HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-03-19APPROVED APR IL 16, 1985
MINUTES
HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION
Council Chambers - Civic Center
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, California
TUESDAY, March 19, 1985 -•7:00 p.m.
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:- Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood,
Erskine, Porter, Mirjahangir
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None
CONSENT CALENDAR:
A-1 Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting Study Session on
March 5, 1985 and A-2 - Minutes -of the Planning Commission
Meeting on March 5, 1985.
APPROVED AS TRANSCRIBED ON MOTION BY WINCHELL AND SECOND BY
LIVENGOOD (5 AYES 0 NOES SCHUMACHER AND ERSKINE ABSTAIN)
A-3 Proposed Underground Utility District.
CONTINUED TO THE NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ON APRIL 2,
1985.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMISSION ITEMS:
B. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMISSION ITEMS:
COMMISSIONER ROWE SHARED SOME HANDOUTS AND INFORMATION FROM HIS
RECENT ATTENDANCE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS INSTITUTE
SEMINAR.
B-1 Town Square Project (Mola Development)
FRANK MOLA WITH ERNIE VASQUEZ AND DICK HARLOW MADE A
PRESENTATION ON THE PROPOSED -PLANS FOR THE TOWN SQUARE PROJECT.
B-2 Code Amendment 85-2 (Oldtown/Townlot)
A- COMMISSIONER LIVENGOOD SUGGESTED PLACING ITEM B-2 UNDER D ITEMS
TO BE DISCUSSED AT THE END OF -THE PUBLIC HEARINGS.
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS:
C-1 HUNTINGTON SHORES MOBILE HOME PARK RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PLAN
Applicant: Huntington Beach Company
The Huntington Shores Mobile Home Park Relocation Assistance Plan
was submitted in November 1984 and originally scheduled for a public
hearing before the Planning Commission on January 8, 1985. The
public hearing was postponed to March 19, 1985, however, to allow
the Huntington Beach Company to negotiate with the City regarding
their participation in development of a Relocation Park. On Monday,
March 18, 1985, the Huntington Beach Company will submit to the City
Council a letter outlining the terms of their participation in the
Relocation Park. It is anticipated that the offer will be for a
$250,000 contribution to development of the Relocation Park, plus
moving expenses for those coaches moving to the Relocation Park. If
this concept is acceptable to the City Council, this offer would
supersede the attached Relocation Assistance Plan. Staff will be
prepared to review with the Planning Commisson on March 19, 1985
Council Action and will have an alternative resolution for approval.
After a brief discussion, the Commission motioned to continue the
item in order to provide the City Attorney's Office and Development
Services staff an opportunity to draft sufficient language to amend
the resolution approving the Relocation Assistance Agreement in
accordance with the recent information presented by the Huntington
Beach Company and subject to their review and approval.
ON MOTION BY ERSKINE AND SECOND BY MIRJAHANGER THE HUNTINGTON
MOBILEHOME PARK RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PLAN (RESOLUTION NO. 1338) WAS
CONTINUED TO THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Erskine, Porter,
Mirjahangir
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
C-2 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 84-1 (HOLLY PROPERTY)
Applicant: Huntington Beach Company
Final EIR No. 84-1 has been prepared as an objective assessment of
the individual and collective environmental impacts associated with
the development of approximately 1,200 housing units. Specifically,
the EIR addresses the approval of a General Plan Amendment which
would redesignate 120 net acres of land in central Huntington
Beach. The "Holly Property" encompasses contiguous parcels of land
surrounded by Ellis Avenue to the north, the Pacific Railroad to the
east, Garfield and Ernest Avenues to the south, and Goldenwest and
Crystal streets to the west. The applicant is seeking to have the
property redesignated from estate/residential, Industrial and Office
Professional to Planned Community on the City's General Plan Land
Use Element. The site is predominantly vacant, the only building
(2134d) -1- P.C. Minutes 4/2/85
being two -single family dwellings and a small brick building
occupied by a church.
The EIR was prepared at the request of the applicant (Huntington
Beach Company) in consultation with the Development Services
Department Staff regarding the potential impact associated with the
proposed project. The environmental consulting firm of Michael
Brandman and Associates was engaged by Development Services
Department to prepare the EIR.
Tom Smith of Michael Brandman and Associates commented on the key
issues. He stated the the EIR has been circulated since December.
