HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-03-28MINUTES
HUNTINGTON BEACH BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS
Room B-6 - Civic Center
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, CA
WEDNESDAY, MARCH •28, 1984 - 1:30 P.M.
LA
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Godfrey, Smith,.Evans, Vincent
STAFF MEMBER PRESENT: Pierce
MINUTES: ON MOTION.BY EVANS AND SECOND BY GODFREY,
THE MINUTES -OF THE REGULAR MEETING;OF
FEBRUARY.- 29,, 1984', WERE- APPROVED) AS_ T.RANS-
CRIBELl • BY-' THE-: FOLLOWING: VOTE:
AYES: -
NOES:
ABSTAIN:. -
ABSENT:,
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS:
Godfrrey,. Smith,• Evans,
None
None
Vincent.
CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 84-14-
Applicant• Corbin/Yama-fuj'i &-Partners, Inc.
To permit: a) -,
a reduction, of- turning- radius- from 27 ft. to. 25' ft.,.
b) to permit a reduction -in parking -space length by providing.2-1/2-
ft. of. additional landscaping and- c): landscaping to- allow the 2-1/2
ft. landscape strip to be- included- in minimum landscape. percentage
requirement. Site' location. is 15922* Pacific Coast- Highway• (Mariner's Pt,..);
The applicant's request-wasintroduced- by, Chairman. Smith who stated
that this'proposal is categorically - exempt, Class.. 5, under the --
California Environmental Qua_lityr Act-. of 1:970..
Staff informed the Board that this -project -was -previously -approved
and not discovered until actual construction commenced that landscaping -
and parking requirements -as shown_ on. their_ building, plans can not. be
met. The schematic plans approved lack: a critical-2 ft., 6- in.. auto
Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 28, 1984
Page Two
overhang dimension. This oversight impacts eleven compact parking
stalls required for the building as designed. The applicant is
proposing a twenty-five ft. turning radius in lieu of the Code
required twenty-seven ft., overhanging one-half ft. into the land-
scape planter.
The public hearing was opened by Chairman Smith with Mr. David
Christian present to speak -in favor of his proposal. He stated that
it was not their intention to have the 216" overhang not clearly
illustrated on their original plan. He mentioned that in several
cities throughout the United States a 20 - 24 ft. turning radius
is usually considered acceptable for backing up of autos. Mr.
Christian was asked if he had any objection to moving the curbing
forward, reducing the landscaping within the front setback from
1216" to 10' allowing for full compact stall size (8' x 151) with
no portion overhanging into the landscape planter area. This would
provide a twenty-five ft. turning radius felt not to impair vehicular
maneuverability. Mr. Christian stated his concurrence.
There being no one else present wishing to speak in favor or opposition
of the applicant's request., the public hearing was closed.
ON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY SMITH, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO.
84=14 WAS GRANTED WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOLLOWING,
SUCCEEDED BY VOTE:
FINDINGS:
1. The granting of a reduction in turning radius for compact spaces
will not impair vehicular maneuvering.
2. 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.
3. The qranting of a conditional exception is necessary in order to
preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights.
4. The granting of a conditional exception will not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to property in
the same zone classifications.
5. The granting of the conditional exception will not adversely
affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. A:revised site plan shall be submitted to the Secretary of the
Board for review and approval prior to issuance of building
perm its .
-2- BZA 3/28/84
Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 28, 1984
Page Three
2. Compact parking stalls shall be 8 ft. x 15 ft. with no portion
of that length overhanging landscape planter area.
AYES: Evans, Smith, Godfrey
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Vincent
CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 84-15
AND
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 84-12
Appl.: Hugh Seeds
C.E. Request: To permit: a) encroachment into 50 ft. setback, b)
encroachment into sight angle.
A.R. Request: To permit an addition to existing buildings.
The applications were introduced by Chairman Smith who stated that
the Conditional Exception was a Class. 5 and the Administrative
Review was a Class.l, both categorically exempt under the California
Environmental Quality Act of 1970.
Staff reported that th_e overall site plan for the commercial shopping
center has sufficient parking for the proposed additional square
footage of floor area. Staff, upon analysis, generally felt that
as the commercial building to the south is located at a ten (10) ft.
setback, the applicant's proposal would be compatible. Additionally,
that as a glassed -in greenhouse is proposed fronting the facility,
impact would be minimized giving the appearance of an open area.
Suggested Conditions of Approval were discussed.
The public hearing was opened by Chairman Smith.
