HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-03-18MINUTES
HUNTINGTON BEACH BOAR OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS
Room B-8 - Civic Center
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, California
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 18 1987 - 1.30 P.M.
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Evans, Krejci, Poe, Smith, Strange
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Phillips
MINUTES: MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 11, 1987, WERE
DEFERRED TO THE MEETING OF MARCH 25, 1987, FOR FURTHER
REVIEW BY THE BOARD MEMBERS
REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS:
CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 87-2 (Cont. from 3/4/87)
USE PERMIT NO. 86-71 (Cont. from 3/4/87)
Applicant: Nassim-A-Jebaii
CE REQUEST: 1) To reduce required landscape planter width from
required ten feet (101) to zero feet (0'), 2) to reduce required
landscape area from eight percent (8%) to 3.7 percent, 3) to permit
reduction in required aisle width from twenty-seven feet (27') to
twenty-two feet (221), and 4) to reduce required front and exterior
side yard setbacks from fifty feet (501) to forty-one and one-half
feet (41.5').
UP REQUEST: To permit operation of an automotive repair facility.
Subject property is located at 4995 Warner Avenue (Northwest corner
of Warner Avenue and Bolsa Chica Street).
This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 1,
California Environmental Quality Act, 1986.
The Staff member, Laura Phillips, reported the project had been
continued from the meeting of March 4, 1987, to give the applicant
additional time to work with Staff in an effort to resolve the
various problems. The applicant has turned in preliminary plans and
Staff has prepared restrictive conditions for the project. The
operation shall be discontinued within one (1) year of approval date
and shall be restricted to minor automotive repairs only. Also, any
detailing work shall be performed inside, fencing shall be
installed, and the applicant shall report back to the Board within
six (6) months on progress of underground clean-up of the site.
This approval, if granted, will be for interim use of the location
Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 18, 1987
Page 2
and any change of use or ownership would invalidate this approval.
Any future developments would necessarily have to be per Code
regulations. Staff further added that Wilbur Lorbeer had submitted
a letter to the Board indicating proposed alterations to the site.
Daryl Smith expressed concern about the lack of landscaping for the
project and Ms. Phillips indicated there was very little room for
landscaping because of the aisles. Dennis Krejci asked Staff who
would be required to submit the progress report - the tenant, lessee
or property owner. Staff replied possibly all three. Mr. Krejci
then inquired what action the Board could take in the event the
reports were not forthcoming and Staff replied the permit could be
revoked.
There was a discussion about street improvements and Les Evans said
that repair of the broken sidewalks would be the only Public Works
requirements at the present time.
Chairman Dennis Krejci stated the Public Hearing had been left open
from the previous meeting. The applicant's representative, Wilbur
Lorbeer, was present and complained that he had just been -given a
copy of Staff's recommended conditions and had not properly reviewed
them. Mr. Lorbeer further indicated displeasure with several of the
items. The Board members clarified several of his concerns and
Daryl Smith suggested continuing the item until later in the meeting
to give Mr. Lorbeer, the lessee of the property, time to thoroughly
peruse the conditions. Mr. Smith added it was not fair to the other
applicants present to require them to wait in the audience until
Mr. Lorbeer went over each item with the Board. Mr. Lorbeer said he
could not have an answer to all the conditions, such as an item
regarding signs, by the end of the meeting. The applicant,
Nassim-A-Jebaii, stated there was no sign on the premises other than
one written on the building. Staff indicated a sign pole had been
shown on the site plan; but it was determined to be a pole where a
sign had once existed but now contained lights. After further
discussion, Mr. Lorbeer finally requested a continuance to later in
the meeting There was no one else present wishing to speak for or
against the project but the Public Hearing was left open for the
continuance and further discussion of the request.
UPON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY POE, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION
NO. 87-2 AND USE PERMIT NO. 86-71 WERE CONTINUED TO THE END OF THE
REGULAR MEETING, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Krejci, Poe, Smith, Strange
NOES: Evans
ABSENT: None
1
-2- 3/18/87 - BZA
Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 18, 1987
Page 3
CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 86-67
USE PERMIT NO. 86-69
Applicant' Rosemary and Charles Carter
OE REQUEST: To permit 1) a twelve foot (121) wide driveway in lieu
of required forty foot (401) wide driveway and 2) a balcony to serve
as private open space in lieu of a patio for one (1) unit.
