Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-01-30MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS Room B-6 - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 30, 1985 - 1:30 P.M. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Cranmer, Evans, Godfrey, Smith, Vincent Pierce, Poe MINUTES: UPON MOTION BY EVANS,AND SECOND BY GODFREY, MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF DECEMBER 12, 1984, WERE APPROVED AS TRANSCRIBED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Cnanmer, Evans, Godfrey, Smith, Vincent NOES: None ABSENT: None AGENDA ITEMS TO BE CONTINUED: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 84-1207 Applicant: McDonald's Corporation REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 84-73 - (SITE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 84-29) (Cont. from 1/9/85) Applicant: Mikkelsen/Schwartz A request to permit a 20' x 35' walled outdoor dining area to encroach five feet (51) into the required twenty-five foot (251) front setback. Subject property is located at 17182 Beach Boulevard (East side of Beach Boulevard approximately 300 feet South of Blaylock Drive) . This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 5, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. Ms. Pierce reported that, at the previous meeting when this project was discussed, Staff had recommended denial or modification. The applicant has prepared a new plan which shows a reduction in the height of the wall to'a maximum of forty-two inches (42") and a patio cover which will allow maximum visibility. With the inclusion of the landscaping, the applicant has complied with requirements, and Staff would recommend approval. Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments January 30, 1985 Page 2 Daryl Smith opened the Public Hearing and Stephen Schwartz was present. Mr. Schwartz presented photos of similar projects to the Board and requested approval of -the request with modifications. There was no one else present to speak so Mr. Smith closed the Public Hearing. UPON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY VINCENT,'CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 84-73 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND -CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: _. 1. The existing patio is located within the minimum front setback. The proposed structure covers this area. 2. The proposed patio structure affords visibility to adjacent site. 3. More intensified ;landscaping will be`provided within the mini- mum front setback`. 4. The granting of a conditional exception is necessary in order to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. 5. The granting of Conditional Exception No. 84-73 will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property in the same zone classifications. 6. The.granting of the conditional exception will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The plan received January 21, 1985, shall be the approved layout. AYES: Cranmer, Evans, Godfrey, Smith, Vincent NOES: None ABSENT: None SITE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 84-29 (CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 84-73) ('Cont. from 1/9/85) Applicant: Mikkelsen/Schwartz A request to permit a 20'x 35' walled outdoor dining area located at 17182 Beach Boulevard (East side of street approximately 300 feet South of Blaylock Drive). -2- 1/30/85 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments January 30, 1985 Page 3 This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 5, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. Staff would recommend approval of this site plan with the modifi- cations made by the applicant and this approval would amend Use Permit No. 82-38 as amended by Site Plan Amendment No. 84-21. UPON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY CRANMER, SITE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 84-29 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan and elevation received January 21, 1985, shall be the approved layout for the patio area and setback landscaping. 2. This approval amends Use Permit No. 82-38 as amended by Site Plan Amendment No. 84-21. 3. All necessary permits shall be obtained. 4. The proposed structure shall be architecturally compatible with the existing structure. 5. The proposed structure shall not be converted to a fully enclosed structure. 6. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan to the Department of Development Services and Public Works,for review and approval. 7. Maximum height of berm and wall shall not exceed forty-two inches (42") . AYES: Cranmer, Evans, Godfrey, Smith, Vincent NOES: None ABSENT: None CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 84-74 (USE PERMIT 84-85)(Cont. from 1/16/85) Applicant: Diversified Shopping Centers A request for a reduction in parking (from 259 to 235 spaces) and joint use parking. Subject property is located at 16552-16600 Bolsa Chica Street (Southeast corner of Bolsa Chica Street and Heil Avenue). This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 5, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. -3- 1/30/85 - BZA Minutes, h. B. Board of coning Adjustments January 30, 1985 Page 4 Staff stated this is an old shopping center which the applicant would like to modernize. Staff has concerns regarding the parking layout and has attempted to resolve this problem with the applicant. Staff has figured parking based on the old Code for existing buildings and used the new Code for calculating parking for the proposed additions. The applicant is also short on the required six percent (6%) landscaping requirement. -, After a lengthy discussion by the Board members, Daryl Smith stated the Public Hearing had remained -open from the previous meeting. The applicant's representative, John Guiltinan, was present and stated he had no questions of the Board.,-. Stratton Matinas, owner of an apartment.complex adjacent to the shopping center, said his tenants had complained vigorously about the noise emanating from the shoppingcenter, especially the