Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-08-26 (7)MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH OFFICE OF ZONING ADMINISTRATOR Room B-6 - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 26. 1987 - 1:30 P.M. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR PRESENT: James W. Palin STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Laura Phillips MINUTES: MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF AUGUST 12, 1987, WERE DEFERRED TO THE MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 2, 1987, BECAUSE THE ACTING ZONING ADMINISTRATOR WAS NOT PRESENT TO APPROVE THEM MINUTES OF THE MEETING -OF AUGUST 19, 1987, WERE APPROVED BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, AS TRANSCRIBED REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 87-25 Applicant: Anthony Bartoli A request to permit a four thousand, nine hundred sixty (4,960) Square Foot, two (2) story residence. Subject property is located at 16452 Malden Circle (North side of Malden Circle approximately one hundred eighty-five feet (185') West of Somerset Lane). This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 3, California Environmental Quality Act, 1986. The Staff member, Laura Phillips, stated this was a request for construction of a two (2) story, single family residence abutting on the channel. This proposed dwelling would be located in the Coastal Zone and would thus require a Coastal Development Permit. Adjacent property owners were notified but Staff received no comments. Staff recommended that modifications be depicted to the maid's quarters so that they would become an integral part of the house. There should be no outside entrance, no wiring for a stove, no garbage disposal (single sink only), and only a small refrigerator should be allowed. Staff indicated the fence, pool, and spa would require separate permits. Staff recommended approval of the request with these modifications and other conditions. Minutes of Meeting Office of Zoning Administrator August 26, 1987 Page 2 Mr. Palin asked for further clarification of the notification process. Staff indicated letters had been mailed to the adjacent property owners more than ten days prior to the hearing but Staff had received no comments. The Public Hearing was opened by James W. Palin, Zoning Administrator, and the applicant's representative, John Calb, was present. Mr. Calb said he understood the conditions and had no questions of Staff. There was no one else present wishing to speak for or against the project so the Public Hearing was closed. COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 87-25 WAS APPROVED BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS: 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. 3. At the time of occupancy, the proposed single family residence can be provided with infrastructure in a manner 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 and elevations received and dated July 29, 1987, shall be the approved layout. 2. A revised floor plan shall be submitted depicting the modifications described herein: a. Maid's quarters shall be revised as follows: (1) No outside entrance (2) No wiring for stove (3) Small refrigerator only (4) No garbage disposal; single sink only (8990d) -2- 8/26/87 - OZA Minutes of Meeting Office of Zoning Administrator August 26, 1987 Page 3 3. Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall submit proof that plans have been submitted to the Homeowner's Association, if applicable. 4. Prior to issuance of building permits, a grading plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Public Works. 5. An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be approved and installed pursuant to Fire Department regulations. 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. Swimming pool, spa, fences, and cantilevered deck require separate review and permits. 8. Natural gas shall be stubbed in at the locations of cooking facilities, water heaters, and central heating units. 9. Low -volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets. 10. 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. 11. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits. INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC CODE REQUIREMENTS: 1. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department. 2. The applicant shall meet all applicable local, State, and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards. 3. The Zoning Administrator reserves the right to revoke Coastal Development Permit No. 87-25 if any violation of these conditions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs. COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 87-26 Applicant: George Heuser A request to remodel an existing single family dwelling and add seven hundred twenty-nine and three -tenths (729.3) Square Feet. Subject property is located at 16652 Coral Cay Lane (East side of Coral Cay Lane at intersection with Bayside Lane). (8990d) -3- 8/26/87 - OZA Minutes of Meeting Office of Zoning Administrator August 26, 1987 Page 4 This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 1, California Environmental Quality Act, 1986. Staff reported this request was for remodeling'an"existing single family residence and constructing a small addition to the home. There were no variances requested and the only modifications would be to -the front -bonus room. The --setback would need to be fifteen feet (15') rather than thirteen feet, seven inches (13'-7"). Staff indicated letters had been mailed to adjacent property owners but no comments were received.