Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-05-05APPROVED 6/16/87 MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION May 5, 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 - April 21, 1987 Planning Commisson Meeting A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECOND BY HIGGINS, TO APPROVE MINUTES OF APRIL 21, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION, AS SUBMITTED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Livengood NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Summerell MOTION PASSED B. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS AND COMMISSION ITEMS B-1 DENSITY BONUS STUDY SESSION A MOTION WAS MADE BY SILVA, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO SCHEDULE A DENSITY BONUS STUDY SESSION FOR 6:00 PM, JUNE 2, 1987, AND DIRECTED STAFF TO PREPARE A REPORT WHICH WOULD INCLUDE THE PROCEDURE NEWPORT BEACH, WESTMINSTER, SEAL BEACH AND LAGUNA BEACH USE IN GRANTING A DENSITY BONUS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell, Livengood NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED B-2 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT STUDY SESSION I Commissioner Schumacher requested that staff prepare a list of the General Plan Amendments for the year and the deadline for submitting an application for a General Plan Amendment. B-3 SETBACKS FOR SWIMMING POOLS Commissioner Silva requested that staff prepare a report addressing setbacks for swimming pools in Huntington Beach and a survey of the setback requirements imposed by other cities. It was requested that special attention be made to engineering problems due to excavation be addressed in the report. Staff was to prepare recommendations for possible modifications to our codes. I PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -2- (8266d) C. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS C-1 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 87-15 IN CONJUNCTION WITH CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 87-23 (CONTINUED FROM APRIL 21, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING) APPLICANT: CENTER FOR SPECIAL SURGERY, INC. On April 21, 1987, the Planning Commission continued Conditional Use Permit No. 87-15 with Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 87-23 for correction and re -publication of the legal notice and directed staff and the applicant to provide additional information concerning the existing office building net square footage and parking for other similar facilities (out -patient surgery centers). Revised notices reflecting a variance request for 60 parking spaces was mailed to all property owners within 300 feet of the subject property on April 23, 1987. Conditional Use Permit No. 87-15 is a request to add an 8,886 square foot, two-story, 20-bed skilled nursing facility to the southerly side of an existing 8,002 square foot, single -story out -patient surgical center within a 36,662 gross square foot medical complex at the southeast corner of Beach Boulevard and Newman Avenue (17752 Beach Boulevard). The variance request (Conditional Exception No. 87-23) is for 149 parking spaces in lieu of 209 (Section 9606) and to maintain an existing three (3) foot wide planter along Beach Boulevard and Newman Avenue in lieu of six (6) feet (Section 9608). ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The proposed project is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15301(e), Class 1 (Existing Facilities) of the California Environmental Quality Act. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Deny Conditional Use Permit No. 87-15 in conjunction with Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 87-23 based on the findings and conditions of approval. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Dr. Neil A. Friedman, applicant, spoke in support of the project. He objected to staff's finding for denial that claimed that the proposed expansion would have a detrimental effect upon the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of persons working in the area and being detrimental to the value of the property in the vicinity because of insufficient parking. He feels that the new project will benefit the health needs of the area and will financially benefit the community. He further stated that he feels the traffic calculations were figured incorrectly and that he is willing to perform traffic studies of the site annually. Sherrill Cornwall, architect for the project, spoke in support of the project. He stated that the medical building will not undergo any changes. PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -3- (8266d) Jerry Bame, representing Humana Hospital, spoke in opposition to the project. He stated that his client has two concerns with the project (the quality of health care with this type of hospital and the parking). Humana Hospital has completed a traffic survey and they feel that since this is an in -patient health facility that the project will not meet the code requirements. Ronald Jonas, traffic consultant for Humana Hospital, spoke in opposition to the project. His company completed a traffic study for Humana Hospital and the results indicate that there will be potential parking problems. He feels that 245 spaces should be provided. Mark Aanonson, Humana Hospital, spoke in opposition to the project. He feels that the facility will require more parking spaces for their staff and patients. Additional spaces will also be required for trucks that will be loading and unloading. Harold Graham, Beach Boulevard Medical Group, spoke in opposition to the project. Madelyn Tinkler, representing the applicant, spoke in support of the project. She feels that traffic survey results are completed to satisfy the opinions of the person requesting the survey. She further stated that since there will be no changes made to the medical building that only the surgical center should be addressed. There were no other persons present to speak for or against the project and the public hearing was closed. The Commissioners expressed their concerns with the project, mainly the parking problem. They felt that the request should be continued and requested a revised conceptual site plan that would include plans for a parking structure that would include at least 209+ parking spaces. They also suggested that the applicant consider a 20-bed expansion and asked staff to determine whether the landscaping should be enhanced and brought up to code. A MOTION WAS MADE BY SCHUMACHER, SECOND BY HIGGINS, TO CONTINUE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 87-15 IN CONJUNCTION WITH CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 87-23 TO THE MAY 19, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell, Livengood NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED r_� PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -4- (8266d) C-2 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 86-42 WITH SPECIAL PERMITS/ TENTATIVE TRACT 12822/ NEGATIVE DECLARATION N0. 