Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-11-02APPROVED ON 11-16-82 MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Council Chambers 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 1982 - 7:00 PM - Civic Center California COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Higgins, Livengood, Winchell, Paone, Porter, Schumacher, MirJ ahangir CONSENT CALENDAR: Commissioner Porter requested that Item A-2, Extension of Time on Tentative Tract 10910 and Conditional Use Permit No. 80-4, be pulled for separate consideration. ON MOTION BY WINCHELL AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR, CONSISTING OF THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 19, 1982, AND EXTENSION OF TIME ON CONDITIONAL USE PER- MIT NO. 81-28, WAS APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Winchell, Paone, Porter, Schumacher, Mirjahangir NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Livengood ON MOTION BY PORTER AND SECOND BY MIRJAHANGIR THE REQUEST FOR EX- TENSION OF TIME ON TENTATIVE TRACT 10910 AND CONDITIONAL USE PER- MIT NO. 80-4 WAS CONTINUED FOR THE PURPOSE OF REVIEWING THE SITE PLAN AS IT RELATES RESIDENTIAL AREAS, TO THE MEETING OF NOVEMBER 16, 1982, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Livengood, Porter, Schumacher, Mirjahangir NOES: Winchell, Paone ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE NO. 82-8/ZONE CHANGE NO. 82-15/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 82-40 (Continued from 10-19-82) Initiated by the City of Huntington Beach A request to find the zone change in conformance with the General •0 %Ar H.B. Planning Commission November 2, 1982 Page 2 Plan and a request to change the zoning from Rl-0 and R1-O-CD to R2-0-PD-CD at property located north of Utica Avenue between 17th and Lake Streets. Secretary Palin gave a brief presentation on the historical back- ground of the area. He stated that original studies were conducted to analyze intensity levels resulting in the proposed zone change request. A compromise was agreed to when an impasse occurred in terms of the old railroad right-of-way, which resulted in some trade-offs. It was envisioned that the City would declare a portion of the property as surplus on both sides of Pine Street. Access was discussed to come from Lake Street with a possible secondary access coming off of 17th Street. At this time the possibility of a com- munity center was discussed. However, at no time was there a dis- cussion of providing access off of Utica. The Secretary further re- minded the Commissioners that any proposed project would require the filing of appropriate applications - this would consequently re- quire notices to be sent to residents within 300 feet of the proposed project. Commissioners briefly discussed parking on l7th Street. Les Evans, City Engineer, gave a synopsis of the traffic report which was conducted by Public Works Department. Commissioner Porter asked if it was considered to widen Utica. Mr. Evans stated that it would not be feasible. Commissioner Porter questioned setbacks in terms of vacation at the north end of 17th Street. Secretary Palin sug- gested that if the Planning Commission was concerned, it could sug- gest that a qualified suffix be attached to the zone. Chairman Paone opened the public hearing. The following persons spoke against the proposed General Plan Confor- mance and Zone Change: Bob Bolman Faye Ogden William Rodell Verl Cowling E. Rutherd Craig Garris George Abon John Pederson Rick Murphy Mr. Gusterhouse Esther Danielson Bob Washguy Some issues raised by public testimony included complaints with the notification policy. Commissioners explained that even if residents were not close enough to.be notified by mail, that public notices do appear in the Huntington Beach Independent. Also questioned was the issue of circulation, with possible heavy traffic going through residential streets that are populated with children. Complaints were also registered against the accuracy of the staff report. Residents also felt that the police cars would have trouble exiting from the station. Traffic volume and circulation were also cited. Along with the public testimony, a petition was submitted voicing the concerns against the proposed zone change and numerous letters against the proposal were entered into the record. H.B. Planning Commission November 2, 1982 Page 3 The public hearing was closed. Commission discussion continued with a discussion on density, vacation of streets, traffic circulation, etc. A motion was made by Livengood and seconded by Winchell to continue the General Plan Conformance to the meeting of December 7th, at which time a corrected traffic rej?ort would be submitted along with various information relative to the impact on the environment. After con- siderable discussion the maker and second withdrew their motion. A MOTION WAS MADE BY PORTER AND SECONDED BY SCHUMACHER TO FIND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE NO. 82-8 NOT IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN AND NOT IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE GOVERNMENT CODE BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF ADEQUATE INFORMATION AND OF SUFFICIENT DEFINITION OF THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE USE PROPOSED FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THE MOTION PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Livengood, Winchell, Porter, Schumacher, Mirjahangir NOES: Paone ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Some additional comments were made relating to the above motion. Com- missioner Schumacher felt that a senior center next to a high school did not seem compatible, nor would there be adequate buffer. Tom Tincher also added some comments relating to the consolidation of par- cels in the area. ON MOTION BY PORTER AND SECOND BY HIGGINS, NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 82-40 WAS APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES:- Higgins, Livengood, Winchell, Paone, Porter, Mirjahangir NOES: Schumacher ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ON MOTION BY PORTER AND SECOND BY WINCHELL ZONE CHANGE NO. 82-15 WAS DENIED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE, AND FOR- WARDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDING DENIAL: FINDINGS: 1. The proposed density is not compatible with surrounding residential --area. 2. The proposed "PD" suffix would only compound an existing parking problem in the area. AYES: Livengood, Winchell, Paone, Porter, Schumacher, Mirjahangir NOES:. Higgins ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ON MOTION BY PORTER AND SECOND BY WINCHELL STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO PRE- PARE A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT REDESIGNATING THE PROPERTY TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, BY THE -FOLLOWING VOTE: H.B. Plannin Commission November 2, 982 Page 4 ... AYES: Livengood, Winchell, Paone, Porter, Schumacher, Mirjahangir NOES: Higgins ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 82-26 Applicant: Atlantic Richfield Company A request to permit the conversion of an existing service station, / located at the southwest corner of Heil and Goldenwest, into a con- venience market combined with gasoline sales. Jim Barnes stated / that a suggested condition was inadvertently omitted from the staff / report that if the Planning Commission chooses to approve the pro- ject they would ". . . have the right to rescind the application in the event of any violation of applicable zoning laws". The public hearing was opened. Sam Glick, speaking for the appli- cant, stated that he agreed with the staff recommendations and asked for approval of the project. Commissioners asked if this was proposed to be a 24 hour operation. Mr. Glick stated that it would be open 24 hours. Speaking against approval of the project were Dottie Jones and Bob McCullum. Both cited problems occuring at the present time and were .�.. totally against a 24-hour operation. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Livengood questioned if the project met the require- ments of the service station standards. Staff stated that since this was a request for conversion that service stations standards were non -applicable. Since the main objection to the conversion was the fact that it is proposed to operate "around the clock", Coni- .missioner Schumacher recommended that conditions be attached to the application limiting the hours of operation. Mr. Glick responded that the idea of the "AM/PM Market" was to give shoppers the con- venience of being able to shop any time and further stated that the hours of operation were non, -negotiable. ON MOTION BY PORTER AND SECOND BY LIVENGOOD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 82-26 WAS DENIED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLO-NING VOTE: FINDINGS FOR DENIAL: 1. The proposed use would be materially detrimental to the public health, welfare and safety of persons residing in the neigh- borhood. 2. The proposed use is not compatible with the surrounding re- sidential area. �e AYES: Livengood, Winchell, Paone, Porter, Schumacher, Mirjahangir NOES: Higgins ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None H.8. Planning Commission November 2, 1982 Page 5 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 82-28 Applicant: Isaak Gorbaty/Yury Kirnos A request to establish a video game arcade in conjunction with an ice cream parlor within a 14,000 square foot shopping center on the west side of Beach Boulevard south of Adams Avenue. The public hearing was opened. Speaking in favor of approving the project were Don Sanchine and Yury Kirnos, the applicant. No one else was present to address this issue, so the public hearing was closed. The Commissioners had some question regarding bicycle racks taking up needed parking spaces. Staff stated that the required number of parking spaces were not affected. There was also some discussion about the floor plan, however, the details would be worked out with the plan checker, prior to the issuing of building permits. ON MOTION BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY MIRJAHANGIR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 82-28 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDI- TIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: 1. The subject application substantially complies with the criteria set forth in Section 9332, Game Arcades. 