Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-04-251 MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS Room B-6 - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA WEDNESDAY, APRIL -25, 198-4• - .1.;30 P.M. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Godfrey, Smith, Evans, Vincent STAFF MEMBER PRESENT: Pierce MINUTES: ON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY VINCENT, THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 28, 1984, WERE APPROVED AS TRANS- CRIBED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Godfrey, Smith, Evans, Vincent NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: RECONSIDERATION OF DENIAL ACTION USE PERMIT NO. 84-18 (Con't. from 4/18/84) Applicant: Mr. Rudi Van Mil Reconsideration of request to permit a 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 at the northwest corner of Beach and Slater Avenue. Following introduction, Chairman Smith reopened the public hearing to reconsider denial action taken by the Board on March 28, 1984. The original layout was felt to create a hazardous onsite circulation pattern and the drive-thru portion -of the restuarant was located too close to the entrance/exit on Slater Avenue. The proprietor, Mr. Rudi Van Mil,was present. Mr. Carl Wayne, of Wendy's (tenant) and Mr. Grover of Mohler, Grover and Associates were not present to speak in favor of their proposal within the commercial center. Secretary Godfrey stated that upon review of the traffic impact report prepared by Mohler, Grover and Associates for Wendy's, it was revealed that their original layout was again proposed only with alternatives for circulation. The applicant was previously informed by staff that by turning the building around it would eliminate the majority of concerns. Wendy's preferred not to do so for esthetic and architectural reasons; the report supports Wendy's layout denied by the Board which Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 25, 1984 Page Two is inconsistent with reason predicating reconsideration. Mr. Van Mil stated that as grading and paving have transpired, to turn the building would not be wise economically. Concerns with the report (Alternatives A thru D) were discussed with Mr. Van Mil covering problems with stacking, backing up, over- building of site, driveway locations, etc. It was the consensus of all of the Board Members that the statistical analysis received reaffirmed problems staff felt to be evident on original plan denied by the Board. ON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY GODFREY, DENIAL WAS REAFFIRMED WITH FINDINGS AND VOTE FOLLOWING: FINDINGS FOR DENIAL: 1. The on -site parking requirement provided for the proposed structure 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 on -site 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 CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 84-21 Applicant: Dordoni & Associates To permit a reduction in rear yard setback from 1010" to 710". Subject property is located at 20752 Colima Street. Chairman Smith introduced the applicant's request and stated that, per Section 15101 of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, this proposal is categorically exempt, Class. 5. It was stated that an analysis of the subject property verified that the dwelling was not placed parallel with the property line. Additionally, that an addition would encroach into all setback areas because of the irregular shape of the lot located at the tangent point of a cul-de-sac. Open space requirement will be met. -2- BZA 4/25/84 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 25, 1984 Page Three The public hearing was opened with Mr. Dordoni, applicant, and the property owner present to speak should the Board Members have questions. Mr. Dordoni stated that the 330 sq. ft. addition will not be visible from the street and will be architecturally compatible with the existing dwelling. There being no one else present wishing to speak in favor or opposition of the applicant's request, the public hearing was closed. As the proposed addition will intrude three (3) ft. at one corner only into the required 10 ft. rear yard setback, the encroachment was felt to be minimal. Findings justifying hardship, meeting the intent of the Code, were discussed. ON MOTION BY VINCENT AND SECOND BY EVANS, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 84-21 WAS CONDITIONALLY APPROVED AS FOLLOWS, SUCCEEDED BY VOTE: FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: 1. Due to the fact that the existing dwelling is positioned on the lot in such a way as to inhibit future additions, 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 classification. 2. Because the proposed encroachment of 23.5 sq. ft. + into the setback area is minimal, the granting of Conditional Exception No. 84-21 will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent upon other properties in the vicinity and under an identical zone classification. 3. The granting of Conditional Exception No. 84-21 is necessary 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 nor injurious to property in the same zone classification. 5. The granting of the Conditional Exception will not adversely affect the Master Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan and floor plan received April 9, 1984, shall be the approved layout. 