86-48 (CONTINUED FROM APRIL 21, 1487 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING) APPLICANT: SASOUNIAN & PARTNERS Tentative Tract 12822 is a request to permit a one lot subdivision (2.62 acre parcel) for the purpose of constructing a 76 unit condominium development located at 4581 Warner. Conditional Use Permit No. 86-42 is a request to permit 76 condominium units with special permits for reduction in common open space, front yard setback encroachment and increased building bulk. The request also includes a 17 percent density bonus, which will allow for an additional 11 units to be constructed over and above the 65 units which are permitted by the R3 zoning. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Pursuant to the environmental regulations in effect at this time, the Department of Development Services posted draft Negative Declaration No. 86-48 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. 86-42 and Tentative Tract 12822, it is necessary for the Planning Commission to review and act on Negative Declaration No. 86-48. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Negative Declaration No. 86-48, Conditional Use Permit No. 86-42, as modified by staff with two special permits for reduction in common open space and deviance to building bulk requirements only, and Tentative Tract No. 12822 based on findings and conditions of approval outlined in this staff report. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Richard A. Harlow, representing the applicant, spoke in support of the project. He stated that his applicant is very anxious to complete this project and is agreeable to any suggested changes by the Commission. There were no other persons present to speak for or against the project and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Summerell, who was absent at the previous meeting, stated that he had reviewed the tape of the meeting and felt that there was still a problem with access to this site and was concerned with granting a density bonus. There was a discussion among the Commissioners regarding bonus. Straw votes were taken to (1) reduce the number 71 removing 3 units from the Warner side and the other 2 the applicant's discretion, and (2) reducing the number 65 and not granting a density bonus. the density of units to units at of units to PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -5- (8266d) STRAW VOTE MOTION BY PIERCE, SECOND BY HIGGINS, TO ALLOW 71 UNITS WITH 3 UNITS BEING REMOVED FROM THE WARNER SIDE AND THE OTHER 2 AT THE APPLICANT'S DISCRETION. AYES: Higgins, Pierce, Livengood NOES: Silva, Schumacher, Leipzig, Summerell STRAW VOTE MOTION FAILED STRAW VOTE MOTION BY LEIPZIG, SECOND BY SILVA, TO ALLOW 65 UNITS WITH NO DENSITY BONUS GRANTED. AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Leipzig, Summerell NOES: Higgins, Pierce, Livengood STRAW VOTE MOTION PASSED Findings were added regarding the denial of the density bonus. A MOTION WAS MADE BY SILVA, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 86-42 WITH SPECIAL PERMITS/TENTATIVE TRACT 12822/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 86-48, WITH NO DENSITY BONUS, 65 UNITS, AS MODIFIED, WITH 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, 86-42: 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 the Conditional Use Permit will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. 3. The proposed 65 unit condominium development is consistent with the City's General Plan of Land Use which designates this property as Medium High Density Residential. i� 1 PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -6- (8266d) 1 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - TENTATIVE TRACT 12822: 1. The proposed subdivision of this 2.62 adjusted gross acre site conforms to the R3 zoning requirements. The lot is greater than 6,000 square feet and has a frontage along Warner Avenue of more than 60 feet. 2. The proposed subdivision is consistent with the objectives and policies of the General Plan. Sixty-five (65) multi -family units will be developed within the subdivision which is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map designation of Medium High Density Residential. 3. The site is physically suited for a 65 unit condominium development. The proposed density, 25 units per acre, can adequately accommodate multi -family residential development and will not create an adverse impact on local traffic and circulation. 4. The applicant's request for a development of 76 units (17% density bonus) would be detrimental to the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of the neighborhood and the City in general and would have an adverse impact on traffic and circulation in the vicinity of Warner and Algonquin due to the site's location on the curving portion of Warner Avenue and because the site has only one ingress/egress point onto Warner Avenue. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - SPECIAL PERMIT FOR REDUCTION IN COMMON OPEN SPACE AND DEVIANCE TO BUILDING BULK REQUIREMENTS: 1. The proposed development will promote better living conditions and environments by providing more private open space in the form of balconies and patios for each unit than is required by the Ordinance Code. 2. The proposed development utilizes land planning techniques which include a tasteful style of architecture, landscaping, site layout and design. 