- Staff recommended approval with conditions. Mr:.-Pal.in asked if`the setback requirements had been indicated in the conditions and Staff replied in the affirmative. The Public Hearing was' opened- and 'the' project"'Architect;' ,Larry Halonen, was present: Mr. Halonen had no pxoblem.with'�acceptance of the conditions:as outlined by Staff. There was no one else present wishing to speak for or against the project so the Public Hearing was closed. s COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 87-26 WAS APPROVED BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS: - _ .. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: 1. The•proposed:single family residence addition 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,t-the R1 ZoningtDistrict,•-as well as other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code :applicable to the -property. . I . , . ... - � . _ 3. At the time of occupancy, the proposed single family residence can be provided with infrastructure• in. a- manner 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. -It does -not impact access to or views - of the coast. SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:' 1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated July 31, 1987, shall be -the approved layout, with the modifications described herein: (8990d) -4- 8/26/87 - OZA 1 Minutes of Meeting Office of Zoning Administrator August 26, 1987 Page5 a. Bonus room shall be set back a minimum of fifteen feet (15') from the front property line. 2. -Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall submit proof that plans have been submitted to the Homeowner's Association, if applicable. 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. Proposed structures shall be architecturally compatible with existing structures. 5. Natural gas shall be stubbed in at the locations of cooking facilities, water heaters, and central heating units. 6. Low -volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets. 7. 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. 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. The Zoning Administrator reserves the right to revoke Coastal Development Permit No. 87-26 if -any violation of these conditions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs. CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 87-60 Applicant: Donald R. and Carolyn S. Foster A request to permit a three foot (31) side yard setback for a garage addition in lieu of a required five foot (5') setback. Subject property is located at 6672 Gate Hill Circle (South side of Gate Hill Circle at end of cul-de-sac). This request is.covered by Categorical Exemption, _Class 5, California Environmental Quality Act, 1986. Staff reported this was a "flag" lot which was allowed here in Huntington Beach in the early 70's. The owner is proposing to revise an existing garage into living area space and constructing a (8990d) -5- 8/26/87 - OZA Minutes of Meeting Office of Zoning Administrator August 26, 1987 Page 6 new two (2) car garage. The garage would be -located within three feet (3') of,.the side yard setback instead of.five.,feet (5'.) and there would be a straight driveway into the garage. When this tract was approved by the Planning Commission, there was a condition that these lots would be the same as shown in the file.located,in•the Planning Department. Staff indicated the -configuration of the, -lots to the Zoning Administrator. Staff recommended the request be referred to the Planning Commission to.determine whether=ior:.not this new plan would meet the guest parking•requirements•since the spaces would have to be on the street rather than on the lot. The Public Hearing was opened and the.applicant-'s Architect.andi representative, Mitchell Sheltraw, was.;present. He said he had shown, in previous discussions regarding the project, that there was one hundred fifty. feet (150' )• of street parking spacel'-on- the.- cul-de-sac.which could,be utilized and could accommodate ten (10) vehicles. The driveway was in excess of sixteen feet (16') in width and forty feet.(40') in length which could also accommodate automobiles in a tandem ,fashion. :• j ta,+> =- Mr. Palin said it was his understanding there:had.-already been some modifications to the property which affected the originally -approved plan for.guest parking--that•on-site guest parking;and.turnarounds had been required for.all the ".flag" lots. Mr.- Palini•asked if•the residence was a.two story unit and Mr. Sheltraw-replied-it-was only a single story.- Mr..Palin suggested the additional square footage could possibly be attained by addition of a second story or on the back of the house. Mr. Sheltraw said the property backed onto a golf course -and there would be objections from adjacent property owners to blocking their "golf course" views. The Zoning Administrator inquired about the square footage of the existing residence, the existing.garage, and.the proposed -.addition; Mr. Sheltraw was rather unsure,of the.footagesrinvolved.and,checked his figures several times. This was followed by a discussion regarding the percentage of lot coverage and Mr.