Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-03-01APPROVED 4/19/4 MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, MARCH 1, 1994 Council Chambers - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California STUDY SESSION - 5:30 PM REGULAR MEETING - 7:00 PM PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE P A P P P P P ROLL CALL: Cook, Gorman, Inglee, Dettloff, Richardson, Newman, Biddle 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. Buck Marrs, 19265 Archfield Circle, spoke regarding the connection of Seapointe Avenue to Pacific Coast Highway. He stated that the connection should be open to pedestrian, foot and emergency vehicle traffic only, to avoid the impacts of excessive traffic. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BIDDLE, SECOND BY RICHARDSON, TO BRING ITEMS B-2 AND B-4 TO THE FRONT OF THE AGENDA FOR ACTION, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Cook, Inglee, Dettloff, Richardson, Newman, Biddle NOES: None ABSENT: Gorman ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED PLEASE NOTE THAT THE MINUTES WELL REFLECT ACTIONS TAKEN IN THEIR ORIGINAL ORDER 1 J B. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS B-1 COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 93-28/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.94-2 (CONTINUED FROM THE FEBRUARY 15. 1994 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING): APPLICANT: Orange County Environmental Management Agency (Harbors, Beaches and Parks Division) LOCATION: 5801 Seapoint Avenue (west side of Seapoint Avenue between Palm and Garfield). Conditional Use Permit No. 94-3 and Coastal Development Permit No. 93-28 were continued at the February 15, 1994 meeting to allow the Orange County Harbors, Beaches and Parks additional time to look into issues and suggestions brought up at the February 1, 1994, Public Hearing. Conditional Use Permit No. 94-3 in conjunction with Coastal Development Permit No. 93-28 represent a request by the County of Orange to review and approve the general design plans for Phase IA of the Bolsa Chica Regional Park. Phase 1A consists of development of a forty (40) space parking lot, two park entry points with signage, a vista overlook with interpretive signage, bicycle/pedestrian trails, two picnic areas, security lighting, perimeter fencing and signage, installation of ornamental and native plant materials and irrigation. Phase IA also includes creation of a wetland enhancement area located beyond the City' s boundary within the County's jurisdiction. Because this area is outside the City's jurisdiction, the County will be applying directly to the California Coastal Commission to obtain a Coastal Development Permit for this area. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the request because it is consistent with the General Development Plan and Environmental Impact Report that were conceptually approved by the Huntington Beach City Council in October of 1992 and Orange County Board of Supervisors in November 1992 and conforms with the plans, policies, requirements and standards of the City's Local Coastal Program Staff from the Orange County Department of Harbours, Beaches and Parks gave a presentation to the Commission. The Commission discussed with County and City staff the suggested alternative location for the parking lot. They considered the negative and positive aspects of each location, and asked that the public speakers declare which location is acceptable to them during the public hearing. PC Minutes - 3/1/9.3 (pcm002) THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Buck Marrs, 19265 Archfield Circle, adjacent resident stated that he was opposed to the alternative parking lot locations No. 1, 2 and 3. He stated that he preferred parking lot alternative No. 5. He also stated that he would prefer the park to remain at least 90% natural in terms of topography and vegetation. Jan D. Vandersloot, 8101 Newman, Suite C, Bolsa Chica Land Trust, spoke in support of retaining the gully, and use of all natural vegetation. Leigh Esposito, 6141 Morningside Drive, Seacliff Estates, read into the record a letter from her father. Mr. Esposito stated his opposition to the interpretive center, and stated that the park should remain 100% passive. Jacqueline Geier -Lahti, 17192 Lynn, stated her concern regarding the presence of Native American artifacts that may be present on the bluff. She was concerned that the EIR had not addressed what would become of said artifacts, if found. Greg Herder, 6461 Oakcrest Circle, stated he wanted the park to retain its natural vegetation. He also stated that alternative parking locations No. 3 and 4 were acceptable, but parking along Seapointe Avenue would be the best. Marcia Hanscom, 19276 Torrey Pines Circle, concerned with archeological issues and the possibility of destroying more wetlands. Mike