Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-12-31MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS Room'B-8 - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 31, 1986 - 1:30 P.M. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Evans, Godfrey, Krejci, Poe, Smith STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Phillips, Franklin MINUTES: UPON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY SMITH, MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 1986, WERE APPROVED AS TRANSCRIBED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Evans, Godfrey, Krejci, Poe, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: None REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 86-99 USE PERMIT NO. 86-86 Applicant: John David King CE REQUEST: To allow 1) a,portion of a driveway over one hundred fifty feet (1501) in length to be ten feet (101) wide, 2) a minimum ten foot (10') with average eleven foot (111) side yard setback in lieu of required minimum fifteen foot (151), average twenty foot (201) setback, 3) an average seventeen foot (171) front yard setback in lieu of an average twenty foot (201) setback, and 4) private yards to fulfill common open space requirement. UP REQUEST: To permit a, six (6) unit apartment complex. Subject property is located at the Southeast corner of Elm Street and Cypress Avenue. This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 3, California Environmental Quality Act, 1986. The Staff member, Laura Phillips, stated the requests were for a six (6) unit apartment complex without a density bonus but with several variances. The requests had been continued from the previous meeting to allow the applicant to meet further with Staff from the Redevelopment Department. The applicant had originally planned access from Cypress Avenue. However, Redevelopment determined Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 31, 1986 Page 2 access should be from Elm Street and other restrictions were placed on the project which necessitated readvertising. Mr. King has made several revisions to the plans but the proposed setbacks are still not adequate. The driveway is not wide enough which could cause traffic circulation hazards. Staff can find no special circumstances to warrant approval of the project; therefore, Staff is recommending Denial of the Conditional Exception and the Use Permit since the project is not feasible without the variances. The Public Hearing was opened by Chairman Tom Poe and it was ascertained that the applicant was not present. Glen Godfrey suggested the requests might be continued to a later time in the meeting to see if the applicant arrived. Mr. Reuben Alvarez asked to speak relative to the matter and Chairman Poe explained he would have an opportunity later to present his concerns. The Public Hearing was left open. UPON MOTION BY GODFREY AND SECOND BY SMITH, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 86-99 AND USE PERMIT NO. 86-86 WERE CONTINUED TO A LATER PORTION OF THE MEETING, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Evans, Godfrey, Krejci, Poe, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: None CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 86-108 ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 86-56 NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 86-63 Applicant: Cavan Associates CE REQUEST: To permit zero foot (01) setback from City easement in lieu of required five foot (51) setback. AR REQUEST: To permit construction of eight (8) industrial buildings (total of 54,687 Square Feet). Subject property is located on Metzler Lane at cul-de-sac (Northeast of Talbert Avenue and Gothard Street). This request is covered by Negative Declaration No. 86-63. Staff reported this request was for eight (8) industrial buildings on Metzler Lane. New plans were received yesterday which provide a turnaround and the buildings have been moved five feet (5') back from the easement so Conditional Exception No. 86-108 is no longer needed. The new plan meets landscaping and parking as a whole but Building "H" would be one (1) parking space short if considered separately. Staff recommended approval of the Negative Declaration and the Administrative Review and removal of the Conditional Exception request. -2- 12/31/86 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 31, 1986 Page 3 Les Evans asked if the conditions indicated that Metzler Lane and Belva Lane be constructed prior to issuance of building permits and Ms. Phillips stated they did. There was a general discussion regarding a secondary access to the project, possibly through from Talbert Avenue. The Public Hearing was opened and the applicant's representative, Bill Borden, was present, along with R. Hastings and Jon Lundstrom, Architects for the project. Mr. Borden stated he was in agreement with the conditions as presented by Staff. He inquired relative to access through the Gibson property and Tom Poe said the applicants could pick up building permits when they could show access to that property. Mr. Lundstrom asked if plans could be submitted into plan check before access was provided and Mr. Poe replied in the affirmative. Mr. Smith and Mr. Evans stressed the importance of the applicant providing an all-weather surfaced road to the project for fire protection access. There was no one else present wishing to speak for