Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-04-03MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS Room B-6 - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California WEDNESDAY, APRIL 3, 1985 - 1:30 P.M. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Cranmer, Evans, Godfrey, Smith, Vincent STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Hess, Poe, Shaw MINUTES: UPON MOTION BY VINCENT AND SECOND BY EVANS, MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF FEBRUARY 27, 1985, WERE APPROVED AS TRANSCRIBED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Cranmer, Evans, Godfrey, Smith, Vincent NOES: None ABSENT: None REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: USE PERMIT NO. 85-15 (Cont. from 3/27/85) Applicant: Scott Oil Com any A request to permit redrilling of one (1) existing well. Subject property is located at 19200 Holly Street (Northeast corner of Holly Street and Clay Avenue). This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 1, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970: Scott Hess stated the applicant had submitted to the Director of Development Services a letter stating they would comply with the Board's dedication requirements within forty-eight (48) months providing their new well averages forty (40) barrels or more net oil per day. The Director has also submitted a letter to the Board for their consideration. Both letters were read by the Board members. Daryl Smith opened the Public Hearing and Tom Scott, the applicant's representative, stated the conditions were agreeable to him. There was no one else present to speak for or against the project so the Public Hearing was closed. Jim Vincent said the stipulation in Mr. Palin's letter calling for "producing from between 20 to 40 barrels of oil per day" should be changed to "producing twenty (20) or more barrels of oil per day", and the Board members concurred. Glen Godfrey suggested that both letters be made a part of the Minutes, and they are as follows: Minutes, H..B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 3, 1985 Page 2 "April 2, 1985 Scott ,Oil Co. 19200 Holly Huntington Beach, Calif. 92648 Attn: Mr. Jim Palin With the Board's approval, we are willing to comply with the Dedication Requirements in forty eight months. Providing the new well averages forty barrels or more, net oil per day. The said property has been landscaped and a sprinkler system has been installed and approved by Mr. Tom Shaw. /s/ Daryl J. Scott /s/ Thomas W. Scott" "To: Board of Zoning Adjustments From: James W. Palin, Director Development Services Subject: SCOTT OIL STREET IMPROVEMENTS - Date:- April 3, 1985 Attached herewith is a letter received from the Scott family requesting that the City consider postponement of the dedication and street improvements in conjunction with their proposed drilling operation on the property located on the northeast corner of Clay and Holly. 'In this letter the statement is made that if the new well averages 40 barrels of oil or more per day they would be willing,to perform said street improvements. I am,recommending, to the Board, pursuant to the authority granted me by Section 9682.3 and the criteria contained within Section 9682.4 that the Board consider granting a postponement until after.the drilling of the well to make a determination if it going to be a dry or producing well. If it is producing from between 20 to 40 barrels of oil per day, the applicant will file improvement plans for the street improvements and that he be granted two years within'which to start those improvements and have them completed within four years after the first production of the subject well. The.section sited above within the code appears to grant the Director certain authority with criteria for the Boards use; however, I believe that this is an oversight that needs to be cleared up. This recommendation is for the Boards use in' conjunction with review of the use permit application. JWP:jr" -2- .4/3/85 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 3, 1985 Page 3 UPON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY VINCENT, USE PERMIT NO. 85-15 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: 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 Land Use. 4. The proposed project complies with the Downtown Specific Plan requirements for resource production overlay. 5. Enough open space has been reserved around the oil operation site to allow all existing and future equipment which could reasonably be expected to be used on the site, including any setbacks from new development required by the Fire Chief. 6. Adequate access from a public street or alley to all operation sites is provided for portable equipment and emergency vehicles. 7. Reasonable expansion of the existing facilities, if permitted in the oil district, can be accomplished. 8. Any proposed development includes all provisions for soundproofing and fire protection required by the Fire Chief. 9. Screening of oil facilities from any new development are included in the plan. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. Noise attenuation for the drilling operation shall be provided pursuant to the Oil Code. 2. 