Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983-05-18MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS Room B-6 - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA WEDNESDAY, MAY 18, 1983 - 1:30 P.M. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Godfrey, Evans, Parker, Vogelsang, Smith MINUTES: ON MOTION BY VOGELSANG AND SECOND BY EVANS, THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 20, 1983, WERE APPROVED AS TRANS- CRIBED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Godfrey, Evans, Vogelsang NOES: None ABSTAIN: Smith, Parker MINUTES: ON -MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY EVANS, THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 27, 1983, WERE APPROVED AS TRANS- CRIBED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Godfrey, Evans, Smith, Vogelsang NOES: None ABSTAIN: Parker MINUTES: ON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY EVANS, THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 4, 1983, WERE APPROVED AS TRANSCRIBED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Godfrey, Evans, Smith NOES: None ABSTAIN: Parker, Vogelsang REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 83-10 In Conjunction With USE PERMIT NO. 83-23 Applicant: Mr. Eric F. Mossman To permit construction of a ten (10) unit 3-Story Apartment Complex, each unit approx. 1,036 sq. ft. and to construct ten (10) single -story garages. Location - N.E. corner of Yorktown and Huntington Street. Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments May 18, 1983 Page Two The Board reviewed the information contained in the negative declaratio request and considered mitigation measures applicable to the project. ON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY VOGELSANG, THE BOARD HAVING FOUND THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT, ADOPTED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 83-10, WITH THE MITIGATING MEASURES AS IMPOSED ON USE PERMIT NO. 83-23, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Godfrey, Evans, Parker, Vogelsang, Smith NOES: None ABSTAIN: None Secretary Godfrey informed the Board that under the R-2 Zoning where five (5) or more dwelling units are proposed, a Use Permit shall first be approved by the Board of Zoning. Mr. Eric Mossman, representing the property owners, was in attendance. Secretary Godfrey explained the proposal to the Board and stated that the application was in substantial ordinance code conformance. The public hearing was opened by Chairman Evans. There being no one present wishing to speak in favor or opposition of the project, the public hearing was closed. Dave Eadie, of the Huntington Beach Company stepped forward and reviewed the applicant's plan and elevations as to the proposed location of the garages, access, etc. in consideration of the proposed Ranch Project to be located to the west.of Mr. Mossman's apartments. Suggested findings and conditions for approval were discussed with the applicant with emphasis placed on replacement of landscaping. ON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY PARKER, USE PERMIT NO. 83-23 (IN CONJUNCTION WITH NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 83-10) WAS APPROVED WITH FINDINGS, CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND VOTE FOLLOWING: FINDINGS: 1. The construction as proposed will not be detrimental to the general welfare of persons residing in the vicinity or detrimental to property or improvements in the area of the proposed construction. 2. The granting of a Use Permit will not affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The plan received April 25, 1983, shall be the conceptually approved plan. -2- BZA 5/18/83 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments May 18, 1983 Page Three 2. Natural gas and 220V electrical shall be stubbed in at the location of clothes dryers. 3. Natural gas shall be stubbed in at the locations of cooking facilities, water heaters, and central heating units. 4. Low volume heads shall be used on all showers. 5. All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material, shall be disposed of at an offsite facility equipped to handle them. 6. The structures on the subject property, whether attached or detached, shall be constructed in compliance with the State acoustical standards -set forth for units that lie within the 60 CNEL contours of the property. The interior noise levels of all dwelling units shall not exceed the California insulation standards of 45 dba CNEL. Evidence of compliance shall consist of submittal of an acoustical analysis report, prepared under the supervision of a person experienced in the field of acoustical engineering, with the application for building permit(s). All measures recommended to mitigate noise to acceptable levels shall be incorporated into the design of the project. 7. A detailed landscape and -irrigation plan shall be submitted for approval to the departments of Public Works and Development Services prior to issuance of building permits. To compensate for the loss of 1 - 24 foot avocado tree and 1 - 24 foot deciduous tree, along with various bushes, the applicant shall plantfour - 24 inch box trees where space permits. The species and location of said trees shall be approved by the landscape division of the Public Works Department with the landscape plan. 8. The maximum height of the three-story structure shall not exceed 35 ft. in height. 