HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-03-17APPROVED APRIL 21, 1937
MINUTES
HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION
March 17, 1987 - 7:00 PM
Council Chambers - Civic Center
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, California
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
P P P P P
ROLL CALL: Silva, Schumacher, Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig,
P P
Summerell, Livengood
A. CONSENT CALENDAR:
A-1 Minutes - February 18, 1987 Planning Commission meeting
A-2 Minutes - March 3, 1987 Planning Commission meeting
A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECOND BY SCHUMACHER, TO APPROVE
MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 18, 1987, WITH CORRECTIONS, AND MINUTES OF MARCH
3, 1987, WITH CORRECTIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell,
Livengood
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION PASSED
A-3 GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE 87-3 - 1987-88 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
PROGRAM
A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECOND BY HIGGINS, TO FIND GENERAL
PLAN CONFORMANCE NO. 87-3 IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN AND
APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 1376, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell,
Livengood
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION PASSED
B. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMISSION ITEMS
A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO MOVE ITEM D-3
(DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR PROPOSED BEACH BOULEVARD
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA) FORWARD FROM THE AGENDA TO BE HEARD
UNDER ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES:
Silva, Schumacher,
Livengood
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
None
ABSTAIN:
None
MOTION PASSED
Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell,
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR PROPOSED BEACH BOULEVARD
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
Steve Kohler and Pat Mann of Cotton/Beland Associates reviewed the
Environmental Impact Report with the Commission and reported the
progression of the schedule and steps to be taken for certification
of the document. It was explained that the document has been
distributed to the effecting taxing agencies, PAC, the public, State
Clearninghouse, and the Commission for review and comments only and
that the comment -receiving time would be open until April 4, 1987.
It was further explained that a joint public hearing would be held
July 6, 1987, with the second reading of the ordinance on July 20,
1987, and a 30-day period after which the ordinance would be in
effect.
The draft EIR was reviewed by the Planning Commission and comments
were made.
The main concern of the Commission was the request for certification
and approval of a document that they felt was incomplete. They
requested that further analysis and study be made on mitigation
measures for the following:
1. Evaluation and input from the County on their mitigation
measures regarding a 100-year flood, and the runoff problems
into our main flood control channels. This is a determining
factor for the City.
2. Analysis of traffic - the EIR is based on normal traffic
only. Requested an analysis be made on summer beach traffic
and the traffic resulting from the buildout of Downtown
Redevelopment.
3. County suggested a fly -over of the Beach/Warner corner for the
Superstreet project. The Council eliminated this suggestion.
This corner in the project area needs further discussion.
4. Projected volume/capacity with and without a project. Will
the suggested CalTrans improvements be made without a project?
PC Minutes - 3/17/87 -2- (7776d)
1
1
A MOTION WAS MADE BY LEIPZIG, SECOND BY PIERCE, TO HAVE THE PLANNING
COMMISSION COMMENTS TRANSMITTED TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FOR
RESPONSE, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell,
Livengood
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION PASSED
Dean Albright, Environmental Board, reiterated comments and
responses from the Environmental Board related to the Draft
Environmental Impact Report.
PC Minutes - 3/17/87 -3- (7776d)
C. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
C-1 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 86-57 (CONTINUED FROM MARCH 3. 1987
PLANNING COMMISSON MEETING)
APPLICANT: PADDOCK & FLAIR ARCHITECTS
Conditional Use Permit No. 86-57 was continued by the Planning
Commission from the March 3, 1987 meeting as requested by the
applicant in order to extend negotiations between the applicant and
adjacent northerly property owner.
Conditional Use Permit No. 86-57 in conjunction with Negative
Declaration 86-61 is a request to construct a three story, 53 unit
motel which includes a manager's unit on the west side of Beach
Boulevard north of Garfield Avenue.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS:
Pursuant to the environmental regulations in effect at this time,
the Department of Development Services posted draft Negative
Declaration 86-61 -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. 86-57, it is
necessary for.the Planning Commission to review and act on Negative
Declaration 86-61.
REDEVELOPMENT STATUS:
The subject property is within the proposed Beach Boulevard
Redevelopment Project Area.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of Conditional Use Permit No. 86-57 based on
findings.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED
Sunil Patel, applicant, spoke in support of the project. He stated
that he has been trying to build a motel on this property since 1984.