Jones, 19267 Archfield, stated he would prefer to see parking on Seapoint Avenue, with one side red curbed. Jean Kimbrell, 17192 Englewood, spoke in support of the request. Terry Dolton, 17892 Shoreham Lane, Citizen Advisory Committee, spoke in support of the request, stating it would be an excellent resource for the public. Chuck Scheid, 8062 Ebbtide, stated his preference of parking lot location alternative No. 3, and allowing the gully to remain unfilled. Chuck Nelson, 16321 Magellan Lane, Amigos de Bolsa Chica, stated his support for the request and encouraged the Commission to move forward with the project. Dr. Louann W. Murray, 17461 Skyline Lane, spoke in support of the request, preferring parking lot location alternative No. 2, and urged the retention of natural vegetation. Eileen Murphy, 201-21 st Street, spoke in support of parking lot location alternative No. 3. PC Minutes - 3/1/94 3 (p=002) 0 Donald Guillaume, 19243 Meadowood Circle, stated his preference for parking on Seapointe Avenue, with one side red curbed. He also stated he wished to see the gully remain unfilled. John McRee, 19269 Archfield Circle, stated his preference for parking on Seapointe Avenue. THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Cook expressed the following concerns. She stated her opposition to the _ City giving the County this land, citing that once the land is controlled by the County they will have a freehand in the development. She was also concerned with the use of parking meters because of the negative visual impact. Commissioner Cook stated her support of having the park completely passive and using natural plant materials. Commissioner Biddle stated his concurrence with Commissioner Cook, stating his preference to continue action until all issues could be resolved. Commission Dettloff, expressed her support for the request. She stated her preference to approve the project, and include in the Commission's recommendation to City Council any outstanding concerns of the Commission and the public. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BIDDLE, SECOND BY COOK, TO TABLE THE REQUEST UNTIL ALL ISSUES WERE RESOLVED. MOTION WITHDRAWN. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BIDDLE, SECOND BY NEWMAN, TO DENY COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO.93-28 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-3 WITH FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Cook, Inglee, Newman, Biddle NOES: Dettloff, Richardson ABSENT: Gorman ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED PC Minutes - 3/1/94 4 (pcm002) FINDINGS FOR DENIAL- COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 93-28: 1. Coastal Development Permit No. 93-28 for the proposed design plan for Phase 1A of the Bolsa Chica Regional Park does not conform with the plans, policies, requirements and standards of the City's Local Coastal Program. It is difficult to determine compatibility of the Regional Park with the Bolsa Chica wetlands when the land uses and wetland restoration project boundaries for Bolsa Chica have not been approved. The Bolsa Chica Regional Park Planwith delineated trail locations, parking lot, and plant materials may conflict with the ultimate restoration plan for Bolsa Chica. 2. The location, site layout, and design of Phase IA of the Bolsa Chica Regional Park may not properly adapt the proposed use to existing streets, driveways, and other adjacent structures and uses in a harmonious manner by maintaining existing circulation pattern and preserving view opportunities for residents on the opposite side of Seapoint Avenue. FINDINGS FOR DENIAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.94-3• Conditional Use Permit No. 94-3 for the development of the Phase 1A of the Bolsa Chica Regional Park is part of the larger Bolsa Chica project currently being processed by the County of Orange. Processing of the design plans for Phase IA of the Bolsa Chica Regional Park constitutes a segmentation of the processing of the larger Bolsa Chica project. 2. Conditional Use Permit No. 94-3 for the development of Phase IA of the Bolsa Chica Regional Park is premature and needs to be addressed in conjunction with development plans for the entire Bolsa Chica area. 3. Conditional Use Permit no. 94-3 for the proposed design plan for Phase 1 A of the Bolsa Chica Regional park does not properly integrate the proposed park uses in a manner sensitive to the surrounding residential properties. The proposed park includes "active" use areas which duplicate facilities provided at nearby Central Park and are not compatible with adjacent residential uses. Park uses should be passive in nature. PC Minutes - 3/1/94 5 (pcm002) B-2 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 94-1: APPLICANT: Jin Ha Choi LOCATION: 5828 Edinger Avenue (southwest corner Springdale and Edinger) Conditional Use Permit No. 94-1 is a request to establish a 4,265 square foot Tae Kwon Do (Karate) training facility in the Marina Village Shopping Center located at 5828 Edinger Avenue. Section 9630 (H) of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code requires a Conditional Use Permit for health clubs with more than 2,500 square feet. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit No. 94-1 as submitted by the applicant, due to the fact that the proposed use properly integrates with the other uses in the center, is consistent with the General Plan and zoning designations and will not negatively impact adjacent businesses or residences. 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 BIDDLE, SECOND BY RICHARDSON, TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.94-1 WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Cook, Inglee, Dettloff, Richardson, Newman, Biddle NOES: None ABSENT: Gorman ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 94-1 : 1. The location, site layout, and design of the proposed 4,265 square foot Tae Kwon Do training and workout facility in the existing Marina Village shopping center properly adapts to the other uses in a harmonious manner and with the existing layout of the center since the use utilizes an, existing retail suite in the center and is considered a commercial use. PC Minutes - 3/1/94 6 (pcm002) 2. The combination and relationship of the proposed 4,265 square foot Tae Kwon Do training and workout facility in the existing Marina Village shopping center is properly integrated with the other uses in the center. The hours of operation and peak demand periods will not conflict with the other uses in the center. 3. The access to and parking for the proposed the proposed 4,265 square foot Tae Kwon Do training and workout facility in the existing Marina Village shopping center does not create an undue traffic problem since the parking requirements are based on the standard one (1) space per 200 square feet of retail ratio and the suite has parking provided. 4. The proposed 4,265 square foot Tae Kwon Do training and workout facility is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan and with the General Commercial land use designation in the General Plan. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.94-1: 1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated January 11, 1994 shall be the conceptually approved layout. 2. The use shall comply with the following: a. The rear door shall remain closed during operating hours to minimize noise impacts on adjacent residential uses. b. Class sizes shall be restricted to maximum of 35 students. c. Employees shall be required to park in the rear of the suite as stipulated in Condition No. 2 of CE 86-41[UP 8 5-3 0 requiring a Parking Management Plan for the center. 3. Prior to submittal for building permits, the applicant/owner shall complete the following: a. The site plan shall include (or reference page) all conditions of approval imposed on the project printed verbatim. 4. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke Conditional Use Permit No. 94- 1 if any violation of these conditions or the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs. 5. Conditional Use Permit No. 94-1 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; and until the ten day appeal period has elapsed. PC Minutes - 3/1/94 7 (p=002) 6. Conditional Use Permit No. 94-1 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. CODE REOUIREMENTS: 1. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department. 2. All building spoils, such a unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material, shall be disposed of at an off -site facility equipped to handle them. 3. Construction shall be limited to Monday - Saturday 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM. construction shall be prohibited Sundays and Federal holidays. B-3 REVISED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 91-57/REVISED COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 92-2/REVISED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO.92-9: APPLICANT: JeffBergsma LOCATION: 303 Third Street Revised Conditional Use Permit No. 91-57, Revised Coastal Development Permit No. 92- 2, and Revised Negative Declaration No. 92-9 represent a request to allow a revision to an approved project. The subject property is located at 303 Third Street. The applicant - proposes to add a 4,400 square foot basement to the previously approved 13,200 square foot, 2 story health club. A lap swimming pool, spa, restrooms, and pool equipment room are proposed in the basement. There are two primary issues discussed in the analysis section of the report regarding the project: floor area ratio and parking. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Since the addition does not affect the exterior of the building and the use previously analyzed is not significantly changing, staff is recommending approval of the request. PC Minutes.