HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-06-091
MINUTES
HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION
TUESDAY, JUNE 9,1998
STUDY SESSION - 5:00 PM
(Room B-8)
HB MALL RENOVATION PLAN — Jane Madera
MEADOWLARK SPECIFIC PLAN —Amy Wolfe
AGENDA REVIEW - Scott Hess
REGULAR MEETING - 7:00 PM
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council Chambers - Civic Center
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, California
P P P P P. P P
ROLL CALL: Inglee, Chapman, Tillotson, Livengood, Kerins, Biddle, Speaker
AGENDA APPROVAL
Anyone wishing to speak must fill out and submit a form to speak No action can betaken by the Planning Commission on
this date, unless the item is agendized. Any one wishing to speak on items not on tonight's agenda or on non-public hearing
items may do so during ORAL COMMUNICATIONS. Speakers on items scheduled for PUBLIC HEARING will be invited
to speak during the public hearing. (4 MINUTES PER PERSON, NO DONATING OF TIME TO OTHERS)
A. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
NONE
B. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
B-1 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.97-93NARIANCE NO 98-12 (APPEAL)
(MERCS RESIDENCE) (CONTINUED FROM THE MAY 12,1998 MEETING)•
APPLICANT: The Louie Group, Louie Hernandez
APPELLANT: Planning Commissioner Tom Livengood
LOCATION: 524-22°d Street (south of Goldenwest and west of Acacia)
PROJECT
PLANNER: Scott Hess
Conditional Use Permit No. 97-93 represents a request to allow a 408.5 square foot, third level
enclosed habitable area consisting of a converted mechanical room and 222 square foot addition.
Variance No. 98-12 is requested to allow a floor area ratio (FAR) of 1.03 (2,981 square feet) in
lieu of maximum 1.0 (2,875 square feet). At the May 12, 1998 Planning Commission meeting, a
motion was made to deny the conditional use permit request which failed (2-3 vote; Chapman -
Absent; Speaker -Abstaining). A subsequent motion was made to continue the appeal (and to
notice the variance request) which passed (3-2 vote; Kerins, Biddle -No; Chapman -Absent;
Speaker -Abstaining).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends denial of the request with findings for denial.
Commissioner Speaker stated that in order to avoid the appearance of any misconduct or undue
influence he would abstain from taking action on this item.
Commissioner Chapman stated that he had been absent at the May 12, 1998 meeting, but had
reviewed the video tape of that meeting and was prepared to take action on the request.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS RE -OPENED.
James Meres, 524-22nd Street, homeowner, stated that he had an en ineer pre are a technical
report to be presented this evening and show slides of houses on 19 and 22° Streets that were
of greater height than his request.
Laura Meres, 524-22nd street, homeowner, stated that they were not intending to enclose the
whole deck only move a wall of the room rearwards. She stated that the proposed enclosure was
designed not to impact the adjacent neighbors. Ms. Meres also stated that they had consulted
their neighbors prior to submitting their plans and the neighbors had supported the request.
Bill Zimmerman, 607-21St Street, engineer, stated that the required Floor Area Ratio creates a
hardship for this property and creates a devaluation to the home as they cannot expand.
Jay Weir, 526-22nd Street, spoke in support of the request.
Louie Hernandez, 19312 Harding Lane, architect and applicant, stated that the enclosure will
only encroach four (4) feet, that a hardship does exist on the 25 foot lot and it is not a grant of
special privilege.
Dr. William Hyde, 602-22°d street, spoke in opposition to the request and stated it was non
conforming to the Ocean Pointe tract.
Darryn Lowenstein, 573-20th Street, spoke in support of the request.
Eric Smit, 528-22°d Street, spoke in support of the request.
Mary Smit, 528-22nd Street, spoke in support of the request.
PC Minutes — 6/9/98 2 (98PCM609)
Pat Zimmerman, 607-21" Street, spoke in support of the request stating they had 80 signatures of
support from the surrounding neighbors.
THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE
REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Commissioner Kerins stated that the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance was in place to protect
the citizens of Huntington Beach. He stated that for a variance to be granted there must be
special circumstances and a hardship on the property. He did not feel there were either and that
approving this request would set a precedent for the neighborhood. Commissioners Chapman
and Biddle also did not support the request because the home already exceeds allowable size and
felt there were no hardships on the property.
Commissioner Inglee stated that the property is constrained by not being allowed additions
which could maximize the value of the home, and does not believe that the proposed addition
would be detrimental to the general welfare of the community; he would support the variance.
Commissioners Livengood and Tillotson also indicated they support the variance request.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY BIDDLE, TO DENY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.
97-93 AND VARIANCE NO.98-12 WITH FINDINGS FOR DENIAL. MOTION FAILED
FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY KERINS, SECONDED BY BIDDLE, TO APPROVE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.97-93 WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF
APPROVAL, AND DENY VARIANCE NO.98-12 WITH FINDINGS FOR DENIAL, BY
THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES:
Chapman, Kerins, Biddle
NOES:
Inglee, Tillotson, Livengood
ABSENT:
None
ABSTAIN:
Speaker
MOTION FAILED
A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECONDED BY INGLEE, TO APPROVE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.97-93 WITH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S
FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND APPROVE VARIANCE NO.98-
12 WITH FINDINGS FOR HARDSHIP DUE TO CALCULATION ERRORS, BY THE
FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Inglee, Tillotson, Livengood
NOES: Chapman, Kerins, Biddle
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: Speaker
MOTION FAILED
PC Minutes — 6/9/98 3 (98PCM609)
A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECONDED BY KERINS, TO APPROVE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.97-93 WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF
APPROVAL, AND DENY VARIANCE NO.98-12 WITH FINDINGS FOR DENIAL, BY
THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Chapman, Tillotson, Livengood, Kerins, Biddle
NOES: Inglee
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: Speaker
MOTION PASSED
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.97-93:
1. Conditional Use Permit No. 97-93 for the establishment, maintenance and operation of a 114
square foot addition (revised size since Variance No. 98-12 was denied) to the existing third
level mechanical room in a location partially occupied by an open roof deck will not be
detrimental to the general welfare of persons working or residing in the vicinity or
detrimental to the value of the property and improvements in the neighborhood. The addition
to the existing third level mechanical room is designed to integrate with the existing
residence and the site is physically suitable for this type of development. Based upon the
design of the addition to the existing third level mechanical room and maintenance of the
roof deck, there will not be an impact to the existing views of the properties located to the
north and south of the site. The views will be maintained along with the open space provided
on the roof deck.
2. The conditional use permit will be compatible with surrounding uses because the proposed
colors, materials, and design of the third level addition will be compatible with the existing
third story residence and with other third level elements within the surrounding neighborhood
(Oceanpointe). In addition, since the expansion to the existing third level mechanical room
would be constructed within the overall building envelope of the existing residence, and
would not exceed the maximum 35 height limit, it would not visually dominate and contrast
significantly with the character of the neighborhood.
3. The proposed addition to an existing third level mechanical room will comply with the
provisions of the base district and other applicable provisions in Titles 20-25 of the
Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and any specific condition required for
the proposed use in the district in which it would be located. The proposed addition and
remodel will comply with the provisions of the RMH-A base district and other applicable
provisions in Titles 20-25 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and
any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be
located. The addition to the existing third level mechanical room would be compatible with
the existing residence in colors, materials and design and with other homes within the
Oceanpointe development. The existing development has third level elements (mechanical
room) with open space decks and the proposed addition to the existing third level mechanical
room will not significantly alter the overall appearance of the residence or impact existing
views and will not significantly reduce the open space deck for the site. In addition, the
proposal will not increase the non -conforming site coverage for the site because the addition
to the third level will not affect the building footprint or the site coverage calculation for the
site.
