Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-08-05 (13)APPROVED SEPTEMBER 17, 1935 MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Council Chambers - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California MONDAY, AUGUST 5, 1985 - 7:00 P.M. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter, Erskine (arrived late) COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Mirjahangir CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE A. CONSENT CALENDAR: A-1 Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting on June 18, 1985 A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER TO APPROVE THE JUNE 18, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: Winchell MOTION PASSED A-2 Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting on July 2, 1985 A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER TO APPROVE THE JULY 2, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: Porter MOTION PASSED A-3 Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting on July 16, 1985 A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY ROWE TO APPROVE THE JULY 16, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES AS AMENDED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: Winchell MOTION PASSED A-4 Recommend approval to the City Council of the Proposed Underground Utility Districts (Downtown Commercial Area and on Beach Boulevard from Pacific Coast Highway to the 405 Freeway) as modified A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY ROWE TO APPROVE REVIEW OF PROPOSED UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICTS BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED B. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMISSION ITEMS: None C. ITEMS FOR PUBLIC HEARING C-1 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-26/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 85-11 Applicant: Nan Patel Conditional Use Permit No. 85-26 in conjunction with a Special Permit and Coastal Development Permit No. 85-11 is a request to develop a three-story, 52-unit motel including a manager's unit and maid's quarters on a 0.45 net acre vacant site at the northwest corner of Pacific Coast Highway and 8th Street. The Special Permit request is to allow the encroachment of a canopy with support columns 10 feet into the required 15 feet exterior side yard setback from 8th Street, for an 18 foot wide drive ramp in lieu of the required 24 foot width requirement, and for 25 feet-6 inches wide driveway aisles in lieu of the required 27 foot wide requirement. At the Planning Commission meeting of July 2, 1985, the Commission continued Conditional Use Permit No. 85-26 and requested that the applicant submit a revised plan showing the driveway ramp to the subterranean parking with access from 8th Street instead of the alley, and provide additional information regarding the feasibility of incorporating the adjacent 50 foot wide lot with the motel development. At the Planning Commission meeting of July 16, 1985, the Commission continued Conditional Use Permit No. 85-26 and Coastal Development Permit No. 85-11 and directed staff to obtain additional information L_J P.C. Minutes (3156d) -2- 8/5/85 regarding the adjacent 50 foot wide lot with oil operation. According to City records, oil production averages 2.6 barrels per day or 940 per year. Life expectancy of the well is undetermined. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The proposed motel project is exempt from environmental review because it is in conformance with the Downtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report pursuant to Section 15182 of the California Environmental Quality Act. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Ron Pattinson informed the Commission that his client made an offer to Mr. Vasterline which he refused. He added that since his client had abided by condition No. 4, it should be dropped. Mr. Vasterline stated that he could not accept the offer of Mr. Pattinson due to the terms. He also argued that the offer should not include mineral rights. The mineral rights were a seperate issue. There were no other persons to speak for or against the proposal and the public hearing was closed. Chairman Livengood vocalized support for staff's recommendation. He added that the Commission requested and the applicant made an effort to consolidate the two lots. Commissioner Rowe expressed concern as to whether Mr. Pattinson's offer was in line with current property values in the area.. Commissioner Schumacher argued that the Commission does not have the right to deny a project when an applicant comes up with a plan that fits the Downtown Specific Plan. The City should get going with development in the Downtown area, she added. Commissioner Porter asked staff if the rendering done by the architect is still going to be what the applicant is proposing. Secretary Palin stated that this is the architectural interpretation. Chairman Livengood requested to include in condition No. 6 "Architectural Design" consistent with the Downtown Specific Plan. Florence Webb of staff commented that staff has been working with the developer. There are many elements in the rendering that will be seen in the final constructed structure. Commissioner Porter commented that the rendering was very nice adding that he was going to vote in favor of the project but expressed concern regarding consolidation of lots in the Downtown. P.C. Minutes (3156d) -3- 8/5/85 A MOTION WAS MADE BY SCHUMACHER AND SECOND BY WINCHELL TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-26 AND COASTAL DEVELOPMENT WITH FINDINGS AND MODIFIED CONDITIONS BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR SPECIAL PERMIT ITEMS 1 AND 2: 1. The encroachment of the single story, unenclosed canopy up to 5 feet of the exterior side property line is unobtrusive and enhances the main entrance of the building. 2. A reduction of the drive aisle widths from 27 feet to 25 feet-6 inches is acceptable since it pertains to the subterranean parking structure which is used for valet parking only. 3. 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. 4. The project is consistent with objectives of.the Downtown Specific Plan in achieving a development adopted to the natural land features and compatible with the surrounding environment. FINDINGS FOR COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 85-11: 1. The proposed 52-unit motel is consistent with the City's Coastal Zone suffix and the Downtown Specific Plan District 1 standards, except as provided for in the Special Permit request, as well as other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code applicable to the property; and conforms with the plans, policies, requirements and standards of the City's Coastal Land Use Plan. 2. The proposed development conforms with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act. Adequate public access to the beach is provided on 8th. Street and Pacific Coast Highway; and building layout and design optimizes visual views to the ocean. 3. The proposed development can be provided with infrastructure in a manner that is consistent with the Coastal Land Use Plan. Existing underground sewer and water utilities in 8th. Street along with the required improvements as described in the conditions of approval are sufficient to handle the proposed development. P.C. Minutes (3156d) -4- 8/5/85 FINDINGS FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-26: 1. The proposed 52 unit motel will not have a detrimental effect upon the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of persons residing in the area, not upon the value of the property within the vicinity. 