9. There shall be no encroachment of structure into easements established for purposes of maintenance of public utilities, ingress and egress in favor of the City of Huntington Beach. Encroachment into the five (5) ft. setback from public utility easement for sidewalk and stairs shall be approved by the Depart- ment of Public Works. Said easement and setback requirements shall be plotted on the plat map for identification purposes. 10. All Conditions of Tentative Parcel Map No. 83-557 shall be complied with prior to issuance of building permits. AYES: Godfrey, Evans, Parker, Vogelsang, Smith NOES: None ABSTAIN: None -3- BZA 5/18/83 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments May 18, 1983 Page Four USE PERMIT NO. 83-28 Applicant: Abbas Mostafavi To permit a C-2 Use in a C-4 Zone. Property located at 17552 Beach Boulevard. Acting Chairman Evans introduced the proposal and stated that this request is Categorically Exempt, Class. 1, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. Secretary Godfrey briefly outlined the applicant's request. He stated that parking was integrated and that the proposed use is not making an additional demand on the parking; that parking is sufficient for the site. The public hearing was opened by Acting Chairman Evans. Don Wills, representing the applicant, stated he was available to answer questions of the Board. Dr. Edward A. Devlin addressed the Board in opposition of the applicant' request. He informed the Board that his office is located in the Beach Medical Villa, 17522 Beach Boulevard - Suite #104, which is located on the north side of the common driveway immediately adjacent to the building for the proposed change of use. He stated he is a physician and surgeon, obstetrician and gynecologist. The medical building is basically a two-story frame and stucco building with windows in each examining room. The building is not soundproof. He said that the existing traffic is very disconcerning and that by allowing a retail auto accessory business adjacent to the common driveway would invite heavy duty trucks, motorcycles, vans, a lot of foot traffic with the possibility of repairs to autos in the.parking lot. He mentioned that many times, as it presently exists, he finds it hard tO hear the fetal heart tones, etc. and talk -to his patients and cannot conceive what it will be like with the additional noise if the proposed use is approved. He felt it would be a definite negative impact on the community, on the other doctors practicing in the same medical building and especially for his patients. Mr. Mills readdressed the Board and stated that they are proposing a high-class tool supply outlet only; no auto parts, automobile repair, etc. will be provided. Further, that this business will have much less foot traffic and require less parking than the earlier tenant - Mesa Leasing Service. Board discussion carried with considerable consideration given to the adjacent property. It was the consensus of all of the Board Members that the proposed change of use, if conditioned for the sale of tools only, would not have an adverse affect on the adjacent properties. -4- BZA 5/18/83 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments May 18, 1983 Page Five ON MOTION BY VOGELSANG AND SECOND BY SMITH, USE PERMIT NO. 83-28 WAS APPROVED WITH FINDINGS, CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND VOTE FOLLOWING: FINDINGS: 1. The use will not be detrimental to persons working in the vicinity. 2. The structure within which this activity will take place already exists. 3. The use of a retail outlet for tools and accessories will have a minimal affect on the adjacent uses. 4. The use will not be injurious to other properties in the vicinity. 5. The granting of the Use Permit will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The plans received April 29, 1983 are the conceptually approved plans. 2. All pertinent requirements of the City Code shall be complied with as required. 3. The use will be strictly for retail sales of tools and related ascessories and not for automobile parts, automobile repair, etc. AYES: Godfrey, Evans, Parker, Vogelsang, Smith NOES: None ABSTAIN: None USE PERMIT NO. 83-29 Applicant:— Mr. Luis Lopez To permit a ten (10) percent increase in maximum height. Property located at 17122 Sims Street. Acting Chairman Evans introduced the proposal and stated that this request is Categorically Exempt, Class. 5, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. Secretary Godfrey informed the Board that the applicant is asking for permission to construct a residential structure which exceeds the maximum allowable height in the R-1 District of less than ten (10) percent (less than three (3) ft.) adjacent to R-2 and R-3 Zoning. -5- BZA 5/18/83 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments May 18, 1983 Page Six The public hearing was opened by Acting Chairman Evans. Mr. Luis Lopez introduced himself to the Board and stated that a three-story residential structure would allow him to view the ocean over the two-story structure homes in his area. Further that the proposed dwelling will maintain continuity of the roof line with the four-story condos adjacent to his property. The public hearing was closed. Findings justifying the applicant's request were discussed. It was felt that the proposed increase in maximum height (less than 3 ft.) for a three-story residential dwelling would be compatible within the applicant's neighborhood. ON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY VOGELSANG, USE PERMIT NO. 83-29 WAS APPROVED WITH FINDINGS, CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND VOTE FOLLOWING: FINDINGS: 1. The use will not be detrimental to persons living or working in the vicinity in that the height over maximum is less than ten (10) percent. 