PC Minutes — 6/9/98 4 (98PCM609)
1
4. The granting of the conditional use permit will not adversely affect the General Plan. It is
consistent with the Land Use Element designation of Residential Medium High Density
(RMH-25) on the subject property. In addition, it is consistent with the goals and policies of
the General Plan since the addition to the third level mechanical room will be compatible
with the existing structure and structures within the surrounding neighborhood, maintain
existing views, maintains adequate open space, and does not increase the non -conforming
site coverage for the site. (LU 9.1.2).
FINDINGS FOR DENIAL- VARIANCE NO.98-12:
1. The granting of Variance No. 98-12 for a third story deck addition which would increase the
floor area ratio to 1.03 (2,981 square feet) in lieu of maximum 1.0 (2,875 square feet) will
constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with limitations placed upon other
properties in the vicinity and under an identical zone classification. The addition will exceed
the FAR by 106 square feet. A variance to exceed the floor area ratio has not been granted
for similarly zoned properties in the general vicinity.
2. There are no special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shape,
topography and location or surroundings. The strict application of the zoning ordinance is
not found to deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the
vicinity and under identical zone classification. The lot is a typical rectangular 25 ft. x 115
ft. size identical to other lots in the RMH-A zone. The third story deck addition would create
an adverse impact to aesthetics and the floor area ratio for the lot. The addition would set a
precedence as no other residence within the same development incorporates an addition on
the third floor which exceeds the floor area ratio for the structure and would increase the bulk
and mass of the structure.
3. The granting of a variance is not necessary to preserve the enjoyment of one or more
substantial property rights. The granting of the variance will be materially detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to property in the same zone classification. The property is
developed with a three story home and a third level deck. The variance request would allow
the property owner to increase the floor area ratio 106 feet.
4. The granting of the variance will be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious
to property in the same zone classification and is consistent with the General Plan. The deck
enclosure will be not architecturally compatible with the existing home and will alter the
height and floor area ratio of the existing residence. It is not consistent with the Land Use
Element designation of Medium High Density Residential -Small Lot Subdistrict on the
subject property and is not consistent the following goals and policies of the General Plan:
a. Require that all new residential development within existing neighborhoods be
compatible with existing structure. (LU 9.1.2)
b. Identify that structures and site are designed and constructed to maintain their long term
quality. (LU 4.2)
PC Minutes — 6/9/98
(98PCM609)
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.97-93:
1. The site plan, and elevations received and dated November 5, 1997, and the floor plan dated
February 5, 1998, shall be the conceptually approved layout with the following modification:
a. The third story addition shall be reduced in size by 106 square feet so the total square feet
of the residence does not exceed 2,875 square feet (FAR 1.0).
b. Revised elevations shall depict colors and materials.
2. Prior to submittal for building permits, zoning entitlement conditions of approval shall be
printed verbatim on the second page of all the working drawing sets used for issuance of
building permits (architectural, structural, electrical, mechanical and plumbing).
3. Prior to issuance of building permits, the following shall be completed:
a. Submit copy of the revised site plan, floor plans and elevations pursuant to Condition
No. 1 for review and approval and inclusion in the entitlement file to the Department of
Community Development.
b. Compliance with all conditions of approval specified herein shall be accomplished and
verified by the Community Development Department.
c. 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.
4. The Community Development Director ensures that all conditions of approval herein are
complied with. The Community Development Director shall be notified in writing if any
changes to the site plan, elevations and floor plans are proposed as a result of the plan check
process. Building permits shall not be issued until the Community Development Director has
reviewed and approved the proposed changes for conformance with the intent of the Planning
Commission's action and the conditions herein. If the proposed changes are of a substantial
nature, an amendment to the original entitlement reviewed by the Planning Commission may
be required pursuant to the HBZSO.
INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC CODE REQUIREMENTS:
1. Conditional Use Permit No. 97- 93 shall not become effective until the ten day appeal
period has elapsed.
2. Conditional Use Permit No. 97-93 shall become null and void unless exercised within one
year of the date of final approval or such extension of time as may be granted by the
Director pursuant to a written request submitted to the Department of Community
Development a minimum 30 days prior to the expiration date.
3. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke Conditional Use Permit No. 97-93,
pursuant to a public hearing for revocation, if any violation of these conditions or the
Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance or Municipal Code occurs.
