Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-06-0311 1 f,l U MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS Room B-6 - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California WEDNESDAY, JUNE 3. 1987 - 1.30 P.M. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Evans, Godfrey, Krejci, Poe, Smith STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Phillips MINUTES: UPON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY POE, MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 20, 1987, WERE APPROVED AS TRANSCRIBED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Evans, Godfrey, Krejci, Poe NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Smith UPON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY POE, MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 27, 1987, WERE APPROVED AS TRANSCRIBED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Evans, Godfrey, Krejci, Poe, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None REGULAR AGENDA ITEM USE PERMIT NO. 87-32 (Cont. from 5/27/87) Applicant: International Red Onion A request to permit outdoor dining on the patio area. Subject property is located at 16450 Pacific Coast Highway (North side of Pacific Coast Highway approximately five hundred feet (500') West of Admiralty Drive). This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 1, California Environmental Quality Act, 1986. The Staff member, Laura Phillips, reminded the Board this item had been continued from the previous meeting to readvertise the request. Staff's understanding of the original request had been for Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments June 3, 1987 Page 2 outdoor dining on the patio for Sunday brunch only; however, the applicant's representative stated they were requesting dining on the patio for the entire time they were open for service. The applicarc proposes eleven (11) tables on the patio facing the walkway. Staff has several concerns - one of which is maintaining the minimum ten foot (10') clearance on the walkway as required by the Coastal Commission. The site plan shows tables along the building wall which would extend outwardly approximately four feet (4'). These tables would be situated between the several doors on that side of the building. Maintaining the proper clearance would necessitate waiter service through those doors without encroachment into the walkway clearance. The Fire Department is requiring that Table 10 be relocated because it is blocking a fire exit. Some type of railing or division would be required between the tables and the walkway or smaller tables could be installed, allowing service around them. Staff has received several letters and calls from adjacent residents in objection to this request because of added noise, increased parking demands, traffic, late night disturbances, and difficulty of reaching their boats through the walkway access. Staff recommended approval of the request with conditions, including those presented to the Board. Daryl Smith asked Staff if the applicant had previously been made aware of the recommended conditions and Staff replied in the affirmative. The Public Hearing was opened by Chairman Dennis Krejci. The applicant's representative, Ralph Saltsman, was present, along with Bradley Anderson. Mr. Saltsman stated he concurred with the conditions and recommendations made by Staff and would have no problems adhering to them. He added the Red Onion wanted to be a good neighbor to the adjacent residents and held meetings with them periodically to discuss and resolve any problems which might occur. Dennis Krejci reminded the applicant that Staff was recommending the operation be conducted in such a manner that no customer or employee would enter the area within the ten feet (10') walkway space. Mr. Saltsman stated he understood this restriction. Leonard Itkoff, 3205 Moritz Drive, stated he docked his boat in the marina and had, on many occasions over the last three years, been stopped'by Peter's Landing security or restaurant employees from going along the walkway to reach his boat. He mentioned that the Red Onion held parties in this area and had plastic canopy dividers with pipe on the bottom with which they blocked off the area. He also added he had measured the available space, and the area between the planters and the water line would be only six and one-half feet (6-1/21) wide. Mr. Itkoff also objected to the noise from the disco area upstairs over the main restaurant. -2- 6/3/87 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments June 3, 1987 Page 3 Stefan Steinberg, 16541 Tropez Lane, stated he lived in the nearby Broadmoor complex and had mailed a letter of objection to the Board. Mr. Steinberg added he was a member of the Broadmoor Homeowners Association but was unaware of any "good neighbor" policy meetings such as mentioned by Mr. Saltsman. Mr. Steinberg also said he and other people occasionally walked their dogs along the walkway area and wondered if the Health Department might not have objections to food being served in an area like this. He further expressed complaints about the late night noise, parking problems, etc. He stated the Homeowners Association presently had an injunction against the Red Onion because of past problems and he and others had been keeping a log showing dates and times