Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-10-16MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH OFFICE OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR Room B-6 - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach California WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 16,1996 -1:30 P.M. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Herb Fauland STAFF MEMBER: Mary Beth Broeren, Jane Madera, Susan Pierce, Kim Langel (recording secretary) MINUTES: None ORAL COMMUNICATION: None ITEM 1: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.96-72 (ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT) APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: Thomas F. McNamara, 5662 Littler Drive, Huntington Beach, CA 92649 REQUEST: To permit a 639 square foot, one-story accessory dwelling unit addition to the front of an existing single family dwelling. LOCATION: 5662 Littler Drive (south side of Littler Drive, approximately 300 feet east of Birdie Lane). PROJECT PLANNER: Susan Pierce Susan Pierce, staff planner, displayed a site plan and stated that this application was a request for a one (1) story accessory dwelling unit addition to the front of an existing single family dwelling located in the northern part of Huntington Beach, south of Edinger Avenue and east of Springdale. The neighborhood was built in the early 1960's and is primarily a one (1) story neighborhood. The property owner was issued a building permit for a room addition without a kitchen. The request currently before the Zoning Administrator is to turn the addition into an accessory unit with a kitchen. The single family dwelling is a one (1) story house with a 639 square foot addition to the front of the home. The addition will protrude slightly beyond the garage, however, it will meet the code requirements for front setbacks. Access will be through the main door of the house but the unit also will have a private entrance. The accessory unit will have one (1) bedroom and meets the maximum code requirement of 650 square feet. There is parking in the garage for two (2) vehicles plus two (2) vehicles in the driveway and parking on -street in front of the house. Staff supports the request based upon compliance with zoning code requirements and special conditions that are applicable to this site. The code requirements include a provision that the property owner pay a park land dedication in - lieu fee at 25 percent of the single family residence rate which is approximately $800.00. The code also requires 40 percent of the front yard to be of planting area and that the conditions of approval, if approved, be recorded with the County Recorders Office. Special conditions require: 1) the main dwelling unit or the accessory dwelling unit be owner occupied; 2) the existing room addition permit that was issued and the plumbing permit be updated within 30 days to reference this as an accessory dwelling unit; 3) add any plumbing facilities that are required in the kitchen; and 4) prior to issuance or update of those permits that the park land dedication in - lieu fee be paid. In the event the permits are not updated the applicant would need to revise his building permit plans and identify what the area shown on the plans as kitchen will be used as. Planning staff supports the application because it complies with the intent of the zoning ordinance, is consistent with the design of the neighborhood, there are adequate services for the site, and it will provide for an elderly family member. Herb Fauland, Zoning Administrator, asked staff if the City had received any comments in regards to the project. Susan Pierce, stated she had received one (1) phone call from a gentleman who was concerned that approval of this application would be granting the applicant a special request. Ms. Pierce explained to the gentleman that this process is necessary for this type of application and this process would be available to him if he ever wished to construct an accessory unit, which satisfied his concerns. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Thomas F. McNamara, 5662 Litler Drive, applicant, stated that this would be used as a habitational unit for his mother who is elderly and needs assistance. Mr. Fauland asked the applicant if he was aware of and willing to comply with the conditions of approval presented by staff. Mr. McNamara stated that he was. THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.96-72 WAS APPROVED BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. HE STATED THAT THE ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR CAN BE APPEALED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITHIN TEN (10) CALENDAR DAYS. ZA Minutes - 10/16/96 2 (MIN1016) FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 96-72• 1. Conditional Use Permit No. 96-72 for the establishment, maintenance and operation of the 639 square foot, one bedroom accessory dwelling unit will not be detrimental to the general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity or detrimental to the value of the property and improvements in the neighborhood. The exterior appearance of the residence with the accessory dwelling unit addition maintains the scale of adjoining residences and is compatible with the design of existing dwellings in the vicinity in terms of building materials, colors and exterior finishes. Parking for the unit can be provided on -site; the dwelling will be owner occupied. Public and utility services including emergency access are adequate to serve both units. 