Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-06-20APPROVED 7/18/89 1 MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 20, 1989 Council Chambers 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, STUDY SESSION - 5:30 PM REGULAR MEETING - 7:00 PM PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE P P P ROLL CALL: Shomaker, Kirkland, Williams, P P Mountford, Leipzig A. CONSENT CALENDAR None B. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - Civic Center California P P Bourguignon, Ortega Donald McCallum, 6841 Nyanza Drive, requested Planning Commission follow up on complaints filed with the City Attorney's office regarding on -going code violations at the Home Depot. He also requested revocation procedures be implemented on the recently approved conditional use permit. He said Home Depot has not made any improvements to the facility and is still violating all City codes. His complaints include: trucks still unloading illegally; use of gas fork lifts instead of electric; trash compactor operating after designated hours; two new illegal containers being used as storage. B-1 PLANNING COMMISSION SUB -COMMITTEE REPORTS None C. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS C-1 EQUESTRIAN BOND ASSESSMENT FOR TENTATIVE TRACTS 11769 AND 13210(CONTINUED FROM MAY 16, 1989 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING) APPLICANT: THE DAHL COMPANY The determination of the per lot equestrian bond assessment was continued by the Planning Commission to the June 20, 1989 meeting. Both the applicant and staff requested this item be continued until the City Council had taken action on the Ellis-Goldenwest Specific Plan. On June 5, 1989 the City Council approved the Ellis- Goldenwest Specific Plan with minor revisions. The Ellis-Goldenwest Specific Plan as approved by the City Council does not require the establishment of a common equestrian stable within 160 Ellis-Goldenwest Quartersection. Rather the Specific Plan promotes estate residential with equestrian amenties. The Specific Plan contains the provisions to encourage on -site stabling of horses rather than requiring the construction and long-term maintenance of a common stable. The equestrian bond assessment will not be required of future subdivisions within the 160 acre quartersection. The equestrian bond assessment was imposed by the Planning Commission on existing residential subdivision projects which were approved prior to the adoption of the Ellis-Goldenwest Specific Plan. There are three existing residential subdivisions which have been conditioned by the City to provide an equestrian bond assessment which needs to be addressed prior to final occupancy of the last phase of development in each tract. Staff has identified three possible uses of the equestrian bond assessment obligation required of Tracts 11769, 13210 and 11473, Lot 1. As an alternative, the Planning Commission may determine that the equestrian bond assessment is not necessary since the adopted Specific Plan does not require the establishment of a common equestrian facility. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Direct staff accordingly. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED David Dahl, 505 Park Avenue, Balboa Island, spoke in support of staff's position on the bond amount. He feels the amount proposed is reasonable and encouraged the use of the fees to promote the General Estate theme. John Fisher, 6692 Shetland Circle, spoke in support of staff's position on the bond amount and said he would like to see the funds used for enhancing the area not purchasing more land. PC Minutes - 6/20/89 -2- (3187d) 1 Gerald Chapman, 6752 Shire Circle, -said the only reason the homeowners agreed to sell the set -aside lot is because they were promised another in the area. He feels the developer should deposit the money in an interest -bearing loan and if a decision is made to not use it the money should be returned to the homeowners. Don Jankowiak, 6711 Shetland Circle, said the developer agreed to an amount of $108,000 and feels the money should be used to improve the area. In answer to questions,from the Commission he stated 20 percent of the homeowners either have horses or are taking riding lessons and that 15 trained horses will become homeless without an equestrian facility. There were no other persons present to speak for or against the bond issue and the public hearing was closed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LEIPZIG, SECOND BY ORTEGA, TO REQUIRE AN EQUESTRIAN BOND ASSESSMENT BE POSTED FOR TENTATIVE TRACTS 11769, 13210 AND 11473, LOT 1, FOR A PERIOD OF 10 YEARS BY THE DEVELOPER IN THE AMOUNT OF $108,000 AND SHALL BE POSTED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS FOR THE LAST LOT IN EACH TRACT, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Kirkland, Bourguignon, Ortega, Mountford, Leipzig NOES: Williams ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED ON MINUTE ACTION STAFF WAS REQUESTED TO IDENTIFY AN AREA FOR A COMMUNITY PARK IN THE ELLIS-GOLDENWEST AREA AND FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL FOR ACTION. C-2 CODE AMENDMENT NO. 89-4/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO, 89-11 APPLICANT: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Code Amendment No. 89-4 and Negative Declaration No. 89-11 is a request to amend Article 963 (Unclassified Uses) to allow social service type uses in residential zones and to amend Article 908 (Definitions) to include a definition for social services. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Pursuant to the environmental regulations in effect at this time, the Department of Community Development posted draft Negative Declaration No. 89-11 for ten days, and no comments either verbal or written were received. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Deny Code Amendment No. 89-4 with findings. PC Minutes - 6/20/89 -3- (3187d) Since Code Amendment No. 89-4 (Item C-2) and Conditional Use Permit No. 89-8 (Item C-3) were being heard concurrently and approval of the conditional use permit depended on the passage of the code amendment public testimony was taken for both items. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Vicki Walker, 3721 S. Ross Street, Santa Ana, representing Center for Creative Alternatives, spoke in support of the code amendment to allow social service type uses in residential zones. She feels non-profit agencies/community services should be located in residential areas. She briefly explained services rendered by her center (services abused children, drug problems, etc.) She said the center sees approximately 18 clients per day and that 43 percent of them are residents of the City. Other services provided by the center include support group meetings, community lectures, etc. William Adair, 16542 Kellog Circle, spoke in opposition to the center being located on a school site. He said parents in the neighborhood are concerned and against the proposal. He said there are many unattended children in his neighborhood during the day and he feels a mental health facility would be added trouble. Kirk Cuningham, 16621 Tunstall Lane #2, addressed his concerns and those of his neighbors with the code amendment. He said there are about 80 children in his neighborhood and most of them are latch -key children and does not feel the area needs added strangers. He does not feel a facility such as the one being proposed belongs in a residential neighborhood. Danna Hudson, 16621 Tunstall Lane #1, spoke in opposition to the code amendment. He related his own experiences with drugs and said he feels people with drug problems should not seek help in a residential neighborhood. He does not feel it would be safe. Vicki Glass, 16641 Tunstall Lane #1, said she was speaking for all single mothers in the area (total of 8 on her street) in opposition to the code amendment. She said she thinks the program sounds wonderful however not in her area. She feels it will add traffic to the area. David Gobel, 16631 Tunstall Lane #2, spoke in opposition to the code amendment. He said if a mental health facility is approved in a residential area who is liable for thefts, injuries, assaults, traffic problems, parking problems, reduction in property values, etc. He said there are too many children in his area and is concerned with their safety. Reverend Robert Hardin, 16242 Magellan Lane, spoke in support of the center and what it offers however does not feel it is an appropriate use for a residential neighborhood. He said his neighborhood was not notified of the public hearing and felt that they should have been due to the issue. PC Minutes - 6/20/89 -4- (3187d) 1 Anthony Valli, 7251 La Mancha #A, spoke in opposition to the request. He said the park is presently overused and there are already too many transients in the area. Sally Mathiesen, 15471 Columbia Lane, an intern at the Creative Alternatives Center, said the majority of their clients come from the community not from outside the area. She said there were more interns at the clinic than clients. She would support a center such as this one in her neighborhood. She said these people are fearing the unknown and that there are already existing problems in their area and feels they would benefit from the center. Vic Bachand, 16652 Bartlett Lane, spoke against the request. He said parking is already a problem in the area especially with the recent closure of parking on Goldenwest Street. David Fehser, 16681 Tunstall Lane #4, said the only reason the center wants to locate in this neighborhood is because of the cheap rent and he opposes the request. Ray Hendrickson, 4199 Campus Drive #700, Irvine, member of the Board of Directors for the Center, spoke in support of the request. He said he did not realize the center would create so many problems; his center counsels victims not criminals. He further stated the most critical problem in our schools is drugs and the only way to solve the problem is through education. He said the center needs more space and a location in a community that needs their help which he believes is this one. He addressed the parking concerns (presently 47 