He commented on key issues such as the compatibility of the adjacent
land uses, traffic impacts and desirability of residential versus
the existing General Plan designation. Another issue he commented
on was the Police Heliport. The Heliport is to be upgraded to
become the city's main police heliport located on the west side of
Gothard and approximately 500'feet north of the project site.
Commissioner Erskine asked Mr. Smith to go through the economic
fiscal analysis to compare the proposed project to the General
Plan. Mr. Smith stated that the basic approach is to compare
revenues and costs of the proposed General Plan Amendment to
revenues and costs proposed from the development. Commissioner
Erskine questioned Mr. Smith'if'Eheie were any park and recreations
fees. Mr. Smith stated that there is a $3,843 revenue source to
park and recreation fees. Commissioner Schumacher questioned Mr.
Smith on the table where the EIR is comparing the cost for public
safety which shows the same figure for both the existing General
Plan and the proposed project. She asked how this was justified.
Mr. Smith stated that he was not prepared for this question.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED:
Larry Strasbaugh, owner of property located at Ellis and Gothard
northeast of the project, commented on two points of concern one
being the Police heliport and the traffic it will'create, and the
conclusion of the fiscal impacts section of the EIR concluding that
residential uses will bring in more revenue than industrial uses.
Allen Strasbaugh statea that he was not opposed to the EIR but
would like to see the General Plan Amendment held till the next
meeting.
Bill Holman, representing huntington Beach Company, discussed the
industrial and residential zoning.
There were no other persons present to speak for or against the
proposal, and the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner
items in the
Commissioner
Porter.
Porter thanked the Planning Staff for incorporating
EIR that the Commission discussed months ago.
Winchell stated that she concurred with Commissioner
(2134d) -2- P.C. Minutes 4/2/85
The Commission discussed concerns regarding traffic and the fiscal
analysis stating that there were no grounds to vote down the EIR but
the fiscal analysis needea further research to clarify ]ustification
for the numbers presented and the conculsions reached thereon.
ON MOTION BY ERSKINE AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT NO. 84-1 (HOLLY PROPERTY) WAS APPROVED BY THE
FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Erskine, Porter,
Mirjahangir
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN:- None
C-3 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 85-1
Applicant: Huntington Beach-Com$an
Transmitted for public hearing is Land Use Element Amendment No.
85-1. The amendment addresses approximately 126 acres of property
known as the Holly Property located on the south side of Ellis
Avenue, west of'the Southerh-Pacific Railroad Right -of -Way, north of
Garfield and Ernest Avenues and east of Crystal and Goldenwest
Streets. The request is to change the Land Use designation from
Estate Residential, General Industrial and Office/Professional to
Planned Community. Environmental Impact Report No. 84-1 was
prepared for this amendment as a separate document and must be
approved by the Planning Commission for recommendation to the City
Council before action is taken on the Land Use Element Amendment.
At the applicant's request, General Plan Amendment No. 85-1 was
continued with the concurrence of the Planning Commission to the May
7, 1985 Planning Commission Meeting.
ON MOTION BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY MIRJAHANGIR-•GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT NO. 85-1 (IN CONJUNCTION WITH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
84-1) WAS CONTINUED TO THE MAY 7, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Rowe Winchell, Livengood, Erskine, Porter, Mirjahangir
NOES: None
ABSENT: Schumacher out of the room
ABSTAIN: None
C-4 TENTATIVE TRACT 9653 (REVISED), USE PERMIT NO. 85-7,
CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 85-10
Applicant: Beach Front Properties/Rick Jeffries
Use Permit No. 85-7 in conjunction with Tentative Tract 9653 is a 1
Lot Subdivision for the purpose of developing 32 apartment units.
The applicant has also filed a Conditional Exception to allow for
the reduction in the 1 bedroom unit size from the required 650
square feet to 517 square feet.
(2134d) -3- P.C. Minutes 4/2/85
Due to the fact that a previous Tentative Tract on the subject site
was acted upon by the Planning Commission and that the applicant is
requesting a density bonus, this item requires Planning Commission
review.
After some discussion, the Commission with the applicant's
concurrence decided to continue Tentative Tract 9653 (revised), Use
Permit No. 85-7, Conditional Exception 85-10 was continued to the
April 2, 1985 Planning Commission meeting.