3. The proposed development will benefit the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of the neighborhood and the City, in general, and will not be a detriment to or degrade property values in such neighborhoods and the City. 4. The use of three story building forms will not be detrimental to the general health, welfare, safety and convenience, nor detrimental or injurious to the value of property or improvements in the neighborhood because only 3 building modules are visible from Warner Avenue and the elevations viewed from the north or south contain offsets in the building facade. PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -7- (8266d) 5. The use of three story building forms will promote better living environments by reducing overall site coverage and increasing open space. 6. The three story building forms result in an aesthetically pleasing type of architecture with varied building elevations and roof forms and the use of patios and balconies to provide visua� relief on the vertical building forms. FINDINGS FOR DENIAL - SPECIAL PERMIT TO ENCROACH IN FRONT YARD SETBACK: 1. The granting of a special permit to encroach into the front yard setback will not promote a better living environment because the patios and balconies will be too close to Warner Avenue, and as such will be detrimental to the health, welfare and safety of the residents of such units. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 86-42: 1. The site plan dated April 16, 1987 and the elevations dated October 1, 1986, shall be revised and submitted depicting the modifications described herein: a. Total number of dwelling units shall be 65. b. Front yard setback shall conform to Section 9150.7 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. c. The three story unit on the southeast corner of the site adjacent to Warner Avenue shall be a one bedroom unit, in order to create a varied building form along the Warner Avenue elevation. 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. Landscaping shall comply with 5.9150.18 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 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. c. 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. PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -8- (8266d) 3. Public Works improvements shall be constructed as required. 4. The driveway approach on Warner Avenue shall be radius type. Prior to location approval, the developer shall submit cross -sections evaluating site distance and grade. 5. Access to the project from Warner Avenue shall be limited to right turns in and out. 6. No parking shall be allowed along Warner Avenue adjacent to the project. Warner Avenue, in this location, shall be red -curbed. 7. If gates are installed across the driveway at the entrance of the parking structure or within the parking structure, the location and configuration shall be approved by Public Works Department. 8. An automatic fire sprinkler system is to be installed throughout the complex to comply with NFPA 13 Standards. 9. A wet combination stand pipe system approved by the Fire Department shall be installed in designated locations. 10. An automatic alarm system shall be installed throughout. This system must provide the following: a. Water flow, valve tamper, trouble and detection. b. Audible alarms. C. Graphic annunciation. Panel to be located near front entry. d. 24-hour supervision. 11. Two fire hydrants will be required. They must be installed per Public Works Standards and located in areas approved by the Fire Department. 12. Fire lanes are to be designated and posted pursuant to Fire Department Standard 415. 13. Elevators are to be sized to accommodate an ambulance gurney. Minimum 6' 8" wide by 4' 3" deep with minimum of 42" opening. 14. Two access stairways are to be located in the parking structure, one to be located on the northwest corner and the other to be located on the southwest corner. 15. An emergency fire access gate approved by the Fire Department is to be installed in the fence between the complex and the property near the northwest corner. The gate must be equipped with a KNOX locking device. 16. Installation of required landscaping and irrigation systems shall be completed within twelve (12) months. PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -9- (8266d) 17. Natural gas shall be stubbed in at the locations of cooking facilities, water heaters, and central heating units. 18. Low -volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets. 19. 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. 20. 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. 21. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department. 22. The applicant shall meet all applicable local, State, and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards. 23. 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. 24. The structures on the subject property, whether attached or detached, shall be constructed in compliance with the State acoustical standards set forth for units that lie within the 60 CNEL contours of the property. Evidence of compliance shall consist of submittal of an acoustical analysis report, prepared under the supervision of a person experienced in the field of acoustical engineering, with the application for building permit(s). 25. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits. 26. Mature trees on site removed for development shall be replaced on a 2 for 1 basis. 27. During construction the fire protection must comply with Article 87 of the fire code. Additionally, when the complex has reached 50 percent 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 area to be available for suppression of incipient stage fires (Section 10.301 UFC). PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -10- (8266d) 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). CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - TENTATIVE TRACT 12822: 1. The tentative tract map received and dated September 3, 1986, shall be revised so that: a. The Warner Avenue cross sections are labeled to show existing and proposed improvements. b. All existing water mains and easements shall be shown. If no easements exist, the developer shall dedicate easements as required. c. The 12 foot wide deceleration lane along Warner Avenue and the revised corner radius at the project entry shall be shown as depicted on the approved site plan dated April 16, 1987. 