2. The granting of Conditional Use Permit No. 96-72 will not adversely affect the Low Density Residential Land Use designation of the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach which is to provide for the development of housing for senior citizens and to provide a range of housing units for the diverse economic, physical, and social needs of the City's residents. The accessory dwelling unit is intended to provide housing for an elderly family member. 3. The proposed use will comply with the provisions of the base district and other applicable provisions in Titles 20-25 and any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located. The accessory unit meets all code requirements in regards to setbacks, site coverage, building height, access, maximum 650 square foot, one bedroom unit size, parking and design. SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.96-72: 1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated September 4, 1996 shall be the conceptually approved layout. 2. The main dwelling or the accessory dwelling shall be owner occupied. 3. The existing room addition building permit and plumbing permit shall be updated within 30 days of final approval (by November 27, 1996) to include reference to the accessory dwelling unit and addition of kitchen plumbing features. 4. Prior to building permit and plumbing permit update, the required parkland dedication in -lieu fee shall be paid. 5. If the permits are not updated, the building permit plans on file in the Community Development Department shall be revised to delete the kitchen and identify the new floor use. ZA Minutes - 10/16/96 3 (MIN1016) 6. Prior to final building, plumbing, or electrical permit approval, the following shall be completed: a. 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. b. The required front yard landscaping shall be installed. c. Compliance with all conditions of approval specified herein shall be accomplished. 7. Low -volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets. 8. The Zoning Administrator shall be notified in writing if any changes in building height, floor area, setbacks, building elevations or open space are proposed as a result of the plan check process. Building permits shall not be issued until the Zoning Administrator has reviewed and approved the proposed changes. The Zoning Administrator reserves the right to require that an amendment to the original entitlement be processed if the proposed changes are of a substantial nature. INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC CODE REQUIREMENTS• 1. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance, Building Division, and Fire Department. 2. The applicant shall meet all applicable local, State, and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards. 3. Park land dedication in -lieu fee shall be paid at 25% of the fee for a single family residence. 4. Forty (40) percent of the front yard shall be in planting area. 5. These conditions of approval shall be filed for record with the County Recorder within 30 days of final approval (by November 27, 1996). Evidence of such filing shall be submitted to the Director within 30 days of final approval. 6. The Zoning Administrator reserves the right to revoke Conditional Use Permit No. 96-72 if any violation of these conditions of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance occurs. ZA Minutes - 10/16/96 4 (MIN1016) [1 ITEM 2: ENTITLEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 96-01 APPLICANT: John P. Erskine, Esq., Nossaman, Guthner, Knox, and Elliott, LLP, 18101 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 1800, Irvine, CA 92612-1047 PROPERTY OWNER: Sharp Electronics Corporation, Sharp Plaza, 20600 S. Alameda Street, Carson, CA 90810-1105 REQUEST: To amend certain conditions of approval for Conditional Use Permit No. 95-63 which was previously approved for the construction of a distribution and regional headquarters for Sharp Electronics Corporation. The conditions of approval proposed for amendment include water service, sewer connections, and bus turnouts. LOCATION: 5901 Bolsa Avenue (Northwest corner of Bolsa Avenue and Springdale Street). PROJECT PLANNER: Jane Madera Jane Madera, Staff Planner, stated that this application was a request to change conditions of approval for a project that is currently under construction. Approximately one (1) year ago the Zoning Administrator approved a conditional use permit to construct a 538,000 square foot building for Sharp Electronics Corporation. The building will be used as a regional headquarters for Sharp Electronics which includes a warehouse and distribution center. Since the approval of the building permit and the beginning of construction, the site conditions have changed; therefore, a need to revise the conditions of approval has arisen. The applicant has requested an amendment to certain conditions in order to meet their needs for infrastructure and also to work with the City in providing infrastructure to the site. Ms. Madera stated that staff has worked with the