Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-02-15MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS Room B-6 - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1984 - 1:30 P.M. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Godfrey, Smith, Evans, Poe STAFF MEMBER PRESENT: Pierce MINUTES: ON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY SMITH, THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 18, 1984 WERE APPROVED AS TRANS- CRIBED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Godfrey, Smith, Evans, Poe NOES: None ABSTAIN: None REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 84-5 Applicant: Mr. Paul H. Breen To permit a portion of the required open space to be located behind the front setback and separated by a structure less than 42 inches in height. Subject property is located at 19712 Phoenix Lane. Chairman Smith introduced the applicant's request and stated that this proposal is categorically exempt, Class. 5, under the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970. Staff informed the Board that the plans submitted were evaluated with a visual inspection made of the property. The applicant is proposing to build an addition within his rear yard encroaching into his open space area. The Zoning Ordinance will allow the applicant to use part of his front and part of his rear yard to satisfy his open space requirement providing both areas consist individually of 625 sq. ft. The applicant can meet this requirement and is requesting that the existing 28 inch separation structure within his front yard setback be allowed in lieu of a 42 inch structure. Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments February 15, 1984 Page Two The public hearing was opened by Chairman Smith. Mr. Breen was present to speak in behalf of his proposal. He asked for favorable consideration of his request as he felt the 28 inch brick -capped wall matched the architectural treatment of his home. Photographs were submitted to the Board Members to help in their deliberation. Mr. Breen felt that to add additional bricks► bring- ing the separation structure up to 42 inches in height would detract from the esthetics of the existing curved wall, surrounding a courtyard. It was stated that a telcon communication was received from an adjacent neighbor stating he has no objection to the addition providing it is a single -story. Their being no one present wishing to speak in favor or opposition of the applicant's request, the public hearing was closed. Upon the Board's review of the conceptual site plan, it was felt that the pie shape lot has created the applicant's hardship justify- ing approval of his request. ON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY SMITH, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 84-5 WAS GRANTED WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOLLOWING, SUCCEEDED BY VOTE: FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: 1. The granting of the conditional exception will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent upon other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classification. 2. Because of the existing courtyard located behind the frontyard setback and physically separated by an existing 28 inch high wall (42+ inches abave property line grade) the intent of the open space requirement is satisfied. .3. Because of the existing topography of the property, the strict application of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classifications. 4. The granting of a conditional exception is necessary in order to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. 5. The granting of a conditional exception will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to property in the same zone classifications. 6. The granting of the conditional exception will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. -2- BZA 2/15/84 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments February 15, 1984 Page Three CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan, floor plan, and elevations received January 30, 1984 shall be the approved layout. 2. The addition shall be architecturally compatible with the existing structure. 3. No other additions will be permitted which will reduce the open space area requirement. AYES: Godfrey, Smith, Evans, Poe NOES: None ABSTAIN: None USE PERMIT NO. 84-7 (In conjunction with T.P.M. No. 84-556(W) Applicant: Edward Rowan/Glen Burchfield To permit construction of three dwelling units on property abutting an arterial. Subject property is located at 950 - 10th Street. The applicant's request was introduced by Chairman Smith. It was stated that this proposal is categorically exempt, Class. 