of various infractions or infringements upon their personal rights. Dennis -Krejci said it seemed many of the problems mentioned might stem from alcoholic beverages being served on the premises. Glen Godfrey asked Mr. Steinberg if he would be able to furnish the Board a copy of the complaints covered in the "daily log" they were keeping. Mr. Steinberg said he could make it available to the Board, along with a copy of the temporary injunction. Daryl Smith asked Staff if she had analyzed the parking situation in relation to the additional restaurant seating. Staff said it would be minimal - something like two and one-half (2-1/2) spaces. There was no one else present wishing to speak for or against the request so the Public Hearing was closed. Glen Godfrey added he did not think the applicant was providing ample parking as required by Code. He said valet parking, joint use parking, and a Parking Management Plan had been worked out in the past to allow joint use parking and the plan had been approved by the City Council. Tom Poe stated he had many concerns over approval of the request because of blocking of fire exits and circulation around the tables and through the building. He added the Fire Department had problems in the past with access and circulation and'he would not be comfortable with approving the site plan as presented: Dennis Krejci asked if Tom Poe was speaking from a practical point of view or as a fire fighter. Mr. Poe replied from the standpoint of a fire fighter, Code writer, plan checker and functional point of view. Les Evans agreed with Tom Poe's concerns and added the restaurant had caused many problems in the past. He also said the walkway was not provided for use by a restaurant but rather for use of the general public for access to the water. Mr. Evans said he was ready to make a motion -for denial,,whereupon Daryl Smith asked that a condition be added to the Findings for Denial relative to the fire safety issue. Mr. Evans and Mr. Poe concurred, and Glen Godfrey added he also had concerns over closure of and encroachment into the Coastal Commission's required accessway, as well as parking problems. -3- 6/3/87 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments June 3, 1987 Page 4 Mr. Saltsman asked if he might speak again. i,He said,no concerns had been expressed which could not be resolved. UPON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY SMITH, USE PERMIT NO. 87-32 WAS DENIED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS FOR DENIAL: 1.- The proposed use will not - be� compatible with -adjacent': properties -due to noise and additional activity associated with outdoor dining:. 2. The establishment;- maintenance --and: operation;,of, the :use will be detrimental to .thee general welfare of :persons working,�or- residing in:.the ;vicinity. , !,Noise.,and ,activity generated will be incompatible with adjacent condominium development. 3. The establishment, maintenance and operation of the use will be detrimental„to the value of the property and improvements in the neighborhood. 4. The proposed ,use; conflicts_with the,•,spirit,-o� ,the;;Coastal.,, Commission's,,condition,,for unobstructed -access along the, walkway. 5. The proposed„use,:W,ill.aggravate.an-existing parking problem in ,the evenings. 6. Granting of --the use will compound past problems with blocking of the fire exits and difficulty circulating through the building due to tables blocking the aisles. AYES: Evans, Godfrey, Krejci, Poe, Smith NOES: None . ABSENT: None, - MOTION WAS MADE- BY- SMITH -AND SECONDED- BY,,KREJCI .THAT:,THE„LAND USE DIVISION BE'REQUESTED TO INVESTIGATE.THE COMPLAINTS RELATIVE -TO ENCROACHMENT INTO-THE,WALKWAY,BY RESTAURANTS SUCH AS RED -ONION -AND BRISTOL CAFE, THE PARKING SITUATION, AND ENFORCEMENT OF STIPULATIONS AGREED UPON BETWEEN THE CITY AND PETER'S LANDING. MOTION CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Evans, Godfrey, Krejci, Poe, -Smith NOES: None - ABSENT: None 1 -4- 6/3/87 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments June 3, 1987 Page 5 COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 87-16 Applicant: Christopher R. Pook A request to permit a second story addition to an existing single family dwelling. Subject property is located at 16671 Peale Lane (South side of Peale Lane approximately two hundred twenty-five feet (225') West of Gilbert Drive). This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 1, California Environmental Quality Act, 1986. Staff said this was a request to add square footage to the lower floor, as well as the addition of a second story, to an existing single story residence. There are no variances being requested but the Coastal Development Permit was required because of proximity to the water. Staff has received no comments from the adjacent property owners and Staff recommended approval of the project. The Public Hearing was opened and the applicant, Christopher R. Pook, was present. Mr. Pook said he had written letters to all of the adjacent property owners introducing himself and his family and explaining what he planned to do with the renovation of his house. He said three of his neighbors had expressed support and a fourth one had made no statement - neither for nor against the addition. An adjacent property owner, Mr. Serio, stated he lived one door away from