•.Sheltraw,stated they were to be allowed up_to;fifty-eight percent,(58%). Diane Ranny, 6682 Gate Hill Circle, was present.and reminded Mr. Sheltraw that the existing residence was larger than he was indicating because she had the ,same model..home... She .also noted that the applicant had previously added onto the original residence. Ms. Ranny objected to the request because of the parking impact on the neighborhood and further mentioned that planters were being built along the driveway which would cut down on the available parking space on the driveway.itself. Another resident, Betty Engle of 6662 Gate Hill Circle, spoke in opposition to the request because of the impact of additional parking on the street. (8990d) -6- 8/26/87 - OZA. Minutes of Meeting Office of Zoning Administrator August 26, 1987 Page 7 There was no one else present wishing to speak for or against the project so the Public Hearing was closed. Mr. Palin expressed concern over this request because a great deal of Staff time had been expended providing an acceptable and workable solution for parking when the development was originally proposed and constructed. He added there was a definite need for on -site parking and turnaround space on these "flag" lots in order to prevent backing a long distance into the street. The Zoning Administrator added he was denying the request because it would grant a privilege not enjoyed by other "flag" lot properties in the area. Mr. Palin reminded the applicant's representative that his decision was appealable to the Planning Commission. CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 87-60 WAS DENIED BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: FINDINGS FOR DENIAL: 1. Since the subject property can be fully developed within regular established setbacks, such a Conditional Exception is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights. 2. Although the property is irregular in configuration, the size of the lot satisfies the minimum size of 6,000 square feet. 3. Granting of Conditional Exception No. 87-60 would constitute a special privilege inconsistent with limitations upon properties in the vicinity. 4. The subject property was legally subdivided and developed in a manner consistent with applicable zoning laws. 5. The placement of structures on the lot was approved pursuant to Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract No. 7421. The approved placement was intended to provide resident and guest parking on -site, as flag lots precluded guest parking on the street. 6. The proposed structure would eliminate turnaround on -site and require backing a considerable distance onto a cul-de-sac. CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 87-64 Applicant: Southridae Homes/Yorktown Associates A request to permit 1) a wood wall at zero foot (0') setback along the southerly property line in lieu of a masonry wall and 2) a thirteen foot, four inch (13'-4") minimum front yard setback in lieu (8990d) -7- 8/26/87 - OZA Minutes of Meeting Office of Zoning Administrator August 26, 1987 Page 8 of fifteen feet (15'). Subject property is located at 2418-2420 Huntington Street (Southeast corner of Yorktown Avenue and Huntington Street). This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 4, California Environmental Quality Act, 1986. Ms. Phillips stated this project had originally been approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustments and had been before the Board again as a Site Plan Amendment for changes to the site and elevations. The applicant now wishes to construct the rear wall of the garages with wood rather than masonry construction. Staff indicated -a point where concrete was poured incorrectly at thirteen feet, four inches (13'-4") when it should have been at fifteen feet (15'). Staff recommended denial of the request because the applicant had not shown justification for the variance. Staff further added she had received a letter from the adjacent property owner stating opposition to allowing wooden fencing rather than masonry. Mr. Palin asked the height of the wall and Staff replied it was thirteen feet (13') high with the parapet and would be five feet, six inches (5'-6") from the structures on the adjacent property. The Public Hearing was opened and Tony Ursino, R. L. "Duf" Sfreddo, and Emil Benes, the Architect, were present to represent the applicant. The property owner, "Duf" Sfreddo stated the justification was that they had taken the project completely through plan check. It had been approved as a wood wall and now the City wanted a masonry wall. The curb was poured and the City inspector allowed pouring of the slabs. We thought we were doing what was correct. Mr.•Sfreddo continued that the setback error was only for a length of about five feet (5') at the corner of one building, and the average was to be fifteen feet (15'). Ms. Phillips corrected the property owner with the statement that the average dimension was to have been twenty feet (20') with a minimum of fifteen feet (15'). Mr. Sfreddo said he would have his Architect address the technical points of the project. Another representative of the applicant, Tony Ursino, discussed the height and distance of a block wall and indicated where it dropped down to thirty inches (30"). After questioning by Mr. Palin, Mr. Ursino indicated the wall was not on the property line. Mr. Palin added it would create an area for bugs, trash, etc., to collect. Mr. Palin and Staff reminded the applicant's representatives they - originally had an approved