Ken Paddock, architect, summarized the benefits of the project and
urged the Commission to grant approval.
Ron Pattinson, consultant representing the Patels, spoke in support
of the project. He expressed concern with staff's recommendation to
deny, after three years of recommending approval, due to'
non -compatibility. He stated that he feels the reciprocal agreement
from the Shens should be enforced and urged the Commission to grant
approval.
1
PC Minutes - 3/17/87 -4- (7776d)
1
Jerry Bame, attorney representing the Shens, spoke in opposition to
the project. He stated that another motel would not be compatible
with the area.
Dr. James Shen, 18751 Beach Boulevard, urged the Commission to deny
the project. He expressed his opposition to another motel in the
area.
There were no other persons to speak for or against the project and
the public hearing was closed.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY SCHUMACHER, SECOND BY SUMMERELL, TO DENY
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 86-57 WITH REVISED FINDINGS, BY THE
FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Schumacher, Higgins,
NOES: Silva, Pierce
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION PASSED
FINDINGS FOR DENIAL:
Leipzig, Summerell, Livengood
1. The proposed 53-unit, three-story motel will not be a
compatible use with the adjacent car dealerships and dental
office and will be detrimental to the value of the property.
Z. Approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 86-57 will leave a
residual 37'6" wide lot substandard (northerly adjacent parcel)
and possibly undevelopable in the future which would be
detrimental to the value of the property.
3. The orientation of the proposed motel driveway is inadequate
because it creates a driveway that is too close to the existing
northerly driveway on Beach Boulevard.
4. Approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 86-57 without an
integrated driveway with the adjacent northerly lot off Beach
Boulevard leaves a substandard, one-way driveway on the
adjoining northerly lot which is severely inadequate, awkward
and creates an egress and ingress problem on Beach Boulevard.
5. Approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 86-57 without an
integrated driveway with the adjoining northerly lot as
intended when Administrative review 71-15 was approved for
development of that lot does not comply with City policies and
standards, and the principal objectives of the draft
redevelopment plan for the proposed Beach Boulevard
Redevelopment Project Area and the "Super Street" designation
and plan on Beach Boulevard.
PC Minutes - 3/17/87
-5-
(7776d)
C-2 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0, 87-10 WITH SPECIAL PERMITS/
TENTATIVE TRACT 13017/COA5TAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO, 87-6/
NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO, 87-3
APPLICANT: BEACHFRONT CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION
Conditional Use Permit No. 87-10, Tentative Tract 13017, Coastal
Development Permit No. 87-6 and Negative Declaration No. 87-3 is a
request to permit a 64-unit condominium project with special permits
including deviations to open space and width of travel lanes at
project entry on the east side of Lake Street between Indianapolis
and Acacia.
As of March 12, 1987, no communication in opposition to this
proposal has been received by the Department of Development
Services. One adjacent property owner expressed his support for the
project.
The applicant is revising his plan to meet the concerns of both the
Planning Department and Building Division. The applicant has also
waived the mandatory processing date.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Continue Conditional Use Permit No. 87-10, Tentative Tract 13017,
Coastal Development Permit No. 87-6 and Negative Declaration No.
87-3 to the April 7, 1987 Planning Commission meeting.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO CONTINUE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 87-10, TENTATIVE TRACT 13017, COASTAL
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 87-6 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 87-3 TO THE
APRIL 7, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell, Livengood
NOES: None
ABSENT: Silva, Schumacher (Out of Room)
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION PASSED
C-3 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 87-8 WITH SPECIAL PERMITS/
TENTATIVE TRACT 13014/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 87-3
APPLICANT: SOUTHRIDGE HOMES
Conditional Use Permit No. 87-8 with Special Permits in conjunction
with Tentative Tract 13014 and Coastal Development Permit No. 87-3
is a request to develop a three-story, 42-unit condominium project
with subterranean parking on a primarily vacant .88 acre site on
Pacific Coast Highway in the Downtown Specific Plan Area. There are
five special permit items related to parking, private open space and
building offsets.
PC Minutes - 3/17/87 -6- (7776d)
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.
