Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-08-20APPROVED-2L4L92 MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, AUGUST 20, 1991 Council Chambers - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California REGULAR MEETING - 7:00 PM PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE P P P P P ROLL CALL: Richardson, Newman, Shomaker, Kirkland, Dettloff 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. None B. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS B-1 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 91-29/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 91=21 (CONTINUED FROM THE JUNE 18, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING): APPLICANT: F.H.P., Inc. LOCATION: 19066 Magnolia This project was originally scheduled to come before the Planning Commission on June 18, 1991. At that time, the applicant, F.H.P., Inc., requested that the application be continued to a date uncertain. Unforeseen delays and problems associated with litigation between F.H.P., Inc., and the other tenants on the site prevented F.H.P., Inc., from moving forward with the project. The Planning Commission continued the item to the August 20, 1991 meeting for either a public hearing or a status update on the project. At this time, F.H.P., Inc., has not resolved the legal issues regarding the subject propety and is not prepared to proceed with the application. It is anticipated that should the litigation result in a favorable conclusion for F.H.P., Inc. the application will be reactivated. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission continue the application for Conditional Use Permit No. 91-29 and Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 91-21 at the applicant's request to a date uncertain. A letter was received dated August 20, 1991, from F.H.P., Inc., asking staff to withdraw their application for Conditional Use Permit No. 91-29 and Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 91-21. APPLICATION WITHDRAWN AND THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST B-2 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 90-338/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION VARIANCE) NO. 91-3/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 91-10: APPLICANT: Gerhard & Eileen Schultz LOCATION: 7932 Rhine Circle (South side of Heil Avenue approximately 160 feet west of Beach Bouelvard) Tentative Parcel Map No. 90-338 and Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 91-3 is a request to subdivide one (1) 14,307 square foot lot into two (2) parcels with an easement across Parcel 1 to allow for vehicular access rights to Parcel 2 pursuant to Section 9920 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 91-3 has been initiated because the proposal does not comply with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, in the following areas: 1. Section 9110.2(b) specifies that the minimum lot frontage for a knuckle lot is 45 feet. The applicant is requesting to reduce the lot frontage to 34 feet for Parcel 1 to allow for a vehicular access easement to Parcel 2. 2. Section 9110.2(a) specifies that the minimum lot area shall be 6,000 square feet. The applicant is requesting to permit a net lot area of 5,680 square feet for Parcel 1 to allow for a vehicular access easement to Parcel 2. 3. Section 9110.7(b) specifies that the minimum exterior side yard setback shall be ten (10) feet. The applicant is requesting zero (0) feet to allow for a vehicular access easement to Parcel 2. PC Minutes - 8/20/91 -2- (0779d) 4. Section 9960 specifies that all lots shall have direct vehicular access to a street. The applicant is requesting that all vehicular access for Parcel 2 be taken from a ten (10) foot wide access easement across Parcel 1 to Rhine Circle instead of taking direct vehicular access to Heil Avenue. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Negative Declaration No. 91-10 and Tentative Parcel Map No. 90-338 and Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 91-3 with findings and conditions of approval. The Commission discussed emergency access adequacy and the future upgrading of Heil Avenue. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. THERE WERE NO PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LEIPZIG, SECOND BY RICHARDSON, TO APPROVE NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 91-10, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Richardson, Bourguignon, NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED Newman, Shomaker, Kirkland, Dettloff, Leipzig A MOTION WAS MADE BY LEIPZIG, SECOND BY RICHARDSON, TO DENY TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 90-338 AND CONDITION EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 91-3 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 - TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 90-338: 1. The proposed subdivision residential use is not in of property necessary for easement would result in PC Minutes - 8/20/91 of two (2) parcels for purposes of compliance with the size and the shape that type of development. The four (4) code deficiencies. -3- (0779d) 2. The General Plan has set forth provisions for this type of land use as well as setting forth objectives for implementation of this type of use. The easement would result in an unsafe vehicular access easement. 4. The size, depth, frontage, street width and other design and improvement features of the proposed subdivision are not proposed to be constructed in compliance with standards, plans and specifications on file with the City as well as in compliance with the State Map Act and supplemental City Subdivision Ordinance. FINDINGS FOR DENIAL - CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 91-10: 1. The proposed subdivision would result in an unsafe vehicular access easement, therefore, it would be materially detrimental to persons working or residing in the area. 2. Although the property is irregular in configuration, the size of the lot satisfies the minimum size of 6,000 square feet and exceeds the minimum frontage of 60 feet. 3. Exceptional circumstances do not apply that deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the same zone classifications. B-3 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 91-11: APPLICANT: Haim Katzir/Rabbi Berkowitz LOCATION: 5432 Heil Avenue (Southwest corner of Heil Avenue at Graham Street) Conditional Use Permit No. 91-11 is a request to permit the establishment of religious services, adult education classes and nursery/daycare facilities with joint use parking pursuant to Section 9630.