Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-11-27MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Council Chambers - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California TUESDAY, November 27, 1984 - 7:00 PM COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Higgins, Livengood, Porter, Erskine (arrived late), Schumacher, Mirjahangir COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None CONSENT CALENDAR: ON MOTION BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY MIRJAHANGIR THE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF OCTOBER 16, 1984 WAS APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Winchell, Livengood, Porter, Schumacher, Mirjahangir NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine ABSTAIN: None ON MOTION BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY HIGGINS EXTENSION OF TIME FOR TENTATIVE TRACT NO.10067 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 81-31 WAS APPROVED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Winchell, Livengood, Porter, Schumacher, Mirjahangir NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine ABSTAIN: None REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT No. 84-23/TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 12242 Applicant: Harold Tobin Bob Corona continued from 11-13-84 Conditional Use Permit No. 84-23 is a request to construct a 17 unit, three story condominium development. Tentative Tract No. 12242 is a proposed one lot subdivision for condominium purposes on the subject property. Mike Adams stated that the proposed development consists of 17 stacked Page 2 Planning Commission Minutes November 27, 1984 condominiums situated in two three story buildings over one level of subterranean parking. He said that the applicant has applied for three special permits to allow compact parking spaces; eliminate the upper story setback; and allow a 3 foot encroachment of two fin walls into the required rear 7.5 foot setback. - Commissioner Schumacher stated that the plan shows 14 ground level garages for 17 units. She questioned whether there would be three enclosed garages in the subterranean garage. Mike Adams responded that three units would not have enclosed garages but would have assigned covered spaces. Commissioner Schumacher stated concern that these units would not have secured storage and would end up using balconies for storage. Secretary Palin responded that it could be a condition of approval to provide the residents who do not have enclosed garages with one hundred cubic feet of storage area per unit. Commissioner Schumacher questioned if the CC&R's could be conditioned to require the residents to park in the garage because of the parking problem in downtown area. Bob Sangster, legal counsel, responded that this requirement should be in the CC&R's. The public hearing was opened. Robert Corona, the applicant, addressed the Commission: He stated that he was in agreement with the conditions of approval. Bob Brye, the architect, addressed the Commission. He stated that each resident would have one hundred cubic feet of storage area that will be partitioned and secured. There were no other persons to speak for or against the project and the public hearing was closed. ON MOTION BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY HIGGINS TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 12242 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 84-23 WERE APPROVED WITH FINDINGS, CONDITIONS, AND SPECIAL PERMITS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS FOR SPECIAL PERMIT ITEMS 1. The inclusion of five compact parking spaces and allowing the fin wall to encroach 3' into the rear setback will provide maximum use of aesthetically pleasing architecture, landscaping, open space areas and site design. 2. The proposed deviations will not be detrimental to the general health, welfare safety and convenience of the neighborhood or city in general, nor injurious to the value of adjacent properties. (1640d) 1 Page 3 Planning Commission Minutes November 27, 1984 3. The project is consistent with objectives of the DTSP in achieving a development adapted to the terrain and compatible with the surrounding environment: FINDINGS FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT'NO.--84-23 AND TENTATIVE TRACT"NO: 12242 1. The proposed residential development will not have a detrimental effect upon the general health; welfare, safety and convenience of persons residing in the area; nor upon the value of the property within the vicinity. 2. The proposed use is compatible with existing uses in the vicinity. 3. The proposed development is consistent with the goals and objectives of the General Plan and Downtown Specific Plan. 4. The property was previously studied for this intensity of use at the time the Downtown Specific Plan zoning designation was placed on the subject property. 5. The lot size; depth; frontage and through the use of a special permit, all other design and implementation features of the proposed subdivision are proposed to be constructed in compliance with standard plans and specifications on file with the city as well as in compliance with the State Subdivision Map Act and Supplementary City Subdivision Ordinance. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR CONDITIONAL USE'PERMIT #84-23: 1. Ube site plan; floor plans and elevations dated 11-26-84 shall be revised and submitted for review and approval by the Planning Director reflecting the following modifications: a. Additional architectural treatment shall be provided along the rear of the building "c" units facing the loth St. alley; similar to the side elevation at building "b". b. The stairway from the subterranean quest parking spaces to grade level shall be relocated to as close to the "b" unit building.