Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-05-01APPROVED 6/5/90 MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 1, 1990 Council Chambers - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California STUDY SESSION - 6:30 PM REGULAR MEETING - 7:00 PM PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE P (arrived @ 8:00 PM) P P P ROLL CALL: Shomaker, Mountford, Williams, Ortega, P P P Kirkland, Bourguignon, Leipzig A. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS George Arnold, Third and Walnut, spoke in opposition to the approval of EIR No. 89-8 (Huntington Beach Municipal Pier). He said it violates Federal Procedure No. 10650 and urged the Commission to not certify it as adequate. He also reported that there is an office building being used on Third Street without the issuance of a certificate of occupancy and requested follow up by Land Use. Doug Langevin, 8196 Pawtucket Drive, addressed his concerns with Main Pier Phase I. He said that the project does not comply with the conditions of approval regarding view corridors. Cheryle Browning, 16771 Roosevelt Lane, reported violations occurring in her neighborhood which included: 1) illegal real estate signs on the corner of Bolsa Chica and Pierce causing visual blight; 2) commercial business (Ken Moody) being conducted in a residential neighborhood; 3) the Nerio property at Pierce and Roosevelt in total disrepair (trash/debris, potential fire hazard, windows boarded up, etc.). B. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS B-1 1989 DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO, 90-11 APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach California State Law requires that local governments prepare and adopt a Housing Element of the General Plan, and that the element be updated at five-year intervals. This is a request to review the updated Housing Element which conforms with the new State -mandated requirements and transmit recommendation to the City Council for their adoption. The 1989 Draft Housing Element was reviewed by the Planning Commission at the April 3, 1990 meeting, and continued to the May 1, 1990 meeting after public input was received. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Negative Declaration No. 90-11 and Draft Housing Element and transmit recommendation to the City Council for adoption. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Tom Van Tuyl, Huntington Beach/Fountain Valley Board of Realtors, 8101 Slater Avenue, complimented staff on the development of the document and thanked them for incorporating many of their suggested comments and corrections into the draft. He reiterated comments made in his letter dated April 23, 1990, which included: 1) expedited processing for all housing developments; 2) permit second units in all areas of the City providing they meet Ordinance requirements; 3) increase of $2,500 to grant fund for property improvements that provide handicap accessibility; 4) preservation of affordability program; and 5) selling of surplus City land at below -market rates to non-profit corporations to build low-income rental housing. He spoke in opposition to retrofit ordinances regarding energy conservation triggered by the sale or improvement of property. He further urged the Commission to delete the Limited Equity Cooperative program from the Housing Element. He feels they are poor investments for homeowners and do not provide any additional housing units. THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE HOUSING ELEMENT AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY KIRKLAND, SECOND BY BOURGUIGNON, TO DELETE POLICY REFERENCE TO ENERGY CONSERVATION RETROFIT ORDINANCE, BY THE FOLLOWING STRAW VOTE: AYES: Kirkland, Bourguignon NOES: Mountford, Williams, Ortega, Leipzig ABSENT: Shomaker ABSTAIN: None STRAW VOTE MOTION FAILED PC Minutes - 5/l/90 -2- (5752d) A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY KIRKLAND, SECOND BY MOUNTFORD TO DELETE REFERENCE TO EQUITY COOPERATIVES, BY THE FOLLOWING STRAW VOTE: AYES: Mountford, Kirkland, Bourguignon, NOES: Williams, Ortega, Leipzig ABSENT: Shomaker ABSTAIN: None STRAW VOTE MOTION FAILED A MOTION WAS MADE BY KIRKLAND, SECOND BY BOURGUIGNON, TO APPROVE NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 90-4, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Kirkland, Mountford, Williams, Ortega, Bourguignon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: Shomaker ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED A MOTION WAS MADE BY KIRKLAND, SECOND BY WILLIAMS TO APPROVE THE DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Kirkland, Mountford, Williams, Ortega, Bourguignon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: Shomaker ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED A MOTION WAS MADE BY KIRKLAND, SECOND BY WILLIAMS TO RECOMMEND AND FORWARD APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 90-11 AND THE DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Kirkland, Mountford, Williams, Ortega, Bourguignon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: Shomaker ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED B-2 SPECIAL SIGN PERMIT NO. 90-1 (CONTINUED FROM APRIL 17, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING) APPLICANT: WATT COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT CORP. LOCATION: Southwest corner of Edinger Avenue and Sher Lane Special Sign Permit No. 90-1 is a request to construct a freestanding sign which exceeds the maximum height and area permitted by the Sign Code. Additionally, the sign is proposed to PC Minutes - 5/l/90 -3- (5752d) be located approximately 60 feet from an existing freestanding sign in lieu of the Code required minimum separation of 200 feet. On April 17, 1990, the Planning Commission continued Special Sign Permit No. 90-1 so that staff could present additional information regarding the existing signage at the center. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Special Sign Permit No. 90-1 as modified by staff with findings and conditions of approval. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Ron Phadnis, Watt Commercial Development, gave a brief history of the shopping center and reiterated the reasons for his original request for a freestanding sign. He said the alternative recommendation for maximum height of 25 feet with a reduced sign area does not satisfy the expressed desire of his tenants to have their businesses included on the sign. George Arnold, Third and Walnut, spoke in opposition to the request. He feels there is too much sign clutter at the existing center which interferes with the required landscaping. THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Williams stated that he visited the site and, although the center is situated on a very deep lot, there did not appear to be any special land -related circumstances. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LEIPZIG, SECOND BY WILLIAMS, TO DENY SPECIAL SIGN PERMIT NO. 90-1 WITH FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Williams, Ortega, Kirkland, Bourguignon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: Mountford (Out of Room) ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR DENIAL: 1. Strict compliance with Section 9610.5 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code does not present a substantial hardship to the applicant. Adequate signage can be provided for the major tenants in full compliance with the Code. 2. The proposed sign may adversely affect other signs in the area. 3. The proposed sign with a height of 29 feet and an area of 250 square feet may be a hazardous distraction to vehicular and pedestrian traffic. PC Minutes - 5/l/90 -4- (5752d) 1 B-3 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 90-3/PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM N0, 90-1 APPLICANT: ROGER MILLER HONDA LOCATION: 19232 Beach Boulevard The Planning Commission, on April 3, 1990, continued this item for 30 days so that a more complete Planned Sign Program could be submitted, and to allow Roger Miller Honda to demonstrate compliance with existing code requirements regarding flags and banners. During the past thirty (30) days, various flags, banners, and temporary signs have been removed from the property. However, on Sunday, April 22, 1990, staff observed temporary flags attached to display automobiles. No applications have been filed to display such flags and banners. Roger Miller Honda has submitted additional scaled drawings of the existing signs on site, and is requesting a modification to the originally requested Planned Sign Program. The 45 square foot, internally illuminated wall sign identifying "Honda" will be removed, rather than remain. The 44.11 square foot, non -illuminated, foam letter wall sign identifying "Roger Miller Huntington Beach Honda" and the street address will remain, rather than be removed. This change is still consistent with the provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, which allow a maximum 121 square foot wall sign for this site. The remaining proposed signage is the same as that presented on April 3, 1990, including a 25 foot high, 112.98 square foot readerboard sign, and a 5 foot high, 13 square foot monument sign which identifies the service entrance. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: On April 25, 1990, staff received a letter from Roger Miller Honda requesting a continuance of the request to June 5, 1990, so that they could prepare their planned sign program, and waiving their mandatory processing date. Commisioner Williams stated that he visited the site and met with Mr. Miller regarding the request. The Commission requested Land Use Division follow-up on the illegal temporary flags and balloons at the dealership. A MOTION WAS MADE BY WILLIAMS, SECOND BY KIRKLAND, TO CONTINUE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-3 AND PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM NO. 90-1 TO THE JUNE 5, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, NOES: Ortega ABSENT: Mountford ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED Williams, Kirkland, Bourguignon and Leipzig (Out of Room) PC Minutes - 5/l/90 mm (5752d) B-4 PRECISE PLAN OF STREET ALIGNMENT NO 89-4/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO 89-46/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 89-63 (CONTINUED FROM APRIL 17, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING) APPLICANT: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH LOCATION: Seapoint Avenue south to Pacific Coast Highway and north to Garfield Avenue and alignment of Garfield Avenue west of Edwards Street to the City boundary The City Council adopted the Master Plan of Arterial Streets and Highways on March 22, 1976, which established the general alignment of Seapoint Avenue and a portion of Garfield Avenue west of Edwards Street. On January 8, 1990, the City Council adopted the Holly-Seacliff General Plan Amendment which reaffirmed the alignment of Seapoint Avenue and Garfield Avenue. Precise Plan of Street Alignment No. 89-4 is consistent with the adopted City of Huntington Beach Master Plan of Arterial Streets and Highways and the recent Circulation Amendment associated with the Holly-Seacliff Master Plan. On April 17, 1990, the Planning Commission continued Precise Plan of Street Alignment No. 89-4 and directed staff to provide an analysis of alternative alignments in context with Bolsa Chica Linear Park planning efforts and provide comments from the Environmental Review Board. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Pursuant to the environmental regulations in effect at this time, the Department posted draft Negative Declaration No. 89-63 for thirty days. On January 31, 1990, the Environmental Review Committee, in its initial study of the project, has recommended that a Mitigated Negative Declaration be approved with special studies which include an archaeological study of ORA-366. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Negative Declaration No. 89-63 and Coastal Development Permit No. 89-46 and adopt Resolution No. 1430 approving Precise Plan of Street Alignment No. 89-4 and recommend adoption to the City Council. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Lorraine Faber, on behalf of Amigos de Bolsa Chica, shared the concerns regarding approval of the connector because of potential problems with premature connection of Seapoint and the proposed Garfield extension in the area of the swale. They are concerned with the two different standards being applied to adjacent property owners. She said the Amigos recommends that an alternative alignment, showing Seapoint linking up with Garfield at the Garfield/Edwards intersection in a "T" configuration be given PC Minutes - 5/1/90 -6- (5752d) 1 consideration because of the speculative nature of State and Federal approvals of the crossgap connector. She also requested that any approval of Seapoint's eastern alignment be continued, in the minimum, until there has been public review of upcoming traffic consultant reports; and that approval of the link -up be delayed until State and Federal approvals have been received to avoid dislocation of the traffic pattern. Ralph H. Bauer, 16511 Cotoit Circle, expressed his concerns with the future potential for acquisition of land because of the loss of 2.7 acres in the linear park. He urged the Commission to include as a condition of approval the statement made by staff that the replacement of the 2.7 acres lost to Seapoint be made up in the desirable bluff and swale areas north of Garfield Avenue. THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. The Commission discussed the possibilities of approving the southern end of the alignment only or moving the alignment eastward. They agreed that there would be no benefit in approving an alternate alignment based on the engineering principles, existing land uses, and existing easements. Also they agreed that the proposed alignment would not change the basic concept approved for configuration of the park. A MOTION WAS MADE BY WILLIAMS, SECOND BY BOURGUIGNON, TO APPROVE NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 89-63, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Mountford, NOES: Ortega, Leipzig ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED Williams, Kirkland, Bourguignon A MOTION WAS MADE BY WILLIAMS, SECOND BY KIRKLAND, TO APPROVE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 89-46 WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Mountford, NOES: Ortega, Leipzig ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED Williams, Kirkland, Bourguignon PC Minutes - 5/l/90 Ms (5752d) A MOTION WAS MADE BY WILLIAMS, SECOND BY KIRKLAND, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 1430 APPROVING PRECISE PLAN OF STREET ALIGNMENT NO. 89-4 AND RECOMMEND ADOPTION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Mountford, NOES: Ortega, Leipzig ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED Williams, Kirkland, Bourguignon FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - PRECISE PLAN OF STREET ALIGNMENT NO, 89-4: 1. Precise Plan of Street Alignment for Seapoint Avenue and the Garfield Avenue extension west of Edwards Street is consistent with the City's Master Plan of Arterial Streets and Highways and the Master Plan of Arterials for Orange County. 2. The Precise Plan of Street Alignment No. 89-4 will not adversely affect the City's General Plan because it will allow the construction of arterial streets necessary to provide adequate circulation. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 89-46: 1. The proposed precise plan of street alignment conforms with the plans, policies, requirements and standards of the Huntington Beach Coastal Element of the City's General Plan. 2. Coastal Development Permit No. 89-46 is consistent with the Coastal Zone suffix and other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 3. Construction of Seapoint Avenue and the western extension of Garfield Avenue will provide infrastructure in a manner which is consistent with the Huntington Beach Coastal Element Land Use Plan. 4. The proposed alignment of Seapoint Avenue and western extension of Garfield Avenue conforms to the public access and public recreation policies contained in Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan dated received April 11, 1990, shall be the approved layout. 2. Construction plans shall be limited to Seapoint Avenue. for the western extension of Garfield Avenue the right-of-way between Edwards Street and C PC Minutes - 5/l/90 -8- (5752d) 1 3. Prior to issuance of grading plans for the construction of Seapoint Avenue and the western extension of Garfield Avenue: a. If required by the Department of Public Works, 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. b. 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. c. A map indicating the location of all current and abandoned oil wells within the right-of-way shall be submitted to the Community Development and Fire Departments. All oil facilities within the boundaries of the designated right-of-way are to be removed and abandoned, reabandoned and shall meet all existing requirements of the City of Huntington Beach and the State Division of Oil and Gas. Further protective measures may be required, depending upon the conditions and quality of the abandonments and reabandonments. 4. All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material, shall be disposed of at an offsite facility equipped to handle them. 5. 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. 