or against the project so the Public Hearing was closed. Daryl Smith moved for approval of Negative Declaration No. 86-63 and Administrative Review No. 86-56, and Tom Poe seconded the motion. Les Evans stated he still had a problem with the parking and did not like the configuration requiring cars to back up into the main accessway. Daryl Smith stated it would be a private street and would be a problem for the tenants and owners to resolve. Mr. Evans asked if the maker and seconder would accept an amendment to the motion that the rolling gate be kept closed except in case of an emergency. Tom Poe stated a Knox box lock system could be put on it to meet Fire Department standards. Both the maker and seconder of the motion accepted the amendment. UPON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY POE, NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 86-63 AND ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 86-56 WERE APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The floor plans dated December 5, 1986, shall be the approved layout. Elevations shall be subject to review and approval of the Design Review Board. 2. A revised site plan shall be submitted depicting the modifications described herein: -3- 12/31/86 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 31, 1986 Page 4 a. Approved access to Talbert Avenue through abutting southerly property (Parcel 3 of Parcel Map 79-558) or approved access to Gothard Street through Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 79-558. 3. Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall file a parcel map. Said map shall be recorded prior to final inspection and a copy submitted to the Department of .Development Services. 4. 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. 5. Installation of required landscaping and irrigation systems shall be completed prior to final inspection. 6. Building permits,shall not be issued until such time as secondary access to Talbert Avenue or Gothard Street is resolved to the satisfaction of the Departments of Development Services, Fire, and Public Works. 7. Applicant shall complete Design Review Board review prior to issuance of building permits and shall comply with all conditions recommended by the Design Review Board. 8. An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be approved and installed pursuant to Fire Department regulations. 9. Service roads and fire lanes, as determined by the Fire Department, shall be posted and marked. 10. 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. 11. There shall be*no outside storage of vehicles, vehicle parts, equipment or trailers. 12. All repair work shall be conducted wholly within the building. -4- 12/31/86 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 31, 1986 Page 5 13. 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. 14. Rolling emergency access gates shall remain closed except during emergencies. 15. Natural gas shall be stubbed in at the locations of cooking facilities, water heaters, and central heating units. 16. Low -volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets. 17. 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. 18. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits. 19. Belva Lane, Metzler Lane and the private access roadway shall be constructed to the standards and satisfaction of the Public Works Department. 20. Emergency access gate shall be provided at South end of property to Fire Department standards. 21. Applicant shall dedicate forty foot (401) wide access easement from Metzler Lane cul-de-sac to abutting westerly property for fire access purposes. 22. If foil -type insulation is to be used, a fire retardant type shall be installed as approved by the Building.Department. 23. An inventory of materials and a business plan shall be submitted to the Fire Department. 24. Buildings shall be set back a minimum of eight feet (81) from the ten inch (1011) sewer. 25. Water system shall be dedicated to the City of Huntington Beach. 26. Drive approaches shall be twenty-seven feet (271) minimum width of radius type construction. 27. Hydrology shall be approved by Department of Public Works. 28. Private on -site sewer shall be required. -5- 12/31/86 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 31, 1986 Page-6 29. No trees or structures to be in storm drain and sewer easement. Ultimate cross section through easement required to ensure construction equipment can do emergency and maintenance work. 30. Accept and provide drainage from property to the West. INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC CODE REQUIREMENTS: 1. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department. 2. The applicant shall meet all applicable local, State, and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards. 3. 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. 4. Landscaping shall comply with Article 960 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 5. A plan for silt control for all storm runoff from the property during construction and during initial operation of the project shall be submitted to the California Regional Quality Control Board staff for their review prior to the issuance of grading permits. 6. Information on equipment or facilities which may generate air pollutants shall be submitted to the South Coast Air Quality Management District staff for their review prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any use within the building. 