UP REOUEST: To add two (2) units to an existing duplex with
nonconforming setbacks for a front entry garage.
Subject property is located at 17211-213 Elm Street (West side of
Elm Street approximately two hundred forty feet (240') South of
Cypress Avenue).
This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 5,
California Environmental Quality Act, 1986.
Staff indicated the applicant was requesting permission to add two
(2) new units to an existing duplex and also an addition of a family
room, laundry room and garages to the present structure. The
existing front entry garage has a fifteen foot (15') nonconforming
setback and the current Code requires twenty-two feet (22'). A
portion of the building would be more than one hundred fifty feet
(150') from the street which would require a forty foot (40')
driveway, and the applicant is asking for a twelve foot (12')
driveway. Staff further added Redevelopment had reviewed the plan
and was not in favor of the project as presented. Redevelopment has
recommended relocating the driveway to the South end of the lot with
side entry garages, and feels the twelve foot (12') driveway would
not be wide enough to serve the project. Staff recommended denial
of the requests since there was no land -related hardship for
granting all the variances.
Dennis Krejci asked Staff about Redevelopment's recommendation for
moving the driveway to the South when it was already there. Staff
explained there was a thirty-three foot (33') curb cut along the
front of the property. The driveway entrance would be limited to
the South end of the property and the other portion restored to
curbing.
The Public Hearing was opened and Rosemary and Charles Carter were
both present. Mr. Carter said he wanted to keep the front entry
garage because of the cost, and he disapproved of Redevelopment's
plan because cars backing out of the garages would have a "blind"
area. Mr. Carter presented photographs to the Board and explained
his position with regard to the overall area, landscaping, etc.
Mr. Carter added they wanted to make the area more attractive by
constructing the new units and had worked diligently to stay within
the limitations of the narrow, forty-eight foot (48') lot.
-3- 3/18/87 - BZA
Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 18, 1987
Page 4
Dennis Krejci asked about the garages and guest parking in the rear
and the applicant replied there was no on -site guest parking at
present. Mr. Carter added he had received clearance -.from the Fire
Department to eliminate the turnaround if he would install a
commercial -type fire sprinklering system, and added he would install
such a system. Tom Poe asked the applicant who he had talked with
in the Fire Department but Mr. Carter did not recall with whom he
had spoken. Mr. Poe added that was the type of system they usually
required but said he did not see it indicated on the plans.
There was no one else present wishing to speak for or against the
project so the Public Hearing was closed.
Daryl Smith asked Staff what section of the Code required the forty
foot (40') driveway and Staff replied it was Article 960 which
required the forty -foot (40') turnaround. Tom Poe reminded Staff
the turnaround requirement would be for sixty-two feet (62'). Staff
said the same section required a twenty foot (20') clear width for
from one hundred foot (100') length and over. Daryl Smith inquired
as to where the measuring started and Staff replied from the edge of
the curb. Mr. Carter said the distance should not be measured from
the edge of the curb but rather from the front portion of the
buildings. Les Evans reminded Mr. Carter that would still be in
excess of the one hundred foot (100') limit. Mr. Carter said the
sprinkler system installation should eliminate that concern.
Dennis Krejci stated he could accept the open space and setback
requests but his main objection to the project would be the twelve
foot (12') driveway width. Two.cars meeting would not even be able
to pass each other and one would have to back out. Daryl Smith
added that should not be a problem because of the guest parking
spaces where one car could wait. Mr. Krejci felt those spaces might
be occupied. Daryl Smith inquired about the neighbor's driveway -
whether a reciprocal arrangement might be worked out; however,
Mr. Carter•stated•the driveway on the adjacent property was on the
opposite side of the lot. Mr. Smith then asked about the present
parking situation and Mr. Carter stated it was all in the front or
on the street. Daryl Smith suggested several other "what if"
situations to Staff and Les Evans replied Staff would have to refer
to the Code and recommend denying them.
