Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-01-211 MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS Room B-8 - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 21, 1987 - 1:30 P.M. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Evans, Godfrey, Krejci, Poe, Smith STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Phillips MINUTES: UPON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY POE, MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF DECEMBER 31, 1986, WERE APPROVED AS TRANSCRIBED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Evans, Godfrey, Krejci, Poe NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Smith REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 86-115 USE PERMIT NO. 86-96 Applicant: Paul K. Alford CE REQUEST: To permit 50.87 percent site coverage in lieu of fifty percent (50%) maximum site coverage. UP REQUEST: To permit an additional dwelling unit on a lot with existing nonconforming side yards. Subject property is located at 606 Eighteenth Street (East side of Eighteenth Street approximately fifty feet (501) North of Acacia Avenue). This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 5, California Environmental Quality Act, 1986. Staff member, Laura Phillips, reminded the Board this item had been heard by the Board the previous week. It was continued because there was a question as to whether or not roof overhangs, etc., had been included in the calculations. The applicant's designer was not present and Mr. Alford was unsure about how the designer had done the calculations. Since that time, the designer has been queried and stated the eaves were not included in the figures. Staff can find no land -related hardship and is recommending denial of the Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments January 21, 1986 Page 2 Conditional Exception; however, Staff would recommend approval of the Use Permit if the applicant will reduce the size of the structure to meet the fifty percent (50%) site coverage requirement. Chairman Dennis Krejci noted that the Public Hearing had remained open from the previous week's meeting. The applicant's designer and representative, Jay Earl, was present. Mr. Earl reiterated Mr. Alford's statements from the earlier meeting that he had received erroneous information when he first approached the Planning Department regarding the amount of lot coverage. He continued that Mr. Alford had removed the Second Floor deck from the plans and had made other reductions after learning of the fifty percent (50%) site coverage requirement. Mr. Earl added they were unable to further reduce the size without completely revising the plans and having new structural engineering plans prepared. These changes would be extremely expensive for Mr. Alford, according to Mr. Earl. There was no one else present wishing to speak for or against the project so the Public Hearing was closed. Les Evans asked for a comment from Staff as to why the applicant's representative was given erroneous information at the counter and what created the discrepancy between the fifty and fifty-five percent coverage. Ms. Phillips stated she had not given the applicant the information but assumed the difference was that two single family units were being constructed on one parcel. Mr. Earl said he had been told by the man at the counter that the Code was being revamped and had not yet been approved. Ms. Phillips added that was for single family dwellings only. Dennis Krejci added these units might be considered as a duplex. Daryl Smith stated he did not feel Mr. Evans question had been answered, and Mr. Evans again asked if the planner had said the fifty-five percent (55%) site coverage would meet the Code requirements. Glen Godfrey explained that "over-the-counter" information was for conceptual planning only and subject to further review in plan check. He added that occasionally erroneous information might be given at the counter in the Planning Department just as it was in the Public Works and Fire Departments. Mr. Godfrey added that, if the Board so chose, they could consider the units as two (2) entirely separate single family units and work it out that way. Daryl Smith stated the misunderstanding at the counter had, indeed, created a hardship and felt the Board could live with a discrepancy of less than one percent - the 0.87 percent. Mr. Smith said the rest of the project met Code requirements and open space requirements could be met. He added that the applicant would have to spend thousands of dollars to change the plans at this point. -2- 1/21/87 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments January 21, 1986 Page 3 UPON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY EVANS, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 86-115 AND USE PERMIT NO. 86-96 WERE APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO 86-115: 1. With the exception of an insignificant 0.87 percent increase over allowable site coverage, the development meets remaining Code requirements, including open space, setbacks, and parking. SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO 86-115: 1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated December 29, 1986, shall be the approved layout. 2. All Conditions of Approval of Use Permit No. 86-96 shall apply. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - USE PERMIT NO 86-96: 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. 86-96 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 - USE PERMIT NO. 86-96: 1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated December 29, 1986, shall be the approved layout. 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. 3. Installation of required landscaping and irrigation systems shall be completed prior to final inspection. -3- 1/21/87 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments January 21, 1986 Page 4 4. 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. 5. Natural gas shall be stubbed in at the locations of cooking facilities, water heaters,. and central heating units. 