HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-06-23MINUTES
HUNTINGTON BEACH OFFICE OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
,,,Room B-6 - Civic Center
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach California
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 23,1999 -1:30 P.M.
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Herb Fauland
STAFF MEMBER: Amy Wolfe, Wayne Carvalho, Peter Vanek, Ramona Kohlmann
(recording secretary)
MINUTES: None
ORAL COMMUNICATION: None
ITEM 1: COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO 99-05 (WATERFRONT WETLANDS)
APPLICANT: The Robert L. Mayer Trust, c/o The Robert Mayer Corporation, P.O.
Box 8680, Newport Beach, California 92658
PROPERTY OWNER: City of Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency
2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648
REQUEST: To grade/fill approximately 0.8 acres of isolated, degraded wetland area
(which will be mitigated by the implementation of a wetland and
riparian woodland restoration habitat program involving 2.4 acres at the
Donald G. Shipley Nature Center).
LOCATION: Northwest corner of Pacific Coast Highway, and Beach Boulevard
(Waterfront Development Master Plan area)
PROJECT PLANNER: Amy Wolfe
Amy Wolfe, Staff Planner, displayed site plans stating that the project site is located within the
Coastal Zone, Downtown Specific Plan Area, District 8 (High Density Residential), and is subject to
a Conservation Overlay. Staff stated that the subject parcel is a part of the Waterfront development
master plan area, more specifically the residential component of the project, and is bounded by Beach
Boulevard to the east, residential uses to the north and vacant land to the northwest.
Staff stated that the site is currently undeveloped and includes an 0.8 acre of isolated, degraded
wetland fragment and that the subject wetland area is not subject to tidal flushing and received urban
freshwater runoff from the properties to the west. Staff stated that the urban run off drains via pipes
under Beach Boulevard to the salt -water wetland system east of Beach Boulevard.
Staff stated that the Robert Mayer corporation request for the filling of the existing degraded wetland
area is proposed in association with the implementation of a wetland and riparian habitat restoration
program. Staff indicated the habitat restoration program will be implemented within the Shipley
Nature Center and will provide 2.4 acres of habitat restoration pursuant to a comprehensive plan,
which has been reviewed and endorsed by the Army Corp of Engineers and the California
Department of Fish and Game.
Staff stated that the biological evaluation and wetlands delineation was conducted for the subject site"
in 1987 and that a reassessment was completed in 1998. Staff stated that the environmental impacts
associated with this proposal were analyzed as part of SEIR #82-2 and the addendum to SEIR #82-2.
Staff stated that mitigation measures were required to be implemented in conjunction with the filling
of the wetlands and have been included as part of the draft conditions of project approval.
Staff stated that a determination has been made that the existing freshwater wetlands represent a small
fragmented isolated and degraded habitat, which functions minimally as a biological resource, and
off -site restoration represents the best means of addressing issues associated with the value of the
subject wetland area. Staff stated that grading and filling of the subject site will not be injurious to
the general health, welfare and safety, nor detrimental or injurious to the value of the property and
improvements of the neighborhood or the City in general. Staff stated that the project is consistent
with the requirements of the Local Coastal Program, Downtown Specific Plan, Coastal Zone Overlay
District and the Amended and Restated Development Agreement applicable to this proposal.
Staff recommends approval of CDP 99-05 subject to the submitted draft findings and conditions with
modifications. Staff provided the Zoning Administrator and the applicant with a copy of the
proposed revisions stating that the revisions are somewhat technical in nature. The changes address
the fact that the Coastal Commission is not the primary decision making body and authority in the
issuance of the coastal development permit. Staff stated the changes apply to Conditions 3.b, 3.c, 3.d,
3.e, and 3.f where references were made in the mitigation measures that were adopted as part of the
SEIR. Staff stated that Finding #3 is a minor clarification.
Zoning Administration, Herb Fauland, stated that in reviewing the suggested conditions along with
the mitigation, it is very clear as to what is necessary to accomplish the on -site mitigation and the
proposed restoration plan. Mr. Fauland stated that he had no further questions, concurred with the
recommended changes, and complimented staff on a job well done.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED.
