Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-09-05 (7)APPROVED 10/2/90 L 1 MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 5, 1990 Council Chambers 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, STUDY SESSION - 5:30 PM REGULAR MEETING - 7:00 PM PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Civic Center California P P P P P (7:30) ROLL CALL: Shomaker, Mountford, Williams, Ortega, Kirkland, P P Bourguignon, Leipzig A. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS (4 MINUTES PER PERSON, NO DONATING OF TIME TO OTHERS) Anyone wishing to speak must fill out and submit a form to speak prior to Oral Communication or Public Hearing items. No action can be taken by the Planning Commission on this date, unless agendized'.` B-1 None PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-40 (CONTINUED FROM AUGUST 21, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING): APPLICANT: JEFFREY C. ROHRING LOCATION: 17296 Beach Boulevard, Suite B-D (Eastside of Beach Boulevard approximately 50 feet north of Holland Drive) This item was continued from the August 21, 1990, Planning Commission meeting in order to allow Planning staff time to re -advertise the item to include a request for joint use parking. Conditional Use Permit No. 90-40 is a request to permit dancing and live entertainment within an existing restaurant. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The proposed project is categorically exempt pursuant to Class 1, Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny Conditional Use Permit No. 90-40 with findings. The Commissioners discussed t dancing. They questioned the when valet services would be level and an adequate buffer asked staff if their concern from parking. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED he restriction of parking criteria for strict parking criteria for dancing, used for rear parking. The decibal were also discussed. The Commission was over noise from the building or John F. Duggan, 17242 Beach Boulevard, is the adjacent property owner who spoke in opposition to the permit. His major concerns were litter and loitering from the applicant's establishment. John Rohring, Applicant, stated that his business would be carrying over the same hours as the previous restaurant. Mr. Rohring told the Commission that they have hired a professional security service to take care of any litter or loitering. He also described their valet services and agreement that after 11:00 PM all cars would be brought from the rear to the front of the building. THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. A MOTION WAS MADE BY WILLIAMS, SECOND BY BOURGUIGNON, TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-40 WITH ALTERNATIVE FINDINGS AND MODIFIED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Mountford, Williams, Ortega, Bourguignon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: Kirkland ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0, 90-40: 1. The proposed addition of dancing and live entertainment (live musicians/taped music) will be compatible with adjacent residential properties/uses because the existing parking and site layout provide adequate parking and buffering from the existing two (2) story apartment buildings located to the east of the subject property. PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -2- (7171d) 2. The establishment, maintenance and operation of the proposed dancing and live entertainment (live musicians/taped music) will not be detrimental to the general welfare of persons working and/or residing in the vicinity or detrimental to the value of property and improvements in the neighborhood. Adequate on -site parking, parking space distribution and buffering from the residential zoned property and uses is provided. 3. The location, site layout, and design of the existing structures with dancing and live entertainment (live musicians/taped music) does properly adapt to the proposed use and structures and to the streets, driveways, and other adjacent structures and uses in a harmonious manner. 4. The combination and relationship of one proposed use to another on a site are properly integrated. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-40: 1. The site plan and floor plans received and dated August 6, 1990, shall be the approved layout. A final seating plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department. 2. Live entertainment and dancing shall be limited to a maximum four (4) musicians and performances shall be limited only during the following hours: Sunday through Wednesday (taped music) 9:00 PM - 1:30 AM Thursday through Sunday (live music) 9:00 PM - 1:30 AM 3. The dance floor shall be limited to 192 square feet. The stage area shall be no larger than 12 feet by 12 feet. 4. Prior to issuance of an entertainment permit the applicant shall complete the following: a. The non conforming freestanding sign shall be brought into conformance with Article 961 (signs) prior to Certificate of Occupancy. b. All proposed business identification (wall) signs shall be in conformance with Article 961 (signs). c. A Planned Sign Program for Holland Center shall be submitted for review and approval by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission. d. An entertainment permit shall be submitted and approved by the Police Department prior to the establishment of the live entertainment within the restaurant. PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -3- (7171d) e. Joint use parking shall require that a Joint Use Parking Agreement be recorded between property owners prior to issuance of an entertainment permit. A copy of the legal instrument shall be approved by the City Attorney as to form and content and, when approved, shall be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder. A copy shall be filed with the Department of'Community Development. f. Submit a Parking Management Plan for review and approval by the Community Development Department which contains parking space designations for tenants/employees. 5. The proposed use shall comply with all applicable Fire and Building codes, including chapter 33 of the Uniform Building code. 6. All activities shall comply with all applicable ordinances of Title 5, Business License and Regulations, and Title 9, Public Peace, Morals and Welfare of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code. 7. The proposed live entertainment shall comply with Chapter 8.40 "Noises" of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code. Should complaints be received regarding noises generated by the live entertainment, the Planning Commission reserves the right to require the applicant to mitigate the noise level. 8. This conditional use permit shall run with the applicant. Any additional activities beyond those proposed shall require the review and approval of the conditional use permit process. 9. The primary use of the building shall be dining and the sale of food. Dancing and live entertainment shall be a secondary use. 10. This conditional use permit shall not become effective for any purpose until and "Acceptance of Conditions" form has been properly executed by the applicant and an authorized representative of the owner of the property, recorded with County Recorder's Office, and returned to the Planning Division; and until the ten day appeal period has elapsed. 11. A review of the use shall be conducted within six (6) months of the issuance of and thereafter on a yearly basis, to verify compliance with all conditions of approval and applicable Articles of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. A parking study provided by the applicant shall be submitted prior to the review process. If, at that time, there is a violation of these conditions or code sections, Conditional Use Permit No. 90-40 may become null and void. 12. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke this conditional use permit if any violation of these conditions or the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs. PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -4- (7171d) 11 1 B-2 USE PERMIT NO. 90-36/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 90-34/SPECIAL SIGN PERMIT NO. 90-6 APPLICANT: LUIS A. GRUNER, BARR LUMBER LOCATION: 19240 Beach Boulevard Use Permit No. 90-36 is a request to permit outside storage and display in conjunction with a home improvement retail operation pursuant to Section 9220.10(b) of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 90-34 has been initiated because Section 9608(f) specifies that when existing establishments are expanded or modified they shall provide 6% of the total net site area in landscaping . with a minimum 6 foot wide landscape strip along the street frontage of the property. The applicant is proposing 4.9% of landscaped area with a 10 foot wide strip along the street frontage. Special Sign Permit No. 90-6 is a request to permit a 15 foot 6 inch freestanding sign rather than the code permitted 7 foot sign. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The proposed project is categorically exempt pursuant to Class 11, Section 15377 of the California Environmental Quality Act. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 1. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Use Permit No. 90-36 and Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 90-34 with findings and conditions of approval; and 2. Staff recommends denial of Special Sign Permit No. 90-6. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Luis A. Gruner, applicant, stated he was trying to build a good project and a long term commitment to the area. Mr. Gruner told the Commissioners that because of the many bus stops along Beach Boulevard, his signs are hidden. His goal is to have his signs seen from the north and the south which will aide the delivery truck's in finding his entrances. THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -5- (7171d) A MOTION WAS MADE BY WILLIAMS, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO APPROVE USE PERMIT NO. 90-36 AND CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 90-34 WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Mountford, Williams, Ortega, Kirkland, Bourguignon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED A MOTION WAS MADE BY WILLIAMS, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO DENY SPECIAL SIGN PERMIT NO. 90-6 WITH FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Mountford, Williams, Ortega, Kirkland, Bourguignon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - USE PERMIT NO. 90-36/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 90-34: 1. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the land, buildings or premises involved that do not apply generally to other property or uses in the district. The deep and narrow shape of the lot has the open storage in the rear and all publicly accessible and visible portions toward the front of the lot are well landscaped. Additional landscaping in the rear portion of the lot would cause a hardship to the storage and internal circulation system. 2. The granting of Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 90-34 for less landscaping than required by code will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, or injurious to the conforming land, property, or improvements in the neighborhood, in that the applicant is substantially improving an existing substandard condition. 3. The use permit for outdoor storage is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan and Land Use Map designation of General Commercial. 4. The granting of this conditional exception from Section 9608(f) of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code will not defeat the general purposes or intent of the code which is to improve the visual appearance of properties with adequate and attractive landscaping. PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -6- (7171d) 5. The granting of the Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 90-34 for less landscaping than required by code will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - USE PERMIT NO. 90-36/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 90-34: 1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated August 22, 1990 shall be the conceptually approved layout. 2. Selected colors for the building and signs shall be from "Edwards Dunn" paints chart (Cottenseed Yellow No. Q5-41P and Adam Green No. Q11-5B). 3. Landscape and irrigation plan improvements as depicted on the site plan shall be submitted and approved by the Department of Community Development and Public Works. 4. The subject property shall enter into irrevocable reciprocal driveway and parking easement(s) between the subject site and adjacent properties. A copy of the legal instrument shall be approved by the Community Development Department and the City Attorney as to form and content and, when approved, shall be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder. A copy shall be filed with the Department of Community Development. 5. Fire Department Requirements are as follows: a. An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be approved and installed pursuant to Fire Department regulations. b. Service roads and fire lanes, as determined by the Fire Department, shall be posted and marked. c. Fire access lanes shall be maintained. If fire lane violations occur and the services of the Fire Department are required, the applicant will be liable for expenses incurred. d. On -site fire hydrants shall be provided in number and at locations specified by the Fire Department. 6. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department. 7. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke Use Permit No. 90-36 if any violation of these conditions or the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs. PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -7- (7171d) FINDINGS FOR DENIAL - SPECIAL SIGN PERMIT NO. 90-6: 1. Strict compliance with Article 9610.5 will not result in a substantial economic hardship to the applicant in that adequate advertising and signage of the premises is maintained.. 2. The view angle considered necessary by the applicant would be a hazardous distraction to passing motorists. B-3 CODE AMENDMENT NO 90-3/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO, 90-17: APPLICANT: JIM CAVIOLA LOCATION: City Wide The Planning Commission continued this item from the July 27, 1990 meeting, in order to allow the Planning Division the opportunity to notify the Huntington Harbour property owners associations. Code Amendment No. 90-3 is a request to amend Articles 911 (Low Density Residential), 912 (Medium, Medium High, and High Density Residential Districts), 915 (Planned Residential Development) and 942 (Water Recreation Districts) to allow projecting decks up to five (5) feet beyond the bulkhead. Currently, the code only allows such projections in the single family residential zones (R1). ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Pursuant to the environmental regulations in effect at this time, the Department of Community Development advertised Draft Negative Declaration No. 90-17 for twenty-one (21) days, and no comments, either verbal or written were received. The staff, in its initial study of the project, has recommended that a negative declaration be issued. Prior to any action on Code Amendment No. 90-3, it is necessary for the Planning Commission to review and act on Negative Declaration No. 90-17. LI PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -8- (7171d) 1 COASTAL STATUS: An amendment to the Huntington Beach Local Coastal Program implementing ordinances will be filed with the California Coastal Commission to incorporate the changes of this code amendment following approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of Negative Declaration 90-17 and Code Amendment 90-3 and forward the proposed ordinance to the City Council for adoption based on findings. The Commission questioned staff on certain points in the Codes that they felt needed clarification. The Commissioners discussed a continuance to allow the Harbour Committee to clarify the wording in the Codes to their satisfaction. The applicant agreed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LEIPZIG, SECOND BY BOURGUIGNON, TO CONTINUE CODE AMENDMENT NO. 90-3 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 90-17 TO THE SEPTEMBER 18, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO ALLOW THE HARBOUR COMMITTEE TO CLARIFY THE WORDING IN THE CODES, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Mountford, Ortega, Kirkland, Bourguignon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: Williams (out of room) ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED B-4 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO 90-3/ZONE CHANGE NO. 90-3/ NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO, 90-23: APPLICANT: Redevelopment Agency, City of Huntington Beach/Bijan Sassounian LOCATION: Two sites: one south of Talbert Avenue, west of Joyful Lane; and the other south of Happy Drive between Jolly Lane and Joyful Lane. General Plan Amendment No. 90-3 is a request to redesignate a 3.83 gross acre area located on the south side of Talbert Avenue, west of Joyful Lane (Site A) and at the southwest corner of Happy Drive and Joyful Lane (Site B2 as depicted on Attachment No. 1) from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential. Zone Change No. 90-3 is a request to rezone three areas totalling 4.14 acres (see Attachments 1, 4, and 5) as follows: PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -9- (7171d) Site A - Rezone from (Q)R2-PD (Qualified -Medium Density Residential -Planned Development) to R4-PD (High Density Residential -Planned Development). Site B1 - Rezone from R4-SR (High Density Residential -Senior Suffix) to R4-PD (High Density Residential -Planned Development) Site B2 - Rezone from R2-SR (Medium Density Residential -Senior Suffix) to R4-PD (High Density Residential -Planned Development). The General Plan Amendment and Zone Change are being submitted for review and recommendation by the Planning Commission and then forwarded to the City Council for final decision. Although the requests do not constitute any new development, it will allow for residential development of the site. If approved, up to 155 condominium units may be constructed. Concurrently being processed with this General Plan Amendment and Zone Change is Conditional Use Permit No. 90-12 with Special Permits and Tentative Tract No. 14357 for 140 condominiums. This report is designed to investigate the concerns associated with the proposed amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan and zone change, and to analyze whether such an action is compatible with surrounding land uses and in conformance with the goals and policies of the General Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Pursuant to the environmental regulations in effect at this time, the Department of Community Development advertised Draft Negative Declaration No. 90-23 for twenty one (21) days, and no comments, either verbal or written were received. The staff, in its initial study of the project, has recommended that a negative declaration be issued. Prior to any action of General Plan Amendment No. 90-3 and Zone Change 90-3, it is necessary for the Planning Commission to review and act on Negative Declaration No. 90-23. REDEVELOPMENT STATUS: The subject property is located within the City's Talbert -Beach Redevelopment Project Area. Property owners for the proposed project include the Seaview Village Corporation, and the Redevelopment Agency, City of Huntington Beach. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions: A. Approve Negative Declaration No. 90-23 with mitigation measures and forward to the City Council for adoption, PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -10- (7171d) 1 11 B. Approve General Plan Amendment No. 90-3 by adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 1435 and forward to the City Council for adoption; and C. Approve Zone Change No. 90-3 with findings and forward to the City Council for adoption. The Commission elected to combine items B-4 and B-5 for the public hearing in order to address all issues of the requests. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Ernie Vasques, Architect, stated the issues of major concern were affordability and comptability with surroundings. Mr. Vasques described the methods used to tie all the aspect together for the neighborhood. He also said that one building was deficient in guest parking, while two buildings had a surplus. Edward Hill, 18176 Sharon Lane, stated he felt the density was far too high. He feels this project will destroy their peaceful and quiet neighborhood. When Mr. Hill purchased his home he expected it to be next to low density, and is very concerned about his property value declining. Dr. Marc Bock, 7821 Lori Drive, spoke in opposition to the project. His major concerns included noise, property value declining and future projects. Dr. Bock would like to see the property keep senior zoning. Susan Bock, 7821 Lori Drive, said she was opposed to the project for the same reasons stated by her husband, the previous speaker (Dr. Bock) . Roy Richardson, 16982 Bedford Lane, recommends that the project area be left as specified in the General Plan. He strongly opposes the negative declaration. Victor D. Brown, 7841 Essex Drive, was concerned as a citizen about parking. He said the City should be concerned about the quality of life and conditions and how this will affect the people living their many years, not with numbers and profit. Nancy Kirkland, 18071 Wakefield, stated she was concerned with density of traffic congestion patterns. Ms. Kirkland feels that it is not fair to move -in thinking one type of zone will be there and then have it changed. PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -11- (7171d) James Sutton, 7801 Essex, was told when he moved in one year ago that the zoning for project area was low to moderate. He said he took this fact into consideration when buying his home. Mr. Sutton stated that he felt the zoning ordinances are to protect neighborhoods, and changing them violates the intent of these codes. He would also like to see an environmental impact report done. Steve Mattoon, 7846 Lori Drive, stated he concurs with his neighbors. He feels the variance is taylored to the developer rather than the general public. He is concerned with the traffic if the zoning changes from low and moderate to high. Vee Kennedy, 7821 Happy, when purchasing her home inquired about vacant lot and was assured it was zoned for seniors. Ms. Kennedy feels changing the zoning will off balance the neighborhood with the different age groups. She said there are better suited places to build the proposed project. Iva Miles, 7821 Happy, stated when she bought her condominium one year ago she was told the project area was zoned for retired seniors. She is very concerned about the parking problems that may arise. Ms. Miles also feels an environmental impact report should be done. Karen Day, 7816 Essex Drive, said she had the same concerns as previous speakers. She was especially concerned with the volume of people that the project would bring into the area. Margie Rockoff, 7826 Lori Drive, stated she was concerned about the senior citizens. She said it was the only area left in the City to build for senior citizens, and asked that it not be taken away. Denise Hill, 7855 Lori, is concerned with density of project. He stated that before purchasing he was assured that the zoning of project area