Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-09-27MINUTES - Huntington Beach Planning Commission Tuesday, september 27, 2006 Huntington Beach Civic Center 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648 Study Session _ Room B-8 5:15 p:m. CALL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO ORDER P P_ P-- P P P A ROLL CALL: Dwyer, Scandura, Dingwall, Ray', `Livengood, Burnett Horgan Commissioner Horgan arrived at approximately 5:25 p.m. AGENDA APPROVAL • A MOTION WAS MADE BY DINGWALL, SECONDED BY SCANDURA, TO APPROVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION AGENDA OF AUGUST 23, 2005, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Dwyer, Scandura, Dingwall, Ray, Livengood, Burnett NOES: None ABSENT: Horgan ABSTAIN: None A. PROJECT REVIEW (FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS) A-1. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.05-08 (LE PETIT PARIS DANCING) — Ron Santos Ron Santos, Associate Planner, presented an overview of the proposed project. Commission discussions with staff ensued concerning the following: • History of prior complaints at the subject site concerning noise and disturbances in the parking lot. • Type of entertainment as requested on the application. • Proposed recommendation by staff for approval of the request. • Soundproofing of the subject restaurant. • Staffs contact with the Fire and Police departments concerning staffs recommendation. • B. STUDY SESSION ITEMS B-1. PLANNING COMMISSION RULES & PROTOCOL (Continued from September 13, 2006) — Chair Steve Ray Chair Ray addressed Rule No. 13 stating the difference between a conflict of interest vs. a bias. Discussions ensued. Deputy City Attorney Leonie Mulvihill advised that the law requires that in the case of a conflict of interest, a commissioner is required to leave the room; however, a bias does not require leaving the room. The Commission was advised by Ms. Mulvihill that it is in the judgment of each Commissioner to determine when a conflict or bias is applicable. A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY RAY, SECONDED BY SCANDURA, TO REVISE RULE NO. 13 TO STATE THAT WHEN ABSTAINING FROM AN ITEM DUE TO A CONFLICT OF INTEREST LEAVE THE ROOM UNLESS OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR BY STATE LAW UNTIL THE COMMISSION CONCLUDES THAT ITEM, AND WHEN ABSTAINING FROM AN ITEM DUE TO A POTENTIAL BIAS, LEAVE THE DAIS. ACTION WAS TAKEN ON THE STRAW VOTE MOTION BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Dwyer, Scandura, Dingwall, Ray, Livengood, Burnett, Horgan NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED Commissioner Scandura addressed Rule No. 20 and Chair Ray explained the reason_ for the suggested changes. Discussion ensued. A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECONDED BY DINGWALL, TO APPROVE RULE NO.20 AS WRITTEN. ACTION WAS TAKEN ON THE STRAW VOTE MOTION BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Dwyer, Dingwall, Ray, Livengood, Burneff, Horgan NOES: Scandura ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED Chair Ray stated reasons for revising Rule No. 21. Discussion ensued emphasizing the key word "should." • PC Minutes - 05pcm0927 • A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECONDED BY.. SCANDURA, TO ACCEPT THE REVISED RULE NO.21 AS WRITTEN. ACTION WAS TAKEN ON THE STRAW VOTE MOTION BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Dwyer, Scandurs, Dingwall, Ray, Livengood, Burnett, Horgan NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED Chair Ray stated reasons for revising Protocol No. 25. Discussion ensued.: A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECONDED BY HORGAN, TO DENY THE SUGGESTED REVISION TO.RULE-NO.25. ACTION WAS TAKEN ON THE STRAW VOTE MOTION.BY-THE,FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Dwyer, Scandura, Ray, Livengood, Sumett; Horgan NOES: Dingwall ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED .: Commissioner Burnett questioned if No. 27 is a Rule or a Protocol stating that appointments by seniority don't render an effective chair.. Discussion ensued. ; Chair Ray stated that selection by seniority follows the City Councils method of selecting the City Mayor. A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY BURNETT, SECONDED BY LIVENGOOD, TO. FOLLOW THE EXISTING BYLAWS AND STRIKE PROTOCOL NO.27. . ACTION WAS TAKEN ON THE STRAW VOTE MOTION BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Burnett NOES: Dwyer, Scandura, Dingwall, Ray, Livengood, Horgan ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION FAILED Chair Ray addressed Rule No. 29 and discussions ensued concerning representation of the majority by the Chair and representation on matters of appeal as set forth in the Commission Bylaws. PC Minutes - 05pcm0927 3 A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECONDED BY DINGWALL; TO ADD RULE NO.29 TO THE COMMISSION PROTOCOL. ACTION WAS TAKEN ON THE STRAW VOTE MOTION BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Dwyer, Scandura, Dingwall, Ray, Livengood, Burnett, Horgan NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY HORGAN, SECONDED BY BURNETT, TO APPROVE THE STRAW VOTES RECOMMENDING THE MINOR CHANGES TO RULES AND PROTOCOLS NOS.1-29. ACTION WAS TAKEN ON THE STRAW VOTE MOTION BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Dwyer, Scandura, Dingwall, Ray, Livengood, Burnet4 Horgan NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED A MOTION WAS MADE BY DINGWALL TO DEFER FURTHER PROTOCOL MATTERS TO THE NEXT MEETING. THE MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY DWYER THAT THE STUDY SESSION BE CANCELLED WHEN NO ITEMS ARE AGENDIZED FOR A REGULAR MEETING. Chair Ray stated that the purpose for the project review process would be defeated and stated that a vote could be conducted prior to canceling a regular meeting. Discussions ensued. Commissioner Scandura called for the question. Commissioner Horgan seconded the call. ACTION WAS TAKEN ON THE STRAW VOTE MOTION BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Dwyer, Livengood, Burnett NOES: Ray, Dingwall, Scandura, Horgan ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION FAILED • PC Minutes - 05pcm0927 4 Chair Ray stated that rule vs. protocol would need to be agendiaed for further • Commission discussion at the next study session. PLANNING COMMISSION RULES & PROTOCOL WAS CONTINUED BY : 'ACCLAMATION TO THE OCTOBER 11, 2005 MEETING. C. AGENDA REVIEW (UPDATE ON ALL AGENDA ITEMS) — Herb Fauland Herb Fauland reported the following: ; • A presentation by the Public Works Department on the Citywide Storm Drain System. • Item No. 1 is being continued at staff s request for proper notification., • Item No. 2 is an appeal of Entitlement Plan Amendment No. 05-01 with one late communication Chair Ray addressed the privileged/confidential communication received by the Commissioners from the City Attorney's office. He referred questions or comments to the City Attorney's Office stating that it is not intended for public distribution. Ms. Mulvihill advised that an investigation is being conducted concerning an e-mail communication from a Commissioner to the Commission concerning the Target appeal. - She advised that the information would be forwarded to the District Attorney's office based upon information received today. D. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMITTEE REPORTS — NONE. • E. PUBLIC COMMENTS — Regarding Study Session portion of Meeting - — NONE. p g • Any one wishing to speak on study session items during PUBLIC COMMENTS may do so by filling out a Request To Speak form and giving it to the Secretary._ (4 MINUTES PER PERSON, NO DONATING OF TIME TO OTHERS) F. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS — NONE Reaular Meetine City Council Chambers 7:15 p.m.• PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Led by Commissioner Scandura . CALL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO ORDER P P. I P. - P-. P P. P ROLL CALL: Dwyer, Scandura, Dingwall, Ray, Livengood, Burnett, Horgan PC Minutes - 05pcm0927 5 AGENDA APPROVAL A MOTION WAS MADE BY DWYER SECONDED BY_SCANDURA TO APPROVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AGENDA OF SEPTEMBER 27, 2005, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Dwyer, Scandura, Dingwall, Ray, Livengood, Burnett, Horgan NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED A. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Robert Cronk, Huntington Beach, expressed objection to on -going construction at 7383 Harriman Avenue (CUP 98-55Nar 98-28) and inadequate parking requirements. Con Bliss, Huntington Beach, referenced a letter he submitted objecting to the project approved at 7383 Harriman Avenue (CUP 98-55Nar 98-28). Steve Stafford, Huntington Beach, stated that a traffic hazard exists at State Circle near Huntington Beach High School. PRESENTATION BY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT: CITYWIDE STORM DRAIN SYSTEM Geraldine Lucas, Public Works Department (PW), gave a Power Point presentation focusing on water quality and emphasizing the Citywide Urban Runoff Management Plan. Todd Broussard, Public Works Department, addressed flood control issues including drainage elements and the Master Plan of Drainage (MPD): Dave Webb, Public Works Department, and PW staff, responded to Commission questions concerning: • Goldenwest watershed drainage and various pathways. • Updating the Slater Avenue pump station. • County involvement and plans for the Wintersburg Channel. • Definition of the one, ten, and one hundred year floods. • Reasons why residents should avoid parking in a curb catch basin. - • Lack of resources for a priority list of problems. • Financial ramifications and on -going attempts at obtaining grants by PW. • Various -pockets of rainfall throughout the City in determining intensity and inches of rain within the City. • PC Minutes - 05pcm0927 6 • B. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS B-1. ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO.05-01 (RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY — COMPLIANCE WITH RLUIPA): Applicant: City of Huntington Beach Request: To amend Chapters 204.16, 210.04, 212.04, and 230.06 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance in order to comply with the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). Location: Citywide Project Planner: Jason Kelley, STAFF RECOMMENDATION: "Continue Zoning Text Amendment No. 05-01 to the October 11, 2005 Planning Commission meeting with the public hearing open." Herb Fauland stated that a continuance is being.requested to the October 11, 2005, meeting in order to properly provide public notification of the item. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECONDED BY DWYER, TO CONTINUE THE ITEM TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 11, 2005, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: 1 . I - - AYES: Dwyer, Scandura, Dingwall, Ray, Livengood, Burnett, Horgan NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None • MOTION APPROVED • B-2. APPEAL OF ENTITLEMENT_ PLAN AMENDMENT NO.05-01 (TARGET — TRUCK DELIVERY HOURS): Applicant: Pacific Land Services (John Warren) Appellant: Planning Commissioner Robert Dingwall Re nest: To amend Condition of Approval No.. 5a. of Conditional Use Permit No. 03-35 that prohibits deliveries on weekends to the newly constructed Target Department Store. The proposed amendment is to allow truck deliveries between the hours of 8 a.m. and 7 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday. Location: 9882 Adams Avenue '(southwest comer of Brookhurst St. and Adams Ave.)= Project Planner: Paul Da Veiga STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: - "Approve Entitlement Plan Amendment No. •05-01 with suggested findings and conditions of approval." Paul Da Veiga, Associate Planner, presented an overview of the staff report for the subject entitlement plan amendment. Mr. Da Veiga stated that the Zoning Administrator approved the item on August 3, 2005 with limited weekend delivery hours. Herb Fauland, Principle Planner, reported that a late communication was received on September 23, 2005 from Robert and Camille Copeland opposing the Commissioner's appeal of the proposed project. PC Minutes - 05pcm0927 7 The Commission made the following disclosures: • Commissioner Dwyer spoke with the applicant on the telephone and visited the subject site. • Commissioner Scandura visited the subject site, drove through the neighboring tract, and spoke with staff and the applicant. • Commissioner Dingwall was present last year when the Planning Commission voted on the Target demolition and rebuild appeal, walked the subject site and similar businesses to make comparisons, had no contact with the principles or the applicant. • Commissioner Livengood was also present last year when the Planning Commission voted on the Target demolition and rebuild appeal, spoke with the applicant on the telephone, visited the subject site on several occasions, and visited the Wal-Mart and Lowes stores to make comparison. • Commissioner Burnett spoke with the applicant on the telephone, visited the job site, witnessed trucks at the loading dock, and visited other similar sites. • Commissioner Horgan visited the site as well as Wal-Mart, Lowes and Home Depot, engaged in no conversations. • Chair Ray visited the subject site, drove through the neighboring tract, visited similar sites, was unsuccessful in attempts to return a telephone call from the applicant, and was also present last year when the Planning Commission voted on the Target demolition and rebuild appeal. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED: Cheryl Keegan, neighboring property owner, voiced complaints related to noise, and urged the Commission not to grant additional delivery days. Merrilee Madrigal, neighboring property owner, urged the Commissioners to uphold the original appeal decision. Doug Brown, neighboring property owner, voiced opposition to the subject project. Robert Kerr, neighboring property owner, voiced opposition to additional delivery hours. Robert Copeland, neighboring property owner, voiced opposition to the Target loading dock located near residential uses. Philip Larschan, neighboring property owner; voiced opposition to additional delivery hours because of noise from trucks backing up and additional traffic. Tim Geddes, neighboring property owner, -voiced opposition to the location of the loading docks stating that their quality of life is at issue. Francis Arciaga, neighboring property owner, voiced opposition to the action taken by the Zoning Administrator. Mr: Arciaga presented a letter from Tom Rybolt and a note from David Bowman opposing additional delivery hours. Susan Kelley, neighboring property owner, stated that she did not receive notification of the subject appeal because her property is outside the notification radius by five houses. • PC Minutes - 05pcm0927 8 Ms. Kelley voiced opposition to additional delivery hours. She questioned the size of the trees planted along Adams Avenue as opposed to the smaller trees near residential homes, which are barely visible. Franklin Cheng, neighboring property owner, voiced opposition to additional delivery hours and stated that his deck has a direct view into the loading dock. Girard Manke,- neighboring property owner, voiced opposition to- additional delivery hours, stated that staffs direction is in error, stated that property values will be impacted as well as overall peace and tranquility in the enjoyment of their home. - John Warren, applicant, explained the difference between Target product truck delivery and vendor truck delivery and explained the importance of deliveries on a daily basis. Mr. Warren acknowledged sensitivity to the needs of the neighbors and proposed amending the weekend deliveries on Saturday and'Sunday from 12:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. He spoke on behalf of.the