spaces on the site, they only require 18). Frank Sutherland, 16661 Tunstall Lane #2, said the School Board approached this agency to rent the school space. He feels there are areas in the City more desirable for the center. Mary Baroglio, 16282 Magellan Lane, said she was told that the center did treat offenders and charged them $300 to $400 for treatment. She is concerned that there is a pre-school right next door to the proposed mental health clinic as well as a baseball diamond, play yard and park. She feels this is a high -risk program. Colleen Chapman, 9701 Ingram, Garden Grove, Administrative Assistant for the center, said her children come to work with her and have never experienced any problems. She said they frequently have visiting Girl Scouts in the office and children to attend puppet shows and does not feel they are in any danger. She supports the request and feels the services offered are needed in the community. Jan Tyler, 8382 Millbridge, spoke in support of the center because she feels social services should be able to use vacant school sites. She said she is more concerned with the alternative uses that might be proposed. PC Minutes - 6/20/89 -5- (3187d) John Stuart, 9861 Cornwall Avenue, Westminister, works for the center, said the center only deals with victims not offenders. He said the center is trying to educate children and grown-ups who have relationship problems and that it is not a rehabilitation center. He has never experienced any violance since he has been with the facility. He said for every $20, 60 children can be helped in his program. Donna Cog, 16532 Kellog Circle #1, presented several petitions in opposition to the center signed by residents in the area. She said she is concerned with a mental health facility in a residential area. She said Murdy Park already provides community services for the neighborhood; they do not need any more services. There were no other persons present to speak for or against the request and the public hearing was closed. The Commission expressed concern with the language in the code amendment. They felt the proposed center was a very reputable and needed facility however did not feel it should be located in a residential area. A MOTION WAS MADE BY MOUNTFORD, SECOND BY WILLIAMS, TO DENY CODE AMENDMENT NO. 89-4 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 89-11 WITH FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Kirkland, Williams, Bourguignon, Ortega, Mountford, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR DENIAL: 1. Code Amendment No. 89-4 to permit social service -type uses pursuant to a Conditional Use Permit in residential zones would not be compatible with the intent of residential environments. 2. Code Amendment No. 89-4 to permit social service type uses in residential zones may generate additional traffic which will impact the residential street systems and residential zoned property. 3. Code Amendment No. 89-4 to permit social service type uses in residential zones is inconsistent with the goals and policies of the Huntington Beach General Plan. PC Minutes - 6/20/89 -6- (3187d) C-3 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0, 89-8 APPLICANT: CENTER FOR CREATIVE ALTERNATIVES/VICKI WALKER LOCATION: 16666 Tunstall Lane (Park View School) Conditional Use Permit No. 89-8 is a request to permit a community mental health (counseling) agency at the vacant Park View School site pursuant to Code Amendment No. 89-4. Should the Planning Commission approve Code Amendment No. 89-4 the proposed mental health agency shall be required to meet the criteria as outlined in the proposed code amendment for location, size, parking, and hours of operation. If the Planning Commission denies Code Amendment No. 89-4 the Planning Commission must reject Conditional Use Permit No. 89-8 since there will be no provisions in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code to process such application. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Deny Conditional Use Permit No. 89-8 with findings. DUE TO THE DENIAL OF CODE AMENDMENT NO. 89-4 UNDER ITEM C-2, THE APPLICATION WAS REJECTED AND WILL BE RE -PROCESSED IF CODE AMENDMENT NO. 89-4 IS APPEALED TO CITY COUNCIL. C-4 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0, 89-18 APPLICANT: NICHOLAS P. DI PIETRO LOCATION: 8468 Indianapolis Avenue (southwest corner of Indianapolis and Newland) Conditional Use Permit No. 89-18 is a request to permit beer and wine sales for on -site consumption in conjunction with an existing restaurant. Pursuant to Section 9636 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, a conditional use permit is required for any business proposing to sell alcoholic beverages for on -site or off -site consumption. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 89-18 with findings and conditions of approval. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Lisa Di Pietro, applicant, spoke in support of her family -operated business and the request. There were no other persons present to speak for or against the request and the public hearing was closed. PC Minutes - 6/20/89 -7- (3187d) The only request made by the Commission was to add a condition stating that beer and wine sales shall be permitted for on -site consumption only. Concern was also expressed by the Commission regarding the appearance of the center at this location. They requested follow up from the Land Use staff to determine if the center had any violations. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LEIPZIG, SECOND BY MOUNTFORD, TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 89-18 WITH FINDINGS AND ADDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Kirkland, Williams, Bourguignon, Ortega, Mountford, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: 1. The proposed sale of beer and wine for on -site consumption in conjunction with an existing restaurant will not create an undue traffic problem. The small size of the restaurant precludes additional parking requirements. 2. The proposed sale of beer and wine for on -site consumption in conjunction with an existing restaurant is compatible with the existing uses within the center. 3. The proposed sale of beer and wine for on -site consumption will not have a detrimental effect upon the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of persons working or residing in the neighborhood and will not be detrimental to the value of property and improvements in the vicinity. 4. The proposed sale of beer and wine for on -site consumption in conjunction with an existing restaurant is consistent with the commercial zoning designation on the subject property. 5. The proposed sale of beer and wine for on -site consumption in conjunction with an existing restaurant will not be detrimental to the goals and policies of the Huntington Beach General Plan. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan and floor plan received and dated May 9, 1989, shall be the conceptually approved layout. PC Minutes - 6/20/89 -8- (3187d) 1 2. The applicant shall obtain a license to sell alcoholic beverages from Alcoholic Beverage Control prior to the sale of alcoholic beverages. 3. The hours of operation for the restaurant shall not extend past 10:00 PM Sunday through Thursday nights and 11:00 PM on Friday and Saturday nights. 4. Seating provided for on -site dining shall not exceed 12 seats. 5. No live entertainment as defined in Article 9220.12 shall be permitted. 6. Beer and wine sales shall be permitted for on -site consumption only. 7. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke Conditional Use Permit No. 89-18 if any violation of these conditions or the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs. 8. This conditional use permit shall not become effective for any purpose until an "Acceptance of Conditions" form has been properly executed by the applicant and an authorized representative of the owner of the property and returned to the Planning Division; and until the ten day appeal period has elapsed. C-5 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 89-19 APPLICANT: JUDITH G. PARKER LOCATION: 6061 Jade (north side, approximately 260 feet west of Edgeview Lane) Conditional Use Permit No. 89-19 is a request for a second unit addition to a single family dwelling pursuant to Section 9110.3 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The proposed project is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15301, Class 1, of the California Environmental Quality Act. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 89-19 with findings and conditions of approval. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Judith G. Parker, applicant, spoke in support of the request. She said the addition was for her 70-year old mother and that the house would be owner -occupied. PC Minutes - 6/20/89 -9- (3187d) There were no other persons present to speak for or against the request and the public hearing was closed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY MOUNTFORD, SECOND BY KIRKLAND, TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 89-19, WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. AN AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION WAS MADE BY ORTEGA, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO ADD A CONDITION REQUIRING AN OWNER -OCCUPIED COVENANT WITH THE PROPERTY, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Williams, Bourguignon, Ortega, Mountford, Leipzig NOES: Shomaker, Kirkland WITH THE AMENDMENT ACCEPTED, THE MOTION WAS RE -STATED FOR APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 89-19 WITH FINDINGS AND AMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Kirkland, Williams, Bourguignon, Ortega, Mountford, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: 1. The location, site layout, and design of the proposed 415 square foot second unit properly adapts the proposed structure to the existing house and other adjacent structures and uses in a harmonious manner. 2. The access to and parking for the proposed 415 square foot second unit does not create an undue traffic problem. There are four on -site parking spaces available. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan, floor plans and elevations received and dated May 24, 1989, shall be the conceptually approved layout. 2. Prior to submittal for building permits, the applicant/owner shall complete the following: a. Floor plans shall depict natural gas and 220V electrical shall be stubbed in at the location of clothes dryers; natural gas shall be stubbed in at the locations of cooking facilities, water heaters, and central heating units; and low -volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets. PC Minutes - 6/20/89 -10- (3187d) b. The site plan shall -include (or reference page) all conditions of approval imposed on the project printed verbatim. 3. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department. 4. 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. 5. Pursuant to Article 911 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, the following conditions shall apply: a. The second unit shall not be sold separately from the main dwelling. b. The park and recreation fee shall be assessed at 25 percent of the fee for a single family residence. c. No separate utility meters shall be permitted for the second unit. d. The following safety and conservation measures for the new unit shall be implemented: (1) Insulation of accessible attic areas to R-19. (2) Weatherstripping of doors and windows. (3) Installation of low flow shower heads and faucets certified by the California Energy Commission. (4) Installation of approved smoke detectors. 6. A covenant shall be filed with the County Recorder's Office stating that the property shall be owner occupied. 7. This conditional use permit shall become null and void unless exercised within one (1) year of the date of final approval, or such extension of time as may be granted by the Planning Commission pursuant to a written request submitted to the Planning Department a minimum 30 days prior to the expiration date. C-6 CODE AMENDMENT NO, 89-8/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 89-17 APPLICANT: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has completed a new Flood Insurance Study (FIS) and prepared revised Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) for Huntington Beach based on the most recent study. In order to remain in compliance with Section 60.3(c) of the National Flood Insurance Plan (NFIP) regulations, the City must adopt these changes by September 15, 1989. PC Minutes - 6/20/89 -11- (3187d) The primary changes are to identify flood depths in coastal flood areas and to change flood classification nomenclature to correspond with County -wide maps. The changes do not modify flood depths or floodplain development standards in the 100-Year flood zone. Rather, the changes in that area are only in terminology. The new coastal flood depths, however, do constitute a change in floodplain management criteria. These changes primarily affect the beach area on the ocean side of Pacific Coast Highway. Depths of flooding, due to wave action and/or overflow of the Santa Ana River range from 11 to 13 feet above sea level. Since this new flood information is identified exclusively on the ocean side of Pacific Coast Highway, there will be very little impact on new or existing development. The only project that will likely be affected by the new information is the Pierside Village restaurant project, of which a portion is in the newly identified 13 foot flood zone. It is not anticipated, however that the new flood data will hinder construction or design of that project. No changes to riverine flooding contours or depths are proposed, on the inland side of Pacific Coast Highway. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Negative Declaration No. 89-17 and Code Amendment No. 89-8 and forward and recommend adoption by the City Council. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED There was no one present to speak for or against the code amendment and the public hearing was closed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY KIRKLAND, SECOND BY WILLIAMS, TO APPROVE NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 89-17 AND CODE AMENDMENT NO. 89-8 AND FORWARD AND RECOMMEND ADOPTION BY THE CITY COUNCIL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Mountford, NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED Kirkland, Williams, Bourguignon, Ortega, Leipzig D. ITEMS NOT PUBLIC HEARING D-1 CITY WATER CONCERNS Jeff Renna, Water Department, and Jim Van Hann, Orange County Sanitation, gave a presentation on water supplies, water demands and water capacities in the City of Huntington Beach and the County of Orange. THE PRESENTATION WAS ACCEPTED AND FILED. COPIES OF THE PRESENTATION CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. PC Minutes - 6/20/89 -12- (3187d) 1 D-2 STATUS REPORT - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 88-39/ CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) N0. 