6. An on -site qualified archaeologist shall monitor all initial grading and excavation activities. a. Should any cultural materials be encountered during the initial site survey or during grading and excavation activities, all activity shall cease and the archaeologist shall determine the appropriate course of action. b. Should any human bone be encountered during any construction activities on the site, the archaeologist shall contact the coroner pursuant to Section 5097.98 and 5097.99 of the Public Resources Code relative to Native American Remains. Should the coroner determine the human remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission shall be contacted pursuant to State Law SB 297. PC Minutes - 5/1/90 -9- (5752d) c. The northern portion of ORA-366 shall be fenced as specified in the archeological report FOR ORA 366 dated March 23, 1900. 7. During cleaning, grading, earth moving or excavation, the applicant shall: a. Control fugitive dust by regular watering, paving construction roads, or other dust preventive measures. b. Maintain equipment engines in proper tune. 8. During construction, the applicant shall: a. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems to keep all areas where vehicles move damp enough to prevent dust raised when leaving the site. b. Wet down areas in the late morning and after work is completed for the day. c. Phase and schedule construction activities to avoid high ozone days (first stage smog alerts). d. Discontinue construction during second stage smog alerts. 9. Construction shall be limited to Monday - Saturday 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM. Construction shall be prohibited Sundays and Federal holidays. 10. Prior to initiation of construction, police and fire departments shall be notified and the departments shall be kept informed about duration and extent of construction throughout the process. B-6 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 89-52/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 89-29/FLOOD PLAIN VARIANCE NO 90-1/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 89-8 APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach Conditional Use Permit No. 89-52 and Coastal Development Permit No. 89-29 constitute a request by the City of Huntington Beach to demolish and reconstruct the deteriorated Huntington Beach Municipal Pier. The existing pier has been closed to the public since July, 1988. The proposed new pier will closely approximate the visual character of the existing pier, and will incorporate the same types and amounts of commercial activity at approximately the same locations. This entitlement is for the pier structure only, including the establishment of development envelopes for future commercial buildings on the pier. It does not cover the architecture or design of buildings on the pier, or the pier plaza. The new buildings will be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Board prior to issuance of building permits. PC Minutes - 5/l/90 -10- (5752d) 1 fJ Flood Plain Variance No. 90-1 is required for new habitable construction seaward of the mean high tide line within the FP-3 (Floodplain) District, in accordance with Article 940 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. The variance is being processed at this time because the building envelopes will be established. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 89-8 was prepared to analyze the potential adverse environmental impacts of the project. Environmental Impact Report No. 89-8 was prepared by The Planning Center. City staff has responded to all comments received and will also be included as an appendix in the Final EIR. The document must be adopted and certified by the Planning Commission prior to any action on Conditional Use Permit No. 89-52 and Coastal Development Permit No. 89-29. COASTAL STATUS: The portion of the pier that is landward of the mean high tide line is within an appealable area of the Coastal Zone, over which the City of Huntington Beach has permit jurisdiction. Coastal Development Permit No. 89-29 covers this portion of the project. The portion of the pier that extends seaward of the mean high tide line is within the original permit jurisdiction of the Coastal Commission. The City of Huntington Beach must grant conceptual approval of this portion prior to final action by the Coastal Commission. The Coastal Commission will utilize Final Environmental Impact Report No. 89-8 when considering their action. Prior to any action on Conditional Use Permit No. 89-52, the Planning Commission must review and act on Coastal Development Permit No. 89-29. REDEVELOPMENT STATUS: The proposed project is located in the Main -Pier Redevelopment Project Area. SPECIFIC PLAN: The project is within the boundaries of the Downtown Specific Plan, District 10 (Pier -Related Commercial). The pier and all associated development must comply with the standards of the District. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD: The proposed pier design has been reviewed by the Design Review Board on numerous occasions. On April 4, 1990, the Board reviewed the two proposals approved by the Pier Design Committee. The Board recommended that the Planning Commission approve: 1) the handrails as proposed and detailed by Moffatt and Nichol Engineers; 2) pier light fixtures to be similar to those approved by the City Council for the Main Street corridor; 3) the concrete pier structures shall PC Minutes - 5/l/90 -11- (5752d) be of natural concrete and gray in color; 4) the concrete shall receive a light sandblasting to provide continuity in overall appearance unless the City Engineer determines the process is harmful to future steel reinforcement oxidation; 5) approve the longitudinal pier silhouette as recommended by the Pier Design Committee, as it is the most similar to existing conditions. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: (A) Adopt and certify as adequate Environmental Impact Report No. 89-8 by adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1431; and (B) Approve Coastal Development Permit No. 89-29 with findings; and (C) Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 89-52 and Flood Plain Variance No. 90-1 with findings and conditions of approval. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Lorraine Faber, Amigos de Bolsa Chica, addressed her concerns regarding the pier closure during construction. She feels the closure will result in a financial hardship to the downtown merchants and would like to see the closure areas and periods less exclusive. Teresa Reynolds, Historical Society, read a letter into the record which stated opposition to the demolishing of the pier and encouraged reconstruction of the existing structure. She said the pier has already been declared an historic landmark and deserves to retain its place in the community. She urged the Commission to follow the historic precepts regarding construction of the pier since demolition of the pier is not a reconstruction under the law and does not mitigate to insignificance the damage that would be done to the existing historic structure. Barbara Milkovich, Historical Resources Board, said the EIR is inadequate. She said an historical artifact cannot be destroyed. She further said CEQA does not allow a split project and feels an intermediate alternative must be considered and a statement of overriding considerations prepared. She wants to see the existing buildings on the pier restored. Doug Langevin, 8196 Pawtucket Drive, said he would like to see three restaurants on the pier (a one-story end cafe,. Neptunes with added square feet, and the Captains Galley).. He agreed with comments made by the Historical Board and asked if any of the local surf shops or surfers were notified of the proposed closure of the beach. Debbie Cook 6692 Shetland Circle, spoke in opposition to the closure of the beach and urged the Commission to request a Statement of Overriding Considerations on the environmental impact report. PC Minutes - 5/l/90 -12- (5752d) Abert Watkins, 207 Geneva Avenue, urged the Commission to not allow any cars on the pier and said he hopes the pier pilings will be deep enough in the sand this time to protect them from the mercy of "Mother Nature". He asked if a boat landing was being proposed for the pier. THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. A discussion ensued regarding construction of the pier, beach closure, whether or not to consider a one-story or two-story end cafe, and the statement of overriding considerations. Jim Crumpley, Moffatt & Nichol Engineers, answered questions regarding the estimated expenditures for construction. He said it would cost approximately $11 million to reconstruct and $15 million to rehabilitate and the rehabilitation would take four times longer. He said for safety reasons and in order to enable the contractor to obtain insurance during construction the beach would have to be closed, however that the City Engineer and Construction Manager would attempt to minimize any closures, particularly during peak use periods. Chairwoman Ortega expressed concern regarding the EIR and the splitting of the project and spoke in favor of a Statement of Overriding Considerations. She said she would like to see all proposed structures on the pier come back to the Commission for review and approval and although there may be slight variations in square footage for each building, to keep the 6,370 square foot total as the maximum envelope permitted. A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY KIRKLAND, SECOND BY WILLIAMS, TO INCLUDE LANGUAGE IN THE CONDITIONS REGARDING SHUTTING DOWN THE BEACH DURING DEMOLITION AND PERIODS OF CONSTRUCTION AND THAT THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AND CITY ENGINEER WOULD MINIMIZE CLOSURES DURING PEAK USE PERIODS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Mountford, Williams, Ortega, Kirkland, Bourguignon, Leipzig NOES: None STRAW VOTE MOTION PASSED A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY BOURGUIGNON, SECOND BY KIRKLAND, IN FAVOR OF CONSIDERING A TWO-STORY STRUCTURE FOR THE END -OF -THE -PIER CAFE, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Mountford, Kirkland, Bourguignon, Leipzig NOES: Ortega, Williams STRAW VOTE MOTION PASSED PC Minutes - 5/1/90 -13- (5752d) A MOTION WAS MADE BY KIRKLAND, SECOND BY BOURGUIGNON, TO ADOPT AND CERTIFY AS ADEQUATE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 89-8 AND TO PREPARE A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Mountford, Williams, Kirkland, Bourguigonon, Leipzig NOES: Ortega ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED A MOTION WAS MADE BY KIRKLAND, SECOND BY BOURGUIGNON, TO APPROVE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 89-29 WITH FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Mountford, Williams, Ortega, Kirkland, Bourguigonon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED A MOTION WAS MADE BY KIRKLAND, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO APPROVE FLOOD PLAIN VARIANCE NO. 90-1 WITH FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Mountford, Williams, Ortega, Kirkland, Bourguigonon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED A MOTION WAS MADE BY KIRKLAND, SECOND BY BOURGUIGNON, TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 89-52 WITH FINDINGS AND REVISED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BY THE FOLLOWING: AYES: Shomaker, Mountford, Williams, Ortega, Kirkland, Bourguigonon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED 11 PC Minutes - 5/1/90 -14- (5752d) FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 89-29 1. The proposed pier development conforms with the plans, policies, requirements and standards of the Huntington Beach Coastal Element of the General Plan. 2. Coastal Development Permit No. 89-29 is consistent with the CZ (Coastal Zone) suffix, the Downtown Specific Plan, and other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code applicable to the property. 