issued in the mean- time. Both the maker and the second then withdrew their motion. ON MOTION -BY KENEFICK AND SECOND-BY,MAHAFFEY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-19-AND CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION N0: 81=012-WERE CONTINUED TO THE MEETING OF AUGUST 4, 1981, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Kenefick, Pa -one, Schumacher, Mahaffey NOES: None ABSENT: Bannister, Winchell, Porter''' ABSTAIN: None A motion was made by_ Mahaffey that. -the Planning Commission pass a - resolution to submit to the City Council recommending that the drainage assessment fees for the use be deferred at this time. Mo- tion failed for lack -of a second: The following items will be undertaken prior 1) staff will research the code on temporary 2) research will be done into the expiration ities in the area; and 3) Public Works is to report on the implications which deferral -of particular use would have. to the next meeting: horse facilities; dates of similar facil- be asked to prepare a drainage fees for this - CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 81-10/CONDITIONAf USE PERMIT NO. 81-14/ TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 81-564/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 80-52 Applicant: Lindborg/Dahl Investors, -Inc. (Cont:. from 6-16-81)`- To permit a- four -parcel division - of land for the construction of a 175,400 square foot office/professional complex -,'and -to permit approximately 60 compact parking spabes-.to-be included in -the total 588 parking spaces for the proposed compl-ek, on property located on the west side of Magnolia Street north of Warner Avenue. James Barnes presented an outline of plan submitted to the Commission is a the Fire Department to mitigate some the major change is a paved fire lane project. Bill -Cooper stated that the needs for access. The public hearing was opened. the proposal. The revised result of negotiations with of that department's concerns; cut into the interior of the plan meets Fire Department 1 -4- 7-21-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission July 21, 1981 Page 5 David Dahl addressed the Commission to inform them that the developer has received all necessary approvals through the County of Orange for the acquisition of the flood control channel. Mr. Dahl also asked that suggested condition of approval No. 3 be modified to make the improvement of the cul-de-sac on Conner Drive subject to the concurrence of the adjacent property owners on Conner Drive. He assured the Commission that the compact parking stalls, if permitted, will conform to whatever dimensions'are specified in the up- coming ordinance. Bill Hartge, engineer for the project, spoke to correct the description of the tentative parcel map from three parcels to four. There were no other persons present to speak for or against the proposal, and the public hearing was closed. The Commission discussed the traffic generation and access. Public Works explained the need for the cul-de-sac at Conners Drive as being principally for ease of maintenance. Commis- sioner Mahaffey questioned the prohibition of retail uses and was advised of the unique access and circulation problems on the site which both applicant and staff felt would preclude retail uses with their high generation of automobiles in and out, to avoid impacting the adjacent residential uses and the arterials. ON MOTION BY SCHUMACHER AND SECOND BY KENEFICK NEGATIVE DEC- LARATION NO. 80-52 WAS APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Kenefick, Paone, Schumacher, Mahaffey NOES: None ABSENT: Bannister, Winchell, Porter ABSTAIN: None ON MOTION BY SCHUMACHER AND SECOND BY KENEFICK CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 81-10, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 81-564, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-14 WERE APPROVED WITH THE FOL- LOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 81-564 1. The lot size, depth, frontage, street width, and other de- sign and improvement features of the proposed subdivision are proposed to be constructed in compliance with the Gen- eral Plan and ordinances regulating land uses on the site. C(WITIONS: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 81-564 1. The tentative parcel map received by the Department of Development Services on July 10, 1981 shall be the approved layout. -5- 7-21-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission July 21, 1981 Page 6 2. A parcel map shall be filed with and approved by the Department of Public Works and recorded with the Orange County Recorder. 3. The applicant shall submit to the Department of Development Ser- vices for review and approval a reciprocal access agreement over the four parcels identified in the parcel map, providing recip- rocal ingress and egress for joint use of the driveway located on Magnolia Street and for joint use between the proposed office complex and the retail shopping center to the south. 4. Water supply shall be through the City of Huntington Beach water system at the time said parcels are developed. 5. All utilities shall be developed underground at the time said parcels are developed. 6. Sewer, drainage, and water facilities shall be installed in ac- cordance with the Department of Public Works standards. 7. The property shall participate in all drainage assessment dis- trict requirements and fees. 8. Copies of the recorded parcel map shall be filed with the Depart- ment of Public Works and the Department of Development Services. 9. The parcel map shall comply with all applicable City ordinances. FINDINGS: CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 81-10 The applicant has shown exceptional circumstances on the subject property, an inability to enjoy property rights, and that the excep- tion would not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare or injurious to the surrounding area; also, the applicant is willing and able to proceed with the project without unnecessary delay. FINDINGS: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-14 1. The proposed use is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan, which designates the site as general commercial. 