PC Minutes — 6/9/98 6 (98PCM609)
4. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid. (PW)
5. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Municipal Code,
Building Division, and Fire Department as well as applicable local, State and Federal Fire
Codes, Ordinances, and standards, except as noted herein.
6. Construction shall be limited to Monday - Saturday 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM. Construction
shall be prohibited Sundays and Federal holidays.
7. The applicant shall submit a check in the amount of $38.00 for the posting of the Notice
of Exemption at the County of Orange Clerk's Office. The check shall be made out to
the County of Orange and submitted to the Department of Community Development
within two (2) days of the Planning Commission's action.
B-2 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO.97-2/ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT NO.97-
5/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO.97-22/LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
AMENDMENT NO.97-1/TENATATIVE PARCEL MAP NO.97-199/HOLLY
SEACLIFF AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 1
(GREENBRIAR/MONTECTIO):
APPLICANT: PLC Land Company
LOCATION: South side of Garfield Avenue, between Peninsula Lane and
Goldenwest Street, north of Summit Drive
PROJECT
PLANNER: Mary Beth Broeren
General Plan Amendment No. 97-2 and Zoning Text Amendment No. 97-5 represent a request
by PLC Land Company to amend the General Plan Land Use Map and the Holly Seacliff
Specific Plan to change the land uses and maximum number of units on 58 acres. PLC has
requested consideration of two alternatives. Both alternatives would expand the existing
commercial area from seven to 11 gross acres. Alternative #1 also reduces residential density in
the Greenbriar area and increases density in Montecito. Alternative #2 lowers density in both
Greenbriar and Montecito. Both Alternatives yield fewer residential units than the existing plan.
Tentative Parcel Map No. 97-199 would subdivide the 58 acres into three parcels. The
amendment to the Affordable Housing Plan would allow rental units to meet affordable housing
goals in addition to for -sale units.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the applicant's request for Alternative #2,
the tentative parcel map and the amendment to the affordable housing plan, as modified by staff,
for the following reasons:
• The proposed low density land use designation is compatible with existing and proposed land
uses in the area.
PC Minutes — 6/9/98 7 (98PCM609)
♦ Development of the expanded commercial site can be designed to be compatible with
surrounding uses and the expansion will be fiscally beneficial to the city.
♦ The tentative parcel map conforms with the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan and Ordinance
Code.
♦ The allowance of affordable rental housing is consistent with the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan
and the goals of the General Plan Housing Element.
♦ The potential environmental impacts of the project have been evaluated in Negative
Declaration No. 97-22 and mitigation measures will reduce impacts to a level of less than
significant.
The Commission discussed with staff the differences between the Affordable Housing Plan
Amendment, Alternative No. 1 and Alternative No. 2.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED.
Bill Holman, 23 Corporate Plaza Drive, #250, Newport Beach, stated that the applicant would
prefer approval of Alternative No. 2 and concurs with staff s report and recommendation with
the exception of the staff recommended changes to the language of the Affordable Housing Plan
requiring a 50-50 mix of low and very low income units for rental units.
The Commission asked Mr. Holman if marketing studies had been done to assure that
commercial property would be viable in this area and how the Seacliff Shopping Center
expansion would affect their proposed commercial center. Mr. Holman stated that a study had
been done and there is demand for a market and commercial development in this area. He stated
that the area is growing and the Seacliff Shopping Center expansion would not preclude a need
for their proposed center.
Mike Colonna, 6902 Derby Circle, Hampton's Homeowner Association, spoke in opposition to
the expansion of the commercial acreage and would request lower density for the residential
portion.
Bill Lewerenz, 18936 Caddington Circle, Hampton's Homeowner Association, spoke in
opposition to the request.
Lou Mannone, Huntington Seacliff Homeowners Association, referred to his letter dated June 8,
1998, stating the Association prefers Alternative No. 2 with concern regarding proposed hours of
operation, truck noise, light intrusion, and traffic flow for the commercial center. They support
the Saddleback "Paseo" as a pedestrian -only link with concern for safety issues, and request that
traffic be carefully considered along Goldenwest and Garfield.