2. The proposed use is compatible with surrounding land uses because they are either zoned and designated on the General Plan as general commercial, or are adequately buffered as defined in Section 9332 of the Ordinance Code. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan received and dated September 30, 1982, shall be the approved layout. 2. Operation of the business shall be between the hours of 8:00 AM and 11:00 PM. 3. The facility shall be supervised at all times during operating hours by at least one adult. 4.- The Planning Commission reserves the right to rescind the Con- ditional Use Permit approval in the event of any violation of the applicable zoning laws. Any such decision shall be preceded by a notice to the applicant and a public hearing, and shall. be based on specific findings. AYES: Higgins, Livengood, Winchell, Paone, Porter, Schumacher, f4irjahangir Ow. NOW H.B. Planning Commission November 2, 1982 Page'6 NOES:, None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None DISCUSSION ITEMS: INTERIM AFFORDABLE HOUSING POLICY FOR THE COASTAL 'LONE The "Mello Bill" became law on January 1, 1982, and requires cities with coastlines to establish implementation polices relative to af- fordable housing in the Coastal Zone. The Housing Committee estab- lished by the City Council, presented a policy addressing such con- cerns as restrictions on demolitions and conversions; replacement requirements; inclusionary requirements; speculation control; and transfer of credits. Also presented was a draft resolution to be presented to the.City Council for adoption. Some discussion took place regarding the buildings in the downtown area, as far as some of those buildings being condemned. Art Folger stated that the City did pass an ordinance to bring those building up to earthquate stan- dards, however, they would not be condemned as long as they met the building standards at the time they were built. Chairman Paone sug- gested-that'a change be made on Page 3, the first paragraph under "Policy for Affordable Housing in Construction of New Residential Units in the Coastal.Zone". Staff was directed to reword the sentence to state that the developer has the choice to locate the affordable units on -the site or elsewhere within the City. ON MOTION BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY WINCHELL STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO TRANSMIT THE INTERIM AFFORDABLE HOUSING POLICY TO CITY COUNCIL STATING THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUPPORTS THE DRAFT RESOLUTION WITH CH:1\GES AS STATED ABOVE, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Livengood, Mirjahangir NOES:, None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN,: None - Winchell, Paone, Porter, Schumacher, CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS OF OCTOBER 25 AND NOVEMBER 1, 1982 Secretary Palin reviewed the action taken at the City Council meetings of October 25 and November 1, 1982. Fie informed the Commission that the code amendment on garages and carports (CA 82-8) was referred back to the Planning Commission. A request for a variance on a small lot, which was denied by the BZA and the Commission was also denied by the City Council. The precise plan of street alignment which was approved by the Commission for Cypress Street was also approved by the Council. '-On the zone changes proposed for seven mobile home parks, the Council approved all of those to be changed to MIi (Mobile Iiome) District. H.B. Planning Commission November 2, 1982 Page 7 PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS: Commissioner Porter directed staff as follows: 1. On assumption that Conditional Use Permit No. 82-26 is appealed, point out to the City Council that the applicant indicated the hours of operation was not a negotiable item. 2. Gas station at the corner of Goldenwest and Slater has what appears to be numerous illegal signs - please check original conditions of approval and service station standards on that project and report back to the Commission. 3. A car wash at the corner of Garfield and Brookhurst was opened at 11:00 PM - please check those original conditions of approval relative to the hours of operation and report back. Commissioner Livengood expressed concerns regarding the method in which information is conveyed to the City Council. ADJOURNMENT: The chairman adjourned the meeting at 10:40 P.M. to the nett regular meeting on November 16, 1982. Tim Paone, Chairman