2. The addition shall be restricted to one-story in height. 3. The addition shall be architecturally compatible with the existing structure. -3- BZA 4/25/84 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 25, 1984 Page Four AYES: Vincent, Smith, Evans NOES: Godfrey ABSTAIN: None ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 84-25 Applicant: Intermetrics To permit construction of an industrial office building of 25,032 gr. sq. ft. Site location is 5312 Bolsa Avenue. The applicant's proposal was introduced by Chairman Smith who stated that this request is covered by E.I.R. No. 73-16 (Lusk Industrial Park). John Difrancesco, Partner, was present to speak on the proposed research and development building. He was informed that the compact parking stalls, adjacent to the rear emergency exit, would have to be increased in depth to fifteen (15) feet and that the pedestrian walkway in this area, if moved closer to the building, will eliminate overhanging of automobiles prohibited by Code. On -site parking and landscaping requirements are satisfied with reciprocal drive approach previously approved by the Planning Commission,meeting approved layout. Mr. Difrancesco questioned fire requirements for the exit doorways. It was suggested that he meet with a Fire Protection Specialist for clarification. ON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY VINCENT, ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 84-25 WAS CONDITIONALLY APPROVED AS FOLLOWS, SUCCEEDED BY VOTE: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan, floor plan, and elevations received and dated April 10, 1984, shall be the approved layout, subject to the following: Prior to issuance of building permits, the following plans shall be submitted for review and approval: a. A revised site plan shall be submitted reflecting compact car spaces a minimum of fifteen (15) feet in depth; b. Landscape and irrigation plan to the Department of Develop- ment Services and Public Works. C. 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. -4- BZA 4/25/84 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 25, 1984 Page Five 2. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division and Fire Department. 3. All compact parking spaces shall be clearly and permanently marked. 4. On -site fire hydrants shall be provided in number and at locations specified by the Fire Department. 5. An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be approved and installed pursuant to Fire Department regulations. 6. Low -volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets. 7. All building spoils, such as unusable material, shall be disposed of at an offsite facility equipped to handle them. 8. 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. 9. 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. 10. The subject property shall enter into an irrevocable reciprocal driveway easement(s) between the subject site and adjacent properties. AYES: Godfrey, Evans, Smith, Vincent NOES: None ABSTAIN: None CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 84-22 USE PERMIT NO. 84-25 ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 84-24 Applicant: Architects Orange C.E. Request - To permit an averaging of setback and landscape requirements providing more landscaping in front setback than required by existing code. U.P. Request - To permit a truck well facing street. A.R. Request - To permit construction of a 37,000 sq. ft. manufacturing and warehouse facility. Chairman Smith introduced the applications covering property located on the west side of Pipeline Lane, approximately 400 ft. south of Engineer Drive. -5- BZA 4/25/84 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 25, 1984 Page Six The applicant's requests are categorically exempt, Class. 5, under the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970. Staff informed the Board that the conditional exception in no way attempts to decrease the intent of the setback requirement or of the landscape provided along Pipeline Lane. In lieu of a 20 ft. wide setback, as required by Code, along the entire 244 ft. long building, this exception would allow the proposed staggered building to have a setback depth varying from a minimum of 12 ft. to a maximum of 44 ft. behind the existing easement line. By allowing some areas of the building to encroach into the required setback, while other areas would be setback over twice the required distance with landscaping, staff feels the intent of the Ordinance Code,:'if,ap1#dVed,. would be satisfied. The public hearing was opened by Chairman Smith with Mr. Darrel Hebenstreit present to speak in favor of his proposal. He stated that should the variances be granted, it would allow the property owner to efficiently use his property while providing the City with an aesthetically pleasing building felt to achieve the intent of the Code, providing visual relief along the street elevation more effectively than strict adherence to the setback requirements. There being no one else present wishing to speak in favor or oppositio of the applicant's request, the public hearing was closed. Conditions for approval were discussed taking into consideration that the truck well is proposed to be located approximately 94 ft. from a public street screened from view (45 ft. setback required by