HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-12-01APPROVED 1 20 93
MINUTES
HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1992
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: Inglee, Bourguignon, Richardson, Shomaker, Dettloff,
P (left 7:30) p
Newman, 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, 92-36:
APPLICANT: Roy Rinaldi, Rinaldi's Child Care Concerns, Inc.
LOCATION: 20451 Craimer Lane
Conditional Use Permit No. 92-36 is a request to establish a
preschool for 45 children at an existing public school site pursuant
to Section 9634.3 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code.
The preschool is proposing to relocate from their current site at
the Bushard School to LeBard School which is east of Brookhurst
Street and south of Adams Avenue. The proposed preschool meets all
the code requirements for a day care center including adequate
indoor and outdoor play area, security fencing and adequate
parking. The preschool -is compatible with the Huntington Beach City
School District offices currently operating at the school and with
the surrounding residential neighborhood.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Conditional
Use Permit No. 92-36 with findings and suggested conditions of
approval.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED.
Susan Claudius, 10042 Jon Day Drive, spoke in opposition to the
request. She stated the possible creation of excessive traffic
would be a safety risk to the children in the area.
Bruce White, 10152 Crailet, spoke in opposition to request, and
submitted letters of opposition from surrounding property owners.
He stated his concerns were decline of property values, excessive
traffic and the safety of the children.
Robert Mirabal, 20402 Craimer Lane, spoke in opposition to the
request. He stated his concern of excessive traffic and the safety
of the children.
Lorraine Amer, 10132 Crailet Drive, spoke in opposition to the
request. She reiterated concerns of the previous speakers. -
Mary Santostefano, 10142 Crailet Drive, submitted a letter of
opposition to the Commission stating her concerns.
Jerry Buchanan, representing Huntington Beach School District,
stated the project was supported by the School Board.
Neil Boodman, 10212 Jon Day Drive, asked if the applicant was
related to Jon Rinaldi.
Roy Rinaldi, applicant, stated he was not related to Jon Rinaldi.
He also spoke to the commission regarding school hours and drop off
times.
THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE
REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
The Commission asked if the the Homeowner's Association was polled
as to opposition or support of the preschool. It was stated that
they were not polled. The Commission requested that if approved the
preschool advise parents of the dangers of speeding in the area and
also notify City Council of the possible problems of speeding in the
area.
PC Minutes - 12/1/92 -2- (5572d)
A MOTION WAS MADE BY RICHARDSON, SECOND.BY. DETTLOFF, TO APPROVE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 92-36 WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF
APPROVAL AND A REQUEST TO FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL THEIR CONCERN
REGARDING THE PRESENT PROBLEM OF SPEEDING THAT OCCURS ON CRAIMER
LANE, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Inglee, Bourguignon, Richardson, Shomaker, Dettloff,
Leipzig
NOES: None
ABSENT: Newman
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION PASSED
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 92-36:
1. The proposed preschool is consistent with the goals and
objectives of the City's General Plan and Land Use Map
designation of low density residential which allows for
preschools and day care centers.
2. The location, site layout, and design of the proposed preschool
properly adapts the proposed structures to streets, driveways,
and other adjacent structures and uses in a harmonious manner.
The preschool is proposed at an existing school site and is
compatible with the Huntington Beach School District offices
currently operating there.
3. The combination and relationship of one proposed use to another
on a site are properly integrated. The school previously served
450-500 school children and the proposed school is compatible
with the Huntington Beach City School District Offices at LeBard
School.
4. The access to and parking for the proposed preschool does not
create an undue traffic problem because the day care center can
be provided with parking as well as adequate ingress and egress.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 92-36:
1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated
November 20, 1992 shall be the conceptually approved layout.
2. The applicant shall post signs in the parking lot to designate a
minimum of five (5) parking spaces for loading and unloading of
preschool clients only.
3. The applicant shall submit a copy of the Orange County Social
Services license prior to the operation of the day care center.
4. The applicant shall obtain a business license prior to the
operation of the day care center.
PC Minutes - 12/1/92 -3- (5572d)
5. The use shall conform to the following:
a. Children attending the day care center shall be restricted to
designated play areas only, unless supervised by an adult.
b. The day care center shall comply with all applicable
requirements of Chapter 8.40, Noise Control of the Municipal
Code.
c. Enrollment shall be limited to a maximum of 45 children.
6. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke Conditional
Use Permit No. 92-36 if any violation of these conditions or the
Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs.
7. This conditional use permit shall not become effective for any
purpose until an "Acceptance of Conditions" form has been
properly signed and notarized by the applicant and returned to
the Planning Division; and until the ten day appeal period has
elapsed.