ON MOTION BY ERSKINE AND SECOND BY PORTER TENTATIVE TRACT 9653
(REVISED), USE PERMIT NO. 85-7, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 85-10 WAS
CONTINUED TO THE APRIL 21 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING BY THE
FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Rowe, Schumacher, Livengood, Erskine, Porter,
Mirjahangir
NOES: Winchell
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
C-5 USE PERMIT NO. 85-13
Applicant: Mola Development
Use Permit No. 85-13 is a request to permit the development of a 102
unit apartment complex on the north side of Warner Avenue between
Lynn and Sims Streets. The project was previously approved as a
102-unit condominium project in January 1984 (CUP 83-31, Tentative
Tract 12084/ND83-47).
Due to the fact that a previous entitlement (CUP 83-31) on the
subject site was acted upon by the Planning Commission the applicant
is also requesting that an entitlement be grantea under the
apartment standards. The applicant is also requesting a density
bonus. Both of these requests require Planning Commission review
and approval.
The project site is approximately 3.73 gross acres in size, with a
net site area of approximately 2.60 acres. In determining density
for apartment projects, gross acreage is usea to calculate the total
number of units permitted. The City's General Plan designates the
area as High Density Residential and the subject property is zoned
R3 (24.89 units/acre maximum). ,
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED
Dick Harlow, representing Mola Development, stated that staff
basically covered all concerns.
There were no other person present to speak for or against the
proposal, and the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Porter, referring to condition no. 7, questioned if the
CATV System is provided by the Apartment Complex. Staff stated yes.
(2134d) -4- P.C. Minutes 4/2/65
Chairman Livengood questioned staff if,.the city was looking at a
density bonus of 10%. Howard Zelefsky of staff stated yes.
Chairman Livengood also questioned the applicant what type of
laundry services were provided. Dick Harlow stated that a the
project will have a centralized laundry facility.
Commissioner Winchell questioned what!the criteria was for
calculating the number of affordable units. Howard Zelefsky of
staff stated that the project must have a number of units before
they qualify for the density bonus. Commissioner Winchell asked
staff why there was a double bonus. She also suggested 10 units
instead of 7 for families of moderate income.
Dick Harlow asked the Commission to consider 20 units for families
of low income and 10 units for families of moderate income.
ON MOTION BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY WINCHELL USE PERMIT NO. 85-13
WAS APPROVED WITH FINDINGS AND AMENDED CONDITIONS BY THE FOLLOWING
VOTE:
AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Erskine, Porter,
Mirjahangir
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Findings for Approval Use Permit No. 85-13
1. The granting of Use Permit No. 85-13 will not adversely affect
the Master Plan of the City of Huntington Beach because the
General Plan has set forth provisions for this type of land
use as well as setting forth objectives for implementation of
this type of housing.
2. The granting of Use Permit No,.85-13 will not be in)urious to
property and improvements in the vicinity because the lot
size, depth, frontage and other design features are proposed
to be constructed in compliance with standard plans and
specifications on file with the City.
3. The granting of Use Permit 85-13 will not be detrimental to
persons residing or working the vicinity because the property
was previously studied for this intensity of land use at the
land use designation for Medium -High Density Residential was
placed on the property.
Conditions of Approval - Use Permit No. 85-13
1. The site plan, floor plan ana elevations receivea and dated
-March 11, 1985 shall be the approved layout subject to any
revisions described herein.
2. Prior to issuance of building permits the applicant shall work
with staff to revise the parking layout which reflects the use
of compact parking.
(2134d) -5- P.C. Minutes 4/2/85
3. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall
file a parcel map with the Board of Zoning Adjustments, which
shall be recorded prior to final inspection on the last unit.
4. Natural gas and 220V electrical shall be stubbed in at the
location of clothes dryers. This requirement may be waived
provided that the applicant will install a more
energy -efficient alternative subject to review and approval of
the Department of Development Services.
5. Natural gas shall be stubbea in at the locations of cooking
facilities, water heaters, and central heating units. This
requirement may be waived provided that the applicant will
install a more energy -efficient alternative subject to review
and approval of the Department of Development Services.
6. Low volume heads shall be used in all showers.
7. All building spoils, such as unused lumber, wire, pipe, and
other surplus or unusable materials, shall be disposed of at
an off site facility equipped to handle them.
8. Energy efficient lighting, such as high pressure sodium vapor
lamps, shall be used in parking lots to prevent spillage onto
adjacent areas and for energy conservation.
9. All 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 a
building permit.
