The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutConditional Exceptions for 1987 - 87-68 (denied), 87-34, 87- it ' 1 r � '� 1 � �t �� , � ,��, ��. M �. i`. F„ 6.� S Y �t C 'ai•, Y�� ,,, �� ,{ �i cs r,• ��;!�' k;!; '-, ly,: Pyy�, f�: ►'�� 4��1' ��,1, 1h'�y, :'.N� �Fi.� � 1 �'1('. �;+i, `�/I:^! '� ��C.��, a I ' r i W ^i 1 i . AtathtNrtK1 (� Put►aatlt Ad►rrUa►�m�lr at aril r rn�� mcludtng public nolrce ll kW Decree of the f3upwjor Courl of Orange public Calalawnaa . Number A-5214, darlod 29 Sarplember, 1961. and A-24931. Cited I Jund. 1*10 STATE OF CAUFORNIA County of Orange .,�.� . �..•r• �r..« I sm a Citizen of the United Stales and a resident of the County aforesaid; I aAt over the age of eighteen years: and 17 A a party to or intere6led in the below entitl*d metier. I am a principal a;leek of the Orange Coast DAILY PILOT, with whis,h is combined the l e NEWS-PRESS, a newspaper of general circulation, �- rinistd and published in the City of Costa Mesa, I P p y County of Orange. State of California. and that a '1 Notice of Public Hearing of which copy attached hereto is a true and complete copy, w4s printed and published in the ;osta Mesa, a I W�wDort Beach, Huntington Beach, Fountain Va,iey, Irvine, the Sa;lth Coast communities and Laguna 1 ' Beach Issufss fit ,1ai.! newapapW for one time + � to wit the issu s of d( 1 � �,I► r:sal. y July 9 g Feu 198 f , or~ 18d ,c1wr aye. an:t � w iir X �.... - , 1911— r a1!- r w I declare, under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing Is true and correct. Executed on July a -_ at Costa M Oalifornla. Slpnaturfa or PROOF QP PURUCATiON .w ��. CITY OF H UN"1 INGTON BEACH ! 2WO MAIN STRE'!T CALIFORNIA 92648 OFFICE of THE CITY CLERK July 22 , 1988 J. H. Hendrick A ;o. 900 S. San Gabriel Blvd. San Gabriel , CA 91776 The C1ty Council of the City of •Hunting ton Beach at their regular meeting held July 18, 1988 granted your appeal to the Planning Commission denial of At 87-29 and den7Ce yar-r appeal relative to CE 87-8$. AR 87-29 was aaproved by Counc w th amended conditions. The denial of CE 87-68 is a final decision. You are hereby notified that pursuant to provisions of Section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the State of California you have ninety days froia July 22, 1988 to apply to the courts for Judicial review. Please call the Coomnity Development Department - 536-5271 - for further infomation. COON I E BROCKWAY City Clerk CB:js Enclosure ii� Tle ,yI I � \ RED;-JE, ` FOR CIT Y COUNCit ACTION 1 De to ally-11., ;988 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Submitted by: Paul Cook, City Administrator . -- Pr*M by: Douglas Le Belle, Deputy City Administrator/Cnrniri. D SubjW: APPEAL TO PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF ADMINISTRATIV REVIEW NO. 87-•29 AND CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 87-68 i Camimnt with Council policy? [vf Yea Now Policy or Exception $`tatwmt of Issue, Recernnondation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachrmnt : Transmitted for your consideration is an appeal by the applicant , J .H. Hendrick and Company, to the Planting Commission ' s denial of AdministratiNe Review No . 87-29 and Conditional Exception (Variance) Ito , 87-68 . Administrative Review No . 87-29 is a requeot to construct a three story, 10, 600 square foot medical office building with joint oso of parking with a proposed church on an adjacent parcel. Conditional Exception (Variance) No , 87•-68 is a request to reduce the exterior s ideyard from 10 feet to 5 feet and reduce the landscape planter from 10 feet to 5 feet . Planrii n Commission .ucomenddhUn and action on June -7 . 19-8.8 : A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOCID AND SECONDED BY LEIPZIG TO DENY ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 87-29 , E'Y THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Livengood, Silva, Leipzig , Ortega , Bourguignon HOES: Slates ASS ilN: None ABSENT: Higgons A MOTION WAS MADE BY L I VENGOOD AND SECONDED BY LE I PZ I G TO DENY CONDITIONAL EXCEPT I Olt ( TAN I. ''CE) NO. 8 7-6 8, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Slates, Livengood, Silva, Leipzig , Ortega NOES: Bourquignon ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Higgins i e FOR 1 . The granting of Administrative Review No . 87-29 for the construction of a tr•9dical office building with joint use of parking with a church, surrounded on three Bides by residential will adversely affect the General plan of the City of Huntington Beach. 2 . The establishment, maintenanca and operation of the medical office building will be detrimental to : a . The general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity dua to limited parking on-site thereby creating a need to park on-street . b , property and improvements in the vicinity of such use of building due to the !grade and height of the building . 3 . The location, site layout # bulk and height of the proposed medical office building hoes not properly adopt the proposed structures to streets, drivRwaya, and other adjacent structures and uses in a harmonious manner . 4 . Joint use of parking for the proposed medical office building with the adjacent church facility is not sufficient . Additional spaces for general mainten;.nce an administrativ a procedures of the church, during the weep, is not being provided. E2=112M._ 1QN =111AL__=MQIIIQIIAL EXQ211014 ,(YAR1ANGE) Iq 7--6 a 1.. The granting of Conditional Exception (variance) No. 87-'68 for a five (5) foot in lieu of ten ( 10) foot exterior sideyar : building aetback and a five (5) foot in lieu of s ten (10) foot planter width along Van Buren will adversely affect the General plan of the City of Huntington Beach. 2 . Since the subject Croperty can be fully developed within regular established setbacka, Conditional Exception (Variance) No . 87-68 for reduced exterior sideyard setback building and pl,inter width is not necessary for the preservation and enjoym at of substantial property rights . 3 . The granting of Conditional Exception (Variance) No. B7--68 for reduced exterior sideyard building setback and planter width will be detrimental to the general welfare of parsons working or residing in the vicinity. 4 . The granting, of Conditional Ezcepti.on (Variance) No. 87--68 for exterior sideyard building setback and planter width will be detrimental to the value of the property and improvements in the neighborhood. RCA - 7/18/88 -2- (0923d) ftsnting of Conditional Exception (variance) No . 87-68 for exterior sideyard setback and ;planter width would constitute a special privilcge inconsistent with limitations up)n other Office professional properties in the vicinity. 6 . Because of the si: ,3, configuration, shape and lack of unique topographic feeatut •rY of the subject property, there does not appear to be exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the land, buildings or premises Involved that does not apply generally to property or class of uses in the Office Professional district. Staff Re mmeadation: Approve Administrative Review No . 87-29 with findings and conditions of approval (see attachment 1) and uphold the Planning Commissiou ' i denial of Conditional Excepcfun (Variance) No. 87-68 with findings . Ms: ` The applicant is appealing the planning Commission ' s denial based or. the following assertions that a recorded covenant runs ti,3,th the land which dasignates exclusive reciprocal access and parking, in addition to hours and days of operation . Within the proposed medical office building, approximately 750 square feet will be devoted to a highly specialized, low demand cancer treatment ceentor. The applicant is requesting this area to be considered at a lower parking ratio than the required one space per 1.75 gross square foot of floor area . Staff supports this request . During the Planning Commission meetings , public testim6ny and general discussion focused on the reciprocal parking with the proposed church and the scale of the three story medical office building in comparison to the surrounding neighborhood . The Planning Commission denied the project and variance revuests based on findings relating to parking and traffic concerns as well as incompatibility with the established residential neighborhoods . Staff has analysed the project and feels that a recorded joint use of parking agreement which establisher hours and days of opesrition will be catisfsctory. Staff supports the request fo.r the madical office building and the joint use of parking with tt.ee proposed church on the adjacent parcel. Since there appears to be an abuence of a land-related hardship, staff does not support the variance. requests , The proposed project is c.,ov;iced under Negative Declaration No . 82-32 which was approved by the Planning Commission for a similar project of the same size and intensity on October 5, 1982 . RCA - 7/18/88 -3- (0923d) YID •1 .. } a,",,fir." •" ' � P�' r . I VAMIN . not Applicatle The City Council may approve Administrative Review No . 97-29 and COoditional Exception (Vakiance) No . 87-68 . 1. Staff recommended Findings for Approval and Conditions of Approval for Adminietrativa Review No. 87 -29 Z. Applral letter 8 . Staff report deed June 7, 1988 DLit: r i RCA - 7/16/88 -4- (0923d) o' r • ' As A1'rA� 110. 1 ZZMI1198 FOR AFFRO AL-, ADMIN STRATIVE VIEW NO. 5. -29 : 1 . The gre sing of Admi.nintrative Review No . 87-29 for c --istraaticjn of 10, 317 sq . ft . medical office building will not a4vore►eLy affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. E 2 . The establishment, maintenance and operation of 10 , 317 sq, ft . medical office building will not be detrimental to : I a . The general welfare of persons residing or working In the vicinity; b. Property and iwiprovements in the vicinity of ouch use or building . 3 . The location, site layout , and design of the proposed medical office building properly adapts the proposed struwtures to streets, driveways, and other adjacent at:.'uctures and uses in a t armonious mriner. 4 . The combiastion anC relationship of the proposed medical office building and the pr♦oposad use on the adjacent sits are properly integrated. 5 . There will be no conflict in the operation hours and demands for thus propcsod 10,317 sq . ft. medical office building and the proposed church on the adjacent parcel and will not create an undue traffic problem since they will never be in use sinultameously, as agreed to in the CCO' s and Grants of Rasement . CCMITI as of! APUML-0 1. The site ii' an, floor plans and elevations dated May 27, 1980 , shall be the conceptually approved layout subject to the following modifications : a . The building on the site, plan shall be revised to reflect a 10 foot exterior sideyard setback from Newman Avenue. b. The parking area landscape planter along Newman shall be increased to 10 feet in width. 2. prior to issuance of building perraits , the applicant shall submit the following plans : A. Landscape and irrigation plan to the Department of Community Development and public Works ' far review and approval . b. Rooftop Mechanical Eq»ipmert Plan. Said plan shall indicate screening of all rooftop mechanical equipment and shall delineate the type of material proposed to screen said equipment. c. The project shall be reviowed and approved by the Design I Review Board for design compatibility with the proposed church to be located on the adjacent parcel . d. The Declaration of Establishment of Protective Covenants j Conditions and Restrictions and Grcnts of. Easement shall be amended to reflect the approved days ind hours of operation f of the medical building and the church pi,ior to re-recordation , e. A Joint Use of Parking Agreement which will assure the j compliance of the approved days and hours of operation of the medical office building and the church on the two parcels shall be approved by they Department of Community Development and the City Attorney prior to recordation . Five (5) parking spaces shall be deeignsated for administrative church personnel during weekdays . 3 . Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall complete the following : a . Install antire parking area as depicted on site plat dated May 27# 1988 . h. Construct all Public Works improvement as required. 4 . The medicAl office vise shall be limited to hours between 6: 00 AN to 6 :00 PI4, Monday through Friday. Office uses beyond these hours shall be prohibited. These provisions shall be stated in all lease agreements with tenants . 5 . Should the linear aceelorator be removed , the floor area shall be restricted to storage use only. 6 . One on-sites ,.Ire hydrant shall be provided at oast property line as specified by the Fire Department . 7. An automatic lire sprinkler system with combination standpipe system shall be approved and installed pursuant to Fire Department regulakions. 8. Service roads and fire lanes, as determined by the Fire Department, shall be posted and marked . 9 . Drive circulation shall be smaintoined from Van Buren to Newman thru the parking lot with s minimum inside radius of 17 feet provided at come:. I h G. 1.0 . Driveway approaches shall be a mir_inum of twenty-seven feet (27 feet) in width and shall bu of radius type construction . 11. All building spoils , such as unusable lumbar , wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material, shall be disposed of at an off•-site facility equipped to handle them. 12. Low-volume heads 6hall be used on all spigots and water. faucets . 13. if lighting is included in the parking lot , high-pressure sodium vapor lamps shall be used for energy savings . All . outside lighting shall be directed to prevent "spillage" onto adjacent properties , 14 . All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits . 15. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department . 1d. A detailed soils analysis shall be prepared by a registered Soils Engineer . This analysis shall include on-site soil sampling and laboratory testing of materials to provide detailed recommendations regarding grading, chemical and fill properties, foundations , retaining walls , streets , and utilities . 17 . Landscaping shall, comply► with Section 9608 of the Huntington i Beach Ordinance Code. 15 . The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke this Administrative Review if any violations of these conditions or the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs . AMW publish 7/8/88 ADMINISTRATIVE RTVIEW NO . 87-29/ CONDITIGMALL EXCEPTION ('VARIANCE) NO. 87-68 (Appeal to the planning Commission ' s denial of a request to construct a medical office building with varian(;es for exterior sidayard setbacks) NOTICE IS HEREBY ainn that the 3untington Beach City Council will held a public hearing in the Council Chamber at the Huntington Beach ! Civic Center , 2000 Min Street, Huntington Beach, California , on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and tonnider the statements of All persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. 093 Monday, Juir 18 , 7 : 00 p .m. Administrative Review No. 87-•29/ Conditional Exception (variance) Igo . 87-68 J. N . Hedrick and Co . 8201 Newman Avenue (northeast corner of Newman Avenue and Van Buren Street) OP (Uffice professional) Appeal to Planning Commission ' s denial of a request to construct a 3-story, 1n 600 square foot medical office building with variani,es for an exterior sideyard setback of B feat r.n lieu of 10 feet ; landscape planter w;dch of b feet in lieu of 10 feat and joint use of parking with a proposed church on an adjacent parcel . ETAM: Covered by Megaaive declaration No . 82-32 which was approved on October 5 , 1982 . not applicable ALL IMMARSTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions nr submit evidence for or against the application as outlined above. All applications, exhibits, and descriptions of this proposal are on file with the Office of the City Clerk, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, for inspection by the public. HVNTI114MN BEACH CITY COMICIL � By: Alicia M. Wentworth City Clerk Phone (716) 536-5403 (0914d,-2) -___ A ! - y .ou wiser l.1st L.Bilandzija TR R.Nakagawa + A/ is 1167-482-30 31 . ' 26162 Bridlewood 20161 Viva Cir. I.aguna Hilla,Cn.92653 Huntington Beech ,Ca.92646 167•-282-16 167-483-30 eF S 7 - 48 W.L. Shavey 1.1iwang D.Lyons 3050 NE 47th St. 8161 Newman A-ie.NA 8x51 DaraY Dr. Fort Lauderdale,l�'L 3330E ' Huntington lleach,Ca.92647 Fort aude Huntington Reach,Ca.92641 167-482-OS 167-483-31 i D.Maynard N Mansour R.Stellrecht 8262 Darsy ,Dr. 17662 Van Buren 16591 Graham St. Huntington Beach,Ca.92647 Huntington Beach,Ca.92647 Huntington Beach,Ca.92641 i 167-482zO6 167-462-29 167-483-34 W.tshimoto Van Buren Properties G.Stull , 8261 Noble Cir. , 2075 Palos Verdes Dr.N. 8271 Noble Cir. Huntington Beach,Ce.92647 Lamits,Ca.90717 Huntington Beach,C.a.92647 IS 167-482-07 1 167-482-30 167-502-010 H.Hoffsan Church Nillcreat J.Garman 8251 Noble Cfjr. 1723 W. Siva Ave. 8271 Noble %':ir. ; Huntington Beach,Ca.92647 Anehcim,Ca.92B04 Huntington Beach,Ca.92647 167-,482-08 167-482-31 167-503-01 1<.Misadn C.Lin E.Mazzari 8241 Noble Cir. 17714 Contador Dr. 904 Acacia Ave. !Iuhtington Beach,Ca.92647 Rowlhnd Heights,Ca.91748 Huntington Beach,Ca.92648 167-482-09 167-483•-24 167*503-02 D.Locke J.Du rloo Y.Long 103252 Noble Cir. 8888 Lauderdale Ct./821 8292 Noble Cir Huntington Beach,Ca.92647 Huntington Beach,Ca,92646 Huntington Beach,Ca.92647 167-482--10 167-483-25 167-503-04 R. Kelly D justice D.Martinez 8262 Noble Cir. IMD6 Chinook Ave. 8291 Newauin Ave. Huntington Beach,Ca.92647 Fountain Valley,Ca.92708 Huntington Beach,Ca.92647 167-482-11 167-483-26,27,28. 167-503-08 lG.Xidd Humane Inc. J.Irvin 8261 Newman Are. F. Q. fox 1488 8281 Newman Ave, Nuntington Beach,Ce.92647 -Loulsevllle, KY 40201 Huntington Beach,Ca.92647 167-482-I 2 167-601-1 4,15 167-•503-09 S.1liltori Roman Cathaae Bishop of R.Seasr�r/JT Et Ai 87'i 1 Newman Ave.$251 ftwon Ave. Orange Huntington Besch,Ca.92647 2811 E. Villa Real Dr. Huntington Beach,Ca.92647 1b7 48Z-1.9 Orange, Ca. 92051 167-503-10 167-801-08 ,k A..-ia"*e J.Thowas Huntington Beach Interco=. 1217 Aleboft Sit. 6556 malt St. P.O. Sax 1438 AvatiDgton Uach,Ce.97647 We tswintAter,C�.92646 Louiaevllli,KY 40201 f I6 �-#Fib=i0 167- l-J2 916 j 17. 137-482-14 c4 ti .•l if 191 .5 'k-1 &Clow e $•SAN GABRIEL BLVD.,SAN QAMIEL,CALIFUANIA0177E(l11f1;2A7.9721 J June 16 , 1983 ',�, �` �'� ' , c+, <, f City of Huntington Leach •, .- �-- City Council Civic Center 2006 Main Street Huntington Beach, CAL 92648 RTS: Disapproval. of Administration Review No . 