- 3/1/94 8 (p=002) A MOTION WAS MADE BY INGLEE, SECOND BY BIDDLE, TO CONTINUE REVISED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO.92-2, REVISED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.91-57 AND REVISED COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO.92-2 TO THE APRIL 5,1994 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Cook, Inglee, Dettloff, Richardson, Newman, Biddle NOES: None ABSENT: Gorman ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED B-4 CODE AMENDMENT NO. 93-5B (CARTS/KIOSKS) - (CONTINUED FROM THE JANUARY 19 1994 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach LOCATION: City Wide Code Amendment No. 93-5 is a request to establish zoning provisions to allow carts/kiosks on private or public property. The project was continued from the Planning Commission meeting of January 19, 1994, to allow the subcommittee that was established by the Planning Commission an opportunity to further discuss the draft ordinance and formulate a recommendation to the Planning Commission. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The subcommittee met three (3) times during February. A revised draft ordinance is being prepared for review and comments by the Departments of Community Services, Public Works and Police. Staff recommends Code Amendment No. 93-513 be continued to April 5, 1994. A MOTION WAS MADE BY INGLEE, SECOND BY BIDDLE, TO CONTINUE CODE AMENDMENT NO. 93-5B, CARTS AND KIOSKS, TO THE APRIL 5, 1994 MEETING, TO ALLOW STAFF TIME TO PREPARE A REVISED DRAFT ORDINANCE, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Cook, Inglee, Dettloff, Richardson, Newman, Biddle NOES: None ABSENT: Gorman ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED PC Minutes - 3/1 /9-1 9 (pcm002) B-5 CODE AMENDMENT NO. 93-6/DRAFT NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 93-22 (CONTINUED FROM THE FEBRUARY 15. 1994 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING): APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach LOCATION: City-wide Code Amendment No. 93-6 is a request by the City of Huntington Beach to regulate tattoo establishments within the City subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. As proposed, tattoo establishments would be permitted within the C2 and C4 Commercial - Districts, subject to the following locational criteria: 1. Tattoo establishments shall not be located closer than 200 feet from any lot zoned or general planned for residential use; 2. Tattoo establishments shall not be located closer than 500 feet from any lot upon which there is located a church or educational institution frequented by minors; and 3. Tattoo establishments shall not be located closer than 1,000 feet from any lot upon which there is located any adult business as defined in Section 975 or another tattoo establishment. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission approve Negative Declaration No. _ 93-22 and Code Amendment No. 93-6 with findings and suggested conditions of approval and forward to City Council for adoption. This item was continued from the February 15, 1994 Planning Commission meeting. Discussion ensued with staff and Commissioners regarding the reasoning behind considering tattoo establishments and adult business. Staff stated that City Council had directed them to do so. The Commission question other cities policy on this matter. Staff explained that of those polled, Anaheim and Santa Ana regulate tattoo establishments as Adult Businesses. The Commission suggested that a more in-depth study be done, and the polling of more cities occur. The Commission did not needlessly want to restrict this type of establishment in the areas they could exist. It was stated that to allow the areas of location to be changed, they would have to change the Adult Business classification on tattoo establishments. PC Minutes - 3/1/94 10 (p=002) THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Traci Goodson -Smith, 1717 Delaware, spoke in support of the request. Ms. Goodson - Smith stated that if regulation of tattoo establishments did not occur it would lead to unhealthy situations. She did not agree, however, with the classification of a tatoo establishment as an Adult Business. THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. The Commission did state that they wish to have restrictions on tattoo establishments to maintain a healthy atmosphere. A MOTION WAS MADE BY NEWMAN, SECOND BY INGLEE, TO CONTINUE NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 93-22 AND CODE AMENDMENT NO.93-6 TO THE APRIL 5, 1994 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO ALLOW STAFF TIME TO RESEARCH THE CONTITIONS AND REGULATIONS OF OTHER CITIES THAT ALLOW TATTOO