Karen Jackle, 6702 Lawn Haven Drive, Huntington Seacliff Homeowners Association, stated
that the Association would prefer Alternative No. 2.
John Roe, 19382 Surfdale Lane, would support Alternative No. 2.
Jerri Hesprich, 6971 Garden Circle, stated that the commercial development should be
considered as a separate item and traffic and parking studies need to be done prior to acting on
the request.
PC Minutes — 6/9/98 8 (98PCM609)
lJ
John Edwards, 6712 Lawn Haven, Seacliff Homeowners Association, stated that he would prefer
no commercial zoning on the property, ;only jow. density, residential.
Jeff Metzel, 19391 Shady Harbor Circle, Huntington Seacliff Homeowners Association, prefer
Alternative No. 2. Mr. Metzel stated that the Association would prefer no commercial zoning
and low density residential in both developments. He also urged the Commission to have a
traffic study done.
J.D. Miles, 19415 Castlewood, FANS, spoke in support of Alternative No. 2. He stated the
commercial portion of the project will benefit the residents in the area.
Colleen Wilson, 18941 Silverbit, Hampton's Homeowners Association, stated concern with
expanded commercial area and stated the proposed density of the residential should be the same
as the existing residential.
Andy Pieter, 6916 Turf Drive, President Hampton's Homeowners Association, stated concern
with the expansion on the commercial property and the adverse impacts from the light and sound
that will be created.
David G. Aguilar, 19215 Beckonridge Lane, stated concern with children's safety with increased
traffic and urged the Commission to approve low density residential and less commercial area.
Jim Dello Russo, 18815 Rockinghorse Lane, Hampton's Homeowners Association, stated he
wanted low density for all residential and no expansion of the commercial area.
Suzanne Beukema, 9052 Christine Drive, FANS, spoke in support of Alternative No. 2.
Tamlyn Hagemeiser, 19900 Beach Boulevard, Suite I, spoke in support of the request.
Carol Lewis, 18925 York Lane, spoke in opposition to having a grocery store in the commercial
center.
Phillip Ow, 16907 Summer Grove Lane, spoke in support of Alternative No. 2.
Philip Talbert, 6572 Radcliff, spoke in opposition to having a grocery store near residential and
suggested the commercial properties be located in the adjacent industrial zone.
THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE
REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
The Planning Commission took straw votes on the project. The Planning Commission's straw
votes reflected unanimously to not support Alternative No. 1 and voted unanimously to support
the residential plan of Alternative No. 2. The Planning Commission voted to approve the
expansion of the commercial area from seven to 11 acres with Commissioner Livengood
dissenting.
PC Minutes — 6/9/98 9
(98PCM609)
A MOTION WAS MADE BY KERINS, SECONDED BY SPEAKER, TO CONTINUE
ACTION ON THE HOLLY SEACLIFF AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN
AMENDMENT NO.1 TO THE JULY 14,1998 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING,
BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Inglee, Chapman, Tillotson, Livengood, Kerins, Biddle, Speaker
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION PASSED
A MOTION WAS MADE BY KERINS, SECONDED BY SPEAKER, TO APPROVE
NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO.97-22 WITH FINDINGS AND MITIGATION
MEASURES, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES:
Inglee, Chapman, Tillotson, Livengood, Kerins, Biddle, Speaker
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
None
ABSTAIN:
None
MOTION PASSED
A MOTION WAS MADE BY KERINS, SECONDED BY SPEAKER TO APPROVE
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO.97-2 FOR ALTERNATIVE NO.2 WITH
FINDINGS AND FORWARD RESOLUTION TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR
ADOPTION, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES:
Inglee, Chapman, Tillotson, Livengood, Kerins, Biddle, Speaker
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
None
ABSTAIN:
None
MOTION PASSED
A MOTION WAS MADE BY KERINS, SECONDED BY SPEAKER, TO APPROVE
ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO.97-2 FOR ALTERNATIVE NO.2 AND LOCAL
COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO.97-1 WITH FINDINGS AND FORWARD
ORDINANCE TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION, BY THE FOLLOWING
VOTE:
AYES: Inglee, Chapman, Tillotson, Livengood, Kerins, Biddle, Speaker
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION PASSED
PC Minutes — 6/9/98 10 (98PCM609)
F - „i
FINDINGS FOR ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO.97-5:
1. Zoning Text Amendment No. 97-5 to modify the land use designations and amount of
allowed development in Planning Area III of the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan is consistent
with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan.