10. An engineering geologist shall be engaged to submit a report
indicating the ground surface acceleration from earth movement
for the subject property. All structures within this
development shall be constructed in compliance with the
g-factor as indicated by the geologist's report. Calculations
for footings and structural members to withstand anticipated
g-factors shall be submitted to the City for review prior to
issuance of building permits.
11. A chemical analysis, as well as physical properties of the
soil on subject property, shall be submitted to the City for
review prior to the issuance of building permits.
12. A fire alarm system, approved by the Fire Department, shall be
installed throughout as per NFPA standards.
13. An automatic sprinkler system, approved by the Fire
Department, shall be installed throughout as per NFPA
standards and City specifications.
(21346) -6- P.C. Minutes 4/2/65
14. A standpipe system approved by the Fire Department shall be
installed as per Huntington Beach Fire Code and NFPA standards.
15. A pedestrian access gate, minimum 6 foot width for Fire
.Department use, shall be provided from Warner Avenue to gain
access to the east side of Building 2, the recreation center,
and the west side of Building 1.
16. Hydrants must be installed onsite to provide a hydrant within
150 feet from any part of the perimeter of any building.
17. Prior to any combustible construction all roadways, water
supply systems, and fire hydrants shall be installed and
operable.
18. All perimeter block walls shall be on private property.
19. Heavy screen planting, specifically trees, shall be required
along northerly property line of the development.
20. All onsite sewer and storm drain facilities shall be private
and constructed per Public Works standards.
21. All onsite accessways shall be private and constructed per
Public Works standards.
22. No on street parking will be permitted on the north side of
Warner Avenue.
23. The developer shall provide and install any traffic control
devices as required by Public Works.
24. All public improvements shall be completed per approved
plans. These plans shall be reviewed by the City's
engineering staff and revised to current City standards by the
developer's engineer.
26. The applicant shall draft a development agreement which
addressed the following.
Mechanism for monitoring of affordable units
Set aside 20 units.for families of low income (less than
80 percent of Orange County median income)
Set aside 10 units for families with income between
80-100-% of the county median income.
_NOTE: 17.of the 30 affordable units are to satisfy off site
affordable housing needs which are required for coastal
development residential projects.
This agreement shall be reviewed by the City Attorney's office as to
form and content and approved by the Director of Development Services.
(2134d) -7- P.C. Minutes 4/2/85
27. A common antenna television C.A.T.V. shall be providea for the
apartment complex. The developer shall pursue a "bulk rate"
package with cablesystems in order to provide Cable T.V. to
residents that desire it.
28. Every floor served by elevators shall have access to, at
least, one elevator car having a minimum inside car platform
of 6' by 8" wide by 4' 3" deep with a minimum clear opening
width of 420.
C-6 & C-7 SPECIAL SIGN PERMIT NO. 85-2 and 85-3
Applicant: Orange Coast Sign Company
Special Sign Permit No. 85-2 is a request to permit the installation
of a 64 square foot, 15-foot high double face subdivision directional
sign in an R5 zoning district. The proposed sign is to be located
north of Warner Avenue approximately 450 feet east of Bolsa Chica
Street.
The applicant has initiated a special sign permit because the proposal
does not comply with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, Article 976,
Sign Code in the following area:
1. Section 9760.17.4 specifies that all signs shall set back two
hundred (200) feet from any developed property other than that
property which contains the dwellings which are a part of a model
home and sales complex for which the sign is intended. The
applicant is requesting that the proposed sign be located within
25 feet of developed property.
Special Sign Permit No. 85-3 is a request to install a 64 square foot,
15 foot high double faced subdivision directional sign in an R2 zoning
district within 200 feet of developed property. The sign is proposed
to be located on the east side of Warner Avenue approximately 200 feet
south of the intersection of Sandra Lee Street and Warner Avenue.
The applicant has initiated a special sign permit because the proposal
does not comply with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, Article 976
in the following area:
1. Section 9760.17.4(b) specifies that "such signs are not permittea
on any property zoned residential, except on -site. The applicant
is requesting that the proposed sign be located on property zoned
R2, Medium Density Residential.
2. Section 9760.17.4(c) specifies that "all signs shall be set back
200 feet from any developed property other than that property
which contains the dwellings which are a part of a model home and
sales complex for which the sign is intended." The applicant is
requesting the proposed sign be locatea within 20 feet of
developed property.