* as possible. c. Garage space for each tenant shall comply with Section 4111 of the H.'B.M.C.* by providing partitions between garages and single car garage doors. (1640d) Page 4 Planning Commission Minutes November 27, 1984 d. All patio and balcony areas shall comply with the City's minimum requirement. 2. Natural gas and 220V electrical shall be stubbed in at the location of clothes dryers. This requirement may be waived provided the applicant installs a more energy efficient alternative subject to the review and approval by the Department of Development Services or Director. 3. Natural gas shall be stubbed in at the location 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 materials shall be disposed of at an off -site area equipped to handle them. 6. Energy -efficient lighting shall be used in open space areas. 7. All dwellings on the subject property shall be constructed in compliance with state acoustical standards set forth for units that are within the 60 CNEL contour of the property. 8. A detailed soils analysis shall be prepared by a registered soils engineer. This analysis shall include on=site sampling and laboratory testing of materials to provide detail recommendations regarding grading; chemical and fuel properties foundations; retaining walls, streets and utilities; etc. 9. A detailed landscape and sprinkler plan shall be subject to the approval of the Department of Development Services prior to the issuance of building permits. 10. Trie location and design of all entry gates shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Development Services; Public Works Department; and Fire Department prior to the issuance of building permits. 11. A fire sprinkler system approved by the Fire Department shall be installed throughout in accordance with Pamphlet 13 of the National Fire Protection Association. 12. A wet fire standpipe system approved by the Fire Department shall be installed near all stairway landings and comply with Uniform Building Code standard 38. 13. Water and fire hydrant systems improved and upgraded to provide a fire flow of 3;500 gallons per minute. (1640d) Page 5 Planning Commission Minutes November 27, 1984 14. All corridors and exitways to comply with Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building code. 15. The elevator car is to be a minimum of 6'8" wide by 4'3" deep to allow the use of an ambulance stretcher which has a minimum size of 22" by 78" in its horizontal position. 16. All approved drives shall be considered required fire lanes and shall be designed as deemed necessary by the Huntington Beach Fire Department. 17. The two abandoned oil wells shall be modified as required by the Fire Dept. prior to the issuance of building. permits. 18 The alleys and adjacent to the project shall be reconstructed to full width per City Standards. 19. Minimum driveway width within parking structure shall be 25'. 20. The covenants, conditions, and restrictions shall be approved as to form by the City Attorney and contain provisions that: a. require garages to be accessible for parking motor vehicles, and; b. prohibit storage of boats, trailers and recreational vehicles on the site. 21. All roof top antennas are prohibited. 22. Prior to the issuance of building permits the applicant shall agree to provide housing units for persons of low or moderate income subject to the provisions of Government Section 65590 (d). The applicants compliance with Section 65590 (d) of the Government Code in terms of amount and location of affordable housing provided shall be subject to the review and approval of the Department of Development Services. 23. Prior to the issuance of building permits, a zone change shall be submitted to eliminate the "0" designation on the southernmost portion of the subject property. 24. The project's revised site plan and elevations shall be submitted to the City's Design Review Board. 25. The project shall include one hundred cubic feet of private storage space per unit. (1640d) Page 6 Planning Commission Minutes November 27, 1984 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR TENTATIVE TRACT #12242: 1. The tentative tract map received and dated July 25, 1984 shall be the approved layout. 2. All water connections shall be to the north/ south alley water main. 3. The curb face on loth St.* shall be moved to 29 1/2' from centerline. Also. the existing curb on Walnut Avenue and loth St. shall be replaced with curb and gutter: Furthermore; and 8' sidewalk shall be constructed on loth St. and a 6' sidewalk adjacent to the curb on Walnut Avenue: 4. Walnut Avenue and loth St. shall be improved to at least centerline and the intersection of the streets modified to accommodate full height curb at the return. 5. The street lights shall be relocated per S.C. Edison and City Standards. 6. The existing overhead utilities shall be relocated underground and a 2' wide public utility easement dedicated adjacent to the parkway. 