applicant, Sharp Electronics Corporation, and the previous landowner, McDonnell Douglas Realty Corporation (MDRC), to develop the mutually agreed upon version of the conditions of approval that are proposed for review today. Sharp Electronic Corporation wrote a letter to the City requesting certain amendments to the conditions, mostly regarding water service, sewer connections, and bus turnouts. Staff analyzed the request from Sharp Electronic Corporation. Community Development, Public Works and City Attorney staff members prepared a version of the conditions of approval that would meet the City's and the applicant's needs. Ms. Madera stated that a letter was sent to the applicant outlining the acceptable re -wording of the conditions of approval. ZA Minutes - 10/16/96 5 (MIN1016) Staff has received many comments from MDRC, who is not the actual applicant but does have an interest in the conditions, and Sharp Electronic Corporation. Ms. Madera stated that she has distributed a copy of the latest revisions to all the parties involved present today. Staff is recommending the conditions as stated in a previous letter. The difference between the letters is staff s request for the withdrawal of Condition No. 4.v. which requires a bus turnout to be constructed on the Sharp Electronic Corporation property. Herb Fauland, Zoning Administrator, asked staff who the land owner was when the original conditional use permit went through the process. Staff stated that MDRC was the land owner at that time. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. John P. Erskine, Esq., 18101 Von Karman Avenue, Ste. 1800, representing Sharp Electronics Corporation, stated that they have reviewed the October 16, 1996, revised conditions and concur with all, including deletion of Condition No. 4.v. Herb Fauland, Zoning Administrator, asked if everyone concerned with this project had the revised letter pertaining to the conditions dated October 16, 1996, and stated that if not copies were available. Dennis O'Neil, 19900 MacArthur Boulevard, Ste. 1050, representing McDonnell Douglas Realty Company (MDRC), stated that he had been given a copy of the latest letter containing revisions (10/16/96) from a few moments ago, and he has not had a chance to talk to MDRC about the modifications. He requested that after testimony and discussion a recess be taken to allow him to discuss the revisions with MDRC. Mr. O'Neil referred to his letter dated October 15, 1996, wherein they set forth their position with regards to the conditions that were being proposed at that time, and made the following comments regarding those conditions: 1) 4.v. has been eliminated. He noted that MDRC does not object to this, however, there is some concern that if OCTA needs a future bus turnout facility, it seems that having a turnout on Bolsa Ave. adjacent to the Sharp Electronics property would be a desirable location. MDRC has submitted information to the Traffic Engineer noting that west of Able Lane there are about four (4) bus stops and on Bolsa Ave., between Springdale St. and Bolsa Chica St., there are a number of bus stops. MDRC would like to note for the record that they would assume that further bus stop/turnout obligations would not be imposed upon McDonnell Douglas. He continued by saying that whether OCTA will, at some time, want a turnout next to the Sharp property should be a matter between Sharp, the City and OCTA. He noted that MDRC would certainly honor that determination. Item No. 2) 4.j., MDRC stated that they have requested that Sharp contribute to the oversizing of the existing sewer system in that area, by their decision to discharge into the Bolsa Ave. line. The agreement that Ms. Madera referenced in her opening remarks between MDRC, as the seller, and Sharp Electronic Corporation, as the buyer, was predicated on the conditional use permit conditions. The original conditions would require sewer service to be connected to Springdale St. and then if sewer was to be taken to the west that there would be a requirement for an enlargement in the system. Through no fault of Sharp Electronics, it ZA Minutes - 10/16/96 6 (MIN1016) became evident that Sharp could not connect into Springdale St. when it was discovered there was another large water line in that street that would prevent this. Sharp did have other options to choose from, the pump station or a siphon, but elected to go to the west. In the meantime, studies were done by engineers to determine that there was capacity in the Bolsa Ave. line to accept the sewage from the Sharp property. Because the City calculates and allocates sewer capacity based on the amount of land involved and the maximum amount of development on a particular parcel, by Sharp drawing to the west into Bolsa Ave., it has maxed out the line in Bolsa Ave. This would require MDRC to upsize the line in Bolsa Ave. or build a parallel line in Bolsa Ave., because it currently accepts the sewage flows from the "Vegas" residential tract to the north. In fact, half of the capacity in the Bolsa Ave. line currently is allocated to the northern "Vegas" residential tract which is not a MDRC project. MDRC's position is to have a City sewer system in place in this general area. Sharp was required to pay for an expansion to that sewer system if they went to west. It has been