Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-08-06MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, AUGUST 6, 1991 Council Chambers 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, REGULAR MEETING - 7:00 PM PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Civic Center California P P P P P ROLL CALL: Richardson, Newman, Shomaker, Kirkland, Dettloff P P Bourguignon, Leipzig A. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS (4 MINUTES TIME TO OTHERS) Anyone wishing submit a form to speak prior to Hearing items. No action can be Commission on this date, unless None B. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS PER PERSON, NO DONATING OF to speak must fill out and Oral Communication or Public taken by the Planning agendized. B-1 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 91-33 WITH SPECIAL PERMITS/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 91-14: APPLICANT: Mr. Bart DeBoe LOCATION: 112-18th Street (Eastside of 18th Street approximately 175 feet north of Pacific Coast Highway) Conditional Use Permit No. 91-33 with Special Permits in conjunction with Coastal Development Permit No. 91-14 is a request to permit the construction of a new 2,585 square foot three (3) story single family dwelling with special permits. The special permits are to permit a reduction in the exterior side yard setback and a reduction of the upper story setback. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit No. 91-31 with Special Permits and Coastal Development Permit No. 91-14 with findings and suggested conditions of approval. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Kaz Begovich, Architect, spoke in favor of the request. He stated he was there to answer any questions the Commission may have. THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BOURGUIGNON, SECOND BY SHOMAKER, TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 91-33 WITH SPECIAL PERMITS AND COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 91-14 WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Richardson, Newman, Shomaker, Kirkland, Dettloff, Bourguignon NOES: Leipzig ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 91-33: 1. The location, site layout, and design of the proposed three (3) story single family dwelling with two (2) special permits properly adapts the proposed structure to streets, driveways and other adjacent structures and uses in a harmonious manner. The overall project, building setbacks, building mass and building bulk are properly addressed and are compatible with the adjacent structures and uses. 2. The proposed three (3) story single family dwelling with two (2) special permits is compatible with surrounding properties in terms of architecture and orientation. The site layout, building setbacks, building bulk and building mass are properly addressed through design implementation. 3. The development of a three (3) story single family dwelling with two (2) special permits conforms to the provisions contained in the Downtown Specific Plan, District 2. 4. Conditional Use Permit No. 91-33 to permit a three (3) story single family dwelling with two (2) special permits is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's General plan and Land Use Map designation. As proposed by the applicant, the intent of the land use designation and zoning is to provide a better living environment and promote aesthetically pleasing development. PC Minutes - 8/6/91 -2- (0781d) FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - SPECIAL PERMITS: 1. The following special permits promote a better living environment by adapting the Downtown Specific Plan, District 2 requirements which enhance the area and provide a compatible project with the surrounding area: a. A reduction of the minimum exterior sideyard setback for the garage. b. A reduction of the minimum ten (10) feet average for the upper story setback along the exterior alley elevation. 2. The requested special permits provide for maximum use of aesthetically pleasing types of architecture, landscaping, design and building layout. 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. The building bulk, building mass and overall project design are properly addressed and will not be a detriment to the surrounding neighborhood. 4. The requested special permits are consistent with the objectives of the Downtown Specific Plan, District 2 standards in achieving a development adapted to the terrain and compatible with the surrounding environment. The proposed project provides a better living environment and an aesthetically pleasing project through design implementation. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 91-14: 1. The development of a three (3) story single family dwelling with special permits as proposed by Coastal Development Permit No. 91-14 conforms with the plans, policies, requirements and standards of the Coastal Element. 2. The development of a three (3) story single family dwelling with special permits is consistent with the CZ suffix, the Downtown Specific Plan as well as other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code applicable to the property. 