3, Calif- ornia Environmental Quality Act, 1970. Staff informed all concerned that the applicant's proposal is to completely renovate an existing home and add three rental units located in an R-3 zoning district. The zoning ordinance, prior to construction of dwelling units abutting an arterial highway, requires that a Use Permit first be approved contingent upon the developer's compliance with all the criteria contained in the current standards for apartment development. The parcel map waiver is to eliminate the lot line between parcels 40 and 41. It was explained to the applicant that although alley dedication has been made, he will have to post a surety bond with Public Works or what- ever type method deemed necessary by the City Attorney's Office to perform improvements necessary on Lake Street prior to issuance of building permits or concurrently. The public hearing was opened by Chairman Smith. Discussion carried with the applicant covering fencing to screen the parking area, possibilities for the parkway (sidewalk and stair -step landscaping), roof and architecural treatment. ON MOTION BY POE AND SECOND BY EVANS, USE PERMIT NO. 84-7 (IN CONJUNCTION WITH TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 84-556(W) WERE BOTH APPROVED AS FOLLOWS, SUCCEEDED BY VOTE: -3- BZA 2/15/84 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments February 15, 1984 Page Four FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - U.P. NO. 84-7 1. The establishment, maintenance and operation of the use will not be detrimental to: a. The general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity; b. Property and improvements in the vicinity; -of, -such use or building. 2. The granting of a use permit will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. 3. The proposal is consistent with the City's General Plan of Land Use. = CONDITIONS -_OF -APPROVAL: 1. The elevations submitted January 24,1984 shall -be the -approved layout ,subject to the additional requirements. 2. Roof material shall be fire -retardant shadow shingle. 3. Special architectural treatment around windows and doors and roofline shall be to the -satisfaction of the Secretary of the Board. 4. Existing structure shall be architecturally compatible with proposed addition. 5. A maximum 3-1/2 ft.-high fence shall be constructed along the east property -line -from the alley to the north end of the -parking--area. Said fence shall be architecturally compatible with the proposed project. FINDING FOR APPROVAL-:T.P.M. NO. 84-556(WAIVER) 1. The proposed subdivision complies with the requirements as to ._area „ improvement and design, -flood and water drainage control, appropriate improved public roads, sewer and water facilities, environmental protection and other requirements of the City Subdivision Ordinance"and Subdivision Map Act. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: A. TO -BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO USE OR OCCUPANCY OF SAID PARCEL FOR ANY -PURPOSE: 1. The tentative parcel map received by the Department of --Development Services on January 26,- 1984 shall'be the approved layout. -4- BZA 2/15/84 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments February 15, 1984 Page Five 2. Water supply shall be through the City of Huntington Beach's water system at the time said parcel is developed (if such systems exist within 200 feet of said parcel). 3. Sewage disposal shall be through the City of Huntington Beach's sewage system at the time said parcel is developed (if such systems exist within 200 feet of said parcel). 4. All utilities shall be installed underground at the time said parcel is developed. 5. Compliance with all applicable City Ordinances. 6. The applicant shall file, through the Huntington Beach City Clerk's office, and have recorded with the Orange County Recorder's office, a certificate of compliance in conjunction with the approved plat map. A copy of the recorded certificate of compliance and plat map shall be filed with the Department of Development Services prior to issuance of building permits on the subject property. 7. The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the Public Works Department to install improvements along Lake Street by a date certain. Said agreement shall be filed prior to issuance of building permits and accompanied by the required cash deposit or other bond method approved by the City Attorney. In the event no agreement is filed, a parcel map shall be required. AYES: Poe, Evans, Godfrey, Smith NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 83-90 Applicant: Mr. J. Don Hartfelder To permit construction of a 28,000 sq. ft. Industrial Building to be located on Woodwind Drive - north side of street (Lot 1 - 169, Block 5 of Tract 171) . Chairman Smith introduced the applicant's request and stated that this proposal is covered by Negative Declaration No. 79-35. The applicant and property owner met with staff prior to today's hearing to receive comments on their proposal. Concerns with poor circulation, relocation of trash area from the east side of the site to the west side, increase in parking stall size, and relocation of the handicapped parking space were discussed. -5- BZA 2/15/84 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments February 15, 1984' Page Six The applicant agreed to revise his plan incorporating changes satisfying `the_Board's concerns as outlined in the conditions for approval_. Materials, color and architectural features for the tilt -up -concrete industrial building were discussed. Board Member Evans objected to the two (2) parking stalls_proposed within the building. _ ON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY POE, ADMINISTRATIVE -REVIEW NO. 83-90 WAS GRANTED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS'OF APPROVAL; SUCCEEDED BY -VOTE: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. A revised site and floor plan and elevations shall be submitted depicting the modifications described herein: a. Relocation of trash--bin.