Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-09-261 MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 Council Chambers - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California STUDY SESSION — 5:15 PM (Room B-8) SPORTS COMPLEX — Mary Beth BroerenlRicky Ramos (Continued) MAJOR PROJECTS UPDATE — Herb Fauland DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN UPDATE — Wayne Carvalho AGENDA REVIEW — Herb Fauland PUBLIC COMMENTS — Bob Bolen spoke on the update of the Downtown Parking Master Plan. — Jim Lane spoke on the update of the Downtown Parking Master Plan. REGULAR MEETING - 7:00 PM PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE P P P P P P P ROLL CALL: Shomaker, Kerins, Mandic Chapman, Biddle, Livengood, Speaker AGENDA APPROVAL Anyone wishing to speak must fill out and submit a form to spear 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 heating. (4 MINUTES PER PERSON, NO DONATING OF TIME TO OTHERS) A. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS NONE B. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS B-1 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15964/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.99-73 (SOUTHRIDGE HOMES 13-UNIT SUBDIVISION): APPLICANT: Southridge Homes, c/o Duf Sfreddo LOCATION: Westside of Holly St., South of Main St. PROJECT PLANNER: Wayne Carvalho • Tentative Tract Map No. 15964 request: - Subdivide approximately 1.6 acres into 13 numbered lots and two lettered lots - Vacate a portion of Holly Street resulting in the closure of Holly Street at Main Street and construction of a modified cul-de-sac on Holly Street • Conditional Use Permit No. 99-73 request: - Construct 13 two-story detached single family homes on small lots States Recommendation: Deny Tentative Tract Map No. 15964 and Conditional Use Permit No. 99-73 because: - The project is inconsistent with General Plan goals, policies, and objectives for land use because it does not propose a housing product type that is appropriate for the site. - The project is incompatible with surrounding multi -family attached residential uses. - The project is designed with incompatible access/circulation, and is not in keeping with the surrounding multi -family residential neighborhoods. - The irregular shape of the parcel is more adaptive to a cluster or attached housing product type rather than the creations of several small residential lots, some with awkward shapes. In addition, some units will result in backing vehicles out onto cross -traffic on Holly Street. - The project creates residential units that are box -like and lack articulation in building elevations. Also the garages dominate the street scene. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Kevin Kelter, 16562 Graham Place, representing the applicant, responded to staffs alternate suggested conditions of approval and requested additional time to review them. Mr. Kelter stated that they have met with the adjacent homeowners who feel that the project would enhance their property values as well as create a better community for the children. THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. PC Minutes - 09/26/00 Commissioners Mandic and Shomaker spoke in favor of more affordable single-family housing in the City and questioned staffs concerns regarding the backing of vehicles out onto cross -traffic on Holly Street. The Commissioners discussed with staff their concerns regarding code requirements for setbacks and landscaping, and the backing of vehicles onto cross -traffic on Holly Street. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BIDDLE, SECONDED BY SPEAKER, TO DENY TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO.15964/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.99-73 WITH MODIFIED FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Kerins, Chapman, Biddle, Livengood, Speaker NOES: Mandic, Shomaker ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None FINDINGS FOR DENIAL - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15964: 1. Tentative Tract Map No. 15964 for the subdivision of 1.6 acres for development of 13 single family residences is not consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan. The proposed single family residential product is not consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan that encourage development within existing neighborhoods to be compatible with existing structures, including orientation of adjacent developments. The proposed single family detached product type would not be compatible with the existing multi -family residential projects in the area. 2. The site is not physically suitable for single-family residential development. Due to the irregular triangular shape of the lot, a cluster or attached product is more adaptive to the site rather than an individual lot subdivision. Some lots have awkward shapes for residential development. Plus, some lots necessitate vehicles backing out onto cross traffic on Holly Street at an entryway to an adjacent condominium project. 