Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-05-23MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS Room B-6 - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA WEDNESDAY, MAY 23, 1984 - 1:30 P.M. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Godfrey, Smith, Crosby, Poe STAFF MEMBER PRESENT: Pierce REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 84-32 (Con't. from 5/16/84 Applicant: Alfred Robinson, M.D. To permit a Radiological Treatment Center to be located at 19671 Beach Boulevard (SBE Building). This application was continued from the Board Meeting of May 16, 1984, as there was no representation present to respond to concerns of the Board. This request, to allow a radiological Treatment Center, is anticipated to treat ten patients per day, by appointment only, on referral by other doctors. It was relayed by staff that original approval for the subject building approved office -professional use only with no medical or retail allowed. Further, if medical use is approved, staff is recommending that the use be restricted to a total of three (3) employees, no more than ten (10) patients per day with a maximum of 1,500 sq. ft. allowed for the practice. Additionally, if the use is approved, that the use not be transferable to any other medical use. Staff informed the Board Members that the proposed use does not meet the parking requirement of 8.5 parking spaces required for medical whereas office -professional would require five parking spaces. Staff feels that because of the limited nature of this type of operation, and if conditioned as such, parking would not become impacted. Discussion ensued on the City's control of the proposed use, possibility of a six-month review, existing vacancies in the subject building, etc. It was stated that at the time of original approval of the building, parking was more restrictive; 1/135 sq. ft. of floor area was required - now 1/175 sq. ft. of floor area. Walter Lipps was present and explained that a radiological treatment Minutes - H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments May 23, 1984 Page Two facility is not presently available in H.B. Because of the expense of the installation and the low number of patients who would use it, hospitals do not provide this type of therapy. The linear accelerator, a high energy x-ray treatment machine, has to be designed by a radiological physicist certified by the State. Actual treatment time is about two minutes per patient with expected total time from parking lot, treatment time, etc. being approximately fifteen minutes or less. It was the feeling of most of the Board Members that by approving this particular type of medical use, less of an impact in parking would be created than by approved use on original entitlement (office - professional). ON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY CROSBY, ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 84-32 WAS CONDITIONALLY APPROVED AS FOLLOWS, SUCCEEDED BY VOTE: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. This approval is to allow a maximum of 1,500 square feet of an existing building to be used as a radiological treatment center. 2. The use is restricted to a maximum of three (3) employees and ten (10) patients per day. 3. The use of this area is non -transferable to another medical use. 4. Prior to occupancy, the applicant shall submit to the Secretary of the Board for review and approval certification stating that this particular facility is suitable for use of radiological equipment and activity. AYES: Godfrey, Smith, Crosby NOES: Poe ABSTAIN: None CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 84-26 Applicant: Mr. Richard Chard To permit a four (4) ft. encroachment into rear yard setback at 16191 Norgrove Circle. 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 although the property is irregular in configuration, the size of the lot satisfies the minimum size of 6,000 sq. ft. and exceeds the minimum cul-de-sac frontage of forty five ft. A review of other variances in this particular section of the City revealed that there have been no encroachments approved into rear yard setbacks. -2- BZA 5/23/84 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments May 23, 1984 Page Three Staff is questioning why the applicant chose this particular location for his bedroom addition. It was stated no letters or telephone calls were received in opposition of the applicant's request. The public hearing was opened by Chairman Smith. Mr. Chard was present and responded to staff's question on "why in this particular area". He stated that the configuration of his home does not allow for it to be constructed elsewhere. The design of his roof line (two-story home) prevents an addition off of his living room, with the only area on the first -floor available being on the west side of his home. The addition is an enlargement of an existing room with no encroachment into open space. The applicant felt that the depth of his lot at 93.5 ft. in lieu of 100 ft. in depth has created his hardship. The public hearing was closed. Following discussion,the Board Members felt that as the lot' is sub- standard in depth, located at the tangent point of a cul-de-sac, and the fact that the applicant received his neighbors approval for the addition justified approval of Conditional Exception No. 84-26. ON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY POE, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 84-26 WAS CONDITIONALLY APPROVED AS FOLLOWS, SUCCEEDED BY VOTE: FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: 1. Approval of this request will not constitute granting of a special privilege. The irregular shape of the parcel has created the applicant's hardship. 