Mr. Pook and had lived there for twenty-three years. He added the house was much too small for the area and was impractical insofar as usage by a family was concerned. He supported the added square footage to the residence. There was no one else present wishing to speak for or against the project so the Public Hearing was closed. UPON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY POE, COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 87-16 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: 1. The proposed single family residence conforms with the plans, policies, requirements and standards of the Coastal Element of the General Plan. 2. The Coastal Development Permit is consistent with the CZ suffix zoning requirements, the R1 Zoning District, as well as other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code applicable to the property. -5- 6/3/87 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments June 3, 1987 Page 6 3. At the time of occupancy, the proposed single'family residence can be provided with infrastructure in a mn aner that is consistent with the Coastal Element of the'"General Plan. 4..;.The proposed single family residence conforms with the public access and public recreation policies of'`Chapter'3 of the California Coastal Act. - SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The.site;plan, floor plans, and elevations received,and,dated May 14,.1987,-shall be -the approved layout.' 2. All building spoils, such as unusable lumber,,wire, pipe,, and other surplus or unusable material, shali'be disposed of "at an off -site facility equipped to handle them.'' 3. Proposed structures shall be architecturally compatible with -existing structures. 4. Natural gas shall be stubbed in at the locations of -cooking facilities,"water heaters, and'central heating units. 5. Low -volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets. 6. Prior.to issuance of building permits, the property owner shall sign, notarize, and record with the County Recorder a "Letter of Agreement" assuring that the single family residence will be maintained -.as one (1) dwelling unit:'' 7. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid prior to, issuance of;building permits. INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC CODE REQUIREMENTS: 1. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division; and"Fire Department. 2. The applicant shall meet all applicable-local','State,-and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards. AYES: Evans, Godfrey, Krejci, Poe, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: None -6- 6/3/87 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments June 3, 1987 Page 7 CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 87-36 Applicant: Rengel and Company Architects A request to permit 1) a three foot (3') interior side yard setback in lieu of five feet (5'), 2) a four foot (4') exterior side yard setback in lieu of ten feet (10'), 3) a seven foot six inch (7'-6") side setback for a front entry garage in lieu of twenty-two feet (22'), and 4) a seven foot three inch (7'-3") rear yard setback in lieu of a seven foot six inch (7'-6"). Subject property is located at 427 Tenth Street (Southwest corner of Tenth Street and Pecan Avenue). This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 5, California Environmental Quality Act, 1986. According to Staff, this is a request to construct essentially a new house. There is an existing single family residence which will be demolished except for the foundation and the basement. Staff said the lot was a rather odd -shaped one, the applicant had no access to the alley, and the lot was smaller than most in the area. The applicant cannot build any other way than to ask for a variance. Staff recommended approval only of the portions of the Conditional Exception which dealt with the stairway to the basement and the garage variance because there was a land -related hardship to support those requests. Daryl Smith asked that a condition be added requiring roll -up garage doors with automatic openers. Les Evans initiated a lengthy discussion between Staff and the Board members regarding the size of the existing residence, whether or not the lot had been split legally, and whether the owners of the adjacent miniscule lot would be able to build anything suitable on their property. Glen Godfrey expressed concern that this might be an illegal, nonconforming situation as it existed and stated he did not want the Board to give a "stamp of approval" without knowing about the title. The Public Hearing was opened and Michael Albanese was present to represent the applicant. He stated the Grant Deed was filed in 1946 and the lot split was included in the package. He added the house was over sixty (60) years old and a small addition had been made in the late 60's. Mr. Albanese said the property had been in the same family for many years and a retired couple from Minnesota were doing the remodel. He added the owners of this property had made several unsuccessful attempts to contact the owners of the adjacent small lot so they could purchase that property. Mr. Albanese said the one encroachment was needed to retain access to the basement since the foundation and basement would remain intact. The garage would remain in the same location and roll -up doors