Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-03-01APPROVED 4/5/88 1 MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 1. 1988 - 7:00 PM Council Chambers - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE P P P P P ROLL CALL: Pierce, Livengood, Silva, Leipzig, Schumacher P P Higgins, Bourguignon A. CONSENT CALENDAR: A-1 MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 2, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECOND BY SCHUMACHER, TO CONTINUE MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 2, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO THE MARCH 15, 1988 MEETING BECAUSE OF MISSING PAGE 9, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Pierce, Livengood, Silva, Leipzig, Schumacher, Higgins, Bourguignon NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED A-2 CERTIFICATION OF WARNER AVENUE WIDENING PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECOND BY SILVA, TO CERTIFY AS ADEQUATE THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT/ASSESSMENT FOR THE WIDENING OF WARNER AVENUE BETWEEN ALGONQUIN STREET AND NEWLAND STREET, BY ADOPTING RESOLUTION NO. 1392, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Pierce, Livengood, Silva, Leipzig, Schumacher, Higgins, Bourguignon NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED B. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 1. PRESENTATION - A plaque was presented to Commissioner Kent Pierce by Chairman Victor Leipzig in appreciation for serving as Planning Commission Chairman during the past year. 2. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO PREPARE A PLAQUE FOR PRESENTATION TO JEAN SCHUMACHER IN APPRECIATION FOR OUTSTANDING SERVICE FOR THE PAST YEAR AS PLANNING COMMISSIONER, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Pierce, Livengood, Bourguignon NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Schumacher MOTION PASSED Silva, Leipzig, Higgins, 3. Dr. Donald Shipley, 829 Main Street, addressed his concerns regarding a rumor in the downtown area regarding the red curbing and widening to 4 lanes on Main Street. He also spoke in support of preserving our natural resource (the beach). 4. Lois Piper, 20361 Sonerville Lane, voiced her concerns and requested investigation of the Seabridge phase under construction abutting the Pacific Sands tract in which she lives. She stated that six years ago the project was approved which only included two-story structures and that presently a three-story structure was being constructed. 5. Loretta Wolf, 411 Sixth Street, publicly thanked Jean Schumacher for her outstanding service as Planning Commissioner. 6. Dorothy Grubbs, 8181 Munster, expressed her concerns with the Seabridge condominiums on Adams Avenue. She stated that the condominiums along the outside perimeter was suppose to be all two stories and that three story units were being constructed. She also stated that she supported the preservation of the beach and was against development that would eliminate any of that natural resource. 7. Geri Ortega, 6951 Lawn Haven Drive, publicly thanked Jean Schumacher for her outstanding service on the Planning Commission for the past year. J PC Minutes - 3/l/88 -2- (0244d) 0 8. Bob Mandic, 1112 Main Street, thanked Jean Schumacher for her outstanding service to the Planning Commission. He also expressed concern with the inability to obtain copies of staff reports on the public hearing items scheduled for tonight's meeting prior to the day of the meeting. 9. Doug Langevin, 8196 Pawtucket Drive, stated that he felt the Brown Act had been violated on the notification of the code amendment scheduled for public hearing at tonight's meeting. He felt that the location described in the legal notice could have been more explicit. PC Minutes - 3/l/88 -3- (0244d) C. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS C-1 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 88-3 APPLICANT: GERALD R. UNRUH Conditional Use Permit No. 88-3 is a request by the homeowner to add a second unit to an existing single family unit located at 8361 Reilly Drive near the intersection of Indianapolis Avenue and Newland Street. The application was accepted as complete on February 17, 1988. In that application, Mr. Unruh, the applicant, represented himself as the property owner. However, on February 23, 1988, it came to the attention of staff that Mr. Unruh's home is located on leased land owned by Trust Services of America, Inc. Representatives of Trust Services of America, Inc. indicated that authorization from the landowner is required prior to any substantial improvements on the property. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Continue Conditional Use Permit No. 88-3 to allow the applicant time to obtain permission from the landowner. A MOTION WAS MADE BY PIERCE, SECOND BY LIVENGOOD, TO CONTINUE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 88-3 TO THE APRIL 5, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Pierce, Livengood, Silva, Leipzig, Schumacher, Higgins, Bourguignon NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED C-2 CODE AMENDMENT NO, 88-3 APPLICANT: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Code Amendment No. 88-3 is a request to revise and expand residential uses in Districts 3, 4, 5 and 6 in the Downtown Specific Plan and to make minor revisions in all districts which will create a more concise document. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Code Amendment No. 88-3 and recommend adoption by the City Council. PC Minutes - 3/1/88 -4- (0244d) A continuance to the March 15, 1988 Planning Commission meeting was agreed to by the Commission and staff after a lengthy study session regarding Code Amendment No. 88-3 for further revisions and clarification. It was suggested that testimony be taken from interested residents so that public comments could also be incorporated into the proposed revisions. It was also recommended that a special joint study session with Planning Commission and City Council be scheduled for March 8, 1988. PUBLIC COMMENT: James Lane, 637 Frankfort Avenue, member of Huntington Beach Cares, stated that he and his group support the renewal of Oldtown however would like to see sensible densities created with adequate parking and traffic circulation. He would like to see a height limit of 35 feet in Oldtown. He spoke in opposition to the closure of the numbered streets, especially Third Street, Main Street and Fifth Street. He suggested that specific blocks be designated as residential and commercial and that a minimum of one street be used as a buffer to separate residential from commercial. He further stated that his group was opposed to cul-de-sacing because of the impacts to the flow of traffic. Geri Ortega, 6951 Lawn Haven Drive, member of Huntington Beach Tomorrow, addressed her concerns with traffic and circulation. She feels that this is a good time to look at the overall circulation element. She stated that she is opposed to the closure of streets and would like to see Main Street a two-way street with no widening. She feels that a transportation center in District 8 would be beneficial to the reduction of parking and traffic problems and would encourage shopping in the downtown area. Doug Langevin, 8196 Pawtucket Drive, expressed his concerns with the proposed density in the Phase I development in District 3. He feels the density should be limited to 35 units per gross acre. He also expressed concern with the commercial being right next door to residential and feels that Third Street should be left open as a buffer and would create more parking. He feels that it is an excellent plan to move the cultural center to District 5. He feels that the height limit in District 7 should be limited to 50 feet and that a transportation center (park and ride) should be proposed to cut down on traffic and that the railroad right of way should be used as a linear park or bike lane. Dianne Easterling, 203 Eighth Street, stated that her concerns included heights, setbacks, density, the closure of Third, Fifth and even -numbered streets, traffic and the preservation of the present quality of life. PC Minutes - 3/l/88 -5- (0244d) Dick Harlow, spoke in support of the proposed code amendment. He stated that the changes and revisions being proposed would mitigate problems that were not anticipated when the original Specific Plan was generated. Michael McMahon, 416 Tenth Street, stated that his main concern was the density in the Townlot area. He questioned the closure of streets since the traffic initiative was approved. He would like the problems of parking, congestion addressed. Natalie Kotsch, stated that she felt there was merit to cul-de-sacing. She feels that it will prevent beach -goers from parking in front of residential property. There were no other persons present to speak. Commissioner comments and suggestions included: 1) eliminate residential in District 5 and allow only residential in District 6 except neighborhood/commercial; 2) consideration of residential in District 3 with a buffer of open space from commercial; 3) height limit of 150 feet in District 8; 4) equally reduce commercial and residential within each district; 5) if streets are vacated, provide on -site parking to compensate; 6) include more low density projects; 7) leave Main Street open; 8) evaluate locations of proposed parking structures. A MOTION WAS MADE BY PIERCE, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO CONTINUE CODE AMENDMENT NO. 88-3 TO THE MARCH 15, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WITH A SPECIAL JOINT STUDY SESSION WITH CITY COUNCIL SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 8, 1988, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Pierce, Livengood, Silva, Leipzig, Schumacher, Higgins, Bourguignon NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED C-3 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 87-36 WITH SPECIAL PERMITS/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO, 87-28/TENTATIVE TRACT 12900 APPLICANT: MOLA DEVELOPMENT CORP./CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Conditional Use Permit No. 87-36 with Special Permits, Coastal Development Permit No. 87-28 and Tentative Tract No. 12900 is a request to develop a mixed -use development consisting of 90 condominiums (74 stacked condominiums and 16 townhomes) and 10,000 square feet of retail space on a 3.7 acre site within the Downtown Specific Plan area, District 6. There are four special permit requests related to driveway aisle width, amount of balcony space for some of the condominium units, six foot high decorative block wall in the exterior side yards, and setbacks from alley. PC Minutes - 3/1/88 -6- (0244d) The request is a joint application by Mola Development Corporation and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The proposed project is exempt from environmental review because it is in conformance with the Downtown Specific Plan Environmental Report, pursuant to Section 15182 of the California Environmental Quality Act. COASTAL STATUS: The proposed mixed -use project is subject to approval of a coastal development permit because it is located within coastal zone boundaries under a non -appealable area. REDEVELOPMENT STATUS: The proposed mixed -use project is within the Downtown Redevelopment Project area. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 87-36 for 89 residential units and 10,000 square feet of commercial with Special Permits, Coastal Development Permit No. 87-28 and Tentative Tract No. 12910 with findings and conditions of approval. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Dick Harlow and Ernie Vasquez, representing Mola Development Corp., spoke in support of the project. Chris Craig, 529 Lake Street, spoke in opposition to the closing of Fifth Street. He said that this is the third condominium development that has caused the closure of streets. James Lane, 637 Frankfort Avenue, expressed his concerns with the closing of Fifth Street. He feels that Fifth Street should remain as a buffer between commercial and residential. He also stated that he would prefer a height not to exceed 35 feet in the area. Lois Freeman, 415 Sixth Street, said that she felt that commercial was being pushed into residential and that there should be a limit in the area of only three stories for any development. She also expressed concern regarding the elimination of bus routes in the area. She further stated that she feels traffic should be studied in more detail. Loretta Wolfe, 411 Sixth Street, stated that she feels the density in the proposed development is too high and feels that there will be problems created with transportation. She was in favor of a continuance of the request. She feels that even though the development is a redevelopment project that it should stand alone in terms of zoning requirements like any other request. PC Minutes - 3/l/88 -7- (0244d) Doug Langevin, 8196 Pawtucket Drive, spoke in opposition to the project. He stated that if Fifth Street is blocked it will create an unviable commercial entity causing it to be landlocked. He feels that the project is poorly designed and that the main arterial circulation plan should be studied. He feels subdividing the City -owned property into 38, 25-foot lots would be more profitable. Jo Christian -Craig, 529 Lake Street, spoke in opposition to the closing of Fifth Street. Frank Mola, applicant, requested the Commission either approve or deny the project. He did not want the request continued or any additional delays imposed on the project. There were no other persons present to speak for or against the request and the public hearing was closed. A lengthy discussion followed and favorable and unfavorable comments were made by the Commission. Some felt that the proposed project was inconsistent with the goals and policies of the Huntington Beach General Plan, incompatible with existing and proposed uses in the vicinity which includes existing and future uses within the District 6 area of the Downtown Specific Plan, and did not meet the intent of the Downtown Specific Plan. It was felt that in order for the development to meet the intent of the Downtown Specific Plan it must be included in a Master Plan. Commissioner Livengood stated that he would be voting against the proposed project because it included a four-story structure. A MOTION WAS MADE BY PIERCE, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO DENY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 87-36 WITH SPECIAL PERMITS, COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 87-28 AND TENTATIVE TRACT 12900, WITH FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Pierce, Livengood, Leipzig, Schumacher NOES: Silva, Higgins, Bourguignon ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR DENIAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 87-36: 1. The proposed mixed -use residential/commercial development is incompatible with existing and proposed uses in the vicinity which includes existing and future uses within the District 6 area of the Downtown Specific Plan. In order for the development to meet the intent of the Downtown Special Plan it must be included in a Master Plan. PC Minutes - 3/1/88 -8- (0244d) FINDINGS FOR DENIAL - SPECIAL PERMITS: 1. The special permits for deviations to the requirements of Downtown Specific Plan will not promote a better living environment and provide maximum use of the land in terms site layout and design. 2. The special permit requests are inconsistent with the objectives of the Downtown Specific Plan in achieving a development adapted to the parcel and compatible with the surrounding environment. FINDINGS FOR DENIAL - TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 12900: the of 1. Tentative Tract No. 12900 is inconsistent with the goals and policies of the Huntington Beach General Plan and does not meet the intent of the Downtown Specific Plan. FINDINGS FOR DENIAL - COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO 87-28: 1. Coastal Development Permit No. 87-28 is inconsistent with the CZ suffix and the Downtown Specific Plan as well as other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code applicable to the property. C-4 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 88-7 WITH SPECIAL PERMITS/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO 88-3/TENTATIVE TRACT 13478 APPLICANT: CALIFORNIA RESORTS/CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Conditional Use Permit No. 88-7, in conjunction with Tentative Tract Map 13478 and Coastal Development Permit No. 88-3, is a request to develop a mixed use project within the Downtown Specific Plan in an area approximately bounded by Pacific Coast Highway, Main Street, Walnut Avenue and Second Street. The request consists of an 8-story hotel complex with 160 hotel suites, 20,000 square feet of retail space (including a restaurant) and 3,000 square feet of office space in addition to a 4-story, 160 unit condominium project. As an alternative to the hotel complex, the applicant is proposing a 90,000 square foot entertainment complex including commercial, office and a 6-plex movie theater. This alternative proposal has approximately the same footprint as the hotel and is designed with a similar architectural appearance. The request is a joint application by California Resorts and the Redevelopment Agency of Huntington Beach. PC Minutes - 3/1/88 -9- (0244d) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 88-7 with special permits, Coastal Development Permit No. 88-3 and Tentative Tract 13478 for a mixed -use project with either hotel or entertainment center option with findings and conditions of approval. Since approval of the revisions and changes to the Downtown Specific Plan were continued to another meeting it was suggested that the request also be continued to a future Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Schumacher stated, for the record, that she was opposed to a 6-plex movie theater being developed on Pacific Coast Highway. A MOTION WAS MADE BY HIGGINS, SECOND BY PIERCE, TO CONTINUE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 88-7 WITH SPECIAL PERMIT, COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 88-3 AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13478 TO THE APRIL 5, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WITH A STUDY SESSION PRIOR TO THE MEETING, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Pierce, Leipzig, NOES: Livengood, Silva ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED Schumacher, Higgins, Bourguignon There was some confusion as to whether this request would be included in the study session scheduled for March 8, 1988, or whether the March 8, 1988 study session would be limited to Downtown Specific Plan discussions only. A MOTION WAS MADE BY PIERCE, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO RECONSIDER THE PREVIOUS MOTION TO CONTINUE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 88-7 WITH SPECIAL PERMIT, COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 88-3 AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13478, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Pierce, Livengood, Silva, Leipzig, Schumacher, Higgins, Bourguignon NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None l� (0 4104) �a I a- 1 PC Minutes - 3/l/88 -10- (0244d) A MOTION WAS MADE BY PIERCE, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO CONTINUE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 88-7 WITH SPECIAL PERMIT, COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 88-3 AND TENTATIVE TRACT 13478 TO THE APRIL 5, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WITH A STUDY SESSION PRIOR TO THE MEETING, WITH A MARCH 8, 1988 JOINT STUDY SESSION WITH THE CITY COUNCIL TO BE SCHEDULED TO INCLUDE DISCUSSION ON THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN ONLY, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Pierce, Silva, Leipzig, Schumacher, Higgins, Bourguignon NOES: Livengood ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED D. ITEMS NOT PUBLIC HEARING None E. DISCUSSION ITEMS E-1 GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE NO. 88-2 (1988-89 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM) SUGGESTED ACTION: Accept the transmittal of the attached list of funded and unfunded projects contained in the proposed City Capital Improvement Program and schedule it for consideration as a General Plan Conformance on March 15, 1988. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO ACCEPT AND AGENDIZE GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE NO. 88-2 AS AN "A ITEM" AT THE MARCH 15, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Pierce, Livengood, Bourguignon NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None IreI - Silva, Leipzig, Schumacher, Higgins, F. PLANNING COMMISSION INQUIRIES Due to the lateness of the hour Planning Commission inquiries were continued to the next meeting. PC Minutes - 3/l/88 -11- (0244d) G. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS Updated Pending Items List presented. H. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ITEMS None I. ADJOURNMENT A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, AT 12:40 AM TO ADJOURN TO A JOINT STUDY SESSION WITH CITY COUNCIL REGARDING REVISIONS TO THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN ON TUESDAY, MARCH 8, 1988, AT 6:00 PM IN ROOM B-8, AND THEN TO THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING MARCH 15, 1988, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Pierce, Higgins, NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED MINUTES APPROVED: Livengood, Silva, Leipzig, Schumacher, Bourguignon L LA. - Mike Adams, Secretary Victor Leipzig, efia'r ii 1 PC Minutes - 3/l/88 -12- (0244d)