Les Evans added he would like to see the public improvements
installed in that particular area; however, he felt the applicant,
in attempting to add two (2) more units to the existing structure,
would be overbuilding the lot. Mr. Evans added he would move for
denial and Michael Strange said he would second -the motion. ,
1
-4- 3/18/87 - BZA
Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 18, 1987
Page 5
Mrs. Carter asked if she might speak. Chairman Krejci said he would
allow her the opportunity even though the Public Hearing had been
closed. Mrs. Carter said the property was zoned R-4 and they
purchased it with intentions of adding two (2) more units. She
added that keeping it as a two (2) unit project would not be
economically feasible for them to do.
Daryl Smith asked Staff if the Code had been changed whereby a
twelve foot (12') drive could have been approved at one time for an
R-4 property. Staff answered that the zoning designated the maximum
density for a lot but that setbacks, landscaping and other
requirements would still have to be taken into consideration before
approval. Daryl Smith continued the discussion with Staff regarding
measuring the distance of the drive, the width of the drive,
placement of the garages, etc. Mr. Krejci reminded the Board of a
recent project which had been denied because of a similar problem
and that particular drive length had been only forty feet (40').
Mr. Smith rebutted Mr. Krejci's statement about the length of the
driveway.
Les Evans called for a vote on his motion which had been seconded by
Mr. Strange. Mr. Carter interjected with the statement that if you
added up the sum of the existing building and eliminated the guest
parking and planter area, the length would be ninety-four feet
(94'). Mr. Krejci asked Staff if she was comfortable with her
method of computing the length per Code requirements and Staff
replied in the affirmative.
UPON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY STRANGE, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION
NO. 86-67 AND USE PERMIT NO. 86-69 WERE DENIED WITH THE FOLLOWING
FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
FINDINGS FOR DENIAL - CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO 86-67:
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
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. Granting of Conditional Exception No. 86-67 would constitute a
special privilege inconsistent with limitations upon properties
in the vicinity.
3. Exceptional circumstances do not apply that deprive the subject
property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the same
zone classifications.
-5- 3/18/87 - BZA
Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 18, 1987
Page 6
4. On -site parking and circulation are inadequate and have the
potential of creating a congestion and circulation hazard, due
to an one hundred forty foot (1401) long driveway serving seven
(7) parking spaces (for three units) being "ONE WAY"
only.
FINDINGS FOR DENIAL - USE PERMIT NO 86 69:
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. The establishment, maintenance and operation of the use will be
detrimental to the value of the property and improvements in
the neighborhood.
3. On -site parking and circulation are inadequate and have the
potential of creating a congestion and circulation hazard, due
to an one hundred forty foot (1401) driveway serving seven (7)
parking spaces (three units) being "ONE WAY" only.
4. Common open space is not arranged to provide maximum enjoyment
to all residents.
AYES: Evans, Krejci, Poe, Strange
NOES: Smith
ABSENT: None
CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 87-18
Applicant: Gene Gallonio
A request to permit a six foot (61) high wall over three foot (31)
high retaining wall to encroach twelve feet (121) to fifteen feet
(15') into a rear yard with front yard setback requirements.
Subject property is located on Stellrecht Circle (West of Lynn
Street and North of Los Patos Avenue).
This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 5,
California Environmental Quality Act, 1986.
Staff said the lot in question fronted on two streets - one on Lynn
Street and the other on Stellrecht Circle. In this particular case,
Stellrecht Circle will be considered the front yard and Lynn Street
will be the rear. There is a single family residence to the South
and a condominium project to the North; and what will be the rear of
this property will coincide with front yards of other lots on the
street. The applicant wants to encroach from twelve feet (121) to
fifteen feet (15') to enclose his rear yard by building an
additional six foot (61) high wall over a three foot (31) high
retaining wall. Staff is recommending a "stepped back" effect with
-6- 3/18/87 - BZA
Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 18, 1987
Page 7
the three foot (3') retaining wall on the property line and the six
foot (6') high wall stepped back three feet (3') with a planter area
between the two walls.