2. The use will not be injurious to property and improvements in the vicinity. There are adjacent to this parcel apartment and multi -story dwellings whose heights are now comparable to the proposed residential structure. 3. The granting of this Use Permit will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. That the plans received April 28, 1983 shall be the conceptually approved plans. 2. That all Conditions of Tentative Parcel Map No. 83-559 shall be complied with. AYES: Godfrey, Evans, Parker, Vogelsang, Smith NOES: None ABSTAIN: None USE PERMIT NO. 83-31 Applicant: Huntington Beach Company To permit a commercial coach for interim office use. Location 2110 Main Street. The proposal was introduced by the Acting Chairman who stated that this request is Categorically.Exempt, Class. 3, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. -6- BZA 5/18/83 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments May 18, 1983 Page Seven Secretary Godfrey briefly outlined the applicant's request stating that commercial coachs may be allowed as an expansion to an existing use for a period not to exceed five (5) years subject to approval of a Use Permit application approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustments. The public hearing was opened by Acting Chairman Evans. Dave Eadie, speaking in behalf of the Huntington Beach Company, stated that they are seeking approval to place a commercial coach next to their offices for a period not to exceed five years which will enable the entire staff to be placed in one office facility. Their ultimate objective is to move into either the last building which is proposed within Seacliff Office Park or into one of the existing office park buildings. They do not have enough contiguous space in the existing building to enable a consolidated staff move. Additionally, they have elected to delay construction of another building because of a depressed office market. They expect these factors to be alleviated and thus feel that a commercial coach is the best interim solution to their problem. The public hearing was closed. The Board reviewed the location for the commercial coach and discussed the addition of fifteen gallon trees to screen the coach from view while enhancing the existing landscaping. ON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY GODFREY, USE PERMIT NO. 83-31 WAS APPROVED WITH FINDINGS, CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND VOTE FOLLOWING: FINDINGS: 1. The use will not be detrimental to persons residing or working in the vicinity as it will temporarily house persons working in the office facility on the property. 2. The use will not be injurious to property and improvements in the vicinity as it's a temporary use. 3. The granting of this Use Permit will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The conceptual plot plan received May 6, 1983 shall be the approved layout. 2. A $500 cash bond shall be posted to assure removal of the coach at the end of the approval period. -7- BZA 5/18/83 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments May 18, 1983 Page Eight 3. That parking, setbacks, landscaping and all applicable provisions of the zoning district whereon the coach is located are met. 4. Use Permit No. 83-31 shall be approved for a period of five (5), years after approval date or until such time as the coach is no longer necessary - whichever comes first. 5. Additional fifteen (15) gallon trees shall be planted to screen the coach from view enhancing the existing landscaping. AYES: Godfrey, Evans, Parker, Vogelsang, Smith NOES: None ABSTAIN: None CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 83-10 IN CONJUNCTION WITH USE PERMIT NO. 83-25 C.E. Request: To permit a reduction in landscaping from the Code required landscaping and to allow an encroachment into the required sight angle and front yard setback. U.P. Request: To permit the construction of an 863 square foot build- ing in conjunction with a car rental agency. Applicant: Enterprise Rent-A-Car, Location - 17090 Beach Boulevard Acting Chairman Evans introduced both applications and stated that C.E. No. 83-10 is a Class. 5 Action and Us.e.Permit No. 83-25 is a Class. 3 Action, both Categorically Exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. Secretary Godfrey stated that the applicant is proposing to construct a small office structure to conduct a car rental activity. The subject property is a remnant piece -left over when Beach Boulevard -was improved to its existing right-of-way. The property is 46 ft. in depth, all of which constitutes a setback line as delineated on the sectional district map adopted by the City Council. In order to develop within this setback area a trade-off of one (1) foot of landscaping for every foot of encroachment must be adhered to or a Conditional Exception granted. Staff has reviewed the application and is proposing a slightly amended version for consideration. Staff's version would eliminate the need for an exception to an encroachment into the required sight angle setback. There still would be an exception required for the front yard setback in that there would not be a trade-off of one (1) foot of landscaping for every foot of encroachment. The applicant is proposing a three (3) foot landscape planter area on Beach Boulevard. Staff is asking for the minimum code requirement of nine (9) ft. of -8- BZA 5/18/83 Minutes: H.B, Board of Zoning Adjustments May 18, 1983 Page