8. Conditional Use Permit No. 92-36 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 APPEAL OF ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL
EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 92-17:
APPLICANT/
APPELLANT: Fred Hadjian
LOCATION: 16182 Pacific Coast Highway
This is an appeal of the Zoning Administrator's denial of a request
to add a second driveway to an existing commercial/office site. The
driveway requires a conditional exception (variance) because there
is no internal vehicular circulation between the new driveway and
the existing main driveway on the site. The request also includes
the provision of an additional parking space and relocation of the
existing trash enclosure.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission uphold the Zoning
Administrator's action and deny the conditional exception (variance)
because it increases the points of ingress/egress on Pacific Coast
Highway, it does not meet Caltran's minimum driveway width
requirement of 30 feet, vehicles must enter Pacific Coast Highway to
PC Minutes - 12/1/92 -4- (5572d)
travel to the other side of the site, and,it results in unsafe
circulation. In addition, the new parking space is not necessary to
be considered in conformance with the parking code and the trash
enclosure may be relocated to the south site without also providing
complete vehicular access.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED.
Dick Cahl, 18090 Beach Boulevard, construction engineer representing
applicant, explained the request to the Commission. He stated that
they were not requesting a new driveway, just use of the existing
driveway that was conditioned to be removed. He submitted photos
and a video the the Commission.
Fred Hadjian, 16182 Pacific Coast Highway, applicant, submitted
pictures of the driveway to the Commission. He stated that he
bought the property three (3) years ago and has made numerous
improvements. He questioned why the driveway needed to be closed.
"JP" Peoples, President Huntington Marina Homeowner's Association,
spoke in opposition to the request and stated it would cause a
hazardous driving situation.
THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE
REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
The Commission discussed the safety of the driveway and its current
use by the applicant. Staff stated that the improvements made were
required improvements and they could not be a trade-off for allowing
the driveway to remain.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY RICHARDSON, SECOND BY SHOMAKER, TO UPHOLD THE
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S ACTION BY DENYING THE APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL
EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 92-17 WITH FINDINGS FOR DENIAL, BY THE
FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Inglee, Bourguignon, Richardson, Shomaker, Dettloff,
Leipzig
NOES: None
ABSENT: Newman
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION PASSED
FINDINGS FOR DENIAL - CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO 92-17:
1. Since the subject property can be fully developed within regular
established setbacks, such a conditional exception for an
additional driveway along Pacific Coast Highway for the existing
office building and with no on -site internal circulation is not
necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial
property rights. The renovation of the existing commercial
building, approved under Use Permit No. 90-18 and Conditional
Exception No. 90-19, complied with the parking requirements
based on the code at that time. The additional driveway, has
PC Minutes - 12/1/92 -5- (5572d)
the potential to create additional vehicle, bicycle, and
pedestrian conflicts along Pacific Coast Highway. The
additional parking space does not warrant the conflicts between
vehicles entering and exiting the site, and reduction in
landscaping. In addition, there is a design option available to
the applicant which is to access the southerly portion of the
site from an adjoining lot.
2. Granting of Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 92-17 for an
additional driveway along Pacific Coast Highway for the existing
office building and with no on -site, internal circulation
between the two parking areas would constitute a special
privilege inconsistent with limitations upon properties in the
vicinity. Other parcels along Pacific Coast Highway in the
vicinity have only one point of ingress and egress (driveway).
3. Exceptional circumstances do not apply that deprive the subject
property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the same
zone classifications.
4. Although the property is irregular in configuration, the
proposed driveway access on the southerly property line will
create a hazardous situation with vehicular ingress and egress
and northbound traffic on Pacific Coast Highway.
5. The proposed driveway would create awkward circulation movements
on -site and cause potential ingress and egress conflicts on an
arterial highway. The driveway width is only 18 feet in width
(27' minimum is required by the city) which is not wide enough
to accommodate adequate two-way maneuvering into and out from
the site.
6. The driveway will result in a loss of on -site landscaping and
open space area pursuant a previously approved use permit which
justified a variance for reduced planter width (1' 6" in lieu of
10') along Pacific Coast Highway next to the northerly parking
area.
C. CONSENT CALENDAR
C-1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED SEPTEMBER 15, 1992:
A MOTION WAS MADE BY RICHARDSON, SECOND BY DETTLOFF, TO APPROVE THE
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED SEPTEMBER 15, 1992, BY THE
FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Inglee, Bourguignon, Richardson, Shomaker, Dettloff,
Leipzig
NOES: None
ABSENT: Newman
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION PASSED
PC Minutes - 12/1/92 -6- (5572d)
C-2 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED SEPTEMBER 22, 1992:
A MOTION WAS MADE BY RICHARDSON, SECOND BY DETTLOFF, TO APPROVE THE
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED SEPTEMBER 22, 1992, BY THE
FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Inglee, Bourguignon, Shomaker, Dettloff, Leipzig
NOES: None
ABSENT: Newman
ABSTAIN: Richardson
MOTION PASSED
D. NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
D-1 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 89-20 WITH SPECIAL
PERMITS/TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 89-230/COASTAL DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT NO. 89-9 - ONE (1) YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME:
APPLICANT: Peter Baron, Baron Investment
LOCATION: 115 Eighth Street (west site of Eighth Street,
approximately 175 feet north of PCH)
Baron Investment Company has requested a one (1) year extension of
time for Conditional Use Permit No. 89-20 with Special Permits,
Tentative Parcel Map No. 89-320 and Coastal Development Permit No.