COASTAL STATUS:
The proposed residential project is subject to approval of a coastal
development permit because it is located within coastal zone
boundaries under appeal jurisdiction to the California Coastal
Commission.
SPECIFIC PLAN:
The subject property is located within the Downtown Specific Plan,
District 2 (Residential) and subject to the development standards of
that plan.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 87-8 with
Special Permits in conjunction with Tentative Tract 13014 and
Coastal Development Permit No. 87-3 based on findings and conditions
of approval.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED
Dick Kelter, applicant, spoke in support of the project.
There were no other persons present to speak for or against the
project and the public hearing was closed.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECOND BY SILVA, TO APPROVE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 87-9 WITH SPECIAL PERMITS, TENTATIVE
TRACT 13014, AND COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 87-3, WITH REVISED
FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES:
Silva, Schumacher,
Livengood
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
None
ABSTAIN:
None
MOTION PASSED
Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell,
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 87-8:
1. The proposed 42 unit condominium project will not have a
detrimental effect upon the general health, welfare, safety
and convenience of persons residing or working in the
vicinity; or will not be detrimental to the value of the
property and improvements in the vicinity.
PC Minutes - 3/17/87 -7- (7776d)
2. The proposed 42 unit condominium project is compatible with
existing or proposed uses in the vicinity.
3. The location, site layout, and design of the proposed use is
properly related to the streets, drives and other structures
and uses in the vicinity in a harmonious manner.
4. The proposed condominium project is in conformance with the
adopted Design Guidelines for the Downtown Specific Plan.
5. Architectural features and general appearance of the proposed
42 unit condominium project shall enhance the orderly and
harmonious development of the Downtown Specific Plan area.
6. The proposed 42 unit condominium project is consistent with
the goals and policies of the Huntington Beach General Plan.
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - SPECIAL PERMITS:
1. The following special permits for deviations to the
requirements of the Downtown Specific Plan promote a better
living environment and provide maximum use of the land in
terms of site layout and design:
a. The inclusion of 18 compact parking spaces (17.5%) in lieu
of no compact size parking spaces.
b. An 8 foot offset in lieu of 10 feet between the second and
third floors of the exterior building facades, and no
offset in lieu of 10 feet between the second and third
floor of the interior buildings. The use of building
facade popouts, balcony projections and varied roof lines
create a more aesthetically pleasing visual effect.
c. A total of 128 square feet of private open space in the
form of patio area, balcony and outdoor enclosed storage
in lieu of a minimum of 250 square feet of patio area for
the townhome style developments (Unit Type A).
d. A 25 foot wide ramp to subterranean parking in lieu of 28
feet.
e. A maximum of 52.8% site coverage in lieu of 50%.
2. The approval of the special permits will not be detrimental to
the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of the
neighborhood in general, nor detrimental or injurious to the
value of property or improvements of the neighborhood.
3. The special permit requests are consistent with the objectives
of the Downtown Specific Plan in achieving a development
adapted to the parcel and compatible with the surrounding
environment.
PC Minutes - 3/17/87 -8- (7776d)
I
1
4. The special permits are consistent with the policies of the
Coastal Element of the City's General Plan and the California
Coastal Act.
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - TENTATIVE TRACT 13014:
1. The proposed one lot subdivision for condominium purposes of
this 39,328 net square foot parcel of land zoned Downtown
Specific Plan, District 2, Residential, is proposed to be
constructed having 46.5 units per net acre.
2. The property was previously studied for this intensity of land
use at the time the land use designation and Downtown Specific
Plan, District 2, zoning designation were placed on the
subject property.
3. The General Plan is set up for the provisions for this type of
land use as well as setting forth provisions for the
implementation for this type of houseing.
4. The site is relatively flat and physically suitable for the
proposed density and type of development.
5. The tentative tract is consistent with the goals and policies
of the Huntington Beach General Plan.
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 87-3:
1. The proposed 42 unit condominium project conforms with the plans,
policies, requirements and standards of the Huntington Beach
Coastal Element.
2. Coastal Development Permit No. 87-3 is consistent with the CZ
suffix and the Downtown Specific Plan as well as other provisions
of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code applicable to the property.