2. Proposed addition will not impact neighboring properties. 3. Approval of this request is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. 4. The subject property would be deprived of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity as placement of existing structure on property precludes a reasonable size addition without requested encroachment. 5. The granting of Conditional Exception No. 84-26 will not adversely affect the Master Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. 6. R-1 open space requirement will not be affected by proposal. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The conceptual plot plan and elevations received May 9, 1984, shall be the approved layout. -3- BZA 5/23/84 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments May 23, 1984 Page Four 2. Approval is restricted to a single -story addition. 3. The proposed addition shall be architecturally compatible with existing dwelling. AYES: Smith, Crosby, Poe NOES: Godfrey ABSTAIN: None CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 84-28 NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 84-6 AND ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 84-13 Applicant: Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc. C.E. Request --'To permit a reduction in parking. A.R. Request - To permit construction of a 3-story, 57,265 sq. ft. multi -tenant medical office building with joint use parking. The proposals were introduced by Chairman Smith. Plans for the development of a -three-story medical office building, to be located at the Humana complex on a vacant parcel to the east of the office towers, were viewed by the Board. It was stated that staff analyzed the parking ratio at 1/175 sq. ft. of gross floor area for all three floors with the exception of a small portion on the first -floor to be used,for a pharmacy. 326_parking spaces are required for the site with 50 parking spaces short. When the applicant was informed of this situation, he contracted for a traffic demand study of which the City is in receipt of. The -findings of the study, in brief, state that -although the number of parking spaces provided for the proposed project do not meet the minimum parking requirements of the City, -based on surveys of similar_ specialty medical uses, -adequate parking will be provided for the peak demand plus a -fifteen percent overage factor_. The -parking demand study asserted that the reduction in demand from that anticipated by the City is largely due to the use.patterns associated with specialty medical offices that are owner occupied._ The public hearing was opened -by Chairman Smith with Bill Rasmussen, Ron Jonas and Lynette Cervantes present to speak -in favor of the proposal. The -use of the 3-story building (medical offices for specialists on staff at Humana, a rehabilitation.center and small pharmacy) was discussed along with the parking demand study. Dr. Neil Friedman, Director, Out -Patient Surgery Center and Owner, of Center Medical Complex, addressed the Board in opposition -of the applicants request. He stated his concurrence with the -Code - requirement calling out a parking ratio of 1/175 sq. ft. He stated he has been a tenant and an owner in this location for the past 18 years. -4- BZA 5/23/84 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments May 23, 1984 Page Five F He stated he has contacted the owners of medical buildings bordering this proposed project and they also agree that the parking situation in this area is at best marginal and that any decrease in existing Code requirements would create a further hardship on all of them. He felt that if the Board approved this variance for a reduction irr parking, it will ultimately create significant parking disruptions as well as potential public liability problems. There being no one else wishing to speak in favor or opposition of the applicants request, the public hearing was closed. Discussion carried by the Board Members taking into consideration peak period demand, the total number of parking spaces felt necessary to adequately serve proposed demand, and the fact that staff was satisfied with the reduction in parking based on the survey data collected from three similar medical office sites. Conditions for approval and mitigation measures were discussed with the applicants. - ON MOTION BY POE AND SECOND BY GODFREY, THE BOARD HAVING FOUND THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE A, -SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT, ADOPTED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 84-6, WITH MITIGATING MEASURES AS IMPOSED INCORPORATED INO ADMINISTRATIVE i REVIEW NO. 84-13. E ON MOTION BY POE AND SECOND BY SMITH, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 84-28 AND ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 84-13 WERE CONDITIONALLY APPROVED AS FOLLOWS, SUCCEEDED BY VOTE: CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 84-28 --FINDINGS: 1. A traffic demand report has been submitted justifying the basis of a reduction in number of parking spaces. 