7. Drainage for the subject subdivision shall be approved by the Dept. of Public Works prior to the recordation of a final map. AYES: Higgins, Winchell, Livengood, Porter, Schumacher, Mirjahangir NOES: Erskine ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 84=09 EXTENSION OF TIME-CUP-83-27 Applicant: Robert Zinngrabe Conditional Exception No. 84-09 replaces Conditional Exception No. 83-27 which expired 11-15-83. Conditional Exception No. 8L-07 was a request to permit a 98 unit senior citizen rental project with exception for the number and size of parking spaces, perimeter setback and unit size. Mike Adams stated that several drive -by checks of the hospital area have been performed and each time there were many available parking spaces. Commissioner Livengood noted that after reviewing the November 1983 minutes, it was requested to evaluate the standards in the Pacifica Community Plan. lie questioned if this had been done. Mike Adams responded that it had not and indicated that it would be initiated. The public hearing was opened. (1640d) Page 7 Planning Commission Minutes November 27, 1984 Richard Harlow, representing the applicant; addressed the Commission. fie stated that the project is tied in with huntington Terrace and it does meet the parking standards. He said at the Planning Commission's request, the applicant has entered into a reciprocal agreement with Huntington Terrace regarding parking, kitchen facilities, and recreational facilities. He suggested that Condition 2 be revised to perform the parking study after the Tower is completely occupied. He concluded by stating that they would not have a problem with the conditions of approval as stated in the staff report. Commissioner Erskine arrived at this time. Commissioner Schumacher questioned what criteria would make the residents less mobile. Richard Harlow responded that the project is geared to social security recipients who will choose to live there because of the convenience to the hospital, shopping, bus lines, and dining hall facilities. He stated that the City Fire Department performed an age study at Huntington Terrace and the average age is 80 years. He said this projects move -in age will probably be somewhat lower. he concluded by saying that the owner will be able to control the number of vehicles by not renting to individuals with automobiles if the parking became a problem. Commissioner Mirjahangir questioned Mr. Harlow regarding the old parcel map as to whether the parcels have been consolidated into one. Mr. Harlow responded that they did not do the parcel map because there were two separate owners and instead entered into a consolidation agreement. Commissioner Winchell asked what would happen if one parcel is sold. She questioned if the agreement could tie a future owner. Nir. Harlow responded that if the property was sold, the agreement states a maximum number of 269 units. If the agreement was broken, the City could enforce the conditions of approval. Chairman Porter stated that previously it was determined that parking at the Terrace would be available for the staff of the medical site. F;e said that we need to resolve that problem by determining the net availability of parking spaces over and above 98 units. Mr. Harlow responded that the hospital personnel could be instructed to begin parking in the hospital lot. Chairman Porter responded that part of the reason the Planning Commission relaxed the parking requirements for the medical facility was because overflow parking would go to the Terrace. He went on to say that now we are developing next to the Terrace and that when the Tower is fully occupied, this could create parking problems. Mr. Harlow responded that parking could be conditioned at the Terrace and the new project for their use only; and, require the parking study before the certificate of occupancy. Chairman Porter stated that he would (1640d) Page 8 Planning Commission Minutes November 27, 1984 prefer the survey performed prior to building permits. Mr. Harlow responded that they did not have a problem with the survey. There were no other person to speak for or against the project and the public hearing was closed. Secretary Palin stated that he had been visiting the hospital for several weeks and had been at the hospital at all different times of the day. He went on to say that a parking study at this time would serve no benefit. He said there were many available parking spaces at the times he visited the site. He recommended that the study be done at the framing inspection to allow time to readjust parking assignments and also for the Tower to fill in occupancy. Commissioner Livengood stated that he was still concerned with the ratio of parking. He said that this facility could be a disaster for the City. He questioned the City Attorney whether it is legal for the owner to not rent to someone because they do not have a parking space for them. Bob Sangster, legal council, said that it probably was not enforceable and could cause some problems. Commissioner Livengood stated that he was not prepared to take any action on this without the City Attorney's opinion on the agreement of the two owners of one parcel. He said that this was continued at the attorney's request to work out the legalities and that this had not been done. The Commission went on to discuss amending condition 2. There was discussion for a preliminary parking study to be performed at this time and a complete parking study before certificate of occupancy. Chairman Porter stated agreement with Commissioner Livengood that the supporting documents should be submitted before taking action. ON MOTION BY ERSKINE AND SECOND BY MIRJAHANGIR TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 84-09, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: The Commission and staff went on to discuss the appropriate language for condition 2. Chairman Porter stated that he would be voting against the motion because more thought should be given to the parking study and this should not be worked out at the meeting. He recommended that this be continued to the next regular meeting. ON MOTION BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY PORTER TO TABLE TO THE MEETING OF LECLMBER 4, 1984 TO COME UP WITH APPROPRIATE WORDING FOR CONDITION NO. 2, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: (1640d) Page 9 Planning Commission Minutes November 27, 1984 AYES: higgins, Winchell, Livengood, Porter NOES: Erskine, Schumacher, Mirjahangir ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 10067/CONDITIONAL USE -PERMIT NO. 84--32 Applicant: Seacliff Estates Conditional Use Permit No. 