Walter Lipps, speaking in favor of the proposal, stated that.he felt
the greenhouse would mitigate the encroachment and that the additional
landscaping provided in the front setback will enhance the street
scene. A rendering was displayed for viewing felt to permit integrity
of design (retention of -landscaping, parking and circulation) allow-
ing the applicant equitable potential use of the property. Mr. Lipps
stated the proposed addition to the subject building is to accommodate
a first-class restaurant and gourmet delicatessen/winery shop of a
calibre that will be an asset to the surrounding properties. He.
pointed out that -the -subject shopping center location is unique in that
it is situated between -an office -professional zone to the south upon
which an existing -office building is constructed within 10 ft.'of the
right-of-way, providing no sight angle visibility to the applicant.'s
existing building,.and'a non -conforming service station site to.the
north upon which'structures are located within ten feet of thd,right-
of-way. Hugh Seeds and Ken Bourguignon felt that as more than minimum
requirements required by the Code are.being provided to develop
the property,approval-should be granted.
-3- BZA .3/28/84
Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 28, 1984
Page Four
Helen Psaros, 3531 Venture Drive, spoke in opposition of the project.
She stated that at the intersection of Bolsa Chica and Edinger
there are alot of accidents -'and -felt the proposed use would add
to the hazardous situation. Mrs. Psaros felt onsite parking would
become impacted and that the requested encroachment would block
:the sight visibility of people making.'arght.:_harn into the
shopping center. She felt the fifty (50) ft. setback should be
maintained.
The public hearing was closed by Chairma'n.-Smith -"'
Board discussion ensued covering the additional landscaping proposed
within the front setback considered to be a trade-off for the encroach-
ment -tying in with the.adjacent property, circulation, the fact that
the parcel-'zs=-unique- because: -of -..the 'encroachment of the building
located -to the south felt to be a hardship as it hinders visibility,
etc. Theapplicantstated,;he was amenable to additional landscaping
inside_-o£-tiie:-gla°seed-in'-'greenhoiise7but --felt,,seat ing "Within this
particular.,-area.was necessary. Secretary Godfrey did not concur
with dining---within-the the green�-house area. The applicant was informed_
that overhead fire sprinklers were a requirement.
ON -MOTION BY VINCENT AND`SECOND"BY SMITH; CONDITIONAL�EXCEPTION-NO.
84-15 WAS CONDITIONALLY 'APPRdVED AS'I.OLLOWS; "SUC'CEEbED BY VOTE:
FINDINGS - G.E. NO. 84-15 =`- - 'Q7 -
i:-` 'The proposed encroactimdnt=`="into required=setback is consistent
"`with the setback for th'e adjacent site to the south.
'2., fhe proposed encroachment -into the sight angle is minimized by
the proposed greenhouse addition.
3.k Additional= -intensive landscaping will be provided to reduce
visual impact of encroachment.
,CONDITIONS. OF APPROVAL - 'C.E.-:N0=-84=1-5 •'-• ---
1. The,` site plan_ and elevations -submitted March_-�9, `-1984,` . shall be
-the' approved- Payout. =: __.-._. �,. _ v .
2. 'Adjacent to `-the property `---line and 'south"of 'the7�Bolsa -'ChiCa Street _
"driveway to':the south property --line; a-two=foot wide strip of the
public -right-of-way sidewalk :shall. be _,sawcut, sidewalk --removed,
and an'intensified landscape`plante`r installed; meeting standards
of Publ-icrTW6rks Department and approval of the -City Engineer.
.27'
3. The property, owner. shall enter into,a maintenance agreement with
;the . City -;of '_Hunti ngtorx tBeacYi. -_
4.- The "first -,thirty-six `(36) .1. fiches or equivalent ;of; -glassed -in
greenhouse area shall -be -architecturally treated with landscaping.
-4 BZA 3/28/84
Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 28, 1984
Page Five
AYES: Vincent, Smith, Evans
NOES: Godfrey
ABSTAIN: None
ON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY SMITH, ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO.
84-12 WAS GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL AND VOTE FOLLOWING:
CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL - A.R. NO. 84-12
1. The conceptual site plan and elevations received and dated March
9, 1984 shall be the approved layout.
2. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit
the following plans:
a. Landscape and irrigation plan to the Department of Develop-
ment 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 material proposed to screen said
equipment.'
3. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of
the Ordinance Code, Building Division,.and Fire Department.
4. Proposed structures shall be architecturally compatible with
existing structures. Elevations of office additions shall be
submitted to the Secretary of the Board prior to issuance of
building permits.