2. All vehicular access rights to Warner Avenue shall be dedicated to the City of Huntington Beach except at a City -approved location. 3. The proposed drainage, sewer and water easement shall be obtained prior to grading plan approval. If the easement cannot be obtained, the drainage flow direction shall be approved by the Public Works Department. If pumped, the water shall be pumped to an on -site spreading area and shall gravity flow through the curb and gutter. 4. The on -site sewer system shall be private. 5. Hydrology, hydraulics, sewer and water studies shall be approved by the Department of Public Works. 6. On -site water facilities (mains, fire hydrants, etc.) shall be dedicated to the City. 7. The developer shall install one water meter per building. 8. Surface treatment of ground over 16 inch water line (within easement) shall be approved by Water Department prior to construction. PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -11- (8266d) 9. The developer shall provide water main system on site to Water Department approval, with connections to existing 6 inch main in Warner Avenue and existing 6 inch mains in Tract 8000 and Tract 8106. 10. The existing east/west 6 inch main in Warner Avenue shall be extended westerly to connect to existing north/south 8 inch maia at approximate westerly property line. 11. All water main locations shall be approved by Water Department. 12. Existing water wells on the property shall be abandoned per Orange County Health Department Standards. 13. Separate water service shall be provided for irrigation. 14. 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 12822. C-3 CODE AMENDMENT NO. 87-3 APPLICANT: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Code Amendment No. 87-3 creates the standards to be applied to the new district classification of "OP" (Office Professional). As part of the rewriting and streamlining of Division 9, staff is proposing to change the name of the current Office Professional designation known as "R5". The name change will create less confusion for the public, since it is often assumed that "R5" stands for a high density residential zone. At the same time, the provisions that apply to such sites are being rewritten to eliminate archaic language, to make them consistent with other requirements in Division 9, and to match the format and organization of the rest of the code. The ordinance also repeals existing Article 949.5, which contains provisions for an "OR" (Office Residential) district. There are no properties within the City with this classification. It had originally been intended to be applied near the Downtown area. Also incorporated as part of the proposed ordinance are several clean-up pieces of legislation. Each is separately discussed in Section 4.0 of this report. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Code Amendment No. 87-3 is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Code Amendment No. 87-3 and recommend adoption by the City Council. PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -12- (8266d) 1 THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Kirk Kirkland, 8101 Slater Avenue, Huntington Beach/Fountain Valley Board of Realtors, requested that the name of the zone be changed from R5 to OP and retain the current building standards. He also requested that there be separate provisions (with reduced building story and height limits) for office buildings within 45 feet of R1, but the current provisions permitted under R5 zoning to be retained. Bill Ham, property owner on southeast corner Warner and Oak, stated that he opposed a zone change in the area. Yvonne Dirston, resident, spoke in opposition to a zone change. There were no other persons present to speak for or against the code amendment and the public hearing was closed. It was suggested that buildings located within 45 feet of any property exceeding the maximum building height of 25 feet, zoned or general planned for single family residential uses be subject to conditional use permit approval by the Planning Commission. It was also suggested that Setbacks for interior side yards be changed to read "five (5) feet, except parcels abutting an R1 district shall be a minimum of fifteen (15) feet". A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECOND BY PIERCE, TO APPROVE CODE AMENDMENT NO. 87-3. AN AMENDMENT WAS MADE BY SCHUMACHER, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO ADD THE SUGGESTED CHANGES REGARDING SETBACKS AND REQUIREMENTS OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO THE MOTION, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Schumacher, Higgins, Leipzig, Summerell, Livengood NOES: Silva, Pierce MOTION MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECOND BY PIERCE, TO APPROVE CODE AMENDMENT NO. 87-3, AS MODIFIED WITH THE AMENDMENT, AND RECOMMEND ADOPTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Livengood NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell, PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -13- (8266d) C-4 ZONE CHANGE N0, 87-1 APPLICANT: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Zone Change No. 87-1 was continued from the meeting of April 7, 1987, since it is being processed concurrently with Code Amendment No. 87-3 which creates the new "OP" district standards. The name change for the district necessitates a formal change in the zoning for each site currently zoned "R5". ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The proposed zone change is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, since it results in a name change only and does not significantly change permitted land uses or development intensity. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Zone Change No. 87-1 and recommend adoption by the City Council. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED There were no persons present to speak for or against the zone change and the public hearing was closed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECOND BY SILVA, TO ZPPROVE ZONE CHANGE NO. 87-1 AND RECOMMEND ADOPTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Livengood NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell, C-5 APPEAL OF THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT'S DENIAL OF USE PERMIT NO, 86-69 IN CONJUNCTION WITH CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 86-67 APPLICANT: CHARLES & ROSEMARY CARTER Use Permit No. 86-69 is a request to add two units to an existing duplex at 17211-17213 Elm Street. A use permit is required because the existing structure is non -conforming for front yard setbacks and because a portion of the project is located more than 150 feet from the public right-of-way. Conditional Exception No. 86-67 is a request to permit a 12' driveway in lieu of a 20' wide driveway, and to permit a balcony to serve as private open space in lieu of a patio for one unit. PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -14- (8266d) On March 18, 1987, the Board of Zoning Adjustments denied Use Permit No. 86-69 and Conditional Exception No. 86-67 by a vote of 4 to 1. The applicants have initiated the appeal because they feel that the driveway requirement imposes a hardship on their lot, and that the use will not be detrimental to the surrounding area. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The proposed project is exempt Class 5 Section 15305 from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. REDEVELOPMENT STATUS: The subject site is located within the Oakview Redevelopment area. Redevelopment staff has reviewed the project and is not in favor of the layout proposed by the appellant. The existing driveway leading to the front entry garages, combined with additional driveway width required to serve the proposed parking spaces to the rear of the lot, result in a 33 foot wide driveway on a 48 foot wide lot. The view from the street would consist of a large amount of concrete drive and parking area, with minimal landscape buffering. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Uphold the Board of Zoning Adjustment's denial and deny the appeal based on the findings. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Charles and Rosemary Carter, applicants, spoke in support of their request. They stated that they are trying to upgrade their property to make it financially feasible. There were no other persons present to speak for or against the request and the public hearing was closed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY HIGGINS, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO DENY USE PERMIT NO. 86-69 IN CONJUNCTION WITH CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 86-67 WITH FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell, Livengood NOES: Silva, Schumacher ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED The applicants appealed to the Commission to reconsider their motion to deny and allow the request to be continued to another meeting to enable them to work with staff to design an alternative proposal. It was pointed out by staff that if continued the new project description will require re -notification. The applicant's waived their mandatory processing date. PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -15- (8266d) A MOTION WAS MADE BY PIERCE, SECOND BY SILVA, TO RECONSIDER THE MOTION TO DENY USE PERMIT NO. 86-69 IN CONJUNCTION WITH CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 86-67 WITH FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell, Livengood NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO CONTINUE USE PERMIT NO. 86-69 IN CONJUNCTION WITH CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 86-67 TO THE JUNE 2, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell, Livengood NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None C-6 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0, 87-12 WITH SPECIAL PERMITS/ TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 87-165/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO 87-4/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 87-5 APPLICANT: URSINO DEVELOPMENT CO. Conditional Use Permit No. 87-12 with Special Permits in conjunction with Tentative Parcel Map 87-165, Coastal Development Permit No. 87-4 and Negative Declaration No. 87-5 is a request to construct a 3-story, 18-unit apartment project with a 29 percent density bonus at the southwesterly corner of Walnut Avenue and 19th Street in the Downtown Specific Plan, District 2. There are three special permit requests pertaining to parking, lot coverage and building offsets. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Pursuant to the environmental regulations in effect at this time, the Department of Development Services posted draft Negative Declaration No. 87-5 for ten days, and no comments, either verbal or written were received. In addition the proposed residential project is in conformance with the Downtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report pursuant to Section 15182 of the California Environmental Quality Act. I. PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -16- (8266d) 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: Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 86-12 with Special Permits for compact parking spaces only in conjunction with Tentative Parcel Map 87-165, Coastal Development Permit No. 87-4 and Negative Declaration No. 87-5 based on the findings and conditions of approval. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Tony Ursino, applicant, spoke in support of the project and urged the Commission to grant approval. Arthur Andrew, 218 20th. Street, spoke in opposition to the project. He stated that he is opposed to rentals and multi -family complexes being built in the area due to parking and trash problems. He submitted a petition to the Commission with 15 signatures. Dick Kelter, Southridge Homes, spoke in support of the project. He stated that he is consolidating his two lots with the applicants. Mike Buckley, resident on 20th. Street right behind the project, spoke in opposition to the project. He objects to more units being built that had conversion potential thus increasing the density. There were no other persons present to speak for or against the project and the public hearing was closed. Changes to the findings and modifications to the conditions of approval were explained by staff. A MOTION WAS MADE BY HIGGINS, SECOND BY PIERCE, TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 87-12 WITH SPECIAL PERMITS, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 87-165, COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 87-4 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 87-5 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, PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -17- (8266d) FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 87-12: 1. The proposed 18 unit apartment project with a 29 percent density bonus 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. 