2. The proposed use is compatible with existing use 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 location, site layout, and design of the proposed motel use does properly adapt the proposed three-story motel structure to streets, driveways, and alleys, and uses in a harmonious manner. 6. Access to and parking for the proposed use will not create undue traffic problems if designed as prescribed in the attached conditions of approval. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-26: 1. The site plan dated July 11, 1985, and floor plans and elevations dated June 6, 1985 shall be revised and submitted for review and approval by the Planning Director reflecting the following modifications: a. The drive approaches on 8th. Street shall conform to Public Works standards. b. The driveway ramp to the subject parking shall not exceed a 15% slope. C. Additional architectural treatment along the north elevation, such as inset windows or projecting horizontal bands, shall be provided. d. Setback first floor of structure 3 feet from ultimate rear property line. e. A conceptual plan showing how the adjacent lot can be integrated into the development and the adjacent restaurant parking lot. 2. Valet parking shall be utilized all year round. 3. A parcel map shall be submitted and recorded prior to the issuance of building permits for consolidating the existing 25 foot wide lots. P.C. Minutes (3156d) -5- 8/5/85 4. The applicant shall make an offer to acquire the adjacent 50 foot wide lot and integrate into the motel development. If the applicant is unable to acquire this parcel, a letter of offer and rejection shall be submitted to the Department of Development Services. 5. A detailed landscape plan and sprinkler plan shall be in accordance with the Downtown Landscape Guidelines, including the use of extensive berming in the front setback area along Pacific Coast Highway; and shall be submitted and approved by the Development Services and Public Works Departments prior to the issuance of building permits. 6. A materials pallet indicating final color choices of the building materials and an architectural design consistent with the proposed Downtown Specific Plan architectural guidelines must be submitted for review and approval by the Development Services Director prior to the issuance of building permits. 7. Provisions must be made to buffer the motel from the adjacent oil operation, and are subject to review and approval by the Fire and Development Services Department. 8. An automatic sprinkler system approved by the Fire Department shall be installed throughout the complex per N.F.P.A. STandard 13. This system must be supervised per Fire Department Standards. 9. A wet standpipe system approved by the Fire Department shall be installed in the stairways and is to comply with Uniform Building Code Standards. 10. An alarm system approved by the Fire Department shall be installed throughout per Uniform Fire Codes Standards. 11. To accommodate the use of an ambulance gurney, every floor served by elevators shall have access to, at least, one elevator car having a minimum inside car platform of six feet, eight inches wide by four feet, three inches deep with a minimum clear opening width of forty-two inches. 12. The water system must be upgraded to provide a fire flow of 3,500 GPM. New fire hydrants are to be installed in areas approved by the Fire Department. 13. The stairway enclosure on the south side must include a corridor on the ground floor leading from the stairway to the exterior of the building or the stairway can exit directly to the south side exterior. 14. Two exits shall be required for the spa/lounge on the roof deck. 15. The 2-1/2 foot of alley dedication shall be paved per City Standards. The developer shall also pave the entire dedicated alley from 8th. Street to the northwesterly property line. P.C. Minutes (3156d) -6- 8/5/85 16. The curb and gutter along 8th. Street shall be constructed at 29.5 feet from the centerline to accommodate future perpendicular parking when 8th. Street is cul-de-saced. 17. A 2 foot wide public utilities easement is required behind the sidewalk. 18. An 8 inch minimum water main shall be constructed in 8th. Street. 19. A sewer main shall be constructed in 8th. Street from Pacific Coast Highway to the Orange County Sanitation District Sewer Trunk in Walnut Avenue and connect at an approved location. 20. Any abandoned oil wells shall be modified as required by the Fire Department prior to the issuance of building permits. 21. Low volume heads shall be used on all showers. 22. 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. 23. Energy -efficient lighting shall be used in open space areas. 24. 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. 25. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke this Conditional Use Permit if any violation of these conditions or the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs. C-2 TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 12410/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-20/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 85-18 Applicant: Casa Linda Development Co. Tentative Tract No. 12410, in conjunction with Conditional Use Permit No. 85-20 and Negative Declaration No. 85-18 „ is a request for a one lot subdivision on a 1.16 acre site for the purpose of constructing 20 airspace townhomes. The applicant is seeking two special permit requests for the development of the project: reduction in turning radius from 25 feet to 24 feet (Section 9791d), and reduction in building separation for units side by side from 20 feet to 16 feet (Section 9362.7d). On July 2, 1985, the Planning Commission continued the subject request due to the length of the agenda. The applicant requested in a letter that the Planning Commission continue this item to the first meeting in August. P.C. Minutes (3156d) -7- 8/5/85 On July 16, 1985 the Planning Commission continued the subject applications at the request of the developer. Since that time there have been no modifications to the site plan. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: On June 18, 1985, the Department of Development Services posted Draft Negative Declaration No. 85-18 for ten days. No comments, either verbal or written, were received. The staff, in its initial study of the project, has recommended that a negative declaration be adopted; prior to action on the project applications, it is necessary for the Planning Commission to review and adopt Negative Declaration No. 85-18. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED There were no persons to speak for or against the proposal and the public hearing was closed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY PORTER AND SECOND BY WINCHELL TO APPROVE NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 85-18 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED A MOTION WAS MADE BY SCHUMACHER AND SECOND BY ROWE TO DENY TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 12410/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-20 WITH FINDINGS BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR DENIAL TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 12410 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-20: 1. The proposed layout and design for the 20 unit townhome project does not properly adapt the proposed structures to streets, driveways, and other adjacent structures and uses in a harmonious manner. 