5. Low -volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets.
6. 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.
7. If lighting is included in the parking lot, high-pressure sodium
vapor lamps shall be used for energy savings. All outside
lightingshall- be _di"rected to prevent "spillage" onto adjacent
properties.
8. If foil -type -insulation is to be used,"a fire retardant type
shall_ be installed as approved by the Building Division.
9. A fire sprinkler system shall be installed meeting the standards
of the Fire Code.
AYES: Evans; Smith, Vincent
NOES: Godfrey
ABSTAIN: None .
-5- BZA 3/28/84
Minutes: : H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 28, 1984
Page Six
USE PERMIT- NO: 84-18
Applicant: Mr. Rudi Van Mil
To permit 3,200-'sq. ft. drive-thru - Bldg. "D", 2,400 sq. ft. retail
and '2-, 000 sq. 'ft:: 'office second story - Bldg. "C" . Site location
is northwest corner of Beach Boulevard and Slater Avenue.
The proposal wasintioduced by Chairman Smith who informed all
concerned that this request, is covered by Negative Declaration No.
78-23
Staff reiterated.. that as a condition for approval -of Use Permit
No.` 83-40 covering entitl'ementf=for `construction of the shopping
center-,"aconditaon' was imposed .for Pads C and D that prior to
development' `approval 'would have to `Yie -granted-,for 'tYieir-`use via
the permit _proce_ss .
The. appl'ica'nt' •is_ 'requesting' to use Building "C "` -for�"reta11 and
Building -"D"-_`for` a Wendy Drive=.thru restaurant.- "Although -the
Code -allows ten,parking-spaces`to'be counted in the drive-thru
portion-_the.,site is still ,deficient. by ,twentyr two_ parking4_spaces.
Should. the. applicant, enter. into a.. reciprocal, park-i,ng_' and,'-acces-s
agreement,._with. the _adjacent; shopping center-.(under.;the same` ownership
total -,parking;- for the, enure_ j��i.tes =wou] d` 'still, -bej; short three parking
space.. Staff .is _not .in_ favor -.of; integrated. pa:Eking _on' both .sites.
Add itionall--.,,,that the, drive=;tYir i portion: of ',the= r;e_Staurdnt his too -
close, -to._thb; entrance/exit oil; Slater Avenue_ _felt` -to :create -
congestion. _ ..
The- public heari-ng wa s opened by CS irmbCn 'Smith .'
Mr. Van Mil, applicant, addressed the Board: He said that Building
"D" can ;not..be relocated -creating?.an ;easement. to give.;his„applicant
the drive=_thr_u_. He stated that ;ou_ r . Traf tic Department: reviewed_ their -
plan and 'had'_no .adverse comments: He introduced ;M!: 'Car1_ Wayne,
Director of. Operations ,for .Wendy'_s._. _, Mr:: Wayne =t _explained heir
operation arid;_felt as theix_;customers _are in; -and but" -within, thirty
seconds 'there -would be no- possibility of -"a stacking_',problem. - The
possibility of a traffic'confl`ict':with.-people entering the property
from -,two different direct ori,s ;was `explained- _to ;the :applicants.
There ;being: no one ,else present wishing: -to _`speak_- in favor --or' opposition
of the ,applicaanth ,proposal'the public hearing was 'closed:
After considerable Board dkscifssion,,.onsite circulation for the
drive'-thru could'not-be justified.
ON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY SMITH, USE PERMIT NO. 84=18 WAS
DENIED WITH'FINDINGS AND VOTE.FOLLOWING:
-6- BZA 3/28/84
Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 28, 1184
Page Seven
FINDINGS FOR DENIAL:
1. The onsite parking requirement provided for the proposed
structures is deficient. Twenty-one spaces and ten spaces
allowed in the drive-thru lane require reciprocal parking with
adjacent commercial center. The combined total requirement
based on use is three more than provided.
2- The drive-thru concept has the potential of creating a hazardous
. onsite circulation pattern.
3. The drive-thru concept has the potential of creating a hazardous
ingress and egress traffic impact.
AYES: Godfrey, Evans, Smith, Vincent
NOES: None_
ABSTAIN: None
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 84-11
Applicant: Mr. DeWayne Brown c/o John Hewitt by Del Chan Co., Ltd.
To permit the construction of a 20,000 sq. ft. concrete tilt -up
office/manufacturing building. Site location is at the southwest
corner. of Graham and Bolsa.
