Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-07-03MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS WEDNESDAY, JULY 3, 1985 - 1.30 P.M. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Room B-6 - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California Cranmer, Evans, Smith, Vincent, Zelefsky Hess, Poe AGENDA ITEMS TO BE CONTINUED: UPON MOTION BY CRANMER AND SECOND BY VINCENT ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 85-30 AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 83-564 WERE CONTINUED TO THE MEETING OF JULY 10, 1985, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Cranmer, Evans, Smith, Vincent, Zelefsky NOES: None ABSENT: None REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 85-36 Applicant: James K. Reed A request to permit a two foot encroachment into side yard setback. This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 5, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. Scott Hess of staff reported that the request is for a two story addition. He indicated that staff felt the addition is not part of the main unit and could be converted to a second unit. Staff recommended denial based on findings. Daryl Smith opened the public hearing and the applicant, James Reed was present. Mr. Reed stated that the addition was proposed for his parents who are in their 80's. Howard Zelefsky asked the applicant if he anticipated the stairs being a problem due to the age of the proposed residents of the addition. Mr. Reed responded that if it became a problem, they would convert the downstairs. Board of Zoning Adjustments Minutes July 3, 1985 Page 2- -- There were no other persons-to.speak.for or against the item and the public hearing was closed. Ross Cranmer stated he would be voting against the conditional exception because the plans could be modified and brought into conformance. Howard zelefsky stated -he would be voting against the conditional exception because it would be more appropriate to apply to the Planning Commission for -a -conditional use permit. Daryl Smith stated that -it appeared the project would be denied by the Board and asked the applicant if he would like to request a continuance and come up with a new plan. The applicant requested a continuance. UPON MOTION BY CRANMER AND SECOND BY ZELEFSKY, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 85-36 WAS CONTINUED TO THE MEETING OF JULY 17, 1985, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Cranmer, Evans, Smith, Vincent, Zelefsky NOES: -None ABSENT:'- None - CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 85-34 /COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 85-13 Applicant: --Carolyn L. Deden Conditional Exception No. 85-34 is a request to permit a 1' encroachment into the 22' garage setback and a wall to encroach 5' into the required 15' front setback. Coastal Development Permit No. 85-13 is a request to allow construction of a single family dwelling. This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 1, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. Scott Hess reported that staff recommends approval of the coastal development permit and approval for the block wall portion of the conditional exception; however, recommends denial for the 1' encroachment into the garage setback. Daryl Smith opened the public hearing and Carolyn Deden, the applicant, was present. She presented photographs to the Board of homes with up to a 5' encroachment into the required garage setback. She stated that the reason for the encroachment was due -to the location on the common walkway. (2950d) -2- 1 Board of Zoning Adjustments Minutes July 31 1985 Page 3 Daryl Smith suggested a condition for roll up garage doors which, in his opinion, would eliminate the 22' requirement for parking in the driveway. UPON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY CRANMER, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 85-34 AND COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 85-13 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: Findings for Conditional Exce tion No. 85-34: 1. Applicant's backyard faces onto a channel and because of that, a public walkway along the back of this property was required by the Coastal Commission. As they have no privacy in their rear yard, it is necessary to allow applicant to fence off open space in his front yard to allow privacy by encroachment of five feet (51) into the front yard setback. 2. The granting of the conditional exception will not constitute a grant of a special privilege inconsistent upon other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classifications as there are other homes in the area that have either a structure or wall at a ten foot (10') front yard setback. 3. The granting of a conditional exception is necessary in order to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. 4. The granting of a conditional exception will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to property in the same zone classifications. 5. The granting of the conditional exception will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. Findings for Coastal Development Permit No. 85-13: 1. The Coastal Development Permit application is consistent with the Cz suffix, as well as other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code applicable to the property. 2. The proposed single family residential is located on a site where the existing street pattern is consistent with the Certified Land Use Plan. (2950d) -3- Board of Zoning Adjustments Minutes July 3, 1985 Page 4 3. The development conforms to the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act because of the existing walkway'system abutting the rear of the property. 