2. The access to the guest parking as well as the required enclosed parking does not meet the minimum standards of the ordinance code for turning radius. Guest parking is not conveniently located throughout the project. 3. The use of two driveways along Warner Avenue for the proposed 20 unit townhomes creates an undue traffic problem. P.C. Minutes (3156d) -8- 8/5/85 1 4. The proposed use will have a detrimental effect upon the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of persons residing or working in the neighborhood because traffic circulation will be negatively impacted. C-3 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-25/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 85-19/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 85-26 Applicant: Huntington Beach Company On July 16, 1985, the Planning Commission continued Conditional Use Permit No. 85-25 to allow time for a Coastal Development Permit to be legally advertised. During this time, the applicant withdrew the zone change request and filed a Conditional Use Permit in accord with the Unclassified uses of the ordinance code. By maintaining an R2-PD-O-CZ zoning designation for the subject site, the need for a variance to reduce setbacks is no longer necessary. All proposed setbacks will exceed the minimum requirements of the base district. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: On June 2, 1985, the Department of Development Services posted Draft Negative Declaration No. 85-26 for ten days. No comments, either verbal or written, were received. The staff, in its initial study of the project, has recommended that a negative declaration be adopted; prior to action on the project applications, it is necessary for the Planning Commission to review and recommend adoption of Negative Declaration No. 85-26. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Rick Sailor, representing Huntington Beach Company, stated he concurred with staff's recommendation. There were no other persons to speak for or against the proposal and the puhlic hearing was closed. Commissioner Porter asked staff if the request was just for the six tennis courts along Palm Avenue. Staff answered yes. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY PORTER TO APPROVE NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 85-26 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED P.C. Minutes (3156d) 8/5/85 A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-25/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 85-19 WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-25: 1. The proposed six tennis courts are compatible with surrounding land uses and in conformance with the General Plan policies because the facility will become an integral part of the existing Seacliff Country Club. 2. The proposed tennis courts will not be detrimental to the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of persons residing or working in the neighborhood because the facility will have hours of operation limited to the daytime. 3. The location, site layout, and design of the proposed development does properly adapt the structure to streets, driveways and other uses in a harmonious manner. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 85-2: 1. The proposal for 6 tennis courts is consistent with the City Coastal Zone suffix as well as other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code applicable to the property; and conforms with the plans, policies, requirements and standards of the City's Coastal Land Use Plan. 2. The proposed development can be provided with infrastructure in a manner that is consistent with the Coastal Land Use Plan. 3. The proposed development conforms with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-25: 1. The site plan dated May 22, 1985 shall be the approved layout. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan to the Department of Development Services and Department of Public Works for review and approval. 3. The tennis courts hours of operation shall be limited to daytime hours. No artificial lighting shall be permitted. P.C. Minutes (3156d) -10- 8/5/85 4. A copy of the tennis club membership/entry requirements shall be submitted to the Department of Development Services to assure the membership/use is limited to country club members. 5. All building spoils, such a unused lumber, wire, pipe and surplus or unusable materials, shall be disposed of at an off -site facility equipped to handle them. C-4 SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 85-10 Applicant: Thomas Jacobs The applicant's request is for the development of seven single family dwellings on seven lots at the southwest corner of loth. Street and Walnut Avenue. The zoning designation is Downtown Specific Plan, District Two. The specific plan permits residential uses in District Two subject to a site plan review. Article 989 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code provides for site plan reviews to be approved by the Planning Commission. This application has been continued from the Planning Commission meeting of July 16, 1985, at the request of the applicant, who has mow submitted revised plans. The revisions completely alter the site plans, floor plans and elevations previously reviewed by the Commission. Conditional Exception No. 85-24 to waive the alley dedication was denied by the Commission on July 16, 1985. Since that time it has been determined that no alley dedication off of this parcel will be required for the alley parallel to Pacific Coast Highway. All necessary dedication is be taken from the lots fronting Pacific Coast Highway pursuant to the Downtown Specific Plan Section 4.4.08. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS The proposed residential project is exempt from environmental review because it is in conformance with the Downtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report pursuant to Section 15182 of the California Environmental Quality Act. Commissioner Schumacher stated that the map in the packet is not the same as the rendering displayed on the wall. She would like to be sure of what the applicant is proposing and asked that the date of the rendering on the wall to be added in the conditions. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Thomas Jacobs spoke in support of the project stating that the structures will be built as shown on the elevations displayed on the wall. Chairman Livengood asked the applicant, referring to elevations received in the packet, if the Commission will see structures that look like this. P.C. Minutes (3156d) see 8/5/85 Thomas Jacobs responded yes, adding the flat roof areas are in areas that have roof decks. These areas are held back from the street elevation that are in between the houses. There were no other persons to speak for or against the proposal and the public hearing was closed. The Commission requested that staff monitor the applicants compliance of the conditions. A MOTION WAS MADE BY PORTER AND SECOND BY LIVENGOOD TO APPROVE SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 85-10 WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 85-10: 1. The proposal for seven single family residences will not have any detrimental effect upon the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of persons residing or working in the neighborhood if redesigned in accord with the conditions below. 