The proposed changes are consistent with General Plan Amendment No. 97-2 which is being
processed concurrently. The changes do not result in greater traffic impacts than were
assumed in the Environmental Impact Report No. 89-1 for Holly Seacliff certified in 1990
and subsequent amendment. The changes will implement General Policies.
2. In the case of a general land use provision, the zoning text amendment is compatible with the
uses authorized in, and the standards prescribed for, the zoning district for which it is
proposed. The changes would not add any new land uses to the area and are compatible with
uses in the vicinity.
3. A community need is demonstrated for the change proposed. The changes would reduce the
number of residential units allowed on the subject property which would reduce demand on
community facilities. The expanded commercial area would result in greater sales tax
revenue to the city which may be used for infrastructure improvements and community
services.
4. Its adoption will be in conformity with public convenience, general welfare and good zoning
practice. The zoning text amendment will not introduce any new land uses to the area. It
will ensure the continued provision of increased living opportunities fore residents close to
services.
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL FOR NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO.97-22:
1. The Negative Declaration No. 97-22 has been prepared in compliance with Article 6 of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. It was advertised and available
for a public comment period of twenty (20) days. Comments received during the comment
period were considered by the Planning Commission prior to action on the Negative
Declaration, General Plan Amendment No. 97-2, Zoning Text Amendment No. 97-5, Local
Coastal Program Amendment No. 97-1, Tentative Parcel Map No.. 97-199 and Affordable
Housing Plan Amendment No. 1.
2. Mitigation measures, incorporated into the attached conditions of approval, avoid or reduce
the project's effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment will
occur. Mitigation measures address a number of potential impacts, including: construction
noise, aesthetics, air quality, transportation, lighting, hazardous materials and public services
and facilities when ultimate construction will occur.
3. There is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the Planning Commission
that the project, as mitigated through the conditions of approval for Tentative Parcel Map No.
97-199 will have a significant effect on the environment.
PC Minutes — 6/9/98 11 (98PCM609)
A MOTION WAS MADE BY KERINS, SECONDED BY INGLEE, APPROVE
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO.97-199 WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF
APPROVAL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Inglee, Chapman, Tillotson, Livengood, Kerins, Biddle, Speaker
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION PASSED
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL — TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO.97-199:
1. Tentative Parcel Map No. 97-199 for the subdivision of one parcel into three parcels is
consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element designations of Medium, Medium High
and Low Density Residential and Commercial on the subject property, or any applicable
specific plan, or other applicable provisions of this Code. The proposed subdivision will
result in parcels which conform to General Plan policies.
2. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. The site is generally
flat and was previously analyzed for the proposed land use designations for residential and
commercial development. No new land uses are proposed for the area.
3. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not cause serious health
problems or substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or
wildlife or their habitat. There are no sensitive habitats on the subject site or in the vicinity.
The creation of three parcels will not result in any environmental damage.
4. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements,
acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed
subdivision unless alternative easements, for access or for use, will be provided. No
easements exist on the site.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - TENTATIVE MAP NO.97-199:
1. The tentative map received and dated June 1, 1998 shall be the approved layout.
2. The following conditions shall be completed prior to recordation of the final map unless
otherwise stated. Bonding may be substituted for construction in accordance with the
provisions of the Subdivision Map Act. (PW)
a. The following shall be dedicated to the City of Huntington Beach:
1. An easement for storm drain purposes as shown on said map.
2. The storm drain system and appurtenances, within the storm drain easement, as
shown on the improvement plans for this map.