87-29 Conditional Exception ( Variance ) No. 87-68 Dear Hembera of the City Council : On btabalf of Van Buren Properties , J. it. He *irick & Co , is hereby appealing the Planning Commission Disapproval detted. June 7 , 1986 of the above refarenced applications . It is felt that, Vain Buren 1'rapertiels and the adjacent .land owner, Hil.lcrest Missionary- Baptist Church have diligently and over a considerable length of time worked to produce a development plan which would sallow each JL&nd owner to zubstantially enjoy ita, property rig,'•its within the zoning and planning regulations of the City of Huntington Beach . In order to •: Iearly understarid the issues in this nppea:l a short history of the proposod Project is provided below: In 1983 the City Council of Huntington Beach approved a project Submitted by van Buren Properties Aril Hilicrost Mi,ssi(,,nary Baprtlat Church which involved the Joint use of parting through a reei.prical parking agreement and was based on a desion which coupled the medical office function with the church '.ruction in one structure . Two variances were approved, one for a def{.r.iency of ton parking spaces the other for the ab ence of a side yard set bank ( since botch facilities existed in one structure ea.:h k, essentially sat on the property '.ine) . As part of the approval Covenamta , Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R' s ) were recorded by both property owners on both parcelz which in ersenoe: provided for two things 1 a specific times were, established in F�hlch either the No-,diaar;l Office Build+rg or they Church but not both had sxelunive use of the parking area; 2 ) a uae restriction Was placed on the Church property limiting its use to only that of a church. The CUR' s cor�tii�ue to run �;{tt; the property indefinitely and were reviewed and approved by the City Attorney' s office. That ;pro3ect never wao built. o�o��,'euaaua+�wa,iar • ,4Y e� , a i v n+ r i .w Gity of Hurltingtrrn beach City Council ;tine 16 , 19813 Page 2 In August of 1 ,937 , on b_ifi a l f of Van. Bkiren Properties , J . H. Hedrick & Co, submitted a revi ed , r,itich different and -superior plan in whi.c;h the medical office. bull-lding, was :tree standing , met all zoning and setbAck requirements ( ,f.t_� �,e shc)ulrJ be. noted herep that tD-acil nml.i rement was f lie ;tqt at; the time of and required only an Administrative Review for the medical office use/Joint parking anti a Condit oval Exception for reduced landscape planter width. However, the progress of the project was delayed due to some ruH:stions field by the Planning Department . Afte.: lengthy review involving both the City Attorney and Planning Department t'•hti latter imposed the requirement of the submittal of a letter from the Church . During this delay the C:.ty of Huntington Beach changed the setback requirement to tdn feet f rom f j.V(:, feet After FY;;,rking clos�:ly with agents of the Church and t:,e Planning Department t-he project came before •che Planning Commins.Lon can May 17 , 1968 , Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a copy of the Planning Department Staff Report . The Planning Commission Continued the project, subject to applicant inc7:r-acing the parking available on the site . Applicant again worked closely with the Planning Department and while the site is extremely limited due to its configuration through a combination of the aotutal physical addition of two parking spaces to the site plan , building size reduction ( both Medical Office Building and Church ) ; and the presence of a hi.9b).y A1?ee1ol i A!p_4 lgw traffic canes tre_�t Ment canter cainprjgq og twc� few. t.h�ck f��,rt�te walls within t}�e Medical Off ice � il.di n the applicant provided on site parking which exceeded the requirement by seven spaces . Please sere the Planning Department Staff Report dated June 7 , 1968 attached hereto as Exhibit B . Ac;ditionally it was demonstrated that because of the pregence of a five ff�gl 1L"'V,r:R Sty MY- �r�®�Y �cer�ted �at�eer� ttnf� i re edge of �e 11dan k and tie RMd-Rerty. iinc which] the landowngrA o.ff,eud :te. 1 j -qnd v_,gJnta_1Va. tkI � w� is +_ri a .fi:ct nave a rk fr2m th© a0tvAlk cif aleven feet. The pro Jeict , while fully complying With the direction provided it by the Planning Comwls Dion , Was then summarily disapproved , ON City of Hunt iington Beach City Council June 16 , 1386 page 3 We believe that no valid b&Fj.s exists for the di.�approvnl. and 4 consequently must, appeal it . We .t1lat %-,he configuration of the site in extrtmely limited !for p.,X4Mplo, rnTApyIna !?Tp 1.1 _g.n t. 0- ....�r., Any M.9.pg We believe that the project w&5 unfairly victimi?,fi-d by a delay not caueed by applicant and a subsequent Code change . We believe that we have attempted to adhere to all the concerns of the Planving Department and the local citizenry . We appeal to the City Council to objectively consider the diligent and reBponsiblo plan we have proposed for its ability to permit the substantial enjoyment of their property rights by t] e Owners . Sincerely, J . H . HZDP.ICK DEYELOPMENI & REALTY CO. , ING. 0 J . IGGINS tULNKER P?erct Manager J HM: ms encls . huntinpton beach Jopertrnent Of community tevmlopmont 30NAf f TO, Planning Commission FRONS Con minitir Development DATE: June 7, 1988 SUBJECT: ADKI I STRAT I V'R REVIEW NO, 0 7-•19/2OND I T I ONAL =CEPT ION (VARIANCE) NO . 87-68 (CUNTINUED FROM MY 17 , 1986 PLANNING COMISSION MEdTING) J .H. Hedrick and Co . 900 South San Gabriel Blvd . May 3 , 1988 � 63n Gabriel , Chi 91771, NOLyATOAY N I Na 1?hn : Van Buren Properties Jely 3 , 1986 2075 Palos Verdes Dr . North Suite 214 I=: OP (Office Lomita, CA 90717 Professional) gam: A$s To construct a 3- =UAL Pegg: Off Ice story 10 , 567 sq. ft . Professional medical officer building with joint use of � parking with 64% of the EX1317,.8g. M. Vacant roc-uired parking provided on adjacent parcel gay: located to the east . . 28 acre : 1) Reduce landscape (12, 232 net sq .ft . ) planter width from 10 ft . to 5 ft . ; 2) Reduce, exterior sideyard setback from 10 ft. to 5 f t . : 8201 Mewman Avenue, (Northeast corner of Bewwan and Van Buren) La��t�Ki �ACT, : Approve Administrative Roview No . 87- 29 with findings and conditions of approval and deny Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 87-69 with f L:dings On NOT 17y 1988, the Planning Commission continued Administrative ReVieM Its, 97-39 sod Conditional g:Geption (VariancO Po. 87-68 and directed staff to work with the applicant in order to redesign the site plan and provide additional parking spaces on-site. A19fti" M•�M l huntinQton beach Jopartment of community development STAf -R-EPOR 7C3; FLanning Comraission FFO1: Comminity Development DATE : June 7, 1988 SUBJECT: AMIHISTRATI'VL REVIEW NO. 87-29/CONDIT:IONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 8 7-6 8 (CONT T NUED FROM MAY 170 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION MERITING) I 'ILCAMs J. H. Hedrick and Co . 900 South lean Gabriel Bled. May 3, 1988 San Gabriel, CA 91776 U&NDA10 Y, pRQG Z661NQ DA3Z: Qu : Van Buren properties July 3 , 1988 2075 Palos Verdes Dr , North Suite 224 ZONE: OF (Office Lomita , CA 90717 Proiassional) A$t To const cuct a 3- GEN:RAL PLAN: Office story 10# 567 sq . ft . Pro€essicnal medical office building with joint use of parking with 64% of the LJ S 1E „ ,: Vacant required parking provided � on adjacent parcel located to the east . . 28 acre CZ: 1) deduce landscape ( 12 , 232 net aq. ft . ) planter width from 10 ft . to 5 ft . ; 2) Reduce exterior sideyard setback from 1.0 ft . to 5 f t . i IQB: 8201 Newman Avenue (northeast corner of Newman and Van Buren) 1. 0 sugm`r n =1011: Approve Administrative review No . 87-39 with findings and conditions of spptoval and deny %Zonditionsl Exception (Vat ionce) No. 87-68 with f in4ings 2 . 0 L IIJFI BifAT10JJ On Nal 17, 1988, the Planning Comtaiss.ion continued Administrative neview No. 87-29 and Conditional Zxception (Variance) No. 87-68 and directed staff to work with than applicant in order to redesign the Bite plan and provide additional parking spaces on-site. (L 4 A•FM rn order to address the parking concern the applicant has reduced fr the gross square footage of the medical office bcl., xding fro.,a 1.0 , 567 square feet to 10, 317 square feet . Also , the applicant tarts identified 766 square feet which will be used for a linear acceleratorJsimulator . This use will generate less parking demand and is therefore requesting that the linear accelerator/simulator floor area be calculated at a lower parking ratio. The linear accelerator is a unique room ennased by 2 to 3 foot thick solid concrete walls . Its use now is limited and certainly vtIl not require the parking demand for typical office space (I space per 175 square feet) . Staff supports parking the linear acceleration floor area at a ratio of one parking space put 500 square feet of gross floor area; because of its deaign and limited use . The following is a matrix comparing the rriginal plan to the revised plan: BRS"O .1RRua sagui rsdi !2rigiaAl Rzyi sad 9200 . 4 Parcel sire 300000 s , f 12, 232 s . f same Frontage 100 ft . 100 ft . same j Bldg . Sq . Ft . 10 , 567 s . f . 10 , 317 a .f . (includes 766 s. f. linear accelerator room) 9200 . 5 Bldg . Height 3 stories 3 stories 36 ft . 35 ft . game 91200 . 6 Setbacks : print 10 ft . 10 f 4. . same Int . Side 5 ft . 46 ft . same Ext. Side 10 ft . 5 ft . * same* Rear 5 ft . 5 ft: . same 9602 Joint use of 36% c;n--sits 39% on-site Parking 64% can 61% on adjacent adjacent Parcel** parcel** 9606 Parking Spaces 1 space per 61 56 175 sq . ft . 10 , 567 :sq. ft . 9 , 551 1 175 =54 of floor 766 0 500 = 2 area Total Provided (both parcels) : 61 63 (7 eYcess spaces) * variance Request '�• Joint Use of Peaking Request IJ duff Report - 6/7/88 (0692d) K. 1 section Inoue Sguixod 96O8 Landecaps Area 6% 1O% 10% (Combined 21399 aq. ft . 2 , 906 sq . E . 3 , 125 sq - ft . Parcels) ,Landscape 10 f t . 5 f t . * game* Planter width along Newnan A-fe . * Variance Request Joint Use of Parking Request As the matrix illustyrates # the groan egtiare footage of the building has been reduced by approximately ?50 sque,te feet . This reduces the original tnuMbet of required parkittq spacell from 61 alpaca$ to 59 spaces . By applying the ans space. per 5OfJ gross square footage to the linear accelfirstor/simulation floor urea (766 equate feet) , the required parking is reduced from 59 spaces to 56 spaces. . The proposed dhurch building layout on the adjacent site has been revised to provide two (2) additional spaces which will be available for the medical office use during weekdays for the church use, if necessary. Thereforms Stith the reduction of the regUiZad parking spaces for the medical office building from 51 spaces to 56 hpaces and the addition of two (2) spaces ton the church site, a total of seven (7) excess parking spacos will be available during weekdays. Since the recorded Declaration of RstablishnWant of Protective Covenanta, Conditions and Restriotiens and Grahts Of EhOements restricts hours and dolts of operation for the medical IIffice building to weekdays and the revised layout results in additional parking* staff supports the applicant ' s request . 4-Ak • Staff recommends that the Planning ColmtissiOn alpprove Admiinistrativs Review No. 97--29 with the following findings and conditions of approval and deny Conditional Rzczi�tion (Variance) No. 87-68 with the following findings: IMEW re AZIAQM " N=10I 92`r 1319 JIM'I EGr,.,ga._ 8 7 1, The granting of Administrative Review No . 07-29 for Construction of 10, 317 sq . ft. tnedicdl, office building will clot 14versely atffeCt this General Plan of the City Of Huntington ilea:oh 2. The establishmat, maintenance and operation of 10 # 317 sq. ftr, nWical office building will not to detrimental to : +6. The gafteyrel welfare of pdrso:ta residing or storking is the vicinity; ' gal Report - 6!7/88 (0492d) y r MEMb r b. Property tnd improvements in the vicinity of such use or building . 3 . The location, site layout , and design of the proposed medical office buildings properly adapts the proposed structures to stre3ets, driveways , and other adjacent structures and uses in a harmonious manner . 4 . The combination and relationship of the proposed medical office building and the proposed use on the adjacent site are properly intograted . 5 . The;:e will be nu conflict in the ooerati.cn hours and demands for the proposed 1.0, 317 sq . ft . rnadical office building and the proposed church on they adjacent parcel and will not create an undue traffic problem since they will never be in use simultaneously, as agreed to in the CC&R ' s and Grants of Easempnt. 1 . The granting of Conditional Exception (Variance) 80 . 87-68 for a five ( 5) foot in li,ou of ten (10) foot exterior sideyard building setback and a five (5) foot in lieu of a ten (10) foot planter width along 'vac► Buren will adversely affect the General PLn of the City of Huntington Beach . i 2 . Since the subject property can be fully developed within regular established setbacks, Conditional Exception (Variance) No . 87-68 for reduced exterior sidey{, .A setback building and planter width is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights . 3 . They granting of Conditional Exception (Variance) 21o . 87--68 for reduced exterior sideyard building setback and planter width will be detrimental to the general welfare of, persons working or residing in the vicinity. 4 . The granting of Conditional Exception (Variance) No . 87-68 for exterior sideyard building setback .)nd planter width will be detrimental to the value of the pro)+arty and improvements in the neighborhood. 5 . Granting of Conditional Exceptioa (Variance) No. 87-68 for exterior sidayarrl setback and pl2,iter width mould constitute a special )rivilege inconsistent with limitations upon other Office Professional properties in the vicinity. b . Because of the siaee, configuration, shape and lack of unique topographic features of the subject property, there does not appear to be exceptional or extraordinary cireumstanc j or conditions applicable to the land, buildings or premises involved that does not apply generally to property or class of � uses in the Offices Professional district. staff Repott 6i7/88 ..4- (0092d) i +rr y CQIMXIIQHS o • 1. . The site lan, floor plans and elevations dated May 270 1988 , shall be the concep Ua l ly approval layout subject to the following modifications : a. The building on the site plan shall be revise�E to 1reflect a lb loot exterior sidayard setback from Newman Avefiue. b. The parking area landscape Planter along Newman shall be increased to 10 feet In width . 2 . Pr!or to isjuance bf building perMits , the applicant shall submit the following plans : a. Landeca q and irrigation plan to the Department of i:oinntinity beVelopment and Public Works for rev;,eW and I approval . b. Rooftop Mechanical: Ecluipinent Plan . Said plan shall. indicate screening of all rooftop hnechahical equipment and shs1l. delineate the type of material ptopoied to scrboh said equip..jeht . c. The project shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Board for design compatibility with the proposed church tb be located bn the as j acaht paresey. . d. The Declaration of Establishment of protective rovhnanta , Conditioner and Restrictions and Grants of hasemetrt shell be amended to reflect the approved days and hours of operation of the itedical building athd the church prior to re-recordation . e. A Joint Use of parking Agreement which will assure the compliance of the a;ipro-ied days Arid hours of operation of the modical office building and the church on the two parceig shall he approved by the Department of Camninity bavdlopMdrit and the City Attorney prior to recordation . Five (5) parking space* shall be designated for adminixttAtive church perebfinel :luring weekdays. 3 . prior to issuance of a Certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall complete the following : s . Install entire parking area as depicted on site plan dated May 27, 1988. b. Construct all Public Works improvement to required. 6 . The radical office use shall be limited to hours oetween 6 :00 AN to 6:ba PK, Monday through Friday. office uxes beyond these hour; shall be prohibited. Thecae provisions shall be stated in all leas• agrewaa:nts with tenants. bkttf Report 6/7A88 -5- (0692d) i F, I 5 . Should the linear arcaler,ator be removed, the a:loor area shall be restricted to storage use only . 6 . One on--site fire hydrant aba.11 be provided at east, gxoperty line as specified by the Fire Department . 7 . An automatic fire sprinkler system with combination standpipe system shall be approved and installed pursl4ant to Fire Departmdnt :.eq)%l.at:ions . S . Services reads and fire lanes, as determined by the Fire Department , ish4l 1. be pofated and marked. 9 . Drive cf rculati.on shall bA ma ntained from Van Bu;en to Newman thru the parking lot with a minimum inside radius of 17 feet provided at corner. 10 . Driveway approachec shall be a minimum of twenty--seven feet (27 feet) in width and shall be of radius type construction. 11 . All building spoils , such as unusable lumber, wire , pipe, and other surplus or unusable material , shall be dingosed of at an off--site facility equipped to handle them. 12 . Low-volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets . 13 . if lighting is included in the parking lot , high-yressure sodium vapor lamps shall be used for energy savings . All outside lighting shall be directed to prevent "spillage" onto adjacent properties . 14 . All applicable Public Works fees shall be Paid T: rior to issuance of bui ll i ng permits . i 15 . The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of � the Ordinance Code, Building Divisxor., and Fire Department . 16 . A detailed soils analysis shall be prepared by a registered Coils Engineer. This analysis shall, include on--site soil sampling and laboratory testing of materials tc provide detailed recommendations regarding grading, chemical and fill properties, foundations, retaining walls, atreeetn, and utilities . 17. Landscaping shall comply with Section 9608 of the; Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 16. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke this Administrative Review if any violations of these conditions or the Huntington beach Ordinance Code occurs . ot9f a 1tmport - 6/7/38 (0492d) l Y i l The Planning Commission may deny Adcn',.nistrative keview No . 87-29 and Conditional Exception (Variance) No . 87-68 with findings . []: 3Q INQIJ yEQR UR KCAL: 1 . The granting of Administrative Review No . 87-29 and Conditional Exception (Variance) No . 87--68 for the construction of a medical office building will adversely affect the Oenesal Man of the City of Huntington Beach. 2 . They establishment, maintenance and operatiun of the medical office building will be dot:rimenta a. to: a . The general welfare: of persons residing or workAng in the vicinity` b. Property and improvements in .he vicinity of such use of building . 3. The location, site layout, bulk and height of the proposed medical office building does not properly adopt the proposed structures to streets, driveways , and other adjacent structures and uses in a harmonious manner . j 4. Joint use of parking for the proposed medical offices building with the adjacent church facility its not suf'f-Iciont . Additional spaces for general maintenance and administrative procedures of the church, during the week, is not hying provided. Approve Administrative Review No . 87-29 and Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 87-68 with findings and conditions of. approval . 1. Site plan, floor plans and elevations dated and received May 270 1988 2. Ezpanded narratives dated received May 27, 1988 3 . Nerighborhood letter dated received May 180 1988 4 • Staff Report dated May 17 , 1988 Bit t�tJ.y:kl s Y; StAf f ,,. Apo:k w 6/7/68 0692ay s. •w� r.�F ••ww,.w�wa.w•vrwro•w•wur "" � P' am OWN" WOW dih* �•�i� �� r a - ,MA.IRK l IF, l _� . , 11 I t OR., ia ".0 kk � rr I 1 � L, 1 A The Planning Commission may deny- Administrative Review No . 87-29 and Conditional Zzeeption (Variance) No . 87•-68 with findings . yz RD1110 'LQ'R DWAL: 1 . The granting of AdYmAni+str.ative Review k4o. 87--29 and Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 87-68 for the construction of e medical office building will adve sely affect- the General plan of the City of Huntington Beach . 2 . The establishment, maintenance and operation of the medical offices building will be detrimental to: a . The general welfare of persons resi6ing or working in than vicinity' b. Property and improvements in the vicinity of such use of building . 3 . The location , site layout , bulk and height of the proposed medical office building does not properly adopt the proposed structures to streets, driveways , and rather adjacent structures and uses in a harmonious manner . 4 . Zoint use of parking for the pr.orQse,i medical office building with the adjacent church facility is not sufficient , � Additional spaces Eor general maintenance and administrative procedures of the church, during the week, is not being provided . NQ" 2 Approve Administrative Review No 87-29 and Condi.t:onal, Exception (Variance) No . 87-68 with findings and conditions of approval . Q =: I. Site plan, floor plans and elevations dated snA Lece:ived May 27, 1988 2 . Expanded narrative dated received May 27, 1988 3 . Meighborhood letter dated received May 18, 1968 4 . Staff Report dated May 17, 1988 �� ` Stott art - 4/7*006 lq t� e rqL + W.M, r._ t n ;4L QB qm 7 w I E _ol -�-- - - . �M I yMr�,(. am C4Kt) ell W r , i tr� -tag AL 10 Ile IL { A � � { 44 N Jq I I I Ilion ,t I r f� ��{i � f � � .}r � ,t t �• 4 ,•• - --- -- - _._ ��,1+jiff---� --- •�•-��.-��.�:�-�-�`=- -._...._....__ _..... _... ..__�__,_..__,..._.__.. f ; 'TK"�r.rl r Mt•11Y1 rri� ,i -" � �` / j1 r`Iiwl•l r��yf .)))•,�.�R��r' w�'�11�1� �� 'r,it y ry A{{//�� / 'h 1 1 a , a 1 I _ 1 � ` V I � 1 Oc lw j tee. ,+a1 aimp M +ps JL / IF ? I�; 's��• �='-_ E - ..ram ''� � . a � � • s F t•t! it ' � .. � ..�.. ! l +.........� I I �Jr 1 id �f.1 �1J ` N` ' 1.• ._�_!�i _! �.c' 'dl .Jf l ._ eJl :.d i f-1 t! ' s �j•l ! - Ar I-1liM 1a } i )-...a. i _ WEE p / .t 1r IL ��rM ry.arwi� 11�i �.fE. Y TIQN Ltvit-lb1+T. ""`�` `iff r • r�newmR caai0•W ll r !M.Lw f.��. w•La! .L1� W� - E wwlps•Sawa Sas. .00 —.�+...• 'S E i +�rw.irwa � i sy * �. @ '.wI . row O► — "� it i a .ter, 4 1� • • �� „""""ram � � �.r �3,�';Q�� .'� � :��.� A _ t • S z • T T11 ! r tip.. 1 _ � w l • ti ' Y �� I't � d,^ i RECEIVED x MAY 27 IM y fir. DEPARTMENT OF ' COMMUNITY MELOPMeNT t way 26 ai PLANNING VVISION r .r City of Au>stiaston beach bopa1rtaf?