project and urged the Commission to approve the foregoing suggested hours. Mr. Warren stated that during the hearing for Entitlement Plan Amendment No. 05-01 they missed the conditioned restricted hours for delivery. WITH NO ONE ELSE PRESENT TO SPEAK, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS'CLOSED. Commissioner Scandura questioned the tumaround time during truck.deliv6des and asked if staff has conditioned the prohibition"of.trucks idling during delivery. He asked what delivery hour restrictions are placed on othergrocery stores. . Commission Dwyer stated that the residents agreed to Saturday deliveries from 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. at the Zoning Administrator meeting. • Commissioner Horgan questioned the ability for trucks to negotiate the entry into the loading dock. She stated that comparable stores have deliveries seven days per week but their' location to residences is different. - She questioned how it was possible for the applicant to not be aware of the delivery restrictions conditioned at the EPA hearing. Commissioner Burnett addressed the height of the wail and asked if there is a code requirement prohibiting the beeping signals that wam when trucks are backing up. Commissioner Livengood compared the extended wall at the Ralph's store located at Wamer Avenue and Bolsa Chica to the wall at the -subject site. Commissioner Dingwall, appellant, presented reasons for the appeal, stated his background in the grocery store business -and stated disagreement with the applicant's reasons for the necessity to conduct weekend deliveries. Commissioner Dingwall gave a Power Point presentation emphasizing the location of loading docks utilized by comparable businesses with minimal adjacent neighboring properties. He urged a compromise from -Target by eliminating the 10:00 a.m. Saturday delivery. A MOTION WAS MADE BY DWYER, TO REVISE THE SATURDAY DELIVERY HOURS FROM 10:00 A.M. TO 12:00 P.M. PC Minutes - 05pcm0927 9 Chair Ray stated that too many side bar discussions were taking place among the commissioners during the course of tonight's meeting. He called for order and stated that the meeting shall be conducted in a non -hostile manner. Commissioner discussions ensued concerning the following: • Duty of the Commission to apply codes and regulations. • Delivery hours of other "big box" retail stores that include weekend deliveries and discrimination to the applicant if denied weekend deliveries. • Limited weekend delivery with a conditioned six-month Planning Commission review. • Alternatives to accommodate the concerns of the neighboring residents. • Light spillage from a sign. • Conditions as previously recommended by staff and agreed to by the applicant and approved. • Inventory control'and adequate stocking of shelves in anticipation of needs. • The immature trees along the adjacent residential wall that was requested by a resident at a prior Zoning Administrator meeting. • Height of the wall and the option to raise the wall to eight feet per code. THE MOTION WAS RESTATED BY DWYER AND SECONDED BY BURNETT TO APPROVE ENTITLEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO.05-01 BY CHANGING THE SATURDAY DELIVERY HOURS FROM 10:00 A-M TO 12:00 P.M. Discussion ensued concerning revisions to Condition of Approval No. 3..to include action by the Planning Commission for a six-month review and revocation hearing, if warranted. COMMISSIONER DWYER AMENDED HIS MOTION TO STATE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION SHALL CONDUCT A SIX-MONTH REVIEW CONCERNING THE HOURS OF DELIVERY TO INVOLVE PLANNING, CODE ENFORCEMENT, POLICE, AND NEIGHBOR COMPLAINTS, AND THAT A REVOCATION HEARING SHALL BE CONDUCTED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION SHOULD ANY VIOLATIONS OCCUR CONCERNING THE MITIGATION MEASURES, CONDITIONS OR ZONING CODES. COMMISSIONER BURNETT SECONDED THE AMENDMENT. Chair Ray stated opposition to weekend deliveries and presented reasons thereof including the applicant's ability to inventory their needs and the impact of noise and lighting upon the neighboring residents. Chair Ray also questioned how the applicant could have missed the previously conditioned delivery hours at the ZA hearing. Commissioners Dingwall and Horgan also voiced opposition to weekend deliveries. Commissioner Scandura asked the maker of the motion to consider including delivery on Sunday to be consistent with other "big box" retail stores in the City. The maker of the motion declined. Discussions ensued concerning the addition of a condition to extend the wing wall in the truck area, and associated problems that would result such as the impact on the truck PC Minutes - 05pcm0927 10 • turning radius, ownership of the wall, structural integrity to the existing wall, and ramifications of the engineering and permitting process: Scott Hess, stated that a consent item would be more cost effective should the Commission agree to a six-month review concerning the delivery hours. THE MOTION WAS AMENDED BY DWYER, SECONDED BY BURNETT, TO APPROVE ENTITLEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO.05-01 WITH FINDINGS AND MODIFIED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL BY CHANGING THE SATURDAY DELIVERY HOURS FROM 10:00 A.M TO 12:00 P.M.; TO STATE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION SHALL CONDUCT A SIX-MONTH REVIEW CONCERNING THE HOURS OF DELIVERY AND WILL INVOLVE PLANNING, CODE - ENFORCEMENT, POLICE, AND NEIGHBOR COMPLAINTS, AND THAT ANY VIOLATIONS MAY REQUIRE A DULY NOTICED REVOCATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. AYES: Dwyer, Scandura, Livengood, Burnett NOES: Dingwall, Ray, Horgan ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED . FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — ENTITLEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT • NO.06-01: FINDINGS FOR PROJECTS EXEMPT FROM CEQA: The Planning Commission 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 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines, because the proposed change to delivery hours represents a minor change to the conditions of approval that does not involve an expansion of use. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL — ENTITLEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO.05-01: 1. Entitlement Plan Amendment No. 05-01 to amend Condition of Approval No. 5.a of Conditional Use Permit No. 03735 by allowing Target truck deliveries between the hours of. _ 12p.m. and 6 p.m. on Saturday and vendor truck deliveries between the hours of 8 a.m. and 12 noon, Monday through Friday, 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. Delivery trucks entering the site will not travel behind the building adjacent to residences. The new configuration of the building directs the loading area to Adams Avenue and therefore, delivery trucks enter the site from Adams Avenue and back up directly into the loading bays which minimizes noise impacts to surrounding residents. The design of the project and conditions of approval, which include a six-month review of the loading operation by the Planning Commission, will ensure that the delivery operation will not be detrimental to the surrounding neighborhood. PC Minutes - 05pcm0927 11 2. The entitlement plan amendment will be compatible with surrounding uses because the conditions of approval and mitigation measures prohibit truck idling during deliveries and the is loading area is enclosed on three sides and soundproofed to minimize impacts to residents. Based on the design of the building and limitations on truck idling coupled with the restrictions on delivery hours, the proposed amendment to allow weekend truck deliveries will be compatible with surrounding uses. 3. The proposed Entitlement Plan Amendment No. 05-01.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 (HBZSO). The proposed amendment is in compliance with requirements in the Municipal Code regarding maximum decibel level at the, property line. A noise study was submitted as part of Conditional Use Permit No. 03-35 which concluded that the maximum decibel level of 55 dB at the property line would not be exceeded by loading and unloading activities proposed on the site. The HBZSO does not otherwise prohibit weekend truck deliveries. 4. The granting of the conditional use permit will not adversely affect the General Plan. The project is consistent with the Land Use Element designation of CG-F1 (General Commercial — FAR 0.35) on the subject property. In addition, it is consistent with the following goals and policies of the General Plan: Goal LU 1: Achieve development that maintains or improves the City's fiscal viability and reflects economic demands while maintaining and improving the quality of life for the current and future residents of Huntington Beach. Policy LU 10. 1.5: Require that buildings, parking, and vehicular access be sited and designed to prevent adverse impacts on adjacent residential neighborhoods. Policy LU 10.1.6: Require that commercial projects abutting residential properties adequately protect the residential use from the excessive or incompatible impacts of noise, light, vehicular traffic, visual character, and operational hazards. The proposed Target store would support the needs and reflect market demand of City residents and visitors. Through design features implemented to mitigate noise impacts and operational restrictions to truck deliveries including restricted delivery hours and restrictions on truck idling, the residents will be protected from excessive noise impacts from loading and unloading activities. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - ENTITLEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO.06-01: 1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated March 18, 2004-shall be the conceptually approved design. - 2. Target product delivery and trash pickup shall be permitted between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 12:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. No deliveries shall occur on -Sunday. Delivery hours for vendor trucks shall be permitted between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 12 p.m. Monday through Friday. All delivery vehicles, including Target product delivery trucks and outside vendors trucks that cannot be accommodated with a typical 9 foot wide by 19 foot deep parking stall shall utilize the • enclosed delivery bays for all loading and unloading activities. All other delivery vehicles that are no larger than a typical parking stall size may utilize the parking lot and access the PC Minutes - 05pcm0927 12 • store through the main entrance. Deliveries of any kind