2. The proposal will not adversely affect the General Plan of Land Use. Single family dwellings are a permitted use. 3. The proposal is compatible with other uses and proposed uses in the neighborhood. 4. The location, site layout, and design of the proposed residential development if modified according to the conditions of this report can properly orient the proposed structures to streets, driveways, sunlight, wind, and other adjacent structures and uses in a harmonious manner. 5. Access to and parking for the proposed use will not create any undue traffic problem. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 85-10: 1. The site plan, floor plans and elevations dated July 31, 1985 and August 5, 1985 shall be revised to include the following modifications: a. The flat roof design used for a portion of the structures shall be eliminated. A hip roof design shall be incorporated. P.C. Minutes (3156d) -12- 8/5/85 b. Raised trim accents shall be continued around all sides of the structures. c. Windows shall project from building facade to provide for adequate fenestration. d. Eave overhangs a minimum of eighteen inches shall be provided. 2. A materials pallet shall be submitted for approval by the Director of Development Services. 3. Any changes to the exterior elevations or materials specification shall be subject to review and approval by the Director of Development Services. 4. The project shall comply with all other applicable provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. C-5 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-32/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 85-31/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 85-9/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 85-29 Applicant: Chandulal K. Patel The applicant's request was continued from the July 16, 1985 Planning Commission meeting to allow time for the applicant to revise his plans in accordance with expressed concerns by the Commission. The applicant has deleted two units from the originally proposed twenty-one. The proposed project includes the demolition of an existing abandoned eight unit motel and the construction of a three story, 19 unit motel on the property. The conditional exception is to permit the construction of the motel on a substandard size lot. Section 9471.1 requires a minimum seventy (70) foot frontage for hotels and motels. The site proposed for the use is sixty-three (63) feet in width. The second part of the conditional exception request is to permit a reduction in the required vehicle turning radius from twenty-seven to twenty-five feet. The zoning is Visitor -Serving Commercial, which lists hotels and motels as permitted uses subject to approval of a conditional use permit and pursuant to the standards for such uses contained in the C4 District (Article 947). ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Pursuant to the environmental regulations in effect at this time, the Department of Development Services posted draft Negative Declaration No. 85-29 for ten days, and no comments, either verbal or written were received. The staff, in its initial study of the project, has recommended that a negative declaration be issued for the project. Prior to any action, it is necessary for the Planning Commission to review and act on Negative Declaration No. 84-29. P.C. Minutes (3156d) -13- 8/5/85 THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Chandulal Patel spoke in support of the project. Paul Smith, Board of Directors of Marina Home Owners Association, requested that the Commission include in the conditions that the elevations present an attractive appearance to all surrounding properties. There were no other persons to speak for or against the proposal and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Porter suggested that staff drop the last four words in the findings for Use Permit No. 85-32 findings No. 3. He also questioned staff if the width of the lot was the problem with the turning radius. Staff responded in the affirmative. Chairman Livengood asked staff if there was access to get across Pacific Coast Highway, and what has been done in the design of this project to make it compatible with one of the busiest highways in California. Florence Webb stated that there was nothing unique that could be done to remedy this situation. Secretary Palin stated that it provides a turn around whereas the other plans did not. Chairman Livengood referred to the concern of public speaker Paul Smith, requesting staff to incorporate this in the conditions of approval. Commissioner Winchell requested staff to specify exactly what the findings were for the conditional exception. A MOTION WAS MADE BY PORTER AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER TO APPROVE NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 85-29 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN; None MOTION PASSED A MOTION WAS MADE BY PORTER AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-32/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 85-31/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 85-9 WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED P.C. Minutes (3156d) -14- 8/5/85 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 85-31: 1. The conditional exception for the turning radius reduction and minimum lot width requirement is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights. 2. The granting of the conditional exception to the minimum turning radius requirement of 25 feet will only effect 1 parking space which is the handicap space and the minimum lot width requirement of 70 feet when reduced to 63 feet will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, or injurious to the conforming land, property or improvements in the vicinity. 3. Because of the size and shape of the subject property, there does appear to be exceptional or extraordinary circumstance or conditions applicable to the land, buildings or premises involved that does not apply generally to property or class of uses in the same district. 4. The conditional exception will result in no modifications to the requirements of the C-LUP. FINDINGS FOR COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 85-9: 1. The proposed 19-unit motel is consistent with the City's Coastal Zone suffix and the Visitor -Serving Commercial standards, as well as other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code applicable to the property; except as provided for in the conditional exception request, and conforms with the plans, policies, requirements and standards of the City's Coastal Land Use Plan. 2. The proposed development conforms with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act. 3. The proposed development can be provided with infrastructure in a manner that is consistent with the Coastal Land Use Plan. Underground sewer and water utilities are existing in the area and are sufficient to handle the proposed development. FINDINGS FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-32: 1. The proposed 19 unit motel 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 19 unit motel is compatible with existing uses in the vicinity. 3. The proposed development is consistent with the goals and objectives of the General Plan. P.C. Minutes (3156d) -15- 8/5/85 4. The location, site layout, and design of the proposed motel use does properly adapt the proposed three-story motel structure to streets, driveways, and uses in a harmonious manner. 