determined that the Graham St. line does not need expansion, but that Bolsa Ave. will need the expansion in order to continue to accommodate the "Vegas" residential tract as the MDRC property develops out; Item No. 3) MDRC has noted on the record and for purposes of this hearing that they are not a party to this conditional use permit application and would submit that the Zoning Administrator lacks jurisdiction to impose conditions on MDRC. Further it is probably inappropriate to impose conditions that could effectively prevent Sharp Electronics from obtaining the final inspections and certificate of occupancy if there is disagreement on Condition 4.r. There are recommended conditions being set forth binding MDRC who is not an applicant to this conditional use permit request, and Sharp could be penalized if MDRC doesn't perform under these conditions. Mr. O'Neil stated the MDRC is ready and able to sell the property, constituting the 20 foot wide reservoir drain easement for $69,600. The City is stating that they will sell for $62,500 based on an appraisal that MDRC has never seen. He stated that they had agreed in concept with the staff that the amount the City will pay for this easement will be based on one-half of the fee value as appraised. He also stated that over the last several months MDRC has been actively marketing their sites and in some instances selling their property in this very same area and have a very good idea, based on those sales, as to what the cost of property is per acre. He stated that MDRC came up with the $69,600 based on their knowledge of the market place. He also stated that it could be argued that the difference in the two amounts could consist of value assigned to the option for holding this off the market for the eight month period of time. Mr. O'Neil stated that he would like the representatives of Adams Streeter to explain their position on the sewer hook up into Bolsa, which is Condition No. 4.j. He requested that after that we have a short recess so he could consult with his clients and then reconvene to discuss their comments on the latest revised condition letter. Don Karpinen, Adams Streeter, 15 Corporate Park, Irvine, submitted pictures to the Zoning Administrator for the record and also showed exhibits and poster boards. The first exhibit showed the existing facilities that are being served by the Graham St. sewer. There is a residential tract to the north which contributes 50 percent of the capacity to this line. He stated that a study was done in 1995 by Kennedy Jenks regarding the capacity of the sewers in this area and how these facilities would be allowed to be drained to. There is a small area which has been ZA Minutes - 10/16/96 7 (MIN1016) resolved with Public Works Department and now this sewage will be acceptable in the Graham St. line upgrading. The existing 24 inch line system on the site of Sharp Electronics will handle approximately 69 percent of the capacity in the sewer line. This is a 23.4 acre site which will provide 3,900 gallons per day per acre, 91,000 gallons approximately. The capacity is substantially different at 5,700 gallons per day. The City has sewage capacity tested in this area and those tests indicate no problems currently exists. Dennis O'Neil, MDRC, concluded his presentation by stating that the original conditions places the burden and responsibility on Sharp Electronics to handle the increased capacity of sewer, if in fact, sewer was directed to the west. The modification of the condition as proposed has eliminated the responsibility of Sharp to handle the modifications to the sewer system and to handle their anticipated capacity. The responsibility has now been shifted to MDRC, which they believe is unfair under the circumstances, because this system is not a system that was built or will be added to by McDonnell Douglas development. He stated that it would not be right to amend the condition to relieve the responsibility of Sharp to pay its fair share for the increased cost of expanding the system and place that burden on McDonnell Douglas. Herb Fauland stated he would have City staff present their issues and then he would call a recess. Dave Webb gave a briefing on the sewer system from staff s view. There is an existing 12 inch line in Bolsa Ave. This whole area was tabled to go to this line in the City's sewer master plan, including the Sharp site. Staff thought there would be capacity problems for the master plan, which they later found out to be untrue. In trying to relieve that flow and maybe help the client, staff thought that they could gravity drain to another site, possibly over to the Springdale St. line. This is how the issue was to be addressed and how the original condition was proposed. However, MDRC cannot provide a gravity drain to Sharp in this line, due to existing water lines. The only other realistic option is to drain to Bolsa Ave., which will have an impact on the future design of the sewer system. Herb Fauland asked Dave Webb about the discrepancy in the dollar amounts in Condition No. 4.r.6. Dave Webb deferred to Debbie DeBow, who stated that Scott Fields, City Attorney's Office, derived the $62,500 figure. Richard Harlow, representing MDRC, stated that he had a conversation with Les Jones, Public Works Director, who was aware that MDRC