area behind Lucky's. Mr. Matinas stated that, if the Board should deem to grant this applicant's request, restrictions should be placed on delivery times to Lucky's, landscape buffers and higher fencing should be installed between the shopping center and the apartment complex, and trucks should not be allowed to sit with their motors idling for hours behind Lucky's. Another property owner, George Sada, stated he had receivea complaints from his tenants regarding the noise from the rooftop air conditioning unit, as well as the other problems mentionea by Mr. Matinas. Mr. Sada also expressed a concern about the safety factors involved with the parking situation ana'said he was asking the Board to reject the entire request of the applicant. There was no one else present who wished to speak and the Public Hearing remained -open. Mr. Smith asked that the record reflect that the applicant was in concurrence with the continuance. UPON MOTION BY GODFREY AND SECOND BY CRAMMER, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 84-74 WAS CONTINUED, WITH CUNCURRENCE OF THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE, TO THE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 6, 1985, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Cranmer, Godfrey, Vincent NOES: Evans, Smith, ABSENT: None -4- 1/30/85 - BZA 1 Minutes, H. B. Board of 2,oning Adjustments January 30, 1985 Page 5 USE PERMIT NO. 84-85 (CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 84-74) (Cont. from 1/16/85) Applicant: Diversified Shopping Centers A request for an addition of 5,803 Square Feet to an existing commercial center, remodel existing building. Subject property is located at 16552-16600 Bolsa Chica Street (Southeast corner of Bolsa Chica Street and Heil Avenue). This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 1, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. Daryl Smith statea the Public Hearing had remained open on this request and asked for a motion to continue in conjunction with Conditional Exception No. 84-85. UPON MOTION BY GODFREY AND SECOND BY CRANMER, USE PERMIT NO. 84-85 WAS CONTINUED TO THE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 6, 1985, WITH CONCURRENCE OF THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE.: AYES: Cranmer, Evans, Godfrey, Smith, Vincent NOES: None ABSENT: None Les Evans left the meeting at this time. CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 85-1 Applicant: Tarek Samee/Pacific Fourteen A request for a reduction in driveway width from ten feet (10') to nine feet (9') at 8092 La Palma Avenue (South side of La Palma Avenue approximately sixty feet (60') East of Patterson Lane). This request is covered by Cateyorical Exemption,,Class 1, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. Nis. Pierce said this was a request to take an existing single family residence with a double garage, remove the garage, and construct two (2) additional units on the property. One unit would be attached to the residence and the other would be on the side with the garage in front. The driveway would be 105 feet long and, according to City Code, this length driveway would require a twenty -foot (20') wiae drive. Staff stated the parking space parallel to La Palma Avenue should be eliminated. -5- 1/30/85 - BZA Minutes, H. B. board of Yoning Adjustments January 30, 1985 Page 6 Daryl Smith suggested the applicant might install nine feet (9') of landscaping to shorten the length of the driveway and eliminate the necessity for the twenty -foot (20') width. Glen Godfrey stressed the fact there did not appear to be a land -related hardship associated with this project. Mr. Smith opened the Public Hearing and Rob Patterson, the project Architect, was present to represent the applicant. There was a discussion with the applicant concerning eave overhangs obstructing the use of the driveway and with the possibility of combining this drive with an adjoining neighbor's drive. There was no one else present wishing to speak and the Public Hearing remained open to give the applicant an opportunity to pursue the reciprocal driveway concept. GODFREY MOVED THAT'CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION•NO. 85=1 BE DENIED BASED ON THE FINDINGS PRESENTED BY STAFF FOR DENIAL. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF SECOND. UPON MOTION by VINCENT AND SECOND BY SMITH, CUNDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 85-1 WAS CONTINUED TO THE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 6, 1985, WITH CONCURRENCE OF THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE• AYES: Cranmer, Smith, Vincent NOES: Godfrey ABSENT: Evans Ms. Pierce reported the applicant for Conditional Exception No. 85-3 and Use Permit No. 85-4 was not•present and asked the Board if it would consider postponing these requests until -the end of the meeting. The Board concurred with this request. ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 84-85 ` Applicant: Rudolph Cienfuegos, Sr. A request to permit a 10,000 Square Foot manufacturing building wit: office -to be located at 17861, 17871, 17881, and 17891 Sampson Lane (West side of Sampson Lane approximately 300 feet 'South of Woodwind Drive). This request is covered by Negative Declaration No. 82-23. Ms. Pierce said this is a development proposed to be constructed across two (2) existing lots within a new tract. Parking is not satisfactory the way it is shown on the plan and the applicant would -6- 1/30/85 - b2,A Minutes, H. 13. board of Zoning Adjustments January 30, 1985 Page 7 have to increase warehouse space as opposed to office space in order to satisfy parking requirements. The project is shown as two (2) lots which would require two (2) separate Administrative Reviews or consolidation of the two (2) lots. Mr. Cienfuegos was present and stated he would be consolidating the lots as Ms. Pierce suggested. There was a further discussion concerning sprinklering of the buildings, parking problems, and trash receptacle location. UPON MOTION by VINCENT AND ,ECOND by CKANMEK, ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 84-85 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, by THE FOLLOWING VOTE: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated January 16, 1985, shall be the approved layout. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall file a parcel map consolidating Lots 10 and 11 of Tract-11831. Said map shall be recorded prior to tinal inspection. 3. 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. 4. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, building Division, and Fire Department. 5. Maximum separation between building wall and property line shall not exceed two inches (2"). 6. Driveway approaches shall be a minimum of twenty-seven feet (27') in width and shall be of radius type construction. -7- 1/30/85 - bZA Minutes, H. B. board of mooning Adjustments January 30, 1985 Page 8 7. All signs shall comply with Article 976 of the Huntington beach Ordinance Code. 8. Low -volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets. 9. All building spoils, such as unusable lumber,,wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable'material, shall"be disposed of at an offsite facility equipped to handle them. 10. if lighting is included in the parking lot, -high-pressure sodium vapor lamps shall be used for energy savings. All outside lighting shall be directed to prevent "spillage" onto adjacent properties. 11. A detailed soils analysis shall be prepared by a registered Soils Engineer. This analysis shall include on -site soil sampling and laboratory testing of materials to provide detailed recommendations regarding grading., chemical and fill properties, foundations, retaining walls, streets, and utilities. AYES: Cranmer, Smith, Vincent NOES: Godfrey ABSENT: Evans CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 85-3 (USE PEkIviIT NO. 85-4) Applicant: Jon R. Thornton A request to ,permit an addition along the existing setback line (three feet) in lieu of V -9""side yard -setback. Subject property is located at 743 Main street (West side'ot street approximately 135 feet South of Crest Avenue). This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 1, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. According to Ms. Pierce, this is a piece of -property with two (2) existing buildings. The applicant proposes to demolish one building and construct a new building attached to the remaining structure. The Public Hearing was opened by Daryl Smith. The applicant was not present and there was was no one else present -to speak for or against the request so the Public Hearing was closed. UPON MOTION by GODFREY AND SECOND by CRANMER, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 85-3 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, by THE FOLLOWING VOTE: -8- 1/30/85 - BZA Minutes, H. b. Board of Zoning Adjustments January 30, 1985 Page 9 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: 1. Because the property has existed for many years with two (2) structures, both at the present nonconforming setback, and the applicant proposes to re -erect one (1) structure fully attached to the other, the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classifications. 2. The granting of a conditional exception is necessary in order to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. 3. The granting of Conditional Exception No. 85-3 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: 1. The site plan received and dated January 10, 1985, shall be the approved layout. AYES: Cranmer, Evans, Smith, Vincent NOES: None ABSENT: Evans USE PERMIT NO. 85-4 (CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 85-3) Applicant: Jon R. Thornton A request to permit an addition to structure with nonconforming setbacks located at 743 Main Street (West side of street approximately 135 feet South of Crest Avenue). This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 5, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. Daryl Smith opened and closed the Public Hearing since neither the applicant nor any other persons were present to speak. UPON MOTION BY GODFREY AND SECOND BY SMITH, USE PERMIT NO. 85-4 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: -9- 1/30/85 - bZA Minutes, H. B. board of Zoning Adjustments January 30, 1985 Page 10 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 the 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 Lana Use. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated January 10, 1985, shall be the approved layout. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall file a lot line adjustment eliminating the lot line between Lot 22 and Lot 21, Block 706', Wesley Park Tract. Said lot line adjustment shall be recorded prior to final inspection, and a copy provided to the Department of Development Services. 3. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department. 4. Dedication of 2-1/2 feet along both alleys abutting.the subject site shall be made -prior to issuance of building permits. 5. Proposed addition shall be architecturally compatible with existing structure. 6. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a document recorded in the Orange County Recorder's Office restricting the use of the property to two dwelling units. 7. Natural gas shall be stubbed in at the locations of cooking facilities, water heaters, and central heating units. 8. Low -volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets. 9. All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material, shall be disposed of at an offsite facility equipped to handle them. -10- 1/30/85 - BZA Minutes, H. B. board of Zoning Adjustments January 30, 1985 page 11 10. 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). 11. If foil -type insulation is to be used, a tire retardant type shall be installed as approved by the'Building Division. AYES: Cranmer, Godfrey, Smith, Vincent NOES: None ABSENT: Evans There was no further business to be discussed so the meeting was adjourned to the pre -review meeting of February 4, 1985, at 10:00 A.M. Glen K. Godfrey, Secretary Board of Zoning Adjustments jh (2106d) -11- 1/30/85 - bGA