2. The proposed 18 unit apartment project is compatible with existing or proposed uses in the vicinity. 3. The location, site layout, and design of the proposed residential project is properly related to the streets, drives and other structures and uses in the vicinity in a harmonious manner. 4. The proposed apartment project is in conformance with the adopted Design Guidelines for the Downtown Specific Plan. 5. Architectural features and general appearance of the proposed 18 unit apartment project shall enhance the orderly and harmonious development of the Downtown Specific Plan area. 6. The proposed 18 unit apartment project is consistent with the goals and policies of the Huntington Beach General Plan. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - SPECIAL PERMITS FOR 20% COMPACT PARKING SPACES, 54.7 PERCENT LOT COVERAGE, AND RELIEF FROM 10 FOOT CONTINUOUS OFFSET BETWEEN SECOND AND THIRD FLOORS: 1. The following special permits for deviation 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 8 compact parking spaces (20%) in lieu of no compact size parking spaces. b. 54.7% lot coverage in lieu of 50% lot coverage c. Relief from 10 foot continuous setback between second and third floors. 2. The approval of the special permit 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 - 5/5/87 -18- (8266d) 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 PARCEL MAP 87-165: 1. The proposed consolidation of six (6) parcels into one (1) parcel for purposes of residential uses is 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 Downtown Specific Plan District 2 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 subdivision 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. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO, 87-4: 1. The proposed 18 unit apartment project with special permit for compact spaces, site coverage and third floor setbacks conforms with the plans, policies, requirements and standards of the Huntington Beach Coastal Element. 2. Coastal Development Permit No. 87-4 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 18 unit apartment 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 18 unit apartment 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 project will have 4 designated affordable units, which will be provided as the result of a density bonus which was granted for affordable housing as stated in condition #24. PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -19- (8266d) b. Due to location and economics involved, it would not be feasible to provide an additional 20 percent affordable units as required by the Mello Bill. The value of the land coupled with the requirement to provide extensive off -site improvements would prohibit the ability to provide an additional 20 percent affordable units. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0, 87-12: 1. The site plan and floor plans received and dated April 14, 1987, shall be revised depicting the modifications described herein: a. Eliminate all fourth level lofts. b. Units with one bedroom and den shall be restricted to 1.5 baths. C. Indicate assigned parking spaces which is to be assigned to each unit. d. Provide automatic garage door openers to the tenants for each enclosed parking space. e. Show distance of property line to centerline of Walnut Street. f. Provide laundry facility. 2. The elevations dated April 14, 1987, shall be subject to review and approval by the Design Review Board and conform with the following: a. Provide mission clay tile roof material. b. Provide a one foot eave overhang. 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. Landscaping within public right of way shall be maintained by property owner. b. Plant material as specified in the Downtown Landscape Guidelines manual shall be used. 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 3,000 gpm. 5. All existing or former oil well sites must be abandoned pursuant to Division of Oil and Gas and Fire Department standards. PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -20- (8266d) 6. The complex is to be protected by an automatic sprinkler system installed to comply with Fire Department standards. 7. Fire extinguishers MUST be installed pursuant to Fire Department standards. 8. Building address numbers are to be installed pursuant to Fire Department standards. 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. 10. During construction, the construction site must comply with Article 87 of the Fire Code. Additionally, when the complex has reached 50% built stage, a 24 hour fire watch approved by the Fire Department must be provided for the abatement of fire hazards and for reporting code violations, suspicious persons and fires to the Fire Department. 11. Natural gas shall be stubbed in at the locations of cooking facilities, water heaters and central heating units. 12. Natural gas and 220V electrical shall be stubbed in at location of clothes dryer. 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. Walnut Avenue, 19th Street and surrounding alleys shall be improved to Department of Public Works standards. 18. The curb and gutter shall on 19th Street shall be constructed st 29-1/2 feet centerline. 19. Sidewalk on 19th Street shall be 8 feet wide. 20. The half -round pipe on 19th Street crossing Walnut Avenue shall be replaced by cross gutter. This includes intersection modifications if necessary. 21. Landscaping within public right of way shall be maintained by property owner. 22. Street lights shall be installed per City requirements. PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -21- (8266d) 23. Submit a report evaluating geologic, seismic, flood and fire hazards. 