were being planned. -7- 6/3/87 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments June 3, 1987 Page 8 Daryl Smith wanted the architect made aware that Staff was not recommending approval of the entire request - only a portion of it. Mr. Albanese said he understood but felt all the variances were necessary for satisfactory execution of the project. - Dan Soriano stated he lived across the street and had�'hot been made aware that all these variances could be requested when he built on his property. He added he had revised all of his drawings to conform with Code restrictions and he did not feel it was fair for someone else to be allowed privileges such as those being requested. There was no one else present wishing to speak for or against the project so the Public Hearing was closed. Dennis Krejci stated he did -not perceive this as'being_ari''addition to an old building because, for all intents and purposes; it was new construction., -He added he was basically taking into consideration the size of the lot, the corner location, and placement of the residence on it. Mr. Krejci also cautioned the-architect{about the foundation and basement walls meeting present Code"standards. MOTION WAS MADE BY SMITH AND SECONDED BY KREJCI FOR -APPROVAL OF, - CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 87-36 WITH AMENDED FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS AS SUGGESTED BY STAFF. MOTION WAS DENIED BY'THEFOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Krejci, Smith NOES: Evans, Godfrey, Poe ABSENT: None Les Evans instituted further discussion regarding ownership of the lot and said family members could have more strenuously attempted to resolve this problem prior to building on'the property. Mr."Evans said.approving this type of situation was not, in his opinion, in keeping with what the City had been attempting to accomplish in this particular area. Glen Godfrey asked the architect the size of the existing residence 'and of the proposed addition. Mr. Albanese stated the existing building was approximately 1,400 Square Feet and the addition would bring the completed residence and garage to over 2,100 Square Feet. Mr. Godfrey said a fifty percent (50%) addition was too much for the property. Tom Poe added he understood seismic alterations could be made but that rebuilding over a foundation and basement as old as this was asking for problems. Daryl Smith stated the condition of the foundation would be a concern of the Building Division when permits were issued and the adjacent property owners could build a two-story structure if and when they rebuilt on the small lot. -8- 6/3/87 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments June 3, 1987 Page 9 UPON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY GODFREY, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 87-36 WAS DENIED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWINP VOTE: FINDINGS FOR DENIAL: 1. Approval of the proposed structure on this lot will cause problems with the adjacent substandard lot and would be contrary to the City's continuing efforts to consolidate parcels in the Town Lot area. 2. Problems associated with a small lot with no alley access have been known to the owner's family for a number of years and could have been dealt with previously. 3. The proposed structure would not be consistent with other residences constructed in the Town Lot area. AYES: Evans, Godfrey, Poe NOES: Krejci, Smith' ABSENT: None CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 87-37 Applicant: Albert S. Friedman A request to permit an eight foot (8') rear yard setback in lieu of a required ten foot (10') setback and to permit six hundred seventy-six (676) Square Feet of open space in lieu of nine hundred (900) Square Feet for a patio enclosure. 'Subject property is located at 15012 Baylor Circle (East side of Baylor Circle at end of cul-de-sac). This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 5, California Environmental Quality Act, 1986. Ms. Phillips said this was a request to add a patio enclosure to an existing single family dwelling which would encroach into the rear yard setback. The residence is located on a cul-de-sac and the house is set approximately thirty-four feet (341) back on the lot with a front entry garage. The house to the rear of this property is located approximately twenty feet (201) from the property line. Staff had received no objections from adjacent property owners and recommended approval with conditions because of the land -related hardship. The Public Hearing was opened. The applicant, Albert S. Friedman, was present and stated the owner of the property was also present. Mr. Friedman stated there would be a total of nine hundred (900) Square Feet of open space but it would be in separate areas. He -9- 6/3/87 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments June 3, 1987 Page 10 added there was an existing permit for the wooden patio cover and this was the only logical place to locate the enclosure. He also stated that 15082 Baylor Circle had been granted a similar variance Glen Godfrey asked what type of material would be used and Mr. Friedman said part of it would be extruded aluminum with plastic removable windows. There was no one else present wishing to speak for or against the project so the Public Hearing was closed. Dennis Krejci reminded the applicant a patio area was not to be considered a habitable area for use as a sleeping room. UPON MOTION BY KREJCI AND SECOND BY EVANS, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 87-37 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 size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, 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. Lot is located on a cul-de-sac and has an unusual lot shape, resulting -in placement of house to the rear of the lot. 2. The granting of Conditional Exception No. 87-37 will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to property in the same zone classifications. 