site plan before they requested the site plan amendment. Mr. Ursino said they had the project primarily set 1 (8990d) -8- 8/26/87 - OZA Minutes of Meeting Office of Zoning Administrator August 26, 1987 Page 9 up for a density bonus and then they changed architects. City Staff members had also made recommendations for.changes to the elevations and the applicants had tried to conform to those suggestions. The new Architect, Emil Benes, stated he had gotten involved with the project after the site plan was approved but he could not make it work legally. He added they had redesigned the basic units and the City had requested more information on the elevations. The project was approved and building permits were obtained. Mr. Benes further explained their design was for a one (1) hour fire wall with parapet but the City then informed them it should have been a block wall. This was not a Building Department requirement but rather from the Planning Department. Mr. Palin then stated it was a City requirement which had been adopted by the City Council. Mr. Palin and the representatives held a lengthy discussion relative to changes in the site plan, moving the garages to'the easterly side of the project, height and construction material of the wall, requirements of the Fire Department with relation to fire protection and fire hydrants, distance tenants would have to walk to and from, garage locations, etc. The Zoning Administrator then informed the representatives of the applicant he was not inclined to approve this request because of the many problems they had discussed. He asked representatives if they would like a continuation to see if these stated problems could be corrected and offered his assistance in "ironing" out the problems with and through other departments. After a consultation, the applicant's representative agreed they had no alternative but to - accept the continuance. Mr. Sfreddo officially requested a continuance to resolve the situation. After a discussion between the Zoning Administrator and Staff, it was determined the request would have to be readvertised because of the proposed change in location of the wall and garages. This readvertising would require that the request be continued for a period of two (2) weeks - to the meeting of September 9, 1987. Mr. Sfreddo then agreed to this delayed continuation. There was no one else present wishing to speak for or against the request and the Public Hearing was left open to the future meeting. CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 87-64 WAS CONTINUED BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE, TO - THE REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 9, 1987. (8990d) -9- 8/26/87 - OZA Minutes of Meeting Office of Zoning Administrator August 26, 1987 Page 10 USE -PERMIT NO. 87-64 Applicant: St Bonaventure Catholic Church A request to, permit a three (3) day,Church festival - October 9,- 10 and ll,.1987. Subject property is located at 16400 Springdale-' Street ,(Northeast corner of Springdale Street and Heil•Avenue)•.• This request_is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class:5; California Environmental Quality Act, 1986. r,.. Ms. Phillips said this was a,festival which has been.held:annually for -several -years. The -Police Department has been.contacted;.and. they want the same conditions imposed as were placed on the event last year. The Police mentioned parking problems but the proposed conditions should mitigate them.- Staff.recommendedlapproval with conditions.such,as.street barricades,,police protection (paid for by the applicant), restrictions on hours of operation, etc. Mr. Palin reminded Staff there had been a problem with cleaning up the site after last year's event. He suggested, -the Church,Committee should be able to clean up the grounds within:two..(2) days after.the festival and -have all,structures completely removed.,within,sone_,W week of .thelcompletion of the festival. The applicant's,.representative,.Tim Johnson,_was present. Mr. Johnson stated.he was Chairman of this year's.,festival and noted that, in past years, the parishioners had done the work themselves but now they were hiring it.done. •He.agreed-the site;couldT:be,iclean of all signs of the festival-within.the,•one (1);week period, and he further agreed -to abide by the.other conditions as stipulated by Staff. The Zoning Administrator -reminded the audience.this type of request did not require a Public Hearing but, because of past problems, the City had required that -adjacent -,property owners be_ notified:..,;..;;- Virginia Mason, -an adjacent resident, addressed past. -problems,.:_ including parking.in residential areas.;_ She said Sunday -morning was really a bad time because of parishioners coming to Church along with those people attending the festival. Ms. Mason also mentioned noise problems during the night.while•the,equipment is being.set'up and torn down.and,requested that.some.type of restrictions-be.=placed on hours of operation to prevent this noise. Mr. Palin suggested that the Chairman contact the Police Department - for further assistance with parking arrangements. The Zoning Administrator and Staff discussed hours.of operation and conditions suggested to alleviate the problems which had,been discussed. (8990d) -10- 8/26/87 - OZA Minutes of Meeting Office of Zoning Administrator August 26, 1987 Page 11 USE PERMIT NO. 87-64 WAS APPROVED BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS: FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: 1. The establishment, maintenance and operation of the use will not be detrimental to: a. The general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity; b. Property and improvements in the vicinity of such use or building. 