agreed to fair market value price as opposed to putting the City in a position of determining whose figure is correct. Mike Akamoto, Shimizu America Corp, architects representing Sharp Electronics Corp., stated that they had designed the Sharp facility and gave a brief history of the project. He stated that the actual sewer capacity is substantially smaller than explained by the MDRC representatives. For the record he wanted that to be corrected. He also stated that the initial direction was to connect the sewer into a sweep spinner, but technically it was very difficult and after some analysis it was directed to go to the Bolsa Ave. side. ZA Minutes - 10/16/96 8 (MIN1016) John Erskine, representing Sharp Electronics Corp., stated that the proposed Sharp facility has only nine toilets that would be impacting the sewer line. Thus, despite the square footage size of this project, it has virtually no impact to the existing system. He also cited the May 3, 1996, letter received from Dave Webb, that said `in his professional determination the project would have minimal impact on the Bolsa Ave. line' and basically authorized them to move forward to connect to Bolsa Ave. at that time. Tom Overturf, representing MDRC, stated that the issue under discussion is the change in a condition that was the basis for their original agreement with Sharp Electronics. The reason Sharp is promoting this change is that it switches the burden of them paying for the expanded system to MDRC. This would have required Sharp to spend $600,000 to meet the condition had they gone to the west. They elected, without consulting MDRC, to build in that (west) direction and then to politically try to make the change so that the burden was shifted from Sharp to MDRC. He stated that if the Zoning Administrator approved the condition, the burden of payment of this system upgrade would be switched from Sharp to MDRC. Through MDRC efforts they were able to reduce the cost design from $600,000 down to $130,000. It is MDRC's strong feeling that it should be Sharp's responsibility to make the system upgrade which was required under the original condition. Secondly, an effluent pump exists on the north side of their building. Instead of it lifting for one bathroom it could lift for eight more. From an engineering standpoint, their full 2.8 million square feet of McDonnell Douglas property is handled by a sewage pump that pumps all the effluent from all of the buildings in the entire 300 plus acre complex up to the Bolsa Ave. line and down into the Graham St. line. The pump is simpler and much less complex. Herb Fauland attempted to clarify the issues by stating that the conflicts, as he understands them, are with Conditions No. 4 J and 4.r.6, and everything else is based upon the revised conditions of approval outlined in the letter. Debbie DeBow stated that Condition No. 4.r.1 is also in question. Mr. Fauland stated that his goal is to find some satisfactory resolution at this level and not have to elevate this discussion to the Planning Commission. He also stated that he would consider a continuance if all parties cannot come to an agreement. Mr. Fauland recessed until 2:30 PM. The Zoning Administrator meeting was reconvened at 2:40 PM. Dennis O'Neil, representing MDRC, stated that he had the opportunity to review the changes made today in the letter and reported they still did not concur with Condition No. 4.r.1. He stated that Mr. Les Jones, Public Works Director, is here to address Condition No. 4.r.6 with regards to the price paid for the easement. Mr. O'Neil stated that the agreement is not appropriately a part of the conditional use permit application. He suggested that Sharp Electronics be granted their amendments so they could have their conditional use permit amended and allowing them to complete their project by pulling the condition in question and continue to work with staff on it. He stated that staff has no obligation hold over MDRC, and they have been engaged in good faith negotiations with the City for over a year and there is no reason they could not continue to do that. ZA Minutes - 10/16/96 9 (MIN1016) C Les Jones, Public Works Director, stated in regard to Condition No. 4.r.6., that they had received an appraisal and Fair Market Value had been discussed. He proposed a 30 day discussion period on this item to allow discussions to occur with the City's Real Estate Personnel. John Erskine stated that he concurred with Dennis O'Neil, MDRC, regarding removal of Condition No. 4.r. from the conditional use permit request as the Zoning Administrator has no jurisdiction to impose these conditions on their project. He also concurred with the removal of the condition for a required bus stop. In regard to Condition No. 4.j., he stated that originally the condition had a sentence that talked about upsizing the Graham St. line. Mr. Erskine stated that the Kennedy Jenks Study showed no need to upsize this line. He stated that any obligation for upswing sewers is a contractual issue between McDonnell Douglas and Sharp Electronics, and he asked that the City not insert itself into that contractual dispute. He further stated that it is their understanding that the ability to hook into the Springdale St. line on a gravity feed line is subject to a ten (10) foot clearance around the