%t of Community Development Curio 44.,ter, 2000 Kain Street Vastington Beach, California 92648 ♦itentioa: Scott Rest Ike: •dainistrativd Ravielw No. 87-29/ Coaditional Exception (Variance ) No. 87-68 raltking ksduct ion bear Hr . Bess: Om May 17 , 1988 the above mentioned s%b ject was brought before the City of bunti.ngton Beach Planning Coam fission . parties representing both the ovu�trs of the proposed medical building and I residents of the cormun ,tj spoke to either support or oppose the proposed development . After hearing all those concerned , the FlukAniog Commission asked the ownerm to review and revise their plane in order to accommodate an additional %aspecified number of parking spaces. It was our understanding that between seven and time spacen Would be sufficient. The folleving is our proposal for providing the additional •.� lelraac• s 1 . The ad j4cent Chureb is relocating their Northeast stair z alloviag an aelditiooal two (2) spacess r; 2 . The information on staff roport dated May 17 , 1988 above 10 ,567 square feet . We feed this figure should not ise lmde stairs, elevators or air duct shelf is p wbi►eh ato rsot habitable spates . This would reduce t1ke beildiag area to 100021 equate feet. Is the Soatb*aat 4012er of the first floor leaseable ., area is • special treatment applioation $t'oa called out ` th e atom brows . This :. S * �i>Melar •oteller i Sing entire emits , which would be occupied by Drs Ts b. Chano ate of the building ' s owners , to a highly P. y. L gib'^ :•ti +fU Saatington Beach 110pd#tmset of Cawaariti 1DOWelopmeat pap• specialised , low volume , cancer treat*&*& castes. Tbo treatment applie- stioa Bross *assist of a total of 766 square feat , vbeicb is enclosed by Z foot thick aancrato . and steel walls and ceilings or 1 / 4" lead walls and c0111aa4 . Tbie space it occupied by only one ( 1 ) areas at s times oa the aysrape , that$ age 14 ( 1 per our ) patients a day that are troated as a pre -sot aptoistwent only basis . Pooh p4tiiant visit lasts approximately 20 minutes and there' is absolutely no "walk - in" traff ic . Also . there is pvactic.ally no patient waiting . As a result , patient* coraly overlap. In addition , only three (3) employoeo ocampy tbo satire suite , one ( 1 ) physici.aar , one ( 1 ) tochnician and a receptionist . In summary . a maxistum of only five ( 5) people would occupy a space of 10759 square feet and should this couSitien occur , it would only be for a small fraction of tine since each prtiaat, visit is only approximately 20 minutes long. Therefore , while f i-ye ( 5 ) people would be the a+txinum , in reality Cho suite would rarely contain move than four (4) people total. The parking requirLueot of ose ( 1) space per 175 •quarts feet would mean that this specialized law volume cancer treatmout ceutvr would have approriesately ten ( 10) parking spaces oil.ocated to it. As desoustrated above. ten ( 10) spaces mould in fact be doublei the amount required to amply accommodate the maximum parkin$ needed (5 ) for the smite. Co;.sequentl,y , we request that ee ratio of Des ( 1 ) space per 500 square feat of treatment application, area (766 sq.ft ,) be used. It is o'air opinion that a ratio of one ( 1 ) space per 500 equa*e feet in this area is roasogapls. Office hours are 800 a.m. to 4. 30 p.m., Ko4day thrgvgb Friday , with 11�0 eetc�rptieaa . 4 , li,aally, as additional section will be removed from Abe front of the medical office building totellias 250 µ ' equals feet. this would locate the buildisp 11 lest from the sidewalk. rho proeading proposals would result in the following;b*i.stieg racking di spaces Nov $pages church site Total i5 spaces {Mi 1f I 11. r city of Brotingtom 8iaeb ,y porotimenk of Community Development May 26 , 1966 Pope 3 2094 1 1411d i ng Area 10 o021 Sq f t• lemovot from Building 250 s .p t. . Usea r Acce i. an. =.. _� Sq.P t . 96003 Stat . i Spnees per 173 9q.Pt.1 51 .46 spaces required Y N aoe p per 500 Sq.7t. spaces requi -red ,E feral Perkins , Spaces Degnired 53 r.' lotel Parking Spaces Provided 63 Spaces Over 10 It 3• Qur opinion that this is a reasonable and fair solution to the parkia,g problem. We hope this meets your spprov.. 1 along with everyome concerned. It you have any questions or suggestions which would facilitate approval by the Plonsing Commission , please do not; hesit.- te to call we at (818) 286-1101. I tbeek you for your tin* and consideration of this matter. Tory truly yours . wNaOQY S Al IMIRAL DPBIGN GROUP S16 A. Dii best+,& Director s:•M� e e . bO 1 i � 1 1Y 4 1 1 A , �M1 S•yR•• (ii. 1 w f 2 s 1 Newman Avenue Huntington Beach, CA 02647 (724) 647-7121 E D IV RECE .. . May 14 , 10*4 YXB ?31 mpAarwar OF ` planning issian City; of �lin'�i Ban Beach GRAfirflfNlYY �1rE1„Q/NMiNT ` 2000 Min street ''1A►teNs1� WVlSlOf1 RuhtingUn beach, CA 92640 SUNJUM RUMT WOR DZKUL air AAflW 67-29 CMDXTXMAL ZXCItPrXOX (VAUMCs) *7- 68 WF 87-17 CONDITIONAL V I C I PTIOR (vMtlUCt) 08-29 P PWZD NEDICAL OMCN i CMMCH MMMPNZNT Doan Meembeersse of the Planning Commission: I an writing this latter on behalf of my family and other area homeeommerssse living adjacent to and/or near the proposed medical office/church development . No are concerned that this project* as currently proposed, does riot conform to the high standards eatablisheed by the City of Huntington beach , We would likes to brig to your attention our three primary concerns involving parking, setbacks, and traffic. 1. PARMMG - This project proposes the joint use of parking between the office and church. We feel that the quantity of available parking is not sufficient to fully satisfy the parking demands of these tiro uses. Furthermore, we feel that the agreement between the medical office and the church is not realistic given the normal course of business for a church. The joint us* of parking is an acceptable concept when impletmeatod properly. However,, in this case there area not .; enough ps,rk nq spaces to adegjat+ely and simultaneously sa r. ate parking needs of both uses, We reealisee that r dut the noralal operating hours for the medical office DuiW ag they church will have a lsawer parking demaM than it .; will on sundry, Roweve r, all churches do generate parking s d dating they voekday. 00"its p rk M ausrlt be provided for the miaister, church : fstt +custodian mW for �r r r4 of the c4tltigrsgati0!'1 will have app►aintmonts during tho day with the minister* not unusual activities for a church On the oontarwry, churches serve their 4maig ration and in doing so '" Met provide parka" for these normal daily aativitiess, - - - - ----- 1 ' DIY ,yJ1, K / ,W I $7-17, (VARMCE) 6 B-19 ' R y � 2 t ' No conducted a briof telephone survey of churches similar to a one proposed . Six churches were contacted (sash of i&ich were Baptist) and asked the following four questions: A. Does this church have aro ular activities during Weekdatys? a. A your church have regularly schardulod bible studies or evangelise studies during regular ve*kday work :soars? k, C. Do you allow special, interest groups such as ladies groups , senior citizen groups, etc. to utilize your facilities during weekday hour? D. Do you share your facility Frith other churches? Table 1 presents a summary of the results of our survey. As shown in Table 1, 5 out of 6 churches provide services to their members during the typical weekday between the hours of 6:01 AK and 6: Q0 PM. Additionally, 4 out of 6 churches allow special interest groups such as ladies +qroups,, senior citizen groups, etc. to use their facilities daring the day. Also, Z of "a churches surveyed share their facility with another church, wh ,C.1z results in an *von greater parking l woad throughout the weekday. Civen the typical operating characteristics of a church, it is ubtair and unrealistic to pass conditions an this church (as pr+"s*d by this project) that thiy can not ,have any aretivitfes during the weekday. If the church is to thrive : prosper they must be ail low" to pia raw► 1 act and parking must be provided to support these norml Makivitirs. fte current proposal reflector the provision at SIL parking 4 spaces !'total on both s ites y . This propvsd supply exaMIL OqMUS the City"s ra piremnt for the proposed ueOical 11 00 lbulldtw MRsed an this parking saplply and pur�ra�n� it ions ag"Md to by both "vel ntr no pr ti 4passo are prmialed to smart any weekday activities at the L�yyyy77 y �. 1.J�3 r� . Y• its .i _.._ —.-- mom r #. .� CVP 47w17, (1771UXIME) SO-29 MY 14 loss page 2 We feel that .it is only fair to require a Loin of 10 ..' ' part.inq spaces to support the normal and neces ry weekday ' activities associated with the needs of the dhurrch . These 10 parkinq spaces were deteerninod based on analysis of our urah telephone survey and the follovinq assumptions: f, minis-ter 1 Secretary 1 Oust ad ian # 3 212etin .-.�...... 7 Total Weeek4ay Parking Demand 10 Assumes an average auto occupancy of 1. 5 persons per vehicle for a meeting of 10 people. . i i Based on the above analysis, we rrrspecttully request that the Planning Commission require the redesign of the proposed projects to either 1) increase the on-site parking supply by 10 spaces or 2) reduce the sire of the seedical office building to 8 , 925 square feet, thereby reducing the roquirod parking for the office tc 51 spaces , This would provide a ninimum of 10 parking spaces to support the weekday activities associated with the church. 2 . SWM C - We agree with the Staff Reports findings for denial of the Ce aditional Exception (Variance) No. 87-68 and Where are no extraordinary circumstances which would necessitate a waiver for the Cites requirement for setbacks. furthermore, since this Office Professional gone to surrounded an three sides by residential uses a ire ductior ib A he estba ck roquirenent vould only exaggerate the di.tterencas in land use type between residential units, a thite story offteMe, and church. 2kiwotoro, we request that tho Planning Comaission reglkird i redesign of the propo"d dortel"ments to reflect trig rd to toot sstb4cks ti k � i planning commission 7-.9 , (VMUAVCt) 87-66 CVP $711, , (VARIANCS) 88-19 may 14 , 398S Pogo 4 3 . MUSI 'IC Although no traffic steady was required by city Staa,f t, it should be noted that a significant amount of tww traffic will be generated by the proposed developments. TsibleR 2 attached, presents the generally acceptable trip generation rates for a medical office building and for a church using established trip generation rates published by the Institute of Transportation Sn ineers. Table 1 . presents the rasultIng vehicle trips which would de generated by the proposed developments. Xs shown in Table 3, an additional 413 weekday trips will be added to the surrounding street system. This figure includes 52 daily trips generated by the proposed church , further substantiating that activities do in fact take place at a church during typical weekday work hours. Table 3 has been expanded to present the projected trip generation on a Saturday and Sunday for c©=pariscon purposes only. As shown in Table 3 , the daily vehicle trips are suhstantially lens that those for a typical weekday . However, AM peak hour trips are significantly higher. This increase in peak hour traffic directly relates to the peak activities at the church. Based on a cursory review of the adjacent street system, it appears that there is 3uff.icient capacity to adequately handler the additional traffic which would be generated by these proposed projects. However, it should be noted that: frequent speeding its a common problem along Nowman Avenue. The addition of a significant amount of traffic to this street torill result in increased nu=!w ers of vehicles speading. ktaidents along Newman Avenue are already concerned for the welfare of our children and increased traffic only worsen this potentially hazardous situation. In addition to the } vehicular speed problem ve are faced with the illegal over-- night parking of semi tractor-trailer rigs and moving vans al onq the mouth side of Newman Avenue across from our homes. As we understand the city ordinance parking of there a large tx aks on public stxeerts s forbidden. We therefore request that tbo planning ^.ostaission instruct City Staff to investigate potontial solutions to the spm fling problem along our residential street and that the Police Department be repeated to increet su parking enforcesent along Xewran Avenue* • r 11• ' rn1 1 • / 4 1'1 J }; Planning Cowminsa ion AOLAW 417-88, (VARIANCZ) 87-68 M 67-17, (YARIANCZ) 8Y *18 May 14 r 1888 Relative to the speeding issue X have noted than numerous cities have instituted speed control devices such as "Speed k ; , Hump*" which have proven very effective in lowering vehrllar speed. one such city is the city of Yayrba Linda `! who has adopted the use of "Speed Mm ps" as an official .r traffic control device wAth specific varrants for Installation. "Speed Humpw" differ from "speed bumps" in ' that they are designed to sloe vehicles without the potential hazard associated with "Speed Rusppa" . We the concerned nasidents of Newman Avent,.,ee would , vary much like the city of Huntington Beach to install such speed control devices on our street and increase law enforcement activities in our neighborhocd. Thank your for your consideration of our requests and for the � opportunity to present our concerns to the City of Huntington Beach planning Commission. we take pride in oux city as we know you do. Si.ncerply, Jw Stephen D. Hilton on !?eha l f of the resident: of N owMan Avenue* enclosures : Tables 11 2 , 3 .: List of Concerned residents .1 and their signatlresa a;, •rT: 't i a: er, TABLE 1 CHURCH ACTIVITY SUNNhRl Y (Based on answers to telephone survey) RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS "cvrmL B'ArTrST 600 Numbers Y Y Y H AV== BAPTIST 100 Members Y Y N N %I�, KISSIONARY 200 Members Y' Y Y Y BAPTIST 200 Members Y Y Y Y Im LZGRT MISSIONARY BAPTIST 70 Members N R N N IMMTI U1221go„ MFTISR'_t=gA ..._......_...,. 0Q jj!jBkMrS - Y--..,x Y N 1" Y Total Yew Responses 5 5 4 2 ]CLAY TO SUMY QUES T,IQ15 A Does this church hr.ve regular activities during weekdays? B Doss your church have regularly ;scheduled la:ble studies or evangelism studies during regular weekday work hours? C Do you allow special interest groups such as :ladi.as groups, senior citizen groups , etc. to ut- ilize your facilities during weekday hour? D Do you share your facility with other, ct+,urcbes? r.�fl i ,1. . i 4�y1 ti xArLI 2 TRIP GgUMTIW IRA Zs R t � OXCNL 0"ICS/0M TRIP GINIMTIOR ;rtATE3 � H VX p H0M 24 HOUR AK Ipt"LLr �R OUT TOT 2-MINX I, . ''4'P�4wL',• � MA CA oUT TOT .r.rrw.yr�,.•wa.ww�r•a.a i WOPWYer11w. +��r�rA i��••.1•rrr�•+.+•rr�Yraa.r..rrai«w..i+rr«+ priday XondoL=0A1office 091 .72 1. 6� 2 . 03 1.60 9 . d3 �4 w 17 . 11 . 36 6 . b4 7.70 4►tub' 6 .92 modicsl Office . 1 . 4 . O . 00 .00 . 00 4 .90 Chinch • 92 377 1 . 24 . 00 Suns& . lb . 1� . �8 . an .04 . 00 .96 x4elICS1 4f f iced .00 . 00 31 .,46 �.tu c • �i •�� V . Jla • VQ w'r•rrw.ra.w...wa• r�•Ii�rr�.rrr�.�Y.ter r.w�..�ra.wrrrw.�«r•r.w w.. Rates based an vehicle trips per 1, 000 square feet e.i: GFA. Sourcev Trip Genoratione September 1967 Institute of Transportation Engineers . L ,r Mlli TAUR 3 on =TrxhTlg MUY AL OFFICS/cMCH } , .4' : 4 ESTIMATED '�'F.t�1Vrxc O��'IC)M M f. 1i1M FEAR PH PUX HOUR 24 If MR TO"! XX OW T 2-WAY •ter. _....,.._. - Friday ly 21 16 38 361 Chi3fth 0 0 0 i�+ ✓+iiilq�iii�wfaiWtr�1,+•Ii y,idle�rriY�wil�r•►M wY 1fAii+t•n. �1 W�AiiiiiL Total Monday _ Friday 9 7 17 23 17 42 413 }v Saturday Medical office �s i4 42 0 0 0 73 Church 6 2 0 00 33 ' M sii iiai.�Mw st♦�w ap ti+wiw iYrii wn��.sM.w4rr�M�ii�r swwr....+w�rr�r��at.A.w�ifa+tls A�.�t_arr�rrrr..+t•i Total Saturday 32 18 50 0 0 0 104 Sunday Medical Office 1 1 2 0 0 10 Church 24 33 57 0 0 9 �14 sa.M+iF.��rwwrii.w��ww�� +� ++aM+lrwM�•rw�`rr�rr+tw a..•�.r..�rsa�rw�r�irwr.��.r.L...0N+i+�+rw 216 Total Sunday 25 4 0 226 Sexed On the proposed medical office of 10, 567 boss square feet and the 'proposed church at S, 868 Voaa square feet . r Mr' �..1 i 44 7¢ rAl, tooT. 'ply . •. i be 09 of CoAIIN'1 aft MOM r o, Si jA • •. ' a ✓1' I. ont 17, 1088 ti CUDITIOML XiCRPTION (VAR IAWC) NO, 8 7-6 8 ' . . the 61 l0k and Coo .Idd 09uth Sun 4469W Blvd. Ray 3 , 1986 �tr= dun Gabriel, CA 91176 Omn t Van Buren Propetties July 3, loss 2075 1?*%os Verdes ter. North Suite, 214 zJMg OP (office w ' _ ;7f Lootter CA 90717 professional) kAffiam't #As To construct a 3- ONINE" W"t Office story 10, 567 sq.ft. prafesgiot�sl wdlabl office building "Uh ,jotat Use of a . , �rrkiug Mith 66% of the *BTsIMJMs 'Vacant rgqui gyred parking ra► i�ds+d ' on adjacent located do t a east , j12, 231 Z9 aorr 1) Reduce landscape not sq. ift« ) 'E, Y planter Wi th $ram ig It t to 6 ft . 8 2):. ice oxteri.oc sideysrd setback from 10 f t. to S i t . W 8201 Memen Avenue .4 of *moan bnd vas Auren) Amb �► tsistr#ti re leview Mite. 67--29 with findings end conditions f II C +pMal and deny Conditional Exception (Variance) No . 7 60� with i,nistrativis IsTiew Bo. 87- 29 is a request to construct a 3--story 40#067 sq. ft . raedlcal office building on the northeast corner of 34iWWn Avoone and Vain Buren Street . Oontdi•tionol Xseeption Mkishse) Mt. 67�-68, is arequest for an exterior •idaysrd fatback , 't. , t A lieu Of 10 foot for the office building and landeespe suet wi th 04iecont to paskjag sloirg rouse Avomve of 6 toet in tbet. Although the p1pater is setuallp an Mee adjacent coo r hr, i,ti MOW i op `tif ' 4$9`'`fib#• 'o8 ftt panting, are@ necessary for this . t to roceeGo In addition, the applicant is requestip joist . P Ittng bet a the proposed "dical of f icie and a pro;050 the adjacent parcel to the east (CpM4.iktonoi Use PermitW IL Akio >, ix brl. `L ems 't�" ►: =" ' PLAN U1 SZOA'1TION: 163dium Density Residential IF. 12 (Medium Density Residential) .,�,.,,� 1�► s Apartancht� PLAN 088XOMTION: Office Professional 'r• s y OP (Office Professional) tAXD M. Vacant (Propbieed Church ww Conditional E Use Permit No . 87-•17) ORMAL PIAN DN$IGUTIOg: Public• Quasi-Public, Institutional gam; SP-1 JI MD VIM t Ceaaetary AV k ON=" PLAY DEBT UTION: Medium Density Residential Unit_ Ra (Medium Density Residential) i UM Va.. Apartments a,�,Q IMDM P�'t L STATUS: 'her proposed project it covered under Negatives Declaration No. 82-32 F' *h1ch was approved by the Planning Conseission for a similar project or the same also and intensity on October 5, 1982 (see minutes for October 5, 1981 planning Commission meeting) . SAO P�luaciWiThIle ',`�Td18• Dot applicablo. L0 , .0 6TAI1t8: Not applicable. L,,Q..AMY ?. ,..g7 t not applicable, a g raQTyretn�r z Ir et not applicabler. AdMinx4trative Review No. 87-29 and Conditional Dtzception (Variance) Rd. 81-68 In a regtcest to construct a 3-story, 10,567 sq. ft . i42 office building with a req:iest for joint use of parking with � star# Report - 5/17/88 �8- 1 1 1. r L; LLr 14 � r 1-6 . .M! � M Il64 for est lot ii ` � loanal •'Do� e width. l�i this r�oft beo bMn sV ltto 190pemently t coin Co i t ion0l Jae Sim I. :(lr9 o4, ,* reh) . �� , o Wants ief both wor �titift in working to bthat to eoV141 t boo been rocorW on the su 04t $it* ;. 