Shawn Millbern, The Mayer Corporation, 660 Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach, the applicant,
thanked staff and clarified, for the record, that Condition 3.d is, in fact, this subject Coastal
Development permit. Mr. Millbem stated that it is a condition that a Coastal Development permit be
obtained and, in fact, that is what this action is. Mr. Millbern stated that he did not want it to be
confusing to others in the future who might misinterpret this as meaning that after the Coastal
Development permit is issued, a second permit would be required as well.
THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE
REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO.99-05 (WATERFRONT WETLANDS)
WAS APPROVED BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR WITH THE FOLLOWING
MODIFIED FINDINGS AS OUTLINED IN THE HANDOUT DATED JUNE 23,1999 AND
ZA Minutes 6/23/99 2 (99ZM0623)
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ALONG WITH THE SUGGESTED CHANGES TO THE
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AS OUTLINED IN THE JUNE 23,1919 HANDOUT, HE
STATED THAT THE ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR CAN BE
APPEALED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITHIN TEN (10) CALENDAR DAYS.
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO.99-05•
Coastal Development Permit No. 99-05 for the grading and filling of 0.8 acres of wetlands in
conjunction with a habitat restoration program, as modified by conditions of approval, conforms
with the General Plan (HBZSO 245.30-A-1), including the Local Coastal Program (HBZSO
245.30-A-3). The existing freshwater wetlands represent a small, fragmented, isolated and
degraded habitat, which functions minimally as a biological resource. The project site is located
within the Downtown Specific Plan Area, District No. 8 (High Density Residential) and is subject
to a Conservation Overlay (HBZSO 245.30-A-2) which allows other restoration options to be
undertaken, pursuant to the Coastal Commission's "Statewide Interpretive Guidelines for
Wetlands and other Wet Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas" for wetland sites of less than
one acre in size. Off -site restoration represents the best means of addressing issues associated
with the value of the subject wetland area. The City of Huntington Beach approved the concept
of the Donald G. Shipley Nature Center Habitat Enhancement and Creation Program (May of
1991) to provide 2.4 acres of off -site mitigation for the Waterfront Development wetlands.
2. The project is consistent with the requirements of the CZ Overlay District, Downtown Specific
Plan District No. 8 (High Density Residential), as well as other applicable provisions of the
Municipal Code. Grading and filling of the subject will not be injurious to the general health,
welfare and safety, nor detrimental or injurious to the value of the property and improvements of
the neighborhood or the City in general. The project will augment expansion of the Donald G.
Shipley Nature Center natural habitat thus providing additional educational and recreational
benefits to Huntington Beach residents.
The subject proposal will not create a demand on infrastructure in a manner that is inconsistent
with the Local Coastal Program, Downtown Specific Plan and the Amended and Restated
Development Agreement by and between the City of Huntington Beach and Mayer Financial,
LTD, and the Waterfront Hotel, LLC. Development Agreement (Rec. No. 19980838602) adopted
on September 21, 1998.
4. The development conforms with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of
the California Coastal Act. The project will not interfere with the public access to any coastal
amenity.
5. The project does not fall under the Coastal Commission's "retained jurisdiction" over "tidelands,
submerged lands and Public Trust lands". The project is occurring on private property and there
has never been an issue of "public trust" lands and therefore the "public trusts lands" exclusion is
irrelevant. The reference to "submerged lands" is similarly not applicable as this property, while
wet from time to time, is not submerged or underwater. The project does not involve any
"tidelands" as the degraded wetland fragment is not tidally influenced.
ZA Minutes 6/23/99 3 (99ZM0623)
6. The California Coastal Commission has declined to assert federal consistency jurisdiction for the
project due to the following: a) the project has or will receive a locally issued coastal
development permit and is located within an area where such permits are appealable to the
Coastal Commission; and b) the proposed project does not significantly affect coastal resources or
raise coastal issues of greater than local concern.