water main and that might be an impossibility. Mr. Erskine stated that staff s recommended revision to the condition is appropriate and as a matter of record the sewer line to Bolsa Ave. is already constructed. Tom Overturf stated that it seems all parties are in agreement with Condition No. 4.j. and requests a decision be made on that item this day. He also requested that the revised conditions (4.r.1. & 4.r.6.) that were handed out this day be continued for a matter of 30 days, to allow all parties to come to an agreement. Richard Harlow suggested that the Zoning Administrator impose a condition that these two (2) matters be mutually agreed upon within 30 days at which time they would appear before the Zoning Administrator and finalize the wording. Dave Webb commented on Mr. Erskine's statement of taking the sewer into the Springdale St. line. He stated that when a sewer system is designed it is based on the average flow for the tract, approximately 3,300 gallons per day per acre for industrial. Understanding Sharp has only nine (9) toilets and their flow may be only 900 gallons total for the day, a sewer system must still be designed based on the tract size potential. The Springdale connection has a 16 inch water main and a 12 inch water main and a bank of telephone conduit encased in concrete which creates several problems. For the record, regarding staff s recommendation on 4.j., he recommends keeping it from Bolsa Ave., because it is a contractual agreement between the two parties that they will have to work out. Debbie DeBow addressed 4.r. regarding the appropriateness of the condition even being part of the Sharp conditions. She noted staffs understanding is that MDRC made some commitments to Sharp that infrastructure would be provided. The City has no way to condition MDRC because they have no project under consideration, that is why it is conditioned on the proposed Sharp Electronics project. She stated that she felt a continuance is necessary on 4.r.1. and 4.r.6. ZA Minutes - 10/16/96 10 (MIN1016) Jane Madera, stated that if that is the case then she suggests continuing all of 4.r. for a 30 day period. Ms. Madera does not feel this will hold up the construction or completion of Sharp's building. She also suggested the possibility of removing 4.r. from the conditional use permit entirely and questioned staff as to the affect it would have on the project further down the line. Dave Webb stated that, if agreeable with both parties, it could be a condition that they work in good faith to negotiate an agreement. The only contractual way we can deal with this, if we can't reach an agreement, is to hold up any further development until everything is put in place. Debbie DeBow suggested that that would be too late. Condition No. 4r addresses the fact that the Sharp project would have required Sharp to build a new water line in Springdale St. Because of the cost and the alternative way to accommodate the City's needs, it is necessary to work with MDRC to get a well site developed that would give basically an equivalent to this water line on Springdale St.. If the City doesn't have the conditions of 4.r. met, then the City will have not satisfied its water infrastructure needs for the Sharp development. She stated for these reasons she is not comfortable taking that condition out or postponing it. John Erskine stated that he had been informed, except for two (2) fire hydrants, they would be granted a Certificate of Occupancy even if these negotiations would continue to the end of 1997. He stated Sharp believes that they will have the water service that Sharp needs irrespective of their negotiations on the other six (6) items. To simplify their only concern today, he requested a decision on all of the other requested entitlement plan amendment items and a continuance only for the purposes of condition No. 4.r. and the negotiations between MDRC and the City. Herb Fauland, Zoning Administrator, stated that with the discussion today and the understanding that the majority of these conditions have been agreed upon, he would like to continue the item for two (2) weeks. He noted that it was not possible to piecemeal the conditions and that the entire package of amendments should be acted upon at once. He felt that the outstanding issues should be resolved within the next two weeks and if they are not, he may have to refer the item to the Planning Commission and let them debate the issues. Tom Overturf stated his concern with continuing the entire thing because they have contractors standing by to build the bus turnout today. They need to know today if the bus turnout will be required by the City. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED ENTITLEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO.96-1 WAS CONTINUED BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR TO THE OCTOBER 30,1996 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MEETING. ZA Minutes - 10/16/96 11 (MIN1016) THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 3:05 PM BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR TO THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ON WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 23,1996 AT 1:30 PM. s- -- . 01- -- Q j Herb Fauland Zoning Administrator :kjl .ZA Minutes - 10/16/96 12 (MIN1016)