(2134d) -b- P.C. Minutes 4/2/85
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED
Scott Kimball, representative for Orange Coast Sign Company, stated
that he concurred with all the findings and conditions presented by
the Planning Staff.
There were no other persons present to speak for or against the
proposal, and the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Porter stated that he did not agree with the condition
regarding indirect lighting of the sign. Scott Kimball stated that
they would be willing to go unlighted. Chairman Livengood questioned
staff if the sign could only stand for a minimum of one year. Mike
Adams of staff stated that this was correct.
ON MOTION BY MIRJAHANGIR AND SECOND BY ROWE SPECIAL SIGN PERMIT NO.
85-2 AND 85-3 WAS APPROVED WITH FINDINGS AND AMENDED CONDITIONS BY THE
FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Erskine, Porter,
Mirjahangir
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
C-8 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-6 & NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 85-6
Applicant: Timothy Woodson
Conditional Use Permit No. 85-6 is a request to establish a wholesale
nursery pursuant to Sec. 9331.i of the Huntington Beach Ordinance
Code on a 3 acre vacant site owned by Southern California Edison.
The subject property is approximately 680 feet north of Adams Avenue
adjacent to the west side of the Santa Ana River and within and R1,
Single Family Residential district.
Commissioner Winchell stated that since on -site movement of nusery
stock would be electric carts, she felt this should be stated in the
conditions. Mike adams of staff stated that staff could made this
change. Commissioner Schumacher questioned why portable and
permanent office and storage buildings had to be located within fifty
feet from the east property line. Mike Adams stated that this
actually means the structures must be located within the first 50
feet away from residential properties.
Commissioner Winchell asked staff what the width of the property.
Mike Adams stated 180 feet. Commissioner Mirjahangir asked staff
what the recommended hours of operation were. Mike Adams stated that
the project's hours would be from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. He stated
that condition no..,7 covered -this -question. Commissioner Winchell
stated that she could not tell what the shade house looked like and
she felt staff should be more descriptive. Mike Adams statea that he
could add "based on the approval of the Planning Director" to the
condition. Mike Adams stated that he would like to add a condition
on the direction of Tom Poe, Fire Department.
(2134d) -9- P.C. Minutes 4/2/85
There were no persons present to speak for or against the proposal,
and the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Erskine asked staff if the people on Oronsay had been
notified. Mike Adams stated yes. Commissioner Winchell asked staff
how many trucks per day were going to be passing on this street.
Staff did not have this information. Commissioner Mirjahangir asked
staff if there were any on -site parking for the employees. Mike
Adams stated approximately two which would easily accommodate this
project.
ON MOTION BY ERSKINE AND SECOND BY SChUMAChLR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. 85-6 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 85-6 WAS APPROVED WITH FINDINGS
AND AMENDED CONDITIONS BY ThE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Erskine,
Mirjahangir
NOES: None
ABSENT: Porter out of the room
ABSTAIN: None
Findings for Approval:
1. The proposed nursery is compatible with existing uses in the
vicinity because it is small scale and for wholesale purposes
only.
2. The conditions of approval will assure that the proposed
nursery will not have a detrimental effect upon the general
health, welfare, safety and convenience of persons residing
in the neighborhood, nor be detrimental to the value of the
property and improvements in the neighborhood.
3. The proposed nursery is consistent with the goals and
objectives of the General Plan.
4. Access to and parking for the proposed use will not create
undue traffic problems because the use is wholesale and not
open to the public.
Conditions of Approval:
1. The conceptual site plan dated February 1, 1985, shall be
amended to include the following:
* Employee parking area adjacent to the south boundary of
the project
* Truck loading and unloading area, to be kept 185 feet
from residential, adjacent to the south boundary of the
project.
2. The shade house shall be setback greater than 20 feet from
the westerly block wall, shall not exceed 15 feet in height
and open on all sides. The design of the structure shall be
subject to the review of the Director of Development Services.
(2134d) -lU- P.C. Minutes 4/2/85
3. The site and access road shall be maintained with gravel
ground cover or other suitable material to control dirt and
dust. Asphalt paving transition from driveway apron shall be
to the satisfaction and specifications of the Public Works
Department.
4. All soil amendments or planting mix material shall be kept
damp as to not blow onto adjacent properties. All such
material shall not be stackea over a height of six (6) feet
and shall not be stored within 20 feet of the westerly or
northerly property lines.