3. At the time of occupancy, the proposed 42 unit condominium
project can be provided with infrastructure in a manner that is
consistent with the Huntington Beach Coastal Element and Land Use
Plan of the General Plan.
4. The proposed 42 unit condominium project conforms with the public
access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the
California Coastal Act.
5. The Mello Bill Affordable Housing requirements, Government Code
Section 65590(d), is satisfied in the following manner:
a. The City has provided density bonuses within three miles of
the coastal zone which have provided affordable housing.
PC Minutes - 3/17/87
(7776d)
b. Due to the location and economics involved it would not be
feasible to develop affordable housing on this site. The
value of the land coupled with the need to provide
subterranean parking on site would prohibit the ability to
provide for affordable housing.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 87-8:
1. The site plan and floor plans, received and dated March 12, 1987,
shall be the conceptually approved layout.
2. ''The elevations dated March 12, 1987, shall conform with the
following:
a. Same accent color shall be used for the chimney cap,
railings, and awnings.
b. Colors shall be submitted to the Design Review Board along
with the materials pallette for final approval.
c. Architectural treatment and/or landscaping to soften the
central portion of the rear building elevation to be reviewed
and approved by the Department of Development Services.
3. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall
submit a landscape and irrigation plan to the Department of
Development Services and Public Works for review and approval.
a. Plant material as specified in the Downtown Landscape
Guidelines manual shall be used.
b. Palm trees shall be in settings of 3 to 5 with various trunk
heights (i.e. 4 feet, 6 feet, 9 feet, 12 feet, and 15 feet).
4. Fire hydrants are to be installed pursuant to Fire Department and
Public Works standards. The fire hydrants must be installed
prior to combustible construction. Fire flow provided must be a
minimum 4,500 gpm.
5. All existing or formal oil well sites must be abandoned pursuant
to Division of Oil and Gas and Fire Department standards.
6. The complex is to be protected by an automatic sprinkler system
installed to comply with Fire Department standards.
7. Building address numbers are to be installed pursuant to Fire
Department standards.
8. Any security gates which are locked must be provided with a "knox
key box" for emergency access key.
9. Alarm systems must be installed throughout the complex to provide
the following: water flow, valve tamper, trouble, audible alarm,
annunciation, and 24-hour supervision.
PC Minutes - 3/17/87 -10- (7776d)
10. A combination wet standpipe system must be installed in the
stairways from the parking garage to each floor landing.
11. During construction, the construction site must comply with
Article 87 of the Fire Code. Additionally, when the complex has
reached 50% built stage, the following procedures MUST be
provided for on -site fire suppression and to reduce the risk of
fire ignition.
a. A telephone must be provided on -site which can be readily
accessible for reporting an emergency (Section 87.103 UFC).
b. A minimum of two (2) water hoses, minimum one (1) inch by one
hundred (100) feet are to be located on -site at opposite ends
of the complex. Each are to be available for suppression of
incipient stage fires (Section 10.301 UFC).
c. A twenty-four (24) hour fire watch, approved by the Fire
Department, MUST be provided on -site to watch for any
hazardous condition which may cause a fire to occur; to
immediately report to the Fire Department any fire which
occurs; and, to attempt to suppress any incipient stage fire
(Section 10.301 UFC).
d. On buildings more than three (3) stories in height, the
automatic sprinkler system is to be temporarily installed and
operational to protect all floors lower than the floor
currently under construction (Section 10.301 UFC).
12. Natural gas shall be stubbed in at the locations of cooking
facilities, water heaters and central heating units.
13. Low volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets.
14. 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.
15. All dwellings on the subject property shall be constructed in
compliance with State Acoustical standards set forth for units
that are within the 60 CNEL contour of the property.
16. The method of trash pick up shall be subject to the approval of
Public Works Department.
