Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-11-03APPROVED 12/1/87 MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION NOVEMBER 3, 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 A Summerell, Livengood A. CONSENT CALENDAR: A-1 MINUTES OF OCTOBER 6, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A MOTION WAS MADE BY HIGGINS, SECOND BY SILVA, TO APPROVE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 6, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AS SUBMITTED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell NOES: None ABSENT: Livengood ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED A-2 AMENDMENT TO PLANNING COMMISSION BY-LAWS A MOTION WAS MADE BY SCHUMACHER, SECOND BY PIERCE, TO CONTINUE THE AMENDMENT TO PLANNING COMMISSION BY-LAWS TO THE DECEMBER 1, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, TO BE SCHEDULED AS AN INFORMATION ITEM, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell NOES: None ABSENT: Livengood ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED B. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Edward Garakian, 16392 Magellan Lane, addressed a complaint and concern to the Commission regarding the revolving door located in the main lobby of City Hall. He stated that he has made several complaints to no avail regarding the tarnished brass and dirty condition of the door. C. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS C-1 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 87-43 APPLICANT: LETTUCE AMUSE U. Conditional Use Permit No. 87-43 is a request to permit an adult traffic violator school within Suite No. 14 of the De La Cuesta office building located at 17301 Beach Boulevard. The proposed school will operate evenings and on the weekends and requires joint use of parking. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The proposed project is exempt Class 1 Section 15301 from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Conditional Use Permit no. 87-43 with findings and conditions of approval. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED There was no one present to speak for or against the request and the public hearing was closed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY SCHUMACHER, SECOND BY HIGGINS, TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 87-43 WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell NOES: None ABSENT: Livengood ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: 1. The proposed traffic violator school will not have a detrimental effect on the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of persons residing or working in the neighborhood because the use will operate on the week nights and weenend when a majority of the other businesses are closed. 2. The proposed traffic violator school with a maximum enrollment of 30 students is compatible with other uses in the office complex. PC Minutes - 11/3/87 -2- (9474d) 3. The proposed joint use of parking will not cause a hardship for other businesses in the complex because the various uses have divergent needs in terms of daytime versus nighttime hours and weekday versus weekend hours. 4. The school use is consistent with the goals and policies of the Huntington Beach General Plan. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan and floor plans received and dated September 16, 1987, shall be the approved layout. 2. The proposed use shall comply with all applicable provisions of the City Ordinance Code and Building Division. 3. The traffic violator school shall be limited to an enrollment of no more than 30 students. Any expansion in number shall require approval by the Planning Commission. 4. The conditional use permit shall apply only to the suite labeled No. 14 on the site plan. Any expansion of area shall require approval of the Planning Commission. 5. The traffic violator school shall operate between the hours of 5:45 PM and 9:30 PM during the evenings and 8:45 AM to 4:45 PM on Saturday and Sunday. 6. The applicant shall obtain a business license from the City of Huntington Beach. 7. All signs shall comply with Article 961 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code and shall be subject to a sign permit. 8. Evidence of an agreement for joint use of parking shall be provided by proper legal instrument, approved as to form by the City Attorney. The instrument shall be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder and shall be filed with the City prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 9. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke this conditional use permit if any violation of these conditions or the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs. C-2 USE PERMIT NO 87-76/TENTATIVE TRACT NO 13212/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 87-39 APPLICANT: COULTRUP DEVELOPMENT CO. Use Permit No. 87-76 is a request to construct seven separate four -plea units (28 units) on a two -acre site located at 16852 Bolsa Chica Street. Tentative Tract No. 13212 is a request to subdivide the site into seven parcels with a public cul-de-sac street on the east side of Bolsa Chica Street approximately 400 feet south of Pearce Drive. PC Minutes - 11/3/87 -3- (9474d) ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Pursuant to the environmental regulations in effect at this time, the Department of Community Development posted draft Negative Declaration No. 87-39 for ten days, and no comments, either verbal or written were received. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Use Permit No. 87-76, Tentative Tract No. 13212 and Negative Declaration No. 87-39 with findings and conditions of approval. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Jon Coultrup, applicant, spoke in support of the request. David Lang, architect, stated that the development was created with a community feeling with extensive landscaping to enhance the surrounding neighborhood. Sally Graham, 5161 Gelding Circle, spoke in support of the development. She stated that it was nice to see an out-of-town developer with concerns for the City. Mark Browning, 16771 Roosevelt Lane, member of Huntington Beach Tomorrow, spoke in support of the development however still expressed concerned with parking in the area. Cheryl Browning, 16771 Roosevelt Lane, stated that the proposed development was very attractive and she was anxious to see the finished product. She further stated that it was nice to see the plans proposed within the R2 standards with no conditional exceptions requested. There were no other persons present to speak for or against the development and the public hearing was closed. The Commission complemented the developer on the proposed development. A MOTION WAS MADE BY SCHUMACHER, SECOND BY SUMMERELL, TO APPROVE NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 87-39, USE PERMIT NO. 87-76 AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 13212 WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell NOES: None ABSENT: Livengood ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED PC Minutes - 11/3/87 -4- (9474d) FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - USE PERMIT NO, 87-76: 1. The proposed seven separate four -plea units (28 units) 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 seven separate four -plea units (28 units) are compatible with existing or proposed uses in the vicinity. 3. The location, site layout, and design of the proposed use is properly related to the streets, drives and other structures and uses in the vicinity in a harmonious manner. 4. Architectural features and general appearance of the project will enhance the orderly and harmonious development of the area. 5. The proposed seven separate four -plea units (28 units) are consistent with the development standards of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code and the goals and policies of the Huntington Beach General Plan. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - TENTATIVE TRACT 13212: 1. The proposed seven lot subdivision for apartment purposes of this 2 gross acre parcel of land zoned (Q)R2 (Qualified -Medium Density Residential District), is proposed to be constructed having 14 units per acre. 2. The property was previously studied for this intensity of land use at the time the land use designation and (Q)R2 (Qualified -Medium Density Residential District) zoning designation were placed on the subject property. 3. The General Plan is set up for the provisions for this type of land use as well as setting forth provisions for the implementation for this type of housig. 4. The site is relatively flat and physically suitable for the proposed density and type of development. 5. The tentative tract is consistent with the goals and policies of the Huntington Beach General Plan. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - USE PERMIT NO. 87-76: 1. The site plan, floor plans and elevations received and dated October 26, 1987, shall be the approved layout. 2. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department. PC Minutes - 11/3/87 -5- (9474d) 3. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the following shall be completed: a. The applicant shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan to the Department of Community Development and Public Works for review and approval. b. Final tract 13212 shall be accepted by City Council and recorded with the County Recorder's Office. c. FAA and CalTrans Aeronautics approvals shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development. d. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid. e. 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. The interior noise levels of all dwelling units shall not exceed the California insulation standards of 45 dBA CNEL. 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). All measures recommended to mitigate noise to acceptable levels shall be incorporated into the design of the project. f. 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. 4. Provide block wall on the perimeter property lines of the entire project. a. Walls on interior property lines shall be prohibited. b. Perimeter fence materials and colors shall be subject to Design Review Board approval. 5. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a grading plan shall be submitted to the City's Department of Public Works. A plan for silt control for all water runoff from the property during construction and during initial operation of the project may be required by the Director of Public Works if deemed necessary. 1 C PC Minutes - 11/3/87 -6- (9474d) 6. Existing mature trees on site shall be retained and incorporated into the site plan if feasible. Any existing mature tree that must be removed shall be replaced at a 2:1 ratio with 36 inch box trees which shall be incorporated into the project's landscape plan. 7. The applicant shall meet all applicable local, State, and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards. 8. All buildings to be fully sprinklered and installed pursuant to NFPA 13 and Fire Department specifications. 