84-32 in conjunction with Tentative Tract No. 10067 is a request to revise the previously approved Tentative Tract and Conditional Use Permit for Product Area B of the Seacliff Phase IV project. Mike Adams stated that the revised site plan is a request to permit a 430 unit planned residential development, with a townhouse type design. The public hearing was opened. Dave Eadie, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission and stated agreement with the conditions of approval. - There were no other persons to speak for or against the project and the public hearing was closed. Chairman Porter asked*if the 12 inch section of sewer system replaces the restriction that was causing a problem with the existing Seacliff Development. Mr. Eadie responded that the restriction had been replaced by the Orange County Sanitation District. ON MOTION BY MIRJAHANGIR AND SECOND BY HIGGINS TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 1O067/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 84-32 WAS APPROVED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: Commissioner Livengood questioned what area was notified of the public hearing. Howard Zelefsky responded that notification was sent to addresses within a 300 foot radius from property the lines. Commissioner Livengood asked how many dwelling units were notified. 11oward Zelefsky responded that he did not have that information in front of him but recalled it to be about a half a dozen. Commissioner Livengood stated that he was concerned that not one resident utilizing Palm Street was notified of the project. Chairman Porter stated concern that the density level was being increased and felt that they should also increase the open areas. (1640d) Page 10 Planning Commission Minutes November 27, 1984 FINDINGS: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0.-84-32: The Planning Commission may approve an application for a Conditional Use Permit when it finds that the plan will substantially comply with the requirements of this Article (936), the general plan of land uses, and the development standards for the particular use. 1. The proposed project as presented is consistent with the land use designation on the subject property. 2. If the Special Permit is granted, the proposed plan will be in substantial compliance with the requirements set forth in Article 936, planned unit development; and will be in keeping with the intent of the ordinance. FINDINGS: TENTATIVE TRACT 10067: 1. The proposed subdivision of this 37.3 acre parcel of land zoned R2-PD-0-CZ, will be constructed having 11.5 units per acre. 2. The general plan has set forth provisions for this type of land use as well as setting forth objectives for the implementation of this type of housing. Therefore; the project as proposed complies with the City's general plan. 3. The lot size, depth, frontage, street width, and through the use of a Special Permit all other design and implementation features of the subdivision, are proposed to be constructed in compliance with standard plans and specifications on file with the City, as well as in compliance with the State Map Act and City Subdivision Ordinance. CONDITIONS: The Staff is recommending that all applicable adopted Conditions of Approval for Conditional Use Permit 77=23 be maintained for Conditional Use Permit 84-32 with the addition of the following: Conditional Use Permit No. 84-32: 1. The site plan, floor plans; and elevations received and dated November 14, 1984, shall be the approved lay' -out and design. 2. The City's 12 inch sewer main located between Palm Avenue and Goldenwest Street, is anticipated to reach capacity at a future date, during the construction of the Seacliff Phase IV development. The City will monitor the flow periodically and at the time Public Works Department determines that flows are approaching capacity, the developer will be notified in writing of the conditions. Within 90 days of notification, the developer shall begin construction of remedial measures, that are acceptable to the Department of Public Works, to eliminate the capacity problem. (1640d) 1 Page 11 Planning Commission Minutes November 27, 1984 3. Section 65590 (D) of the Government Code requires that new housing developments constructed within the coastal zone shall, where feasible, provide housing units for persons of low and moderate income. Where it is not feasible to provide these units in a proposed new housing development; the City shall require the developer to provide such housing, if feasible to do so, at another location within the same city or county, either within the coastal zone or within three miles thereof. The Staff is recommending that prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City to provide affordable housing units within the Pacific Ranch project. The minimum number of units shall be 46 and shall be priced at or below that which is deemed affordable to persons earning 120% of the median family income for this statistical area of Orange County: In the alternative, the applicant may enter into an agreement with the City prior to issuance of building permits to provide affordable housing units either on -site, through a transfer of excess affordable unit credits with another developer, or through any other method acceptable to the City at the time of committment. The amount of affordable units to be provided shall be not less than the requirements in effect at the time the agreement is executed. In both of the above instances, if affordable housing requirements are no longer in existence at the time building permits are to be issued, this condition of approval will not longer be applicable. 