7. All on -site hazardous materials shall be handled in accordance with the Uniform Fire Code. Disposal of any hazardous material shall be in accordance with State and Federal regulations. 8. The Board of Zoning Adjustments reserves the right to revoke Administrative Review No. 86-56 if any violation of these conditions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs. AYES: Godfrey, Krejci, Poe, Smith NOES: Evans ABSENT: None -6- 12/31/86 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 31, 1986 Page 7 NOTE: Conditional Exception No. 86-108 was withdrawn by the applicant's representatives since it was no longer necessary. CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 86-99 USE PERMIT NO. 86-86 Applicant: John David King Chairman Tom Poe determined that Mr. King was now present in the audience and the Public Hearing on his referenced projects could be continued. Mr. Poe informed Mr. King that Staff had recommended Denial of his projects and reiterated Staff's concerns. Mr. King stated he had contacted Pat Spencer of Redevelopment again and Mr. Spencer had informed him the area would be basically commercial, thus their concerns about construction of an apartment building on the parcel. Mr. King further stated he was willing to construct the block wall about which Mr. Alvarez, an adjacent resident, had previously expressed concern. The applicant reminded the Board that he had revised his plans several times to meet requirements of various departments, especially Redevelopment, and read a memo from Pat Spencer reiterating Redevelopment's position on the project. Mr. King added he had done everything possible to develop a desirable project for the corner. Reuben Alvarez, 18162 Elm Street, stated he lived on the lot immediately to the South of the proposed project. There was a discussion with Mr. Alvarez regarding the setbacks and construction of a block wall. There was no one else present wishing to speak for or against the project so the Public Hearing was closed. Daryl Smith inquired about the requirement for the forty foot (401) driveway and Ms. Phillips replied the Code required the drive and a turnaround because a portion of the buildings was more than one hundred fifty feet (1501) from the street. Dennis Krejci said he felt a less intense development would be more appropriate for a parcel of this size and Tom Poe agreed. UPON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY POE, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 86-99 AND USE PERMIT NO. 86-86 WERE DENIED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS FOR DENIAL - CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 86-99: 1. Because of the size, configuration, shape and lack of unique topographic features of the subject property, there does not appear.to be exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or -7- 12/31/86 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 31, 1986 Page 8 conditions applicable to the land, buildings or premises involved that does not apply generally to property or class of uses in the same district. 2. Since the subject property can be fully developed within regular established setbacks, such a Conditional Exception is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights. 3. The establishment, maintenance and operation of the use will be detrimental to the general welfare of persons working or residing in the vicinity. 4. Granting of Conditional Exception No. 86-99 would constitute a special privilege inconsistent with limitations upon properties in the vicinity. FINDINGS FOR DENIAL - USE PERMIT NO. 86-86: 1. The establishment, maintenance and operation of the use will be detrimental to the general welfare of persons working or residing in the vicinity. 2. On -site circulation is inadequate and has the potential of creating a congestion and circulation hazard. 3. Proposed layout of the project is not feasible if concurrent Conditional Exception requests are denied. AYES: Evans, Godfrey, Krejci, Poe, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: None USE PERMIT NO. 86-90 Applicant: Philip Siegel A request to permit a sandwich shop with twenty-four (24) seats. Subject property is located at 19142 Beach Boulevard (East side of Beach Boulevard approximately one hundred fifty feet (1501) South of Garfield Avenue). This request is covered by previously approved Negative Declaration No. 85-53. Staff said this was a request for a small sandwich shop with twenty-four (24) seats in a new development along Beach Boulevard. Parking can be accommodated on the site and Staff recommended approval with conditions. -8- 12/31/86 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 31, 1986 Page 9 Glen Godfrey asked if the Parking Management Plan required in the Conditions of Approval for the original development had been filed, and Staff replied she was not sure. The Public Hearing was opened and the applicant, Philip Siegel, was present. Mr. Siegel stated he was in agreement with the conditions. Tom Poe reminded Mr. Siegel the occupancy load would have to be kept to less than fifty to meet Fire Department standards. Frank Bennett identified himself as a representative of the developer and said a copy of the lease agreement between the tenants and the