5. The taller and larger plant materials shall not be stored
within twenty (20) feet of the residential properties to the
west. Lower growing trees and shrubs only shall be permitted
within 20 feet of these residential properties, shall be no
higher than one (1) foot lower than the top of existing block
wall.
6. Chemical spraying of plant materials is prohibited. Plant
watering shall be done in such a manner to prevent water from
flowing into the residential area.
7. There shall be no activity, nor deliveries, including
maintenance, between the hours of 8:00 P.M. and 8:00 A.M. on
weekdays, excluding holidays. On weekends or holidays, there
shall be no activity whatsoever other than general
maintenance.
8. No retail activity or sales to the public shall take place on
the property.
9. All vehicles operating within the nursery shall not exceea
speeds of ten (10) miles per hour. All stock movement on
site shall be via electric carts.
10. Outside phone alarms, intercoms, and loudspeakers are
prohibited.
12. Any yard lighting proposed shall be directed away from
adjacent residential properties.
13. Any proposed signing shall conform to Article 976 of the
Huntington Beach Ordinance Code.
14. Proposed portable and permanent office and storage buildings
(including storage bins) shall be located within fifty (50)
feet from the east property line, and subject to review and
approval by the Director of Development Services.
0
(2134d) -11- P.C. Minutes 4/2/85
15. All chemicals used or stored at the subject site shall be
approved by the Orange County Agricultural Department, as
required by law.
16. The applicant shall submit a grading plan to the Department
of Public Works for review, approval, and issuance prior to
any grading operation or change of drainage.
17. Proof of access rights on the County Sanitation District road
shall be submitted to the Department of Development Services
within 60 days.
18. This Conditional Use Permit is subject to annual review. Any
violation of the conditions of this report or applicable
zoning laws may be cause for revocation of this Conditional
Use Permit.
19. Complex will comply with all applicable regulations of the
Huntington Beach Fire Department.
C-9 ZONE CHANGE NO. 85-4
Applicant: Gerald Sy Golob
Zone change No. 85-4 is a request to permit the addition of a pet
store ana related sales (Pet store specialty retail) to the list of
permitted uses within the (Q) C-4 Highway Commercial District located
at the southwest corner of Warner Avenue ana "A" Street. The existing
(Q) C4 zoning presently allows all uses within Section 9741.3,
Professional Services and Offices (except medical, dental and retail)
and a fisherman's supply center. The subject property is also
restricted with a 110 foot building setback from the sectional
district line and a maximum building size of 3,000 square feet.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED
Gerald Sy Golob, applicant, statea that he concurred with findings
recommend by staff.
There were no other persons present to speak for or against the
proposal, and the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Winchell expressea concern about the zone change being
compatible with adjacent units. Commissioner Winchell also requested
a list of permitted uses within the (Q) C-4 highway Commercial
District.
ON MOTION BY SChUMAChER AND SECOND BY PORTER ZONE CHANGE NO. 85-4 WAS
APPROVED WITH FINDINGS BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Rowe, Schumacher, Livengood, Erskine, Porter, Mir3ahangir
NOES: Winchell
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
(21346) -12- P.C. Minutes 4/2/65
Findings For Approval:
1. An expansion of the permitted uses within the existing (�)
C4, highway commercial district to include a "Pet Store
Specialty Retail" is consistent with the General Plan Land
Use designation which is General Commercial.,
2. A pet store specialty retail use is compatible with
surrounding land uses based on the applicant's traffic study
and if appropriately conditioned by the BZA to mitigate
noise, odors and outside activities.
C-10 CODE AMENDMENT NO. 85-9 AMENDING CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
Applicant: The City of Huntington Beach
The California Coastal Commission is authorized to exclude certain
categories of development from coastal development permit
requirements. The City currently has an approved categorical
exclusion for single family residences on existing lots. This
exclusion will expire upon certification of the Local Coastal
Program. The City submitted a new request to the Commission for
categorical exclusions which would become effective upon
certification. The exclusions would allow certain developments
which are ministerial or are allowed by right in specified districts
to be constructed without obtaining a coastal development permit.
Such developments would still have to comply with all other
requirements of the base zoning district and the CZ district.
There were no persons present to speak for or against the proposal
and the public hearing was closea.
ON MOTION BY ERSKINE AND SECOND BY MIRJAHANGIR CODE AMENDMENT NO.