PC Minutes — 6/9/98 12 (98PCM609)
b. All vehicular access rights to Summit Drive, Peninsula Lane, Garfield Avenue and
Goldenwest Street shall be released and relinquished to the City of Huntington
Beach except at locations subsequently approved by the Planning Commission.
c. The engineer or surveyor preparing the final map shall tie the boundary of the map
into the Horizontal Control System established by the County Surveyor in a manner
described in Sections 7-9-330 and 7-9-337 of the Orange County Subdivision Code
and Orange County Subdivision Manual, Subarticle 18.
d. The engineer or surveyor preparing the final map shall submit to the County
Surveyor a digital -graphics file of said map in a manner described in Sections 7-9-
330 and 7-9-337 of the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange County
Subdivision Manual, Subarticle 18.
3. Upon recordation of the map, a mylar and print of the recorded Parcel Map plus digital files
per City of Huntington Beach requirements shall be provided to the Public Works
Department. (PW)
4. Prior to construction of any permanent residential or commercial structures, a
conditional use permit and tentative tract map, if appropriate, shall be approved by the
Planning Commission.
INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC CODE REQUIREMENTS:
1. Tentative Map No. 97-199 shall become null and void unless exercised within two (2)
years of the date of final approval. An extension of time may be granted by the Planning
Director pursuant to a written request submitted to the Planning Division a minimum 30
days prior to the expiration date.
2. The applicant shall submit a check in the amount of $38 for the posting of the Notice of
Determination at the County of Orange Clerk's Office. The check shall be made out to
the County of Orange and submitted to the Department of Community Development
within two (2) days of the Planning Commission's action.
C. CONSENT CALENDAR
C-1 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED MAY 12,1998
A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECONDED BY BIDDLE, TO APPROVE
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED MAY 12,1998, BY THE FOLLOWING
VOTE:
AYES:
Inglee, Tillotson, Livengood, Kerins, Biddle, Speaker
NOES:
None
ABSENT:
None
ABSTAIN:
Chapman
MOTION PASSED
PC Minutes — 6/9/98 13 (98PCM609)
C-2 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED MAY 26,1998
A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECONDED BY INGLEE, TO APPROVE
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED MAY 26,1998, BY THE FOLLOWING
VOTE:
AYES: Inglee, Chapman, Tillotson, Livengood, Kerins, Speaker
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: Biddle
MOTION PASSED
D. NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
None
E. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS
E-1 PLANNING COMMISSION COMMITTEE REPORTS
Commissioner Inglee — stated that the Environmental Review Committee has appointed
three (3) new members pending approval by the City Council.
E-2 PLANNING COMMISSION INQUIRIES/COMMENTS
Commissioner Inglee - None
Commissioner Chapman - None
Commissioner Tillotson - None
Commissioner Livengood — reviewed the June 16, 1998 Planning Commission Special
Meeting Draft Agenda.
Commissioner Kerins - None
Commissioner Biddle - None
Commissioner Speaker - None
F. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ITEMS
F-1 CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS FROM PREVIOUS MEETING
Howard ZelefsL Planning Director — stated the appeal of the Seacliff Shopping Center
remodel will be heard at the June 15, 1998 City Council meeting.
PC Minutes — 6/9/98 14 (98PCM609)
LJ
I
LI
F-2 PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING
Mary Beth Broeren, Senior Planer - reviewed items for the June 16, 1998 meeting.
G. ADJOURNMENT — Adjourn to the June 15,1998 City Council Joint Study Session at
5: 00 PM and then to a special meeting on June 16,1998.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY INGLEE, SECONDED BY CHAPMAN, TO ADJOURN TO
A 5:00 PM JOINT CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION ON
JUNE 15,1998, AND THEN TO A SPECIAL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AT
7:00 PM ON JUNE 16,1998, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Inglee, Chapman, Tillotson, Livengood, Kerins, Biddle, Speaker
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION PASSED
/kjl
Planning Co ssion Cha rperson
PC Minutes — 6/9/98
15
(98PCM609)