90, 11Or1,49 to a aatrix outl0iing goal moo 4 cel gtoe 10,000 e. E 120233 s .f , m eatag+� I1.00 100 020000 Itoxf bldg. height 3 stogies 3 storles 3 8 ' 6 Front 10 ' i0 late fide ' 66 ' ,. . : , but• fide 1p � 6 ' � • drat 54 6 i6li rip : pe0eo 61 32 t on-site p�tsbpl ** floor area) 61 Total 4e sod Tea 1.0% l�� d A parcels) 21996 s.f. 3, 996 s .f. Len4aa4 Heater 10' S y „ w1d4b Along street at Use of Parking Request : dote 'th4a M edioa►l office use will bs 114it to 6s 'Wore. The church will be limited to 6100 AN to 11:00 . Zdah n" shall ba r• 4WIMNIVO use at botb porUng s�tor tinq their designated hours of operation as agreed to in the " lar tio,n of establishment of Protective Coveaetnts CO9&tio0s, h 268triotio and Rents of dasomert" an recordsd by t6 County rd*r. .axd oppreve4 as to fav a by the City of Huntington Attorney ttsd0jit d) 1re08 on the Huntington Boach Ordinance Code Article 940, parking requirement of one space for 175 square feet of floor area for medical offlcast the medical building requlrea 61 parking spaces* The e0plicent 10 providing 33 spaces (36%) on site and the remaining 39 spaces (64 %) an the od j econt church parcel . Duo to the offset days staff h'aport - 54 17/40 i� 1 . of opera�lon of the two uses, required parking will be provided f*c each 48816 W=ties of Van Whack and LAUAI <aea Plaetar , � , ��. u�� hr u� ■■ i .ice. ■■u � { 4rhe.,8V#J$d6 t is requesting variances for reduced building setback and uc i la $capes planter widths of 5 foot in lieu of 10 feet slang man Avoud, in sovember of 19s'70 the Office Professional Zoning d*strict requirement for front setback changed from five (5) feet to t#n (10) feet. As indicated in Section 4 .00 Environmental Status # of tb1N report, an October 5, 1982 a project very similar to this project• . was approved by the planning Commission. The former project was approved with a five (5) toot front setback in 1982 which complied With the office professional Zoning District . However, since than roject never moved forward, the entitle.aents became null and void . rant yard setback for the building along Vast Buren is 10 feet as required by Huntington beach ;ordinance Code Article 961. Overall landscaping exceeds the required 8 percent . Although the :reduced setback would not create a major negative impact on Newman h: since it i.s across the street from a cemetery with a great deal of open space# there is not a land-related hardship to justify granting the variance. The site meets the minitaum frontage and area requirements and is relatively flat and rectangular . To meet the setback requirement, the building will have to be narrowed by 5 feet . ' Thli r''mould create a 10 feet wide landscape area along Newman p9oAstent with the Van Buren frontage for more mature landscaping . itZ with blur- unding_uses The proposed project is surrounded by residential uses to the north • and west . Medium density apartments located across Van Buren Street to the west are buffered by the street; the apartmet,t units; to the north are a minimum of 5o feet from the corm property line with little or no view of the proposed building due to an existing 6 foot r'aosonrlr wall , mature landscaping, and a driveway along their property �-' line. The office will be compatible with the proposed church to the '. oast . Located across Newman Avenue to the south is an enclosed' undeveloped rti,on of ,cemetery. Across Newman, closer to Beach Boulevard is the ipital complex which will be compatible with the proposed medical buildis, . To insure architectural compatibility of the two buildings, nori9 Review Board approval is required as a condition of approval . "A,. Staff racmm-nds that the Planning Commission approve Administrative Review No. 87-29, with the following findings and conditions of approval and deny Conditional Exception (Variances) No . 87-68 with the follbVing findings : i staff Report - 5/17/88 (0566d) _ .� ` _ _ _ ___ '. ,," s yy n lift AL in a Mall too .4 'M ' ,ff'„�: -of UWAGAStrative Review Noe 67�-1g fot construction ITL 6 ft. �fs01 office building will not saveirsely i t • :�°� ,� .,, • � kcal plan of the City of Huntington acractr. aM4 operskion, of 10v$67 sq• It be will not be detr(+routsl to: < ' '. . ) al' welfa�th of persons residing or working u the b. Property and i0provementr in the vicinity of such use or location ' hite layout, and design of the proposed medical of faqir ti� i -89 properly adapts the proposed structuCee to F�. . Weets, drivewaya, and other adjacent structures and uses 3n a 46 combination stud relationship of the propose! ,nledioal office +,�. . 341fMlOW the frtropoai6 uae on the adjeattnt site are properly " Acce 8, to. and parking ,for the proposed 100567 sq. ft . medical attics building and the proposed church on the adj6dent parcel r, vl411 not Create an undue traffic problem since tbAr will AOVG r be eisr I s u►s1YI as agreed to in the C0496 ai#docents of " mob �ICIQIf �V �i1ML'S1 YL?. 87-6s; r tibg of Conditional zXception (variance) no* 67-68 for a ivMc � foot in lieu of ten (10) foot exterior sideyard building "tbeek and a five (5) foot in lieu of s ten (10) foot: planter °'l New -along gran Aureu will adversely affect the General plan of , -of ftntingtoa beach. 0, sib the, subject property can be fulls. ' developod within regulaic 04,,,OOAbscks,, Conditional, Exception (Vatiance) No. 87�ge Its 0rZl esrterior sideyatd setback building and plantar width to 8►4t necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of �Stia3 property, tights . 3. The granting of Conditional exception (Varlande) go. 87-68 for redu►o.od ostorlor sidey*rd building setback and planter width will be detria"otal to the general welfare of persons working or ftai4inq in the vicinity. 6+ The fronting of Conditional Except+ioA (Variance) No. 87•-6f for tear4pr sidayard building setback and planter width will be detrimental to the value of the property and Improvewntg in the neighborhood. Stott airport - 5/17/80 -5- (05666) Iro do* '): y ,�;, ,,;. , . -., �•. grsgti� . �b�lt�:�1i1 twtseptiOn �tiance) 18s. i7- 8/ for ' *. rrior sidsryard setback and planter width Would constitute a ' it emosetrent with lindtations upon other Office %Sol rtles is the vicinity* '� ' + + ► ! th4 visor configuration, shaper and lacer of unique 9-04tviov, of the sub$60t, prevortylp there doier "t J . �, r r ; �ptiotiMl os r:t' rd na� rcretae or itsoas i #11cable to the land, brui ldlogs or promises involved { h Mot .Mpp1 gowra'lir to property at class of, uses in the Ito Profsrs�rt�anar district. 1,0 The sit* plan dotard April 27, 198$1 floor plans, and elevations "%,.V4*oireW and doted April 12, 1,988 shall be the conceptually a*roved layout subject to the following modifications Is. The building on the site plan shall be revised to reflect a 10 foot exterior sidayard setback from Newman Avenue. ;r 2a. The parkilag 'area landscape planter alorig I4aaman shall be > increased to 18 feet in width. ti. "Zo .: ,,Ptior to issuance of building permits, than applicant shall submit V.. follo0ing plans : ,;+ k 1, . ,: I+a►adsa��r r and iraigation plan to the Departarrent of CoOmnity Development and Public works for review and approval. .., ;ltoofto -Xwha alcal bquipwat : Flan. Said #U& shall indicate screening of all rooftop mechanical, equipment and shall delineate than type of matorial proposed to screen said ,.c., The project shall be revie%ad and approved by they Design ' Review aoard for design compatibility with the prtsposed church to be located on the adjacent paircol . �a' < Pe r to issuance of a Certificate of Ck=pancy, they applicant �� • � .u:' g16011 il000 lots the tollowi.ng: i' a. install entire' packing area as depicted on site plan dated .. April 27, 1988. b. Construct all Public Works improvement an required. t . One on-site fire hydrant shall be provided at east property line so specified by the Fire Department . 8. AA automatic fire sprinkler system with combination standpipe aystowr chell be approved and installed pursuant to fire Department regulations , Taft Uport - 5/17/88 -6� g886d� 1 tM fi.I' i11 �r IJ r r: ifn 9e0641 SA fire lanes, so determined by the Fire 1p4rtttonto shall be posted and marked, IV* air laties shW be Maintained f raa Van Nunn to 6lewman • • �� ft�t r 110er�k n�yd**lot• with a minimum inside V84LMs of 17 fit Dell be a srini of twenty-eev feet r,.�1;: :;,.,`',;k . • i4l all" an ti and shall be of radius type construction. r f. - All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pips, and otr iuriplus or unusable material , shell be disposed of at an off-sits facility equipped to handle them. its. hoar-volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water Faucets . llo if lighting is included to the parking lot, high-pressure sodium vapor lamps shall be used for energy savings . All outside lighting shall be directed to prevent "spillaga" onto adjacent �; ,•, �tratVerties. yf 11. All • plicable Public works fees shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits . 13 . The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Firs Department . 140' A detailed soils analysis shall be prepared a registered Soils Y by a * x This analysis shall include on-situ soil sampling and I-i tatorr testing of materials to provide detailed recomwendations regarding grading# chemical and fill properties, foundations , retaining galley , streets, and utilities. 15 . Lantdstcapiug shall comply with Section 8608 of the Huntington � Beach Ordinance Code. 16. The office use shall be limited to between 6 : 00 am and 6 pm *Mdoy through Friday. Office uses beyond those hours aru Prohibited. ig. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke this inintrativ Review if any violations of these conditions at the Huntington Beach Ordinance Coda occurs . MMUM WE: The Planning Commission may deny Administrative Review No. 87-29 and Conditional Exception (Variance) no. 87 -68 with findings. $*Off AGPOtt - 5/17/81 -7- (056") ^4 . •r t � eimpot idar $StpblisbAmot of Protoctivo owaaoato catoitioux w� '`' ��r ► and agents of 240at 60tobor "'fir 19112 i(►2'#�l' i9k9 CCNIr11LOSION IMOtAft90 �. V�1 1 , ^• f r r1 1 y,,�,t;r: 74•n,� , ,1, ti� PW4 r1 ' f rYl J ' "402 Roport 5/17/80 --�- (0'�6dd) i p •• 777VVV"' 'r y der M 1'w1�M)• i. '.I. �,• . • • • • a.• .-- ---- • -•.-..-.•..• ..• • hl ee ` y • SAO W.1pm CQ ic t I't � Low so ` Y Qv # r . j �.. _ . .-ter.---=-e-.-... ,_•. �- .--_.- � ' M a4��par� -ire 10.0:)-IW ' (WIN � .... f .. •� • .ter q wpp . 1 � • lrIL �} 16 As SUL a ! �• Y,, + I ry r " 1 5 .rr �. a i y"": .r..:+ ••,v;'x.,',h}rw,r .:� rr w r+rA -►► . . r j � �i'. „ •. � � phi, ' 4- AirP' fit` i I•LI r• • l; r I,, mm OR .1hopVt doom ANW 01 •r• •— ,Mrr!—. .y. .f++- . �. � !ail F }1trF 1 �'�,'x^�,'; fit,' ! � � .► 1r�. � � � I' i 1 � 1 �r■ d�'r';p1r��'n y5lijy;,i^7r:,// !�� , • PI eK Y .� V :1 -: `� . r I ' r r i ; •`�:. ' � � .' �• {.�+ III 4,r rr�rJ' i 1 II 1 I r• ,. j . -- i- - �- l Tr O • . 1 • r .s 1 � 1 , 1 ; 1 I 1 N: wawa• � ��"� � .�.� * '• ..� � � •� •� � ram• ..�.� �.+�� . '� �.. .,�.�. ,�.. . .w.w.n �,M�•. ��. wJr�Jv 4i .�� r'A`�i Ml �1 + I '44' r I t / 1 '�-----.__ 9 _ — .-- — - — — _v -fir �•'h'��1�o':h' WA L•_r ter.._-�, r .. --�... '�� .A+ -- -� i .� r' y r � 7 , , ,PO.- 'I M1 , IL 5' 411 i1�',`, fir` . :,�t•,, �+� e i yJ •Ay'3' r +"1 r � � � 1 r•,ICl/ ,.I.. 1 � l JJJ y 1'`;�,1• wy�� r.• ,err, ,y, W 7 A • +1 �I I:i'••i•� :Y � AJS'!D-r� .�-��. ..�..MMYt.��..•r•.w.-w �.�rSr��.�� t! i••� 4 4•' r 1 f Of 40, 4,tl r'''v .y. +l� .Y, 1��'+"t • %• r !• 1 j 1 , 1 „ r `,1 � �,'.• \ 1, i \ TI 'fir r '�• , Jr _ rRR i •;, E •r I ` may• �1 • � . I' • t 4 i • •tom � ti *4 goo as 20 ry limit i 1 1.4- , i' •J,7 11 + 1 a a .. .� I• �";'�. �%'fir ;� • , i � � � r � '� : r ISI ..4 r. , 1. ••• ' 'F I,• ':� pill • r r 11'� --- - I 1�� rMa•r•1•�rar...•.,...w.r..r - - -- L.y�,��r.�Y,..•.r� ... J ir•��IL r 1 ., } fir•, , 1., , 14. ,GYM�'Y�,,.' !n•I�1 Y' DLYD.,iP&kM 6kL.OUPOM A 1h TT1i 11'514 IW*12 i 11:. • .' flan &*on Medical Office building Ir%'r1, 1h k*pww To The "A0011 c-Aldi R&qUIr6rk*his11 Mom 09 We OifPtI i hic Ndfrativ* wq (e) Site I Mew for Iiilklatlhg 1his sp iWitluh. we brre ,ptbposing id bdS*t t:,P 3 story f 1 f f i 09 (W4.1 ) 404fi � tddt Madlos l C)MC* p iildlog to a :V** +dermted as R-S O' 'tees .Orofb*ian4l dirtr.iCk' , 5InCa this Z" c -hbt el i aW fug thit tyo of btdiidift *a ria ,s it 6e ,erf M- `'' t for this pis*ilp 1 (b� Am& dasttrIptiaii po dhlk&6h sarvted by the proposed Usb tit thti project. i he prod p-io jdct Is loobt6d hbAh and ee�t tit I- Mnd kbe l el of Hunt- . �• h . At *611 at klihilhoton SbdCh MbdIbAl tbWakIs Wd Wbet. 'Beach 1 The pro)eck� w1h tbrire Odds is virhb i'ediiirb hdtll tii�h thl�t�py for ar>cer, and rr' w►itl ::blwri-rirovidie iafflati •pato tO dtrbidiv Lb see patl6hts otiWcW thb hospital anvirat�r *mt. the ptoj�t irritl aieb t,�a � i�dvtli"fktlir� fcr teleail xesideFits who r y sae►k medical owvidits t i dN bUt patient basis. f alp of ttie pKyt •S4twibb►s: FurkI*T trtrtsily; the projebt will provide offices for doctors ko trait patients <;p Iti the hooital r fbl'ivlkiFirt wit. , ? Ow. w. i ! t heir* Ot. F. K, ChMO « will provide Mill tlbn there- ��r lira � .C*k 1ptwn of &&*MiN Awc pMoot litirth Of 0* proposed 10o jeer it cries IO6d tif, a number of 2 ? �� ,l 1dr n studio ertrr�tMt64 tb thb Ootk stt ait*416 fatrlliy hotmot to the ,;• � .: ;,.. iris. to the Atli is a large OPM lot thmt foods III*& t lot bahilbts d furrd 6d Barth. Jug west of the ift Is tip 1-wrt►shs Hoipital AR "Mtitiigton Bch. Fdrther crest is ti ,_ 06 �dbch radical Towbts and boyorid thei is West beach MedlL 1 roR ' r 4Y 41 � + ' ',.• �1� . v , 1/ i .*a a SAN (iAMlnee:L KV0,SAM OAMEL,CAI IFOA IA M lie eaeteaa 2"1 Bags .�' in Response To "Application Requirements" Item #10: For Conditional Exception What exCeptioneai circurnstancPs apply to petitioned property (ins►uding size, 09pe, 1t!ophy, location or surroundings) that deer►.ve it of privileges ellaerljoyeed? cr' Titis ''twt Is that compose the lot are independently owned (Parca�l #1 by r ' , Vaen` fHoag east of the property centerline sears_, Parcel #y by %ftg sidnary Baaotlet Church, west of the property centerline). Ultirrrato[ a two buildings will be built on this property. It the percale were 'd�ivl d6d e4allY, bw pfarking requirements would make bot;i prelects unfeasi- ble. Combining the parking will satisfy all conditiLins. Since ass 106divel Mice Building and a Church fuention at. very different hours, shored parking is •realistic end practical. Both owners i1ave atysbd to ptrtking eeasRnrisInts for each other on days they do not themselves require perking. rC Will the rti Mst coni:titute a grant of special privilege inconsistent With Mill llettttr»? w Since both owners have agreed an Um ertinditionj of the parking !easements, "y will not' suffer arty inconveniences. The parking condition will not affect the surrounding properties. TWs lb an "11-5 Prmfossional Office District" p►rdpetty, eysl will, be a tering wary 1 yS�L 1 , . rend teevirxl the afta throughout the day, as would be expected. The i t ie� Jn %tif .e at�i•' soorbWeta venture would be similaq therefore, Ow impact of this pa i ft arrewngernent would not be anyrrruaro deb itaaeerttol than thiae;r aeMre3aa wa* -L' ir'reed to a trhoic by weeny of ronlreg. (a) WW.j. itet this request necemry for the preservation and enjoyment of orm or y b ease.al of perty ritfits , l **tWy the prZty tight of use rend deve R proont within thee tuning,W,, ,,�,, r�} ► ? Pe 't�` bit wom eefficlesrttly: utilized for tft modieaesl ew'rd • J 1 a�, i fit of tine a totghborhemid. ' �, tar ;; , ,. , •„ , to Statee` raesew why the eatntirrg of this request will not be r uteerially detri- msAtal to ttm public wel are. time this south poertIon of the proposed building faces an empty lot, its man Is not intnuive. The north fay prgmrty separated by: i A driveewaay wW parking from they building itself. 1i A corrcroteer block wall. ; iii An alley driveway (for the residents of the apartment � building). iv The e:es"rtes for those aaapartrrient tenants. r; The project carowt be a detrimont to any of its neighbom r.` ta.: 1MI�e�ltwli!!selM Me:Oit awn 1• ' L' ` IOU MAtl 4A&%�t Q40UMA 91714 wIG M4PM to "Applizntico RaWIMP t 1t" Item #10, For Conditional Exception st t, � r btpri oi= .., 4ppilr I 'btu' p l4nsd praiwrty (itroiuding sizes , ,SLY `," ' la►potl n or eur auWingo) that deprive It of privllagas rWIN0 �+ � dR of th1b project end aN the parkartg� re it rfeentg are extremely �' "Pd1r -thin pMP6(: *' twM to df&10r * 10'�P'601146 " frdrn`'th& curbs Can *�Mllsrly If i bUrrn) L tq the pr rty lit*,. � rya opa Landacep ing will fir " ihli diIrt`It►iretidr't. 'In addlifoh, Wi` 'Aeitif Lb66k .511 to the S . f th d bulidt with additiomf landscaping a in sflr� in- st# t� bulldir4 .` p we 4" ttiiv(rslhg the prdperty 114: 'with 64 #0'-0" µto lanedecaping r/''+• ft'�crrnZT:::68911i O�ode Ssclt on 9�bn0.`�17�t�4ne1jr ww alb meeting relief „ .. (b) Will the regUest romtitute s groat of q*L-1 1 privilegeinconsistent with normal 11mitstlans? jai, Ior4ww wtheek is 10'-00 slog the ic, ,right-of-way at the Prqwrty lft, it Is felt that our proposal will not constitute special privi- :I llf*y 10 thia request rocessary for the preeervation drid enjoyment of one or rt "*M tahtiuf pt"rty. tights? <, "�,. 04 thght WI l gUaw the property to be efficiently utilized. �t 1:j�iA� . i ".IJ. M•. T.4<�1ti ., . , d , an .• _ - .. � f��` ,v,, G+ ;,, !,r► :..., ' , thesr.�.� tiro of this re"# will not bee., materially detri- •<<. > �' �a� i I i INO 9MtMV of this request will rat be dbiOtronte' l to the publlcto welfare ' . l "MSMlhg will vistAlly cr"ate the souse effect as the ih the ba►tbftic. ,r :r Y t Yr . Vie.,�� ,�;, ',• ,r r milli WMFqFF er aa All AM 1.) *85 saw Y%Q CI C 1 r14•^',• AMb NOTATIM 41 p � y 1'r I 1 �,•'�•le- R'_t sI',}*.I,,}.i1rFi j�,11u,, .F?1 f • r�'�•,��,pVrF . I! ia* Gum , I r .r��t 1 A.. IYY�Y.dI...I .•� TNIS FI4V #JMXD MD 110TATIM 09CLAUTION AND GRMT 18 trade µ r w'.: ' ,' ►,, I: *4 .N$44MM 11XISICOASY MIST V CNr IMC6 , a C411909AL& �1' I M!F�C� �r 1 To "tor ca, liod "Chard," OW VAN Ali r�'EWi18* a �: A rll�eit ii# L�Mie�od rsstrwrr'hip, hersinaf ter polled 'hlaa kren " -wW sew Ir*Wes and tormlie►stes the previous dacl■raefam of Establishment of ,I lK'ata ivo`l n.ii "titcoeldttiaas awW Sastrictions and brtatr of # heretofore recorded on or akmt May 7. 14A3, Instent , piilr�enis bf � t°'ti' . . s' .". ,'riSr "nor• i . � Y , /d�wld4711. �'` to March end Tan fares Are ornars of that eartairr meal pretty •lid ` is the City of antiratoo Hearn, Co.mty •tf Otanre* State of California, NOUNS,":.Forcol's J,,ar1 j of Parcel Sop Me. $2576. . rserarrded is Book 179, Oige I mad Z of Parcel Maps in the Office of the County Hecor&r of Said �a testy as pa�id' er ftbLbit 'we attached hereto+ wrbieh parcels of j' r 'law liect:lwil eewite that Ce rtaia prerpotrtf �ot�lte4 .MtNommm •''',' AtrON* and 'a 1. Fore patrpdios of chi's Adroemst, SA,U UFtels cad I are beialmrfgor tollectireLy called the "Fotire Property." p. Murch is the comer of Parcel r. 3. van Mt" is the ir of Parcel 1. d. The SatLra property to delineated on Vcbibit ~!," *ttaehed helrote rind by this rofereme made a pert bewoof. 5. lie purpose of this pecleitstion fs to subject each and ""rJ 4Motr7 pectlem of the Wire Property to the Covenants, Conditions and harrtrrlotima berstnefter set forth,, to sstAblLsk the apportm at rase- _ Ir F4y 41owtowd, moo to provide the pertlat locate with the ataNd that tht Matite pfol=rtty vill be 4#v0jQp4W fa Ne nbrdAMO With : F � `z ! p►egt bpatMte for the actccl iteiflt •� they atntetri lli ft t Wito h"ct dad their tee tine u m T rMOW00, p1sotsaor U*tt0a s• ifMrtt, MW it I iU*Wtsj ' pbld play st 10#,rtn oment to brarkai Inhibit "A'." attaehsd �,, ,�'�'. �d� �a��rM lNaorperrsRe�e� MtrtdiA. rah,+«•.,ka+�q.k...r7.'.y!.- 'ar y.;yl,. :,+.'. • / .. tab, Mini flirt bursa deg harouy •stobliah tha eovsa"Its, ."'o , tomi ittlaftt betalnatto r mat forth$ sad pant to each s o horsieaftat 'deacti d. ,to Chdtob do*" horNgr past to Yrrt ,futon as 4MCIvelve ease- ! for tbei ,P%rpmo# rpaeifIM4 it boatlob 3 014t, ethos• at opw the �. • ; pear �' Jim6. 01 Mat'trrp "htr c i as hereinafter 44 i OW fit pte t f Em A. • $ r;Oth t}oeg hd1robp pant to Van bukeft ON +t•eMott Over i ,, r►r, q ar t Marlazo Atom of farce" 9 for tha patpart of i14ters and Xirt 400 bt rdrte i 1 .41OW the MOW put 1ApMa. .,�M SOON d440 WOOY $t#At to Ch%40 48 akeluaLve dame r. :; ► ot. �a: � �!# n pat+i �rr�' �eeRd e. e04 410srt the Ion" "tsirrty Q*tr,4 �44tvit j itonrr," as is 4eetUm 41 Wo 1 ifto 4MW brrrbr praAt; to Cwteh an 04Sea"t ever 1 ti, "O IPf ft Of Parcel 1 tot lobe porposet of taMre en and the MNrittrt A"& of Pareal Z and the Owtrch 2vfldIsSe 1i. IU errata Atoned hatoia► WWII ire eae a isetartee be A �401'.Alt tN tea WildhM Afar Of the 09t641 Of the U4104 • of aeWlt Mawt MA to eeteb itto tdoes Ahall be for khe lore sad befit. to +.•+ A yYth othorr,g of such prance, itm heirs t eo#4atorm. edotat- letertre, N acessorrs o asalpr s teb6ata t ambeemote s, Cust"W re mad �Ya a, . rr p r/ 411 '! yry mob ♦ +' rt .,,f• 4ki '.' � air 46 , J y Ii: 4. ,, ify JJr!,;P,l ,Ylk+.rtr,7<,yro.r . { r • " 1 4 F, Y cY r P.,,, H 'x :� t rM�►' YAvlte�dal a `1 trrnNraa, and the cia0dw 'a Rod W216086 lwvit"r '��;�� •', r��':,,, .,. ' •„�,� � fe�rwr�►.0 rrr trr, 'iwarr�rrr. 04 NO ey Pr .kky., �, i b ' 'l co �r. inbjact {. t0 as i fair cis p+�:p�►aia r , ,•Nti �� w,..h: *�� 1�. ant► t1 ' 1► J6.wen ,do bar64y rsrc ter "a o ff' Avor 060" tdoi ietiv�, pot'�tioaa of` this` it�Cia • A#�a r�btah a tid faut,,,1 ` /dr Psrreiax z, lot tba Purobia uiti'#ft Red w , , . roboIld"S aai repairing ' "tdricttt Jura `ib r iie r+ 't bf . x'tia� ar k t+oirreato rtant llat.d to 6bibic "A," Yhle *a its ri jrt of t..aoaa�la d such lrie.1 f r 000 Oil��d��' 00 !'w�1Fl�d�11� �d l�p�li�• '.y 96rei llatdby fronts to 0burch this aptian to fd*rhrwa I � r • ft,.& iiftitf of the 60re ho 0 a daiarMW as fthdbit ,�� ',�� ,-�' .: •;� •, ,� . � ► d��'" N t� 1r��hrrai ',ilhailY' aeCc*' � lo� � ft,ftemwi �t`ba , van iviaA 4ww2d •d4ct.4m td '"r.a! Foal 16 f0i to 009k w,are ,rwlifay tr Nit x, '' rt!` •!d 1 . ��191 g,* � woost to! Loh d4r if tl Y4il ehi plt1M`lty at r r!' +t p cd'''hlblah tfiij •ev rMi i 4� to ` t' pr Cl arch. ,r : b f .