-- b. Relocation of handicapped parking space. c. Two parking spaces -within building. 2. Prior to -issuance of building permits; the applicant_ -shall - submit 'the following plans: a. Landscape and irrigation plan to the Department of Development Services and Public Works -for review and approval = b. Rooftop mechanical equipment -plan-.' Said plan shall indicate screening of all rooftop mechanical equipment-and_shall delineate-the-type-of•mater-ial.Proposed'to screen said equipment*. - 3. The development -shall comply with -all applicable provisions'of the Ordinance Code, -Building Division and Fire Department._-" 4. Maximum separation between'build_ing -wall and property line shall not exceed two--'(2) inches.' 5. Driveway -approaches shall be a-minimum"of twenty-seven (27) feet in width and shall be of radius type construction. 6. Onsite fire hydrants shall be provided in number and at locations specified by the'' Fire- Department--. -6- BZA 2/15/84 Minutes: H.B. Board February 15, 1984 Page Seven of Zoning Adjustments 7. An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be approved and installed pursuant to Fire Department regulations. 8. Low -volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets. 9. 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. 10. If lighting is included in the parking lot, high-pressure sodium vapor lamps shall be used for energy savings. All outside lighting shall be directed to prevent "spillage" onto adjacent properties. 11. A detailed soils analysis shall be prepared by a registered soils engineer. This analysis shall include onsite soil sampling and laboratory testing of materials to provide detailed recommendations regarding grading, chemical and fill properties, foundations, retaining walls, streets, and utilities. 12. If foil -type insulation is to be used, a fire retardant type shall be installed as approved by the Building Division. 13. Two required parking spaces may be provided inside the building. These spaces shall be striped and marked. AYES: Godfrey, Smith, Poe NOES: Evans ABSTAIN: None NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 84-2 AND ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 84-1 Applicant: Frank H. Ayres & Son Construction Co. To permit an additional 20,510 sq. ft. self -storage to an existing facility located at 7012 Ernest. Chairman Smith introduced the applicant's request. Staff informed all concerned that in 1982 the applicant appeared before the Planning Commission (C.U.P. 82-6) and received approval for a storage building for recreational vehicles on the adjacent property. The applicant is now proposing to construct 20,510 sq. ft. of additional inside storage on the subject property which he has leased. All improvements are in. A twenty-four hour caretaker lives on the adjacent site who will also be responsible for the new addition. -7- BZA 2/15/84 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments February 15, 1984 Page Eight rll 1 The proposed storage facility substantially complies with all provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code -including parking,'setbacks and landscaping with -architectural treatment pending review by the Design Review Board as the proposal is located-in'a-"Civic District". The applicant was -informed that a twenty-five (25) ft. drive for fire access around the perimeter of the proposed interior storage building was necessary creating'a small change -'in the landscaping located on the east side (Stewart Street). Also, -that the trash enclosure will have to be relocated to the -end of.the building on the west side.