2. The proposed use will not adversely impact existing and surround- ing land uses in the general area. 3. According to the Department of Public Works, there would be an estimated increase of 4,595 trip generations produced by the proposed office complex. Based on the design capacity of the adjacent streets, this does not represent a significant impact on said streets. 4. The proposed development will not be detrimental to the general health, welfare, safety, and convenience of the neighborhood or of the City. -6- 7-21-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission July 21, 1981 Page 7 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-14 1. Floor plans and elevations dated July 7, 1981 shall be the approved floor plans and elevations. The site plan re- ceived and dated July 20, 1981 shall be the approved site layout. 2. All means of ingress and egress along Warner Avenue and Magnolia Street shall be designed according to Public Works standards. The applicant shall be responsible for left turn pockets to be constructed on Warner Avenue adjacent to the entrance of the proposed office complex and on Magnolia Street opposite the east entrance of said office complex. 3. The applicant shall be responsible for improving Conner Drive with a modified cul-de-sac within the public right-of- way according to Public Works standards. 4. Pursuant to Public Works standards, the parking area shall employ traffic control measures (e.g., speed bumps). 5. Intensified landscaping shall be installed within the fifteen (15) foot landscaped buffer zone along the western property line. A plan indicating the type of landscaping shall be approved by the Department of Development Services prior to issuance of building permits. 6. Fire protection systems and any other required fire protec- tion and detection devices shall comply with the Huntington Beach Fire Code. Plans for such systems and devices shall be submitted to the Fire Department and shall be subject to approval by the Fire Marshal and the Director of Public Works. 7. The encasement of the flood control channel shall be com- pleted prior to issuance of building permits. 8. Retail commercial uses shall be prohibited from operating within the complex. AYES: Kenefick, Paone, Schumacher, Mahaffey NOES: None ABSENT: Bannister, Winchell, Porter ABSTAIN: None The Commission recessed at 9:30 p.m. and reconvened at 9:40. -7- 7-21-81 - p.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission July 21, 1981 Page 8 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-21 Applicant: Ricky Samuels To permit a family amusement center to be located within a shopping complex at the southeast corner of Beach Boulevard and Atlanta Avenue. Mike Strange outlined the request to the Commission and informed them that the four locational criteria desired by the Commission have been met by the applicant. The public hearing was opened. Rick Samuels addressed the Commission to describe the proposed opera- tion of the amusement center. He also asked for a change in the suggested conditions of approval to increase the hours of operation to allow the use to be open from 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. and to increase the number of machines to 16. Beverly Swanson, owner of a business adjacent to the proposed use (at 21070 Beach Boulevard) also addressed the Commission in support of the proposed arcade use. There were no other persons present -to speak for or against the pro- posal, and the public hearing was closed. Commission discussion ensued. ON MOTION BY SCHUMACHER AND SECOND BY MAHAFFEY CONDITIONAL USE PER- MIT NO. 81-21 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS: 1. The proposed use is compatible with the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan. 2. The proposed use is compatible with surrounding land uses because they are generally commercial in nature. 3. Onsite parking is adequate for the amusement arcade because the site has been approved with a commercial parking ratio of one space for each 200 square feet of gross floor area. 4. The amusement arcade is located more than three-quarters of a mile from a public school. 5. The amusement arcade is separated from all residential properties by buildings, a flood control channel, or an arterial street. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan and floor plan received and dated June 5, 1981, shall be the approved layout, except that the number of machines permitted in the use may be increased to sixteen (16). 1 -8- 7-21-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission July 21, 1981 Page 9 2. The hours of operation shall be limited to between 10:00 a.m. and 11:00 p.m. seven days a week. 3. A bicycle rack capable of holding a minimum of ten (10) bicycles shall be provided for use by the patrons of the arcade. 4. The facility shall be supervised at all times during oper- ating hours by at least one adult attendant. 5. The proposed use shall comply with all Building and Fire Department regulations. 