would not change. Mary Ann Hazelett, 7851 Lori Drive, was concerned about the noise and height of project. She is also concerned about the safety of her children with a high density impact, and creating a slum in 5 years. Joseph Hazelett, 7851 Lori Drive, is concerned about the close proximity of structures to his house. He also expressed concern about noise pollution and an increase in population density. Konrad Raschke, 7816 Essex, felt the zoning change was a major issue. If the zoning change did not take place, the builder could still build something. Mr. Raschke stated he was not opposed to the building, just the zone change. Steve Durant, 17921 Alta Mirano, stated he agrees point mentioned in opposition. He also said that offers a greater quality of life than other Orange and this type of project destroys that lifestyle. with all previous Huntington Beach County Cities, 1 PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -12- (7171d) Debra Lynn Valle, 7796 Essex Drive, had a petition from neighbors opposing the project. She was concerned that the density would almost double what it is now. Ms. Valle's other concerns included height of project, traffic and noise increase, guest parking overflow, decrease of property value, and the project being uncomplimentary to the senior citizens in the area. Cheryl Campbell, 7801 Essex, was concerned with the comptability of the proposed project and existing buildings. He also is concerned with lower property values and traffic increase. Shane Cary, 18176 Alice Lane, asked the Commission to listen to their views as if it were their own neighborhood being affected. Maribeth Layden, 7801 Happy Drive, was told when purchasing home that proposed site would remain senior suffix. She is also concerned with traffic increase from drive thru traffic. Susan Allie, 7842 Lori Drive, stated she is concerned about the high density, noise increase, proximity of units, and loss of privacy. Ms. Allie asked if potential increase of crime had been considered or property value decrease. Bijaun Sassounian, applicant, 6782 President Drive, stated that they have worked through many schemes at great cost and effort, along with staff Design Review Board and City to come up with feasible Design. He also said senior citizens are welcome to the project if they are qualified. A discussion ensued among the Commissioners concerning abandonment of the Senior Suffix. They also questioned affordable housing to first time buyers, excluding senior citizens, guest parking, and what constitutes moderate income for Orange County. The Commissioners thought a continuance would be necessary to make altered conditions. A MOTION WAS MADE BY ORTEGA, SECOND BY KIRKLAND, TO DENY NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 90-23, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Ortega, Kirkland NOES: Bourguignon, Leipzig, Williams, Mountford, Shomaker ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION FAILED PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -13- (7171d) A MOTION WAS MADE BY WILLIAMS, SECOND BY BOURGUIGNON, TO CONTINUE NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 90-23 TO THE OCTOBER 2, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO MAKE ALTERED CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Mountford, Williams, Ortega, Kirkland, Bourguignon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED A MOTION WAS MADE BY MOUNTFORD, SECOND BY SHOMAKER, TO CONTINUE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 90-3 TO THE OCTOBER 2, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO MAKE ALTERED CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Mountford, Williams, Ortega, Kirkland, Bourguignon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED A MOTION WAS MADE BY WILLIAMS, SECOND BY SHOMAKER TO CONTINUE ZONE CHANGE NO. 90-3 TO THE OCTOBER 2, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO MAKE ALTERED CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Mountford, Williams, Ortega, Kirkland, Bourguignon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED B-5 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-12 WITH SPECIAL PERMITS/ TENTATIVE TRACT NO 14357/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 90-23 (IN CONJUNCTION WITH GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 90-3 AND ZONE CHANGE NO. 90-3) APPLICANT: REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY/BIJAN SASSOUNIAN LOCATION: South side of Talbert Avenue, west of Joyful Lane; south of Happy Drive between Jolly Lane and Joyful Lane. 1 PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -14- (7171d) 1 Conditional Use Permit No. 90-12 is a request by Seaview Village and the City of Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency for a 140 unit condominium complex, pursuant to Section 9150.1 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Six special permit requests have been filed, as follows: 1. To reduce the front yard setback along Joyful Lane and the north side of Happy Drive to a minimum of 7 feet for pool fencing, and 10 feet for an accessory building. Section 9150.7 requires a minimum 15' setback with an average of 20'. 2. To reduce the rear setback along R1-zoned property to a minimum of 10' 6" for patio walls with an average of 20 feet to the building face. Section 9150.9 would require a 30' setback from R1-zoned property for this project. 3. To reduce the side -by -side building separation for Building 1 to 20 feet. Section 9150.10(d) requires a minimum 55 feet for this project. 4. To allow 40% of the total project to be one story less than the remainder of the project. Section 9150.12(c) requires that one third of the units in each multi -story structure be one story less than the remaining units in the structure. 5. To allow an average dimension of 75 feet for the main recreation area. Section 9150.14(f) requires a 100 foot average dimension. 6. To allow 15% to 20% ramp slopes into the parking structure. Section 9601.6 requires a maximum 10% slope on ramps with no adjacent parking, and a 16 foot long transition ramp with a maximum 5% slope at intersections with a public street. Tentative Tract No. 14357 is a five lot subdivision to accommodate the construction of 140 condominiums. This conditional use permit and tentative tract map are contingent upon approval of General Plan Amendment No. 90-3 and Zone Change 90-3, which are being requested concurrently. The General Plan Amendment and Zone Change must be acted upon before any action on this request. PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -15- (7171d) ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Pursuant to the environmental regulations in effect at this time, the Department of Community Development advertised draft Negative Declaration No. 90-23 for public review and comment twenty-one (21) days prior to the hearing. No comments, either verbal or written were received with regard to the proposed negative declaration. The Draft Negative Declaration is attached to this report, and all proposed mitigation measures have been incorporated as conditions of approval on the project. REDEVELOPMENT STATUS: The project is located in the Talbert -Beach Redevelopment Project Area. As part of the agreement between the developer and the Redevelopment Agency, the developer has agreed to make available 82 units for moderate income, first time buyers. The general provisions of this program are discussed in the analysis section below. SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE: On July 26, 1990, the Subdivision Committee met to discuss Tentative Tract 14357. Representatives of the Planning Commission, Fire Department, Public Works Department, and Community Development Department were present. The proposed conditions of approval were discussed, and are incorporated in the recommendation section of this report. The Committee expressed concern with the proposed parking plan, and recommended that: 1. All resident parking be provided under its corresponding building. 