The proposal was introduced by Chairman Smith who stated this request
is covered by E.I.R..No. 73-16.
Staff informed the Board Members thatthe applicant's plan as submitted
has some internal circulation problems. The applicant has requested
a two week continuance to rework his plan.
ON MOTION BY GODFREY AND SECOND BY VINCENT, ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
NO. 84-11 WAS CONTINUED TWO WEEKS, TO THE APRIL 11, 1984 MEETING,
BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Godfrey, Vincent, Evans, Smith
NOES: None
.ABSTAIN:, None
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 84-15
Applicant: Mr. -Robert Stellrecht
To permit construction.of a research/development commercial dffice
building approximately 18,905 sq. ft. Site location is on Bolsa
Avenue (east side of Graham Street - north side of Buckingham Street)
Lots 1 and 20.
Chairman Smith outlined the applicant's request and -stated that this
proposal is covered --by E.I.R. 73-16.'
-7- BZA 3/28/84
Minutes:_ H:B. Board of -Zoning Adjustments-,
March 28, , 1984
Page_ Eight
Staff informed -all concerned that at the time of original develop-
ment;of Tract 9879, the developer was granted approval for all
reciprocal ingress and egress. The subject property (Lots 1 and 20)
will -share -reciprocal -driveway easements on Buckingham and-Bolsa
Avenue with. --adjacent property- owners The,applicant was informed
that on the reciprocal drives loading/unloading is not permitted.
Mr. Stellrecht submitted a -revised -floor area designation chart
for the Board's -review. It was determined that. t_he applicant -Is,
plan will not;'accommodate additional- office use. ' Mr. Stellrecht
stated he is primarily interested in industrial use of the property.
Fifty -Five ; (55)...parking spaces: are ,proposed --four.-faced with
twenty-on`e compact spaces provided in lieu�oftwerity-two maximum
allowed (40%). It was the consensus of the Board Members that the
applicant's plan -established _standards of design and -type of use
compatible- within the.Ml-A Zoning district., :-,
ON MOTION BY-EVANS AND SECOND -BY SMITH, -ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO.
84-15 WAS GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL,AND VOTE FOLLOWING:'
_...
CONDITIONSOFAPPROVAL:
1.1 The -site, -plan and ,elevations received and dated -March; _14, 1984,
shall -be -the approved,; layout,.
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 material_proposed.to screen said "
equipment.
3. The'de-velopment shall. comply'with--all"applicabl`e-provisions of:
the:,Ordinance Code,- Building, Division, aInd__F'ire Department.
4. Driveway approaches shall be a minimum of twenty-seven (27)
in width -and shall be-of-radius,type construction.
5. Onsite fire hydrants shall be ;)rovided in -number and at
locations specified by the -Fire Department-
6 Any signing propos<-d shall con:,Aiy with Article 97G o. tho
1untinaron Reach Ordinance Cade.
7., Y,ow volume iinzids shall ''D used can all s;.:-i9,7)ts lti,! wator "at:ccts.
_8_ .BZA .3,1'28/84
1
Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 28, 1984
Page Nine
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.
19. If lighting is included in the parking lot; high-presssure 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.
12. Maximum separation between storage yard wall/fence and property
line shall not exceed two (2) inches.
13. The four (4) covered parking spaces shall not be used for
loading or unloading.
14. The uses within the proposed structure shall not create a
parking requirement in excess of fifty-five (55) spaces as
provided on the approved site plan.
15. An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be approved and
installed pursuant to Fire Department regulations.
16. There shall be no outside storage except in area designated
storage yard.
17. 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. 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) .
18. Prior to issuance of building permits, the subject property
owner shall submit a copy of reciprocal driveway easements
.between the subject site and adjacent properties.
19. Prior to issuance -of building permits, the applicant shall file
a parcel map or parcel map waiver to consolidate Lots 1 and 20
of Tract 9879. The•parcel map or plat map and notice shall be
-�- BZA 3/28/84
Minutes: H.B.-Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 28, 1984
Page Ten
recorded with the Orange County Recorder and -a -"copy of"the
recorded map or plat filed with the Departmerit "bf Development
Services prior to final--"inspections-or occupancy: =
AYES: Godfrey, Evans, Smith,,`- Vincent_ _-•
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: _ None --
THERE BEING;NO FURTHER BUSINESS, -"THE -MEETING WAS ADJOURNED.
Glen-K. 'Godfre Secretar '
Board of Zoning Adjustments
1
-1
-10- BZA 3/28/84