Daryl Smith asked if there had been any response from neighbors and
Staff stated letters had been received stating they had no objec-
tions to the nine foot (9') high wall along the tennis court area.
There was a discussion about the tennis court and its location with
respect to the residence. Staff reminded the Board there would need
to be a ten foot (10') area between the house and the wall
surrounding the tennis court.
The Public Hearing was opened and the applicant, Gene Gallonio, was
present, along with Bob Stellrecht and John Cowles. The applicant
explained the tennis court would be dropped three feet from the
natural grade so the wall would not require any chain link fencing
around it. He added this concept had been presented to his
neighbors and they had consequently agreed to the nine foot (9')
high wall along that portion of Lynn Street. Mr. Gallonio presented
photographs to the Board of other walls in his immediate area.
Daryl Smith inquired whether the photographs showed nine foot (9')
high walls and Mr. Gallonio indicated they did. Mr. Stellrecht
added one had a limited side yard with a six foot (6') high wall.
Daryl Smith asked Mr. Gallonio if he was amenable to the wall
arrangement as presented by Staff and Mr. Gallonio replied he was,
as long as he was allowed to build the nine foot (9') high area
surrounding the tennis court.
There was no one else present wishing to speak for or against the
project so the Public Hearing was closed.
Tom Poe informed Mr. Stellrecht the street name had not been
approved and the situation would need to be corrected.
Mr. Stellrecht said he had been sent addresses so -he assumed
everything had been cleared.
UPON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY EVANS, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION
NO. 87-18 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS,
BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL:
1. Because of special circumstances applicable to the subject
property, including double frontage, the strict application of
the Zoning Ordinance is found to deprive the subject property
of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and
under identical zone classifications.
-7- 3/18/87 - BZA
Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 18, 1987
Page 8
2. The granting of a Conditional Exception is necessary in order
to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property
rights.
3. The granting of Conditional Exception No. 87-18 will not be
materially detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to
property in the same zone classifications.
4. The granting of the Conditional Exception will- not adversely
affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated
February 25, 1987, shall be the approved layout, with the
following modification:
a. The three foot (3') retaining wall South of the tennis
court shall be located at the property line; the six foot
(6') wall shall be set back three feet (31) from the
property line.
2. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall file
a parcel map or parcel map waiver request to consolidate Lots 9
and 10 of Tract 12760. The parcel map or plat'map and notice
shall be recorded with the Orange County Recorder and a copy of
the recorded map or plat filed with the Department of
Development Services prior to final inspection or occupancy.
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.
AYES: Evans, Krejci, Poe, Smith
NOES: Strange
ABSENT: None
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 87-6
Applicant: J. M. Peters Company
A request to permit a temporary subdivision sales office and four
(4) model homes. Subject property is located on the Southeast
corner of Magnolia Street and Atlanta Avenue.
-8- 3/18/87 - BZA
Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 18, 1987
Page 9
This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 4,
California Environmental Quality Act, 1986.
Staff stated this applicant wished to establish a temporary
subdivision sales office on one lot and also build four (4) model
homes for a housing tract. The office will be located on a corner
lot along with the parking spaces and shall be removed within thirty
(30) days after sales are completed. Four (4) of the lots will be
gated off and plans will need to be submitted for signage. Setbacks
must comply with past entitlements. Staff recommended approval with
conditions.
Michael Strange asked about Code requirements for off site parking
for this type of usage and Staff replied there were none.
The applicant's representative, Bob Trapp, was present. Dennis
Krejci asked Mr. Trapp if they were aware of and would comply with
handicap regulations, and Mr. Trapp replied they would comply.
UPON MOTION BY POE AND SECOND BY STRANGE, ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
NO. 87-6 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, BY THE
FOLLOWING VOTE:
SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. The site plan received and dated February 20, 1987, shall be
the approved layout, with the modifications described:
a. "Temporary Sales Information/Parking Directory Sign" shall
be located out of required sight angles.
2. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall
submit the following plans:
a. Landscape and irrigation plan (for models and parking area)
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.
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. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid prior to
issuance of building permits.
6. A site plan and elevations delineating all directional signs
and model identification signs shall be submitted to the
-9- 3/18/87 - BZA
Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 18, 1987
Page 10
Department of Development Services and Public Works for review
and approval. Subdivision directional signs shall comply with
Section 9610.9 (c) of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, and
shall be installed prior to final inspection
7. All roads (including fire access) shall be of hard surface, all
weather construction meeting Public Works requirements, and
shall be installed prior to combustible construction.
8. All water lines and fire hydrants shall be installed and
approved by the Fire Department prior to issuance of permits
for any temporary or permanent structures.
9. The temporary sales office shall be removed upon completion of
the sales office in the permanent structure.
10. The sales office shall not be converted or expanded into a
general business office.
11. The office use shall be discontinued within thirty (30) days
following sale of the last on -site unit. A surety bond of
$1,000.00 shall be posted with the City for the sales office
and for each model home complex to guarantee compliance with
all provisions,of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code and
Building Code. Such model homes shall only serve the tract
specified in subject -Administrative Review application.
12. Handicap access -to the sales office and model homes shall be
provided per Building Division requirements.
13. Setbacks shall comply with approved plans for Conditional
Exception No. 87-7. All applicable Conditions of Approval of
Conditional Use Permit No. 86-35 and Tentative Tract No. 12897
shall also apply.
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. Security fencing, gates, locking devices, and ingress and
egress from streets and parking areas shall be reviewed and
approved by the Fire, Police, and Development Services
Departments prior to issuance of building permits. The parking
area shall comply with Article 960.
-10- 3/18/87 - BZA
Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 18, 1187
Page 11
4. The Board of Zoning Adjustments reserves the right to revoke
Administrative Review No. 87-6 if any violation of these
conditions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs.
AYES: Evans, Krejci, Poe, Smith, Strange
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
SITE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 87-3
Applicant: Reginald de la Cuesta
A request to permit restriping of the parking lot. Subject property
is located at 18061-65 Redondo Circle (West side of Redondo Circle
approximately one hundred fifty feet (150') South of Talbert Avenue).
This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 1,
California Environmental Quality Act, 1986.
Ms. Phillips reported this proposal was for restriping a parking lot
and adding a fence to an industrial site. A previous request had
been approved by the Board on February 25, 1987, which caused a loss
of thirteen (13) parking spaces because of the limited use of one of
the buildings. The applicant has decided he might possibly lease
the building for manufacturing purposes and, therefore, has
submitted this Site Plan Amendment. He will provide forty-four (44)
parking spaces which will include ten (10) compact spaces. The site
will provide ample landscaping and Staff is recommending approval
with conditions.
Michael Strange asked about the wall but Staff explained the
applicant was being required, per the previous approval, to provide
a six foot (6') high chain link fence with top and bottom rails.
Dennis Krejci inquired about door clearances on the building and
Ms. Phillips explained wheel stops would be needed at those
locations to provide ample space for doors to open and close.
The applicant, Reginald de la Cuesta, was present and requested that
the Board drop the requirement for the top and bottom rails on the
fence. Mr. de la Cuesta said it was excessive for the location and
the top rail alone would be sufficient. Upon questioning by Dennis
Krejci, Ms. Phillips explained Staff had originally recommended a
three foot (3') high block wall but the Board had determined the six
foot (6') high fence would be preferable. Daryl Smith stated the
fence should remain as previously approved.
UPON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY EVANS, SITE PLAN AMENDMENT
NO. 87-1 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, BY
THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
-11- 3/18/87. - BZA
Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 18, 1987
Page 12
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL:
1. The granting of Site Plan Amendment No.87-3 will not adversely
affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach.
2. The use of the property will remain the same (industrial).
3. The proposal will result in an improved parking layout.
4. The revision complies with applicable sections -of the Code.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated
March 5, 1987, shall be the approved layout.