3. At the time of occupancy, the proposed pier can be provided with infrastructure in a manner that is consistent with the Huntington Beach Coastal Element and Coastal Land Use Plan of the General Plan. 4. The proposed pier development conforms with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act. 5. Approval of Floodplain Variance No. 90-1 will not result in modification to the requirements of the certified Land Use Plan. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 89-52: 1. The location, site layout, and design of the proposed pier properly adapt the proposed structure to streets, and other adjacent land uses in a harmonious manner. 2. The access to and parking for the proposed pier does not create an undue traffic problem because the square footage will not substantially increase. 3. The proposal is consistent with the intent of the Downtown Specific Plan in providing a public recreational/open space amenity that is affordable and accessible to a wide range of residents and visitors. 4. The proposal is consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation of Visitor Serving Commercial. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - FLOOD PLAIN VARIANCE NO. 90-1: 1. A good and sufficient cause has been shown for the requested variance. A stated goal of the Coastal Element of the General Plan is to provide broad public access to recreational amenities and provide a wide variety of visitor serving commercial services in the coastal zone. The proposal provides for a unique recreational opportunity within the City, and is functionally dependent on a waterfront location. PC Minutes - 5/1/90 -15- (5752d) 2. Failure to grant the variance would result in an exceptional hardship because previously existing amenities on the pier could not be reconstructed for use and enjoyment by the community and by visitors to Huntington Beach. 3. The variance will not result in increased flood heights, threats to public safety, extraordinary public expense, create nuisances, cause fraud on or victimization of the public, or conflict with existing local laws or ordinances. The pier will be constructed at a height that will eliminate wave overtopping and damage, and in compliance with all construction and safety standards for structures in the Floodplain. ONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 89-52: 1. The site plan, and elevations received and dated April 25, 1990, shall be the conceptually approved layout. The proposed pier plan will replace existing commercial buildings in approximately the same locations. Although there may be slight variations in square footage for each building, the 6,370 square foot total will be the maximum envelope permitted. Proposed structures on the pier will be subject to review and approval by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission. 2. Prior to submittal for building permits, the applicant/owner shall complete the following: a. Depict all utility apparatus, such as but not limited to backflow devices and Edison transformers, on the site plan. They shall be screened by landscaping or other method as approved by the Community Development Director. b. Plans shall depict natural gas 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. c. Elevations shall depict colors and building materials as approved by the Design Review Board. d. 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, and shall be subject to applicable permits from other agencies (Section 10, Section 106, Coastal Commission Coastal Development Permit). 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. PC Minutes - 5/l/90 -16- (5752d) 1 * 5. The pier shall be constructed to a height of 38 feet above Mean Lower Low water Line at the seaward end , and in compliance with flood plain standards for Flood Insurance Rate Map zone VE. * 6. The pier shall be constructed in compliance with City Geotechnical Abatement Ordinance and with construction related seismic codes. * 7. Prior to demolition, a detailed and comprehensive textual and pictorial historical documentary of the pier shall be prepared and approved by the Director of Community Development. * 8. Prior to construction, the project design shall include memorialization of the pier's history by such means as plaques. * 9. The project design shall include reconstruction of the pier to as exact as possible as to form and detail of the original structure, as approved by the City Council. *10. The project design shall include preservation of appropriate remains of original elements of the pier including such features as the cornerstone and ornamental balustrade at the west side approach, and if feasible, the remaining Art Deco buildings on the pier. *11. Prior to issuance of building permits, a plan depicting project staging areas, beach access, and bike path/walkway rerouting shall be approved by the Director of Community Development. *12. An interim bike path/walkway shall be provided during construction/demolition. *13. Construction should begin during the off-peak season (September to May) and to the extent that it is practical, concentrated in one general area at a time. *14. Truck deliveries and delivery of large equipment during construction shall be scheduled to avoid the hours between 7:30 A.M. and 9:00 A.M. and between 3:00 P.M. and 7:00 P.M. *15. For safety reasons, a 100 foot by 500 foot area of beach on each side of the existing pier may be closed during the demolition and construction period, and a 500 foot by 1,400 foot area on each side of the pier may be closed to swimming and surfing during demolition and construction. The City Engineer and Construction Manager shall attempt to minimize any closures, particularly during peak