2. Guest parking should be located on -site, rather than on the street. 3. No tandem parking should be considered. The architect has revised the plans to incorporate these suggestions. The Committee voted unanimously to recommend approval of Tentative Tract 14357 to the Planning Commission, noting that this recommendation did not necessarily reflect their concerns with the conditional use permit and site plan. PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -16- (7171d) DESIGN REVIEW BOARD: r, The Design Review Board analyzed the proposed colors, materials, and building elevations on August 2, 1990. The Board made suggestions to reduce the building bulk and soften roof profiles, but remained concerned with the overall form of the building and with the proposed Special Permits. The Board recommended that the Planning Commission impose a condition sending the elevations back to the Design Review Board for final approval of form, materials, and colors. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Negative Declaration 90-23 Conditional Use Permit No. 90-12 with Special Permits, and Tentative Tract No. 14357 with findings and suggested conditions of approval: A MOTION WAS MADE BY ORTEGA, SECOND BY SHOMAKER, TO CONTINUE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-12 WITH SPECIAL PERMITS, TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 14357, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 90-23 TO THE SEPTEMBER 18, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO MAKE ALTERED CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Mountford, Williams, Ortega, Kirkland, Bourguignon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED B-6 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-43 APPLICANT: DAVID M. LAUTNER LOCATION: 217 Main Street (west side, approximately 125' south of Olive Avenue) The applicant has requested a continuance to September 18, 1990, in order to resolve several remaining issues with the Design Review Board, relating to the rehabilitation of the building at 217 Main Street. PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -17- (7171d) A MOTION WAS MADE BY ORTEGA, SECOND BY KIRKLAND, TO CONTINUE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-43 AT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO SEPTEMBER 18, 1990, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Ortega, Kirkland, Bourguignon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: Shomaker, Mountford, Williams (out of the room) ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED B-7 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 90-23 WITH SPECIAL PERMITS/TENTATIVE TRACT NO 14332/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 90-21 APPLICANT: CONCORDE DEVELOPMENT LOCATION: 8302 Atlanta Avenue (southside of Atlanta Avenue, approximately 160 feet west of Lochlea Lane) Conditional Use Permit No. 90-23 with Special Permits and Tentative Tract No. 14332 is a request to subdivide one (1) lot for condominium purposes and construct a 42 unit (24 stacked flats/18 townhomes) Planned Residential Development. Special Permits are requested for: 1) Reduction of the front to front building separation; 2) Relief from the 15 foot setback from the vehicular accessway; 3) Relief from the required 20 foot setback for fifty percent of the garages; 4) Reduced minimum square footage requirement and minimum dimension for a main recreation area; 5) Exceed the maximum building height; 6) Reduction of the rear to rear building separation; 7) Reduction of access width; and 8) Reduction of the minimum dimension and open space credit for at grade dwelling units pursuant to Section 915 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Pursuant to the environmental regulations in effect at this time, the Department of Community Development advertised draft Negative Declaration No. 90-21 for twenty-one (21) days, and no comments, either verbal or written were received. The staff, in its initial study of the project, has recommended that a negative declaration be issued. Prior to any action on Conditional Use Permit No. 90-23 and Tentative Tract No. 14332, it is necessary for the Planning Commission to review and act on Negative Declaration No. 90-21. PJ PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -18- (7171d) SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE: On August 9, 1990, the Subdivision Committee reviewed Tentative Tract No. 14332. After discussion among the applicant, City staff and the Subdivision Committee regarding the project, the Subdivision Committee recommended approval to the Planning Commission as amended by a unanimous vote (see Attachment No. 5). It should be noted, however, that the subdivision committee review is limited to subdivision issues such as vehicular access, the availability of sewer and water services, potential impacts on Police and Fire services, etc. Public Works staff recommended that access to and from the project be relocated from the west side to the east side. Access from the west side would allow a right turn only exit onto Atlanta Avenue because of the location of a street median and left turn pocket. After discussion, the applicant stated that the current access configuration would provide the best on -site and off -site circulation pattern. Although the Subdivision Committee has recommended approval of Tentative Tract No. 14332, the recommendation does not include a recommendation on Conditional Use Permit No. 90-23 which is for the actual project. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD: The Design Review Board reviewed the proposed 42 unit planned residential development on July 19, 1990. Based upon the request of eight (8) special permits in conjunction with the project, the Design Review Board expressed concern that any adverse action taken by the Planning Commission on the special permits would affect the appearance and final configuration of the elevations (see Attachment No. 6). The Design Review Board recommended the project be referred to the Planning Commission for final action without a Board recommendation. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff Recommends that the Planning Commission take the following action: A. Approve Negative Declaration No. 90-21; and B. Deny Conditional Use Permit No. 90-23 with special permits and Tentative Tract No. 14332 with the following findings. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Dennis Gage, applicant representative, stated the reason for all the special permits was to develop a better living environment, better project. PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -19- (7171d) Dennis Nelson, applicant representative, gave an explanation of the special permits. Mr. Nelson clarified height measurements, setbacks interfering with guest parking, recreation center minimum dimensions, and the neighbors to the south requesting that the wall be raised. Robert M. Lambert, 21112 Windchild Lane, stated he was concerned about the noise and his privacy but felt it would not be a problem if the wall was raised. THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. A discussion ensued among the Commissioners regarding the number of special permits and their necessity. They also questioned why Design Review Board did not act on this request. Staff explained that their were too many special permits for Design Review Board to act on, and they were requesting denial because there were not enough trade offs to justify the special permits. A MOTION WAS MADE BY KIRKLAND, SECOND BY WILLIAMS TO APPROVE NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 90-21, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Mountford, Williams, Ortega, Kirkland, Bourguignon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED A MOTION WAS MADE BY KIRKLAND, SECOND BY WILLIAMS, TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-23 WITH SPECIAL PERMITS AND TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 14332 WITH ALTERNATIVE FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Mountford, NOES: Ortega, Leipzig ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED Williams, Kirkland, Bourguignon FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-23: 1. The location, site layout, and design of the proposed 42 unit planned residential development with eight (8) special permits does properly adapt the proposed structures to streets, driveways, and other adjacent structures and uses in a harmonious manner. PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -20- (7171d) LJ 2. The proposed 42 unit planned residential development with eight (8) special permits is compatible with surrounding properties in terms of architecture and orientation. The row type site layout, building bulk and building height are properly addressed through design implementation. 