shall be prohibited behind the subject building, other than the designated loading and unloading bays. 3. A review of the hours of deliveries and all loading and unloading activities shall be conducted by the Planning Commission within six months following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The review shall include a public hearing with notification to all property owners and tenants within a 500-foot radius of the subject site. The six-month review of the hours of delivery and loading and unloading activities will involve Planning, Code Enforcement, Police, and neighbor complaints in order to determine compliance with the conditions of approval; mitigation measures, and applicable Chapters, of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and Municipal Code pertaining to noise and truck deliveries. Any violations -of -the mitigation measures, conditions of -approval, or applicable chapters of the HBZSO and HBMC may require a duly.noticed revocation hearing of the Planning Commission. 4. All conditions of.approval required under Conditional Use Permit No. 03-35 shall be adhered to with the exception of Condition No. 5.a, as amended under Entitlement Plan Amendment No. 05-01. INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS CONDITION: The owner of the property which is the subject of this project and the project applicant if different from the property owner, and each of their heirs, successors and assigns, shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Huntington Beach and its agents, officers, and • employees from any claim, action or proceedings, liability cost,. including attorney's fees and costs against the City or. its. agents, officers or employees; to attack, set aside, .void or annul any approval of the City, including but not limited to any approval granted by the City Council, Planning Commission, or Design Review Board concerning this project. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and'should cooperate fully in the defense thereof. C. CONSENT CALENDAR C-1. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED JULY 26, 2006 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to: "Approve the.July 26, 2005 Planning Commission Minutes as submitted." A MOTION WAS MADE BY HORGAN, SECONDED BY LIVENGOOD, TO APPROVE THE JULY 26, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS MODIFIED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Dwyer, Dingwall, Ray, Livengood, Burnett, Horgan NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Scandura - MOTION APPROVED PC Minutes - 05pcm0927 13 D. NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS D-1. None E. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS E-1. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMITTEE REPORTS - None E-2. PLANNING COMMISSION INQUIRIES/COMMENTS Commissioner Dwyer — urged the Commission to develop a codified set of standard delivery hours for all businesses in the City. He requested assistance from Commissioner Scandura to draft a Minute Action to the City Council. Commissioner Scandura — accepted Commissioner Dwyer's request and suggested that the Minute Action be presented when Commissioner Livengood returns in November. He also questioned if the Zoning Administrator (ZA) is the appropriate level of review for major projects such as Target and Home Depot.. Commissioner Dingwall - urged staff to use Wal-Mart as a standard template on all big box designs; thanked staff for providing enlarged exhibits for Commission review during the course of the meeting. Commissioner Ray - reminded the Commission of Protocol #26 concerning submission of a written request for.consideration by the Planning Commission (PC); thanked those persons present tonight; stated that an upcoming study session will be conducted on the new public hearing process; and announced a native plant sale at the Shipley Nature Center on October 1st Commissioner Livengood - stated concern that the Planning Commission will not hear the new Home Depot project unless appealed and suggested a re -visit of the Streamlining Ordinance. Advised that he will be absent during the month of October. Commissioner Burnett — stated concern in creating standardized delivery hours for every business in the City because each business has different needs. Commissioner Horgan -= stated the need for consistent big box designs and questioned why the ZA and not the PC review such big projects. F. PLANNING ITEMS F-1. CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS FROM PREVIOUS MEETING Scott Hess, Planning Manager, - reported on the Planning Department items heard before the City Council on September 19, 2005 0 F-2. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING Scott Hess, Planning Manager, - reported that the Planning Department has no • items scheduled for the next City Council meeting on October 3, 2005. PC Minutes - 05pcm0927 14 is 0 F-3. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING Herb Fauland, Principal Planner — reported on the items scheduled for Study Session and Public Hearing on October 11, 2005 G. ADJOURNMENT: Adjourned at 11:15 p.m. to the next tentatively scheduled meeting of October 11, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. HZ:HF:rk APPROVED BY: HAVard Zele sky, Secretary Steve ay, air PC Minutes - 05pcm0927 15