17. A minimum 20 foot portion of the street curb adjacent to the
21st. Street entryway shall be painted green. The exact location
shall be approved by the Public Works department.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - TENTATIVE TRACT 13014:
1. Tentative Tract 13014 dated February 4, 1987, shall be the
approved layout with the following modifications:
PC Minutes - 3/17/87 -11- (7776d)
a. Right-of-way radii of 27 feet and 24 feet at the
intersections of 21st. Street and Pacific Coast Highway and
20th. Street and Pacific Coast Highway, respectively.
b. The curb and gutter on 21st. Street to be relocated to 29-1/2
feet from centerline of street with an 8 foot wide sidewalk.
c. An 11 foot wide sidewalk on Pacific Coast Highway to be
constructed.
d. The existing curb and gutter on 20th. Street to be removed
and reconstructed at 25 feet from centerline of street.
e. 20th. and 21st. Streets to be reconstructed to centerline.
2. A storm drain pipe shall be extended from Pacific Coast Highway
to the alley in 20th. Street.
3. Dedicate vehicular access rights along Pacific Coast Highway to
the City.
4. Install street lights as required by Public Works department.
5. Install approved backflow prevention devices on all water
services supplying units more than two stories above street grade.
6. Install separate water services for landscaping and swimming
pool/recreation room uses.
7. Other than on 20th. Street, all landscaping shall be installed on
private property. The landscaping on 20th. Street shall be
maintained by the developer/homeowner's association.
8. A 5 foot wide right of way dedication shall be made along the
alleyside of the property for alley purposes and shall be
improved to Public Works standards.
9. Each building unit shall have separate water meters.
10. A detailed soils report shall be prepared by a registered soils
engineer and submitted to the Public Works Department for review
and approval.
11. A hydrology and drainage system shall be reviewed and approved by
the Public Works Department.
12. CC&Rs shall be submitted for review and approval by the City
Attorney and Development Services Department in accordance with
Article 915 prior to final recordation of Tract Map 13014.
PC Minutes - 3/17/87 -12- (7776d)
1
C-4 CODE AMENDMENT NO. 87-2
APPLICANT: REGINA JONES
Code Amendment No. 87-2 is a request by the applicant to modify
standards in the RA District. The applicant wants to utilize a .33
acre site on Garfield Avenue, east of Goldenwest Street, as a storage
yard for her roofing business. Items that would be stored include
three trucks, two roof kettles (used for hot tar applications), one
metal storage bin leased from Orange County Disposal, some outside
materials such as concrete tile left over from jobs, and employee's
cars or trucks.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS:
The proposed project is categorically exempt from the provisions of
the California Environmental Quality Act.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Code Amendment
No. 87-2 (Alternative 1) to allow storage yards subject to use permit
approval by the Board of Zoning Adjustments in the RA District for an
initial three year period with a maximum of two one-year extensions of
time.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED
The applicant was present but did not wish to speak.
There were no other persons present to speak for or against the
request and the public hearing was closed.
The Planning Commission discussed several concerns with the code
amendment (prohibiting temporary storage yards on any property with a
Civic District suffix, special setback considerations for sites
adjacent to major arterials, and locational criteria that would
specify a minimum distance to any residential development and require
the cessation of the use when development occurs within that buffer
zone) and requested that staff review the alternatives.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY SCHUMACHER, SECOND BY LIVENGOOD, TO CONTINUE CODE
AMENDMENT NO. 87-2 TO THE APRIL 7, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING,
BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES:
Silva, Schumacher,
Livengood
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
None
ABSTAIN:
None
MOTION PASSED
Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell,
PC Minutes - 3/17/87
S*13
(7776d)
D. ITEMS NOT FOR PUBLIC HEARING
D-1 LIMITED SIGN PERMIT N0. 87-1 (CONTINUED FROM MARCH 3, 1987
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING)
APPLICANT: HEATH AND CO.
At the request of the applicant, the Planning Commission continued
Limited Sign Permit No. 87-1 to the March 17, 1987 meeting.
Limited Sign Permit No. 87-1 is a request to permit a face change and
grant a two-year extension of use for an approximately 25 foot high,
96 square foot internally illuminated freestanding sign for Sanwa Bank
located at 6881 Warner Avenue.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Deny Limited Sign Permit No. 87-1 based on the findings.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECOND BY PIERCE, TO APPROVE LIMITED
SIGN PERMIT NO. 87-1 WITH A TWO-YEAR LIMITATION WITH FINDINGS AND
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Livengood, Silva, Pierce
NOES: Schumacher, Higgins, Leipzig, Summerell
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION FAILS.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY SCHUMACHER, SECOND BY HIGGINS, TO DENY LIMITED
SIGN PERMIT NO. 87-1, WITH FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Schumacher, Higgins, Leipzig, Summerell
NOES: Silva, Pierce, Livengood
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION PASSED
FINDINGS FOR DENIAL:
1. Due to a lack of unique circumstances, the 25 foot high, 96
square foot freestanding sign's immediate removal will not
result in a substantial economic hardship for the applicant.