3. The access to and parking for the proposed 42 unit planned residential development with eight (8) special permits does not create an undue traffic problem. The access point for the project and the minimum code required parking provides adequate parking and will not result in a traffic and parking conflict. 4. The planned residential development for a 42 unit condominium/townhomes project with eight (8) special permits substantially conforms to the provisions contained in Article 915. 5. Conditional Use Permit No. 90-23 for a 42 unit planned residential development with eight (8) special permits is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan and Land Use Map designation. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - SPECIAL PERMITS: 1. The following special permits promote a better living environment by adapting the Planned Residential Development requirements which would enhance the area and provide a compatible project with the surrounding area: a) Reduction of the front to front building separation; b) Relief from the 15 foot setback from the vehicular accessway; c) Relief from the required 20 foot setback for fifty percent of the garages; d) Reduced minimum square footage requirement and minimum dimension for a main recreation area; e) Exceed the maximum building height; f) Reduction of the rear to rear building separation; g) Reduction of access width; h) Reduction of the minimum dimension and open space credit for at grade dwelling units. 2. The requested special permits provide for maximum use of aesthetically pleasing types of architecture, landscaping, design and building layout. PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -21- (7171d) 3. The requested special permits will not be detrimental to the general health, welfare, safety and convenience, and not detrimental and injurious to the value of property and improvements of the neighborhood or of the City in general. 4. The requested special permits are consistent with the objectives of the Planned Residential Development standards in achieving a development adapted to the terrain and compatible with the surrounding environment. The proposed project does provide a better living environment and an aesthetically pleasing project through design implementation. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - TENTATIVE TRACT N0, 14332: 1. The size, depth, frontage, street width, and other design features of the proposed subdivision for a 42 unit planned residential development with eight (8) special permits are in compliance with the standard plans and specifications on file with the City as well as in compliance with the State Subdivision Map Act and the supplemental City Subdivision Ordinance. The subdivision as proposed for condominium purposes is properly designed to the zoning designation and planned residential development suffix by the use of land planning techniques and the use of aesthetically pleasing architecture, landscaping, site layout and design. 2. The property was previously studied for this intensity of land use at the time that the General Plan designation of Medium -High Density Residential and R3 (25 units per gross acre) zoning were implemented. 3. The site is relatively flat and physically suitable for the proposed density of 25 units per gross acre. 4. Tentative Tract No. 14332 for a 42 unit planned residential development with eight (8) special permits is consistent with the goals and policies of the Huntington Beach General Plan. SUGGESTED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 90-23 WITH SPECIAL PERMITS: 1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated July 3, 1990 shall be the conceptually approved layout. 2. Prior to submittal for building permits, the applicant/owner shall complete the following: a. Submit three copies of the site plan to the Planning Division for addressing purposes. If street names are necessary, approval. submit proposal to Fire Department for review and PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -22- (7171d) b. Depict all utility apparatus, such as but not limited to backflow devices and Edison transformers, on the site plan. They shall be prohibited in the front and exterior yard setbacks unless properly screened by landscaping or other method as approved by the Community Development Director. c. 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. d. If foil -type insulation is to be used, a fire retardant type shall be installed as approved by the Building Department and indicated on the floor plans. e. The structures on the subject property, whether attached or detached, shall be constructed in compliance with the State acoustical standards set forth for units that lie within the 60 CNEL contours of the property. Evidence of compliance shall consist of submittal of an acoustical analysis report, prepared under the supervision of a person experienced in the field of acoustical engineering, with the application for building permit(s). f. Elevations shall depict colors and building materials proposed. g. All rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened from any view. Said screening shall be architecturally compatible with the building in terms of materials and colors. If screening is not designed specifically into the building, a rooftop mechanical equipment plan must be submitted showing screening and must be approved. h. If outdoor lighting is included, high-pressure sodium vapor lamps or similar energy savings lamps shall be used. All outside lighting shall be directed to prevent "spillage" onto adjacent properties and shall be noted on the site plan and elevations. i. 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. j. The site plan shall include (or reference page) all conditions of approval imposed on the project printed verbatim. PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -23- (7171d) 3. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant/owner shall complete the following: a. A Landscape Construction Set must be submitted to the Departments of Community Development and Public Works and must be approved. The Landscape Construction Set shall include a landscape plan prepared and signed by a State Licensed Landscape Architect and which includes all proposed/existing plant materials (location, type, size, quantity), an irrigation plan, a grading plan, an approved site plan, and a copy of the entitlement conditions of approval. The landscape plans shall be in conformance with Section 9608 and 915 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. The set must be approved by both departments prior to issuance of building permits. Any existing mature trees that must be removed shall be replaced at a 2 to 1 ratio with minimum 36-inch box trees, which shall be incorporated into the project's landscape plan. b. A grading plan shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and it must be approved (by issuance of a grading permit). A plan for silt control for all water runoff from the property during construction and initial operation of the project may be required if deemed necessary by the Director of Public Works. c. Hydrology and hydraulic studies shall be submitted for Public Works approval. d. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid. e. Final Tract Map shall be accepted by the City Council, recorded with the Orange County Recorder and a copy filed with the Department of Community Development. f. Perimeter fencing plans for review and approval which depict decorative materials. g. Submit copy of completed FEMA Elevation Certificate. 4. The Public Works Department requirements are as follows: a. Developer shall submit water improvement plans for approval by the Public Works Water Division, showing all water services, fire hydrants, fire services and backflow devices. b. The water system shall be located within vehicular travelways and dedicated to the City. The Developer/Homeowner's Association shall be held responsible for repairing any enhanced pavement, if the water mains, etc., require repair or maintenance. c. Developer is responsible for payment of any additional fees adopted in the upcoming Water Division Financial Master Plan. PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -24- (7171d) d. The Developer shall adopt further mitigation efforts approved by the Water Division to reduce peak hour demands. e. Developer shall submit water system hydraulic calculations to ensure system adequacy and line sizing. f. The water system shall have two (2) sources, i.e. looped. No dead ends. The water system shall be installed per the Public Works Department's standards, ordinances and policies. g. No combustible construction can occur without the approved water system installed. h. Developer must submit for approval by the Department of Public Works landscaping plans showing the use of "drought tolerant: plants in the design. i. Low -volume fixture heads shall be incorporated into the portable water system design. j. Each unit shall have a separate water service and backflow device. 5. Fire Department Requirements are as follows: a. Automatic sprinkler systems shall be installed throughout to comply with Huntington Beach Fire Department and Uniform Building Code Standards. Shop drawings will be submitted to and approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. b. A fire alarm system will be installed to comply with Huntington Beach Fire Department and Uniform Fire Code Standards. Shop drawings will be submitted to and approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. The system will provide the following: 1. Waterflow, valve tamper and trouble detection 2. 24-hour supervision 3. Smoke detectors 4. Annunciation 5. Audible Alarms c. Fire extinguishers will be installed and located in areas to comply with Huntington Beach Fire Code Standards. d. Three (3) fire hydrants shall be installed prior to combustible construction. Shop drawings will be submitted to the Public Works Department and approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. e. Fire lanes will be designated and posted to comply with Huntington Beach Fire Department Standard No. 415. PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -25- (7171d) f. Security gates will be designed to comply with Huntington Beach Fire Department Standard No. 403. g. Address numbers will be installed to comply with Huntington Beach Fire Code Standards. The size of the numbers will be the following: 1. The number for the building will be sized a minimum of ten (10") inches with a brush stroke of one and one-half (1-1/2") inches. 2. Individual units will be sized a minimum of four (4) inches with a brush stroke of one-half (1/2") inch. h. Installation or removal of underground flammable or combustible liquid storage tanks will comply with Orange County Environmental Health and Huntington Beach Fire Department Standards. i. Dimensions for fire access shall be indicated on plans. Includes twenty-four (241) foot or twenty-seven (27') foot fire lanes, turnarounds and seventeen (17') foot by forty-five (451) foot radius turns. j. Names of streets must be approved by the Huntington Beach Fire Department prior to use. k. Submit to the Fire Department for approval a Fire Protection Plan containing requirements of Fire Department Specification #426. 1. Water supply must be provided and be capable of supplying calculated fire flow in addition to domestic water requirements. m. The applicant shall meet all applicable local, State and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards. 6. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department. 7. 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. 8. Installation of required landscaping and irrigation systems shall be completed prior to final inspection/within twelve (12) months. 9. During construction, the applicant shall: a. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems in all areas where vehicles travel to keep damp enough to prevent dust raised when leaving the site; PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -26- (7171d) b. Wet down areas in the late morning and after work is completed for the day; c. Use low sulfur fuel (.05% by weight) for construction equipment; d. Attempt to phase and schedule construction activities to avoid high ozone days (first stage smog alerts); e. Discontinue construction during second stage smog alerts. 10. Construction shall be limited to Monday - Saturday 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM. Construction shall be prohibited Sundays and Federal holidays. 11. Prior to final building permit approval or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the following shall be completed: a. All improvements (including landscaping) to the property shall be completed in accordance with the approved plans and conditions of approval specified herein. b. Final Tract Map No. 14332 shall be accepted by the City Council. It shall be recorded with the County Recorders Office and a copy submitted to Planning Division prior to Certificate of Occupancy or final inspection of first unit. c. Compliance with all conditions of approval specified herein shall be accomplished. 12. 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. 13. Public Works Department shall provide alternate routes for traffic during the construction phase, if necessary. Adequate signage shall be provided to warn motor vehicles, bicyclists and pedestrians of construction. 14. The Huntington Beach Fire Department shall review and approve the plans for methane overlay compliance prior to issuance of building permits. 15. Should a Traffic Impact Fee be adopted by the City Council, the applicant/property owner shall be responsible for paying such fee prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and/or final building permit approval. 16. The applicant/property owner shall be responsible for paying the Park and Recreation Fees in effect at the time the final map is accepted by City Council or issuance by building permits, whichever occurs first. PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -27- (7171d) 17. The developer will be responsible for the payment of any additional fees adopted in the "upcoming" Water Division Financial Master Plan. 18. Landscape irrigation system shall be designed and constructed to include a separate water line for the use of reclaimed water subject to Water Department approval. 19. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke Conditional Use Permit No. 90-23 with Special Permits and Tentative Tract No. 14332 if any violation of these conditions or the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs. 20. Conditional Use Permit No. 90-23 with Special Permits 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. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - TENTATIVE TRACT NO, 14332: 1. The tentative tract map received and dated August 24, 1990, shall be the approved layout. 2. Public Works requirements are as follows: a. All vehicular access rights to Atlanta Avenue shall be released and relinquished to the City except at locations approved by the Planning Commission. b. Damaged and deteriorated public improvements on Atlanta Avenue shall be reconstructed per Public Works Standards and requirements. c. On -site streets shall be private and constructed per Public Works Standards (24' minimum pavement width, not including curb and gutter). d. On -site sewers shall be private. e. Hydrology and hydraulic calculations shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for approval. f. Submit a soils report and grading plan for Public Works approval. g. Developer shall participate in the proposed Traffic Impact Fee Program. PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -28- (7171d) h. A sewer study shall be submitted for the approval of the Public Works Department. The developer shall design and construct the on -site sewer system required to serve the development. i. Private driveway entries shall be radius type, per Huntington Beach Standard 211 A and B. j. This project is within Zone Al2 of the Flood Hazard Area, which requires the finish floor to be Elevation 11, or greater. 3. At least 60 days prior to recordation of the final tract map, CC&R's shall be submitted to and approved by the City Attorney and the Department of Community Development. The CC&R's shall reflect the common driveway access easements, and maintenance of all walls and common landscape areas by the Homeowners' Association. B-8 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0, 88-45/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 88-44: APPLICANT: HOME DEPOT LOCATION: 6912 Edinger Avenue (Southwest corner of Edinger Avenue and Goldenwest Street) One year review of Home Depot Conditional Use Permit No. 88-45 to review compliance with conditions of approval and the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. On April 4, 1989, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit No. 88-45 and Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 88-44, which was a request to establish a 12,000 square foot fenced outdoor storage/staging area with a variance to parking requirements. On July 6, 1989, the Planning Commission voted to schedule a revocation hearing for the entitlement after hearing complaints from the neighboring property owners and requesting a status report from the Land Use Division regarding the required conditions of approval. A revocation hearing was conducted on August 1, 1989. The Planning Commission re-affirmend Conditional Use Permit No. 88-45 and Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 88-44 and granted Home Depot 30 days to commence construction of site improvements. PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -29- (7171d) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept as adequate Home Depot's compliance with Conditional Use Permit No. 88-45 and schedule an additional one (1) year review. In addition, require Home Depot to submit a parking management plan which shall require all employees to park within the secured portion of the property. The parking management plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development. A MOTION WAS MADE BY ORTEGA, SECOND BY BOURGUIGNON, TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARINGS AFTER 11:00 PM, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Mountford, Bourguignon NOES: None ABSENT: Leipzig (out of the ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Williams, Ortega, Kirkland, room) Bonnie Dapko, 16072 Marjan Lane, stated that violations were occurring at the project site. Some of the violations included parking, loading and unloading behind her house, and gates open in violation. Donald McCallum, 6841 Nyanza Drive, told the Commission he did not accept as adequate the one year review. Mr. McCallum feels the applicants have not lived up to conditions of approval. Some of the violations include truck engines idling after hours, trucks parked along fences, skids and trash in storage area and forklifts running after 5:00 PM. He said they have reported these violations and submitted photographs showing them. Current Manager for Home Depot, said since he has been at the store he is enforcing the cleanliness and the conditions of approval. He stated he will do everything he can to enforce all of them. THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. The Commission asked staff why Home Depot had not been sited for the violations that have occurred and what can be done to enforce the conditions of approval. Staff stated that they have to see the violations as they occur, and they have not seen them thus far. Staff will continue to make frequent checks at the site. F� PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -30- (7171d) 11 A MOTION WAS MADE BY WILLIAMS, SECOND BY BOURGUIGNON, TO ACCEPT AS ADEQUATE HOME DEPOT'S COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 88-45 AND SCHEDULE AND ADDITIONAL ONE YEAR REVIEW, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Williams, Kirkland, Bourguignon NOES: Ortega, Leipzig ABSENT: Mountford (out of the room) ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED CONSENT CALENDER ITEMS C-1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED JULY 24, 1990: it A MOTION WAS MADE BY ORTEGA, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO APPROVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED JULY 24, 1990, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Mountford, Williams, Ortega, Kirkland, Bourguignon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED D. NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS None E. DISCUSSION ITEMS None F. PLANNING COMMISSION INQUIRIES F-1 STATUS OF LIMITED SIGN PERMITS Information item only, no action taken. PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -31- (7171d) G. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS Commissioner Williams: Informed staff that he had received telephone calls from the public complaining about the odors coming from American Landscape, a manufacturer of fertilizer. He requested staff to look into it. Commissioner Ortega: Inquired how the CEQA workshop was coming along and if City Council was interested in being included. Mike Adams informed her they were working on scheduling the speakers, and they will invite the City Council members to attend as soon as the Planning Commissioners formally request them to. Commissioner Leipzig: Informed staff that it had been approximately a year since Angus Oil had a one year review, and although it was not conditioned for them to have another one year review, he requested that staff look into doing so. H. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ITEMS Mike Adams, Director of Community Development, reiterated action taken by Council at the City Council meeting of September 4, 1990. The were three (3) Community Development items which included: the Parking, Landscape Amendment, Planning Fees, and The Holly-Seacliff negotiations. I. ADJOURNMENT A MOTION WAS MADE BY KIRKLAND, SECOND BY ORTEGA, TO ADJOURN TO A 5:30 STUDY SESSION (AGENDA REVIEW, SUB -COMMITTEE REPORT), TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 1990, AND THEN TO THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING AT 7:00 P.M. BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Williams, Ortega, Kirkland, Bourguignon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: Mountford ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED /kj 1 APPROVED isL Z Mike Ada", Secretary ,QJ Planning Commission Chairwoman PC MINUTES - 9/5/90 -32- (7171d)