Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-01-19i� 1 Approved 2-2-82 MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Council Chambers, 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, TUESDAY, JANUARY 19, 1982 - 7:00 PM Civic Center California COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Schumacher, Mahaffey COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Paone CONSENT CALENDAR: ON MOTION BY PORTER AND SECOND BY KENEFICK THE CONSENT CALENDAR, CONSISTING OF THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 5, 1982, AND EXTENSION OF TIME ON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 74-18, WAS AP- PROVED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Schumacher, Mahaffey NOES: None ABSENT: Paone ABSTAIN: None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 81-49 (APPEAL) Applicant: Kenneth A. Reynolds A request to permit a room addition to encroach within 5 feet of the rear yard setback, a garage addition to encroach 14 feet into the front yard setback and a 5 foot high wall to encroach into front yard setback on .15± acre parcel of property located on the north side of Leilani Drive, approximately 250 feet west of Bushard Street. The public hearing was opened. The applicant, Ken Reynolds, spoke on behalf of granting the appeal. He stated that the request was for the wall to be at a height of six feet, not five feet. He fur- ther asked that the Commission look at the historical aspect of encroachments in the vicinity. He felt that this issue was over- looked in the staff report. Seeing no other persons wished to address the Commission on this issue, the public hearing was closed. Minutes, H. B. Planning Commission January 19, 1982 Page 2 The Commissioners discussed the need for, at least, a seven foot apron for the front -entry garage for safety reasons. Commissioners did agree that the property owner should be entitled to the same advantages of the newer residences being built. Commissioner Kenefick stated that with the cost of housing, we need to make it possible for people to stay in their homes and remodel. A MOTION WAS MADE BY MAHAFFEY AND SECONDED BY BANNISTER TO OVERRULE THE BZA DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION 81-49 AND APPROVE SAME. THIS MOTION FAILED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Porter, Mahaffey, Bannister NOES: Kenefick, Winchell, Schumacher ABSENT: Paone ABSTAIN: None A MOTION WAS MADE BY KENEFICK AND SECONDED BY BANNISTER TO OVERRULE THE BZA DENIAL AND APPROVE CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO, 81-49 WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: 1. Based on testimony presented to the Planning Commission at the public hearing, the Commission has determined that exceptional circumstances do exist that would deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed on other properties in the vicinity. 2. The granting of Conditional Exception No. 81-49 would not con- stitute a special privilege inconsistent with limitations upon properties in the vicinity. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan received and dated January 14, 1982, shall be the approved layout, except that the addition at the rear of the dwelling shall be permitted to encroach only to within eight (8) feet of the rear property line. 2. The new garage addition will be equipped with an automatic garage door opener. Said opener shall be installed and opera- ting prior to final inspection. AYES: Porter, Mahaffey, Bannister, Kenefick NOES: Winchell, Schumacher ABSENT: Paone ABSTAIN: None ZONE CHANGE NO. 81-15/CODE AMENDMENT NO. 81-16/EIR NO. 81-3 Applicant: Mola Development Corporation -2- 1-19-82 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission January 19, 1982 Page 3 A code amendment which establishes a Specific Plan setting forth development criteria for 60+ acres of property located at the south- east corner of Beach Boulevard and Adams Avenue, and a request to change the zoning on the subject property from C2 (Community Busi- ness District), RA-0 (Residential Agricultural District combined with oil production), RA-01 (Residential Agricultural District com- bined with oil production), R1-0 (Low Density Residential combined with oil production), and R1-01 (Low Density Residential District combined with oil production) to Seabridge Specific Plan. Also con- sidered was Final Environmental Impact No. 81-3 which assesses the environmental effects of the code amendment and the zone change. Jim Barnes introduced Mr. Charles Pilcher to the Commission who gave an oral report of the highlights of the EIR which his company, EDAW, Inc., prepared. Chairman Winchell opened the public hearing. Frank Mola, the appli- cant, gave a prepared taped presentation of the project. Richard Harlow also spoke in favor of approving the EIR along with the zone change and code amendment. The following persons spoke in opposition to the certification of the EIR and the approval of the zone change and code amendment: Dan Lispi, Resident John DuVal, Resident Jim Keef, Resident John Corgono, Resident Irwin Haydock, Chairman of Environmental Board Mike Molde, Resident The main issues raised in the testimony against approval were as follows: 1. Impact of 1600 new residents in the area with 80 (this figure was questioned) elementary school children entering the local school district. It was brought to the attention of the Com- mission that Pederson Elementary School was recently closed. 2. Loss of park land and wetland area. 3. Incompatibility with original General Plan and overall image of the area. Opposition to high density in the area. 4. Objection of the U. S. Department of Fish and Game to the adequacy of the EIR. 5. No mention of access streets through existing residences. -3- 1-19-82 - P.C. i Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission January 19, 1982 Page 4 6. Deterioration of remaining scenic corridor. 7. Shadow effect of buildings on solar access. 8. Will engineers design buildings with fault line taken into con- sideration. 9. Need for bikeway, equestrian trails, etc., along the flood control channel. 10. 