2. The granting of Conditional Exception No. 84-28 will not ,constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent upon other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classification. 3. The granting of a conditional exception will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious -to property.in the same zone classifications. - 4. The granting of the conditional exception will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. CONDITIONS OF -APPROVAL - C.E. No. 84-28 1. The conceptual -site plan received May 14, 1984, shall be the approved layout. -5- BZA 5/23/84 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments May 23, 1984 Page Six 2. The uses within the,proposed structure are limited to -those as outlined in.the traffic demand study and as listed on the conceptual site plan. Any modification, expansion or change of use shall require,new,entitlement and additional parking. 3. A review of the complex parkirig', as `prepa'red by traffic consultant, shall be submitted to the Secretary of the Board when vacancy factor reaches twenty (20) percent or less. AYES: Godfrey, Poe, Smith, Crosby NOES: None ABSTAIN: None CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - A.R. NO. 84-13 (In conj. with N.D. No. 84-6) 1. The conceptual site plan, floor plans and elevations received and dated May 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 Developme 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. Service roads and .fire,lanes as determined by the Fire Department shall be posted and marked. 5. Driveway approaches shall be A minimum of twenty-seven (27) ft. in width and shall be of radius type construction. 6. An automatic fire sprinkler system and wet standpipe system shall be.approved and „installed pursuant to, Fire Department regulations. 7. Low -volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets. Be 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 foil -type insulation is to be used, a fire retardant type shall be installed as approved by the Building Division. -6- - BZA'" 5/23/84 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments May 23, 1984 Page Seven 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 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. 12. The subject property shall enter into an irrevocable reciprocal driveway and parking easement between the subject site and adjacent properties. A copy of the recorded easements shall be submitted to the Department of Development Services prior to issuance of building permits. 13. Security gate fencing details shall be submitted to the Fire Department for review and approval. 14. The property owner shall designate parking at rear (east side) of hospital for utilization as employee parking. 15. Prior to issuance of building permits, the property owner shall submit a tentative parcel map for review and approval. Said map shall be recorded prior to final inspection or occupancy. 16. Fire hydrants shall be installed at locations as determined necessary by the Fire Department. AYES: Godfrey, Smith, Poe, Crosby NOES: None ABSTAIN: None USE PERMIT NO. 84-21 Applicant: Jerwel Enterprises To permit a temporary commercial parking lot to be located at 7400 Center Avenue. Following introduction of the applicant's request, Chairman Smith stated that this proposal is categorically exempt, Class. 1, under the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970. The Board Members were informed that the subject property covered by this request is currently owned by the Southern Pacific Railroad Company adjacent to property owned by the applicant. At this time there is no access to the property by public right-of-way as it is penned in on three sides by private properties and on the fourth by an Edison easement. The applicant'is proposing a twenty stall temporary parking lot for use by his employees,and for over -flow -7- BZA 5/23/84 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments May 23, 1984 Page Eight parking. Access will be through Jerwells commercial center parking lot, adjacent directly to the west. The public hearing was opened by Chairman -Smith. Gerald Klein, Managing Partner of Jerwel Enterprises-and.David Klein were present to speak on their,application. -Gerald Klein explained that the lease initiated with the Southern Pacific Railroad may be terminated -within thirty (30)--days_by either party. - Conditions warranting approval were discussed. The public hearing was closed.. ON MOTION BY POE AND SECOND BY,SMITH, USE PERMIT NO. 84-21 WAS APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL FOLLOWING, SUCCEEDED BY VOTE: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan received May 10, 1984, shall be the approved layout . 2. Temporary parking lot is valid for five(5) years, expiring May 23; 1989. 3. Parking lot shall comply with all applicable requirements of S.9730.52-. _ 4.-Prior-to issuance of grading permit, design and materials of required parking lot enclosure shall be submitted to the Secretary of,the Board,of Zoning -Adjustments for review and approval,' - AYES: Godfrey, Poe, -smith_, -Crosby -- NOES: None ABSTAIN: None USE PERMIT NO. 84-33 Aminoil, Inc. To permit modification of existing.Use Permit No.171-64 to allow for continued oil and gas development operations from Aminoil's "91 Drill Site". Chairman Smith introduced the applicant's request and stated -that this proposal is categorically exempt, Class. 