use periods. *16. Creosote contaminated wooden timbers will be permanently disposed of at Bee Canyon Sanitary Landfill. * Mitigation measures PC Minutes - 5/l/90 -17- (5752d) *17. In order to minimize generation of creosote contaminated sawdust during demolition, timbers shall be cut as little as possible and shall be wetted down as necessary to minimize dust. *18. Workers shall be provided with heavy gloves to wear when handling creosote treated materials. Contaminated gloves shall be discarded and taken to Bee Canyon Landfill for disposal. *19. Workers shall be provided with particle dust masks to wear when exposed to creosote during construction. *20. Existing pier pilings shall be removed below the sand level between the shore and surf zone. *21. City shall comply with U.S. Coast Guard Regulations governing Notice to Mariners and construction safety requirements during construction. 22. The handrails on the pier shall be as proposed and detailed by Moffat and Nichols and approved by the Design Review Board. 23. Pier light fixtures shall be similar to those approved by the City Council for the Main Street corridor. 24. The concrete pier structures shall be of natural concrete and gray in color. The concrete shall receive a light sandblasting to provide continuity in overall appearance unless the City Engineer determines the process harmful to future steel reinforcement oxidation. 25. Design Alternative No. 4, as designated by the Pier Design Committee, shall be the longitudinal pier silhouette, as it is the most similar to existing conditions. * Mitigation measures The following measures are identified in the Draft EIR as "Mitigation Measures". However, they do not mitigate a potentially significant impact below a level of significance. They are included as ways to improve the project in areas where impacts are already identified as insignificant before mitigation: 26. The SCAQMD recommends the following standard procedures to reduce construction impacts: A. Regular watering of construction areas B. Maintaining construction equipment in proper tune C. Phasing and scheduling construction activities to level emission peaks. D. Discontinue construction during first and second stage smog alerts. PC Minutes - 5/l/90 -18- (5752d) 27. Convenient bicycle storage facilities shall be located near the pier. 28. Construction activities shall be limited to 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM Monday through Saturday, and prohibited on Sundays and Federal holidays. 29. Construction equipment should utilize available sound muffler devices on all equipment, including pile driving equipment. 30. The artificial fishing reef adjacent to the pier shall be maintained to facilitate habitat restoration for sport fishing. 31. All structures on the pier shall be provided with automatic sprinkler systems. B-7 SPECIAL SIGN PERMIT NO 90-3/PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM N0, 90-2/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 90-16 APPLICANT: WATERFRONT CONSTRUCTION I LOCATION: Inland side of PCH, between Huntington Street and Beach Boulevard Planned Sign Program 90-2 and Coastal Development Permit 90-16 constitute a request for a Planned Master Sign Program for the Commercial phases of the Waterfront Development, and a phase -specific Planned Sign Program for the Phase I Hilton Hotel pursuant to Section 9610.2 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Special Sign Permit No. 90-3 has been initiated because the proposal does not comply with the Downtown Design Guidelines with regard to the size and number of signs permitted for a development. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The proposed project is categorically exempt pursuant to Class 11, Section 15311 of the California Environmental Quality Act. COASTAL STATUS: The proposed signs are located in a non -appealable portion of the Coastal Zone. A coastal development permit is required for signs that do not conform with all applicable provisions of the sign ordinance, pursuant to Section 989.5.3.13(a) of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. REDEVELOPMENT STATUS: The project is within the Main -Pier Redevelopment Project Area. PC Minutes - 5/l/90 -19- (5752d) SPECIFIC PLAN: The project is within the boundaries of the Downtown Specific Plan. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD: The Design Review Board, on January 4, 1990, reviewed the proposed signs. The Board unanimously recommended approval of the Master Plan Sign Program and Hilton Sign Program to the Planning Commission. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Special Sign Permit 90-3, Planned Sign Program 90-2, and Coastal Development Permit 90-16 with findings and conditions of approval. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Shawn Millbern, representing the applicant, was present and available to answer any questions from the Commission. He was asked if he would be willing to add the words "Pacific Coast Highway" to the 10022 on the address identification sign. He said he would be willing to make the addition. THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE PROPOSAL AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BOURGUIGNON, SECOND BY SHOMAKER, TO APPROVE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 90-16 WITH FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Williams, Ortega, Kirkland, Bourguignon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: Mountford (Out of Room) ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED A MOTION WAS MADE BY BOURGUIGNON, SECOND BY ORTEGA, TO APPROVE SPECIAL SIGN PERMIT NO. 90-3 WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Ortega, Kirkland, Bourguignon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: Williams and Mountford (Out of Room) ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED PC Minutes - 5/l/90 -20- (5752d) A MOTION WAS MADE BY BOURGUIGNON, SECOND BY ORTEGA, TO APPROVE PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM NO. 90-2 WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Williams, Ortega, Kirkland, Bourguignon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: Mountford (Out of Room) ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT N0, 90-16: 1. The proposed Planned Sign Program and Special Sign Permit conform with the plans, policies, requirements and standards of the Huntington Beach Coastal Element of the General Plan. 2. Coastal Development Permit No. 90-16 is consistent with the CZ (Coastal Zone) suffix, the Downtown Specific Plan and the design elements of the Downtown Design Guidelines. 