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. -3- 4/3/85 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 3, 1985 Page 4 3. The project shall be in substantial compliance with the Huntington Beach Noise Ordinance. 4. All structures and procedures shall conform to Title 15 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code and the Division of Oil and Gas standards:_ 5. All -pipe racks shall be insulated to reduce noise. 6. Applicant shall obtain all necessary electrical permits. 7. Any.work within the public right-of-way is subject to review and approval by the Department of Public Works., 8. Applicant shall install a back flow preventer device/system. 9. The applicant shall meet -with the Landscape Division of Public Works Department to work out plans for revitalization of existing landscaping. 10. Provided the.new well produces twenty (20) or more barrels of oil per day, the applicant shall file improvement plans for the street improvements and commence those improvements within two (2) years; and that 'said improvements be completed within four (4)-years after the first production of subject well. AYES:- ': Cranmer, Evans,•Godfrey, Smith, Vincent NOES: None ABSENT: None CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 85-13-(RECONSIDERATION). Applicant: Larry A. Wall A request to permit reduction -in open space dimension from twenty feet (201) to ten feet (101)-and reduction in open space area from 450 to'350 Square'Feet. Subject property is located at 9322 Southshore Drive (South side of Southshore.Drive-approximately sixty feet (60') East of Fleet -Lane). This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 5, California Environmental Quality Act,•1970. Staff said Mr. Wall had presented a revised plan for:the proposed addition to the Family Room and Master Bedroom, making the proposed addition straight across the rear of the building rather than as originally proposed. -4- 4/3/85 - BZA 1 Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 3, 1985 Page 5 The Public Hearing was opened by Daryl Smith and the applicant, Larry A. Wall, was present. He stated his client was still requesting the addition to the First Floor rather than expanding to the Second Floor because of climbing stairs. There was no one else present to speak for or against the request so the Public Hearing was closed. After a general discussion of the revised plan, the Board was still unable to determine a land -related hardship. UPON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY CRANMER, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 85-13'WAS DENIED FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS FOR DENIAL: 1. The subject property was legally subdivided per U. V. 66-23 and developed in a manner consistent with applicable zoning laws. 2. Exceptional circumstances do not apply that deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the same zone classifications. 3. Granting of Conditional Exception No. 85-13 (Reconsideration) would constitute a special privilege inconsistent with limitations upon properties in the vicinity. AYES: Cranmer, Evans, Godfrey NOES: Vincent, Smith ABSENT: None CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 85-16 Applicant: Dennis J. Lee A request to permit a stairway to be located in required open space area at 3381 Venture Drive (North side of Venture Drive approximately 150 feet East of Walrus Lane). This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 5, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. Scott Hess stated this is a request to permit a stairway to be - _ allowed on the outside of a building presently under construction. The stairway would lead to the Master Bedroom on the'Second Floor. Mr. Hess said this stairway had not been shown on the plan submitted for a building permit. -5- 4/3/85 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 3, 1985 Page 6 The Public Hearing was opened by Daryl Smith and the applicant, Dennis J. Lee, was present. Mr. Lee said the person who designed the house was -not aware of the open space requirements. Mr. Lee stated he and his wife did not feel comfortable without an additional exit from the Second Floor. They also want to build a spa and would like to have access from their Bedroom without going through the house. There was no one else present to speak for or against the project so the Public Hearing was closed. The Board discussed the proposal but was unable to determine a land related hardship. UPON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY GODFREY, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 85-16 WAS DENIED FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS FOR DENIAL: 1. The subject property was legally subdivided and developed in a manner consistent with applicable zoning laws. 2. Exceptional circumstances do not apply that deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the same zone -classifications. The lot is similar in -size to surrounding parcels. 3. Granting of Conditional Exception No. 85-16 would constitute a special -privilege inconsistent with limitations upon properties in the vicinity. 