2. The granting of Use Permit No. 87-64 will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. 3. The proposal is consistent with the City's General Plan of Land Use. SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. Prior to the event, the following shall be completed: a. All necessary electrical permits shall be obtained. b. The applicant shall obtain clearance from the Public Liability Claims Coordinator, Administrative Services Department, and/or shall provide a Certificate of Insurance and Hold Harmless Agreement to be executed at least five (5) days prior to the event. c. An on -site inspection by the Fire Department shall be required prior to the event. The applicant shall apply for a Fire Department permit at least seven (7) days prior to the event to allow for this inspection and to allow sufficient time for final documents to be issued. The applicant shall also submit, along with the application, a detailed site plan indicating fire lanes and booth, ride, and large equipment locations. The applicant shall meet with a Fire Department representative at time of issuance of permit to receive approval of the submitted site plan. The site shall be inspected for compliance prior to 10:00 A.M. on the opening day. d. Submittal of a written agreement form the Redeemer Lutheran Church across the street for the provision of one hundred fifty (150) spaces in addition to the three hundred eleven (311) parking spaces provided on the Church site itself. (8990d) -11- 8/26/87 - OZA Minutes of Meeting Office of Zoning Administrator August 26, 1987 Page 12 e. Prior to operation of any equipment used,in conjunction with the amusement.rides, the City shall be in receipt,of State certification and permits, showing inspection within one (1) year period, stating that the rides meet all requirements of the State Industrial-Safety,Division.. I. The Church shall provide a name and telephone number-of'a contact person with whom the local residents may,make contact about any complaints they may have.on,the festival activities between the dates of October 9-through October 11, 1987. g. The Church shall distribute a letter to -the affected residents indicating the contact person's name and a map showing what streets will be barricaded. h.- A Certificate to Operate shall be issued by the Director of Community Development. :. 2. The hours of operation of:the festival -.shall be!limited•-.to,the following: Noon to 9:30 P.M. on Friday, 10:00 A.M. to 9:30 P.M. on Saturday, and 2:60 P.M. to 9:30 P.M. on Sunday. 3. :All operations of the festival, including machinery other -,than necessary refrigeration-units,,shall•desist between the hours of 9:30 P.M. and,8:00 A.M. No setting up -or tearing down, -of - equipment shall occur between 10:00 P.M. and 7:00-A.M: 4. Use of amplifiers, speakers,.musical.instruments,:and playing of recorded music -are to be discontinued as-of,-9:00-P.M. each :evening. 5.- All,activity.on the site or clean -up -activity -off site shall be -shut down by 11:OO.P.M. All activities-shall:conform,to the provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code,regarding noise. (Section 8.40 of the Municipal -Code.),. 6. In number, as determined by the Police Chief, uniformed officers shall be provided on site during the operation hours of the event except that there shall be a minimum of ten-(10) security officers and one (1) supervising officer on site from 6:00 P.M. to the close of the event on Friday, October 9, 1987, and from 2:00 P.M. to closing on Saturday and Sunday, October 10 and 11, 1987. The contract for the officers shall include an one-half hour period before and after the scheduled duty time for briefing and travel time. Where there may not be -a - sufficient number of Huntington Beach Police officers, the applicant shall hire private security guards. The applicant shall be required to meet with the Patrol Sergeant to ensure standard enforcement. 1 C (8990d) -12- 8/26/87 - OZA Minutes of Meeting Office of Zoning Administrator August 26, 1987 Page 13 7. Two (2) people from the Church shall patrol the adjacent surrounding neighborhoods during the hours of the festival operation to control trespassing and littering from occurring; and additional Church personnel shall monitor Springdale Avenue to deter patrons from jaywalking to reach the carnival or parking lot. 8. The Zoning Administrator recommends that an announcement be made in the Church to ask the parishioners not to park on the neighborhood streets, and that workers at the event itself be encouraged to park in the Lutheran Church parking lot. 9. The following traffic, circulation, and on -site parking provisions shall be made during the event: a. Barricades shall be placed at the intersections of Springdale Street and Brassie Circle, Springdale Street and Orlando Drive, Heil Avenue and Bradbury Lane, Orlando Drive and Bradbury Lane, and Orlando Drive and Angler Lane. The applicant shall provide, at their expense, uniformed police officers to man the barricades at all times during the hours of operation at all locations except Orlando Drive and Angler