• tb'te' y (30) ddyi .'heiarftar tt► .loch to iaar+tf !to = '' i # ►�! t�i vare ,ftreai f at tho Wca. Mt •vh%Al T" %to% to • 6040A#O to•riit or flirt► raid otlrtiah prlei rbiah airair an �rtY'�ir t• Sif-opt *W Owrrh upon mortise of it* optfwm, dwYl ' Isft"Waly 04ia+r we an oselar 1n tb• ruai form PriridLn 01f sold jr itr 'dt °00 "ii prtar M &be � � �; • . .�, . � �� 'tfrr�M erli�l see�t slrs�I praNdde !dr ��rMir� w�thibwl 71 r x > Abe} •(�Q�► �► •! the opoain& tbareat. bb*nJd LWwnp tail to astir option Your But** ohuit be tray t* *ois. 9,4* pwor ry sa ike '*rice offored tbool, -ow at o Mies prUeo elm wAve o t to � paw am �i� 4r p*r�trrr ��a'at � p'�1Mt 4j ( a - Mo ,af%or tho 4wplraR ',*1 the t st VMi�' twp exereloo its option to puwck -apt. Mar Ow a `y wpirettow of eeid elm (6) .mtba period* if VON IWM bW 'not gold ralA Pagel 10 the vlsbt to 4e11 "nol t tM p1irw+os, 904C } tbas dw abarch rhall expire gams` end until they Rive it Jartlot VWt4ce or •roaeive oather off" they are w1111" to , �`�•` � �r !ergo �.• . ($.i. ft%rch hereby Srapte to Man luren tb$ *000s, to fnsebors � Parcel 29 boU a portion o! the Rnt!re Property as 4s**v1 oa hbibit i Po Pa f "B" tea Jaerrrtot. tae111"as 407 isproveosato vhieh have been aroetoj ebtrao. 1k44 oplift to purchase shah aurae so followa: In the event the Church ehavld decide to iralx Parcel R- or -r tot a b" fi,# afles to parobrso Va *am at a price at which they to��ftsll. t WWII, �� Mtl �1, ariR 6t' IlMIiN� Or 0•14 hbef will sell the property o* the offevias pfldrr rhich 1■►P • ;. .4 MMR� M �eot ah 't(iicty (30) i#yd t%00Wit6w to Mbxnb to exeralso ct o epttea Ito pMfthoso 'k"al 9 at the OO 44' rrR1r ioe � M Reh ' x�o Nn# a!'totlri ' rlaa ttowam qtkuw to ste"I,OW 0" fMrft UPON our*I" of its 440 AWIL i WelM sour lotto Ira instew Lit the dell foittr " P"Wi .ter tbo pmraoaw of the oaid t'oMrtf at the si"' p ri+Ae 6008I it k %bSer t►,rct'ow Abell provide for Iglesias 'Within turry Wf -$be 'oparia,R thereat. Shoran Van Berea fa Si to exore#re 6014 optioN CMnb fly. be !row to sill the property at Ae pwiee r � r • fW f�,o' ;,r v IX'40 •,"+fr5 t'.S Y,�p19M1�wM1rYa,Y. .. „ 44 1 ;,A r Y otftm :t ..-or, of s kulaer price. upon the saw tar"';oi past is aw lwe" at ptromia !ow a purled of 'fix (4) P"tho stept the silcPOW04 49 .the tiesatWhich Yon sur s% 03W everelaa lec 'option to the er}lrat 4.6a of rratd a!s ( a rtw"r P00"t it , real. 3..' tow rt#t to sat 1 Fewca l f tp pera me t wtYi Rob s:.+ ll rspiira wS ► OW rMll then* Otto a #ultbwt � !. aorir:a;.'er receive 4WOSr after. they Ord WHILwp, .,ta *aeerpt, as `4Y of « 1A. Per the pMrpo" of thins "Clarstieag 104 pntl.ra ft�rty to i#vi+Asd' i three eateparive raiah relate to seat all of . I Alch arm le4tcated an Exhibit "A" &ad are beraatter~ reRorrod to L' "Owrch Buil.dias &reap" "Medical lAtd `1►rast" dad The torch buildift shall Ue urod for the emaot"et#on operattea and sa.Utowmce of a religious rrorship$ •assembly 1041selo"l facility., seed for tb*, epet iaM god daleenoate of a balA#rap tt,'U'wtilized for •� � i�r�� ,0�=psi. :y Yam► akin ono* 'ehoU be ram. 1 firth#sAr, i other *sgdWa- -011MO)kWISMAM Ad WWI- blue-12LA 1 , .te 1141" .abalt he emoted* plaWA o vatfitrrt+aed, or tar ty OIC491W dO talr part at the 9e91t+a proportlr anti,! dr +elaart tom. �r.tirerrlrs 404p#. appearame and colorLag theesetp aULL bmr burr =s by the astcM by Von bobve. Church aad VON ov're" A811. er i�rSNA qqrowal, evidence the same by mWe telve Maeb approval r Ilk the final •plea#ticatiaa ared tlrhi,erp dnvita for such ,.,', bal3�l�/or rrMlLLCatteo t�K+IM�r JV +i.'4 ', _ .• '•'e ' ►, s may' �2� M +tlWW W"t iwr. 10"Sbf.J aitwAet, ami mei"aaaate of �'' �,�.r,��;�' ht��il�. swi aeitar •at�iwtiras � tber p�t�.r+� ft�+slw�tp rhrll •i. oerttieod wtthi+ tam ltma for the ImWe descrttad respe.rtVr1lr .awd ar"o-ie 4eplottod'va 9*014 '"Ara rttadied tec. ara bate►* drab• MWW..&we of ; * "Ckutah WASUtng xre41" etW ""Nedteet huildI 7. ' �. . � � 2.l� Mrtrltturt�giitap fhw p�tar*airaa of ' ta�rspiie t.1. r tali "I Oboo. P*rklo""w/ .the 1Matit* property 60jamt te' Wldtaf Arw oat be rood' tort; 1*3* (a) . rodastriaa 044*181lrs. piamtil Omealtartr, other `' mat tlra ,,•; � o�:lrc�rpi� features t4erisoei 0) Tbe taaitril.tiont rowmait rapiteemots repair. %so awl **$sto.reea► .o1 apwta a be" hib�� ygra or !terrl�ht�r� anb� for(&". build tad tovwMitoea, 'aiW aaah itdntltiestias o1ro of builitrg ',11lIIrM to as itmW be ettubed to or tram so integral part of a .hwilai*S aW• ice. afteoted my povsi4 •at the Mildias raswaij .J4� r. 2.2r (a) 2M *pwatiag, thsrecato of drr4wo of ►�orrttars" spear "twords 2,63M 40) So tomerar y otwatise of laddenj ,i11m9te"U4 and j,^ .,Vwsr„ of b0swtta* .sod bututwi rlrpMrrrera aN, wpm the 4OW1410mN k0*0099 tt+ot awk couserrattem, IrmwW1*j1mS& rebwtadi" or rr'padr is -: OAX&PROF Partemd MW such legs p scaltolAtap s*d barricades are 3•j � 7Ma4 pertimr of tMev pMttttr property ehioF it twrra . "OOMA01614C r%mm rod AMA t '"As* atteabe►i Mwreito mad by thta swelermg • � . ..,,1004 * prwrt Monot, bat" all Fmcbres of the satire tit etbar tMam O"lly AWOMM mash be NOW',toe +r ftalftw lr*7rp4G" tam twraff. AmLd4 LmLA1L 17 41 'arr 41 10 44 AII 1, ' +t. 'pMtt rrMptjn! thmr sWUieaillp geserlbed beretno f e r it ba"Ot talc referxsd to air "Parking 4151 Wkilol *a mot. he" A. f�• f 3 N. pbftwow w*44I .�'' , i, ` •!' ' +'},C�r .•nt�w. s , f, k� a#. sip a t*blame ;&M the 00d4a- ,yL+, try, imm Vehlaula r tref fig. of the Gwerd at any sad AU, Parrtioas of �+r,,''...`,�ky�`,; a,�;� � �•'; p;�srat„p# t�� ''�d'.tltels osrtpeatitrs i��rrt ollsersaro:r. eeex�ts. `� ' .• �zy �r.., ,� N toe"oo :Itetuat reCambees,tates end ell petMOa:aleo aQ+► bo14 Pt htrterfter mm or boldo pattioes of 'real,'p errtpr Otth to the , rat °ti **r , frf►Pehold etrew4"ot any other idterrst t'Ire"ie. bir space tharsonp' uw tao respective tenants W."btaiwots AmOf swpyopseOf Cost AL em &"d IoviRsete'loi My of 'tkftr777 sIto �� ! '"pho►r laoaMsei &gross mod,vagreis at of the sboi . r'"` `1, . .:+iM! i if >rtiprlgr�► -atri tho'bthlelst thereof, rC& S".Ilt" aar .Oubila efr�w�tta a it ''!a{'tbe 4 X , Y 1,2., toyIU lastellatSed: matmeadesee a", op tmiloMm within d f; tat ,M /�` li+a uttlltfes twrrwimm serving gas; " '�►1aMtailrj=ttrd+IrtaMt with sad titlsilph 1/eMllrr� 1N, met' too 1IM36-:opwiwMr aMmmkof a wdm tie MA f` sited ri+tMlklttltt s , � Swa. N 'U aonstruatiaap sidtetesawto, vagAbre T ' tummut, iltttl0440 test and recomatmetlem of pstblag eltei or atl Ud.; sidemlts� t' r mvewflys, ljkws. ewrM+t, Ptterej, MMOTIre01 PODS rrtilit"es sod +R rani meow ,graillt;ies; ,rr, + .T.„ , ; �:�-.. •� �.�... {e� �o oawetrur+tf�. eeiMtar+ssrta•s ewpetr, re#lee�ettt , 400" Ot aep 1"Aaadowd reset► lwlwi plaRtwte, native , r I.A ,,�F• a'. r.,, ' r Ot PIS { y I V1 1 ,. Mr . %* illy dprtaiclare W4 vaL+ ,, all as nor be aa'rtrod by baoetrw ntsl 34 IM larkla* Area Owl Pat at Ar4 tuo be 00+4 for POW", At. tM4 or lA#kims or w01684101 shamag r qpt for r� r' t#t1 , a* "ISWIDS of ttr em 4UTUR 41 40 "SommettMI I r tllalll yl l t it of 40146*04 v the 20414404 IT ""t.P :#Ad "N'trtmo Of 11044Pa Are&* a1� gaAPt:Matic'rt� too". �, :00,4"Sewco a( "Tking area 404 taprimmW P ,a (OPOICASe � r, ,•F-, : MItla prwttMlt M A- N o +4tan, ha� ra . t s, aq4k at* shall h" �a ,t4 Oat v tcb JA Xt.�:;Saanb.lT treaaaawry to a anion wltb the aad shall be 441patIr POCCdr"d. 4, 19 for As r m" of 1410 4 r a the be dotiaged aP tha yart04 ftm 6te AN to $100 PH rw •aaq;#Vay,. ftm&04y. MWoosdayo Thursdays Friday, for M t the r•I e 6106 • ram; ;, ,• �. fgtr th* purposes of this adrrment the norm "FrUory IMO. " a1Mr l: b* d.l t*od so the par944 trm 6;Q Q ,AXto l 00 .00111 tlet t the real.. l r W 1 r 4-v a, It to 00 latrnntios of ;bta Otto ►� ghat pbe 40 %& ein doclo d ? rdr a iipi�''• '' r , I ,ra ++ . LOW M t a �1O1lratrr d�ttNd. to 91W iaresitan at this saw 0lot _thot or ' alow " " •• barain dalflaw da r Mr - hiraiA def1"We Male 1 r Sol* It is tiny tAtOM►rtOR Of Ate Ai{Yr nt t14t too 4100ra of Farefil i mW lwraal x o1beata crawlty and liability Iearsmce r� lrgr nn th*tr nwreotirve ratrasta aad all lrprav tw Oovate up" '` do tam snd a+niLtiona wet $arth lw e1rla daetleft. dodo • I Or � fit •� �a Set . trt Of rRlRiY � ►tbtRa% BOA f iyw CAR f at sasgronc* ► rcvtdtRjj torate to sayto 111ro Mate and try�earR ►:t, ` star wRo ]Ago Ram wlrirtX p�trolret of ''r►�r1 1 �., ;a for �rtote�etiaMt grow� .��* Policies of lRIM rttO►id � '� ', ,' it 'tot�iree►C/ot the Pi with torict� ,4, �MM us • ror:R y t o a RiP61rrte ., of t rtu►1T obt� , . �AI11iti �arr:ot } tip f t� ��u� � i �' ��, ol�.� �' + pra�tdtog for �Yvtsa ant .; ♦ ,.v ti Ali• to.,thO + 2�yt �itA values wt so jot r� � tiCh par rtN br Weal ��rti the _ i>:r t�rpr+�ti�toToroal. . ,,,'. ' . :�,-._ ' �� ark .�ltatr� �►�►�lcrb��., >:bs Z &#to& tbbt of parrcethO 1 adds r dt^ „.x / Ribf to$1� t M � ;;;, iririttrl�► t1MrgAv" by � ��3 I�rt,,y,�I*�'I r�♦�NI �1 y ` '�F ;.R. �� ,1i l�. �� -r ,� tier •�. ,; do 1 psr4al ,�. for cti, 0111 Jy' g or i�C Mithi�in� ,r�i YC i t,z 2i „ • VMS < �� • � �� O phi otYiit 1f1�Ml� I� after prior artiitea t ii "rt1to ar M hasu�ca ..� • r► Yttod to ebcal� em p wial� bo �' rfieiY r�s or a• At f t1� taultie the ago o for it doh• owl be Cc"" �y the defwictap faraol t 4,Ay t , -�,'•r� , Mrs; ',•' ley.!�' '�� • a ,.,,rw•,•'' '�/:�. 1 � 1 �' 1 �g.�.,, •ty ,,rr" ,. IIA r Oxaottwo. The doftultlag Parcel wn&r shall t d 'h�� • 49+ al otter 1ntorant on pAld !"amlcd prealu / at the N 'Pat' 4VA"' cm4vtad"heo tar d6ta 'WCIVt4I9k t the Or"Sume h0vo Imm paid: I vielt e" 7,1 loss poyable fir 1"0 '� j ie Atldir, `br otb4r-j4'Odan *;r' ''r�,tr . ',I 1+•. ` *• 1'T• � ?7O� ��, 08i�1 �ITlppe#tr. Y °i' Sly. All casual;y •qd 144buity, `pol#r tii obtll in ke rt+tfpreaoied to the lnsatana* lotatiso of (so �N*Peatiwa pare*l ` - IN 14 aM+ l 'p oesi�da for garpoiia of vapal,r of ��. owilecs nt Parrtal 1 Owpot"61 in lilp iif i4o 4 t� Qt' the Pottle for Which ` AY bave 40rood to y ' at t6ot each wma r ehalt lank 061*1y' to it iiisormpea �' ' ► ►. We Ownerr' -of ?*too 1 1 and tarcel ,z 044 'pliW4 from ',` "',�' � �z � iaa:r•ahr a 1piaiei a �1a r1r of k' ' +► rip '. ' Arid i*wr o, C"any "y assul t. The out,OIF of + y yl 1 -00 9 �A,� ;;•' •t• ,'fF ',`1 !"� �' �yr��i� ' 7' ' ��•`! �'�elb � �*� �� *�� wwT Y�t�N� 41 ' 4+ 14 ' d ' r : y +' 'l 1 !` .'y;e�, � �;;�,,. ; •' 'Av1�IM 'N !4 * t. � # ' r�• 111 Id p r "roe • t , �� , lh` t�Y ► +e l i ¢1lrC ia" of R t r a•aspatR ivia ` �" •� ' i Aht x1iottiw to dny' 'Am soll *vo dt6 ltir�oA '•A��.''i $Pmt of Otbirltaim of ptromml property. #Isrt tit N1is1l fit the errat of said rjheeoaawto '�taprrlrr t 1p�Mr l r as afte r elatot to its parcel mW iipt"rwato 'ago .,'ead 611 of the MrbgdIng cmrat4bCov tdaditiom xr�et�trr�tarot: -M L � r 1 7. 1 �,(�t) Sall apply to Bad bind each and all of the a*rrotta of any and all portions of the Entire Prapsrt; and acch aad all of theft respective beirso succerseora, aaaigns, grans ous. aottgageeso resxantso *ad subtananta; 7. 1, M Are hereby Lg4sed pursuant to a &amoral plan for this lesprovismut and use of the Entire Property and are designed for the asutuAl benefit of Bald owners. tenants and occupants of any and all porticos thereof; and 7. 1 . W Shall obligate, inure to, and pass ri.th each and every ¢ortion of the Litira Ptaparty. anJ shall remin in force and effect as heroinafter provided. 7.2. breach of any of the covenants or restrictions I contained is this Declaratton shall not deft, aor render tnvalld the Mess of any osortgage or deed of trust made in good faith and for value ais to tba Entire Property or any part thersof; but all of the foregoing provieidaW, restrictions and covenants snarl be binding and effective sgstnst Gaff owner of any of sold Latire Property, or any parr tbarsef. vboae, tirls thorsto is acquired by foreclosure, trustee's sale. or otbervia'a, 7.3. The tarn "nortgagee." wberever used herela• GbAtll be noon trwW to includo besssficiaries and tcustows under deeds of trusts. 7.4. It shall be 1Mful for any Person or Perron@ owing or holds" any portiarr of the satire fsohseTty to pror Que Boy VT W l at 10V or !'l wF#Sy aguinsst ray p•rnon .iolatiwg. of to VAOSAtg, awry of the COVO erta,r a ittowr rrd tweautsmw bra wad to pawent ib. Mir or ebw treat ra deb* OW a weemr t: 4MWe fta air an +tee o b vlalati . 70 . larr�lirdatiaer o ray Bar •# tewsissta, rare +, t"t 49 oth or Vts W UOi beau saftet d by 1 , , =wrr -r l .r)+ JuJSaw-nt or court order dial t lid ixo way of Net aisr of this other covenants, cond if tunp , raptrict loiiN or hyrjof, and the dame ahal.l roaai+n in full force and effect. 7 ,6. This Declaration shall create privity of contract and eatata with and ownp all granttaa of elf or any part ref the said t+ntirn Property. nand their respective hoics. exuruters, adainistrators. sueeisrors and tartans. ru the rycnt of a breach, or attempted or tbireatdned 'breach, toy any ownet of any part of sAJ-4 Entire Property, in any of the tersw, covenanter and conditions hereof, any one or all such t other o'vnerm of the Entire Property whall be entitled forthwith to frill i sad adequate: relief by Injunction and all such other vaiiable legal and equitable ressedias from the consequences of such breach, and any deed, lease, saaignment , conveyance or contract ,Awls in violation of rhto r ftelarsti-on shall be void and way be set aside upon parition of one or more of the owners of the Entire property. All costs and expeu--:es of any such suit or proceedttigs including attorneys' fees, ar hereinafter prowl.ded. shall be asmosped xgartnat the defaulting owgier• and shall constitets a lies alaftst the reai propskty or the interest therein wrongfutly deededs loosed, assigned, eon:iryisd or contracted for, until paid, O fectivo upou rrtording notice thereof in the office of the county Vscordar of the county in which the Rttlre Property to located. but My Ouch lira shall W subowdinate to elnr bona ffdi mortgage or dead Of trrVet towering seer pertlon of the E tive property, snit any pureh"or at joy foreeel.osnrt of trurtso'• sale (as well as any grant** of dead in lean of taftellasure or trusteee'it sale) wader any such ma rtg4ge or dwA hurt AW11 take this tr4o from any such lW r but othemise M&J&ct to that pal*tons Mtr6bll. 1U takiedlae permitted at iw or opity of 64 sir Ali siaA owwre Opmlifed herein shay) be a mwlative as to each aw Ms to sit. '^ 7� is the 1 Alat that sett is btooght for the onforde. I �J dr the preva Mu f pat-t y lot l+nrl loot tit ine0i atilt shall he silt l t lvd to ha Paid al 1411 ueyR' 1 wNn by (lip l op I ill: !'#irt It ur 11.11'0++r, milli ally I Judgment or decree randpred shall include an award thereof. 7.8 . The captions handing the various sections of this Declaration are convealence and identification only, and shall not be deemed to limit or define the contonts of their respective sections. 7.9. Church and Van Buren each cooperated in the drafting and preparation of this Amended and Restatod Declaration. llencd, ip any j construction to be made of thla agreement, it shall not be construed against either party as draftor. 1 Section S. Term and T�ruination 8. 1 . The covenants, conditions and restrictiona contained in this Declaration shall run with the land and shall be binding upon each and all of the owners of any part thereof and upon all persons claiming under theca; and the same shall continue in perpetuity. 8. 2. This Amended and ltastated Declaration may be aniendad or toslsinated only by the written ag+:actvent of the tee ow eTs of the lead area of ]Parcels l and Z, air. said earcele aria described oft UhLbiw "B " bereto, duly acknowledged by each said owmer, and recorded in the office of the county recorder of the county in which the Rlntire property to •itasted. Motvi,thotaudinM. these Conditions. Covenants and kastxtetlans shall not be arodifted by the psi-ties without the prior wkitlem eaasont of the City Attorneys' Office of the City of Muatillgtoa Mgslrs State of Califurrtia, 8.3* Me #waadad =W Restated Declaration. eaerut+4 to r. of tl@ date h*r"f. @M11 take effect anly Mwo.., fran and after Its «. oal" is the off its of the county rnaosdoir of the county Is %bieh o. &be pat-two Property is situated. IN i.d. A1.1i of thd orewlrl ess of this .ended and Restated Doevorselloo shall be rnwanahtrt run"I"M w/th tho Iona Mira+.ft..t to 1 applicaleia love Includind, but llot I10611-4-e1 tole Fsetlun 105 of the Civil f!ods uI Li,a otatI, ur caiIrornlit. It is &xieremoly 4mrsed 914t each covenant to do or refrain from doing some act on the land (dede ribeed in Exhibit "Ste hereto) of the covenantor (a) 1a for the benefit of the land of the cavoneantse, (b) runs with both the lsied owned by the eavenantor and (c) shall benefit or be OW the land o "A by the covenantee ) sheb�bt«6reOlrSirt or b Mqr c« s n+ DEC ti. INII binding uykin each successive owner, any portion of they loud affected hereby and upon ssch person rendereti to the 0 prevailing panty in such action or proceeding. b.S. This Amendad and Rewteaterd Declaration eshall rewmaiei P In full force and affect notvithstanding any change in mmership of any part of the ltntire Ptoperty. IN WITNESS illtf'RLUP, THIS DYCLARATION AND GLINT is executed by -1 3 M the peertiea hereto as of the day and year first above written. � ' 11I1.I.CRUT MISSIONARY SAPTIST CRUIRCHe 1N a alifo Ala rp on j OAAA x WUNIY Rr VA14 9UKkN PROPERTUS, A Califorala ` Limited PartnermbIp By Tilt C01VAN35, INC. a C € L•pae ^fir r BY 9"erlkl astiMsr By MOC I CAt. PNX'S ICS, TUC. a Ca1iroro a by A Gamerall Prtner E monk l . 01 ! I / I d• a I r n 11 ' IL .. _ 1 CAT. NO. Nt+110171 i 6 16"CAI 1-all TM41 NIlItIgA"M (CexfllMolirin) �aj-+�`t C'�� Aia1*1J1i1 k t q STATI OF C.ALIFOKMI�r*ngi ODUKry up Sept. 13: 1965 bcture me. the Undersyned, it Not"y Public in and said State, f -Im naily tprcared 1Z>t�ttt►�w,,rl�>«,�trr�t�.:,t:re*t,krll� V I i Malt+ proae;d to me nn the WAS 1 s>Cdsfactory tvidence to k the M who executed the within inslturneat as the P�sITl'•nt Freswlcnt,arMl F l o d I taPtin-PAVE _ xwrAWxkxmxxxxx JV prownl to me as the bvAit of l misfactory vvi4knce lu bT the person who vies-used the within instrument sa the +,.tea $ecmuq of the 1;'urporstion OFFICIAL SEAL ths: elurvilge.l the within instrument Bail ark W%vie sled UUMINADA F MONRO'Y to me ihst such coq%wra6m ezectlted the within instru- W01AW PUKIC -CALIFORNIA W114. pulluant :o its by-laws or a rrulbltion of its OVACE CMITY hwrd of dire tors. My aiiinil. fok" 1Aq 11% 1!a wrm.ss my "ad Ircici•l SCSI. (Tkis aMs for Islr'ww Ilaiarm Will) rr � 1 brAlk IW C.4101111N1A 113H .itT 1 �► tafi.MKIL rL_.�...._.. SS. Jay 26 _1 ' ... .._. _ � � .Il.. f +� . . IN'kMC 111l, ►•11le YIIdPr�1�11I11. �•...-• s "MI � �//w said (sn1111 f and *air. per.oaallr known to :in 1W Illl t111t. ' IY (2VVI FOR NOTARYtAttA4 4q iTAAAIr i .l lk'li�/Ittl. aNd .. .._--••---•. 11MaV11 tv wo N/N/jlas 11ty w,�-�•"'1"�i`S'•`=��r ��•___ r� .wtpllf�liall IIYaI eeay■WA for WHOM ival1w11r101 lull ll..lNll I" a w to 1W 11" IlrrooalrSUSM/: t1E '1(ti►/ ti!a►L •Ile r►r+yq�•.1 llle Mi1t>.11 ilMiltMw'/11 eA I�i►Illl u: ca:.l T.Ir1wl+lwN, k r NurMly ltnwr,-c+ttt utNu► -• •• .-.___ . file Wb Will"C01111" t t s• ll}al a•tn t111d 1k witllilr k+lrlrwlllew. w .�ilsal.li�/1K1v1 ew• fawn IA 17, Inr arri t�al t,.Ii1 ..w�rllti«It es�t+�l llrrt w� .. „K�•o I�.nw�r owtlrel&r •rt+s'aW the s"o. 1� f -•.,,,,•.-----=ate�---- _._-.�. �...�... . �'N11� •+.�� t �- . ... . . .hrfw Itlr.llrl uw.Frsia+llsl. .....1 and *oft* r""Well f idtl�l�l( .�_ _�'!Ii . 1►IIr1/M M AK M FC11 1iOT06PtY •ttt/16 Ow *TIiMfr M we M Ir ow _ liRteltnj of .VW -• Mvilp in '•-mot* ��f �•T't t11111 �'MptI.NN.A l�•1 .�rLMdh�MYMMOP��r•.-•..�.�Z ""11 4 tip 01r11iN 16df111NI O 04 `WON Is 00 M 11lr tl►e fwwa►. • ,. �11 111 it" #I"*l.i sw %rf e* IM 4foo al so 1WIwo !If old vfAv 60" �/ M~� j. COkI%111S 'M+lMNVIAfl ipw • e @701 R A a a I a r- Aa Isis -' PARCEL i PARCEL 2 II = � pARKIN6 ' DAaxINa o - lit 7.--p _ z 3t1 c f' 00 ' -' IL -- —:.__—_.__.may_-------- -----�—�---- -- ---------------------r----------- r.. _ H PLAN E ....E o s- r• �, WVA%Ct • own aft ++_ .m-W i w 600 w PARCEL MAP 82-576 a TM c11v w MW§k qM ""It,couwv NF or ,m'Gr , mr! (w ^:A..Wowm . GUNN w41, MM JW at,as rat •1+1 *wm w 409 10 M i*acv IM. 496.PON r+V 1Ma01Mi a fINM 1s,r•M N of 00+1flu Sabo"wP1.M"41 S"4611 OF "Ca.w 11 olr O&A@N d irrrlt.94f.1'ODW6 sibb"C it M�Mr►f 60"w M ON.`A,Nil .4ummv.. 1045 41110 A1fIM G"611410200ft W. +�aIr i1lhlil i i INS +P r�sMi ,. If for)rrri �.,. �+'. '+ •LA: 1,1 w I/1 a1: y..IM►I/w 11ni 1Ico-4 IN,, 1 •s.,li I l w.,�.w l►Ir,. Fd w t vry ►!R ' •.t. 11 f►J spa. . � 'bLhTsla a•V!►+.11.JIL �CGgrT�.d A* CtNTILM 1.4Z AIR 1r MI'f�Mi•t ft+M. tl' ' �••r /�{wl 1• •+�� 1' • ��•1 I0�7^1'All 1 r If.111 i, M @A 4"j" rev 111e ie �Itl+•4�' aR1K IIE7 rrc•w +►c� ++ r.►� +rs 1 P�lh1'wrw�.�c- r.v i 4 w N.C.1 ►OVA 11 Mrs It" WN1NmA:1r041►{.MM 1R efANw*�Vrr ti.t�.t/Rr� i+lr rIb CAM r-y 1I1M�0 1..! 