3. 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 May 7, 1987, shall be the approved layout. 2. 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. 3. Proposed structures shall be architecturally compatible with existing structures. 4. Natural gas shall be stubbed in at the locations of cooking facilities, water heaters, and central heating units. -10- 6/3/87 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments June 3, 1987 Page 11 5. Low -volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets. 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. AYES: Evans, Godfrey, Krejci, Poe, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: None TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 87-257 Applicant: Dan Soriano A request to consolidate two (2) lots into one (1) lot for development purposes. Subject property is located at 501 Tenth Street (Northwest corner of Tenth Street and Pecan Avenue). This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 5, California Environmental Quality Act, 1986. Staff said this request was for lot consolidation and the applicant will be required to dedicate the alley and corner radius. He will move the driveway on Pecan Avenue. Staff recommended approval with conditions. Dan Soriano was present and asked about the corner radius. Les Evans explained this was a standard requirement to update old curb and gutter areas. Mr. Soriano again expressed displeasure over the fact he had met Code requirements for his property while others were granted variances. UPON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY SMITH, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 87-257 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: 1. The proposed consolidation of two (2) parcels for purposes of residential use in compliance with the size and shape of property necessary for that type of development. 2. The General Plan has set forth provisions for this type of land use as well as setting forth objectives for implementation of this type of use. -11- 6/3/87 - BZA Minutes, H. B.=Board of Zoning Adjustments June 3, 1987 Page 12 3. The property was previously studied for this intensity of land use at the time the land use designation for community residential district allowing residential buildings was placed on the subject property. 4. The size, depth, frontage, street width and other design and improvement features of the proposed consolidation are proposed to be constructed in compliance with standards plans and specifications on file with the City as well as in compliance with the State Map Act and supplemental City Subdivision Ordinance. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: A. TO BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO USE OR OCCUPANCY OF SAID PARCEL(S) FOR ANY PURPOSE: 1. The Tentative Parcel Map received by the Department of Development Services on May 18, 1987, shall be the approved layout'(with the amendments as noted thereon). 2. A parcel map shall be filed with and approved by the Department of Public Works and recorded with the Orange County Recorder. 3. The alley and corner radius shall be dedicated to City standards. 4. Water supply shall be through the City of,Huntington Beach's water system at the time said parcel(s) is/are developed (if such systems exist,within 200 feet,of said parcel(s). 5. Sewage disposal shall*be through the. City of Huntington Beach's sewage system at the time said parcel(s) is/are developed (if such systems exist within 200,feet of said parcel(s). 6. All utilities shall be installed underground at the,time said parcel(s) is/are developed. 7. Compliance with all applicable City Ordinances. 8. A copy of the recorded parcel map shall be filed with the Department of Development Services. 9. All vehicular access rights along Tenth Street and Pecan Avenue shall be dedicated to the City of Huntington Beach except at locations approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustments. The existing driveway on Pecan Avenue shall be removed. 1 -12- 6/3/87 - BZA Minutes, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments June 3, 1987 Page 13 AYES: Evans, Godfrey, Krejci, Poe, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: None There was no further business to be presented to the Board for their review. UPON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY POE, THE REGULAR MEETING WAS ADJOURNED TO A STUDY SESSION ON MONDAY, JUNE 8, 1987, AT 10:00 A.M., BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Evans, Godfrey, Krejci, Poe, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: None Glen K. Godfrey, Secretary Board of Zoning Adjustments jgh (8326d) -13- 6/3/87 - BZA