10% addition to traffic volume on surrounding major arterials (Why were figures taken from 1978 data and not recent computer figures?) 11. Who will pay for "open water system"? Possible water waste. 12. Regarding sewerage - if flood control channel is built too high, project will be underwater. 13. Against removal of existing eucalyptus trees. 14. Wildlife in the area is threatened. The public hearing was closed. The consensus of the Commissioners was that due to public testimony, they would feel uncomfortable about dealing with the applications until more clarification was presented. Also mentioned was burial of the oil lines prior to development. Staff stated that questions of this nature could be dealt with at the time of the tentative tract application. ON MOTION BY PORTER AND SECOND BY BANNISTER ZONE CHANGE NO. 81-15, CODE AMENDMENT NO. 81-16 AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 81-3 WERE CONTINUED TO THE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 2, 1982, BY THE FOLLOW- ING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Schumacher, Mahaffey NOES: None ABSENT: Paone ABSTAIN: None CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-30 Applicants: Mike Nall; Theron Carter A request to permit the operation of more than four (4) coin -operated amusement devices to be for public use at property located on the east side of Bolsa Chica Street, north of Warner Avenue. The public hearing was opened. Theron Carter, the applicant, spoke in favor of granting the application. The public hearing was closed. -4- 1-19-82 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission January 19, 1982 Page 5 ON MOTION BY MAHAFFEY AND SECOND BY PORTER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-30 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: 1. The proposed use is compatible with surrounding land uses be- cause they are zoned and designated on the General Plan as general commercial. 2. The subject application substantially complies with the cri- teria set forth in the proposed code amendment regulating game arcades. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan and floor plan received and dated November 24, 1981, shall be the approved layout. 2. The hours -of operation shall be limited to 9:00 A.M. to 11:00 P.M. on week -nights and 9:00 A.M. to 12:00 Midnight on weekends. 3. To eliminate obstruction of the public sidewalk and entryway to the facility, a special area shall be set aside and desig- nated for bicycle parking. 4. There shall be at least one supervisorial employee eighteen (18) years or older during operating hours. 5. Any external sound emanating from the amusement center shall be prohibited and any internal sound or music system shall be such as not to exceed noise levels established within the Municipal Code. AYES: Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Mahaffey NOES: Bannister ABSENT: Paone, Schumacher ABSTAIN: None CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-32 Applicant: The Shooting Range, Inc. A request to permit an indoor shooting range on a .34 acre piece of property located 280 feet north of Talbert and 300 feet east of Gothard Street. The public hearing was opened. A representative of The Shooting Range, Mike Kowalski, spoke on behalf of granting the request. Seeing no other persons wished to address the Commission on this issue, the public hearing was closed. -5- 1-19-82 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission January 19, 1982 Page 6 The Commission was concerned about what type of guns would be used. The applicant said that only hand guns would be used, mainly 44 magnum. Also of some concern to the Commissioners were the materials that would be used in the construction of the backstop and the noise impact to the surrounding area. The applicant assured the Commission that these would be taken care of in the interior construction. He further stated that the same materials would be used that were used in the construction of FBI shooting ranges. Other concerns of the Commissioners are listed in the amended conditions below. ON MOTION BY BANNISTER AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-32 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND AMENDED CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: 1. The proposed indoor shooting facility will generally be compatible with the surrounding industrial uses is the suggested attached conditions of approval are imposed on the applicant. 2. Operation of the indoor shooting facility will not create a detrimental effect upon the general health, welfare and safety of persons residing or working in the vicinity, inasmuch as the use is compatible with the surrounding area and is in conformance with the City's General Plan. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan and floor plan received and dated December 1, 1981, shall be the approved layout. 2. Hours of operation shall be from 12:00 Noon to 10:00 P.M., Monday through Friday and 10:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M., Saturday and Sunday. 3. The proposed facility shall comply with all noise standards set forth in Chapter 8.40 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code. 4. The proposed use shall comply with all Building Division and Fire Department regulations. 5. On -site sales of guns and weapons, including rifles and pistols, shall be prohibited. A pro -shop selling related items and pro- viding related services is permitted. 6. The applicant shall line the 6-inch thick concrete walls with sound board and steel plating to attenuate any noise generated by the facility. In addition, an "air -gap" ceiling will be con- structed to reduce noise. -6- 1-19-82 - P.C. Minutes, H.R. Planning Commission January 19, 1982 Page 7 7. Six months after approval of the facility, the staff shall sub- mit a report to the Planning Commission outlining any noise, parking or other problems relating to the operation of the indoor shooting range. 8. Two additional parking stalls shall be provided on the south side of the facility adjacent to the overhead door. This door shall be sealed and made inoperable during the time the facility is in business. The facility shall have a total of 18 on -site parking spaces. 