2. The 25 foot high, 96 square foot freestanding sign will
adversely affect other lawfully erected signs in the area.
3. The 25 foot high, 96 square foot freestanding sign will be a
hazardous distraction.
I
PC Minutes - 3/17/87 =14- (7776d)
D-2 RECONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0, 87-2/ CONDITIONAL
EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) N0. 87-14) TO ADD ADDITIONAL CONDITION AT
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST
APPLICANT: MONTESSORI SCHOOL OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
On March 3, 1987, Conditional Use Permit No. 87-2 was approved for 120
children. The applicant, Montessori School of Huntington Beach, would
like to have the option to expand up to 191 children, as they
originally requested, without having to go through the conditional use
permit process to consider expanding the number of children to 191.
They are requesting that the Planning Commission reconsider
Conditional Use Permit No. 87-2 and add a condition to allow a
Planning Commission review in six months.
The Commissioners felt that since there is already a parking problem
present on the site that the request should be evaluated when
enrollment reaches 120.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECOND BY HIGGINS, TO DENY THE REQUEST
TO ADD AN ADDITIONAL CONDITION TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.
87-2/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 87-14, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Schumacher, Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell, Livengood
NOES: Silva
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION PASSED
D-3 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR PROPOSED BEACH BOULEVARD
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
This item was heard under B. Items (Oral Communications).
A MOTION WAS MADE BY LEIPZIG, SECOND BY PIERCE, TO APPROVE TRANSMITTAL
OF COMMENTS MADE BY PLANNING COMMISSION TO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell,
Livengood
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION PASSED
PC Minutes - 3/17/87 -15- (7776d)
D-4 CONSIDERATION OF MODIFYING PLANNING COMMISSION PROCEDURES
REGARDING PUBLIC COMMENTS AND PUBLIC HEARINGS
A MOTION WAS MADE BY PIERCE, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO APPROVE A NEW ,
4-MINUTE TIME LIMIT DURING PUBLIC HEARINGS WITH NO BORROWING OF TIME
FROM ANOTHER PUBLIC SPEAKER, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell,
Livengood
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION PASSED
D-5 TAKE FROM THE TABLE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 86-42 WITH
SPECIAL PERMITS, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 12822 AND NEGATIVE
DECLARATION 86-48
A MOTION WAS MADE BY LEIPZIG, SECOND BY PIERCE, TO TAKE FROM THE TABLE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 86-42 WITH SPECIAL PERMITS, TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 12822 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION 86-48, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell.,
Livengood
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION PASSED
E. DISCUSSION ITEMS
E-1 PRECISE PLAN OF STREET ALIGNMENT 85-1/NEGATIVE DECLARATION 85-49
An update was presented on the Precise Plan of Street Alignment
85-1 to the Commission.
F. PENDING ITEMS
The following items were added to the Pending Items List:
PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR PRE-SCHOOLS, using Fountain Valley as a
guideline, be compiled and presented at the next meeting.
VICINITY OF SURF THEATER AND SHED RESTAURANT (DOWNTOWN) - Junk
cars on empty lots.
1985 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE - Find out when the City Council will
be approving and using the 1985 Uniform Building Code.
PC Minutes - 3/17/87 -16- (7776d)
G. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS
None
H. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ITEMS
Follow-up from March 3, 1987 Planning Commission meeting
I. ADJOURNMENT
A MOTION WAS MADE BY HIGGINS, SECOND BY PIERCE, AT 11:25 PM, TO
ADJOURN THE MEETING TO THE SPECIAL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 31, 1987, AT 7:00 PM, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig,
Summerell, Livengood
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION PASSED
APPROVED:
1
s W. Palin, Secretary Kefit)M. Pierce, Chairman
PC Minutes - 3/17/87 -17- (7776d)