9. Two (2) fire hydrants will be installed and operating prior to combustible construction. 10. Address numbers shall be installed per these specifications: a. Building number = minimum 10 inch with brush stroke of 1-1/2 inch b. Unit numbers = minimum 4 inches with brush stroke of 1/2 inch 11. Dedicated street shall be improved with an all-weather driving surface for fire access prior to combustible construction. 12. Natural gas and 220V electrical shall be stubbed in at the location of clothes dryers. 13. Natural gas shall be stubbed in at the locations of cooking facilities, water heaters and central heating units. 14. Low volume heads shall be used on all showers. 15. All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe and other surplus or unusable materials, shall be disposed of at an offsite facility equipped to handle them. 16. If foil -type insulation is to be used, a fire retardant type shall be installed as approved by the Building Department. 17. If lighting is included in the parking lot and/or recreation area energy efficient lamps shall be used (e.g., high pressure sodium vapor, metal halide). All outside lighting shall be directed to prevent "spillage" onto adjacent properties. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - TENTATIVE TRACT NO, 13212: 1. Tentative Tract No. 13212 dated October 19, 1987, shall be revised to depict the following modifications: a. Street section of cul-de-sac shall be 52 feet wide with 6 foot wide sidewalk. PC Minutes - 11/3/87 -7- (9474d) b. Indicate scale. C. Indicate reciprocal parking between Lots 1 and 2, 3 and 4, 5 and 6, and 6 and 7. 2. Backflow devices shall be installed on all domestic pool, fire and irrigation services. 3. CC&Rs shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Attorney and Community Development in accordance with Article 915 prior to final recordation of Tract Map 13212. 4. Left -turns onto or off of Bolsa Chica Street to and from the project site are prohibited. The tract shall be signed for right turns only onto Bolsa Chica Street. 5. Parking on Bolsa Chica Street will be prohibited. 6. An 8 inch water main on the east side of Bolsa Chica Street shall be constructed to connect to the existing system. 7. Sewer, water and drainage systems shall be designed per Public Works Standards. The sewer main shall be an 8 inch diameter pipe. 8. Access rights to Bolsa Chica, except at the public street, shall be dedicated to the City of Huntington Beach. 9. Landsape cut-outs dedicated to the City of Huntington Beach are required at the corners of the cul-de-sac street and Bolsa Chica Street. The irrigation/power lines shall be tied into the system from Tract 12206. Easements for the irrigation/power lines shall be dedicated to the City from Tract 13212 and the proposed tract as necessary for the City to properly maintain the landscape pockets and irrigation/power system. Block walls shall be private. 10. Soils report and grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works. C-3 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 87-49 APPLICANT: BRAD HOLLANDER Conditional Use Permit No. 87-49 is a request to permit a youth center/youth dancing nightclub within a mixed use industrial complex located at 16371 Gothard, Suites G and H, by amending the resolution list which specifies commercial uses permitted within the industrial zone to include such a use pursuant to Section 9530.14. In addition, the applicant is requesting joint use of the parking area permitted for the nightclub portion of the youth center. PC Minutes - 11/3/87 -8- (9474d) ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The proposed project is exempt pursuant to Class 1 Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 87-49 to amend Resolution No. 1313 to allow for a youth center/youth dancing nightclub and to permit joint use of parking with findings and conditions of approval. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Brad Hollander, applicant, spoke in support of the project. He stated that he feels the project will have a positive impact on the neighborhood. He further stated that his new proposal includes a reduction in the number of occupants with more restrooms. Commissioner Higgins questioned the applicant regarding number of occupants versus restrooms and asked how he proposed to control loitering. The applicant stated that his security staff had been well trained and was prepared to hire professionals. Commissioner Higgins said that the site appeared to have a lot of hidden places and was curious as to how the applicant was prepared to control the situation. The applicant stated that cones would be used to block traffic and direct traffic on the site and that his security staff would be on the site at all times. Commissioner Leipzig asked the applicant if he was planning to have live music or dancing during the week. The applicant stated that live music and dancing were only being planned for the week end. Commissioner Silva asked the applicant why with the presence of 13-year olds was the closing hour of 2:00 AM proposed. The applicant stated that 2:00 AM was chosen for exiting purposes with staggered hours. Natalie Kotsch, representative of the applicant, spoke in support of the proposed project. She stated that there would be a youth board involved at the center and that the owners of the center had been checked out with excellent credentials. She feels that the City needs a youth center. Cal