4. The project conforms with the applicable plans, policies, requirements, and standards of the Certified Land Use Plan except as provided for by Conditional Exception 85-34 Conditions for Conditional Exception No. 85-34: 1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated June 10, 1985 shall be the approved layout with the following modifications: a. The garage shall be constructed with automatic roll up doors on all garage doors as shown on the plan. b. An elevation of the block wall and a landscape plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Development Services prior to construction. AYES: Cranmer, Smith, Vincent NOES: Evans, Zelefsky' ABSENT: None Daryl Smith stated for the record that the action taken was for the block wall. The pool was discussed but not included in the consideration. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 85-266 Applicant: Richard Warner A request to permit consolidation of two lots into one parcel. This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 5, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. Staff recommended approval of the extension subject to the standard conditions. Les Evans asked staff why the parcel map was not presented to the Board, to which Scott Hess reported that the map had been waived. Mr. Evans stated that Development Services staff can not waive requirements of Division 9 and if the Board acts on the request, it would be in violation of Division 9. (2950d) -4- r—� I Board of Zoning Adjustments Minutes July 3, 1985 Page 5 Daryl Smith suggested continuance and notify Mr. Warner that he must provide a parcel map. Larry Trueman, representing the applicant, indicated a continuance would be fine. UPON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY EVANS, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 85-266 WAS CONTINUED TO THE MEETING OF JULY 10, 1985, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Cranmer, Evans, NOES: None ABSENT: None USE PERMIT NO. 85-38 Applicant: Larry Canter Smith, Vincent, Zelefsky A request to permit a one day dog wash and sidewalk sale on June 29 and August 10, 1985. Scott Hess reported that the event on June 29 did not receive any complaints. Howard Zelefsky advised the applicant that he should apply for the request for a Use Permit so it can be approved prior to the event. The applicant responded that he had applied two weeks ago and thought that the time frame would be ample. UPON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY SMITH, USE PERMIT NO. 85-38 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: Conditions for Approval: 1. The conceptual plot plan received and dated 7/2/85 shall be the approved layout. 2. Fire access lanes shall be maintained. If fire lane violations occur and the services of the Fire Department are required, the applicant will be liable for expenses incurred. 3. Sidewalks shall be maintained at a clear width of 4 feet. 4. A certificate of insurance form shall be filed in the Administrative Services Department in an amount deemed necessary by the Public Liability Claims Coordinator, along with a hold harmless agreement executed by insured, at least five (5) days prior to the event. (2950d) _5_ Board of Zoning Adjustments Minutes July 3, 1985 Page 6 5. The applicant shall provide for clean up of the areas after the closing of the event per Orange County Agricultural Commission and Environmental Health Department. 6. A certificate to operate shall be issued by the Director of Development Services as required by S. 9730.80 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. AYES: Cranmer, Evans, Smith, Vincent, Zelefsky NOES: None ABSENT: None RECONSIDERATION.OF-EXTENSION OF TIME TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 85-565 Applicant: Neria Yomtoubian A request to permit a one year extension of time with modification of Condition No. 2 of the approved conditions dated 7/27/83. This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 15, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. Scott Hess reported that the applicant was not present at the meeting°when the extension was approved. He stated that the applicant had requested that the word parking be eliminated from condition 2 of the original approval. The Board informed the applicant of the advantages of reciprocal parking agreements for the owners as well as for enforcement by the City in the event of a problem. UPON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY VINCENT TO REAFFIRM ACTION TAKEN JUNE 26, 1985 AND TO REAFFIRM THAT ALL FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL WOULD REMAIN THE SAME, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: Findings: 1. The proposed subdivision is in compliance with the size and shape of parcels for this type of development. 2. The General Plan sets forth provisions for division of land of this type. 3. The property was studied for the type and intensity of land use at the time the land use designation (Commercial) was placed on the subject property. (2950d) -6- 1 0 1 Board of Zoning Adjustments Minutes July 3, 1985 Page 7 4. The size, depth, frontage, street width and other design and improvement features of the existing project have been constructed in compliance with standard plans and specifications on file with the City as well as being in compliance with the State Subdivision Map Act and the City's Subdivision Ordinance. Conditions of Approval: 1. The tentative map received by the Department of Development Services on July 13, 1983, shall be the approved layout. The parcel map shall be filed with the City, approved by the departments of Development Services and Public Works and recorded with Orange County. A copy shall be filed with the departments of Development Services and Public Works. 2. Utility, parking and access reciprocal agreements shall be filed for review and approval by the departments of Public Works and Development Services. 3. No vehicle access from Adams Avenue shall be provided or constructed for Lot 2. 4. Compliance with all applicable City Ordinances.. AYES: Cranmer, Evans, Smith, Vincent, Zelefsky NOES: None ABSENT: None There was no further business to be discussed. UPON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY CRANMER TO ADJOURN TO THE STUDY SESSION MEETING ON MONDAY, JULY 8, 1985, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Cranmer, Evans, Smith, Vincent, Zelefsky NOES: None ABSENT: None Pb and Zele s Act Se etary B and of Zoning Adj ment jr (2950d) -7-