6. The Planning Commission reserves the right to rescind this conditional use permit approval in the event of any viola- tion of the applicable zoning laws or of the foregoing conditions of approval. Such decision shall be preceded by notice to the applicant and a public hearing and shall be based upon specific findings. AYES: Kenefick, Paone, Schumacher, Mahaffey NOES: None ABSENT: Bannister, Winchell, Porter ABSTAIN: None CONDITIONAL EXCEPTIONS NOS. 81-17 AND 81-18 Corona Development Company, Inc. (Referred back by Council) Requests to permit a portion of the main buildings to be con- structed with zero side yards on both sides on properties located at llth and Olive and at 18th and Orange, respectively. Vice -Chairman Paone suggested that in view of the fact that there is only a quorum of four members present to consider these potentially controversial projects it might be better to continue them until more members can be present. He also suggested a study session on the zero setback proposals and Code Amendment 81-5 to enable the Commission to better under- stand the concept. The public hearing was opened. Fleetwood Joiner, architect for the projects, spoke to the Commission to indicate concurrence with the continuance, but asking for further meetings with staff to review the matter. A resident of 220 llth Street addressed the Commission in oppo- sition to allowing the double zero construction, citing the bulk of the buildings, the excessive lot coverage, and the general incompatibility of the resulting buildings with the existing neighborhood. -9- 7-21-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission July 21, 1981 Page 10 Commission discussion ensued. Commissioner Kenefick requested Mr. Joiner to bring slides or pictures of other similar projects to the next meeting on these items. Commissioner Schumacher asked him to beprepared to discuss the light factor of buildings such as he is planning to build and to present a discussion of how air volumes will move through the structures and if there will be any possibility for cross -ventilation in them. Staff was directed to meet with the applicants to review the proposals. ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER CONDITIONAL EXCEP- TION NO. 81-17 WAS CONTINUED TO A STUDY SESSION TO BE HELD AT 6:30 P:-1 ON AUGUST 4-, 1981, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Kenefick, Paone, Schumacher, Mahaffey NOES: None ABSENT: Bannister, Winchell, Porter ABSTAIN: None The public hearing on Conditional Exception 81-17 was left open. ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY MAHAFFEY CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 81-18 WAS CONTINUED TO A STUDY SESSION TO BE HELD AT 6:30 PM ON AUGUST 4, 1981, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Kenefick, Paone, Schumacher, Mahaffey NOES: None ABSENT: Bannister, Winchell, Porter ABSTAIN: None CODE AMENDMENT NO. 81-5 (Cont. from May 19, 1981) Applicant: Initiated by Development Services An amendment to Article 915, Oldtown Specific Plan, and to Article 935, Townlot Specific Plan. This amendment is to clarify and illus- trate specific zoning requirements pertaining to street visibility, sight angle, setback and yard requirements. The amendment also pro- poses to establish a provision for zero setback on both sides of lots located in the Townlot Specific Plan only. The public hearing was opened. No one was present to speak in re- gard to the amendment, and the hearing was left open. ON MOTION BY MAHAFFEY AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER CODE AMENDMENT NO. 81-5 WAS CONTINUED TO A STUDY SESSION TO BE HELD AT 6:30 PM ON AUGUST 4, 1981, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Kenefick, Paone, Schumacher, Mahaffey NOES: None ABSENT: Bannister, Winchell, Porter ABSTAIN: None -10- 7-21-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission July 21, 1981 Page 11 DISCUSSION ITEMS: SMALL LOT CONDOMINIUM ORDINANCE Additional Information Jim Barnes reviewed the added information which had been re- quested by the Commission, consisting of a comparative table of development standards for Articles 932 and 936, codes on the subject from other jurisdictions, and a consideration of affordable housing as a possible tradeoff for reducing the development standards for small lots. The Commission discussed the point at which it would be det- ermined that a project could be considered a "small lot" condo; staff responded that it is the intent to provide specifica- tions in the ordinance. Commissioner Paone pointed out that in comparing the requirements it seems to be the dimension of open space that poses the biggest problem, not the total amount. Staff concurred that the fixed dimension makes it difficult to provide flexibility and that a change is being contemplated. FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR SIDE ENTRY GARAGES HAVING A SECOND STORY ADDITION Although staff had pulled this item from the agenda, the Commis- sion reviewed prior discussions on the possibility of amend- ing the code to allow more flexibility in adding extra rooms to existing dwelling units. Staff was directed to review the types of conditional exceptions that the Board of Zoning Adjustments is receiving and report back to the Commission. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REVIEW: Secretary Palin reviewed the actions taken by the City Council at its meeting of July 20, 1981 for the information of the Commission. SCENIC HIGHWAY ELEMENT June Catalano reported that inclusion of this item was in re- sponse to a Commission request to look into what can be done to implement the landscaped corridors designated in the City. The Commission and staff discussed at length what could be done in this regard. Staff will prepare a packet of the history of what has been done, a report on what work program could be fol- lowed in preparing plans for landscaping the corridors, and try to prepare a "driving itinerary" so that individual Commis- sion members could see what has been done in other cities. Commissioner Paone emphasized that the reports not just address the current status but also what can be done to change the treatment of the corridors. Ms. Catalano indicated that this information can probably be available at the second meeting in August. -11- 7-21-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission July 21, 1981 Page 12 ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY MAHAFFEY THE COMMISSION AD- JOURNED AT 10:00 PM TO A STUDY SESSION AT 6:30 PM ON AUGUST 4, 1981, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Kenefick, Paone, Schumacher, Mahaffey NOES: None ABSENT: Bannister, Winchell, Porter ABSTAIN: None Tim Paone, Vice -Chairman LJ -12- 7-21-81 - P.C.