(c) of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit No. 91-11 with findings and suggested conditions of approval for a maximum of five (5) years to August 30, 1996. The applicant verbally requested a continuance to September 4, 1991 to further work with the neighbors and staff on the parking problems. Chairman Kirkland asked that speakers unable to attend the September 4, 1991 meeting please come forward and speak this evening. 1 PC Minutes - 8/20/91 -4- (0779d) THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Mr. Lee, expressed his objection to project. The project will have a direct impact to his property and his concerns include additional traffic and the safety of the children. Virginia Austin, spoke in opposition to the project. She is concern with traffic and noise impacts. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CONTINUED OPENED. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BOURGUIGNON, SECOND BY SHOMAKER, TO CONTINUE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 91-11 TO THE SEPTEMBER 4, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO FURTHER WORK WITH STAFF AND NEIGHBORS ON THE PARKING ISSUES, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Richardson, Newman, Shomaker, Kirkland, Dettloff, Bourguignon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED B-4 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 91-36/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 91-18/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 91-30: APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach, Department of Community Services LOCATION: 538 Main Street Conditional Use Permit No. 91-36 is a request to establish the use of an existing building as the Huntington Beach Art Center. Section 4.8.01 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code (Downtown Specific Plan) requires conditional use permit approval by the Planning Commission prior to establishing the use of an art gallery. Section 989.5.3(b) also requires approval of a coastal development permit when improvements to structures within the coastal zone result in a change in the intensity of use within a structure. The establishment of the art center constitutes an intensification in the use of a building previously utilized as office space for the Southern California Edison Company. Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 91-30 has been initiated because the proposal does not comply with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, Article 960 in the following areas: 1. Section 9602.2(c) specifies that one (1) parking space per 35 square feet of public assembly area be provided. Based on that calculation, this project requires 125 on -site parking spaces. The applicant is requesting a reduction of 103 on -site parking spaces and the use of ceramic pavement markings in -lieu of required striping dimensions. PC Minutes - 8/20/91 -5- (0779d) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit No. 91-36/Coastal Development Permit No. 91-18/Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 91-30 with findings and suggested conditions of approval. Commissioner Bourguignon stated his concerned regarding the parking. He said he felt the City was getting special treatment in regards to parking. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Bob Goodrich, spoke in support of the request. Mr. Goodrich stated that there had already been several events held at the Art Center and parking had not been a problem. THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LEIPZIG, SECOND BY RICHARDSON, TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 91-36, COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 91-18 AND CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 91-30 WITH FINDINGS AND MODIFIED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Richardson, Newman, Shomaker, Kirkland, Dettloff, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Bourguignon MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 91-30: 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. 2. The granting of a conditional exception for reduction in required parking spaces and the use of ceramic pavement markings is necessary in order to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. 3. The granting of Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 91-30 for reduction in required parking spaces and the use of ceramic pavement markings will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, or injurious to the conforming (land, property, or improvements) in the neighborhood. PC Minutes - 8/20/91 -6- (0779d) 4. The conditional use permit, coastal development permit and conditional exception (variance) for the art center is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan and Land Use Map designation of Mixed Uses -Commercial/ Office/Residential. 5. The granting of this conditional exception from Section 960 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code will not defeat the general purposes or intent of the code which is to provide safe and adequate parking for all uses in the City of Huntington Beach. 6. The establishment, maintenance and operation of the proposed art center will not be detrimental to the general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity; and property and improvements in the vicinity of such use or building. 7. The granting of the conditional exception (variance) for a reduction in required parking spaces and use of ceramic pavement markings will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. 8. The applicant is willing and able to carry out the purposes for which the conditional exception (variance)/conditional use permit is sought and he will proceed to do so without unnecessary delay. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 91-36: 1. The location, site layout, and design of the proposed art center properly adapts the proposed structures to streets, driveways, and other adjacent structures and uses in a harmonious manner. 2. The combination and relationship of one proposed to another on a site are properly integrated. 3. The access to and parking for the proposed art center does not create an undue traffic problem. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO 91-18: 1. The proposed art center conforms with the plans, policies, requirements and standards of the Huntington Beach Coastal Element of the General Plan. 2. Coastal Development Permit No. 91-18 is consistent with the CZ (Coastal Zone) suffix, the Downtown Specific Plan - District 6 zone as well as other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code applicable to the property. 3. At the time of occupancy, the proposed art center 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. PC Minutes - 8/20/91 -7- (0779d) 4. The proposed art center conforms with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 91-30/ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 91-36/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT N0, 91-18: 1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated August 14, 1991 shall be the conceptually approved layout with the following modifications: a. The exterior building walls will include an anti-grafitti finish. 2. Prior to submittal for building permits, the applicant/owner shall complete the following: a. 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. b. 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. c. 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 Section 9607.7 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 with minimum 36-inch box trees, which shall be incorporated into the project's landscape plan. PC Minutes - 8/20/91 -8- (0779d) b. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid. c. Submit a Parking Management Plan for review and approval by the Community Development Department which pursues the feasability of a joint use of parking agreement with any surrounding commercial uses as well as identifies any available on -street parking. The Parking Management Plan shall also include a plan for a shuttle service when needed from available parking areas to the art center. d. A planned sign program shall be submitted and approved for all signing. Said program shall be approved prior to the first sign request. 4. Public Works Department requirement are as follows: a. All damaged public improvements to be removed and replaced. 5. Fire Department Requirements are as follows: a. The applicant shall meet all applicable local, State and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards. b. Automatic sprinkler systems will 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. c. 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: - Manual Pulls - Water flow, valve tamper and trouble detection - 24 hour supervision - Smoke Detectors d. Fire extinguishers will be installed and located in areas to comply with Huntington Beach Fire Code Standards. e. Address numbers will be installed to comply with City Specification No. 428. The size of the numbers will be the following: - 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. f. Exit signs and path marking will be provided in compliance with the Huntington Beach Fire Code and Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. PC Minutes - 8/20/91 -9- (0779d) 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. 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 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. 11. A Certificate to Operate shall be issued by the Department of Community Development as required by Section 9730.80 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 12. The Director of Community Development shall place the CF (Community Facilities) overlay zone on the property to denote its public use. 13. This Conditional Use Permit No. 91-36/Coastal Development Permit No. 91-18/Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 91-30 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-5 SPECIAL SIGN PERMIT NO. 91-6/PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM NO. 84-2 (REVISED)• APPLICANT: THE SIGNS AND SERVICES COMPANY LOCATION: 17011 Beach Boulevard (Guardian Center) Special Sign Permit No. 91-6 and Planned Sign Program No. 84-2(R) is a request to amend Gaurdian Center's existing planned sign program to allow two (2) additional freestanding signs. The two (2) proposed ten (10) foot high, 90 square foot signs will provide for center identification and a tenant directory for businesses without signs on Beach Boulevard or Warner Avenue. Since the proposed PC Minutes - 8/20/91 -10- (0779d) signage deviates from the code in terms of number of signs allowable, distance between signs, square footage of signs and type of information provided, a special sign permit is required pursuant to Section 9610.5(b) of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny Special Sign Permit No. 91-6 and Planned Sign Program No. 84-2(R) with findings. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Cathy Lee, Property Manager for the center, spoke for the request and introduced Ken Gould, Broker for the center. Ken Gould, Broker for the center, spoke for the request. He stated that the small business tentants need better signage for economic reasons. Kevin McConnell, Applicant, spoke for the request. He stated the interior tenants have no visible signage which causes and economic hardship. Jake Degruder, Applicant, spoke for the request. He spoke of the importance of business identification on -street. THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. The Commission stated that they felt center was not condusive to small business, but this was not necessarily due to poor signage. The Commission noted that parking in the center was a problem. A MOTION WAS MADE BY SHOMAKER, SECOND BY NEWMAN, TO DENY SPECIAL SIGN PERMIT NO. 91-6 AND PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM NO. 84-2(R) WITH FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Richardson, Newman, Shomaker, Kirkland, Dettloff, Leipzig NOES: Bourguignon ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR DENIAL - SPECIAL SIGN PERMIT NO 91-6: 1. Strict compliance with Article 961 will not result in a substantial economic hardship to the applicant, since the center presently has adequate signage. 