1 11r fib N .17 cw ww 116 cw 1WJ Olds,iRC !*,t so * 3 01.11 W..1l c i t.f r% c T/1ti r. •:. M1 'Y,.jb" +11 of M I+ i F 1�• r. ?a IG�II:. a�. M .CRs'tu1T%. i.� �. ,J ,w�,��..•..� 4 +A frMf� fi.41i/i1. 14CCR.F'tI r) b' 4 1.104% u I/ ! )6i•a mow O F oil oe .1 da of Paw 4 �. IL IA 11W.� •MAR,M1t1 ►-S/06.1% CAV iW 1/4 *11c IL%,T.61b., N CM r) 044 co •cIc awticp�w � .w � , 40 la %V ,. Kr 1�+I NN+f1r1 a`%;. A r f 1* 46%0%.WI&A 16401 . 61•M, K w N r oe% . pArA11 � PAMtC�i. 4011 1 w+tfyii'.1R tr+� ti �»KA• usRtw�a I �• .w� c+A rl tMr1A w141a tly,�rf>< 91 or ..rr� MMfi�r + l� `1 , • "'�' AtNA 4�! 1111 t M M*w M toNo"1r I r F�rR � 1+ 1 .O- Aftho . e .� &AP OL .may•R Mrr�.ram+ ww•n.r�� .•..•.• •RYA•. _.� . .•.y. • M 1 u•a .1-1 .�� 70,40 AIrvirpli ,90641 �'1a� ft! 0 to ooftct *MP IM "t [. .. W,'W Iris to 00 L s I •4! ACE OF DETERMINATION NUTICr IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A DETERMINATION fii:.S 11rEN MADE WITfi REEpECT TO THE BELOW DESCRIDE.0 PROJECT. APPLICANT: Larry Nye , Hil.l.crest Baptist Church ADDRESS : 82-1 Newman Avenue, Huntington aeach PROJECT TITLE. Conditional Une Permit No . 82--23 1 � - PROJEOT DESCRIP'TJON. Construction or a 10 , 56 .; square fact niedi.cal building in conjunction with a 9 # 100 square LOCATION -a Northeast corner of Newman Avenue and Van Buren Street. i i The move described project was : Approved On � October 19, 1982 Disapproved On By planning Commission Discretionary Body The protect will , x, wil i not, have a significant effect on they environment , Yf approved, havIng a significant of eect, a statement of Overriding CenaW*rations is attat-hed . t ) An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the z.rovi sj ons of CEQA (EIA H ? . W A Negative Declaration wr.i! prepared for this pro4ect pursuant 1k to the provisions of CEGA:`• A copy of tho Negative Declaration (Envirc ntai Cle:""ance n ' to rt� ie attached . V. "W EIR in available for review at the Ci*y of Huntington Sea,-,h DePart"ent 'of brve lopment Serviced Environment Res.-jurces 5ecti no Nit* "e r)s Title oat* Iowa ; r it M~%WWWW CITV CW N 1r1N0TC N BEACH WTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION - To Savoy Bellavia From ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES . Senn6r Planner SECTION Subject NEGATIVE OEU ARATION Bate . October 11 12B 2 NO. 02 y Applicant: Larry Nye, Hillcrest Babtiat Church Reauest: To construct a 4 e 330 sq. 'fit. medical but•ldfnc� in conjunction with a 7 j 969• ;aq. lit, chur^h fact itx+ Location: Northeast corner Newman Avenue and Van Buren Street Qjckgro Based on the Staf f's initial study of this project a Draft Nep�ti ve Declaration was published in the 1 oca 1 newspaper and posted in the Office of the City Clerk for a 10..d&y public review period ending and ,�, — no =& ents, the attached caftwni s were received. Recomwndatt on Tree fnvi rorrrental Resources Section recoar*nds that the 112i� approve. Negative Dec arat on No. nZ-12 .�_.. n n9 e. preptas pr'o ect will not have a significant adverse effect on ' the env i noraaemt. Mitigation Measures The attached ai ti gati ng amsures will reduce potential envi rormota` effects Mu tiag frto the project and ere recoaaaended as conditions of approval. Respectfully RWW t = - MCI 7 ' � • • . . _ . .• _ .;!'+! ,'W! ,•• ••• •. �• .. ri .r �•lj� .a'♦ ��'` �.�• fir,• at' •A� NIT al 6. } r r r • a r r Y ,:�• , i.'' -----'----'- --..�� '•r �r'•'�' 'd�rr •. � 'w''..�••�•�.r.w...M��r� 1ti'�..•'�'ll�•1y�.1 .�•. .ti '•�.�'! . I I i 1 1. Natural qz-.g aM 220V a ctrica1 shall to stubbed in at the location of clothes dryers. '.. Natural gas shall be stubbed in at 'the locations of cooking facilities, wate.f: j •M heaters, and central heating units. 3. ,5F- i aw volurw. heads shall be used on all showers �~ 4. 5j= All build nq spoils, such as unusiable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus j or unusable material, shall be dispcx3ed of at an ofrsi_tz facility equipped ` to handle thFm. _ 5. The structures on the subject property, whether attached or detached, Gall be t- constructed in oampliance with the state acoustical standards set forth for units that lie within the 60 CNEL contours of the property. The interior noise levels of all dwelling units shall not exoee�d- the California insulation standards of 45 dba CNEL. Evidence of ompliance shall comist of sukYni ttal of an acoustical analysis report, prepared tinder the super. Asion of a persm experierr-ed in the field of acoustical. engineering, with the application for building permit:(s) . All measurers remx sm ded to mitigates noise to acceptable levels shall be incorporated into the design of the project. 6. 6 if lighting is included in the parking lot and/or recreation area energy efficient lanps shall be used (e.g. high pressure sodium vapor, metal halide) . All outside lighting shall be directed to prevent "spillage" onto adjacent prcpenrtieg. 7. A retailed soiLs analysis shall be prepared by a registered soils engineer. This analysis shall include on-site soil sampling and laboratory testing of materials to provide detailed reecrmr"ndationa regarding grading, chemical and fill pr perties, foundations, retaining walls, streets, and utilities. 8. if foil-type insulation is to be used, a fine retardant tyre shall be installed as aWroved by the Building Departmnt. 9. An erg irmserfnq geologist shall be engaged to submit a report iMicating the ground surface acceleration fmn earth movemit for the subject prcperty. All structure.- within, this develognent shall be-- a structed in cwplianae with the g`-factors a� ixxUcated by the geologist's report. CalcuJaticna for footLngs and st.ructucscl mober t Ia withetwd anticipated q--factors shall be sulhdtted to the City for reviev prior to the ismmmce of building permits. 10. A i�l►n for _ ilt control for, all aL m rmff fran the property during censtruct•i.on aM du-•ing initia►T. gyration of the project shall be. suhdtted to the California ftgiaml Wbth.sr Qtality Oant=1 Bcura staff for their review prior to the issuance of grading t..arnd.ts. 11. Infonoticn on equipment or facilities which may generate air pollutants sM11 be M*I ittrad to the South Cat Air Oaality 11 aget t District staff for their review prior to the Issuance of a Carti,fiea►t+e of for arty use within the building 1�. rM11r� ♦�i ��Y�Mr.�1� I■ � --- arl.a��r...� '•.r II I 1 1 Minutes, H .B . Planvaing .onvmission October 5, 1982 Page 4 A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD AND SECONDED BY MIRJAIIANGIR THAT '1111r COMMISSION UPHOLD 'ru CONDITIONS IMPOSED BY THE BOARD OF ING A1)JUS1'MEN'rS ON USE: PERMIT NO. 82-2 WITH THE EXCEPTION OF V C AN0 ALLOW THE GARAGE TO BE A MAXIMUM OF 15 FEET IN HEIGH ITH THE PROVISION OF A SPRINKr.ERING SYSTEM AS APPROVED BY THL E DEPARTMENT. MOTION FAILED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES s Higgins , Livengood, Mirj iaha►ngir NOES : Wi ache l l , Schumacher ASSENT: Pa►one, Porter ABSTAIN: None Further discussion followed. ON MOTION BY HIGGINS AND SECON Y LIVENGOOD THE COMMISSION UPHELD THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL I SED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUST- MENTS ON USE PERMIT 82-23 DENIED THE APPEAL BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Higgins , vengood, Winchell , Schumacher NOES, Mirja it ABSENT; Pao , Porter � ABSTAIN: N Coruai.s ner Livengood directed that the record show that his second of t atove notion had been only for the purpose of taking an K'th'n on the request so that the applicant could pursue his appeal City council if he wished to do so. "Dr Tx0 E EE T' O. 82-23 CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 82- Il/ 32 Continued from September 210 1982) + ,F_f�ca►nt3 Ls►ry� for A-QG [JQN h1Q . �czert�i�i8efo,�arti t I,C,D�ureh To permit a reduction of 10 parking spaces within a proposed 8 , 100 square foot church facility to be constructed in conjunction with a 10, 566 square foot medical building with reciprocal parking. Subject property in located on the northeast corner of Newman Avenue and lien Buren Street. Savoy Dellavia reported that parking for the medical facility has been id*ntified by stuff as the major issue in this request, Although a rec ipi-ocal parking agreement will be recorded between the two uses , the lack of adequate parking to &ccommodate the major user would Juftify the staff' s recta, endation that the plan be revised. He also noted that the landscapingg on the total site is insuffLcLent and must bc� enlarged, The Comission and the staff discussed the status of the pending revisions to Artizle 979, parking, and the effect this tsrviil6n might have on such facilities as the subject one. Mr . Bella- vie s'aapotaded that acrarding to present research there would appear to he vary little change in the Ntulle parking requirements for a Radical fac it ity of this *Lze. as a result of the code change . -4- 1 I 1 • [Kin!itea , H.S . Plar...Ang Commission October 5, 19112 Page 5 The public hea►rinq was opened. Larry Nye, applicant: , addrusned the Commission in support of his request . tie pointed out that the parXinq shortage is a re-- ou,lt of the un(terground portion of the medical building which, when calculated on a square footage basis only, accounts for the 1.0-space d if kerenc.F!. He informed the Commission that the use of the basement area for a linedt accelerator only would accommodate such a small. rurh6er of pe tients and staff at one time that the parking spacoa Would not ,,)e necessary when calculated on the basis of Lae rather than square footage. Se noted, too, that the site can bet made to conform with the landscaping re- quirement. There were tea► other persons to speak for or against the proposal, and the p!iblic hearing wat closed . The cormission discussed the parking and the applicant' s rationale for the shorts; . Also reviewed was the elevation of tha subject property above the: property directly behind itt and the suggestion � was male that becaupa of that grade differential no heavy land- � scar s rg be installed there to avoid a problem with drainage and i tha%: the euistinq row of trees be alloyed to constitute the land- scaping along that pro.perty line. ON XMION BY HIGGINS AND SECOND BY LIVENGOOD NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 82-32 WAS APPROVED BY THE POLLONINC VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Livengood, Winchetll, Schumacher, Mir jahangir NOES: Nome ASSENT a Paone, ' Por•ter ABSTAIN: None ON W)TION BY' HIG1GGINS AND SECOND BY LIVENGOOD CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 02-11 WAS APPOOVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOW- IM VM t ?INDING$ FOR APPROVAL: 18 the 014nning Commission determined that the proposed use: of � the bhsa *ht area for housing a linear electron accelerator, oreaetinct a reduction in the number of patients and employees who .grill be using the proposed facility at one time, will 80ficlentlx reduce the parking demnd to allow for the reduc- ti41A of they ten (10) parking spades as rmpested. 2M. o- granting of the conditional exception Will not constitute A 9tant of special privilege iftoons.isteent upon other proper. ties In -the +vicinity and under identical stone Classifications. Thb granting of the canditioual exception is necessary in lire 0i, to preserve the on joyment of one or more substantial mperty righter. 10 -5-02 - F+c* .•qi b i minutes , H . B . Plannin ^ommission OcLobez 5, 1982 Paue 5 4 . The granting of a conditional exception will n•ft be materially d.?tr• imental to the public welfare or injurious to property in the same zoning wlassification. 5 . The granting of the conditional exception will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach . AYES : Higgins, Livengood , Winchell , Schumacher, Mir jalrangir NOES : None ABSENT: Poone, Porter ABSTAIN : None ON MOTION BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY HIGGINS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 82-23 WAS APPRCYVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND COMOITIONS , BY TPE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: 1 . The proposal is substantially in conformance with all applicable provisions of Divisi.-n 9 . 2 . The proposed church/m. edical facility is consistent with the zon- ing and General Flan designations on the subject property. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1 . The site plan received and. dated October 5, 1982, shall be the approved conceptual layout: subject to the following : a► . A revised site plan shall be submitted for review and approval depicting the required ten (10) percent landscaping per Section 9331 (b) of the ordinance code. 2 . Prior to issuance of building permits, a reciprocal parking and access ;agreement between the two uses can the subject site shall be submitted to the City for approval by the City Attorney and thereafter recorded with the County Recorder of the County of Orange . 3. 1A11 building spoils such .an unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable raterials shall be disposed of at an offsite facility equipped to handle them. 4 . If lighting is included in the parking lot area , energy efficient lamps shall be used. All onsite lighting shall be directed to prevent spillage onto Adjacent properties. o . Xis foil,typs insulation is to be us*d, a fire retardant type 8l&11 b* ifn*talted to the approval of the Building DiVision. 6. A 4*t*i16d sails an&lysis shall be prepared by a registered soils '. *ngissear. 'hi• Sn41Ysis shall include onsets soil sampling and. • • ' `6" 10-5- 82 '* P.C. . I4inutea, N. P. Pla...,ling Commission Oc,tob ur 5,, 1982 Page 7 Laboratory test,'ng of materials to provide detailed recom- mendations regarding grading , chemical and fill properties, foundations , retaining walls , street,-,, and utilities . AYES: Higgins , Li.vengood , Winchall , Schumacher , Mirjahangir NOES: None. ABSENT: Paone, Potter. � ABSTAIN: None C a1TIONAL USE PERMIT NO . 02-24 f A icant s Ceneri t Telephone To pe ' t construction of a 3, 250 square foot addition to an existin jenezal Telephone ce titral. office huildfsig Inca►ted at the t northeast: orner of Main Street and Acacia Avenue? . �. The public ring was opened. Venrnech S. Win, Jr . , architect for the nre)poserd addition, ad- � dressed the Comte ion to concur with the suggested conditio:ne of approval except f the limitation of employees to ten. he said that there will bey mporary help in the building while the new ,, ...� equipment is being i talled and perhaps from time to time there- after depending on ne and requested that the limitation be i deleted. He also info d the Commission that the parking Sot had ; f - originally been designed City standards and asked that the mpplicant be relieved of restripin., as well . . j There were no other persons speak for or against the proposal , +; and Ghe public hearing was el d . Staff oxplained than there &.:a n 'peci.fic parking requirements ap- plicable to project3 such as the a ecYt request. The Commission discussed the parking notda of the il.it:y as proposed and the possibility that tWs use might be. ch sled in the future to a use which might require additional parking aces . In response to this concern, the buildfnq engineer fat neral Telephone aasured that, the cast and leyivtics of moving the sat amount of electronic e��. uip"nt in the structure and arecablind t nether location would ' e f!'*ctively quarantee that this, t*uld not ha n. Aa so. taken into I c;onridc�aration weir* ?soar• the employee count co- be verified dnd heir a linitat.ion to a specific nw1ber of emplc a Mould be stem- � faft"d i+ hY. Ll"W= AND uUCMD E1 WHUWHER 'TIONAL USE 'N Y • T IRK PO;JA IM VOT2 4 • The P90P004d 3, 250 sgwr* foist addition to the existing General serene ta#illt , Y is CoMatible with surrounding land uses and -70b nr. .wr. �untington Vooth dop16r#!'roo. bf community tUmlopment STAf f Ft ORT LriK I BIT "Aw TO: p anninq Conninai.un FROM: COnftini ty Development DATE; May 17, 1988 dUBJECT., ADMINISTR.ATIVX REVI W). 57-79/ CONDXTromAL ExcE1 non (VARIANCE) NO.(67-66 "I—,) dPY,li-Y ': J .H. Hedrick and Co. : L,.400 South Ban Gabriel Blva , May 3, 1988 Ban Gabriel , CA 91776 IFt1CtA�Q�Y j}RC}CE5 N'G DATE: am=: Van Buren Properties July 30 1988 2075 Palos Verdes Dr. north Suite 214 zabob OP (Office f ,Loraita, CA 90717 Rrof;ssiona l) $ $ AR: To construct a 3- 9MIM MU: Office story 10 , 567 sq.ft . Professional Racal - of-fl-ce building with joint use of parking with 64% of the isT;,KQsiBZ-: vacant required parking provide4 on adjacent jarcol zQJEAGu: located to the .east . .20 acre CAx 1) Reduce landscape (12, 232 net aq, ft . ) , planter width from 10 ft . to 5 f t . E 2) Reduce exterior sideyard sotback from 10 ft . to 5 ft . � on: 8201 Newman Avenue (Northeast curner of Newman and Van Buren) 1.0 . b1WUz8J= 'AcTiOe: Approve Administrative Review No . 67-29 with findings and conditions of approval snd deny Conditional Exception ('Variance) No. 67-60 with findingn �.o �Ae .. aMUM: Jdministrative Review No. 87-29 is a request to construct a 3- story 10,067 sq. ft. aedicsl office building on the northeast correr of Newman Avenue and 'Van Buren Street . Conditional Exception (Variance) So. 07-68o is a request for an, ezterlor sidayard setback Of 0 fe~t In lieu of is feet for the office building and landscape planter width adjacent to parking along Homan Avenue of 5 feet in lieu of 10 feet . Although the plantar is aotually on the adjacent A•tM I701.11f,Q.. L yrp ' y Y. lot, it is part of comma parking area nec*'n ary for this project to procee:d. In addition, then applicant is requesting joint �e of perking between the proposed medical office and a proposed church on the adjacent parcel to the east (Conditional UBe Permit r No . 97-17) . L 0 11 MI IUD li -ZON1142 GEC+ F .JgHA_TI01 : �,1i 9O,t.wRh92 KtX: NaX-&b of SUb jest. P^plat x GRIMM PLAIN 01Wt3NaAT10N-,1 Medium ae:nnity Residential 101m: Rx (Medium Density Residential) LAW USE: Apartments zaa"r subjac t Proms: GIMIM PLAIN G19SXGNATION: Office Professional SOME: ' 4P (Office Professional) LAyAD UsRt VatcAnt (Proposed Church -- Conditional { Use Permit No. 87-17) { �t��tih of ��,��t prtlrraert�r: i 02312AL PLAN D)1SIMT1Gi9: Public, Quasi-Public, Institutional Iola: dSP-"1 LARD i r$8: Cemetery "St of subixct L•`� : 13MIZRAL PIAN 0951GRATT,Ga: Medium Denatty Residenti of l gong: R2 (Medium Density Residean4ial) tl Udz t Aps r talent s The proposed project Is covered under Negative Declaration No. 82-32 which was approved by the Planning Commission for a similar project of the some sisw and intensity on October 5, 1982 (see minutes for October S, 1902 planning commission meeting) . _R Q: not appiicalbio. Alan lu : not applicable. -7-0- _R=JJtJC„MM: Not applicable. 4-49 rYIZA19 e Not aapplicabla. 2-2 ron WMAea �rsR= Aftiftl8tt4tiVe 24vi0W No. 67-29 and Conditional Zxe%rtion (Variance) M. 47w99 i• a request to construct a 3-story, 70, 567 ■q. ft. W81981 Of9ioo building with a re"ext for joint; use of parking with �Rt�f u>�# - !1/�7199 ' ' •.1- �09i�d) t •1 • ' the adjacent propa4w church use, with variant a- ;" for axtevior sib and setback and landseRpe plantar wfdth. �1ithOugh this app�oartion b&s been submitted independently from Conditional Use Permit No. 17-17 (proposed ehu;ch) ,, The applicants for Math grojects have been cooperative Iv% wo king together to provide required parking and inaure design compatibility. A rec i rico 1 parking and access agremont has- been r*covdad on the subject site and the adjacent site. The following is a matrix outiini.nq compliance with the :sowing: WFI.TA figatialk ,issue AWMAKed &enyided 9200 .4 Nin , pared stxe 100000 s . f 1.3 , ";� 6 .f "in . frontage 1.00 • 1004 9200.3 Max. bldg. height 3 stories 3 btories 38' 35 • 9200.6 &etbocks Front it?' 10 ' Int. :aide 5 • 460 Ext. Nidn 100 • Feat S• 5• 9606 Parking Spaces fil 32 (36%) Gn-site (one apace per. 11 (64%) on adj . 175 ' sq. ft . of parcel * floor area) 61 Total 9605 Landscape Area 10% 10% (Combined parcels) 20996 s . f . 2.996 s . f . Landscaper P:anterr 108 �5• Nidth Alcrnq Street / a Variance IR*queer t as Joist Una of parking Request Mai.nt Ilse of ��rk rya business hours for the ae4icatl office use will be limited to 6 : 00 AN to 6: 0k; PH "sekdays . The church will to limited to 6: 00 AN to 11 :00 RN on Sunday*, Each use shall have exclusive use of both parking areas during their designated hours of operation as agrceod to in the "Dielavation of Establishment of protesAlve Covenantal Conditions h Restrictions and Grants of Rosemont" so recorded by thm County Rao.;4rderr aad approved as to form by the City of Huntington Attorney (Attacbmnt 4) . Based on the iiuntingtou Nesch Ordinance Cod* Article 960# parking requiremat of one space far 175 square foot of floor ores for medics) offices* the medical building requires 61 parking spaces , The Applicant is providing 22 spaces (36%) on sitar and the remaining 3 + spacer (44 on the adjacent church pare*1 * Duo to the offset days dt f impost - /i�lS• ;: - - (05666) of ,operation of thelkie► o0 5eis, tejquir6d ,peirXi'n� K.,L'11 'b4i 'arovided foc each MSM .