4. This 3,800 Square Foot house is currently under construction without the proposed stairway. 5. Approval of this conditional exception for the stairway would reduce the amount of usable open space and reduce the minimum dimension from twenty-five feet (25') to fifteen feet (151). 6. Granting of this conditional -exception is inconsistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan. AYES: Cranmer, Evans, Godfrey, Smith, Vincent NOES: None ABSENT: None LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 85-3 (UP 85-10) (AR 85-4) (ND 85-10) Applicant: Vaughn C. Sweet (Franklin Buccella) LLA REQUEST: A request to permit a lot line adjustment between Lots 22 - 39 of Tract 10648. -6- 4/3/85 - BZA .Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 3, 1985 Page 7 UP REQUEST: -To permit construction of twelve (12) industrial usildings within 150 feet of residential area. AR REQUEST: To permit construction of six (6) industrial buildings. Subject property is in Tract 10648 located North of Talbert Avenue and West of Beach Boulevard. These requests are covered by Negative Declaration No. 85-10. Staff reported this applicant is proposing to construct eighteen (18) industrial buildings. The Use Permit is required for twelve (12) of the buildings which will be located within 150 feet of residential property, and the Administrative Review will cover the additional six (6) buildings. The Lot Line Adjustment is required to adjust the property lines for construction of these buildings. Staff has reviewed the plans and has discovered these buildings have overhead doors which face the residential zone. Staff would recommend continuance of all four of these requests so Staff can work with the applicant to correct this problem. The applicant's representative, Judy Slater, was present and requested the continuance. UPON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY SMITH, NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 85-10, LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 85-31 USE PERMIT NO. 85-10, AND ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 85-4 WERE CONTINUED TO THE MEETING OF APRIL 10, 1985, WITH CONCURRENCE OF THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Cranmer, Evans, Godfrey, Smith, Vincent NOES: None ABSENT:- None ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 85-9 Applicant: W & B Builders, Inc. A request to permit model`homes at 21072'Poolside Lane'(East side of Poolside Lane approximately 250 feet South of Atlanta Avenue). This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class:3, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. Staff reported there are three (3) model homes involved and parking would be along the side of the street. Staff recommended approval of the request with conditions which are standard.for model home complexes. -7- 4/3/85 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 3, 1985 Page 8 The applicant's representative, Bill Johnson, was present. He stated they would be using the sales office originally=approved for -the complex but the models would be different. UPON MOTION BY CRANMER-AND SECOND BY VINCENT, ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 85=9 WAS -APPROVED -WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, BY THE, FOLLOWING'VOTE: CONDITIONS -OF APPROVAL: 1. The conceptual plot plan dated March 15, 1985, shall be the approved layout. 2.-:A landscape and irrigation plan complying with Article 979 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code shall be submitted to the 'Department of Development Services and Public Works for review and approval prior to final inspection. 3. A plan delineating various -directional -signs, landscaping and irrigation, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Department of Development Services and Public -Works and installed prior to final inspection.- - 4. Project identification (subdivision directional) sign shall comply -with Article 976 (Sign -Code) -of the Huntington Beach Ordinance --Code., 5. All roads (including fire access) shall be of hard surface, all weather construction meeting Public Works requirements and installed prior to combustible construction. 6. All water lines and fire hydrants shall be installed and approved by the Fire Department prior to issuance of permits . _ . 4or 'any temporary-. or permanent structures. 7. "Security fencing, gates, -.locking devices,"ingress and egress from streets and parking -areas -shall bb reviewed -and approved by:the Fire, Policeand"-Developm'ent'Services Departments prior to issuance of building permits. 8..- The office -use shall be discontinued within thirty (30) days following sale of the last on -site unit. A surety bond of $1,000.00 shall be posted with the:-City.for-the sales office and for each'model home complex to guarantee compliance with all provisions of the code and,the­Huntington Beach Building Code. Such model homes shall only serve the tract -specified in subject administrative review application. -8- 4/3/85 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 3, 1985 Page 9 9. Sales office shall not be converted or expanded into a general business office. 