2. The proposed fence shall consist of a six foot.(6') high chain
link fence, with top and bottom rail. Specifications and plans
shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of
Development Services prior to installation.
3: Compact spaces in front of doors shall be equipped with wheel
stops to provide a four foot (4') clear area for door swing.
4. There shall be no outside storage of vehicles, vehicle parts,
equipment or trailers,.
5. No gates shall be installed that would block traffic flow
through the site.
INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC CODE REQUIREMENTS:
1. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of
the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department.
2. Landscaping shall comply with Article 960 of the Huntington
Beach Ordinance Code.
3. The Board of Zoning Adjustments reserves the right to revoke
Site Plan Amendment No. 87-3 if any violation of these
conditions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs.
AYES: Evans, Krejci, Poe, Smith
NOES: Strange
ABSENT: None
1
-12- 3/18/87 - BZA
Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 18, 1987
Page 13
SITE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 87-4
Applicant: D. C. Fassnacht Associates, Inc
A request to permit upgrade of apartment complex entrance, including
revised landscape and parking layout. Subject property is located
at 17111 Golden West Street (West side of Golden West Street
approximately five hundred forty feet (540') South of Warner Avenue).
This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 1,
California Environmental Quality Act, 1986.
Staff reported this was a request to renovate the entrance to the
Huntington Grenada Apartment complex. The applicant will rearrange
parking to supply "head in" parking instead of parallel which will
increase the number of parking spaces by one (1). They will install
a new landscape planter and handicap ramps. Staff recommended
approval with conditions.
Tom Poe expressed concern over the width of the median and said the
Fire Department would prefer that it stay as is rather than having
it widened. He further stated fire trucks could reach the carports
from the adjacent property if necessary.
The applicant's representative, Kurt Fromnecht, explained the
existing median was twelve feet (12') and they would like to expand
it to fourteen feet (14'); however, they would also be increasing
the width of the drive from seventeen feet (17') to twenty-two feet
(22').
Daryl Smith asked why the applicant wanted to increase the median.
Mr. Fromnecht explained the project had very limited frontage and
they would like to incorporate a fountain, new trees, plants, etc.,
to beautify the entrance.
Tom Poe agreed the twenty-two foot (22') width would be satisfactory
if "NO PARKING" signs were installed and the curbs were painted red.
UPON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY POE, SITE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 87-5
WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, BY THE
FOLLOWING VOTE:
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL:
1. The granting of Site Plan Amendment No. 87-4 will not adversely
affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach.
2. The proposal is consistent with the goals and objectives of the
City's General Plan and Land Use Map.
3. The proposal results in an improved project.
-13- 3/18/87 - BZA
Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 18, 1987
Page 14
4. The use of the site will remain the same.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated
March 10, 1987, shall be the approved layout, with the
following modification:
a. Proposed landscape planter shall be removed from
right-of-way
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.
4. Handicap curb ramps shall be provided in accordance with Public
Works standards.
5. Service roads -and fire lanes, as determined by the Fire
Department,,shall be posted and marked.'-
6. 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.
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. All signs shall comply with Article 961 of the Huntington Beach
Ordinance Code.
3. Landscaping shall comply with Article 960 of the Huntington
Beach Ordinance Code.`
4. The Board of Zoning Adjustments reserves the right to revoke
Site Plan Amendment No. 87-4 if any violation of these
conditions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs.
-14- 3/18/87 - BZA
1
Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 18, 1987
Page 15
AYES: Evans, Krejci, Poe, Smith, Strange
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
SITE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 87-5
Applicant: Dennis Marchand (Agent)
A request to amend elevations of an industrial building approved
pursuant to Administrative Review No. 86-49. Subject property is
located at 17132 Palmdale Street (East side of Palmdale Street
approximately one hundred forty feet (1401) North of Cedar Avenue).
This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 3,
California Environmental Quality Act, 1986.
Staff explained this was a request to change elevations from those
approved by the Board in September of last year. The revised
elevations would match the architectural facade of plans approved
for the adjacent building. The applicant shares reciprocal driveway
access with the adjacent building and this change would create a
more compatible arrangement for the location. Staff recommended
approval with conditions.