Lane, one (1) hour prior to the opening of the festival to the close of each day (to be approved by the Traffic Engineer and Traffic Division of the Police Department). Barricades shall be delivered and available for placement one (1) day prior to the event. b. Appropriate signs (temporary) for the direction of traffic and on -site parking shall be provided by the -applicant. Said signs, location, and content to be as recommended by the Traffic Division of the Police Department. c. The vehicular access off Orlando Drive and Bradbury Lane shall be secured and not used for ingress/egress to the site except for emergency purposes. d. All vehicular ingress and egress to the site shall be via the Church driveway located mid -block on Springdale Street. e. Vehicular parking shall be prohibited on the driveway leading to Orlando Drive so that emergency access will not be impeded. f. Some additional temporary fencing shall be erected along Bradbury Lane to close off any access from that street into the festival grounds. (8990d) -13- 8/26/87 - OZA Minutes of Meeting Office of Zoning Administrator August 26, 1987 Page 14 g. Any refrigeration truck to be placed on site'shall be` located as near as possible -to the intersection of Springdale Street and Heil Avenue to minimize noise from the unit. h.>, The police shall place barricades at the left­turn­lane- on Orlando Drive to prevent any turning into the Church property at this location. 10. All equipment and manpower required by Condition Nos. 6 and 9. a. shall be provided at the applicant's expense. 11. No structures, booths, etc., shall be erected on the site sooner than two (2) weeks prior to the event, and all evidence of the activity (booths, rides, and other material shall be - completely -removed from the site within one (1), week of closing of the festival; i.e., by the following Sunday night. All rental equipment shall beiremoved from the site within one (1) week of closing of the festival. 12. , The applicant shall provide professional clean-up crews to clear the adjacent streets of trash and debris each evening after closing of, the activity:' - . ' - 13. All trash;,debris, and garbage, as well as special dumpsters, shall be removed from the site within two (2) days of the closing of the festival. 14. Alcoholic beverage sales are-subject`to review and approval -of the Alcoholic Beverage Control-Board--and-issuance of a license. 15. In the event there are any violations of the foregoing conditions or any violations of live safety codes, the festival activity will be terminated'and'not-permitted to reopen.,,`-, - NOTE NOTE TO APPLICANT: You are hereby notified that; for -future events, this Department must receive your complete Temporary Outdoor Event application a minimum of four (4) weeks prior to -the event for adequate review and processing. If this procedure is not followed, your application will not be processed. Also, for your information, you may process up to -three (3) one -day events at a time provided they are all within a few months of one another. 1 . I (8990d) -14- 8/26/87 - OZA- Minutes of Meeting Office of Zoning Administrator August 26, 1987 Page 15 USE PERMIT NO. 87-66 Applicant: Casey Jurado A request to permit a four hundred ninety-four (494) Square Foot addition to a single family dwelling with existing nonconforming setbacks. Subject property is located at 502 Thirteenth Street (Northeast corner of Pecan Avenue and Thirteenth Street). This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 1, California Environmental Quality Act, 1986. Staff reported this was a one-half size lot on the corner of Thirteenth Street and Pecan Avenue. The applicant wishes to construct an addition to a residence with nonconforming setbacks. It would be within one foot (1') of the rear property line. The side yard setback is presently required to be ten feet (101) but Staff members are rewriting the Ordinance to require five feet (5'). The garage entrance would be from Pecan Avenue at six feet (6')-rather than the required twenty-two feet (22'). The applicant wants to add a bath and bedrooms upstairs. Staff could -not find a copy of the original tract map creating this lot. Staff recommended approval of the requeELt with conditions. Jim Palin questioned Staff further regarding creation of the lot and advised the applicant he was not sure this parcel would be a legal building lot. Staff said the size of the lot was fifty-five feet by sixty-nine feet (55' x 69'). The Public Hearing was opened and the property owner, Joe Drucker, was present. Mr. Drucker said he had made an attempt to determine legality of the lot by researching the property back to 1958. - Mr. Drucker added he would like the additional square footage to make more livable quarters for his family. After a lengthy discussion with the property owner relative to the history of lots in that area, the Zoning Administrator stated he did not feel comfortable with approving the request without -legal proof_ of creation of the lot. Mr. Palin asked the applicant if he would like a continuance to give him more time to work with Staff to determine the legality of the lot. Joe Drucker requested the continuance. There was no one else present wishing to speak for or against the project and the Public Hearing was left open. USE PERMIT NO. 87-66 WAS CONTINUED BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, AT THE REQUEST OF THE PROPERTY OWNER, TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 2, 1987.