owners had been filed. The lease required the tenants and their employees to park at the rear of the buildings. Mr. Bennett further explained the employees would be given license plate tags and their cars would be towed if they parked in the front area. Glen Godfrey and Mr. Bennett held a discussion regarding the conditions placed on the project by the Planning Commission, after which the Board members determined the lease agreement would be sufficient at this time. Daryl Smith and Glen Godfrey stressed the fact to Mr. Bennett that a more complete Parking Management Plan might be required as new tenants were located in the shopping center. There was no one else present wishing to speak for or against the project so the Public Hearing was closed. UPON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY GODFREY, USE PERMIT NO. 86-90 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 Use Permit No. 86-90 will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. 3. The proposal is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan and Land Use Map. 4. Parking needs generated by the use can be accommodated on -site. -9- 12/31/86 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 31, 1986 Page 10 SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated December 5, 1986, shall be the approved layout. 2. Employees shall park to the rear of the building as required by the applicant's lease and as accepted by the Planning Commission for the shopping center. 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. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits. INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC CODE REQUIREMENTS: 1. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department. 2. The Board of Zoning Adjustments reserves the right to revoke Use Permit No. 86-91 if any violation of these conditions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs. AYES: Evans, Godfrey, Krejci, Poe, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: None USE PERMIT NO. 86-91 Applicant: Oshman's Sporting Goods A request to permit an outdoor sale in the parking lot for a maximum of seven (7) days. Subject property is located at 15021 Golden West Street (Southwest corner of Bolsa Avenue and Golden West Street). This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 11 (c), California Environmental Quality Act, 1986. Ms. Phillips stated this was a request to set up a forty foot by sixty foot (40' x 601) tent for an outdoor ski supply sale similar to last year's operation. The property owners and tenants have approved the sale and there have been no comments from the Police Department. Staff recommended approval with conditions. Glen Godfrey left the room at this time - 2:35 P.M. Dennis Krejci said he assumed there had been no problems in the past when the sale was held and Staff replied that was correct. Tom Poe -10- 12/31/86 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 31, 1986 Page 11 stated the applicant would need to obtain the State Fire Marshal's approval for the tents as in the past. The Public Hearing was opened and Robert Haas and Mark O'Brien were present to represent the applicant. They had no questions or comments for the Board. Tom Poe asked if the tents would be the same type as last year and Mr. O'Brien replied they would be. There was no one else present wishing to speak for or against the project so the Public Hearing was closed. UPON MOTION BY POE AND SECOND BY EVANS, USE PERMIT NO. 86-91 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 Use Permit No. 86-91 will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. 3. The proposal is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan and Land Use Map. SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated December 5, 1986, shall be the approved layout. 2. The applicant shall provide for clean up of the area after closing of the event. 3. 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. 4. The applicant shall obtain clearance from the Public Liability Claims Coordinator, Administrative Services Department, and/or shall provide a Certificate of Insurance and Hold Harmless Agreement to be executed at least five (5) days prior to the event. -11- 12/31/86 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 31, 1986 Page ' 12 5. Sidewalks shall be maintained at a clear width of four feet (4'). INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC CODE REQUIREMENTS: 1. The applicant shall meet all applicable local, State, and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards. 2. A Certificate to Operate shall be issued by the Department of Development Services as required by Section 9730.8 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code prior to the event. 