89-4, a request to construct a three (3) story, four (4) unit
townhouse project. The applications were originally approved by the
Planning Commission on August 1, 1989, and extended for one (1) year
on September 17, 1991. Based on the reasons contained in the
applicant's letter dated September 10, 1992, the applicant is
requesting a one (1) year extension of time.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve a one (1) year
extension of time to September 17, 1993.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY SHOMAKER, SECOND BY RICHARDSON, TO APPROVE A
ONE (1) YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 89-20
WITH SPECIAL PERMITS, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 89-320 AND COASTAL
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 89-9 WITH ALL PREVIOUS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TO REMAIN IN EFFECT, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Inglee,
Leipzig
NOES: None
ABSENT: Newman
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION PASSED
Bourguignon, Richardson, Shomaker, Dettloff,
PC Minutes - 12/1/92 -7- (5572d)
D-2 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 91-57 WITH SPECIAL
PERMITS/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 91-47/COASTAL
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 91-29 - ONE (1) YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME:
APPLICANT: Tekstra Enterprises
LOCATION: 1014 and 1016 Pacific Coast Highway
Tekstra Enterprises has requested a one (1) year extension of time
for Conditional Use Permit No. 91-51 with Special Permits,
Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 91-47 and Coastal Development
Permit No. 91-29 for the construction of two (2) new single family
residences. The applications were approved by the Planning
Commission on November 5, 1991. Based on the reasons contained in
the applicant's letter dated November 4, 1992, the applicant is
requesting a one (1) year extension of time.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve a one (1) year
extension of time to November 5, 1993.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY SHOMAKER, SECOND BY RICHARDSON, TO APPROVE A
ONE (1) YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 91-51
WITH SPECIAL PERMITS, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 91-47 AND
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 91-29 WITH ALL PREVIOUS CONDITIONS TO
REMAIN IN EFFECT, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Inglee, Bourguignon, Richardson, Shomaker, Dettloff,
Leipzig
NOES: None
ABSENT: Newman
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION PASSED
E. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS/INQUIRIES
Commissioner Richardson - spoke in reference to a staff report (B-5)
heard at the Planning Commission meeting of November 17, 1992. His
concern was related to a measurement given by the applicant that was
later found to be incorrect and could possibly have had an affect on
the outcome of the vote. Commissioner Richardson asked the
Commission if they wished to vote for a reconsideration of the vote
because of the discrepancy. The Commission did not want to
reconsider their vote. The staff stated that they would attempt to
verify any numbers given to Commission, so they can base their
decision on the correct facts.
PC Minutes - 12/1/92 -8- (5572d)
1
Commissioner Leipzig - stated that the area maps usually included in
the staff reports had been omitted. Staff said they would include
the map in all future reports. Commissioner Leipzig also stated
that the large fold out maps included in the packet were not
necessary if they had the reduced versions. He suggested that they
be eliminated to save cost and time and the Commission agreed.
Commissioner Inglee - stated that he felt there was too much
repetition in the staff report. He asked if it could be summed up
in some type of Executive Summary, or streamlined in some way.
Staff suggested a workshop in January of 1993, when the new
Commission is in place, to discuss changes to the staff report that
would reflect their concerns.
Chairperson Shomaker - congratulated Commissioner Leipzig on his
election to the City Council. She commended him on his hardwork as
a Planning Commissioner and wished him well.
Commissioner Leipzig - thanked Commissioner Shomaker and
congratulated her on her service as Chairperson.
F. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ITEMS
None
G . ADJOURNMENT
A MOTION WAS MADE
DECEMBER 15, 1992
FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Inglee,
Leipzig
NOES: None
ABSENT: Newman
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION PASSED
/kj 1
BY SHOMAKER, SECOND BY LEIPZIG, TO ADJOURN TO THE
REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING AT 7:00 P.M. BY THE
Bourguignon, Richardson, Shomaker, Dettloff,
APPROVE BY
G� ZyVI
Mike Ad ms, S cretary
114
P1 nning Commission Chairperson
PC -Minutes - 12/1/92
ME
(5572d)