88-30 APPLICANT: LISA PRODAN On October 4, 1988, the Planning Commission approved the above mentioned project, a request by Lisa Prodan for the expansion of a nonconforming structure at 808 Pecan, with variance to the front yard setback requirement of 8 feet-4 inches in lieu of 12 feet required, and an increase in over 10 percent floor area. (The City Council on appeal sustained the Planning Commission's action on November 7, 1988.) One of the conditions required that a 90 day review be conducted to ensure compliance with the conditions of approval. The Planning Commission reviewed the project's status at their meeting of March 7, 1989. Since the applicant had not met all conditions of approval, but was proceeding diligently, the Planning Commission continued the item for another 90 day period. The applicant still has been unable to satisfy all the required conditions to date. The Building Division has refused to accept her prepared plans without the architect's signature. Since the plans were prepared eight years ago, she had a difficult time locating the architect. Recently, these signed plans have.been returned to her. Separately, the engineering calculations also need to be signed before being submitted, but the applicant has been unsuccessful in trying to fulfill this requirement. Since the applicant has not met all conditions of approval yet, but has been proceeding diligently, it may be appropriate to schedule another review in 30 to 45 days. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Direct staff accordingly. THE PLANNING COMMISSION DIRECTED STAFF TO SCHEDULE ANOTHER REVIEW IN 30 TO 45 DAYS. D-3 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0, 88-40: FAMILY BILLIARDS AND ARCADE CENTER - SIX MONTH REVIEW APPLICANT: BENCO BEACH, LTD./ROCKETS AND POCKETS On October 18, 1988, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit No. 88-40, a request to permit a family billiards and arcade center. Condition No. 12 states that: "Conditional Use Permit 88-40 shall be approved for an initial period of five years with a six month review from the date of issuance of Certificate of Occupancy and report to the Planning Commission to insure compliance with all conditions of approval." PC Minutes - 6/20/89 -13- (3187d) On June 13, 1989, the Land Use Section inspected the billiards and arcade center known as "Rockets and Pockets" located at 19092 Beach Boulevard (units JKLM) for compliance with the conditions of approval. The inspection revealed that the family billiards and arcade center was found to be in substantial compliance with the conditions of approval. Most importantly, it appeared that the concerns of the public and the Commission had been mitigated through the adoption of selected conditions of approval. The Vice unit of the Huntington Beach Police Department stated that no complaints had been received since the opening of the facility. In addition, the Land Use Section has not received any citizen complaints and the on -site security guard stated that he had not observed any loitering or other undesirable activity occurring within the parking areas. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept the six month review of Conditional Use Permit No. 88-40 and direct staff to schedule an annual review. THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACCEPTED THE REVIEW AND DIRECTED STAFF TO SCHEDULE AN ANNUAL REVIEW. D-4 PLANNING COMMISSION STIPEND At the Planning Commissioner's request, staff conducted a survey of stipends paid to the Planning Commissioners in other Orange County cities. The survey indicated that the stipend paid to Huntington Beach Planning Commissioners is comparable to other stipends paid in other Orange County cities. THE REPORT WAS ACCEPTED AND FILED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. E. DISCUSSION ITEMS None F. PLANNING COMMISSION INQUIRIES Follow up by the Land Use staff was requested on the following: 1. Home Depot code violations 2. Appearance/condition of shopping center located on southwest corner of Indianapolis and Newland [1 PC Minutes - 6/20/89 -14- (3187d) [1 G. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS Commissioner Williams - DOWNTOWN PARKING MITIGATIONS (i.e. meters in residential first three blocks) - The Commission discussed the impacts from beach parking to the downtown areas. Establishment of a permit parking district was discussed. SMOKE AND FIRE ALARMS IN COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL - Commission requested a resolution be drafted endorsing ordinance passed by the City Council at their June 19 meeting. H. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ITEMS Mike Adams reiterated action taken by Council at the June 19, 1989 meeting. I. ADJOURNMENT A MOTION WAS MADE AT 11:00 PM BY MOUNTFORD, SECOND BY BOURGUIGNON, TO ADJOURN TO A 5:30 STUDY SESSION, JULY 6, 1989, ON OFF-STREET PARKING AND THEN TO THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING AT 7:00 PM, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Kirkland, Williams, Bourguignon, Ortega, Mountford, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED APPROVED BY: I'N J 1 OZ� Mike Adams, Secretary elanning ission Cirm PC Minutes - 6/20/89 -15- (3187d)