Faello, 16351 Magellan Lane, spoke in opposition to the youth center. He feels that there are not security guards proposed for 300 kids at 2:00 AM. He does not want kids running around in his neighborhood. Edward Garakian, 16392 Magellan Lane, presented a petition in opposition to the youth center. He expressed his concerns which included: the number of cars at the center, restroom facilities, handicapped provisions, liquor on site, road behind the site being used as a drag strip. PC Minutes - 11/3/87 -9- (9474d) Mary Baroglio, 16282 Magellan Lane, stated that she can hear disturbances from Old World, which is a lot further away from her house than the proposed youth center. She spoke in opposition to the center and addressed her concerns regarding liquor on the site, noise, and loitering in the parking lot. She also asked if the night club was going to be available on a rental basis for private use and if the person renting the facility would have to be over 21. She urged the Commission to deny the request. Frank Pfeifer, 16322 Magellan Lane, spoke in opposition to the center. He asked what kind of tutoring or counseling was being proposed. Malcolm Sterling, resident behind the project, spoke in opposition to the request. He stated that noise and traffic will increase with this proposed use. He urged the Commission to deny the request. There were no other persons present to speak for or against the request and the public hearing was closed. The Commission felt that even though the City does need a teen center that this project has a lot of unanswered questions. They requested that the request be continued and that further investigations and studies be made on the project in the following areas: 1) State standards regading toilet facilities; 2) background information on applicant included in the report; 3) how many security guards proposed, how many in uniform; 4) plans for tutoring and counseling; 5) names of members of Board of Directors; 6) list of hours of all proposed uses. Commissioner Higgins stated that he was concerned with the industrial users adjacent to the center. He suggested that the entrance doors be located at the far end of the suites away from the industrial users. Commissioner Pierce suggested that a 6 month review period be imposed on the project for.protection for the adjacent neighborhood. Commissioner Schumacher stated that she feels that this use does not belong at an industrial that has not been totally built out. She feels that it will restrict legitimate industrial users. A MOTION WAS MADE BY HIGGINS, SECOND BY SUMMERELL, TO CONTINUE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 87-49 TO THE DECEMBER 1, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Silva, Higgins, NOES: Schumacher ABSENT: Livengood ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell 1 C PC Minutes - 11/3/87 -10- (9474d) C-4 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 87-42/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 87-42 APPLICANT: HSIN FENG INTERNATIONAL CPROPORATION Conditional Use Permit No. 87-42 is a request to construct a 66-unit motel within the C4 (Highway Commercial) district on the west side of Beach Boulevard, approximately 1,500 feet south of Warner Avenue. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Pursuant to the environmental regulations in effect at this time, the Department of Community Development posted draft Negative Declaration No. 87-42 for ten days, and no comments, either verbal or written were received. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 87-42 and Negative Declaration No. 87-42 with findings and conditions of approval. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Kunio Inoue, applicant, spoke in support of the project. He stated that he does want the design of his building to be colonial because he does not want it to look like another office building. Reanaldo DeLaQuesta, 7811 Glencoe, spoke in support of the project and stated that he does not see why a developer cannot design his building the way he wants to if he has proper frontage. There were no other persons present to speak for or against the project and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Higgins stated that a motel is allowed in this zone with an approved conditional use permit (not automatically allowed). He is not in favor of any more small motels on Beach Boulevard because he feels the small motels will suffer when hotels are developed on Pacific Coast Highway. He would rather see consolidation with other uses. Chairman Pierce stated that motels are permitted. If the City does not want to permit small motels that the code should be changed. Commissioner Schumacher stated that this is a legal lot and is not creating a substandard lot and that no viable finding for denial can be made. Denial cannot be made or architectural requirements imposed on personal preference but on the requirements of the code. Staff stated that Design Review Board approval was required on the project and that is where harmonious architecture would be discussed. PC Minutes - 11/3/87 -11- (9474d) A MOTION WAS MADE BY SCHUMACHER, SECOND BY SILVA, TO APPROVE NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 87-42 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 87-42 WITH FINDINGS AND ADDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Silva, Schumacher, NOES: Higgins ABSENT: Livengood ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell 1. The proposed 66-unit motel is consistent with the development standards contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code and will not have a detrimental effect upon: a. The general health, welfare, and safety of persons working or residing in the vicinity. b. The value of property and improvements in the vicinity. 