10. Fire lanes, as determined and approved by the Fire Department, shall be posted and signed. AYES: Cranmer, Evans, Godfrey, Smith, Vincent NOES: None ABSENT None SITE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 85-4 Applicant: Gerald T. Lamb A request to permit an addition of 2,200 Square Feet to a previously approved plan (Administrative Review No. 81-80). Subject property is located at 7651 Speer Avenue (North side of Speer Avenue at intersection of Speer Avenue and Crabb Lane). This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 1, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. According to Scott Hess, this is a request for an addition to an existing development which was approved under Administrative Review No. 81-80. Staff would recommend approval subject to the three conditions presented. Tom Poe of the Fire Department stated they would like to have an alarm system installed because the building would be used as a mini -storage facility. The system would be monitored by a central agency and this type of system creates a faster response by the Fire Department. The applicant, Gerald T. Lamb, was present and stated the building would.be.of concrete construction and virtually fire proof. After discussing with the Board members, Mr. Poe requested that an additional condition bo placed that the building would be evaluated by the Fire Department to determine the need'for an automatic alarm system. - UPON MOTION BY VINCENT AND -SECOND NO. 85-4 WAS APPROVED AS AMENDED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: BY GODFREY, SITE PLAN AMENDMENT AND WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, 1. The clouded areas shown on the site plan dated March 22, 1985, shall be the approved revised layout to Administrative Review No. 81-80. -9- 4/3/85 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 3, 1985 Page 10 2. The proposed additions shall be architecturally compatible with the existing structure. 3. All previous conditions of Administrative Review No. 81-80 shall be applicable. 4. Building shall be evaluated by Fire Department to determine the need for an automatic alarm system. AYES: Vincent, Godfrey, Evans, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Cranmer SITE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 85-9 Applicant: Sid Crossley, Jr. A request for rehabilitation of existing commercial center with modifications to bring parking and landscaping up to minimum standards to permit a 10'.x 16' storage building adjacent to the rear of the structure to be located at 15011 - 15081 Edwards Street (West side of Edwards Street approximately 115 feet South of Bolsa Avenue). This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 1, California Environmental Quality"Act, 1970. Staff stated the applicant is proposing to improve -the existing shopping center by installation of landscaping and improving the facade of the building. There is an existing 10' x 26' storage building on.the property which would have to be made architecturally compatible. The applicant will provide two (2) handicapped parking spaces and Staff would recommend approval with the conditions as presented. Les Evans stated there was damaged sidewalk adjacent to the property which would have to be repaired and/or replaced and street lights would need to be installed. Ross'Cranmer-said building -permits would have to be obtained for the storage structure and the building brought up to standards. Glen Godfrey mentioned that the signs must be made to conform with Section 976 of the Ordinance Code. UPON MOTION BY CRANMER AND SECOND BY VINCENT, SITE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 85-9 WAS APPROVED WITH'THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: -10- 4/3/85 - BZA 1 Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 3, 1985 Page 11 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan and elevations received and dated March 8, 1985, shall be the approved layout for this amendment to Use Permit No. 135. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan which shall be approved prior to final inspection. 3. All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe and other surplus or unusable material shall be disposed of at an off -site facility equipped to handle them. 4. Low volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets. 5. The 10' x 26' storage building structure shall be structurally integrated with the existing commercial structure and shall be architecturally compatible with the building. 6. The trash enclosure shall contain minimum six foot (61) in height masonry walls and be provided with view obscuring gates. 7. "NO PARKING" signs shall be posted throughout as required per Fire Department No. 415. 8. Any broken portions of the public sidewalk shall be repaired or replaced to satisfaction of the Public Works Department. 9. Street lights shall be installed to satisfaction of the Public Works Department. 