There were no questions of Staff regarding the request.
UPON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY SMITH, SITE PLAN AMENDMENT
NO. 87-5 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 Site Plan Amendment No. 87-5 will not adversely
affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach.
3. The use of the property will remain the same.
4. The amendment will result in a more uniform appearance of
buildings sharing a common driveway.
-15- 3/18/87 - BZA
Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 18, 1987
Page 16
SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
" a
1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated
March 11, 1987, shall be the approved layout.
2. All applicable Conditions of Approval of Administrative Review
No. 86-49 shall still be applicable.
3. The Board of Zoning Adjustments reserves the right to revoke
Site Plan Amendment No. 87-5 if any violation of these
conditions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs.
AYES: Evans, Krejci, Poe, Smith, Strange - -
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
CONDITIONAL'EXCEPTION NO. 87-2 (Cont. from 3/4/87)
USE PERMIT NO. 86-71 (Cont. from 3/4/87)
Applicant: Nassim-A-Jebaii
Staff reminded the Board this project had been postponed to -the end
of the meeting so the"applicant's representative could peruse the
conditions for the project. Chairman Dennis Krejci stated the
Public Hearing had been left open for further discussion -with the
applicant.
Wilbur Lorbeer stated he had talked -with Public Works and they had
told him there would be no fees at present and that, if the property
was developed prior to 1946, the Tentative Parcel Map requirement
could be waived: It was explained to Mr. Lorbeer by several Board
members that the Board was presently considering an interim use for
the site; however, -street improvements and other requirements would
still have to be met when approval was granted for any type of
permanent development.
Mr. Lorbeer made a statement that, if conditions were too
restrictive, he would just have to fence off the lot and leave the
busy corner vacant like many other'corner locations in Huntington
Beach.
There was quite a lengthy discussion regarding overnight storage of
vehicles and fencing to screen them from public view. It was
determined slat type fencing and gates would be required and car
storage would be limited to a seventy-two (72) hour period.
Les Evans left the meeting at this time - 2:43 P.M.
The Board members clarified each item of concern for Mr. Lorbeer and
deleted an item referring to the irrevocable reciprocal access
agreement with abutting westerly property for driveway access.
-16- 3/18/87 - BZA
Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 18, 1987
Page 17
Mr. Lorbeer was again reminded the Board would be requiring the
applicant, the lessee, and the property owner to present a progress
report to the Board within six (6) months of approval date. There
was no one else present to speak for or against the project so the
Public Hearing was closed.
Daryl Smith stated he would move for approval of both requests for
an interim use for a period of one (1) year, with the stipulation
that the Board would revoke the Use Permit if any violation of the
conditions occurred. Tom Poe said he would second the motion.
Michael Strange said he would be abstaining from voting because he
had been involved in seeking zoning compliance on the site which had
included letters to the interim property owner, as well as letters
submitted to the City Attorney's office for legal action.
UPON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY POE, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION
NO. 87-2 AND USE PERMIT NO. 86-71 WERE APPROVED FOR AN INTERIM USE
WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO, 87-2:
1. Because of special circumstances applicable to the subject
property, including size, shape, topography, location or
surroundings, and location of existing building on the lot, the
strict application of the Zoning Ordinance is found to deprive
the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties
in the vicinity and under identical zone classifications.
2. The granting of a Conditional Exception is necessary in order
to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property
rights.
3. The granting of Conditional Exception No. 87-2 will not be
materially detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to
property in the same zone classifications.
4. The granting of the Conditional Exception will not adversely
affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach.
5. Granting of the Conditional Exception is for a temporary use
only.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 87-2:
1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated
February 6, 1987, shall be the approved layout.
2. All Conditions of Approval of Use Permit No. 86-71 shall be
applicable.