2. The proposed freestanding signs may adversely affect other signs in the area by obstructing the view of existing signs and increasing the visual clutter in the area. PC Minutes - 8/20/91 -11- (0779d) 3. The proposed signs may be detrimental to property located in the vicinity and will not be compatible with the surrounding area. The excessive height, sign area and tenant panels do not meet the requirements or intent of the Huntington Beach Sign Code. 4. The proposed signs along Beach Boulevard and Warner Avenue may obstruct pedestrian or vehicular traffic vision. The excessive height, sign area, tenant panels and close proximity between signs has the potential to require motorists to slow down to properly see the monument signs and tenant panels, thereby, causing a traffic and pedestrian conflict along Beach Boulevard and Warner Avenue. FINDINGS FOR DENIAL - PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM NO. 84-2(R): 1. The request to permit two (2) addition monument signs with variance to height, sign area, number of tenant panels, location and amend the planned sign program does not reflect the requirements of a planned sign program or the intent of the sign code by the use of excessive height, sign area, tenant panels, and the unnecessary duplication of signage. 2. The request to permit two (2) additional monument signs with variance to height, sign area, number of tenant panels, location and amend the planned sign program does not provide signs that will be compatible with the existing on -site signs or the requirements and intent of a planned sign program and sign code. B-6 CODE AMENDMENT NO 91 2 IN CONJUNCTION WITH NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO, 91-9: APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach LOCATION: City-wide Pursuant to the California Government Code, Section 65915 et seq., all cities are required to adopt an ordinance installing a mechanism to provide density bonuses and/or other incentives to developers who agree to guarantee that'a specific number of those units will be reserved for lower and very low income and senior citizen households at below market affordable rates for a specific number of years. Draft Code Amendment No. 91-2 is intended to implement this section of State law. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Negative Declaration No. 91-9 and Code Amendment No. 91-2 with findings and forward to City Council for adoption. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. PC Minutes - 8/20/91 . -12- (0779d) THERE WERE NO PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. The Commission asked staff if this decision could be delayed until the Joint Study Session with City Council. Staff said it could not. The Commission also asked staff to reorganize the paragraphs, staff agreed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BOURGUIGNON, SECOND BY SHOMAKER, TO APPROVE CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-2 IN CONJUNCTION WITH NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 91-9, WITH FINDINGS AND FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Richardson, Newman, Shomaker, Kirkland, Dettloff, Bouguignon, Leipzig NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-2: 1. Code Amendment No. 91-2 to amend the Zoning code to provide a mechanism for providing density bonuses and/or other incentives to developers of affordable housing is consistant with the provisions contained in the California Government Code (Section 65915 et. seq. and the following policies of the Housing Element: a. "Encourage both the private and public sectors to produce or assist in the production of housing with particular emphasis on housing affordable to lower income households, as well as the needs of the handicapped, the elderly, large families and female -headed households." (Policy 2.0) This code amendment provides increased density as well as other incentives to developers who guarantee affordable units for lower, very low, and elderly households. b. "Promote and, where possible, require the continued affordability of all units produced with participation by the City or its authorized agents including density bonuses and tax exempt financing." (Policy 5.0) This code amendment provides a mechanism to grant density bonuses and other incentives to developers who agree to construct affordable units. 2. Code Amendment No. 91-2 to provide a mechanism for providing density bonuses and other incentives in return for affordable units offers opportunities for providing affordable housing to lower, very low, and elderly households. This will help the City to provide the number of affordable units identified within the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). PC Minutes - 8/20/91 -13- (0779d) 3. Code Amendment No. 91-2 will not be detrimental to policies contained within the Coastal Act. Individual projects will require a coastal development permit, a conditional use permit and an environmental analysis. Therefore, projects proposed in the Coastal Zone will require a thourough analysis as to their complaince with the Coastal Act. C. CONSENT CALENDAR C-1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED MAY 7, 1991: A MOTION WAS MADY BY LEIPZIG, SECOND BY BOURGUIGNON, TO APPROVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED MAY 7, 1991, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Richardson, Bouguignon, NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED Newman, Shomaker, Kirkland, Dettloff, Leipzig D. NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS None E. DISCUSSION ITEMS Commissioner Richardson - explained that SCE has an in -home survey for energy conservation that is available free. F. PLANNING COMMISSION INQUIRIES Commissioner Richardson - thanked Steve Mays, Public Works, for his patience and responses to the inquiries he had made. Commissioner Richardson questioned Howard Zelefsky about a complaint received from Mr. Ailey, regarding code enforcement. He also questioned why a vacation of easement which staff had recommended Planning Commission to deny, had a recommendation of approval by staff when it was appealed to the City Council. Staff explained that new information had been brought forward, that changed their recommendation. Commissioner Bourguignon - asked staff to aid in solving a problem within the harbor regarding a dock that crosses another's property line. Staff agreed to investigate. PC Minutes - 8/20/91 -14- (0779d) 1 G. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS None H. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ITEMS Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director, reiterated action taken at the August 19, 1991, City Council meeting. I. ADJOURN14ENT A MOTION WAS MADE BY KIRKLAND, SECOND BY SHOMAKER, TO ADJOURN TO THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 4, 1991 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 Y: r Mike A a s, ecretary p anning ommission Chairperson PC Minutes - 8/20/91 -15- (0779d)