� The: applicant is requesting variances for reduced building setback and reduced landscape planter widths , of S feet in lieu of 10 fleet along Newman Avenue. In Noversiber of 1987 , the Office Professional Zoning District requiromeynt: for front setback changed from five (5) feet to test 110) beet. As indicated in Section 4 . 0, Environmental Status , Of this report, an October 5, 1982 a project vety, similar to this project was approved by the' Plinhing' Commission. Tha` 60rme'r prb joct was approved with a five (5) foot front setback its 1982 which compliedwith the Offir4 Profeessi.on&2 Zoning district . ' H6w*'v6i,' since that project never inxwod ' foawardo the eentitrletmeAb became null and void . Front yard setback for, the building along van Buren is 10 fset as required by Huntington Beach Ordinance Code Article 961. III ,. - . , •. . Overall landscaping exceeds the required 8 percent . Although the reduced setback Vould not nreste a major negative 'impart cn Newman across the street from a csnw� tary With a great dead of since it is sax open space-et there is not a land-relatmd hardship to justify granting the variance. The site meats' the ' minimum f ro`ntag6 and area requirements and iR reelativeuly fiat: and rectangular . To most the setback rogtiireerrant, thb w, building will have to be narrowed by 5 feet . This would create a lB feet wide leardscapa area along Newman consistent with the Van Buren front+'age f'or loor'ee' mai tune landscaping. QM21EW & tY With 6ars4und.3ng_.LIB 7he proposed project 'is , erurroundeed, by residential use i to the north and vast . Medium density spartmerits located across Van Buren Street to the west are ;iufferad ' by the street; the spartment units to the �io rt:h are a min;aturn of 50 feet : from the coiamon property line with Mlittle or no view of the ptoposeed building due to an existing 6 foot masonry wall , mature landscaping# and a driveway aloh%, thriis: property line. The office will be compatible with the proposed church to the Located across Newman Avenue to the south is en enclosed undeveloped portion of cemetery. Acroas Newman, c:oser to Beach Boulevard is the hospital complex which will be compatible with the proposed medical building . To insure architeectutal c6mpatibility of the two buildings, Design Review Board approval is required ss a condition of approval . Staff recoamr nds that the Planning Commission approve Administrative Review No. 97-29 with the following findings and condition,3 of � approval and deny Conditional Exception (variance) No. 67-68 with -,gee following findings : ptaff Report - 5/17/86 006- (05666) .f'IN r I 1 a 1 . The granting of Administrative Review No . 87-29 for construction of 101567 sq . ft. medical office building will not adversely effect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Reach. 2 . The ertubliahment, maintenance aadl operation of 10 , 'S67 sq. ft. modicarl office building will not be detrimental to : a, The general welfare of peraoaaa residing or working in the vicinity; ' m rovem nt in he vicinity of such use or b. Property and � p e s t c y building. q layout, and design of the proposed medical � . The location, site yP P office building properly adapts the proposed structures to streets, Mriveways , and other adjacent structures and uses in a harmonious manner { 4 . The combination and relationship of the proposed medical office building and the proposed use on the adjacent site are properly integrated 6 . The atuceps to ind parking for the proposed 10, 567 sq. ft . medical office building and the proposed church on the adjacent parcel . will not create an undue traffic problem since they will never be in use simultaneously, as agreed to in the CC&R' s and Grants 'of Easement. DNA ZQ1 29MI -.M IT_ ION (y"rMCE) gQ. 87 fix 1. The girauti,ng of Conditional Exception ('variance) No . 87-68 for a five (5) foot in lieu of ten ( 70) foot exterior sideyard building setback and a five (5) foot in lieu of , a ten ( 10) foot planter width along Van Buren will adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. 2 . Since the subject property can be fully developed within regular established sotback$ , Conditional Exception (Variance) No . 87-68 for :reduced exterior sideyard setback building and plantar width in not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights . 3. The granting of Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 87r-68 for reduced exterior sideyard building setback and planter width will be detrimental to the general welfare of persons working or residing in the vicinity. 4 . The granting of Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 87-66 for exterior sideyard building setback and planter width will be detariniental to the value of the property and improvements in the nelghborbood. SUES MOpart 5/17/88 605- (05666) r w , n o ail Exception V clans. No .. �87w6A for St Granting of C ..Atibn ( � exterior sidayard setback and planter vidth would constitute a i special privilege inconsistent with limitations upon other Office . Professional propartion in the vicinity,,. . � 8 , bet:ause of the s�tr.k; 'itmanficuration'' ' 'sha lu Wand ,ladk of' unl'quo topographic febtutdil' o'f thet subject, property, there does not appear to be exceptional or bxtraordinary circumstances or conditio►ris applicable' to the lend, buildings or premises involved that does not apply senerally to property or class of uses in the 4ffica Vrofesssional district . . =IONS OJ. APPROVAL I. The site plan dated "April 27 , 1981 , floor plans , and elevations received and dated April 12 , 1988 shall be the conceptually approved layout : subject' to the f0d1low'ing modi.f� cations: la . The building on the site plan shall be r.evisad vo reflect a 'lit foot exterior R ideyard setback from Newman Avenue . 2a. The' parking - area landscape planter along peswman shall be increased , to 10 feet in w dth. 2. Taring 14o Issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit the fol1bwrih2q 0lans : a . Larndscapa ' and ir'tigaition plan to the Department of Community Development and Public works for review and approval . b. ytooftdp wechaniCal Equipment plans. Said plan shall indicate scruenino of ' all rooftop mechanical equipment and shall delineate the type of material proposed to screen, said equ i psaant . • . ., C. The project shell be reviewed and approved by the Design Rerviev Hoard for design compatibility with the proposed church to belodated' bn the adjacent parcel . 3 . Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall complete the following : a. Install entire parking 'area' ' as depicted on site plan dated April 27, 1986 : b. Conatruct ' all ,Public Varks imptovement as required. 4 . One on-site fire hydrant shall be provided at east property lime as specified by the Fire Department . s. An automatic fire sprinkler system with combination standpipe system shall be approved and 1nrstalled ' pursuant to fire Department regulations. f staff Repbat " . 8/17/08 b6_ (A3�drd) A 44 e 61 Service roads 6�..,A firer lanes * rs determine �A'by the Fire Department, shall be posted and m,lrked . • 7 . Drive rrirculation shall be maintained from Van Buren to Newman tbru the parking lot With a minimum inside ,radius of 17 feet provided at corner. S . ftiveeway approaches shell be a mi.r,imum of twenty-seven feet (27 foot) in width and shall be of radium type construction. 9 . All building +spoils , such roe* anusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material , shall be disposed of at an . off-rite facility equipped to handle theta. ld . Low-voluart heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets . 1.1 . tf lighting is included in the parking lot , Nigh--pressure sodium vapor lamps shall be used for energy savings . All outside lighting an all be directed to prevent "apillrage" onto adjacent properties . 12. All applicable Public Works fees shall be pain prior to Issuance I of building porraits . 1&. The development ,shall comply with all applicable provision.-.0 of the Ordinance Codes Building Division, anu 1`iree Department . 14 . A detailed moils analysis shall be prepared by a registered Hails Rogineear . This analysis shall include on--site soil sampling and laboratory testing of mosteriialm to provide detailed recommendations regarding grading, chemical and fill properties, foundations , retaining wall;, , mtreeests , and util.i,ttes . � 15 . Landscaping shall comply with Section 9608 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Coda. 16 . The office use shall be limited to between 6 : 00 am and 6 pro Monday through Friday. Office uses beyond those hours Are prohibited. 27, Tho planning Commission reserves the right to revoke this Mainistrativee Review if vvy violations of these conditions or the Huntington Beach Ordink..:ce Code occurs . 11a y` EM13M AM10 : The Planning Commission may 4-my Administrative Review No. 87-29 and Conditional EzceVtion (variance+) No . 87-•66 with findings. �elr,aP6a ,J i -- -- - � • � ■ ' i t u now � 1 3* Axis *&p 2. Sit* plans floor plan and elevations � 3 . project Narrative 4 . 0*01aration of Establishment of Protective Cove;ants Conditions and! Itest rietions and GrInta of Easement i. Minutes from the October 5, 1982 planning Commission meeting . i • ;i i 1 . (05664) ' lit v kg-CD-01 4fGo w•.-il�4o-CO 1� Emit Rb•�O -, RPM HS � I �•—�..�.. � � � .�,., i ...ski. I -----__� cl) s � r i va . R 78RIO � R .+ r me rn LL � N ... tiff ' p/ Ip�1hM1 A IvOli f .. .. . .. ._._. ... . i ... ... .. .. ......... ..- -- ---- ----------- .... ....... ... � .... i .. ....._... .CAM. .... . . ..... .. .,1611SM ..._.-. ...... i �4 r mom ••MGM rr' - wm IF Firm so t' MY�•. v,.if..w•w�r,+..w..w, .y r.. 1 ~ Y.�IMA•r�• �� t 1 ' ILI OT ! I �t ` •3 + ! 3116 It I - �'�• •� 'fit\\ +i�� 1 ' fwtI L .. , V, Ar•�`_it. t�} � '�^a� - i � :ter►::{ ' �:,v•w• .. {_ ! s � -�� , .. -. .-.` -_Tt �• _'•S '� . tit . . - •- - '-_ �i� - r /� - 61 •loop r f Ir+reww go"-lo W. �. IL "• � ; � '� • - �! • j r •�• Ji c. J fy s • • a♦ •mot o • � .JA 96 R �! � � j � jai . _�_.•-,�..��.-,..._ �� „_ � � 'f _- , {{ T••-7 -vim•• . +.r•O�r+l..y.�..-.T- -- _ _. •_ _ . _.. .� ; I POD f� • • ' ,. • Imo'.. • • .. .. • . NAM --'_ =ice'- 1 - • � •I a, r T"_ 71 Tm -.il%.r-!�z*'.- 0� ftip Pt • . . ;• ".:�+�-.'-�i yt�f;..�,`.,[•. .�[ -� - '/i,•r. «a�'�1•a•r -•� F,�r"f's`a�_��tiLi• � • . _- -.•/i�h�.� L•f.a4T;•"•t�_l.r.. r1•' .�s��_�'.-frYh .r-�t:�'••-� •f `� .. ••a.'r • .1 •l 1_ 'f' .tip�' �^. .. F `�y ,v. ..r•}[ •r, -� � •�•_ '• r.• , _ _ r . 1.J' .1f µ,. 7•• ��`�l •��..y. _ tl. ' - - _ -'f.'.fit 1 .L••;►:r,J-'�, •/- � - • - � -.- •- . .. . ' - _ ; ICI �< R"•ter��fwf - ► 1. •_ ••- - .,- - _ _ f 16 Fu � 11 r 1 ale ill / .-•�e�..��.. J� 4 �---��.�...—� — - � � �� F 0 ot � � ..r.•i�orfw _2 L weft .•:.'91^_1.�7•: _ }-.•'•� '�'•'.�`' r;. :'�:'t€.�:1• ,ice :� ►fat•,� �,..•• - = r, ±'��i t-y� L: .fjG i�Jl - ^�'�+r• - -. • •r"•• •f''. .. - .i s�-:`•.. � '• . � .', •.�r.,•r4 j.�+r�li l�l_`��'�� i •�!.•.� •"��'.hti ftr �M .��.`��-.• ' - •• , r. ��. •+ ��• •� .•,.•• .. +L •r• •Y� ^;_ 'i � LS' r��rlr�'►j.+ � } -.:'µ• 'ter . •' ' - i :+ .?r.i -=tom ° - - •�/: .:f+�'�;•'�-_ /y�`"�'rj:�� :r•._�i 4 - r•• NVI • '. .. ', ��', ' •- -•. ++• - i' fir•.• .' - i (��ll(� �� alit etitv� keWTM OL"A'T _ ,E TI77 ..-_r.. Y-jy •�. - - - err•_._ fir. _ • .rrr10. .. -� .r �!"s'r'It _ t t#g �r•r��nr.•.wr ..-_ e y 46 Al M&$"0WAJJJL 7Ltlr,.MM CAUF0A NJA 0IF74 NIA JWof"1 Vain Buren Medl(:,O Office Building r In Ra+ Rase To The "Application Requireirwnts" Item 09 We Offer This Narrative (a) Site reswz for initiating this applicatiut i. We are proposing to construct ho 3 story, 11,109 (total) "re foot Medical Offlce Building In a zone dwwteid as R-� Office furor-s&ionel District. Since Wi zwo does rrnt sHo w for this type of buiit9ing, we request a zone amend- "*nl for this project. (b) Area dw..ription and population served by the proposed um- of the project. Thr proposed protect Is lucated nortt, and vast of Humans Hospital of Hurt- INtan Bench as wall n4 Hur,tington Beach Medical Tor+;ars and West Beach Medical Atweimtes. i The project wi l', serve* patients who require raad'iatlran thercapv for cancer, and will alma ptavida office apace for drx:tore to spe patients outside the hospital envir r wr►t, T1* proJect will also be an radvantagea for locat residents who may *rak, med;eml services & an out patient b+ar 'gyp) Descriptic*n of tho pro jar,t Se, vices. Fuwtideffwn tally 9 the project *Jll provide offices for dkwt:ors to tre'st patient-3 outside tine hospital et)vironrT*nt. Ono of thsa project owners, Dr. r. Chan, Phd, will prnvide radiatiar, thrr•a- py for comer patients. (d) Description of SAurroun&'K Area. � Ths pcopqorty myth of the proposed project it comprized of a number of 2 bedroom and studio apartments. To the east arse single family homes, to the west aperunents. To the south is a large open lot that leads info a park-like areas. The lot consists of furrowed earth. Just west of the p%�! site b the Hospital o f I-km t cngt do Brach. Furtl►er wcst is RmtIngton Bch Medical Towers arod beyprrd that is West Beach Medical �;::�'A. Aarociatas. 4; A I 0 AM — dkk- In. Response Tic "Application Requirements" item 010% For Conditional Exception (a) 'Wlrat exc4ptional clrcurmte ncos apply ' tb petitiexred property (including size, d%sper tap*`aphyr location or surroundings)', that deprives it of privileges ,nnnmily enjoyed? ; ' 'T!�; two parcels that corr*w" the lot are 1 independently owned (Parcel #1 by Van Sure+n Properties, east of the property centerline so Parcel px 'by ihlllicrset Miaslonary Baptist Church, west of the property centerline). Ultimateslyr two buildings will be bunt on is propert•/: If! the parcels were divided eeequeslly, the parking requirements could make both, projects unfeasi- ble. Co nbining the parking will satisfy all conditions. Sfnceay a h+i dical Office Building and a Church funtion at very different hourar "reed parking is realistic and practical. Both owners have ,agreed to parking easements for each other oe; days they do not themselves require parking. Will the request constitute a great of special privileges Inconsistent with normal limitations? i Since both owners have egreed oe•e the cot ditions of the parking eses+ements, they will not miffer any Inconveniences. The parking corWitiesn will not affect the surrounding properties. , This is on "R-5 Professional Office District" property, cam will be entering and leaving the site Uiroughout the day, as would be expected. TI-w densities of cars in any appropriate venture would be similasrk thesref6re, the impact of this parking arrangement would not be any mores detrimental then 1 `As area was predestined to experietxv by way of zoining. (c) Why Is this request necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of one or man substantial property rights? It will satisfy the property right of use and development within the zoning code. The property can be more effici fntly utilised for the medical and spiritual befit of the nwlghborhood. W kete reasons why the granting of this ree;uest will not be materially dettri rrraet l to then public welfare. Since the south portion of the propoLed 1`.a�ul9ding faces on empty lest, its nness Is anent intrusive. The north faces propeety o"rated bye i A driveway and parking from then building itself. ii A concrete block well. III An all driveway (for the residents of they apartment buildlrsg�... � Iv The carports for those spartment tenants. The project camnat be a detriment to any of Its rosighbors. Mrsrl�r • �0.iAll�Ai1NlL 1!L1i�iy MM »CIMU�+o1N11A i!��M�� • .. In Resporesf To "Application Requh`ertwit" Item 010: For Conditimal Exception (a) What •xcoptional cimmmtences apply to petitioned property (including site, eh Vep topogrooyp location or surroundings) that deprive it of privileges nun naliy enjoyed? T1* doalgn o: W% project and all the parking requir nonts are extrenwly tights For this project we wish to of for a 101-M setback from the curbs (on Ne:':;oan and similarly Van F en) to the property line. Landscep Jng will compose 51-0" of this dimension. In addition, we are sutting back 5'-0" to the In-j face of the pr ,-wd building with additional landscaping and In some stances 7'-011 to tee. building. 5incr we are tre or`slerg the property line with our 10'-0" wide lan•Jecaping (the purpose of this "Conditional Exception"), we are also requesting relief from the 20" berm Cole Section 964-7 , :7, (b) Will the Mquest constitute is grant of special privilege Inconsistent with nun wrl limitatians Normal lwK%cWe setback is 101-0" siong tho public right-of-way at tiw, property Una. It is talt that our proposal will not constitute special privl- l . (c) Why Is this request nacauwry for the preservation and enjoyment of one or more substantial property rlgh;s? Granting this right will allow the property to be efficiently utilized. (d) State reasons why the granting of this request will not be materially detri- mental to the public welfare. The granting of this request wilt ,rot be detrimental to the public's welfare bwaAa the lwwWcgm mounding will visually create the same effect as the additional footege in the setback. M�� a z' 46 4 i, ft &Lo wA .r ,LK `D U Ali 01313 <;4L owl P1 PST A1UW300 AND MTATid +' DKLARATYCM W MAILIBN4UM. OF ,tNOrl` %V3 CWWAM i CMITION2 AM RUMMIG" AMR GkAK'!'f OF "I , ' TPu P1 aw A1mme no unmu aPiDx_Ak1 tom mm Ctiwr !e made by ski bete MILLOM WSSI 1UN 1AP"fliT ClidkQj Inc., & Wiforota Cn•i.,oraties, baroinaftear e4lod '"Chetah,' and WAN SUM PADPRRTYXX, a Califoseirs Lla ted Paarturahlp, berelmf te'r cal:sd "Vas Duraa," and supersedee and ten4satos tl4 pirevious Decloratios of Batablisboeat of px6teat1v-A Covoaa+te, Cs1A4l, 4wo fnd .3j•"car,lctlose ead Create of Iesessnts beretafors ► ocarded os or about May Z, 1983t insttrumat Clorcb sad We ourea si's ownaim of that custaia, real property is the eltlr of BuntiRgtoa Beech, Cou aty oC Create& state of Celifot`aia, known as Pattel.s 1 and 3 vi Parcel Pup No. $2576. recorded to book 1790 ftse l and 2 of ro teal Msps Is the Wit* of the Cosaty Recorder of Deid Cauaty as deaigmted on fthiblt "A" attacbed berate, rbicb parcels of Colloatively ea Wrlso; that ccrtuLa property lacarad at we"E a Lae amd Vas bares kreat. �. eor pagwm r of this Abres+aest, Said Parcels b sad 2 are brref"fra= e011600vely 041W the "fttive Pf"Orty." Is Chureb to the amet of Peel 2. 2. 'Pear &wom is tlao owmer of Parcel 1. d,l ;1 d» Ike Nreirs ltel►errty ft dea loeatod oa fth"Jt "b." •trashed bereto eat by ads Warease s we a met beratfs d. aw Pere of this Dealarstias is to srwjact each sod o'ory Po"Aarr of the wire Ftwercy to the Covemants, Coadltims Ti�p�tNos►i brat ltis eat forth, to otaklu h tba arr"Cumat does- iI 1rtY�l�iy1"' , f all "us west* hereinafter deseribea. and to provide the parties berets W19k that "W rowe that the Irtire prof-tarty will be dtwiew In octerd"co with a Plea •[ T 4prerverent and operated for the mmcl baaelit of the owners of any and all portion of the Rath• property and their respective hditwo„ outcrosers, essipae, grsnteesk martgagess. tenente. AMA 0 w►e til•* Said Piss► of xmprovomient is marked %Xhtbit "A." attached beroto and w;, this reference iacorporstod heroin. i. Church and Van Buren do harobf astabliah the coveoapte, eenditions and restrictions hereinafter set forth. and Secant to each other the eas arents hereinafter dese r Lb4d. 7. Church doew hereby grant to Waco Sumo an "elusive ease— mot for this purposes epocif led in Section 3 over. across add upon the Parking Ares of fNrcel 2 during "!'rtnary Qustness Hours" as hereinafter defined to Section 4. Or, e. Murch does hereby Brant n Van Ddren an maateeont +serer and across the Parking Area of parcel 2 for the purpose of itSress sad r . igress to the Parking Area of MCCe1 t and the radical AulUing. !. Van Burets dues hereby grant to Church an exclusive ease— met for the purposes specified in Sectior 3 aver.' acrase , and upon the Parking Ann of Pare during "Primary Church Activity ■oum** ace �' iereiaaf�r A+ellrrai iet :eAtio�oe �. lQ. Yen Bursa does hereby grant to Church as Samar"' t carer and ser rai the Forking /Brea of Parcel 1 four the purpose of iagensa sod egt" to the Pawkiag Area of Parcel t otrd the Church Pulldiag. ' UP U10 046e10e4kte gusted hereie ahrll in mmb Ammeame be /rst at to ttte irilAliag area of tiro r6weel of tha ara►ms of 404 aes;Ussit+ 04 #n eaaM fnStAnce shall be for the use ard bmwf it. to SwOMra With others. of such grairtero its heirs. ex6outorer,. 