3. The Board of Zoning Adjustments reserves the right to revoke Use Permit No. 86-91 if any violation of these conditions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs. AYES: Evans, Krejci, Poe, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: Godfrey ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 85-19 (EXTENSION OF TIME) Applicant: Tait and Associates, Inc. A request for an Extension of Time for Administrative Review No. 85-19 (to demolish existing service station and build new three (3) bay service station). Subject property is located at 9001 Adams Avenue (Northeast corner of Adams Avenue and Magnolia Street). This request is covered by previously approved Negative Declaration No. 85-21.' Staff stated the applicant had requested an Extension of Time due to the difficulty of obtaining the reciprocal access agreement. The application was originally heard by the Board, and approved with conditions, in October of 1985. Subsequently, it was appealed to the Planning Commission and the Commission upheld the Board's decision. Staff is recommending approval of the Extension of Time with conditions. Greg Stewart was present to represent the applicant but had no questions or comments for the Board. UPON MOTION BY POE AND SECOND BY SMITH, ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 85-19 (EXTENSION OF TIME) WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: -12- 12/31/86 - BZA 1 Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 31, 1986 Page 13 SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. All the Conditions of Approval of previously approved Administrative Review No. 85-19 shall remain in effect. 2. The Board of Zoning Adjustments reserves the right to revoke Administrative Review No. 85-19 (Extension of Time) if any violation of these conditions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs. AYES: Evans, Krejci, Poe, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: Godfrey Glen Godfrey returned to the room at this time - 2:45 P.M. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 86-419 Applicant: Donalie J. Hunt A request to permit consolidation of two (2) parcels into one (1) parcel. Subject property is located at 302 Twenty-first Street (Northeast corner of Olive Avenue and Twenty-first Street). This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 5 (c), California Environmental Quality Act, 1986. Staff reported the applicant had submitted a written request for continuance to the meeting of January 14, 1987, and has waived the mandatory processing time. Staff recommended continuance. UPON MOTION BY GODFREY AND SECOND BY EVANS, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 86-419 WAS CONTINUED TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 14, 1987, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Evans, Godfrey, Krejci, Poe, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: None TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 86-437 Applicant: Hal Tucker/Oilmax A request to permit the subdivision of a separate parcel for lease purposes. Subject property is located at 9862 Adams Avenue (Southwest corner of Adams Avenue and Brookhurst Street). This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 15, California Environmental Quality Act, 1986. A Staff member, Robert Franklin, made the presentation to the Board since he had handled the original project. Mr. Franklin explained -13- 12/31/86 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 31, 1986 Page 14 the Tentative Parcel Map had been a requirement of Use Permit No. 86-61 and had been submitted so the applicant could obtain building permits. Staff reminded the Board that a Tentative Parcel Map was not ordinarily a Public Hearing; however, the surrounding property owners had been notified because of their extreme concern regarding the original Use Permit request. Mr. Franklin added that the request could be considered as a Waiver and recommended approval with conditions. Chairman Tom Poe informed the audience that the Board was only hearing the Tentative Parcel Map request and all comments should be limited to that request only. Don Cline explained he was the person responsible for the appeal filed regarding Use Permit No. 86-61. Mr. Cline said he had not been informed prior to the original meeting because the notice had gone to the property owner, Shell Oil Company. After learning of approval of the project, continued Mr. Cline, he had contacted Mayor Robert Mandic, and Mayor Mandic had filed an appeal in his behalf. Mr. Cline said his main concern had been because of the projected additional traffic and use of the driveway adjacent to his station. Mr. Cline added that, after further meetings with representatives of Oilmax when they agreed to build a temporary or permanent block wail, he had authorized rescinding the appeal. Mr. Cline then stated he has since learned he does not have the reciprocal rights and cannot demand that anyone build the wall; and he was now back at "Square One". An adjacent resident, Francis Arciaga, Jr., 9881 Kings Canyon Drive, reminded the Board of petitions previously submitted from approximately one hundred and eighty (180) adjoining residents who had opposed the project. Mr. Arciaga stated they had not appealed the project because of Mayor Mandic's appeal, and the appeal period had expired by the time the Mayor's appeal had been withdrawn. Mr. Arciaga said this reflects very unfavorably for the City. He added that the City could face serious liability in the event of traffic accidents or fatalities at the busy intersection of Brookhurst Street and Adams Avenue because of additional traffic generated by this approval. Anthony G. Khamis, 9841 Kings Canyon Drive, called attention also to the traffic congestion at -the corner and stated there had been no decrease since the opening of the new Mervyn's store at Huntington Center. He reminded the Board that Adams Avenue was a major artery to Costa Mesa which was very heavily