2. The proposed 66-unit motel is consistent with the City's General Plan. 3. Ingress, egress and circulation in the parking areas are designed to accommodate reciprocal access at a future date which will provide integrated circulation and mitigate traffic problems along Beach Boulevard. 4. The proposed motel is compatible with existing or other proposed uses in the neighborhood. 5. The location, site layout, and design of the proposed motel properly adapts the proposed structures to streets, driveways, and other adjacent structures and uses in a harmonious manner. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan, floor plans and elevations received and dated September 10, 1987; shall be revised and re -submitted depicting the modifications described herein: a. Revise floor plan for suites on second and third floors to reflect single sleeping rooms. b. Eliminate double sleeping unit on third floor. c. Elevations shall reflect consistency with existing architecture of recently approved projects in near vicinity and shall be subject to the approval of the Design Review Board. PC Minutes - 11/3/87 -12- (9474d) 2. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit the following plans: a. Landscape and irrigation plan to the Department of Community Development and Public Works for review and approval. The 15 foot front landscape planter along Beach Boulevard shall be provided with a minimum 24 inch high berm. 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. Submit a hydrology/hydraulic study to the Department of Public Works. d. Submit a grading plan and soils report to the Department of Public Works. e. The property owner shall provide an irrevocable offer to dedicate reciprocal access between the subject site and adjacent properties to the north and south. A copy of the legal instrument shall be approved by the City Attorney as to form and content and, when approved, shall be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder. A copy shall be filed with the Department of Community Development prior to occupancy. f. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid. 3. Natural gas and 220V electrical shall be stubbed in at the location of clothes dryers. 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 showers. 6. All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe and other surplus or unusable materials, shall be disposed of at an offsite facility equipped to handle them. 7. 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. The interior noise levels of all dwelling units shall not exceed the California insulation standards of 45 dBA CNEL. 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). All measures recommended to mitigate noise to acceptable levels shall be incorporated into the design of the project. PC Minutes - 11/3/87 -13- (9474d) 8. If lighting is included in the parking lot and/or recreation area energy efficient lamps shall be used (e.g., high pressure sodium vapor, metal halide). All outside lighting shall be directed to prevent "spillage" onto adjacent properties. 9. 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. 10. Existing mature trees on site shall be retained and incorporated into the site plan if feasible. Any existing mature tree that must be removed shall be replaced at a 2:1 ratio with 36 inch box trees which shall be incorporated into the project's landscape plan. 11. If foil -type insulation is to be used, a fire retardant type shall be installed as approved by the Building Department. 12. Automatic fire sprinkler systems will be installed throughout. 13. A Class III standpipe system (combination) will be installed to comply with Huntington Beach Fire Department requirements. 14. A fire alarm system will be installed pursuant to Fire Department Specifications. 15. Two (2) fire hydrants will be installed prior to combustible construction. Shop drawings will be submitted to the Public Works Department and approved locations by the Fire Department prior to installation. 16. All driveways will be designated fire lanes and posted to comply with Huntington Beach Fire Department Standards. 17. The driveway passing under the building will have a vertical clearance of a minimum 13' 6". This clearance is from final paving surface. The approach and departure must be a level grade. 18. Address numbers shall be installed as follows: a. Building numbers shall be a minimum 10" with a brush stroke of 1-1/2". b. Individual units shall be a minimum 4" with a brush stroke of 1/2" . 19. Developer shall provide for a needed fire flow of 3,500 gallons per minute for the project. PC Minutes - 11/3/87 -14- (9474d) 20. Project to be secured by a perimeter fence. Upon commencement of combustible construction, a 24 hour security guard on site will be required. 21. Beach Boulevard driveway shall be 30 foot width (CalTrans approved). 22. 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. 23. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department. 