ESTABLISHMENT, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Inglee, Newman, Biddle NOES: Cook, Dettloff, Richardson ABSENT: Gorman ABSTAIN: None MOTION FAILED THE MOTION FAILED BECA USE OF A SPLIT (3-3) VOTE A MOTION WAS MADE BY COOK, SECOND BY DETTLOFF, TO APPROVE NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO.93-22 AND CODE AMENDMENT NO. 93-6 WITH FINDINGS AND FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Cook, Dettloff, Richardson, Biddle NOES: Inglee, Newman ABSENT: Gorman ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED PC Minutes - 3/1/94 11 (p=002) FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CODE AMENDMENT NO. 93-6: 1. Code Amendment No. 93-6 will be consistent with the goals and policies contained within the General Plan by regulating the location of tattoo establishments through the use of locational criteria and the requirement of a conditional use permit. 2. Code Amendment No. 93-6 will provide guidelines for the orderly review and establishment of tattoo establishments through the conditional use permit process. C. CONSENT CALENDAR C-1 GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE NO. 94-1 (CONTINUED FROM THE MARCH 15. 1994 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGI- APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach, Department of Community Development LOCATION: 200 Main Street (Parking Structure) General Plan Conformance No. 94-1 is a request to determine if the transfer of title for the Main Street/Promenade Parking Structure, from the Redevelopment Agency to the City of Huntington Beach is in conformance with the General Plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The request was automatically continued from the February 15, 1994, Planning Commission meeting due to a split vote (3-3). There has been no changes to the report and planning staff is recommending approval of the request. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BIDDLE, SECOND BY COOK TO DENY GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE NO. 94-1 WITH FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES; Cook, Biddle NOES: Inglee, Dettloff, Richardson, Newman ABSENT: Gorman ABSTAIN; None MOTION FAILED PC Minutes - 3/1/94 12 (p=002) A MOTION WAS MADE BY RICHARDSON, SECOND BY NEWMAN, TO APPROVE GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE NO. 94-1 WITH FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES; Inglee, Dettloff, Richardson, Newman NOES: Cook, Biddle ABSENT: Gorman ABSTAIN; None MOTION PASSED C-2 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED DECEMBER 21 1993 A MOTION WAS MADE BY RICHARDSON, SECOND BY NEWMAN, TO APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED DECEMBER 21, 1993, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES; Cook, Inglee, Dettloff, Richardson, Newman, Biddle NOES: None ABSENT: Gorman ABSTAIN; None MOTION PASSED C-3 PLANNING COMMISSIONMINUTES DATED JANUARY 4, 1994 A MOTION WAS MADE BY RICHARDSON, SECOND BY NEWMAN, TO APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED JANUARY 4,1994, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES; Cook, Dettloff, Richardson, Newman, Biddle NOES: None ABSENT: Gorman ABSTAIN; Inglee MOTION PASSED PC Minutes - 3/1/94 13 (p=002) D. NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS None E. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS/INQUIRIES Chairperson Dettloff - announced that Commissioner Cook had officially resigned from the Planning Commission. She expressed the Commission's appreciation for her services. Commissioner Cook - thanked the Commission for the experience. F. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ITEMS Melanie Fallon, Director of Community Development, stated that she had spoken to Chief Lowenberg and security could be arranged for the Planning Commission meetings in the form of occasional patrols by the sergeant on duty or full coverage for special meetings. Ms. Fallon also asked the Commission if they would object to changing the Planning Commission meetings from the first and third Tuesday's to the second and fourth Tuesday's of every month. The Commission was agreeable to the change, and Ms. Fallon stated staff would prepare a resolution to change the by-laws to this effect for the next meeting. She also stated that staff would prepare a list of Commissioner inquiries pending or resolved, beginning with the next meeting. G. ADJOURNMENT A MOTION WAS MADE BY DETTLOFF, SECOND BY RICHARDSON, TO ADJOURN TO A 5:30 PM STUDY SESSION TUESDAY, MARCH 15, 1994, AND THEN TO THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING AT 7:00 PM, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Cook, Inglee, Dettloff, Richardson, Newman, Biddle NOES: None ABSENT: Gorman ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED /kjl PC Minutes - 3/1/94 , vw� , - � 2), -Z� �) Planning Vommission Chairp n 14 (p=002)