-17- 3/18/87 - BZA
Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 18, 1987
Page 18
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - USE PERMIT NO 86-71:
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. 86-71 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 86-71
1. The site plan, floor plans, -and elevations received and dated
February 6, 1987, shall be modified as follows: S
a. Drawn to scale, fully dimensioned, depicting aisle widths,
building setbacks,.landscape planter -dimensions, street
dedications, and fencing six feet (6') with screening slats
in fence and gates. -,Said fencing shall be located between
the West property line and Northwest corner,of.the
building, and between the North property line and Northeast
corner of the building.
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. This approval shall be for.automobile minor repairs as defined
by Section 9080.13 (a) of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code.
4. Provide proof of legal lot creation or submit Tentative Parcel
Map.
5. Driveway approaches shall be a minimum of twenty-seven feet
(27') in width and shall be of radius type construction.
6. There shall be no outside storage of vehicles, vehicle parts,
equipment or trailers, except the incidental overnight storage
of cars in for repair. These cars may be stored in an area not
visible from the public right-of-way for a period not to exceed
seventy-two (72) hours.
1
-18- 3/18/87 - BZA-
Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 18, 1987
Page 19
7. All repair work shall be conducted wholly within the building.
8. 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.
9. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid prior to
issuance of building permits. (Major public works improvements
shall be completed at time of permanent development).
10. The applicant shall submit a project update to the Board of
Zoning Adjustments within six (6) months of the date of this
approval. Said update shall include status of the proposed
permanent development plans for the site and status of clean-up
of soil and ground water contamination, including State and
Federal permits and time estimates for completion.
11. All Conditions of Approval shall be completed and approved by
the City of Huntington Beach within ninety (90) days of the
date of this approval (unless otherwise noted), or Use Permit
No. 86-71 is null and void.
12. The applicant shall submit a written acknowledgment of the
conditions of this approval from the business operator
(Nassim-A-Jebaii), the lessee of the property (Wilbur Lorbeer),
and the current property owner (Mobil Oil Corporation).
13. This approval is for interim operation of a minor auto repair
facility. The approval shall expire upon approval of a
permanent project for the site, or one (1) year from the date
of this approval, whichever is first. If, after one (1) year,
no permanent project has been approved, the applicant shall
either vacate the premises or re -apply to the Board of Zoning
Adjustments for a new Use Permit.
14. This approval shall run with the operator of the business
(Nassim-A-Jebaii). Change of use or ownership shall invalidate
Use Permit No. 86-71.
15. The approval of an interim repair facility in conjunction with
the various conditional exception (variance) requests, shall
not constitute a vested right for future development. Future
development requests shall obtain permits in conformance with
applicable codes.
INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC CODE REQUIREMENTS - USE PERMIT NO 86-71:
1. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of
the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department,
except as noted under Conditional Exception No. 87-2.
-19- 3/18/87 - BZA
Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments
March 18, 1987
Page 20
2. The applicant shall meet all applicable local, State, and
Federal Fire Codes, -Ordinances, -and standards..
3. All hazardous materials, including waste, to be located
on -site, shall be handled and stored in accordance with the
Uniform Fire Code. (Waste oil is a hazardous waste.)
4. The business must comply with Chapter 1758 of the City of
Huntington Beach Municipal Code which requires any business
that handles or stores hazardous materials, -including waste, to
inventory the hazardous materials on -site and prepare a
business emergency plan in case of a release of such materials.
5. The Board of Zoning Adjustments reserves the right,to revoke
Use Permit -No. 86-71 if any violation of these conditions of
the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs.
AYES: Krejci, Poe, Smith
NOES: None
ABSENT: Evans
ABSTAIN: Strange
There was no further business to be presented to the Board for their
review.
UPON MOTION BY KREJCI AND SECOND BY POE, THE REGULAR MEETING WAS
ADJOURNED TO A STUDY SESSION ON MONDAY, _ MARCH- 23,- 1987., _AT-"
10: 00 A.M. , BY ---THE- FOLLOWING" VOTE: -
AYES: Krejci, Poe, Smith, Strange
NOES: None"
ABSENT: Evans-
len K. Godfrey, Secretary
Board of Zoning Adjustments
jgh
(7640d)-
LJ
-20- 3/18/87 - BZA