24. All signage shall comply with Article 961 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 25. Length of stay shall be limited to 24 hours minimum and 30 day maximum. C-5 CODE AMENDMENT NO, 87-12 APPLICANT: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH On October 20, 1987, the Planning Commission continued Code Amendment No. 87-12 and directed staff to further clarify the proposed changes to the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Staff proposes two changes to the code: (1) to allow a conditional exception (variance) to be extended when in conjunction with another entitlement (i.e. conditional use permit, use permit, tentative tract); and (2) to permit corresponding time limits for projects when they include a coastal development permit which has received final approval from the California Coastal Commission. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Code Amendment No. 87-12 with findings and forward to the City Council for adoption. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED There was no one present to speak for or against the code amendment and the public hearing was closed. The Commissioners discussed one year extensions on conditional exceptions and the synchronization of entitlements with coastal development permits. There was still a lot of confusion regarding the code amendment and it was suggested that straw votes be taken with the results incorporated and a continuance to the December 1, 1987 meeting. PC Minutes - 11/3/87 -15- (9474d) A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY LEIPZIG, SECOND BY SILVA, TO ALLOW CONDITIONAL EXCEPTIONS TO BE EXTENDED ON WRITTEN APPLICATION (NO FEE) AFTER REVIEW BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR BODY THAT ORIGINALLY GRANTED APPROVAL, WITH THE DISCRETION OF THAT BODY AS TO THE REQUIREMENT OF A PUBLIC HEARING, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Silva, Higgins, NOES: Schumacher ABSENT: Livengood ABSTAIN: None STRAW VOTE MOTION PASSED Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY PIERCE, SECOND BY HIGGINS, TO ALLOW CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS TO COINCIDE WITH TIMING ON COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPROVALS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Silva, Higgins, Pierce, Summerell NOES: Leipzig ABSENT: Livengood ABSTAIN: Schumacher STRAW VOTE MOTION PASSED A MOTION WAS MADE BY LEIPZIG, SECOND BY HIGGINS, TO CONTINUE CODE AMENDMENT NO. 87-12 TO THE DECEMBER 1, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell NOES: None ABSENT: Livengood ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED C-6 CODE AMENDMENT NO. 87-9 APPLICANT: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Code Amendment No. 87-9 was continued from the October 6, 1987 Planning Commission meeting with direction to forward copies of the proposed ordinance to -several interest groups and homeowner's associations as well as those persons who spoke during the public hearings relating to variances for block walls on through lots in the Harbor area. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Code Amendment No. 87-9 with findings and recommend adoption by the City Council. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED PC Minutes - 11/3/87 -16- (9474d) l There was no one present to speak for or against the code amendment and the public hearing was closed. A discussion ensued regarding the size of retaining walls on through lots. Commissioners Higgins and Pierce felt that the present code requiring a 42 inch wall was acceptable. A MOTION WAS MADE BY SILVA, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO APPROVE CODE AMENDMENT NO. 87-9 WITH FINDINGS, AS PROPOSED WITH A MAXIMUM 24 INCH RETAINING WALL WITHIN 15 FOOT REAR SETBACK ON THROUGH -LOTS ONLY AND PROVISION FOR WATERPROOFING ALL RETAINING WALLS ABUTTING A STREET, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Silva, Schumacher, NOES: Higgins, Pierce ABSENT: Livengood ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: Leipzig, Summerell 1. Reorganization of Article 977 creates a more systematic format for implementation. 2. Revisions to Article 977 create more aesthetically pleasing fences which will have less detrimental effect on surrounding properties. 3. Revisions to Article 977 are in conformance with the General Plan; in particular, the Land use and Open Space Elements. The Commission suggested that a study session be scheduled in the future on code amendments before being presented to the Commission during the public hearing. A MOTION WAS MADE BY SCHUMACHER, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO SCHEDULE STUDY SESSIONS BEFORE PRESENTATION OF CODE AMENDMENTS DURING PUBLIC HEARINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell NOES: None ABSENT: Livengood ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED PC Minutes - 11/3/87 -17- (9474d) D. ITEMS NOT PUBLIC HEARING None E. DISCUSSION ITEMS E-1 REPORT OF CITY COUNCIL ACTION ON BIENNIAL PUBLIC HEARINGS ON FIVE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS F. PENDING ITEMS There were no new items added to the Pending Items list. G. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS None H. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ITEMS None I. ADJOURNMENT A MOTION WAS MADE BY HIGGINS, SECOND BY SUMMERELL, AT 11:25, TO ADJOURN TO THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF NOVEMBER 17, 1987, AT 7:00 PM BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Silva, Schumacher, Higgins, Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell NOES: None ABSENT: Livengood ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED APPROVED' 91 tt, Mike Ada , Secretary t M. Pierce, Chairman PC Minutes - 11/3/87 -18- (9474d)