1, under the Californi Environmental Quality Act of 1970. T8- BZA 5/23/84 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments May 23, 1984 Page Nine Staff has met with representatives from Aminoil who explained their proposal allowing modification of existing Use Permit No. 71-64 to allow for continued oil and gas development operations from their "91 Drill Site." This site is bounded by Pacific Coast Highway, 18th Street, 19th Street, and an unnamed alley approximately 200 feet northerly of Pacific Coast Highway. The proposed forty-four foot cellar extension would allow the drilling of five additional wells from the drill site into the existing State Oil and Gas Lease (PRC 91.1), drilling one well at a time. Staff informed the Board Members that the existing property has an eight (8) foot high slumpstone wall which has been constructed around the Drill Site with adequate access to the property. The height of the derrick has been approved by the Director of Development Services. Fire Representative Shaw stated that as far as noise attenuation is concerned, providing an acoustical report meets the Huntington Beach Noise Ordinance, the applicant may accomplish the drilling of the five wells to their own liking, drilling 24 hours a day. The public hearing was opened by Chairman Smith. Spencer Sheldon and Martha Brock, both of Aminoil, were present to speak in favor of their proposal. Mr. Sheldon stated that they have had an acoustical engineer initiate their plans for the general drilling of which the proposed rig is felt to be the "cadillac" for this type of operation. Ms. Brock stated their plan is designed'to provide soundproofing meeting the City's Code requirements with respect to the residential neighborhood which would be located within 450 feet of an active drilling rig. The Board discussed the proposed acoustical blanket insulation as outlined by Ms. Brock and agreed that this installation would most probably minimize noise impact to the adjacent residential area. The public hearing was closed. It was felt that noise reduction should be calculated by the acoustical engineer for the project. The design of the acoustical structure and installation as presented by the applicant is not to be construed as setting a precedent for sound attenuation for other oil operations.. This is because each site and each drilling program will have unique -characteristics with regard to location, land use, and intensity of development. ON MOTION BY POE AND SECOND BY CROSBY, USE PERMIT NO. 84-33 WAS CONDITIONALLY APPROVED AS FOLLOWS, SUCCEEDED BY VOTE: -9- BZA 5/23/84, Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments May 23, 1984 Page Ten FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: 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. 4. The proposed project complies with the Downtown'Specific Plan requirements for resource production overlay. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The conceptual site plan received and dated April 26, 1984, be the approved layout. shall 2. Noise attenuation for the drilling operation shall be provided pursuant to the oil code. 3. A report prepared by an acoustical engineer shall be submitted to -the Department of Development Services prior to commencing new drilling. Said report shall identify dB(a) sound level at the property line both with and without.a sound barrier. 4. The project shall be in substantial compliance with the Huntington Beach Noise Ordinance. 5. All structures and procedures shall conform to Title 15 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code and the Division of Oil'and Gas standards. 6. All pipe racks shall be insulated to reduce noise. 7. Applicant shall obtain all necessary electrical permits. 8. Any work within the public right-of-way is subject to review and approval by the Department of Public Works. 9. Applicant shall install a back flow preventer device/system. 10. The applicant shall meet with Public Works - Landscape Division to work out plans for revitalization of existing landscaping. -10- BZA 5/23/84 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments May 23, 1984 Page Eleven AYES: Godfrey, Smith, Crosby, Poe NOES: None ABSTAIN: None USE PERMIT NO. 84-39 Applicant: Mr. William G. Gallegos To permit a restaurant expansion. Location - 208-210 Fifth Street. Chairman Smith introduced the applicant's proposal and stated that this request is categorically exempt, Class. 1, under the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970. Staff informed the Board Members that the existing restaurant is located on Parcel 10 with the expansion to the restaurant proposed on Parcel 8 located in the Downtown Specific Plan Area. Additionally, on Parcel 8 there is another commercial building and an apartment located over a two -car garage fronting Walnut Street. As both lots are adjacent to an alley, of which the Downtown Specific Plan requires that alley widths be a minimum of 30 feet, the requirement for an irrevocable offer of 7-1/2 ft. was explained to the applicant. Also, the requirement for a tentative parcel map consolidating Parcels 8 and 10. The public hearing was opened by Chairman Smith. Mr. William Gallegos addressed the Board and cited problems incurred to date. He stated he has worked out an agreement with our Redevelop- ment Agency for parking and architectural changes. He