7. The California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) has reviewed and approved the Habitat
Mitigation and Monitoring Program (HMMP) concept for the project and has entered into an
Agreement Regarding Proposed Stream or Lake Alteration (1603 Agreement) with the Robert
Mayer Corporation, dated April 1999. The subject Agreement includes measures to protect fish
and wildlife resources during the work of the project.
8. The California Regional Water Quality Control Board has, pursuant to the Clean Water Act
Section 401, reviewed the proposed project and has certified that the project will not violate State
water quality standards and has issued a waiver of water quality certification. (February 1999).
9. Leaving the existing degraded wetland fragment in its current condition is not the least
environmentally damaging alternative due to a number of factors, including: a) the primary water
supply for the wetland is polluted urban runoff which together with petroleum deposits below the -
surface will result in unacceptable and/or worsening water quality; b) the site is small, extremely
isolated and surrounded by roadways and urban uses exposing the wetland and potential wildlife
to light and noise impacts, as well as traffic hazards as wildlife transits to and from the larger
habitat area east of Beach Boulevard, resulting in a continued decrease in habitat value; and c)
the site is subject to increasing dominance of invasive alien plant species further diminishing any ■
remnants of habitat value on the project site.
10. On -site restoration of the subject degraded wetland fragment is not feasible because the wetland
area is not capable of recovering and maintaining a high level of biological productivity due to
numerous factors including; a) the primary water supply for the wetland is urban runoff which
will together with petroleum deposits below the surface will result in unacceptable water quality
not compatible with a healthy, viable ecosystem; b) the site is surrounded by roadways and urban
uses exposing the wetland and potential wildlife to impacts of light, noise and traffic hazards; c)
the wetland is freshwater in nature and therefore dissimilar from the only nearby wetland east of
Beach Boulevard which is a salt marsh subject to tidal influence; d) the size of the wetland
fragment (0.8 acre) can not support significant wildlife populations or provide significant habitat
area for a diverse ecosystem; and e) the wetland is extremely isolated from other larger wetland
ecosystems and lacks functionality resulting in a lack of contribution to species diversity and a
lack of resilience to impacts, including extreme weather conditions.
11.Off-site restoration at the Shipley Nature Center and filling of the existing degraded wetland
fragment to establish a logical and stable boundary between wetland and urban areas is the only
feasible and least environmentally damaging alternative for the protection and enhancement of the
resource values associated with the existing degraded wetland fragment.
12. Restoration at the Shipley Nature Center is the most appropriate off -site restoration alternative
available for numerous reasons inclusive of the following; a) the Shipley Nature Center is located
in the same general region as the subject degraded wetland; b) it possesses a larger, existing
ZA Minutes 6/23/99 4 (99ZM0623)
wetland habitat of a freshwater character similar to the existing degraded fragment and will
benefit from the addition of more wetland area as well as more native riparian woodland habitat;
c) it is fenced, protected area of the City's Central Park system; d) it enjoys the oversight of a full
time park ranger at the premises; e) the restoration program will additionally expand the
education and enjoyment benefits for park users; and f) no other potential wetland restoration site
possessing similar qualities or located within the same general region has been found to exist.
13. Restoration at the Shipley Nature Center can only be feasibly achieved by the filing of the subject
degraded wetland as such option is the only means available to the City to finance the costs for
such restoration. Further, such financing option arranged after extensive analysis and negotiation
by the City on a host of issues including the cost of the restoration program at the Shipley Nature
Center, and was approved by the City after several public hearings.
14. Filling the existing degraded wetland fragment will establish a stable and logical boundary
between urban and wetland areas by fixing Beach Boulevard as the boundary between the urban
uses to the west and the existing salt marsh wetlands to the east. Such action reduces potential
impacts to wildlife that might otherwise attempt transit of Beach Boulevard between wetland
habitats.