traveled, and he did not want their neighborhood turned into another Harbor Boulevard or Beach Boulevard. -14- 12/31/86 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 31, 1111 Page 15 Louis D. Stan, 9782 Kings Canyon Drive, said the letter he received stated the applicant must be present and asked if the applicant was in attendance. (The applicant's representative was present). Mr. Stan asked about the Code requirement for parking and Robert Franklin stated there would be no deficiency in parking spaces for the parcel. Mr. Stan added that ingress and egress from the shopping center was a difficult situation, and he did not feel this type of business was necessary since there were already several automobile service facilities in the area. Cathy Stan, 9782 Kings Canyon Drive, asked Art Folger of the City Attorney's office for his comments. Mr. Folger stated there was a reciprocal easement and, if the property owner and the Board agree, that easement can be extended and the walls can be put up. Don Cline then stated he would like to ask for an elimination of the right-of-way and he also felt Oilmax should have a driveway directly across from Ralph's. Mrs. Stan asked Art Folger if there was any way the adjacent property owners could revert back to this appeal from Mayor Mandic. Mr. Folger stated that, to his knowledge, there was no way. Chairman Poe again reminded the residents the traffic situation, driveways, etc., were discussed earlier and the Board was only required to take into consideration the requirements and conditions of the Tentative Parcel Map. The applicant's representatives, Ken Brown and Nile Russon, were present and agreed to conditions for the Tentative Parcel Map (Waiver) as presented by Staff. Daryl Smith assured the residents that the Board had listened to their concerns during the original application and had attempted to mitigate those concerns by placing conditions on the project. He continued that the applicant's project met Code requirements and, therefore, the applicant had the right to develop his project in accordance with those stipulations. Dennis Krejci reminded the Board and the audience that the testimony which had been given did not relate to the Tentative Parcel Map but rather to the original request. UPON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY GODFREY, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 86-437 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: -15- 12/31/86 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 31, 1986 Page 16 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL FOR WAIVER: 1. The proposed consolidation complies with the requirements as to area, improvement and design, flood and water drainage control, appropriate and approved public roads, sewer and water facilities, environmental protection, and other requirements of Article 992 of the Subdivision Section of the Ordinance Code. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: A. TO BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO USE OR OCCUPANCY OF SAID PARCEL(S) FOR . ANY PURPOSE: 1. The Tentative Parcel Map received by the Department of Development Services on December 22, 1986, shall be the approved layout (with the amendments as noted thereon). 2. The applicant shall file, through the Huntington Beach City Clerk's office, and have recorded with the Orange County Recorder's Office, a Certificate of Compliance in conjunction with the approved plat map. A copy of the recorded Certificate of Compliance and plat map shall be filed with the Department of Development Services prior to issuance of building permits on the subject property. AYES: Evans, Godfrey, Krejci, Poe, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: None Mr. Khamis asked if the Tentative Parcel Map could be appealed and Mr. Franklin said only the applicant/property owner could appeal the• conditions of such a request. Glen Godfrey said he believed a City Council member could appeal but Art Folger substantiated Mr. Franklin's statement. After further discussion, Mr. Folger said he would check further into the matter. Les Evans stated the City would like to reserve the reciprocal access agreement which presently exists between the Shell property and Target's property in the event the Shell property should ever "recycle" to a different use. Mr. Evans added that the Traffic Division of Public Works did not wish to have any additional curb cuts or accesses off of Adams Avenue. Chairman Poe stated he would like to continue with the meeting and any problems should be worked out with the City Attorney's office and Staff members. 