Nine landscaped area across the front portion of the lot. Further,that the structure be located a distance north approximately the width of the building so that there is "no encroachment into the sight angle setback". The applicant was given a copy of the amended plan and informed of suggested findings and conditions of approval should he agree to the modifications to his site plan. The public hearing was opened for both applications by Acting Chair- man Evans. David Willey, of Enterprise Rent-A-Car, was present to speak in behalf of the two applications. Upon his review of the amended plan he outlined his main concern to be the nine (9) ft. of landscaping in lieu of three (3) ft. shown on his original plan fronting Beach Boulevard because of the narrow depth of the property. He also felt that by the relocation of the driveway (although it allowed additional parking) it might possibly encourage use of the alley for vehicular turning purposes. The Board explained to Mr. Willey that three (3) ft. of landscaping is not sufficient for the front of his property and that the nine (9) ft. of landscaping shown on the amended plan was considered to be a trade-off for encroachment into the setback area. Also, that the relocation of the proposed structure would eliminate his request to encroach into the required sight angle allowing only a slight encroachment into the front yard setback. As Mr. Willey felt he required additional time to review the amended plan along with the conditions, he requested a one (1) week continuance. ON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY PARKER, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 83-10 AND USE PERMIT NO. 83-25 WERE CONTINUED ONE (1) WEEK, TO THE MEETING OF MAY 25, 1983, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Godfrey, Evans, Parker, Vogelsang, Smith NOES: None ABSTAIN: None CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 83-13 Applicant: Mr. Larry B. Taylor To permit a reduction in"the minimum open space dimensional,require- ment and a substitution of the locational criteria for recreational open space. Property located at 1846 Main Street. r%9- BZA 5/18/83 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments May 18, 1983 Page Ten Acting Chairman Evans introduced the proposal and stated that this request is Categorically Exempt, Class. 5, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. Secretary Godfrey commented that the applicant is proposing to construct a single-family dwelling on an R-1 lot. He is asking for relief from the open space requirement of providing a minimum open space area of 900 square feet within the rear 2/3's of the lot. He is proposing to substitute the front yard open space for that requirement. Justification for approval as delineated in the Code, findings and conditions for approval were discussed. The public hearing was opened. Larry Taylor, applicant, informed the Board that it will take him approximately 1-1/2 years to construct his residence and.that, possibily,17th Street may be abandoned by the time it's completed. Fie asked for relief from the condition that a fence be constructed for recreational open space within his front -yard setback due to the possibility of 17th Street being vacated as it would allow him additional area to construct a swimming pool which would change the location of hia fence. The Board explained the necessity of a fence in the applicant's front yard setback in trade for recreational open space in his rear yard and informed him that as long as the fence is architecturally compatible with its surroundings, the fence would not have to be of solid construction for temporary use. ON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY EVANS, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 83-13 WAS GRANTED WITH FINDINGS, CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, AND VOTE FOLLOWING: FINDINGS: 1. The granting of this Conditional Exception will not constitute a grant of special privilege inasmuch as this property is short of area because of the alignment of 17th Street which cuts across the front portion of this lot thereby reducing the area of this lot. The substitution of front yard open space for rear yard open space has been granted previously under certain circumstances. 2. The strict application of the zoning ordinance would deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties within the applicant's subdivision by virtue of the fact that these other lots have more area. -10- BZA 5/18/83 Minutes: H.B._Board of Zoning Adjustments May 18, 1983 Page Eleven 3. The proposal would be consistent with other single-family residences in the vicinity of this property. 4. The granting of the conditional exception will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property in the same zone classification. 5. The granting of the Conditional Exception will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL: The conceptual plot plan and elevations received and dated May 3, 1983, shall be the approved layout subject to the following: 1. Alley dedication of two and one-half (2.5) feet shall be required prior to issuance of building permits. General Condition: 1. That the front yard open space area used for substitute be enclosed by a fence five feet in height so that this space will serve the same purpose as rear yard open space for active and passive outdoor activities. The architectural treatment of the fence shall be approved by the Department of Development Services prior to issuance of building permits. The installation of the fence to be completed prior to occupancy. 