15. The filling of the subject degraded wetland fragment as a part of the proposed restoration plan at
the Shipley Nature Center; a) does not alter presently occurring plant and animal populations in
the ecosystem in a manner that would impair long-term stability of the ecosystem (e.g. actual
species diversity, abundance and composition are essentially unchanged as a result of the project);
b) does not harm or destroy a species that is rare or endangered; c) does not harm a species or
habitat that is essential to the natural biological functioning of a wetland or estuary; and d) does
not significantly reduce consumptive (e.g., fishing, aqua -culture and hunting) or non -consumptive
(e.g. water quality and research opportunity) values of a wetland or estuarine ecosystem.
16. The filling of the subject degraded wetland fragment as a part of the proposed restoration plan at
the Shipley Nature Center complies with applicable requirements of the California Coastal
Commission's Statewide Interpretive Guidelines which are incorporated by reference in the
approved Downtown Specific Plan which is the implementation plan of the City's approved Local
Coastal Program.
!CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO.99-05:
1. All necessary Local, Regional, State and Federal agency approvals shall be secured prior to
commencement of any project activities associated with CDP No. 99-05.
2. CDP No.99-05 shall comply with all applicable agreement(s) and permit conditions of project
approval imposed by Local, Regional, State and Federal Agencies.
ZA Minutes 6/23/99 5 (99ZM0623)
3. CDP No. 99-05 shall comply with all applicable SEIR 82-2 and Addendum to SEIR 82-2
mitigation measures inclusive of the following Biotic Resources-Onsite Wetlands and Biotic
Resources -Adjacent Wetlands mitigation measures:
a) Subject to the approval of the Coastal Commission, as agreed upon by the City staff and Sate
Department of Fish and Game staff, the amount of wetland area that shall be mitigated for is
0.8 acres. (Addendum to SEIR 82-2/ Mitigation Measure No. 7)
b) To mitigate for the loss of on -site wetlands, the Applicant shall prepare a detailed wetland
restoration plan that complies with the Coastal Act requirements discussed above and
Department of Fish and Game criteria. Further discussion with the DFG, and U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service will be necessary to determine the most appropriate restoration site, the type
of wetland to be restored, the monitoring plan, and other considerations. If off site mitigation
is deemed appropriate, preference shall be given to enhancing/restoring wetland sites located
within the City of Huntington Beach. These issues will be clarified prior to City of
Huntington Beach review of the Coastal Development Permit for the affected phase of the
project. (Addendum to SEIR 82-2/ Mitigation Measure No. 8)
c) Full mitigation of the 0.8 acre site shall be completed prior to the subject wetland site being
altered by the proposed project. No development permits for grading, construction or
otherwise, shall be issued for the impacting phase until full mitigation has been accomplished.
The mitigation measure(s) is subject to the approval of the City, and the California State
Department of Fish and Game. The restoration plan shall generally state when restoration
work will commence and terminate, shall include detailed diagrams drawn to scale showing
any alteration to natural landforms, and shall include a list of plant species to be used, as well
as the method of plant introduction (i.e., seeding, natural succession, vegetative transplanting,
etc.). This condition does not preclude fulfillment of the mitigation requirement through the
payment of an in -lieu fee consistent with the Coastal Commission's adopted wetland
guidelines and the Huntington Beach Local Coastal Program. (Addendum to SEIR 82-2/
Mitigation Measure No. 9)
d) Prior to the alteration of the on -site wetland area, a coastal development permit shall be
obtained from the City of Huntington Beach. (Addendum to SEIR 82-2/ Mitigation Measure
No. 10)
e) Subsequent to City of Huntington Beach and Regional Water Quality Control Board approval
of an appropriate wetland mitigation plan, and prior to the filling of the on -site wetland area, a
404 permit from the Corps of Engineers shall be obtained. (Addendum to SEIR 82-2/
Mitigation Measure No. 11)
f) Prior to the alteration of the overall project site by grading or filling activity, a hydrological
analysis of the drainage patterns affecting the onsite wetland area or adjacent wetland area
shall be conducted by the developer. Such analysis shall determine the drainage effects on the
wetland portion of the site. No development, grading or alteration of the project site shall
occur which affects the wetlands or adjacent wetlands without fully analyzing the affects on
the onsite wetland and adjacent wetland. The developer shall provide evidence to the City
ZA Minutes 6/23/99 6 (99ZM0623)
and to the Department of Fish and Game that the project's runoff management system will
deliver approximately the same amount of freshwater urban runoff to these wetlands as under
existing conditions, and in approximately the same seasonal pattern. This evidence shall
include; i) a hydrological analysis comparing the existing and post -project water supply, and
ii) drawings and a description of the runoff conveyance system in sufficient detail for a
qualified engineer to judge its adequacy. The State Department of Fish and Game shall be
consulted regarding alteration of the drainage pattern of the site, which may affect the above -
mentioned wetlands. The developer shall provide the Planning Department with a written
report substantiating compliance with this mitigation measure prior to submittal of grading
plans or permit issuance for each phase. (Addendum to SEIR 82-2/ Mitigation Measure No.