Code). ON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY VINCENT, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 84-22, USE PERMIT NO. 84-25 AND A.R. NO. 84-24 WERE APPROVED AS FOLLOWS, SUCCEEDED BY VOTE: FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - COI\DITICNAL EXCEPTICN NO. 84-22 1. Setbacks were established for minimum sized lots; subject site consists of three lots, each exceeding minimum site area. 2. Variation in setback and architectural treatment provides a visual setback which satisfies the intent of the Ordinance Code. 3. Proposed project will result in a landscaped area equal to that if required setback were maintained. -6- BZA 4/25/84 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 25, 1984 Page Seven 4. The granting of the Conditional Exception will not constitute a grant of a special privilege inconsistent upon other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classifications. 5. The granting of a conditional exception is necessary in order to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. 6. The granting of a conditional exception will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to property in the same zone classifications. 7. The granting of the conditional exception will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. CONDITION OF APPROVAL - C.E. No. 84-22 The site plan received and dated April 10, 1984 shall be the approved layout. AYES: Godfrey, Evans, Smith, Vincent NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ON NOTION BY VINCENT AND SECOND BY SMITH, USE PERMIT NO. 84-25 WAS APPROVED WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOLLOWING, SUCCEEDED BY VOTE: FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - USE PERMIT NO. 84-25 1. The location of the truck loading facility will not be detrimental to surrounding properties. The proposed facility is located approximately 94 ft. from a public street. Due to the location of the truck loading facility, stacking of trucks into required drives will not create onsite circulation problems. 2. 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; -7- BZA 4/25/84 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 25, 1984 Page Eight b. Property and improvements in the vicinity of such use or building. 3. The granting of a use permit will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. 4. The proposal is consistent with the City's General Plan of Land Use. CONDITION OF APPROVAL - U.P. NO. 84-25 1. The plot plan received and dated April 10, 1984 shall be the approved layout. AYES: Godfrey, Evans, Smith, Vincent NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ON MDTICN BY EVANS AND SECOND BY GCDFREY, ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 84-24 WAS APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS AS FOLLOWS, SUCCEEDED BY VOTE: CD DITIONS OF APPROVAL - A.R. NO. 84-24 1. The site plan, floor plan, and elevations received and dated April 10, 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 development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division and Fire Department. -8- BZA 4/25/84 1 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 25, 1984 Page Nine 4. Maximum separation between building wall and property line shall not exceed two (2) inches. 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. Low -volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets. 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.. 12. Driveway approaches shall be a minimum of twenty-seven feet (271) in width and shall be of radius type construction. AYES: Godfrey, Evans, Smith, Vincent NOES: None ABSTAIN: None TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 84-575(W) (In conjunction with C.E.484-22, U.P. No. 84-25 and A.R. No. 84-24) Applicant: Golden West Equity Properties, Inc. To permit a waiver of parcel map requesting consolidation of three (3) lots into one (1) parcel. Property located on Pipeline Lane - approx. 400 ft. south of Engineer Drive. Mr. John Mandrell, of RMG Engineering, was present representing the property owner. Mr. Mandrell stated his concurrence with the Conditions of Approval. -9- BZA 4/25/84 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 25, 1984 Page Ten ON MOTION BY GODFREY AND SECOND BY VINCENT, WAIVER OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 84-575(W) WAS GRANTED WITH FINDING AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOLLOWING, SUCCEEDED BY VOTE: FINDING FOR APPROVAL: 1. The proposed consolidation complies with the requirements as to area, improvement and design, flood and water drainage control, appropriate and approved public roads, sewer and water facilities, environmental protection, and other requirements of Article 992 of the Subdivision section of the Ordinance Code. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The plat map received by the Department of Development Services on April 10, 1984, shall be the approved layout. 2. Compliance with all applicable City Ordinances. 3. 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. AYES: Godfrey, Evans, Smith, Vincent NOES: None ABSTAIN: None THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED TO THE MONDAY MORNING STUDY SESSION ON APRIL 30, 1984, AT 10:00 A.M. A(la-rz,- - Glen K. Godfrey, Secretary Board of Zoning Adjustments -10- BZA 4/25/84