- (8990d) -15- 8/26/87 - OZA Minutes of Meeting Office -of Zoning Administrator August 26, 1987 Page 16 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 87-177 Applicant: Frank Gibson A request to create five (5) parcels for development purposes: Subject,property is located on the North side of Talbert Avenue approximately five hundred feet (500') East of Gothard Street. This request is covered by Negative Declaration No.-87-18: Staff gave the Zoning Administrator a history of the project -which had been approved under Administrative Review No. 87-21. Staff recommended approval of the request with conditions. The applicant's representative, Bill Borden, was present and stated he had received a copy of the suggested Conditions of Approval and agreed to accept them. Mr. Palin held an extensive discussion with Mr. Borden -regarding parking, reciprocal access to the parcels, landscaping, drainage, turnaround areas, ingress and egress to the parcels,,and -adjacent properties. Mr. Palin asked that Staff amend the Conditions of.. Approval to include several items. The applicant's representative, Bill Borden, agreed to.the-amended conditions. �.. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 87-177 WAS APPROVED BY -THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS: FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: 1. The proposed subdivision of five (5) parcels for -purposes of industrial use in compliance with the size and shape of property necessary for that type of development: 2. The General Plan has set forth provisions for this type of land use as well as setting forth objectives for implementation of this type of.use. 3. The property was previously studied for this intensity of land use at -the time the land use designation for community business district allowing industrial 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. (8990d) -16- 8/26/87 - OZA- Minutes of Meeting Office of Zoning Administrator August 26, 1987 Page 17 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 Community Development on August 11, 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 water easement 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 Community Development. 9. All vehicular access rights along Talbert Avenue shall be dedicated to the City of Huntington Beach except at locations approved by the Zoning Administrator. 10. The applicant shall record a Reciprocal Access Agreement for ingress and egress over each parcel to all other parcels. 11. An association shall be established to maintain the private _ street section and any landscaping, if any, in that area. 12. Submit documentation with proof that property to the North will accept concentrated surface drainage. 13. Any retaining walls over eighteen inches (18") high and between property lines shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator for review of placement and design. 14. The designs for landscaping, retaining walls, and any signage located on the West side of the entry drive shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development for review and approval. (8990d) -17- 8/26/87 - OZA Minutes of Meeting Office of Zoning Administrator August 26, 1987 Page 18 15. The Tentative Parcel Map shall be amended to reflect emergency turnaround area on Parcel Nos. 2, 3, 4 and 5. ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 86-43 (EXTENSION OF TIME) '' Applicant' Bryde Mossman Architect/Planner A request to permit the construction of a two-story,'thirty nine hundred (3,900) Square Foot industrial building. Subject property is located at 7422 Warner -Avenue (Southeast corner of°Warner Avenue and Palmdale Street). This request'is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 3, California Environmental Quality Act, 1986. Staff explained this was a request for a one (1) year.Extension of Time on.a previously approved request. Jim Palin asked -Staff if the applicant's letter had -indicated any reason for requesting the extension, and Staff replied it had indicated a problem with financing. Upon questioning by Mr., Palin, the -applicant's representative, Eric Mossman, stated he did not know why the property owner was requesting a time extension. Mr. Palin asked if -the -applicant's representative felt the property owner was "stalling"-unti•l the'City had built the Warner -Avenue improvements.- Again; Mr: Mossman said he did not know the property owner's intent. Mr. Palin added that installation of these street improvements might be very far in the future, and, if this -was the intent;'there was.no point in continuing to grant extensions-. Mr. Palin-then stated he would. continue the request for one (1) week so.that Staff and the -- applicant's representative could determine the exact reason-for'the extension of time. Mr. Mossman agreed to the continuance and said he would have the property owner in attendance at the next meeting. ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 86-43 (EXTENSION OF TIME) WAS CONTINUED BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 2, 1987. There was no further business to be presented to the -Zoning Administrator for review. THE REGULAR MEETING WAS ADJOURNED BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR TO A STUDY SESSION ON MONDAY, AUGUST 31, 1987, AT 1:15 P.M. James w. Yarin Zoning Administrator 1 (8990d) -18- 8/26/87 - OZA