12)
g) If the developer proposes to increase or decrease the water supply to the wetlands east of
Beach Boulevard, or to change the seasonal pattern, the developer shall provide, in addition to
the evidence required in the prior mitigation measure, a biological analysis demonstrating that
there would be no significant adverse impacts on the wetlands or associated wildlife.
(Addendum to SEIR 82-2/ Mitigation Measure No. 13)
4. Prior to issuance of a rough or precise grading permit which would result in the filling or
disturbance of the existing degraded wetland area west of Beach Boulevard the developer
(The Robert Mayer Corporation) shall comply with the following conditions:
a) Proof of sufficient funding to complete the Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Program
(HMMP) for the Waterfront Development at the Donald G. Shipley Nature Center pursuant to
the wetland restoration plan (HMMP), and five years of monitoring and maintenance activities
shall be submitted to the City of Huntington Beach Planning Department.
b) A conservation easement shall be recorded against the Donald G. Shipley Nature Center
wetlands mitigation site. The conservation easement shall run with the land and obligate the
permittee or their successor or assignees to maintain the mitigation site as specified in the
Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan in perpetuity. A copy of said record shall be
forwarded to the Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers.
c) Written documentation, issued by the Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, verifying
that all proposed project activities are authorized under Nationwide Permit (NWP) No. 26,
and will only be undertaken subject to compliance with all applicable NWP Special and
General Conditions shall be submitted to the City of Huntington Beach Planning Department.
5. A final Habitat Planting Plan, Wetland basin Excavation Plan and Temporary Irrigation Plan
consistent with the Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Proposal (HMMP) for the Waterfront
Development at the Donald G. Shipley Nature Center shall be prepared by the developer and
approved by the City Landscape Architect, Department of Public Works, and the Department of
Community Services.
ZA Minutes 6/23/99 7 (99ZM0623)
6. Work activities within the Donald G. Shipley Nature Center shall be subject to the following:
a) All work shall be conducted on dates and times authorized in advance by the Department of
Community Services and shall be performed consistent with the approved final Habitat
Planting Plan, Wetland Basin Excavation Plan and Temporary Irrigation Plan by a qualified
habitat restoration contractor.
b) The walking trail around the Shipley Nature Center shall be preserved and relocated as shown
on the Wetland Basin Excavation Plan. The trail will be raised as is feasible and necessary to
protect it from inundation in periods of high water level.
c) No mature trees shall be removed.
d) No grading will occur in existing wetlands. (Removal of Arundo, an invasive exotic plant
species, from the existing wetland areas pursuant to the approved Restoration Plan is
allowed).
e) The peat and good quality excavated soils will be stockpiled in Central Park for future use,
and will be placed and distributed as specified by the Department of Public Works Park
Supervisor or Landscape Architect and Community Services Department. Vegetative matter
will be removed from the soil as directed by the Department of Public Works Park Supervisor
or Landscape Architect and the Department of Community Services and will be disposed of
legally off -site at a suitable green waste facility or a local landfill. A stockpile permit shall be
obtained from the Public Works Department based on an approved grading plan and truck
haul master plan.