- Additionally, that the door shown on'the property line will have to be removed. Mr. Bruce Ayres addressed the Board. He stated.ihat- although there are two (2) parcels involved, they are -considering same as one project; that they have.ru_ninto a need for more -storage building,proposed on a fully improved,.lot adjacent to where -recreational vehicle=parking now exists. - The possibility.of having two -caretakers was -discussed should the property ever be sold off. --- The Board reviewed the information -contained in the negative declaratio information- contained considered ,'mitigating -measures; in addition to -Conditions of Approva for the proposed project-,__ ON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY,:POE,,THE BOARD,HAVING-FOUND THAT THE _ PROPOSED PROJECT WILL' NOT HAVE: ASIGNIFICANT ADVERSE _EFFECT ON- THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT, ADOPTED NEGATIVE DECLARATION'NO: 84-2, WITH MITIGATING'MEASURES AS IMPOSED ON ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 84-1, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Godfrey, Evans, Smith, Poe NOES None ABSTAIN: -None ON MOTION -BY POE AND SECOND--BY-SMITH, ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 84-1 WAS CONDITIONALLY APPROVED AS FOLLOWS, SUCCEEDED BY VOTE: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site.plan and floor plan received and dated January 24, 1984 shall -be the approved layout. 2. Prior to -issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit -the following -plan: _ a. Rooftop mechanical equipment plan. Said plan shall indicate screening of all-rooftop_mechanical equipment and shall delineate the type of material proposed to screen said equipment. -8- BZA 2/15/84 Minutes: H,,B. Board of Zoning Adjustments February 15, 1984 Page Nine 3. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department. 4. Architectural treatment of proposed buildings shall be approved by the Design Review Board. 5. Onsite fire hydrants shall be provided in number and at locations specified by the Fire Department. 6. An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be approved and installed pursuant to Fire Department regulations. 7. Fire access lanes shall be maintained. If fire lane violations occur and the services of the Fire Department are required, the applicant will be liable for expenses incurred. 8. 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. 9. If lighting is included in the parking lot, high-pressure sodium vapor lamps shall be used for energy savings. All outside lighting shall be directed to prevent "spillage" onto adjacent properties. 10. A detailed soils analysis shall be prepared by a registered soils engineer. This analysis shall include onsite soil sampling and laboratory testing of materials to provide detailed recommendations regarding grading, chemical and fill properties, foundations, retaining walls, streets, and utilities. 11. If foil -type insulation is to be used, a fire retardant type shall be installed as approved by the Building Division. AYES: Godfrey, Evans, Smith, Poe NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 84-4 Applicant: Mr. Chuck Best c/o Security Pacific National Bank To permit joint use of parking for a restaurant in an existing shopping center in a C-2 Zone. The shopping center is located on the southwest corner of Beach & Garfield. Following introduction of the applicant's request, Chairman Smith stated that per Section 15105 of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, this request is a Class. 5, categorically exempt. -9- BZA 2/15/84 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments February 15, 1984 Page Ten It was stated that staff is recommending approval of the applicant's request providing the maximum number.of seating stations for the 2,700.sq..ft. restaurant (Two Brothers' -Pizza)' does not exceed twenty. The existing center has provided 476 parking spaces. The required parking for a retail center combined with a financial institution building equals 469.5 parking space requirement. To add a restaurant facility,based on current parking ratios for intense uses, -a minimum of 13.5 additional spaces are required. Mr. Best of Security Pacific National Bank, Agent representing the owner of the subject property, introduced himself to the Board. He submitted for the.,Board's review a list of.business hours for each tenant - within -the center. Mr. _ - Best stated his concurrence with the condition that employee parking be located at the rear of the restaurant felt to be a voluntary compromise. The shopping center was developed prior to allowance of'_compact car standards. The owner could restripe parking to get the additional thirteen (13) required parking spaces in lieu of -joint use parking. This option was- not - felt necessary by the Board -as joint-use parking was felt to be justified. ON MOTION BY EVANS-AND SECOND BY SMITH;- ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 84-4 WAS CONDITIONALLY APPROVED AS FOLLOWS, SUCCEEDED BY VOTE: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. A floor plan shall-be_submitted to the Secretary of the Board for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 2. Maximum number of seating stations shall not exceed twenty. 3. Employee -parking shall -be to the rear of this building. AYES: Godfrey, Smith, Evans, Poe NOES: None ABSTAIN: None 1 THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, -THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED TO THE MONDAY MORNING STUDY SESSION AT 10:00 A.M. ON FEBRUARY 20, 1984. Glen K. Godfrey, Secretar - Board of Zoning Adjustments -10- BZA 2/15/84