3. At the time of occupancy, the proposed commercial development can be provided with infrastructure in a manner that is consistent with the Huntington Beach Coastal Element and Coastal Land Use Plan of the General Plan. 4. The proposed commercial development conforms with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - SPECIAL SIGN PERMIT No 90-3: 1. Strict compliance with the Downtown Design Guidelines will result in a substantial economic hardship to the applicant,because the standards are designed for small, pedestrian -oriented shops. 2. The proposed sign plan will not adversely affect other signs in the area because the signs will not obstruct the views to other businesses or signs. 3. The proposed signs will not be detrimental to property located in the vicinity and will be compatible with the surrounding area, because the proposed signs are architecturaly compatible and in proportion with the buildings. 4. The proposed signs will not obstruct pedestrian or vehicular traffic vision, because they are adequately set back from public rights -of -way. PC Minutes - 5/l/90 -21- (5752d) FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM NO, 90-2: 1. The proposed program provides for a coordinated sign plan in terms of materials, letter style, colors, illumination, sign type, and sign shape. 2. The proposed signs are compatible with and complement the architectural style of the buildings. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - SPECIAL SIGN PERMIT/LIMITED SIGN PERMIT: 1. The site plan and sign elevations received and dated March 1, 1990 shall be the approved layout with the following modification: a. The words "Pacific Coast Highway" shall be added to the #10022 on the address identification sign. C. CONSENT CALENDAR C-1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED APRIL 17, 1990 A MOTION WAS MADE BY ORTEGA, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED APRIL 17, 1990, WITH CORRECTIONS: AYES: Shomaker, Williams, Ortega, Kirkland, Bourguignon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: Mountford (Out of Room) ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED D. NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS D-1 GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE NO. 90-2 APPLICANT: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH/DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES LOCATION: Southwest corner of Brookhurst and Bushard Streets REQUEST: Determination that the abandonment of approximately 2,823 square feet of street right-of-way is in conformance with the General Plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve General Plan Conformance No. 90-2 with findings. Commissioner Leipzig asked staff to provide a copy of the Zoning Administrator approval and conditions of approval on the Tentative Parcel Map and suggested a continuance. PC Minutes - 5/l/90 -22- (5752d) Fi 1 J A MOTION WAS MADE BY LEIPZIG SECOND BY WILLIAMS, TO CONTINUE GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE NO. 90-2 TO THE MAY 15, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Williams, Leipzig NOES: Shomaker, Ortega, Kirkland, Bourguignon ABSENT: Mountford (Out of Room) ABSTAIN: None MOTION FAILED A MOTION WAS MADE BY KIRKLAND, SECOND BY ORTEGA, TO APPROVE GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE NO. 90-2 WITH FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Ortega, NOES: Williams, Leipzig ABSENT: Mountford (Out of ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: Kirkland, Bourguignon Room) 1. Abandoning the subject parcel would be in conformity with the General Plan by encouraging the rational use of land. The subject right-of-way and the adjacent vacant parcel to the east are presently undevelopable and unusable. Adding this land to the existing properties to the east would provide the most efficient use of the land. (Land Use Element) 2. Abandoning the subject parcel and consolidating it with adjoining parcel for residential purposes would be in conformity with the General Plan by eliminating current unauthorized retail sales and unauthorized beach parking property, and proposals to develop a property separately would create traffic hazards. E. DISCUSSION ITEMS None F. PLANNING COMMISSION INQUIRIES None G. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS Commissioner Williams: Questioned the signs advertising "Space for Lease" at commercial complexes, etc. Requested an on the which legality of real estate shopping centers, a follow-up. PC Minutes - 5/1/90 -23- (5752d) H. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ITEMS None I. ADJOURNMENT A MOTION WAS MADE AT 11:25 PM BY WILLIAMS, SECOND BY ORTEGA, TO ADJOURN TO A 6:30 PM STUDY SESSION (AGENDA REVIEW), TUESDAY, MAY 15, 1990, AND THEN TO THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING AT 7:00 PM, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Williams, Ortega, Kirkland, Bourguignon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: Mountford (Out of Room) ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED /kla APPROVED BY: ike Adams, Secreta Z �Zz) I Planning Commis ion Chairman PC Minutes - 5/1/90 -24- (5752d)