7. The Planning Director ensures that all conditions of approval herein are complied with. The
Planning Director shall be notified in writing if any changes to the subject request are proposed as
a result of the plan check process. Grading permits shall not be issued until the Planning Director
has reviewed and approved the proposed changes for conformance with the intent of the Zoning
Administrator's action -and the conditions herein. If the proposed changes are of a substantial
nature, an amendment to the original entitlement reviewed by the Zoning Administrator may be
required pursuant to the HBZSO.
INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC CODE REQUIREMENTS:
1. Coastal Development Permit No. 99-05 shall not become effective until the ten day California
Coastal Commission appeal period has elapsed.
2. Coastal Development Permit No. 99-05 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 Planning a minimum 30 days prior
to the expiration date.
ZA Minutes 6/23/99 8 (99ZM0623)
3. The Zoning Administrator reserves the right to revoke Coastal Development Permit No. 99-05,
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.
4. An encroachment permit shall be required for all work within the right-of-way. (PW)
5. The applicant shall submit a check in the amount of $38.00 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 Planning within two (2) days of the
Zoning Administrator's action.
ITEM 2: SIGN CODE EXCEPTION NO.99-1 (EXPO DESIGN CENTER)
APPLICANT: Fluoresco Signs, c/o John Nirschl, 870 W. Cienega V, San Dimas, CA
91773
PROPERTY OWNER: M & H Properties, 1721 W. Imperial Hwy, Suite G, La Habra, CA
90631
REQUEST: The request includes a 314 square foot wall sign identifying EXPO in
lieu of the maximum 260 square feet and a 20 foot high monument sign
on Goldenwest Street in lieu of the maximum of 10 feet.
LOCATION: 6912 Edinger Avenue (Southwest corner at Goldenwest Street)
PROJECT PLANNER: Ian Jones
Wayne Carvalho, Staff Planner, presented the project in lieu of Ian Jones. Mr. Carvalho displayed
site plans, stating that this is a request to exceed the code limitations on one freestanding sign and one
wall sign to identify EXPO Design Center at the southwest corner of Edinger and Goldenwest. Staff
stated that there is a third monument sign, which will comply with code, and is located on Edinger
Avenue.
Staff stated that the 20 foot sign on Goldenwest, in lieu of the ten foot sign, as well as the wall sign
(in terms of area), is being recommended by staff for approval together with the recommendation by
the Design Review Board. Staff stated that the recommendation is based on the elevations that were
just recently submitted, and a 20-foot high freestanding sign on Goldenwest with a similar blue
background and a similar blue copy on top of a white background.
Staff is recommending approval based on the findings that the building is setback from Edinger, and
is compatible with the facade that has been constructed for the Expo building. Staff noted the fact
that a freestanding sign on Edinger will act as the center identification sign, and that, based on the
orientation of the business toward Edinger, this will provide ample exposure on Edinger. Staff stated
that the existing signs, which have a mix of colors, will be uniform.
Zoning Administrator, Herb Fauland, confirmed that the freestanding sign at the bank is not a part of
this request. Staff stated that was correct. Mr. Fauland referred to the freestanding sign, which is
proposed on Goldenwest, and noted that the architecture and design seem to compliment and be
consistent with the facade treatment. Staff stated that was correct.
ZA Minutes 6/23/99 9 (99ZM0623)
Mr. Fauland expressed concern about getting a revised planned sign program submitted prior to
obtaining the building permits for the signs in order to open the Expo Design in July. Mr. Fauland
confirmed that the request is just to submit a plan and not to approve it. Staff concurred and stated
the applicant could survey the existing signs for height, square footage and location.
Mr. Fauland repeated concern that the additional time would be critical; however, the applicant stated
it could be done in one day during the 10-day appeal period.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED.
Kerrie Strano, Collins Signs, 4255 Napier Field Road, Dothan, Alabama, the applicant, stated that, as
staff noted, they are basically looking at taking the existing signs and putting them in with the
architectural design of the building. Ms. Strano submitted a picture of what the building would look
like, complete with the wall signs. Ms. Strano stated that the pylon sign reflects the design and noted
that the monument sign would be a little bit different, but illuminated with color.
THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE
REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
SIGN CODE EXCEPTION NO. 99-1(EXPO DESIGN CENTER) WAS APPROVED BY THE
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGSAND MODIFIED
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.