thought that as he was in complete compliance with Redevelopment that he could proceed with his project. He was unaware that a Use Permit application was required. He ordered $30,000.00 worth of equipment, which is sitting idle, and expressed consternation with the City's permit process. The Board explained that possibly a waiver of the final parcel map could be processed which would not hold up his construction. The plat mafi should be recorded prior to final inspection. The public hearing was closed. Conditions for approval were discussed. ON MOTION BY CROSBY AND SECOND BY SMITH, USE PERMIT NO. 84-39 WAS APPROVED WITH FINDINGS, CONDITIONS AND VOTE FOLLOWING: FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: 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; -11- BZA 5/23/84 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning 'Adjustments May 23, 1984 Page Twelve 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 -conceptual site plan -received May 14, 1984,==shall be the approved:pldn. - 2. Employee-parking.shall beprovidedat the rear of.the building. 3. Residential occupants shall utilize garage parking. 4. In lieu of providing additional onsite parking, the property owner shall enter into an agreement with the Redevelopment Agency. 5. The applicant shall file a -parcel map or parcel map waiver request to -consolidate Lots 8-and 10 of Block 204 of Huntington Beach.Tract.- The parcel map -or plat map -and notice shall be recorded with the Orange County Recorder, and a copy of the recorded map or plat filed with the Department of Development Services prior to final inspection or occupancy: 6. The development shall comply. with -all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division and Fire Department. 7. An irrevocable offer of 7-1/2 ft. for alley dedication shall be made to the City of Huntington.Beach for widening purposes prior to issuance of building.permits. AYES: Godfrey, Smith, Crosby, Poe NOES: None _ ABSTAIN: None ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 84-34- Applicant: Blue.White Industries, To permit a 10,250 sq. ft. Industrial Warehousing Building. Site location is at 5422 Business Drive. Following introduction of the applicant's request, Chairman Smith stated that this proposal is categorically exempt, Class. 3, under the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970. -12- BZA 5/23/84 1 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments May 23, 1984 Page Thirteen Staff informed the Board Members that this particular request is to allow development of a building for warehousing of parts which are manufactured offsite. Staff's concerns with the plan submitted were discussed with Mr. Oswald King, President/Owner of Blue White Industries i.e. area located at the southeast corner denoted as area for rejected materials requiring screening, two additional perpendicular parking spaces required at the center of the building (one of which is to be shown as handicapped per State requirement), parking stall width compliance, trash location not depicted, and four (4) truck doors shown facing a public street, which if proposed, would require approval of a Use Permit application. Mr. King stated that as far. as the four truck doors are concerned, he would be willing to provide man doors on the north elevation satisfying entitlement under the Admin- istrative Review process. He further agreed to submittal of a revised plan in an effort to bring his proposal within the requirements of the Ordinance Code. ON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY GODFREY, ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 84-34 WAS CONDITIONALLY APPROVED AS FOLLOWS, SUCCEEDED BY VOTE: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. A revised site plan shall be submitted depicting the modifications described herein: a. trash area to be shown located in the southeast corner. b. parking stall size compliance. c. use of area in southeast corner. d. elimination of overhead doors on north elevation. 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. 4. Maximum separation between building wall and property line shall not exceed two (2) inches. -13- BZA . 5/23/84 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments" May 23, 1984• Page Fourteen 5. Driveway approaches shall be a minimum of twenty-seven (27) ft. in width and shall be of radius type construction. 6. Low -volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets. 7. 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. 8. If foil -type insulation is to be used, a fire retardant type shall be installed as approved by the Building Division. 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 recommenda- tions regarding grading I 'chemical and fill properties, foundations, retaining walls, streets, and utilities. 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-l'spillage " onto -adjacent properties. 11. This approval is granted for a 10,250 sq. ft.,,-industrial warehous building. Any modification, expansion, or change of use shall require additional parking and approval of a site plan amendment. AYES: Godfrey, Smith, Crosby, Poe NOES: None ABSTAIN: None = THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESSt THE MEETING WAS -ADJOURNED -TO THE MONDAY MORNING STUDY -SESSION ON-MAY'"28,"19841--AT 10-:00 A.M._ Glen K. Godfrey, Secretary Board of Zoning Adjustments -14- BZA 5/23/84