2. That all pertinent conditions and requirements of the City Code shall be complied with as required either prior to issuance of building permits or prior to final inspection. AYES: Godfrey, Smith, Evans NOES: Vogelsang ABSTAIN: Parker CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 83-14 In Conjunction with ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 83-19 Applicant: Mr. Joe Gougis C.E. Request - To permit a five (5) foot encroachment into the required ten (10) foot front yard setback. A.R. Request - To permit construction of a 16,224 square foot Industrial Building. Location - 18202 Enterprise Lane. -ll- BZA 5/18/83 s Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments May 18, 1983 Page Twelve Acting Chairman Evans introduced both requests and informed the Board that the applications were categorically exempt, Class. 5, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. Secretary Godfrey outlined both applications stating that the subject property is located on a "dog -leg" street intersection whereat the turning radius required for vehicle turning movements has created an irregular shaped lot. Further, that prior to construction of an industrial building in the M-1 Zoning District an Administrative Review application is subject to approval by the Board of Zoning Adjustments. Suggested findings and conditions of approval were discussed. The public hearing was opened. There being no one present (including Mr. Gougis) wishing to speak in favor or opposition of the requests, the public hearing was closed: The Board Members reviewed and discussed the applicant's site plan taking into consideration the mandatory findings for hardship permitting granting of the Conitional Exception. It was felt that the proposed industrial building would establish standards of design and type of use which would not only enhance the area but would be in harmony with the objectives of the General Plan. ON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY VOGELSANG, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 83-14 AND ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 83-19 WERE APPROVED AS FOLLOWS, SUCCEEDED BY VOTE: FINDINGS - C.E. NO. 83-14 1. The granting of this Conditional Exception will not create a grant of special privilege inasmuch as the subject property is located on a site wherein the front property line has an irregular configuration. 2. The strict application of the zoning ordinance would deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by adjacent properties located in the vicinity. 3. The proposal to encroach into the front setback area would be consistent with other setbacks that exist in the vicinity. 4. The granting of the Conditional Exception will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare nor injurious to property in the same zone classification. 5. The granting of the Conditional Exception will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. -12- BZA 5/18/83 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments May 18, 1983 Page Thirteen CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - C.E. No. 83-14 The conceptual plot plan and elevations received May 3, 1983 shall be the approved layout. General Condition: 1. All Conditions imposed on Administrative Review No. 83-19 shall be applicable. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - A.R. No. 83-19 1. The conceptual plot plan and elevations received May 3, 1983 shall be the approved layout. 2. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan in accord with Article 979 of the H.B. Ordinance Code shall be submitted to the departments of Development Services and Public Works for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 3. Elevations for this building are to be compatible in architectural treatment and surface materials to other industrial uses in the vicinity and shall be approved by the Department of Develop- ment Services. 4. A rooftop mechanical equipment screening plan shall be submitted to the Department of Development Services prior to issuance of building permits. Said plan shall indicate screening of all rooftop mechanical equipment and shall delineate the type of material proposed to screen said equipment. 5. All pertinent City Code requirements shall be complied with as required either prior to issuance of building permits or final inspection - whichever the Code requires. AYES: Godfrey, Smith, Vogelsang, Parker, Evans NOES: None ABSTAIN: None MISCELLANEOUS ITEM: USE PERMIT NO. 83-10 (Approved by the BZA 3/23/83) Applicant: Brian and Nancy Kleeman Original Request Approved by the BZA on 3/23/83 - To permit an addition to a single-family dwelling following existing non -conforming sideyards. -13- BZA 5/18/83 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments May 18, 1983 Page Fourteen Additional request to be approved: Request in square footage to the proposed addition with non -conforming yards. Secretary Godfrey displayed the revised site plan to the Board Members for their review and stated that the only change was a reduction in square footage. It was the consensus of all concerned that the amended plan should be approved. ON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY EVANS, THE AMENDED SITE PLAN WITH ELEVATIONS DATED MAY 13, 1983 SHALL BE THE CONCEPTUALLY APPROVED PLAN. AYES: Godfrey, Evans, Parker, Vogelsang, Smith NOES: None ABSTAIN: None THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED. Glen K. Godfrey, Secretary Board of Zoning Adjustments -14- BZA 5/18/83