6. Low -volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets. 7. 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 applicant shall meet all applicable local, State, and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards. 3. Landscaping shall comply with Article 913 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 4. The Board of Zoning Adjustments reserves the right to revoke Use Permit No. 86-96 i•f any violation of these conditions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs. AYES: Evans, Godfrey, Krejci, Poe, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: None CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 86-98 Applicant• Richard G. Lafferty A request to permit zero foot (01) rear yard setback in lieu of required ten foot (101) setback and zero foot.(0') interior side yard setbacks in lieu of required five foot (5') setbacks. Subject property is located at 19251 Congress Circle (North side of Congress Circle approximately -ninety feet (90') North:of Grant Drive). This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 5, California Environmental Quality Act, 1986. Staff stated this was a request to legalize an existing garage addition which was built in 1956 without benefit of a building permit. It sets along the rear property line and the property also abuts a school yard. The lot is an irregularly -shaped lot since it is located on a cul-de-sac and the applicant has over 2,000 Square Feet of open space area. Staff can find no land -related hardship and is recommending denial of the request. -4- 1/21/87 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments January 21, 1986 Page 5 Daryl Smith asked if the school site was located on the North side of the property and Ms. Phillips replied that was correct. The Public Hearing was opened and Richard G. Lafferty, the applicant, was present. Mr. Lafferty stated the garage structure :had existed when he purchased the residence and he wanted to keep it by trying to bring the addition up to the Building Code. He added the same man had owned this property and the property to the East'at the time the garage structure was erected; and that the property owner was also a licensed contractor who had built the structure. With the same person owning both properties, Mr. Lafferty said he was not sure variances would have been required at that time. He added that the owner had carried the first on the property and he (Mr. Lafferty) was now attempting to refinance the residence. This was the reason for the legalization of the garage structure. Daryl Smith asked Mr. Lafferty if he had contacted an Attorney regarding the situation. Mr. Lafferty stated he had not - that he wanted to pursue this course of action first. Dennis Krejci inquired about the drainage from the parcel and Mr. Lafferty stated it drained mostly into a channel towards the Perry School site. Tom Poe introduced the subject of the type of construction and stated the wall adjacent to the zero foot (0') property line would have to be of fire -proof construction. Glen Godfrey informed the applicant that California law was very explicit about construction of this type, especially if the person who constructed the garage was a licensed contractor, and the applicant had legal recourse in a matter of this nature. Mr. Lafferty gave no indication he intended to follow this legal recourse. Louis Hernandez was present and stated he was a friend of the applicant. Mr. Hernandez further added he had "counseled" Mr. Lafferty about ways in which the structure could be brought into conformance with City Codes, including rerouting the drainage to the street. Tom Poe mentioned to Mr. Hernandez that circulation around the house would have to be provided for fire protection equipment. Dennis Krejci explained some of the process required in attempting to bring the structure into conformance with Codes - excavation of building foundations, cutting holes in walls to check wiring and plumbing, etc. Mr. Lafferty stated he wanted to do whatever was necessary to bring the building up to standards of the Building Code. UPON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY GODFREY, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 86-98 WAS DENIED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: -5- 1/21/87 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments January 21, 1986 Page 6 FINDINGS FOR DENIAL: 1. 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. 2. The proposed structure will not be compatible with adjacent properties. I - 3. The establishment, maintenance and operation of the use will be detrimental to the value of the property and improvements in the neighborhood. 4. Granting of Conditional Exception No. 86-98 would constitute a special privilege inconsistent with limitations upon properties in the vicinity. AYES: Evans, Godfrey, Poe, Smith NOES: Krejci ABSENT: None USE PERMIT NO. 87-1 Applicant: Pet Prevent -A -Care, Inc. A request to permit a Temporary Outdoor Event - Vaccination of dogs and cats in parking lot on three days - January 24, April 12, and July 12, 1987. Subject property is located on Newland Center Parking Lot - Northeast corner of Beach Boulevard and Utica Street. This request is covered by Categorical Exemption. Class 4, California Environmental Quality Act, 1986..