9. The Planning Commission reserves the right to rescind this conditional use permit approval in the event of any violation of the applicable zoning laws or conditions of approval. Such decision shall be preceded by notice to the applicant and a public hearing, and shall be based on specific findings. AYES: Bannister, Winchell, Porter, Schumacher, Mahaffey NOES: Kenefick ABSENT: Paone ABSTAIN: None CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-35 Applicant: Hersel and Mousa Mahaerefteh Myers A request to permit a family arcade center on a .43 acre site lo- cated on the south side of Hamilton Avenue, approximately 550 feet east of Bushard Street. The public hearing was opened. The Reynolds, part-owner of the center, the request. The following persons the request: Dick Erickson Dave Todd John Wooley Gail Mendelsohn Bob Deck Bill Cerri Catherine Deck applicant, Mr. Myers and Ken both spoke in favor of granting spoke in opposition to granting Public testimony revealed incidences at similar arcades where, re- portedly, the customers, most of whom are minors, have drinking parties in the parking lots of these establishments, after they have been asked to leave. Also cited were particular incidences of broken glass and vandalism occurring in the center in question. One speaker told the Commission of several occurrences of deaths at this corner where children on bicycles have been hit due to a blind alley. Commissioner Schumacher asked staff to secure a copy of any police reports they may have pertaining to the above concerns. -7- 1-19-82 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission January 19, 1982 Page 8 Commissioner Kenefick suggested drafting a letter to the City Council urging them to take some action on this matter. ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY BANNISTER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-35 WAS DENIED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS FOR DENIAL: 1. The proposed arcade is generally not compatible with the apart- ments located to the south and east of the subject site. Noise from the electronic games and from customers patronizing the facility may disturb residents of the apartment complex. 2. The proposed arcade is located closer than 31 mile to a public school. The locational criteria adopted by the Planning Com- mission on January 5, 1982, requires that arcade facilities be located at least � mile from a public school, including elemen- tary, junior and senior high schools. 3. The arcade facility is not buffered on the south and east by buildings, utility easements, permanent open space, or arterial streets as required by the locational criteria adopted by the Planning Commission on January 5, 1982. AYES: Kenefick, Bannister, Winchell, Porter, Schumacher NOES: Mahaffey ABSENT: Paone ABSTAIN: None CODE AMENDMENT NO. 81-12 (Continued from 12-15-81) Initiated by Community Services Department A code amendment to repeal Article 974, Park and Recreational Fa- cilities, and amend Article 996, Dedication, relative to park land dedication and in -lieu payment of fees. This amendment contains a provision to allow a 50 percent credit for private open space. Commissioner Schumacher informed the Commission that she listened to the tape of the previous public hearing, and was eligible to vote. The public hearing on this item had been opened and closed at the regular meeting of December 15, 1981. ON MOTION BY PORTER AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER CODE AMENDMENT NO. 81-12 WAS APPROVED FOR RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Winchell, Porter, Schumacher NOES: None -8- 1-19-82 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission January 19, 1982 Page 9 ABSENT: Paone, Kenefick, Mahaffey ABSTAIN: None CODE AMENDMENT NO. 81-17 Applicant: Robert Zinngrabe An amendment to Article 964, Section 9646.10 increasing the height limitation from 45 feet to 150 feet. The public hearing was opened. Bob Zinngrabe, the applicant, ad- dressed the Commission, giving his reasons for the request and asking for approval of the application. Seeing no one else wished to address the Commission on this issue, the public hearing was closed. ON MOTION BY BANNISTER AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER CODE AMENDMENT NO. 81-17 WAS APPROVED FOR RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Winchell, Porter, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: Paone, Kenefick, Mahaffey ABSTAIN: None CODE AMENDMENT NO. 82-1 Initiated by Development Services A amendment to Article 910 by revising the development standards pertaining to windscreens and patios in the R1 (Low Density Resi- dential District). The public hearing was opened and closed. ON MOTION BY PORTER AND SECOND BY WINCHELL CODE AMENDMENT NO. 82-1 WAS CONTINUED TO THE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 2, 1982, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Winchell, Porter, Schumacher NOES: Bannister ABSENT: Paone, Kenefick, Mahaffey ABSTAIN: None DISCUSSION ITEMS: None DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ITEMS: Secretary Palin reported the actions taken at the City Council meeting of January 18, 1982. The conditions of approval for a windscreen, Roger Cole, applicant, were appealed and Council voted in favor of the appellant; and Mr. Gilio appealed the Planning Commission's denial, which was overruled by the City Council. -9- 1-19-82 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission January 19, 1982 Page 10 STAFF ITEMS: Bruce Crosby introduced Bill Patapoff to the Commission, stating that he will be the liaison from the Department of Public Works in the future. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business before the Planning Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 11:30 PM, to a Joint Study Session with the City Council on January 25, 1982, regarding the Community Enhancement Program and to discuss some developments for inclusion in the implementation for the downtown area. : j lm 'Y Grace Winchell, Chairman -10- 1-19-82 - P.C.