FINDINGS FOR PROJECTS EXEMPT FROM CEOA:
The Zoning Administrator finds that the project will not have any significant effect on the
environment and is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to section 15311, Class 11, of the CEQA Guidelines, because the project involves a minor
alteration to an existing commercial structure.
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL — SIGN CODE EXCEPTION NO. 99-1 :
1. Sign Code Exception No. 99-1 to permit a maximum wall sign area of 314 square feet in lieu of a
maximum of 260 square feet, and a 20 foot high freestanding sign on Goldenwest Street in lieu of
a maximum of 10 feet will be compatible with the character of the surrounding area and is needed
for special circumstances defined by the applicant and approved by the Zoning Administrator.
The wall sign is a part of the EXPO trademark logo, and is an essential element given the
increased distance of the building to Edinger Avenue. Goldenwest Street is a major thoroughfare
and the freestanding sign will give motorists ample time to recognize the business location since
the building is oriented toward Edinger Avenue.
2. The proposed signage will not adversely affect other signs in the area. The signs will not block
the visibility of other signs in the surrounding area, and are compatible with existing signs within
the general vicinity.
ZA Minutes 6/23/99
10
(99ZM0623)
3. The proposed signage will not be detrimental to properties located in the vicinity. The wall sign
proposed is proportional to the front fagade, and the additional letter height will enhance the
visibility of the business given the distance to Edinger Avenue. Both the wall sign and monument
sign are compatible with the existing center's architecture.
4. The proposed signage will not obstruct vehicular or pedestrian traffic visibility and will not be a
hazardous distraction. The wall sign is constructed with internal illumination and does not
contain distracting items of information or special treatments, such as flashing or pulsing lights.
The monument sign is not located within the site angle area on Goldenwest Street.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL SIGN CODE EXCEPTION NO.99-1:
1. The site plan received and dated April 6, 1999, and sign elevations received and dated June 21,
1999 shall be the approved layout with the following modifications:
a. The address range shall be included on the freestanding sign on Goldenwest Street.
2. Prior to submittal for building permits, the 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 and mechanical).
3. Prior to issuance of building permits, a revised planned sign program shall be submitted to the
Planning Department. The program shall consist of a complete inventory of all signs in the center
including type (freestanding and wall), location, height, size, color and material.
4. The Zoning Administrator reserves the right to rescind Sign Code Exception No. 99-1 in the event
of any violation of the terms of the applicable zoning laws. Any such decision shall be preceded
by notice to the applicant and a public hearing and shall be based on specific findings.,
5. The Planning Director ensures that all conditions of approval herein are complied with. The
Planning 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 Planning Director has reviewed and approved the proposed changes for conformance with the
intent of the Zoning Administrator's action and the conditions herein. If the proposed changes are
of a substantial nature, an amendment to the original entitlement reviewed by the Zoning
Administrator may be required pursuant to the HBZSO.
INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC CODE REQUIREMENTS:
Sign Code Exception No. 99-1 shall not become effective until the ten day appeal period has
elapsed.
2. Sign Code Exception No. 99-1 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 Planning Department a minimum 30 days prior to the
expiration date.
ZA Minutes 6/23/99 11 (99ZM0623)
3. The Zoning Administrator reserves the right to revoke Sign Code Exception No. 99-1, 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.
4. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Municipal Code, Building
Department, and Fire Department as well as applicable local, State and Federal Fire Codes,
Ordinances, and standards, except as noted herein.
5. All signs shall conform to the HBZSO except for deviations granted under Sign Code Exception
No. 99-1. Prior to installing any new signs, or changing sign faces, a building permit shall be
obtained from the Planning Department.
6. 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 Planning Department within two (2) days of the
Zoning Administrator's action.
THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 1:45 PM BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR TO
THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
ON WEDNESDAY, JUNE 30,1999 AT 1:30 PM.
Herb Fauland
Zoning Administrator
�7
ZA Minutes 6/23/99 12 (99ZM0623)