� Staff reported this was a request to provide vaccinations for dogs and cats in a.shopping center parking�,lot. The applicant is applying at this time for a permit for three (3) separate days. The applicant would have to rope off twelve (12) parking spaces for this operation. Staff has contacted the Police Department but they have no adverse comments regarding traffic, etc. The applicant will be required to clean up the site after the.event and Staff -would recommend approval with conditions. Daryl Smith asked,if.this was the standard type -of -event which the Board had approved previously and Staff replied it was the same as last year. Dennis Krejci -asked if there had.been-any adverse comments,regarding the event and Staff replied there had been none. Glen Godfrey reminded Staff a letter of concern had been received after last year's event from a veterinarian in the area, and Ms. Phillips said she was unaware of it. -6- 1/21/87 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments January 21, 1986 Page 7 The applicant's representative, Sue Shine, stated she could not understand why the veterinarian would be concerned because they were not treating sick dogs or cats - only vaccinating well ones. Glen Godfrey also reminded the applicant they had not complied again this year with submitting their completed application three (3) weeks prior to the date of the first event and asked Staff to again include that stipulation in the conditions. UPON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY KREJCI, USE PERMIT NO. 87-1 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. 87-1 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 conceptual site plan received and dated January 12, 1987, 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. -7- 1/21/87 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments January 21, 1986 Page 8 INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC CODE REQUIREMENTS: 1. 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. 2. The Board of Zoning Adjustments reserves the right to revoke Use Permit No. 87-1 if any violation of these conditions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs. NOTE TO APPLICANT: You are hereby notified that, for future events, this Department must receive your complete Temporary Outdoor Event application a minimum of three (3) weeks prior to the event for adequate review and processing. Also, for your information, you may process up to three (3), one -day events at a time provided they are all within a few months of each other. AYES: Evans, Krejci, Poe, Smith NOES: Godfrey ABSENT: None TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 86-421 Applicant: Angeli Poonsaengsathit A request to legalize an existing parcel. Subject property is located at 7872 Newman Avenue (South side of Newman Avenue approximately four hundred seventy-five feet (475') West of Beach Boulevard. This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 5, California Environmental Quality Act, 1986. Staff said this was a request to legalize an existing parcel with four (4) apartment units previously approved for the site. A five foot (51) dedication will be required for Newman Avenue and the project will need to be sprinklered as a condition of the Use Permit. The applicant's representative, Dave Luciani of Salkin Engineering Corporation, was present. Les Evans stated he had a problem since the map showed a block wall around the parcel which would create a problem with the drainage. Ms. Phillips stated the drainage had been a major concern during approval of the Use Permit but, according to the Minutes, it seemed to have been addressed. Mr. Evans stated he wanted the applicant on notice that drainage of the adjacent lots will be accommodated through this development. -8- 1/21/87 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments January 21, 1986 Page 9 Dennis Krejci asked about the four foot (41) separation and Staff said it had been previously approved that way. Les Evans asked about the existing house - if it would be demolished, and Staff said it would be. The applicant's representative, Dave Luciani, agreed to the conditions as presented. UPON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY GODFREY, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 86-421 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: 1. The proposed legalization of one (1) parcel for purposes of residential use in compliance with the size and shape of property necessary for that type of development. 2. The General Plan has set forth provisions for this type of land use as well as setting forth objectives for implementation of this type of use. 3. The property was previously studied for this intensity of land use at the time the land use designation for community residential district allowing residential buildings was placed on the subject property. 4. The size, depth, frontage, street width and other design and improvement features of the proposed legalization are proposed to be constructed in compliance with standards plans and specifications on file with the City as well as in compliance with the State Map Act and supplemental City Subdivision Ordinance. 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 January 9, 1987, shall be the approved layout (with the amendments as noted thereon). 2. A parcel map shall be filed with and approved by the Department of Public Works and recorded with the Orange County Recorder. 3. Newman Avenue shall be dedicated to City standards. -9- 1/21/87 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments January 21, 1986 Page 10 4. Water supply shall be through the City of Huntington Beach's water system at the time said parcel is developed (if such systems exist within 200 feet of said parcel. 5. Sewage disposal shall be through the City of Huntington Beach's sewage system at the time said parcel is developed (if such systems exist within 200 feet of said parcel. 6. All utilities shall be installed underground at the time said parcel is developed. 7. Drainage from adjacent lots shall be accommodated through this development. 8. Compliance with all applicable City Ordinances. 9. A copy of the recorded parcel map shall be filed with the Department of Development Services. AYES: Evans, Godfrey, Krejci, Poe, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: None There was no further business to be presented to the Board for their review. UPON MOTION BY GODFREY AND SECOND BY POE, THE REGULAR MEETING WAS ADJOURNED TO A STUDY SESSION ON MONDAY, JANUARY 26, 1987, AT 10:00 A.M., BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Evans, Godfrey, Krejci, Poe, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: None Glen K. Godfrey, Secretary Board of Zoning Adjustments jgh (7240d) -10- 1/21/87 - BZA