5. Access to and parking for the proposed motel will not create undue traffic problems. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-32: 1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations dated August 1, 1985 shall be the approved layout except as may be modified by the following condition: a. The elevations of the structure shall be subject to the review and approval of the Design Review Board in order to ensure that all sides of the building presents an attractive appearance to all surrounding properties. 2. Prior to final, any repair or replacement needed to the sidewalk or other improvements in the public right-of-way shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. 3. The proposed 19 unit motel shall comply with all applicable provisions of the City's Ordinance Code and building division. 4. All building spoils such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe and other surplus or unusable material shall be disposed of at an off -site area equipped to handle them. 5. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke this conditional use permit if any violation of these conditions or the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. C-6 ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 85-22/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 85-32 (APPEAL OF BZA APPROVAL) Applicant: John Gray/O.K. Eark Corp. Administrative Review No. 85-22 is a request to construct a 90,000 square foot mini -warehouse and relocate 4,400 square foot existing building. Conditional Exception No. 85-32 is a request to allow a portion of the relocated building to encroach 8 feet into the required front yard (S.9530.06) and to permit a reduction in planter width adjacent to a landscaped bank adjacent to McFadden Avenue (S.9792.3). Planning Commissioner Porter has challenged this approval by the Board of Zoning Adjustments initiating an appeal to the Planning Commission. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Pursuant to the environmental regulations in effect at this time, the Department of Development Services posted draft Negative Declaration No. 85-25 for ten days, and no comments, either verbal P.C. Minutes (3156d) -16- 8/5/85 LJ or written were received. The staff, in its initial study of the project, has recommended that a negative declaration be issued On June 26, 1985, the Board of Zoning Adjustments adopted Negative Declaration No. 85-25. No further action is necessary. The Planning Commission at its July 16, 1985 meeting considered the appeal on Administrative Review No. 85-22 and Conditional Exception 85-32 at which time the item was continued automatically because of the (3/3) tie vote on the applications. The staff had recommended at the July 16, 1985 meeting a continuance of the project pending a meeting with our traffic consultant analyzing the traffic and circulation patterns within the Huntington Center Redevelopment Area. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY ROWE TO CONTINUE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 85-22/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 85-32 TO THE AUGUST 20, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED C-7 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 84-24/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 84-45 Applicant: Shell Oil Company Conditional Use Permit No. 84-24 is a request to establish a convenience market combined with gasoline station pursuant to S.9430.8(b). Conditional Exception No. 84-45, a request to permit a reduction in parking, is no longer necessary, based on a revised development proposal. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Negative Declaration No. 84-28 was approved July 16, 1985 in conjunction with Zone Change No. 84-14. No additional environmental processing is required. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Chuck Defarkas spoke in support of the project and concurred with staff's recommendations. There were no other persons to speak for or against the proposal and the public hearing was closed. P.C. Minutes (3156d) -17- 8/5/85 A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 84-24/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 84-45 WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: 1. The service station/convenience market will not have a detrimental effect upon the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of persons residing or working in the area nor be detrimental to property values or improvements in the vicinity. 2. The proposed convenience market with gasoline station is in conformance with the City's adopted General Plan. 3. The proposed convenience market with gasoline station is compatible with existing commercial uses in the area. 4. The proposed location, site layout and design will properly adapt the site to streets, driveways and adjacent structures and uses in a harmonious manner. 5. The proposed combination and relationship of uses on the site are properly integrated. 6. The proposed access to and parking for the service station/ convenience market will not create traffic or circulation problems. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan with floor plan overlay, and elevations dated July 11, 1985 shall be revised to include the following modifications: a. A landscaped planter of at least 600 square feet with 20 feet minimum dimension from property line inward measured along the bisector of the property lines. b. Convenience window per 5.9430.8.2c. C. Limited parking for air/water usage. d. Label private sanitary sewer easement. e. Relocate trash area. P.C. Minutes (3156d) -18- 8/5/85 2. 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. 3. Landscaping shall comply with S.9430.8.1(b) and all applicable sections pertaining to landscaping within Article 948 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 4. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department. 5. New driveway approaches shall be a minimum of twenty-seven feet (27') in width and shall be of radius type construction. 6. No building permit shall be issued until Zone Change No. 84-14 becomes effective. 7. The applicant shall obtain the necessary permits from the South Coast Air Quality Management District. 8. All signs shall comply with Articles 948 and 976 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 9. Development shall meet all local and State regulations regarding installation and operation of all underground storage tanks. 10. Low -volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets. 11. 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. 12. 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. 13. 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. P.C. Minutes (3156d) -19- 8/5/85 14. If foil -type insulation is to be used, a fire retardant type shall be installed as approved by the Building Division. C-8 SITE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 85-6 (APPEAL) Applicant: Thomas Kardos Site Plan Amendment No. 85-6 is a request to modify Use Permit No. 84-65, the triplex floor plan, and add a third story. This application was denied by the Board of Zoning Adjustments on June 19, 1985. The applicant/property owner has appealed this denial. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The proposed project is exempt Class 3 Section 15303 from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED John Kowls, architect for the project, spoke in support of the project reasoning the findings for denial No. 2 alledging that the reason for the encroachment was to enhance the architectural design of the building. Mr. Kardos, applicant, introduced his son, David Kardos, to present his case. David Kardos spoke in support of the project stating several points in opposition to staff's report. There were no other persons to speak for or against the proposal and the public hearing was closed. Chairman Livengood asked staff if this was intended for a rental or for sale. The architect responded stating the applicant would be renting the bottom unit and he would be occupying the top unit. Chairman Livengood asked staff if the bonus room on the plan was considered a bedroom and how does that impact the parking ratio. Secretary Palin answered that staff has required an additional parking space because this bonus room does fall under the bedroom definition. Commissioner Winchell inquired if this lot could hold three units. Florence Webb of staff stated that if the three findings for denial were to be corrected the plan would be acceptable. Commissioner Winchell suggested that staff work with the applicant to make the plan acceptable. Chairman Livengood expressed concern about three minor problems holding this project up. P.C. Minutes (3156d) -20- 8/5/85 Florence Webb of staff replied that staff could work with the applicant. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY WINCHELL TO CONTINUE SITE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 85-6 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED C-9 ZONE CHANGE NO. 85-13 Applicant: City of Huntington Beach Due to an advertising problem, staff recommends that the Planning Commission open the public hearing on Zone Change No. 85-13 and continue the item to the August 20, 1985 Planning Commission meeting. Initiated by the City of Huntington Beach, Zone Change No. 85-13 is a request to rezone the property located on the northwest corner of Ellis Avenue and Goldenwest Street from C2-0-(Q) (Qualified Community Business District Combined with Oil) to C2-0 (Community Business District combined with Oil Production). The proposed zone change will remove the (Q) (Qualified) designation from the zoning. The (Q) was originally placed on the zoning to require special City design review and to require that any retail commercial development of the site be equestrian oriented. The proposed zone change will remove those requirements. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Pursuant to the environmental regulations in effect at this time, the Department of Development Services posted Negative Declaration No. 85-46 for a 10-day comment and review period to end August 4, 1985. No comments, either written or verbal, were received. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY ROWE TO CONTINUE ZONE CHANGE NO. 85-13 TO THE AUGUST 20, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED C-10 ZONE CHANGE NO. 85-11/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 85-39 Applicant: Atlantic Richfield Zone Change No. 85-11 is a request to add the service station suffix (Article 948) to the existing base zone of C4, Highway Commercial. P.C. Minutes (3156d) -21- 8/5/85 The applicant intends to demolish the existing service station on the site and construct a new service station with convenience market. The SS suffix is required in order to permit the new construction of the service station. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Pursuant to the environmental regulations in effect at this time, the Department of Development Services posted draft Negative Declaration No. 85-39 for ten days, and no comments, either verbal or written were received. The staff, in its initial study of the project, has recommended that a negative declaration be issued. Prior to any action on Zone Change No. 85-11, it is necessary for the Planning Commission to review and act on Negative Declaration No. 85-39. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Sam Blick, representing Atlantic Richfield, spoke in support of the project and concurred with staff's recommendations. There were no other persons to speak for or against the proposal and the public hearing was closed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY PORTER AND SECOND BY LIVENGOOD TO APPROVE NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 85-39 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED A MOTION WAS MADE BY PORTER AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER TO APPROVE ZONE CHANGE NO. 85-11 WITH FINDINGS BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED 1. A change of zone from C4, Highway Commercial District, to C4-SS, Highway Commercial District - Service Station, is consistent with the General Plan designation of General Commercial and intent and purpose of Article 948. 2. The proposed zone change is compatible with surrounding commercial uses. P.C. Minutes (3156d) -22- 8/5/85 C-11 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-31/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 85-37 Applicant: Chris Kiralla Conditional Use Permit No. 85-31 is a request to permit the temporary outdoor storage and wholesale distribution of wood shavings and wood chips on the north side of Talbert Avenue approximately 1000 feet east of Gothard Street. The applicant has indicated that the products are sold to Orange County fertilizer companies, wholesale and retail nurseries, and to landscaping companies. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Pursuant to the environmental regulations in effect at this time, the Department of Development Services posted draft Negative Declaration No. 85-39 for ten days, and no comments, either verbal or written were received. The staff, in its initial study of the project, has recommended that a negative declaration be issued prior to any action on Conditional Use Permit No. 85-31, it is necessary for the Planning Commission to review and act on Negative Declaration No. 85-39. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Chris Kiralla, applicant, vocalized his objection to findings for denial. He stated that he agreed to put up an 8 foot fence and fire hydrant requested by the Fire Department. He also said he would landscape the front of the project. Mr. Kiralla, the applicant's father, spoke in support of the project. There were no other persons present to speak for or against the proposal and the public hearing was closed. Chairman Livengood requested that staff take another look at the application and reinforce the reasons for denial or supply findings and conditions to allow approval of this project. Commissioner Porter said he agreed with staff in some areas, adding that there may be some problems with air borne materials based on the prevailing winds and that a condition should be added to address this problem. A MOTION WAS MADE BY WINCHELL AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER TO CONTINUE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 83-31/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 85-37 TO THE AUGUST 20, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED P.C. Minutes (3156d) -23- 8/5/85 C-12 ZONE CHANGE NO. 85-5/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 85-34 Applicant: Mobil Oil Zone Change No. 85-5 is a request to add the service station suffix (Article 948) to the existing base zone of C4, Highway Commercial. The applicant intends to demolish the existing service station on the site and construct a new service station. The SS suffix is required in order to permit the new construction. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Pursuant to the environmental regulations in effect at this time, the Department of Development Services posted draft Negative Declaration No. 85-14 for ten days, and no comments, either verbal or written, were received. The staff, in its initial study of the project, has recommended that a negative declaration be issued. Prior to any action on Zone Change No. 85-5, it is necessary for the Planning Commission to review and act on Negative Declaration No. 85-14. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Jim Huntsberry, representing Mobil Oil, spoke in support of the project. He said he was willing to,work with staff and the Board of Zoning Adjustments. There were no other persons to speak for or against the proposal and the public hearing was closed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY PORTER AND SECOND BY ROWE TO APPROVE NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 85-14 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED A MOTION WAS MADE BY PORTER AND SECOND BY LIVENGOOD TO APPROVE ZONE CHANGE NO. 85-5 WITH FINDINGS BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: 1. A change of zone from C4, Highway Commercial District, to C4-SS, Highway Commercial District - Service Station, is consistent with the General Plan designation of General Commercial and intent and purpose of Article 948. P.C. Minutes (3156d) -24- 8/5/85 2. The proposed zone change is compatible with surrounding commercial uses. C-13 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-27 Applicant: John Merino The applicant is requesting approval of a business that would provide psychic advisor services pursuant to the recently adopted ordinance permitting fortunetelling within the C4 district and North Huntington Center Specific Plan [Section 9373(j)] subject to the approval of a conditional use permit by the Planning Commission. (Code Amendment No. 84-12 was approved by the City Council on June 3, 1985.) The proposed business is within the Old World Village mixed -use development. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Pursuant to Section 15301 Class l(a) of the California Environmental Quality Act, no environmental assessment is required. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED John Merino, father to Cathy Adams, spoke in support of the project. There were no other persons to speak for or against the proposal and the public hearing was closed. Chairman Livengood asked Mr. Merino if he had several signatures in support of the project to which Mr. Merino answered in the affirmative. A MOTION WAS MADE BY PORTER AND SECOND BY ROWE TO APPROVE NEGATIVE DECLARATION BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED A MOTION WAS MADE BY PORTER AND SECOND BY LIVENGOOD TO APPROVE ZONE CHANGE 85-9 WITH FINDINGS BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED FINDINGS ZONE CASE NO. 85-9: P.C. Minutes (3156d) -25- 8/5/85 1. A change of zone from C4-Highway Commercial to C4-SS Highway Commercial -Service Station is consistent with the General Plan designation of General Commercial and intent and purpose of Article 948. 2. The proposed zone change from C4 to C4-SS is compatible with surrounding commercial uses. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY WINCHELL TO CONTINUE TO THE AUGUST 20, 1985 MEETING, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED C-14 ZONE CHANGE NO. 85-9/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-30/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 85-35 Applicant: Chevron USA Zone Change 85-9 in conjunction with Conditional Use Permit 85-30 is a request to add an SS suffix to an existing service station zoned C2-Community Business. The conditional use permit will allow for the construction of a convenience market in conjunction with the sale of gasoline. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The Department of Development Services posted Draft Negative Declaration No. 85-35 for ten days. No comments, either verbal or written were received. The staff, in its initial study of the project, has recommended that a negative declaration be adopted; prior to action on the project applications, it is necessary for the Planning Commission to review and recommend adoption of Negative Declaration No. 85-35 to the City Council. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Thomas Baumgaram requested the Commission to continue Conditional Use Permit No. 85-30 to August 20, 1985 and approve the zone change and the negative declaration. Jim Haslain, manager of the property, stated that he had not been informed of the entitlement and would in the future like to be informed of any further activity regarding this matter. Commissioner Porter asked staff if the negative declaration addressed the conditional use permit or the zone change. Howard Zelefsky said that it addresses the conditional use permit; however, it was advertised to include the zone change. P.C. Minutes (3156d) -26- 8/5/85 Commissioner Porter asked staff if the conditional use permit could operate prior to the zone change. Howard Zelefsky said that the conditional use permit would not be effective until the zone change was adopted. A MOTION WAS MADE BY PORTER TO APPROVE NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 85-35 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED A MOTION WAS MADE BY PORTER AND SECOND BY LIVENGOOD TO APPROVE ZONE CHANGE NO. 85-9 WITH FINDINGS BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF ZONE CASE NO. 85-9: 1. A change of zone from C4-Highway Commercial to C4-SS Highway Commercial -Service Station is consistent with the General Plan designation of General Commercial and intent and purpose of Article 948. 2. The proposed zone change from C4 to C4-SS is compatible with surrounding commercial uses. MOTION PASSED A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY WINCHELL TO CONTINUE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-34 TO THE AUGUST 20, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Erskine, Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED Commissioner Erskine arrived at the meeting. C-15 APPEAL OF CONDITION #8/USE PERMIT NO. 85-34 (BZA APPROVAL) Applicant: Warner's Mobil On June 6, 1985, Warner's Mobile applied to the Board of Zoning Adjustments for a use permit to allow a snack shop operation in an existing gasoline service station located on the southwest corner of P.C. Minutes (3156d) -27- 8/5/85 Springdale Street and Warner Avenue. Use Permit No. 85-34 was conditionally approved on June 26, 1985. The applicant is appealing condition number 8 which states "No beer and wine sales are permitted." ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The proposed project is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15301 from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. Commissioner Schumacher felt the staff should work with the ABC when these types of uses are posted. Secretary Palin commented that this was a valid point and added that the ABC does the posting. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Leo Urquiza spoke in support of the project. There were no other persons to speak for or against the proposal and the public hearing was closed. Chairman Livengood commented that he did not understand how the city could prohibit people from selling alcohol; adding, that this is not the answer to the problem of drinking and driving. Commissioner Erskine expressed that he disagreed with Chairman Livengood on this issue because of the proximity and the ease with which one might obtain the product that the Commission was trying to prohibit and that the next logical extension on this kind of sale of alcoholic beverage would be extending it to a drive -through type store. Secretary Palin reviewed the City Council's discussion of definitions of Convenience markets and Mini -Markets. Commissioner Porter commented he did not think the Commission should be in the business of making it easier to buy alcohol in driving situations, and expressed the Commission should be careful in their deliberations and decisions with regard to those types of retail activities. Commissioner Schumacher agreed with Commissioner Erskine and Commissioner Porter adding she would uphold the BZA decision. Commissioner Rowe commented he agreed with the other Commissioners stating he would like the sale of Alcohol phased out when connected with gasoline sales. Commissioner Winchell agreed the Commission should try to control the sale of alcohol but expressed concern about distinguishing between a Mini -Market and a Convenience Market or a snack shop in conjunction with a service station or gasoline sales. P.C. Minutes (3156d) -28- 8/5/85 A MOTION WAS MADE BY ERSKINE AND SECOND BY ROWE TO DENY APPEAL OF CONDITION # 8/USE PERMIT NO. 85-34 (BZA APPROVAL) WITH ORIGINAL FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL INCLUDING #8 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Porter, Erskine NOES: Livengood ABSENT: Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED A MOTION WAS MADE BY WINCHELL AND SECOND BY PORTER, TO SUPPORT THE CITY COUNCIL'S DIRECTIONS TO STAFF TO PROCESS A CODE AMENDMENT WHICH WOULD PROHIBIT THE SALE OF BEER AND WINE IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE SALE OF GASOLINE BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Porter, Erskine NOES: Livengood ABSENT: Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED C-16 ZONE CHANGE NO. 85-10/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-34/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 85-35 Applicant: MacDonald Group Ltd. The applicant has requested a continuance of this item in order for him to be present at the public hearing and to provide him and City staff additional time to resolve several issues. MacDonald Group Ltd. has submitted an application for a zone change and a conditional use permit for the expansion of Huntington Center Mall at 7777 Edinger Avenue. A MOTION WAS MADE BY PORTER AND SECOND BY ROWE TO CONTINUE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-34/ZONE CHANGE NO. 85-10/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 85-45 TO THE AUGUST 20, 1985 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Erskine, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED C-17 SPECIAL SIGN PERMIT NO. 85-5 Applicant: Huntington Beach Sign Co. Special Sign Permit No. 85-5 is a request to construct a 50 square foot, 12 foot high internally illuminated freestanding sign intended to be used to advertise an apartment complex. The sign is proposed to be located at 6700 Warner Avenue approximately 1,000 feet west of Goldenwest Street. P.C. Minutes (3156d) -29- 8/5/85 The applicant has initiated a special sign permit because the proposal does not comply with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, Article 976. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Pursuant to Section 15311, Class 11(a) of the California Environmental Quality Act Law and Guidelines 1984, the proposed project is categorically exempt. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Wayne Lamb spoke in support of the project but pointed out objections to findings for denial No. 2 and No. 4. There were no other persons to speak for or against the proposal and the public hearing was closed. Chairman Livengood asked if the special sign permit would be approved if the sign was lowered to six feet. Florence Webb of staff answered yes. A MOTION WAS MADE BY ERSKINE AND SECOND BY WINCHELL TO DENY SPECIAL SIGN PERMIT NO. 85-5 WITH FINDINGS BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Erskine, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR DENIAL: 1. Strict compliance with Article 976, Sign Code, will not result in a substantial economic hardship to the applicant. 2. The proposed fifty (50) square feet, 12-foot high sign may adversely affect other signs in the area. 3. The proposed sign may be detrimental to property located in the vicinity of such sign; and 4. The proposed sign located at the main entrance of the residential complex may obstruct pedestrian or vehicular traffic vision. D. ITEMS NOT FOR PUBLIC HEARING: D-1 RECONSIDERATION OF SPECIAL SIGN PERMIT NO. 85-5 A request to reconsider Special Sign Permit No. 85-4 and schedule a public open hearing for August 20, 1985. P.C. Minutes (3156d) -30- 8/5/85 A MOTION WAS MADE BY ERSKINE AND SECOND BY ROWE TO APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF SPECIAL SIGN PERMIT N0, 85-4 AND SCHEDULE A PUBLIC OPEN HEARING ON AUGUST 20, 1985 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Schumacher, Livengood, Erskine, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: Winchell MOTION PASSED D-2 SITE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 85-23 A request by Paul Tenold for relief from a condition of approval of a previously approved action which required landscaping in conjunction with the construction of a 700 square foot, 15 foot high accessory building located approximately 200 feet northeast of Pacific Coast Highway and 1,500 feet northwest of Anderson Street. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY WINCHELL TO APPROVE SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 85-23 TO REMOVE CONDITIONS NUMBER 3 AND 4 FROM PREVIOUSLY APPROVED CONDITIONS EXCEPTION NO. 84-58 WHICH WAS APPROVED IN CONJUNCTION WITH SITE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 84-58 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Rowe, Winchell, Schumacher, Livengood, Erskine, Porter NOES: None ABSENT: Mirjahangir ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED E. DISCUSSION ITEMS: The Commission requested in the future every staff report include an alternative action with findings for denial and approval. F. PENDING ITEMS: Chairman Livengood thanked staff for responding to the Commission's concerns regarding the removal of the dirt piles located at Warner and Bolsa Chica. He also stated that he was concerned about the gasoline fuel trucks unloading directly off of Pacific Coast Highway into the tanks at the boat fuel facility off of Mariner Drive. Commissioner Schumacher stated that she would like to have a report back on the storage operations between Clay, Garfield, Goldenwest and Main Street noting that these businesses may not have permits. Commissioner Winchell asked staff to look into several signs the Huntington West Company located at the northwest corner of Edwards have put up . P.C. Minutes (3156d) -31- 8/5/85 I. ADJOURNMENT: The Planning Commission adjourned at 10:35 p.m. to the August 20, 1985 Planning Commission Meeting. Tom Li n ood, C air an 1 P.C. Minutes (3156d) -32- 8/5/85