Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-11-12MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH OFFICE OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR Room B-8 - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach California WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 2003 - 1:30 P.M. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR: Mary Beth Broeren STAFF MEMBER: Rami Talleh, Ron Santos, Ramona Kohlmann (recording secretary) MINUTES: October 15 and 22, 2003 APPROVED AS SUBMITTED ORAL COMMUNICATION: NONE Item 3 was moved to the front of the agenda. Please note that the Minutes will reflect actions • taken in their original order. ITEM 1: ENTITLEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 03-14 (PIERSIDE PAVILLION VENDING CARTS — CONTINUED FROM THE OCTOBER 15, 2003 MEETING WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED) APPLICANT: Jeff Bergsma, 221 Main Street, Suite S, Huntington Beach, California 92648 PROPERTY OWNER: Pierside Pavillion, LLC, 2 Park Plaza, #1140, Irvine, CA 92614 REQUEST: To amend Coastal Development Permit No. 00-22/Entitlement Plan Amendment No. 00-12 to allow two additional vending carts on private property side of sidewalk along the north side of Pacific Coast Highway, east of Main Street. LOCATION: 300 Pacific Coast Highway (north side of PCH, east of Main Street). PROJECT PLANNER: Ron Santos Ron Santos, Staff Planner, displayed project plans and stated the purpose, location, zoning, and existing uses of the requested project. Staff stated that the item was continued from the October 15, 2003 meeting to allow the applicant time to submit revised plans. is and stated that since the October 15, 2003 meeting there has been no contact from the applicant and no revised plans have been submitted. AS THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS NOT OPENED. ENTITLEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 03-14 WAS DENIED BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS. THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 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 of the CEQA Guidelines, because the project consists of the placement of minor structures accessory to existing commercial facilities. FINDINGS FOR DENIAL — ENTITLEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 03-14: 1. Entitlement Plan Amendment No. 03-14 to amend Coastal Development Permit No. 00-22/Entitlement Plan Amendment No. 00-12 to allow two additional vending carts on private property side of sidewalk along the north side of Pacific Coast Highway, east of Main Street, 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 • proposed vending karts will interfere with and obstruct pedestrian circulation in an area with high levels of pedestrian traffic. Moreover, the proposed karts will contribute visual clutter near a prominent intersection of streets (Pacific Coast Highway at Main Street) designated respectively in the General Plan as Major and Minor Urban Scenic Corridors. 2. The entitlement plan amendment will be incompatible with surrounding uses because the proposed vending karts will interfere with pedestrian circulation in an area with high levels of pedestrian traffic. Moreover, the proposed karts will contribute visual clutter to the street scene along Major and Minor Urban Scenic Corridors. Pedestrian volumes in the area proposed for the karts are anticipated to increase significantly with the development of planned and recently approved projects located in close proximity to the proposed location of the vending karts. 3. The granting of the entitlement plan amendment will adversely affect the General Plan. In addition, it is inconsistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation of Mixed Use Vertical — 3.0 maximum Floor Area Ratio — specific plan overlay — pedestrian overlay, and the following goals and policies of the General Plan for the Pedestrian Overlay zone: Land Use Element Policy 15.2.1: Preclude the development of uses that are characterized by low levels of patronage or conflict with pedestrian activity along the primary sidewalk and street frontages. ZA Minutes 11/12/03 2 (03zm1112) • • • Land Use Element Policy 15.2.2: Require that structures located in the pedestrian overlay zone be sited and designed to enhance pedestrian activity along the sidewalk, in consideration of the following guidelines: c. assurance that areas between building storefronts and public sidewalks are visually and physically accessible to pedestrians, except as may be required for landscape and security. The vending karts are proposed in an area between the building storefronts and the street which, along with patrons and vendors positioned alongside the proposed karts, would conflict with pedestrian activity along the sidewalk and physically interfere with pedestrian accessibility. Inadequate clearances for pedestrian traffic would be maintained if the proposed karts were approved. ITEM 2: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO.2003-183 (KOURY LOT CONSOLIDATION) APPLICANT: Jeff Bergsma, 221 Main Street, Suite S, Huntington Beach, CA 92648 PROPERTY OWNER: Robert Koury, 200 Main Street, Suite 206, Huntington Beach, CA 92648 REQUEST: To consolidate two 2,937.5 sq. ft. parcels into one 5,875 sq. ft. parcel as required by the conditions of approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 02-09 and Coastal Development Permit No. 02-07. The application also includes a request for a Waiver of Parcel Map Requirements. LOCATION: 428 Main Street (East side of Main Street and south of Pecan Avenue) PROJECT PLANNER: Rami Talleh Rami Talleh, Staff Planner, displayed project