85-9 AMENDING CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION SECTIONS 989.5.3.23 THROUGH
9895.5.3.15 OF THE HUNTINGTON BEACH ORDINANCE CODE WAS APPROVED AND
RECOMMENDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Erskine,
Porter, Mirjahangir
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
C-11 CODE AMENDMENT NO. 84-21
Applicant: City of Huntington Beach
At the public hearing meeting of March 5, 1985, the Planning
Commission had concerns about allowing service stations at the
intersection of any arterial highway. In order to address the
Commission's concerns with regard to secondary arterials, staff
recommends that the Code Amendment be modified to permit service
stations located at the intersection of secondary highways subject
to a Conditional Use Permit.
(2134d) -13- P.C. Minutes 4/2/85
Staff has recently received other inquiries from major oil companies
for expansions and improvements on existing sites. In response to
these requests staff is proposing to rewrite Article 948 (Service
Station Standard) to delete the requirement of the addition of the
--SS suffix for new construction. The proposed rewrite would
require all service stations - full serve, self -serve and in
combination with convenience market - to obtain a Conaitional Use
Permit.
There were no persons present to speak for or against the proposal,
and the public hearing was closed.
Commissioner Porter stated that in his opinion, the city had enough
commercial sites for service stations. He stated that he disagreed
with staff's recommendation.
Commissioner Winchell asked staff iF service stations were only
permitted in areas with commercial already behind them. Mike Adams
stated that this was correct. He stated that three corners have to
be commercial along with a conditional use permit. Commissioner
Winchell stated that she would like this to remain the same way.
ON MOTION BY WINCHELL AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER CODE AMENDMENT NO.
84-2 ARTICLE 948 - SERVICE STATION STANDARDS WAS APPROVED AND
RECOMMENDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES:
Rowe, Winchell,
Mirjahangir
NOES:
Porter
ABSENT:
None
ABSTAIN:
None
Schumacher, Livengood, Erskine,
ITEMS NOT FOR PUBLIC HEARING
D. Items not for Public Hearing
D-1 Site Plan Review No. 85-4
ON MOTION BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY ERSKINE SITE PLAN REVIEW
NO. 85-4 WAS APPROVED (7 AYES 0 NOES)
E. Discussion Items
CHAIRMAN LIVENGOOD QUESTIONED STAFF AS TO WHEN THE MASSAGE
PARLOR ISSUE WOULD BE COMING BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
MIKE ADAMS OF STAFF STATED IN THE SECOND MEETING OF APRIL.
CHAIRMAN LIVENGOOD STATED THAT THE TELEVISION CREW REQUESTED
TO TELEVISE ONLY ITEMS UP TO 'D', WHICH THE COMMISSION AND
STAFF CONCURRED.
F. Pending Items:
(2134d)
-14- P.C. Minutes 4/2/85
F-1 Old World Oktoberfest
COMMISSION AND STAFF REVIEWED OKTOBERFEST, COMMISSION ASKED
STAFF IF MORE GROUND SECURITY WAS NEEDED TO WHICH MICHAEL
STRANGE OF STAFF STATED NO, BUT HE DID SAY THAT MORE OUTSIDE
PATROLS WOULD BE NECESSARY. BERN BISCHOF ADDRESSED ThE
COMMISSION AND CONCURRED WITH ThEIR FINDINGS.
ON MOTION BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY WINCHELL MINUTE ACTION
WAS TAKEN TO UPHOLD CONDITIONS PROPOSED SEPTEMBER %, 1983 OF
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 83-20 (OKTOBERFEST) AT THE PLANNING
COMMISSION'S ANNUAL REVIEW BY ThE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Rowe, Winchell Livengood, Porter
NOES: None
ABSENT: Schumacher, Erskine, Mirjahangir out of the room
ABSTAIN: None
F-2 Pending Items List
CONTINUED TO APRIL 2, 1985
G. Planning Commission Items:
G-1 Advisory Committee for Revision of Open Space and Conservation
Elements
ThIS WAS DISMISSED FROM ThE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DUE TO
THE FACT THAT IT HAD ALREADY BEEN ARRANGED
H Development Services Items: NONE
I. Adjournment:
es
THE COMMISSION ADJOURNED AT 11:32 P.M. TO ThE NEXT' REGULARLY
SCHEDULED MEETING ON APRIL 2, 1985.
. Palin, Secretary Tom L v f
ngoo , Chafirman
I
(2134d) -15- P.C. Minutes 4/2/85