10. Present signs shall be made to comply with Article 976 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 11. A planned sign program shall be approved for all signing within the commercial center pursuant to S.9760.43 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 12. All necessary permits shall be obtained for the existing storage structure, facade improvements, and trash enclosure. AYES: Cranmer, Evans, Godfrey, Smith, Vincent NOES: None ABSENT: None -11- 1 4/3/85 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 3, 1985 Page 12 MISCELLANEOUS AGENDA ITEMS: ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 85-11 Applicant: William R. Paxson A request for relocation of a single family resident to Ill Ninth Street (West side -of Ninth Street approximately 150 feet North of Pacific Coast Highway). This request is covered by Negative Declaration No. 83-36. Staff reported -the applicant is requesting a permit to relocate a residence to Ninth Street which is in the Downtown Specific Plan. This project was before the Planning Commission last night and shall conform to the Mediterranean theme established for this area. It has been referred to the Board of Zoning Adjustments by the Planning Commission and Staff is recommending approval. It should be subject to the same conditions imposed by the Planning Commission. The applicant will need to obtain a permit from the Traffic Department to move the building. Ross Cranmer inquired as to whether the Building Department looked at the soundness of the building for moving -and the applicant stated they had. Daryl Smith broached the problem of the applicant moving the building during the ten (10) day appeal period and Glen Godfrey stated the move would have to be at the applicant's risk. Mr. Godfrey asked about the -foundation for,the building on the new lot and the applicant assured the Board that the house would be moved onto the lot and then put onto the foundation later, at which time he would obtain the permits. - UPON MOTION BY GODFREY AND SECONDED BY SMITH, ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 85-11 WAS APPROVED WITH THE -FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS FOR RELOCATION PERMIT: 1. The house was.built in the early 1950's similar to when other -homes in the neighborhood were built. 2. The architectural design of the building will be modified to reflect a Mediterranean theme consistent with the Downtown Specific Plan and future developments in the area. -3. The size of the house is comparable to other single family residences in the neighborhood. -12- 4/3/85 - BZA I - 1 Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 3, 1985 Page 13 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan dated April 3, 1985, shall be the approved layout. 2. Elevations shall be submitted for review and approval by the Director of Development Services prior to the issuance of building permits subject to the following: a. The exterior building material shall be light-colored stucco. b. A mission clay -tile roof, or similar material, shall be provided as the roof material. C. Special window treatment shall be incorporated on the front elevation. Other windows shall have an offset relief from the wall on which they are placed. d. Entry locations on the front and side elevations shall be recessed into the building. e. Accent colors shall be incorporated on the window trim and chimney. 3. Any changes to the exterior elevations or materials specification shall be subject to review and approval of the Director of Development Services. 4. All improvements to the house and property shall conform to the conditions stated herein prior to the release of electricity and issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. 5. The project shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, the Public Works Department, and the Building Division. AYES: Cranmer, Evans, Godfrey, Smith, Vincent NOES: None ABSENT: None ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 83-57 Applicant: Miller/Nahas A request for Clarification of Conditions of Administrative Review No. 83-57. Subject property is Mariner's Point Office Building located at 15922 Pacific Coast Highway. -13- 4/3/85 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 3, 1985 Page 14 This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 1, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. Staff reported that when this project was originally approved, the conditions were typed incorrectly and delivery hours were shown as 7:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M.. After a general discussion between the Board members, it was determined the -hours should be corrected. UPON MOTION BY GODFREY AND SECOND BY SMITH, ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 83-57 WAS AMENDED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. Fuel deliveries shall be allowed between the hours of 6:00 P.M. and 7:00 A.M. only. 2. All other conditions of Administrative Review No. 83-57 shall remain in effect. AYES: Cranmer, Evans, Godfrey, Smith, Vincent NOES: None ABSENT: -None There was no further business to be discussed. UPON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY CRANMER, THE REGULAR MEETING WAS ADJOURNED TO THE PRE -REVIEW MEETING ON APRIL 8, 1985, AT 10:00 A.M., BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Cranmer, Evans, Godfrey, Smith, Vincent. NOES: None ABSENT: None Glen K. Godfrey, Secre ary Board of Zoning Adjustments jh -14- 4/3/85 - BZA