plans and stated the purpose, location, zoning, and existing uses of the requested project. Staff presented a review of the proposed project and the suggested findings and conditions of approval as outlined in the executive summary. Staff recommended approval of the request based upon the suggested findings and subject to the suggested conditions as outlined in the executive summary. No written or verbal comments were received in response to the public notification. Mary Beth Broeren, Zoning Administrator, engaged in a discussion concerning the dedication. Staff stated that evidence has been produced that the dedication has been executed. AS THERE WERE NO PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. ZA Minutes 11/12/03 (03=1112) TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO.2003-183 WAS APPROVED BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 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 15315 of the CEQA Guidelines, because the project consists of a minor land division in an urbanized area zoned for industrial use. The proposed project is in conformance with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance and no variances or exceptions are required. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO.2003-183: Tentative Parcel Map No. 2003-183 for the consolidation of two 2,937.5 sq. ft. parcels into one 5,875 sq. ft. parcel as required by the conditions of approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 02-09 and Coastal Development Permit No. 02-07 and a request for a Waiver of Parcel Map Requirements is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element designation of MV- F11/25-sp-pd (Mixed Use Vertical — permitted density 2.0/25 units per acre — Specific Plan — • Pedestrian Overlay) on the subject property, or any applicable specific plan, or other applicable provisions of this Code. The proposed parcel map will accommodate development of a previously approved commercial building by complying with the maximum allowed floor area ratio. 2. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development proposed. The proposed parcel map will accommodate development of a previously approved retail/office building designed in accordance with applicable land use and development standards. 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. The project site is void of fish or wildlife habitat, and is not located within an environmentally sensitive area. Proposed development is subject to review and approval of a water quality management plan, hydrology and hydraulic studies and an erosion control plan designed to minimize any potential environmental impacts. 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 public easements exist on the subject property, with the exception of utility easement along the property's street frontage to be dedicated to the City. ZA Minutes 11/12/03 4 (03zm1112) • CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO.2003-183: is 1. The tentative parcel map for the consolidation of two 2,937.5 sq. ft. parcels into one 5,875 sq. ft. parcel received and dated August 12, 2003, shall be the approved layout with the following modifications: a. The applicant shall revise the Tentative Parcel Map to reflect a 4.5 foot dedication for alleyway purposes. 2. The requirement for filing a final parcel map may be waived in accordance with Chapter 251 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance (Section 251.20.A.3) provided that a Certificate of Compliance, approved by the Planning Department, with an accompanying map or plat is recorded. The plat shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department, and applicable Public Works fees shall be paid prior to recordation with the County Recorder's Office. 3. The Departments of Planning and Public Works are responsible for verifying all conditions of approval herein as noted after each condition. The Planning Director and Public Works Director shall be notified in writing if any changes to parcel map are proposed as a result of the plan check process. Permits shall not be issued until the Planning Director and Public Works Director have 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. 4. The applicant and/or applicant's representative shall be responsible for ensuring the accuracy of all plans and information submitted to the City for review and approval. ITEM 3: VARIANCE NO. 03-13 (SEITZ ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT) APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: Kristin Seitz, 909 Huntington Street, Huntington Beach,, CA 92648 REQUEST: To permit an accessory dwelling unit existing without permits over a detached garage: (a) on a 3,307 sq. ft. lot, in lieu of the 6,000 sq. ft. minimum; (b) with two enclosed parking spaces, in lieu of two enclosed spaces and one open space; (c) detached from the main dwelling; and (d) non -owner occupied. LOCATION: 909 Huntington Street (west side of Huntington Street, north of Indianapolis Avenue, south of Joliet Avenue) PROJECT PLANNER: Ron Santos ZA Minutes 11/12/03 5 (03zm1112) Ron Santos, Staff Planner, displayed project plans and photographs and stated the purpose, • location, zoning, and existing uses of the requested project. Staff presented a detailed review of the proposed project and the suggested findings for denial as outlined in the executive summary. Staff recommended denial of the proposed project because of the lack of findings to justify an approval. One inquiry was received at the zoning counter in opposition to the proposed project because of a potential for parking problems and noise from tenants. No other written or verbal comments were received in response to the public notification. Mary Beth Broeren, Zoning Administrator, asked staff if the request is the result of a code enforcement action. Staff stated that code enforcement issued a citation for an illegal conversion. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Kristin Seitz, 909 Huntington Street, property owner, stated that the accessory dwelling unit was disclosed to her as a legal unit when the property was purchased approximately four years ago. Ms. Seitz urged the Zoning Administrator's approval and spoke on behalf of the proposed project. She referenced other similar units in the surrounding neighborhood. Gustavo Perella, 904 Huntington Street, neighboring property owner, spoke on behalf of the proposed project stating that parking is not a problem and that noise from the tenants has not been an issue. 0 THERE WERE NO OTHER PERSONS PRESENT TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE REQUEST AND THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Ms. Broeren stated that she did drive by the subject site. Ms. Broeren and Ms. Seitz engaged in a general discussion concerning action taken by Ms. Seitz related to misrepresentations by the seller at the time that the property was purchased, recourse available, and the statute of limitations. Ms. Broeren engaged in discussions with staff concerning the City's zoning code as related to density, lot size, parking, and suggested Finding No. 4 concerning unplanned demand on City services. Ms. Broeren emphasized the fact that the subject site is permitted as a single-family dwelling at maximum density. She stated that it is incredibly unfortunate that the applicant was misled at the time that the property was purchased; however, that does not constitute grounds for granting the request. Ms. Broeren stated that she was going to deny the request with modified findings. VARIANCE NO. 03-13 WAS DENIED BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR WITH THE FOLLOWING MODIFIED FINDINGS. THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR STATED THAT THE ACTION TAKEN BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR CAN BE ZA Minutes 11/12/03 6 (03=1112) APPEALED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITHIN TEN (10) CALENDAR DAYS. FINDINGS FOR PROJECTS EXEMPT FROM CEQA: 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 15303 of the CEQA Guidelines, because the project consists of the conversion of an existing structure from one use to another and the establishment of a second dwelling unit in a residential zone with all necessary public services and facilities available. The project site is not located in an environmentally sensitive area. FINDINGS FOR DENIAL - VARIANCE NO. 03-13: 1. The granting of Variance No. 03-13 to permit an accessory dwelling unit existing without permits over a detached garage: (a) on a 3,307 sq. ft. lot, in lieu of the 6,000 sq. ft. minimum; (b) with two enclosed parking spaces, in lieu of two enclosed spaces and one open space; (c) detached from the main dwelling; and (d) non -owner occupied, will constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and under an identical zone classification for which second dwelling units are not allowed on a similar size parcel. Requests for accessory dwelling units on parcels located within the RMH-A zoning district are subject to minimum lot size and parking requirements, and must be attached to the main dwelling and owner occupied. The granting of a variance to these code requirements without justification based on special circumstances related to the size, shape, topography, location or surroundings which render the project site unique among other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classification would constitute a grant of special privilege and a violation of state and local law. 2. The subject property does not exhibit special circumstances, including the size, shape, topography, location or surroundings which, when subject to the strict application of the zoning ordinance, deprives the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classification. The subject property is typical in size, shape, and width of parcels in the RMH-A zoning district, has a level topography and is not uniquely located nor surrounded by development which is inconsistent with the RMH-A zoning regulations. 3. The granting of a variance is not necessary to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. The property is currently developed with a permitted single- family dwelling, in addition to the illegally established second dwelling unit. The permitted single-family dwelling constitutes an exercise of property rights at the maximum density permitted by the applicable RMH-A zoning district regulations, based on the size and width of the lot. 4. The granting of the variance will be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to ® property in the same zone classification. The proposed project will provide insufficient on -site parking capacity, thereby impacting parking availability on adjacent public streets. The ZA Minutes 11/12/03 7 (03zm1112) proposed unit does not comply with the minimum design and development standards established by the City to prevent unplanned for demand on City services including greater than planned for traffic volumes and over -crowded living conditions. THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 2:10 PM BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR TO THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR ON WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 2003 AT 1:30 PM. Ma Bet Broeren Zoning Administrator : rmk • ZA Minutes 11/12/03 8 (03zm1112)