1 -16- 12/31/86 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 31, 1986 Page 17 RECONSIDERATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 86-53 Applicant: Huntington Beach Company A request for clarification of Condition No. 28 on previously approved Administrative Review No. 86-53 - "Recess windows eight inches (811) to twelve inches (1211) from wall facade to provide relief and to carry through another architectural element of the existing buildings. Subject property is located at 2110 Main Street (Northeast corner of Yorktown Avenue and Main Street). This request is covered by previously approved Negative Declaration No. 86-55. Laura Phillips stated the original request had been for a three (3) story office building approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustments with conditions recommended by the Design Review Board. The applicant has requested permission to speak with the Board relative to approval of that project. UPON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY EVANS, ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 86-53 WAS RECONSIDERED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Evans, Godfrey, Krejci, Poe, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: None Ralph Hastings of the architectural firm of Hastings and Lundstrom addressed the Board. Mr. Hastings explained the reason for the request was that they were using an insulation product which the manufacturer would not guarantee if the installed dimensions exceeded six inches (611). There was an extensive discussion, after which Daryl Smith had stated they were only looking at one wall - the one facing Yorktown Avenue. Mark Urban, Huntington Beach Company, said they did not wish to have one wall different than the others. Glen Godfrey stated the applicant would have to maintain the windows at no less than six inches (611) and Mr. Urban agreed to that stipulation. UPON MOTION BY GODFREY AND SECOND BY EVANS, RECONSID-_";,TION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 86-53 WAS AMENDED BY THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Condition No. 28 of previously No. 86-53 was amended to read approved Administrative Review as follows: 0&& 12/31/86 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 31, 1986 Page 18 1. "Windows shall be recessed to no less than six inches (611) from wall facade to provide relief and to carry through another architectural element of the existing buildings." 2 All other Conditions of Approval of previously approved Administrative Review No. 86-53 shall remain in effect. AYES: Evans, Godfrey, Krejci, Poe, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: None MISCELLANEOUS AGENDA ITEMS: ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NOS. 86-48, 86-49, 86-50 AND 86-51 Applicant: John DeLeonardi The requests were for the Board to review site plans submitted in order to clarify changes in the parking layout and mezzanine areas. Subject property is located on the East side of Palmdale Street just North of Cedar Avenue. Bob Franklin, Staff member, reminded the Board they had approved construction of four (4) industrial buildings on September 17, 1986, but the approval had been subject to the applicant's submitting revised site plans. Mr. Franklin said he and Susan Pierce had determined the changes were more extensive than Staff should handle and were bringing the site plans back to the Board for their review and approval. Mr. Franklin explained the landscaped area had an excess of eight percent (8%) and the parking has been arranged to accommodate a turning area. Daryl Smith and Staff held a discussion regarding the reciprocal access and driveways, but John DeLeonardi, the applicant, stated it was not needed. After questioning by Daryl Smith, Glen Godfrey added that the configuration of the front parking lot was of concern to Staff. Dennis Krejci expressed concern about the mezzanine area and said it could not exceed one-third (1/3) of the floor area to which it opened. He also stated two (2) stairways would be required in that case. Daryl Smith asked Staff to clarify the request and Staff's recommendations. Staff recommended that the submitted plans be reviewed and approved with the stipulation that the applicant submit full sets of site plans, elevations, and floor plans for the files and for review and approval by Staff. -18- 12/31/86 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 31, 1986 Page 19 Mr. Smith wanted the applicant to understand the mezzanine situation would have to be resolved by meeting Code requirements and not just resolved by the Board. Mr. DeLeonardi wanted the approval to reflect meeting the Codes in effect on the date plans were submitted for plan check and not the present date in the event there had been any Code changes since that time. UPON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY POE, ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NOS. 86-48, 86-49, 86-50 AND 86-51 WERE AMENDED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 86-48, 86-49, 86-50 AND 86-51: 1. Sets of revised site plans, floor plans, and elevations shall be submitted depicting changes in the parking layout and mezzanine areas to the satisfaction of Staff members of the Development Services Department. 2. All other Conditions of Approval of previously approved Administrative Review No. 86-48 shall remain in effect. 3. The Board of Zoning Adjustments reserves the right to revoke Administrative Review No. 86-48 (Amended) if any violation of these conditions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs. AYES: Krejci, Poe, Smith NOES: Evans ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Godfrey There was no further business to be presented to the Board for their review. UPON MOTION BY GODFREY AND SECOND BY EVANS, THE REGULAR MEETING WAS ADJOURNED TO A STUDY SESSION ON MONDAY, JANUARY 5, 1987, AT 10:00 A.M., BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Krejci, Poe, Smith NOES: Evans ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Godfrey Glen K. Godfrey, Secretary Board of Zoning Adjustments �h 7121d) -19- 12/31/86 - BZA