24. The applicant shall submit a recorded affordable housing restriction and covenant "approved as to form" by the City Attorney which will set aside four units for affordable housing (2 one -bedroom units for families of low income; 2 two -bedroom units for families of moderate income) CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 87-167: 1. To be completed prior to use or occupancy of said parcel(s) for any purpose: a. The tentative parcel map received by the Department of Development Services on April 20, 1987, shall be the approved layout. b. A parcel map shall. be filed with and approved by the Department of Public Works and recorded with the Orange County Recorder. c. A 2-1/2 foot alley and 20 foot corner radius shall be dedicated to City standards. d. Water supply shall be through the City of Huntington Beach's water system at the time said parcel(s) is developed (if such systems exist within 200 feet of said parcel(s). 2. Sewage disposal shall be through the City of Huntington Beach's sewage system at the time sid parcel(s) is/are developed (if such systems exist within 200 feet of said parcel(s). 3. Compliance with all applicable City Ordinances. 4. The property shall participate in the local drainage assessment district at the time said parcel(s) is/are developed. (Contact the Department of Public Works for additional information.) 5. A copy of the recorded parcel map shall be filed with the Department of Development Services. 6. A detailed soils report shall be prepared by a registered soils engineer and submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval. 7. A hydrology and drainage system shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. n PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -22- (8266d) 1 C-7 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 87-9/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 87-15 APPLICANT: CHARLES BADDER Conditional Use Permit No. 87-9 is a request to allow the addition of approximately 750 square feet of floor area to an existing 2550 squire feet restaurant located in the M1-A (Restricted Manufacturing) District at 5452 Commercial Drive. Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 87-15 is a request to allow the reduction of six required parking spaces. The existing restaurant was approved by Conditional Use Permit No. 76-4 on July 7, 1976. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The proposed project is exempt Class 1 Section 15301 from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Deny Conditional Use Permit No. 87-9 and Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 87-15 based on the findings outlined in this report. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Charles Badder, 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. It was felt by the Commission that sufficient on -street parking at the restaurant was available to offset the deficiency in parking numbers and that the restaurant expansion would not adversely affect the General Plan. A MOTION WAS MADE BY SILVA, SECOND BY PIERCE, TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 87-9 AND CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 87-15, WITH 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. 87-9: 1. The establishment, maintenance and operation of the expansion will not be detrimental to: a. The general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity; PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -23- (8266d) b. Property and improvements in the vicinity of such use or building. 2. The restaurant expansion will not adversely affect the General Plan. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO, 87-15: 1. Because the existing parking layout was approved with restrictive parking requirements there appear to be exceptional circumstances applicable to the land, buildings or premises involved that does not apply generally to property or class of uses in the same district. 2. The six space parking variance will not be detrimental to the general welfare of persons working or residing in the vicinity. 3. The six space parking variance will not be detrimental to the value of the property and improvements in the neighborhood. 4. On -site parking and circulation is adequate and will not have the potential of creating a congestion and circulation hazard. 5. The granting of Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 87-15 will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. 6. Sufficient on -street parking is available to offset deficient parking numbers. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 87-9: 1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated April 20, 1987, shall be the approved layout. 2. Service roads and fire lanes, as determined by the Fire Department, shall be posted and marked. 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. Single acting door shall comply with Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code. 5. 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. 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. PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -24- (8266d) 1 8. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department. 9. Prior to issuance of building permits the applicant shall restripe the parking lot so that it conforms to provisions of Article 960 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 10. Obtain a building permit for the existing satellite disk located in the parking area prior.to issuance of building permits for the expansion. C-8 CODE AMENDMENT NO. 87-5 APPLICANT: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH A request to amend Section 9130.9 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code to add separate open space requirements for multiple family dwellings in Oldtown and Townlot Districts. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The proposed project is categorically exempt from provision of the California Environmental Quality Act. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Code Amendment No. 87-5 and recommend adoption by the City Council. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Dick Kelter spoke in support of the code amendment. Renada Howard, spoke in opposition to the code amendment. There were no other persons present to speak for or against the project and the public hearing was closed. The Commission requested that additional information be presented regarding this code amendment. They requested that staff come up with some rough drawings and examples of "worst cases" and "best cases" and whether the open space requirements should be more flexible or more restrictive. It was suggested that the item be continued. PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -25- (8266d) A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO CONTINUE CODE AMENDMENT NO. 87-5 TO THE MAY 19, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Livengood NOES: None . ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell, D. ITEMS NOT FOR PUBLIC HEARING D-1 ANNUAL REVIEW OF OLD WORLD OCTOBERFEST (CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 83-20) (CONTINUED FROM APRIL 21, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING) APPLICANT: WEST COAST SOCCER LEAGUE REQUEST: Annual Review of the Octoberfest event at Old World Village STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Continue annual review of Octoberfest to the May 19, 1987 Planning Commission meeting per applicant's request. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECOND BY SILVA, TO CONTINUE THE ANNUAL REVIEW OF OCTOBERFEST TO THE MAY 19, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Livengood NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell, D-2 EXTENSION OF TIME FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 85-15/TENTATIVE TRACT 11881/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 85-2 APPLICANT: Huntington Harbour Bay & Racquet Club REQUEST: One-year extension of time. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Grant a one-year extension of time for Conditional Use Permit No. 85-15, Tentative Tract 11881 and Coastal Development Permit No. 85-2. I PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -26- (8266d) A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECOND BY HIGGINS, TO APPROVE A ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 85-151 TENTATIVE TRACT 11881 AND COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 85-2, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell, Livengood NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED D-3 DISCUSSION AND RESOLUTION FOR REAR BLOCK WALLS ON DOUBLE FRONTAGE LOTS IN HUNTINGTON HARBOUR APPLICANT: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REQUEST: In recent years, a number of building permits have been issued for retaining wall and fence combinations over six feet in height along rear property lines adjacent to streets. These permits were issued without processing of conditional exceptions (variances) based on Code Section 9770.9. The recent construction of a retaining wall/block wall combination on two lots along Concord Lane in the Huntington Harbour area has evoked some controversy regarding this code interpretation. Two alternative designs for retaining wall and fence combinations that will address these concerns are submitted. Staff Alternative A allows for an initial six foot high retaining wall at the property line, topped by a 5 foot wide planter area stepping back from the back of side wall. Another six foot high section of retaining wall could then be placed at the rear of the planter. Staff Alternative B also allows for an initial 6 foot high retaining wall at the property line, but stepped back with two planters and two additional tiers of retaining wall. Each layout would also require a 5' x 5' tree well cut-out every 60' (one per property) at the property line. Both alternatives provide visual relief from the street level, and would allow for planting of shrubs and vines. Should additional fence height be required on top of the highest tier, materials such as glass or wrought iron could be utilized and should not be more than 50% solid. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution to approve Staff Alternative No. 1. PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -27- (8266d) A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECOND BY HIGGINS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION AND APPROVE STAFF'S ALTERNATIVE NO. 1 AND 2, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell, Livengood NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED E. DISCUSSION ITEMS None F. PENDING ITEMS PRE-SCHOOL PARKING STATISTICS - The Commission requested that staff prepare a code amendment for pre-school parking requirements using the statistics obtained from Fountain Valley as a guideline. FOLLOW-UP OF FIVE UNIT APARTMENT AT SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF WARNER AVENUE AND SANDRA LEE - The Commission requested that staff recheck this site for code violations and prepare a follow-up report to be presented at the next meeting. Items added to the Pending Items list: PEOPLE LIVING IN BOATS IN HARBOR (EASTER STREET) ELM STREET AREA - LACK OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS, DENSITY OF UNITS, ASPHALT DRIVEWAYS G. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS Commissioner Silva requested that the "4-minute Rule" allowed for speakers at Public Hearings be discussed at the next scheduled meeting. H. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ITEMS None I PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -28- (8266d) I. ADJOURNMENT A MOTION WAS MADE AT 12:40 PM BY LIVENGOOD, SECOND BY PIERCE TO ADJOURN THE MEETING TO: 1. MAY 15, 1987 REDEVELOPMENT SEMINAR SCHEDULED FOR 9:00 AT THE HUNTINGTON BEACH INN; 2. MAY 18, 1987 JOINT STUDY SESSION ON "PIERSIDE" AT 5:30 PM IN ROOM B-8: 3. MAY 19, 1987 STUDY SESSION AT 5:30 PM IN ROOM B-8 TO DISCUSS GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 87-2 AND THE BEACH BOULEVARD REDEVELOPMENT PLAN 4. REGULARLY SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSON MEETING MAY 19, 1987 AT 7:00 PM AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell, Livengood NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED APPROVED: ames W. Palin, Secretary nt) M. Pierce, Chairman PC Minutes - 5/5/87 -29- (8266d)