3. Coastal Development Permit No. 91-14 at the time of occupancy, the proposed three (3) story single family dwelling with special permits will provide infrastructure in a manner that is consistent with the C-LUP. 4. The development of a three (3) story single family dwelling with special permits as proposed by Coastal Development Permit No. 91-14 does conform with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act. PC Minutes - 8/6/91 -3- (0781d) SUGGESTED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. 2. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated July 18, 1991 shall be the conceptually approved layout. 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 prohibited in the front and exterior yard setbacks unless properly screened by landscaping or other method as approved by the Community Development Director. b. 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. c. 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). d. Elevations shall depict colors and building materials as approved by the Design Review Board on July 18, 1991 along with the following: 1. Rain gutters shall be provided along all roof lines of the dwelling to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department. e. 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. f. 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. PC Minutes - 8/6/91 -4- (0781d) g. The dwelling shall comply with the single unit dwelling design standards of Section 9130.13(e) of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. h. 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, soil corrosivity, fill properties, foundations, retaining walls, streets, and utilities. i. The site plan shall include (or reference page) all conditions of approval imposed on the project printed verbatim. 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 the Downtown Specific Plan of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. The set must be approved by both departments prior to issuance of building permits. 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. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid. d. The property owner shall sign, notarize, and record with the County Recorder a "Letter of Agreement" assuring that the single family residence will be maintained as one (1) dwelling unit. 4. The Public Works Department requirements are as follows: a. Submit a grading plan for review and approval. b. The applicant shall dedicate two and one-half (2 1/2) feet on each alley side of the subject lot. PC Minutes - 8/6/91 M15 (0781d) c. All applicable Public Work fees shall be paid. d. All street improvements shall be required. 5. Fire Department Requirements are as follows: a 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; 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. Compliance with all conditions of approval specified herein shall be accomplished. PC Minutes - 8/6/91 -6- (0781d) 12. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke Conditional Use Permit No. 91-33 and Coastal Development Permit No. 91-14 if any violation of these conditions or the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs. 13. This conditional use permit shall not become effective for any purpose until an "Acceptance of Conditions" form has been properly executed by the applicant and an authorized representative of the owner of the property and returned to the Planning Division. 14. Conditional Use Permit No. 91-33 and Coastal Development Permit No. 91-14 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. B-2 CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-2 IN CONJUNCTION WITH NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 91-9: APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach LOCATION: City-wide Staff is requesting that Negative Declaration No. 91-9 and Code Amendment No. 91-2 be continued to the August 20, 1991 Planning Commission meeting. The Chamber of Commerce has requested additional time to evaluate and comment on the proposed Code Amendment. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission continue Negative Declaration No. 91-9 and Code Amendment No. 91-2 to the August 20, 1991 Planning Commission meeting at the request of the Chamber of Commerce. A MOTION WAS MADE BY KIRKLAND, SECOND BY RICHARDSON, TO CONTINUE CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-2 IN CONJUNCTION WITH NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 91-9 TO THE AUGUST 20, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AT THE REQUEST OF THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Richardson, Bourguignon, NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED Newman, Shomaker, Kirkland, Dettloff, Leipzig PC Minutes - 8/6/91 -7- (0781d) B-3 APPEAL OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DENIAL OF USE PERMIT NO. 91-25: APPLICANT/ APPELLANT: HANY HENEIN LOCATION: 9601 Rocky Mountain Use Permit No. 91-25 is an appeal of the Zoning Administrator's denial to permit an existing six (6) foot high wrought iron fence within the front 15 foot setback area pursuant to Section 9771(L) of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny the appeal and uphold the Zoning Administrator's denial of Use Permit No. 91-25 with findings. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Hany S. Henein, Applicant, stated his disagreement with the staff report. He said he submitted 12 photos to staff of fences in the neighborhood that resembled his own. Commissioner Kirkland asked Mr. henein why he built the fence abutting the sidewalk. Mr. Henein stated it was for security reasons. Pamela Henein, Applicant, restated that they had built the fence for security and privacy. She also stated they would be willing to tone down the white fence to blend with neighborhood. Shawn McCraney, 20092 Glacier Circle, spoke in support of the request. He stated it was an upgrade to the neighborhood and would raise the property value. Gunter Wermig, 20041 Big Bend Lane, spoke in,support of the request. Mr. Wermig felt it was an upgrade to the neighborhood. Jack Frabl, 9702 Bay Meadow Drive, spoke in support of the request. Mr. Frabl stated the fence was not a safety hazard. Henry S. Olersiewicz, 9591 Rocky Mountain Drive, spoke against the request. He stated the fence was an eyesore and dangerous because of the spiked tips. THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. The Commission stated their concerns that the applicant had built the fence without getting permits, therfore, there had been no inspections and the stability of the fence could not be determined. PC Minutes - 8/6/91 -8- (0781d) 1 A MOTION WAS MADE BY LEIPZIG, SECOND BY NEWMAN, TO DENY THE APPEAL AND UPHOLD THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DENIAL OF USE PERMIT NO. 91-25 WITH FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Richardson, Bourguignon, NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED Newman, Shomaker, Kirkland, Dettloff, Leipzig FINDINGS FOR DENIAL - USE PERMIT NO 91-25: 1. The establishment of the six (6) foot high wrought iron fence within the front setback area will be detrimental to: a. The general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity because the fence does not blend well with other properties within the neighborhood. b. Property and improvements in the vicinity of such use or building. Properties in the neighborhood generally do not have fences over 42 inches high within the front setback. 2. The six foot high wrought iron fence in the front setback area would be incompatible with other fences in the neighborhood. B-4 USE PERMIT NO. 91-23 (TO BE CONTINUED FOR RE -ADVERTISING): APPLICANT: Huntington Christian School - Four (4) classroom trailers. LOCATION: 1207 Main The applicant informed staff that they do not wish to pursue the application at this time and that they are withdrawing the application. APPLICANT WITHDRAWN BY THE APPLICANT PC Minutes - 8/6/91 -9- (0781d) C. CONSENT CALENDAR C-1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED APRIL 16, 1991: A MOTION WAS MADE BY RICHARDSON, SECOND BY SHOMAKER, TO APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED APRIL 16, 1991, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Richardson, Newman, Shomaker, Kirkland, Bourguignon, Leipzis NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Dettloff MOTION PASSED D. NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS D-1 ANGUS UNITIZATION PROJECT UPDATE: PRESNETOR: Margaret Kleckner Use Permit No. 88-25 was a request to develop an oil consolidation drill site on Block A and an associated oil facility on Block B. The last Angus review presented before the Planning Commission was on November 20, 1990. During this review, it was suggested that a short explanation and a tentative completion date follow all pending conditions. It was also suggested that staff provide the Commission with a map depicting all wells that have been abandoned by Angus Petroleum. Staff has updated conditions per the Commission's request and a current map has been provided which shows all wells that have been abandoned. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission accept the annual review of Use Permit No. 88-25 and direct staff to schedule a public hearing to amend Condition No. 53 to require further annual reviews. PC Minutes - 8/6/91 -10- (0781d) 1 A MOTION WAS MADE BY RICHARDSON, SECOND BY SHOMAKER, TO ACCEPT THE ANNUAL REVIEW OF USE PERMIT NO. 88-25 AND DIRECT STAFF TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND CONDITION NO. 53 TO REQUIRE FURTHER ANNUAL REVIEWS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Richardson, Leipzis NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Dettloff MOTION PASSED Newman, Shomaker, Kirkland, Bourguignon, D-2 SITE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 91-3: APPLICANT: Johnson Integra Corporation LOCATION: 1300 and 1390 Pacific Coast Highway The applicant is requesting to modify the floor plans and slightly modify the elevations for two (2) identical four (4) unit condominium projects located at either end of the 1300 block of Pacific Coast Highway. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Site Plan Amendment No. 91-3 with all previous findings and conditions of approval to remain in effect and modify Condition No. 1 as follows: 1. The site plans, floor plans and elevations received and dated July 22, 1991, shall be the conceptually approved plan upon final review of elevations by the Design Review Board. A MOTION WAS MADE BY KIRKLAND, SECOND BY SHOMAKER, TO APPROVE SITE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 91-3 WITH FINDINGS AND MODIFIED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Richardson, Bourguignon, NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED Newman, Shomaker, Kirkland, Dettloff, Leipzig ADDITIONAL CONDITION OF APPROVAL - SITE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 91-3: 1. The site plans, floor plans and elevations received and dated July 22, 1991, shall be the conceptually approved plan upon final review of elevations by the Design Review Board." PC Minutes - 8/6/91 -11- (0781d) E. DISCUSSION ITEMS Commissioner Bourguignon - requested staff to clarify the legal status of affordable housing and state regulations. Commissioner Dettloff - asked staff to clarify an item voted on by the City Council on August 5, 1991 regarding Waterfront. She asked if the financial impacts would affect the Planning Commission's decision in any way. Staff explained that financial considerations were not a part of their jurisdiction. Commissioner Richardson - asked for an update on the pierhead line and the Harbor Code. Counsel stated the next Harbor Code Committee meeting was Wednesday, August 14, 1991. Counsel also explained that Steve May, Public Works, was researching the pierhead line maps and would be prepared to respond in approximately three (3) months. Commissioner Newman - moved to reconsider the vote of Zone Change No. 91-2, Tentative Parcel Map No. 89-322 and Use Permit No. 90-63 approved at the July 23, 1991 Planning Commission meeting and schedule for a new public hearing on September 4, 1991 because of significant planning issues which she had not realized until after the meeting of July 23, 1991. Sarah Lazarus, Deputy City Attorney, stated a vote could not be taken to reconsider because it had not been agendized, unless a Statement of Exception was adopted stating reasons why it must be acted upon tonight. A MOTION WAS MADE BY SHOMAKER, SECOND BY RICHARDSON, TO ADOPT A STATEMENT OF EXCEPTION IN ORDER TO VOTE ON A RECONSIDERATION OF ZONE CHANGE NO. 91-2, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 89-322 AND USE PERMIT NO. 90-63, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Richardson, NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Bourguignon MOTION PASSED Newman, Shomaker, Kirkland, Dettloff, Leipzig 1 PC Minutes - 8/6/91 -12- (0781d) 1 STATEMENT OF EXCEPTION OF THE HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION WHEREAS, the agenda for Planning Commission meeting of August 6, 1991, was duly posted at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting; and Information was erroneously omitted from the agenda by staff; and Said information relates to a vote of reconsideration on Zone Change No. 91-2, Tentative Parcel Map No. 89-322 and Use Permit No. 90-63 which were approved by the Planning Commission on July 23, 1991; and Commissioner Newman had requested that staff agendize said vote of reconsideration in due time for the August 6, 1991 Planning Commission meeting as such a vote must be taken at the next scheduled meeting. NOW, THEREFORE, by a two-thirds vote of the Huntington Beach Planning Commission that a need to discuss and/or re -vote has arisen since the posting of the agenda. PASSED AND ADOPTED the 6th. day of August 1991. AYES _Richardson, Newman, Shomaker, Dettloff, Leipzig NAYES ABSENT None ABSTAIN Bourguignon A MOTION WAS MADE BY NEWMAN, SECOND BY KIRKLAND, TO RECONSIDER THE VOTE OF ZONE CHANGE NO. 91-2, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 89-322 AND USE PERMIT NO. 90-63 APPROVED AT THE JULY 23, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AND SCHEDULE FOR A NEW PUBLIC HEARING ON September 4, 1991 BECAUSE OF SIGNIFICANT PLANNING ISSUES WHICH SHE HAD NOT REALIZED UNTIL AFTER THE MEETING OF JULY 23, 1991, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Richardson, Bourguignon, NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED Newman, Shomaker, Kirkland, Dettloff, Leipzig PC Minutes - 8/6/91 -13- (0781d) F. PLANNING COMMISSION INQUIRIES None G. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS None H. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ITEMS Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director, explained to the Commission that the special meeting they were to have on August 27, 1991 regarding the Waterfront project had been postponed until September, 1991. I. ADJOURNMENT A MOTION WAS MADE BY KIRKLAND, SECOND BY DETTLOFF, TO ADJOURN TO THE AUGUST 20, 1991 REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING AT 7:00 P.M. BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Richardson, Bourguignon, NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED /kj 1 Newman, Shomaker, Kirkland, Dettloff, Leipzig APPROVED BY: Mike Adams, Secretary Planning Commission Chairperson 1 PC Minutes - 8/6/91 -14- (0781d)