4. All proposed gates shall be equipped with the Knox Locking System, dual=keyed for police and fire access. (Compliance with Specification 403) 5. Any road which is determined to be a fire lane shall be painted red and posted with appropriate signing to meet Fire Department specifications. 6. Prior to issuance of building permits, emergency access shall be available northerly on 38th Street to the extension of Garfield Avenue and from that point easterly along the extension of Garfield Avenue to the intersection of Garfield Avenue and Edwards Street. Such emergency access shall remain in force until public access is available from Edwards Street and Garfield Avenue to a.dedicated and improved 38th Street having at least two 12-foot travel lanes. The emergency access shall be subject to Fire Department approval as to proper grading, alignment, identification, illumination, and security method. In addition, the emergency access shall be paved to a full twenty-four (24) foot width and shall be maintained by the applicant and shall be installed prior to the first occupancy. (1640d) Page 12 Planning Commission Minutes November 27, 1984 7. At the time of acceptance by the City Council of a final tract for the subject property, any other layout depicted on a tentative tract (for the same site) shall become null and void. 8. The applicant shall be responsible for any park and recreation fees (or land dedication) which would be generated from the proposed increase in density. 9. Buildings 26 or 27 shall be "jogged" in a similar manner as to resemble the design movements in buildings 7 and 8. 10. Prior to issuance of permits, the applicant shall submit a revised Tentative Tract map to the Department of Development Services which reflects the layout of approved Site Plan dated November 14, 1984. AYES: I:iggins, Livengood, Erskine, Schumacher, Mirjahangir NOES: Porter, Winchell ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Commissioner Livengood requested staff to review the notification process. SPECIAL SIGN PERMIT N0. 84-8 Applicant: Ron Sher Special Sign Permit No. 84=8 is a request to modify and change copy to an existing non -conforming 59 1/2 foot freestanding sign at Loehmann's Five Points Plaza. Mike Adams stated that there are two additional new freestanding signs proposed for the center. He said that staff is recommending that the applicant redesign all three signs and incorporate them into the planned sign program. Commissioner Higgins asked if staff was recommending that the two signs at the corner be monument signs. Mike Adams responded that these could be monument signs up to 12 feet high and 100 square feet in area. The public hearing was opened. Ron Sher, the applicant; addressed the Commission. He said that the original variance was granted in 1962 because the center was not on Beach Boulevard. Fie said that they were under the opinion that they could change the face of the sign under the original variance. He went on say that they wanted to do something to improve the appearance of the sign while not making drastic changes. He said (1640d) Page 13 Planning Commission Minutes November 27, 1984 that although the sign is large he felt it is not out of scale with the grand entrance to the center. He concluded that the other two signs are in accordance with the sign code. There were no other persons to speak for or against the proposal and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Erskine stated that he is very pleased with the improvements in the center; however, feels the sign is in poor taste. Commissioner Higgins stated that he agreed that the existing sign is not appropriate. Commissioner Livengood stated that he could not support the proposed sign. Iie said that the item could be continued for the applicant to work with staff; or denied, and the applicant could appeal to the Council. Commissioner Livengood asked the applicant if he would be willing to work with staff to redesign the signs. Mr Sher stated that he felt strongly that he needs identification from Beach Boulevard and would work with staff if it included such identification. ON MOTION BY ERSKINE AND SECOND BY MIRJAHANGIR SPECIAL SIGN PERMIT NO. 84-8 WAS DENIED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Winchell, Livengood; Porter, Erskine, Mirjahangir NOES: None ABSENT: Schumacher (out of the room) AESTAIN: None ITEMS NOT FOR PUBLIC'HEARING PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS Commissioner Mirjahangir was appointed as the Planning Commission Representative to the Specific Events Committee. Commissioner Schumacher requested that staff include; in the staff report, findings for approval and for denial: Chairman Porter directed staff to advise applicants building in the Downtown Specific Plan area to architecturally treat all four sides of the building. ON MOTION BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY WINCHELL STAFF TO REQUIRE THAT ITRUCTURES IN THE DONNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN HAVE ARCHITECTURAL REATMENT ON ALL SIDE OF THE BUILDING, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: (1640d) Page 14 Planning Commission Minutes November 27, 1984 AYES: Higgins, Winchell, Livengood, Porter, Erskine, Schumacher, Mirjahangir NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ON MOTION BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY HIGGINS THE PLANNING COMMISSION MELTINGS IN JANUARY WILL BE HELD JANUARY 8, 1985 AND JANUARY 221 1985, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE AYES: Higgins, Winchell, Livengood, Porter, Erskine, Schumacher, Mirjahangir NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ITEMS Secretary Palin reviewed the actions taken by the City Council at its most recent meeting for the information of the Commission. ADJOURNMENT There was no further business and the meeting adjourned at 10:50 PM: a es W Pal n, Sec etary Marcus M. Porter, Mrir4p.An jr (1640d) f