3. The granting of Tentative Tract Map No. 15964 is not consistent with the following goals and policies of the General Plan: PolLa LU 9.2.1: Require that all new residential development within existing neighborhoods (i.e. infill) be compatible with existing structures, including the: b. use of building heights, grade elevations, orientation, and bulk that are compatible with the surrounding development. Polia LU 9.3.2: Require the design of new residential subdivisions consider the following: c. Cluster residential units and, if possible, integrate small clusters of multi family housing within single family areas to preserve open space. Housing Element PC Minutes — 09/26/00 3 Poky 6.1: Provide for a variety of housing types, sizes and range of prices to accommodate the city's Regional Housing Needs Allocation for affordable housing. The Holly Seacliff Specific Plan provides for development in a range of densities to provide housing opportunities for a broad range of needs, from large detached single-family homes to various types of multi -family dwellings. This area of the specific plan was planned for medium density residential development in order to focus on the particular character of the area and to provide multi -family dwellings. FINDINGS FOR DENIAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.99-73: 1. Conditional Use Permit No. 99-73, for the construction of a 13 unit single family residential units will 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 project is not compatible with the surrounding medium density residential uses. The proposed density is 8.1 units per acre while surrounding projects have densities ranging from 12 to 15 units per acre. In addition, the units are box -like and lack articulation in building elevations because of the small narrow lots. The garages also dominate the street scene. Furthermore, as proposed, the project would not comply with the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance with respect to setbacks and landscaping requirements. 2. Conditional Use Permit No 99-73 will not be compatible with surrounding multi -family residential uses. The proposed triangular shaped subdivision is surrounded by two existing condominium projects and by a proposed residential apartment project. There are other multi- family apartments and townhomes that exist in the immediate area; the closest single family developments are located approximately'/4 mile away. 3. The granting of the conditional use permit will adversely affect the implementation of the General Plan goals and policies. Although the project is consistent with the Land Use Element designation of RM-15 on the subject property, it is not consistent with the following goals and policies of the General Plan: Policy LU 9.1.2: Require that single-family residential units be designed to convey a high level of quality and character considering the following guidelines: a. Modulate and articulate building elevation, facades, and masses (avoiding undifferentiated "box -like" structures). d. Locate and design garages so that they do not dominate the street frontage PC Minutes — 09/26/00 Policy LU 9.3.2: Require the design of new residential subdivisions consider the following: e. Cluster residential units and, if possible, integrate small clusters of multi family housing within single family areas to preserve open space. The proposed single-family subdivision does not promote housing type or site plan layout that is compatible with surrounding multi -family developments. The proposed project consists of large areas of pavement for an interior street, and driveways to each unit. A multi -family project could be designed with common driveways and larger public open space areas which would be more in keeping with the character of the area. B-2 ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO.00-03 (GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY): APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach LOCATION: Six areas along the Beach Blvd. corridor of the City of Huntington Beach. PROJECT PLANNER: Ricky Ramos Please note: Chairman Chapman announced that following the staff report, inclusive of all subareas, the Public Hearing will be opened in accordance with each subarea followed by a discussion and vote. On May 13, 1996 the City Council adopted General Plan Amendment (GPA) No. 94-2. GPA No. 94-2 was a city initiated comprehensive update of the City's General Plan. As part of the update, the Land Use Element and Map were modified. Land use designations for 97 areas were changed to fulfill City goals and policies. As a result of the GPA reclassification, numerous properties now have zoning designations that are not consistent with their General Plan designations. Zoning Map Amendment No. 00-03 represents the third in a series of amendments that are being proposed by staff to correct these inconsistencies. Specifically, Zoning Map Amendment No. 00-03 proposes to rezone six groupings of properties (see Subareas A-F, on page 3) currently used for a variety of land uses. Issues pertaining to land use compatibility were previously analyzed as part of the General Plan update, and the proposed designations were deemed to be compatible with the surrounding areas. Staffs Recommendation: Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve Zoning Map Amendment No. 00-03 for the following reasons: • Zoning Map Amendment No. 00-03 will bring the properties into conformance with the existing General Plan designation on each site. PC Minutes — 09/26/00 • The proposed project will not have any adverse environmental impacts. Zoning Map Amendment No. 00-03 is within the scope of the previously certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) 94-1 for the comprehensive General Plan update. • This action is consistent with goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan because it supports development in accordance with the land uses depicted on the Land Use Plan Map. It will also further goals, objectives, and policies that pertain to the achievement of a variety of land uses that sustain the City's economic viability, and provide employment opportunities as well as services to meet the needs of the citizens of Huntington Beach. SUBAREA A: THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR SUBAREA A WAS OPENED. Alec Walker, 7922 Mac Donald Avenue, property owner, spoke in opposition to the request stating his concern that a negative impact on property values would result. THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. The Commissioners discussed concerns that the proposed project would result in a drastic reduction in affordable housing, would create a financial hardship on existing property owners, would discourage upgrading and maintenance of existing residential use, and recommended revision to the General Plan by the City Council. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECONDED BY BIDDLE, TO DENY ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO.00-03 SUBAREA A WITH FINDINGS, AND FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Kerins, Mandic, Chapman, Biddle, Livengood, Speaker NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None SUBAREA B: THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR SUBAREA B WAS OPENED. Jim Wilson, 20355 Seabright Lane, real estate broker, spoke in opposition to the request stating his concern that approval of the proposed project would create high interest loans, would necessitate a disclosure statement if property were to be sold thereby discouraging potential buyers, and would have a negative impact on property values. Jeff Lang, 5557 Toyon Bay, Long Beach, owner of a rental unit at 7922 Terry Drive, opposed the proposed project stating that rezoning to Commercial General would have a negative impact on PC Minutes — 09/26/00 6 rental values since rental values would be comparatively less, would restrict future sales of property, and would restrict property upgrade ability. THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. The Commissioners unanimously concurred to deny the request for the reasons as set forth in Subarea A. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BIDDLE, SECONDED BY SHOMAKER, TO DENY ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO.00-03 SUBAREA B WITH FINDINGS, AND FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Kerins, Mandic, Chapman, Biddle, Livengood, Speaker NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None SUBAREA C: THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR SUBAREA C WAS OPENED. Phi Zisakis, 16351 Tufts Lane, stated that he has a parking covenant with the City on one parcel within the Oakview Redevelopment area. Mr. Zisakis stated that he was not noticed of this item in a timely manner and requested a postponement or denial. THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. . Commissioner Mandic stated that a parking covenant is an ownership interest and that Mr. Zisakis should have been properly noticed. Commissioner Mandic further stated that past and current uses of the property indicate a lack of appropriate parking. A MOTION WAS MADE BY MANDIC, SECONDED BY BIDDLE, TO CONTINUE ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO.00-03 SUBAREA C, TO THE OCTOBER 10, 2000 MEETING, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Kerins, Mandic, Chapman, Biddle, Livengood, Speaker NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None SUBAREA D• PC Minutes — 09/26/00 THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR SUBAREA D WAS OPENED. Ashley Shaw, 8112 Blaylock Drive, resident, spoke in opposition to the proposed project stating that his property value would be negatively impacted. THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. The Commissioners unanimously concurred to deny the request for the reasons as set forth in Subareas A and B. A MOTION WAS MADE BY SPEAKER, SECONDED BY MANDIC, TO DENY ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO.00-03 SUBAREA D WITH FINDINGS, AND FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Kerins, Mandic, Chapman, Biddle, Livengood, Speaker NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None SUBAREA E• Commissioner Biddle stated that he would be abstaining from taking action on this item because of a conflict of interest. THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR SUBAREA E WAS OPENED. THERE WERE NO PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECONDED BY SPEAKER, TO APPROVE ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO.00-03 SUBAREA E WITH FINDINGS, AND FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Kerins, Mandic, Chapman, Livengood, Speaker NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Biddle PC Minutes — 09/26/00 SUBAREA F• THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR SUBAREA F WAS OPENED. THERE WERE NO PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECONDED BY SPEAKER, TO APPROVE ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO.00-03 SUBAREA F WITH FINDINGS, AND FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Kerins, Mandic, Chapman, Biddle, Livengood, Speaker NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO.00-03 (SUBAREAS A, B, AND D): FINDINGS FOR DENIAL - ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO.00-03: 1. Zoning Map Amendment No. 00-03 to change the zoning for subareas A, B, and D from their current zoning designations of RM (Residential Medium Density) and RMH (Residential Medium High Density) to CG (General Commercial) is not consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan. It will result in a drastic reduction in affordable housing, cause a financial hardship to the property owners, and discourage the maintenance and upgrade of the existing residential units. 2. A community need is not demonstrated for the change proposed. The Zoning Map Amendment will result in a drastic reduction in much needed affordable housing for the community. ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO.00-03 (SUBAREAS E AND F): FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO.00-03: 1. Zoning Map Amendment No. 00-03 to change the zoning for subareas E and F from their current zoning designations of CO (Office Commercial) and RM (Residential Medium Density) to PS (Public -Semipublic) and CG (General Commercial) respectively is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan. The subject locations have General Plan designations of Public and Commercial General. The Zoning Map Amendment would bring the zoning into conformance with the General Plan. This action is consistent with goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan because it supports development in accordance with the Land Use Plan Map. It will also further goals, objectives, and policies that pertain to the achievement of a variety of land uses that sustain PC Minutes — 09/26/00 9 the City's economic viability, and provide employment opportunities as well as services to meet the needs of the citizens of Huntington Beach. 2. In the case of a general land use provision, the zoning map amendment is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the standards prescribed for, the zoning district for which it is proposed. This amendment would change the land use designation rather than a general land use provision. Future development will be compatible with the development standards. 3. A community need is demonstrated for the change proposed. The Zoning Map Amendment will allow the zoning designations on the subject properties to conform to the General Plan. It will also permit the existing uses in subareas E and F to continue and provide services which have been offered to residents in the community. 4. Its adoption will be in conformity with public convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice. The sites are presently designated on the General Plan; the proposed rezoning action will bring each site into conformity with the current General Plan designation. C. CONSENT CALENDAR None D. NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS None E. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS None E-1 PLANNING COMMISSION COMMITTEE REPORTS None E-2 PLANNING COMMISSION INQUIRIES/COMMENTS Commissioner Kerins — asked staff: 1. What traffic problems are anticipated in conjunction with the Oceanview School District's plan to build an auditorium/gymnasium on four of their school sites as suggested by concerned citizens? Staff discussed the involvement of committee meetings and the CEQA process required of the school district. Staff stated that they would keep the Commission apprised as to what is occurring. 2. Does the City of Huntington Beach have a graffiti ordinance similar to that of Fountain Valley's including the reward of $500.00? Staff stated that we do but that we do not PC Minutes — 09/26/00 10 have a similar program for a reward. I Does the City of Huntington Beach have a comprehensive planning program similar to the program currently being considered by the Fountain Valley Planning Commission? Staff stated that they will obtain a copy of the proposed program in order to make a comparison, and will determine if there are any positive aspects to add to our City plan. Commissioner Mandic — asked staff what the status is of the SRO Development specifically what would be required of the City in the event of a lawsuit resulting in a settlement. Deputy City Attorney Paul D'Alessandro explained that the City's action would depend on the action ordered by the court. Commissioner Chapman — asked staff: 1. What the review process is for adding two portable classrooms where the Seacliff Elementary School (in the Holly-Seacliffarea) is, and how does this process differ from the process required of the Oceanview School District? Staff stated that the difference is the extent of the development proposed (i.e., add portable classrooms vs. building a gymnasium). 2. Concerning the minimal parking, circulation and traffic problems at the Seacliff Elementary School, does the City have jurisdiction over parking? Staff stated that the City does have jurisdiction over any traffic hazards. Staff recommends that the homeowners advise the school district of any known impacts. Commissioner Biddle — asked staff if political signs are allowed in medians and, if not, Commissioner Biddle urged that the City vigorously enforce the sign code. Staff stated that an investigation would be conducted. Commissioner LivenQood — asked staff: 1. Has the City prepared a response to the Bolsa Chica EIR and, if so, to provide the Commissioners with a copy of the response. He stated a concern regarding the truck route for the hauling of dirt. Staff stated that a response has been drafted and a copy of the final letter will be forwarded to the Planning Commission. 2. To analyze if we have proper zoning for development of apartments and if the City has created barriers that discourage the development of such (in particular is affordable housing a problem)? Commissioner Speaker — asked staff what time the community workshop is scheduled to commence on 9/27/00 at the Huntington Beach Art Center concerning the Downtown Parking Master Plan. Staff stated that the workshop is scheduled to start at 7:15 p.m. F PLANNING ITEMS F-1 CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS FROM PREVIOUS MEETING PC Minutes — 09/26/00 11 1 Scott Hess, Principal Planner — reviewed items from the previous City Council Meeting. F-2 PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING Herb Fauland, Senior Planner — reviewed items for the —October 10, 2000 Planning Commission meeting. G. ADJOURNMENT — adjourn to the October 10, 2000 Planning Commission meeting. A MOTION WAS MADE BY KERINS, SECOND BY SPEAKER, TO ADJOURN TO A 5:15 PM STUDY SESSION ON OCTOBER 10, 2000, AND THEN TO REGULARLY SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AT 7:00 PM, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Shomaker, Kerins, Mandic, Chapman, Biddle, Livengood, Speaker NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION PASSED /rmk 717y/�-��- ",-, - -/ - AUward �, PC Minutes — 0/26/90 12