84riai- '' i�ttrte►xAr �e�sotic •aeei�ns; Rert�nRs. srbtewcaetrr seretww�re iai "I 7 r 1r•xY IUL1Ol �i ,.y t _�_.... Y , _ .. ....... _....-._._- -___._.- .-I„ T+ K# Ir .. 1 f � Yw • ' d.A• `T bontMrs 1MV44i8 sea 11tonnes. and ties cwsta"rr sad bull"$* Sayttess Ml t ldwurMes of Its 1 rr1n41ts. It. 6xeept for such ancroachments ar Are dealautsd -t-u M&Ibtt "A," so building shall be oreeted or maintained over or tr..pon any of die peopetty within the satire Property which ic, or beemos. subject ►' to ss rraaesst tev *vssoar purposes. 11.. Oureb and Van Buren do bereby great ka each other ear over, tfi**r respective portions of the Parking Area which are locatQ an toceal' �1 pnd/os' Tercel Y,�1 . (etr the pu rpose of buildlog and rebutUtsg mW ropiriring the "]Parking Area" in the svent of is partial or coital 641ptimcilon of All 'ibp#oyssenci; contemplated i:i exhibit "A." This Rosemont shall Ineluds the right of reasonatle ingFcos add ogress over such other portions of Parcels I sad Z for put-poses of buildipg and rebuilding and repair. 14. Van Soren hereby grants to Church the option to purchass faireel 16 being a. portion of the Intl-re Eroperty ,ars deperibed oa Exhibit "Mw atcachad hereta, including an isprovaNents which have been erected tberson. This optiow to purchase shall Cowmento as follows: Is the event Ant Van Buren should de,cide to sell Parcal 1 or vetelve a bons fide affar to purchaso the sus at a prict st Web they are willing to sell$ they *hail notify dorth In writing of the swat for which they will sell the property or the offering price which they are williag to accept, and Chart?. �.. Sr11 have thirty (30) days thereof tar In "bleb to eseraistr its ghee tw parchase Parcel l at the pities at which Was Darts" to • *geese 10 to 0011 or the said offering price, wMch they are willing 'to accept ;Md Church upon ix*ralaa of its opttass Aail isr■salistellr eatst Into en escrow in the usual fawn providing '� for tie Perth"* of said prdparty of the sold pritlN upas the y �i1y P. SU-} US I; %"at term. which east" shall provide for closing within thirty (30) doff of eh4 U* -Mtoot . bWftld WILMA tatl to esereiaa said eptum pia Bursa shall Us faro-- t-3 ssl: the k, proportp it the pairs offered thems or at a higher prices upon the so= femme et parmat to any parses or persons for s period � of sts (6) wanths after the sspirstioa of the ties at which Our" oap exercise its, option to purchase. After the leerpiratton of ■aid six (6) r4nths period* if Van Duren has not sold said Ureal 1, the ri`ht to sell Parcerl i to parsaos other thou the Church shall •%Pies unlede end until they give a further notice or receive another of for 047 art willing to accepts as aforesaid. 15. Church hereby grants to Was Buren the option to purchase Parcel I. being a portion of the Entire Property as doecribed do tshibit ^3" actacbed h+erstot including any improvements which have been erected thereon. phis aptlos to purchase shall cosmage on follows; In the av*ut this Church should decide to sell Parcel Z or receive a bow fado otter to purchase t%e sass at a price at which they 4wa Milling to @e11, they shell notify Vv.t Buren let raffles of the r awew a for which tbsy will soil the property or the offering price which tlrY are willful to 44cept. and Vsa Buren small forme tbirtyr (30) days Ow44.ttee fo Ode% to exercise its opfloo to pureMsom Parcel I at the Prue at t 6kh Owh. b is a0sreaba• to sell or the "Ad off exist price r thl61 toay am riltime0 to accept amid 'cos Barra up" a:orel" of its lma WWU iftlelietely eater late as 04ta n in the wMal lormie pievidbe dorr do pan6ase of the said property at the said ptriae oVea lira saval tone. which *scrag @ball provide iotr cloeietp within thirty ( do" of tlto epsatimas thereat. ibweld 'fret lures fail to exercise f�rtwk amw1b ""I i6 freer to sell ski rropartyr at tier grill i 1,7 eLfel�rd tYerZ:. •r �� o �.igiwrr prrise, Mpasa tMe rawY tit'M 4t p�r►Yraat t0 my "Tom or poraedr tow r< parsed of Sts (•i) rronshr Sttrr the ' Opfretie' of the tow at Olbtch tan Buren may srtretee etc option to patebaeov Actor tho eirpLration of said, Sin (i) Waif'• pixie+ s if *oak Ma sot void said Farcel 2, the right -to ae11 parcel g to persona of kw Ciao Tom hires *hall expire unless and until they *ivo a further awtea or Meier, eaikhor offer they, Caro villias to accept, as #�r�etiak 1 Use to Casioral leis for the purpasr♦ of this Declaration, the tntirr Nroperty Is divided Into Owes •etehorilei which relate to arse, all of erica aro 'i Westad an Ubibit '"A" and' are hereafter referred to mpecE/vely "Church Building Ar*&,vN "lMedital Puil'disp Ares," and "ta'cinp Asws." leis The Church tui ld i ng shall be used for the uma nzetion operation mW saintenance of a veligiaea worship. assembly earn edseac t"61 faculty. " 1.3. The Vadtaal intlding shall be used for the eAMitt'prt#", ap+rrratioa 0" eaiaton*fte• of a budding to be utilized for any Iffful pure. l.4.' 1hw parking area shall be wood for pori.iat sad o► ::ar seer M "Am" 94 $104040 3 horeis. sale So WW" sbreli W arseted, plat". nalsesiawa or OWSS"Staw Wtaw" 40 OW part of the 1karre tMorrty until or sales i do arGstl,M dee4pq qqatarre and color Ing thirso!(, aball have beers rrprrt�wd by IM Clwral► PAW 67 Vr4 freer►. diwrch NOW Vsar 30100 SMil, OPM SLeSM @04 off VW+tl. "ideaaa the tray by SjdoralsC #Weh 4op"We,& • i i i OW of pW Mal rpacf tleaRU► errs the We rhaw drari lire AWA , f eX I. dliw Addp+ ' ell � a rx • a•- � �;�; �.�. �a a�t�tierlr. aatailieho�rrMat. � t�Mtaaaae� •! M OtWW atmetum upon t6a 1oNtrre p""rty elMsii be 7 . aWAmW ritlMir the 11"s for the laadt dercribad reepeetively and eolleati voly " boi ldbW areas as depicted lea ixhtbit "At"' atta d btrola Old by tail r•forome taorpersltod herein. Suah lands are IMarR+reiter toferred to as "Oorth prilding Ara," cod "11ediUal Building Arrl►t" •y. Notwithstanding rho provisions of Pasegrapha 2, 1. and isle 104 era. t*rt(aaa of the 6nttre praparty adjacent to luildinp Are" mey be Used for: �.3. (a) todaatrien sidavalks, planting contatsaro *ad atL*r daaorOtira OW laadacapiNg features sbereon;, 1.3, (h) The Imotallation, rereoval, replasant. rspatr, use ai uinewm was of dorsaopata, hose bibbNa yard or floodlights, sub•- ovirtaee building to mdaMtiona, and arch identification alps of building 4eeapa*rtp as vey be attached to or grow an intargral part of a building at 4my Obw altmeted upon any portion of the SUilding Areaw; 1.3, (a) The opening thermonto of daar■ of Coatigumm Sanding Am ukich opon outward; s . (d) :'be tes"raryr erectiwa of ladders, scaffolding amdl � b=140"d 40144 perl"S of emattaettor' roreodel IM, toMrtldias of NOW& of betUMV amd beltdisS sppvrtaaaaess Mpoa the eaaditias �f etc# thsr 04eM 'IMmINWHom. rewadalb%, robuiJliag or repair to �, diir#� M'Mt�op�d r►d so�1M lwldtrn,, ffs�ia* sad b�Mr�dcriae aso balm h Im" AMA `� , e1w► � promptly ae�oaad s 3a, M( port tr a of the Retire Property which is were M taMhtr rA ew b"bilt "#." actsebod hereto mW by Oda rate do" mde d Vag Mimi* W j &U peMrtlam of the 1641rw pt rty atbar t�MerM al Nrw Ertl rs wa•i for ftAlw par o ,h atr tr 44911w )r •�Via, _. • • w + 1.1 f a" 4 ;r low_-" other purge" excepting th"4 sp"if leallp •d4serilroi Irerstn. kid per«haw at, ,tko dhatlte ltopecty to beree:tar re:arrsd to ear "Prrtirat Ana." ;r ,Tbe term "Parktni" sr used %stain rshiall man and be devow to i•"ledr a" purse! the. followings , ].�. (a) Thfr Perkins of pasnenga«t vehicles. aped the pedes— erietr dad vehim)wr trt ftic, of the owners, of,wiy pa¢ all po rtia is of the Rath a fropragtys .apd their r*aVoctive balrep is tesrose, a�sigaa, pramtoono mortgaapiaao temmt std subtenants„ and all persona. vhq, now own, bald og baroafter awn at hold, pork, amn of real property vithtn the RhAlra rroparty or any laamehold esrata,, or any other iaterest thareitr, or belYdl AS space &%eream; and the respective t.ansnts or subtammoto thdroot; and than. aftrfcara,,• +dirrctars. ageptn, omp]ayeaa . cust"res rieftors imW other licensees and tnrritses of any of thous; J 3.2. (b) The ingrese, agreat artd regress of *air of than above lesipated persc Pal, sW the vehicles thereof. to any and from any fortiou of the Paaaking Asaa and the pabllc streaks adjacent to the faritag AHwa 2.2. (c) Us installation, wainrtanaa►ce acid a"raation, within the eoaflass of the ParkIng Area of public etiliciss services sarving else« IMIldiog Areas togethat with and tacla ding vaults, manholes, raters, #441wnr, valwaq bydrasts, sprImUett costrolso coadolt• a" related paaxflitloo add oavata taeilutma l 3.2. (d) The constrterttoae axstaltoramme, copair+ repleca mat, TOO It MW reesrasMet"m of parhlat sitars, of stalls. sidevelkso Ra�ao dRlMstra�„ larws, ear`s. gvtteR+�. aaistgrs+uud pablire +atilltlar t mad usodersreused swiN ! sas,:t1ttAeas= 3.2. (a) M aoamcnactiaaro usistenarco, raeparir# ralplacamerat rratmflrectsw of my laadeaarped area lrrluding flantorao deaasat#vs 1 W r: t mob r galls aria eprIAters and valves, all as mar too rdqutsrad 57 severanoetal ' rwthrttt� bawlag lvriedictioe•, !•a The Barking Area shall riot at may tier be dare for tM parkistg of tlwaks or the toadiag or unloading thereat. except for a. the porklap. 1"Itng at unloading of trucks during and In tomnaation qr frills lbw aarsrttasa:tive and demolition of buildings upon able iuildleg Arsap tbse sesrvicLaS card supplying of 1uil.4ing Area, or the eanat=actrions repair ow -mintamanc• of parking area ands inprovemento and facilities brrefss pisysttted; upos the conditions however, that rnY such use shall be confined to that vblcb to rwssoaably ascrseary is connection Vitb tha matters herein ripecifLed and shall be diligently and prw*tly perforrsd. lac t ioa 4. kee.1prota l Vas of Fark l tg A+rM 4.10 for the I,urposes cif this agra-snaut. the, town "Primary Wa1 r� lion s"° ri�all be defined an flue period from 61 to 6:00 as *sch Mashy, Tuesday. Wedntsday. Thursday, Pr iday, tbrou*hou; the year, 4.2. For the purposas of this agreement the term "t rimary ■- am Merck Activity Sours" sbalk be defined es the portod from 6�� to 1110 I on dealt SUNAs r tb,roughout the year. 499. It is the intention of this agreement srhst the `r OU'r6% shall Isar Ax lug a Mom. of all "karklasg Arose" as herein defined r.4 dv&Ui$ "lrfa t7 Chafe% Activity UagryO' as baroLa delisted. 's 4,4+ It to Itbse latdntioss of this► ag*amine that Ton b orge 5; estmtfsfstvre fart nt ali "! lea As as bereim def load during �' � s.a~..ww�+ es Isosretr drf iced. IstdasL 9.16 #a ss�a SAO It is tbO isste stfou of this 4reaseat dust the owwro og f4 tet Ieat pirceil 2 abuts essualty 'and liability i".U'r- aeca I I It • . 1 rel"lra *M tlrr106 r"pwtive Forest* mW all UVrevowsove tblerrte ups dw tetsr OW itteM Nt Lotth to this fee90*06 ; r ,ter i • . 1# } li .,10 1 • uA �.l. !'lieu ewers of paresl I mad psweel 2 st,411 obtain ;k $gewrelet'p6iieies oi, luanroMmi lr uV&ding tov arDituutleA fride casualty►. Wledbo bit-not ,lirtrad tb lire damages to racy imW rail irprevemrnta oa ' d� terra �'at�ei is mm ate not loss than sleety percent ("t) of issrksbl ,value'. The,owners of tarQoi U atad fare*l Z �rha11 cbltaiw i*paate pelicios of insurance provtdin: for p►otr.;:tdoA xrt& liability resultiu,p grow harm to' othimrs''and/or this propbrty'of otba tc with ltsbtllty► 'lWtwlof ,1SOO,000'.OQ dinplle Beset or barb. i SA. 1 -The awneve of Parcel 1 shall obtain a *rparate policy of Iaiuriaco Virovidtip' tot`p'rtbkact1*n `f row casualty, ' including but pat lial rid' to' [ire daeseps'," tr- the auAiaint Accens Ares, in an Mmunt out lean tieael lnt ilrxbls Value:' t' 5; S. : Tha 'byuirs iif rareel k &lid partal 2 mall" each par for t o lriiure1,ce' pciliiii "ipplicAl's Li 164' i*rp*4tir0 Nkrcnl. . ` - ` '' 3:6' The' ca�mirr "of 6rcil 1 saki lrarial. 2 airees that the aikiir s6rli bi' 's W as 'ci n add i t iiana l luau •sal` an the *yaarumrnt lotted polieles of ineironci''avid' t6io tie' police.*s' chill contain cross 1 ori' a O'C' urine the foraioint coverages. the Patti&$ shell eacb burr the other virit'tore'noilt• tboreol' tobotber Witb a iOrtlfled copy of tbs' appioprl tr' 0011ciea+' ` front' must' slim' bi jives by As'emote"at' 0btiCel% I Old•Firc,61 2 to 'the othec, parbudlat -to' tht above. Mi4t Wh at' tl*s pli iieb"prervlded for in tbls sectlen oxprsisly prsvids disk the rhol.clei shall ni►r csrcellfd or altered rltbout thirty ( ) dholl *Our, vrttisa iotice to the other Omer. It sitbos Qaires t e.iaeV tit b*,Uft sha1a fail to secure or wriatain The forolotas lnsuuascee do otbor Parcel emit thell ba 'perwitted to obtain such !Muresed to Ae' detabItiad� hrist aw"Ife. now or as toe ahem of the defaultial a' Fami arwrt' Oka &ai,l be sated by tls delsultiep !areal GWOWT !der y R M ; l .tT a 'I i IWI ■ 4•I , k C%o awl of fte laryraaeo promiure. The defaulting, portal moor $hall pay do odes f'arael per lstereirt on paid t"ura le+ prfal w at the late of tar percent (102) par Nahum corjwted from too dieto written notles is received that the pronivas have boon paid. Upon vvittert rural the mmers of parcel, 1 +end parcel 2 rhail provide a loss payable tad4�ssrsst to favor of any leadf l , l iesholder. as other perana or oetity Wolag an interest in saU property. 3.7. All casualty and liability polities shall make specific refereaces to the insurance interest of the respective parcel, ,Ashore is say ptoceeds for purpomis of repair at recoumttuatiwo. � 5.6. The wners of Parcel i and Parcel, 7 n7es that its the event of loss doe to any of the perils for vhieh they have agreed to pte+ride insurance, that each ovuer stall look eal-aly to its Insurance for rscovory. The mmere of Parce). 1 •gad Parcel 2 shall obtain from their respective insurance companies a valver of say ritht of sybEogation vb1ch said iasursnre ca.-pany cash► have itaiast the overt of tsresl 1 or Parcel 2, as the came may be, �.g. All insurance companiee shall have a minimum rativ4 • sE �+ �elass xII. fat im ! Zlato."SOI 46 and Repair+ �1{ 6.1. The owners of Pascal 1 and ?areal 2 do hereby o4ree to Mistate and hoop iM gfiad repair 411 portions of tbatr Respective ¢ r +i.twlmdia but not limited to an �rnd all psi ep g T irlrprarerNeate thetrron card any atdi all equipment or other itaw of personal property. TU parties shall pair the coasts of said waiatom moo iaW repair separately as saws relates to its portal and iarpro+ enants tlrelrsow. i_Alle lia..raus trdvtatone each cad all of tM feuegalap EeveffiWiftts, soetdittons al�#i terflrietlorsrz t J R t Air, ■ TV r p' I • 7.is �.� iMrl i itpply ,to and b end each and 411 of the owse>ra ON twy "d all part-.eas of tho satire Pyopert;- and ecch =a all of their �; ran +ttra iealrs� suecerawra. aseigaa. «ranteMs. raottEegere. taw�oita. lu, MW BOUeaoMta= r4 . ' • 14, M Are •bar'eby irpooad Pursuant to a Femoral pier for } , evameme MW1 'wee at the Entire Pr►mps"'ty sad acre designed for the 7.1 &Aool haaefllt of said oars.' tanaats on, occupants of any and all prfrt�e►os thrrtaaf ipd Chall obligate. inure, to, and pass with each and emery portion of the -Entire Property, and shall remain is /.ores sod effeet as hereinafter provided. 7.2. Breach of sexy of +he covenants or rentrietfons contained to this Caclaration shoat not defeat nor randhr favalld the i lisp of any mortgage or deed of triot Bade in good faith amd for vslua• as to ,tho Entire Property or any part therarf; but all, of the foltesaing pravisiona# restrictions and covaaants @hall be binding and effective agalowt any owner of: any of said Entire Property* nr say part thereof. whose title thereto to acquired by• foraclasure. truotes's sale. or 7.3. TM term "mortgagee." vberavor usod here&n. shall. be I cowtemW to iociude bestficiasics sad trustees under deeds of trusts. 7A. It shall be lawful for any porman or perecas owin$ . I or %o.A t*S any portlan of rho Satire Property to presocsne any ? d e s •at .law or in equity a8ainat may person violatiag. or a t act rt't ter VIOW.o9 asy of the coveeastrt coaditians and reattletiasn '. banjo "d to provost !t$ aia or thew fast eo doing 4VA to recover deasses from or on sec6vat of such vtolar. oo. In•,-alidst�ion of any one of the covenants. OW41ttako. gastelet#ass vi tbow provisions barely contained by Lh 'uhr y_,� .,yr 1� i'�•PTt „� • y'%, p •% 1I,y �-T '644 fJ � rf , �,,� r 1 �u'._ r , , � ,"k•." `', �}�'��T;/ri . J r ;,�j ,"� , �� d 1�• 1 '� ,r 1'` Y' �L � F"d4 L w . . iW J'1•41 ' { , �♦ f i '� lKr 1 ,, ,"I i ll�r .'�• r�^� I , I�,tlQ:'t �ir {'�y' �`, •� v of ,r.{4Y � �. �' *� r , W� 1 ..�I,iA' '° ^a-4'{ q^�,,,•'1�J'A°r'^ rl,` ,� rY �rf ,•kR �4 , ;,,{•'' , r:r� ..� � .�•.li ^' 4'•+/,i. 11i.Y:'•'{:'n , 6 1 ¢ �,, .q 1 { • �' .0 it �,iy I nh�� t y,i�„ �� • " r1 J Sri ` v, V'4,!{ 4: IRMA& WC ] +1N , '�q. ,§d'i{�'�M+!1��'!1!''' if^ • A f I M` etare evader A&I ! is, no war street wy of the otioer tds emOlt1wo# resrrlttlerns nr pirevWbas hurdefs crew= tlw Barer AMU WOMMIO Per full levee Bad affect* 706, this Declaration shall Gunte prIvity of exorrtxaat a r ea art of and or�tt rich end along all p�tanra s o f all o y p 4e 0414 No"@ f r t , OW their ram •tetvo hoirs. e=eeutors, a46irrlsttratova•y P r; swra+ a er + ^.o, slow in for avant of a bro"h. of attwoteed or ,1 tMte rgrad t , by any ewaor of any part of said Matire Property, to , 'W of the tease, emrrrerrant% MW coaditions bereeli, any one or all such 1 otbot owefv of the fttire Property shall be entitled fortbvith to full r =A ah"te relief by injwerlev and all such other available legal sod =.1 ergS"U rawmdles from the consogneseds of such breach; nevi may deed. Laws wel t. coaveryonca or contract node Is violation of this Seelarstion shall be void and may be set aside up m petition of one ar ere of the owners of the Intiro Property. All costs sad espresrass of any seek syt+. or procsedings inelvdloi attorneys' fees, as be�reloafter 1; 1 provided, shall be @amassed adsinat the defaulting oamwr and shall e ftetitater a lies a;alvwt the real property or the intersot therein VMSSWIY deerdsd. lo■aad, aselpnod, conveyed or coatrracted for. until r, paid. effective apon retort'dlog notice tbetoof to the offies of the e w ty ro order of the county to which the Iatire Property to located, but eery suck Alan shall be subordinate to any bona fide wortgage or dead of tryst Coveting soy partion of the lntirre Property, and any purcbasorr at any foreclosure or trwrtse's male (as well as any grantee of dead in lift of foreclosures or ttvates's sale) minder say such wrtpadu or deed i 09 trcuet shed take title fires from any such lien, but Otherwise erutijett to the prawislons bersof. The rowdla• peruittad at lace or aquity of eeoy of all sued :0ers spoettied ba*sin shall be cawlatio 1 as to each and of to all. y.f. is the avant that We is berdaght for a" onfoticoft r IARR ,� .!• M.. A. oils+ .4 �� ,,1 � Tw • « n. �� S�fib , it 1Vk' t r «�• rot+ r OR-, F � 1 {. • is 31% .r ✓LL}}, � �'� 1 f,�� ]• rr �, 7yT �� „i, r � '� ."Ry ' '( ',R,✓,},+,r} �yd�yr , -y+ y M ',srt,�l r �yT �';i w� "w ,i r.fy._i �f del'(fnT'�'• r Y1 �`M rJ n 1 1 •r7}r�, '� w {r f !:� i r ;; 4,4, P i 4h r , '1 JAx « ►2 rlrff,.py Q y••') ♦ •I`1 �' .b '? �ry •�P �r r 'v, Y , rMt Y. r ;io• 1. °., ' M' d• h} '�' 1 1 ,,,�Ar� yjy(q ! ��j' ;, �+ � f1 i r�' � ry;r r ' . ,� ..� Mr', ♦ +yS G ,� , �•f R, 'l F� 1 '� , " •+ r+• ,y r ',Y i, �di ) ' + �:z' b� , {f . `A, Yj ,'-� �" !•v''r j`la"J`}F if tiV,, ✓ a l, A• , r,,1''i"T^�,�`f'i'+T'r � (!,i�/,� ��M ," l,••4 1� ,rL' �iy!"'r�'�,T"':42• /�,�A'• � ':'h,,'+�'^,�FjIMK"' s+' 4�J' 4640spol ieg party „r vartIs* w aw•h suit Pliall be satiflod to be �;,. , �r rtla� you I�rrr by tle l410laf 1"Irty of P-ITLtSr. Sad ray jeftow at doom mind shall delude am owd thereof. TM ea'tiosa hssills the Vamps soatiose of this Oael+lat+ttift an row Salome and Identification echo sad 0 4rf1 not bo &Now to lust or deft" the contents of tboll respoctive socti.m. 7.l. Cktrah and Was taros each cooperated is the drafting srd preparatiew of this *waded sad Restated Declaration. hie$ to my to nstractles to hr wade of this aMreeswst# it shall out be cossttrred $ mast 014ber party ss dvatter. NW f.. IM sad 121MiwaW9r solo The covesaate, aondittoos, and restricts cestatssd As Afo "eIsretim shall run with tba land a" Aail be bindiwf upon � 4 eaahc a" rill of the a vaers of aA art thereof and d r f p pod all persons clan ad" adder tbos= and the sw *hall eoatinve is porpw'tvity. 8.2. This Amaded and ■eatatod beelarwltlos my be sweaded of ter! ted only by tba wvtttoar &$lament of the too owbars of the i land area of lareol* 1 wA 20 as said faxeals are deseribsd oa Ubibtt 1 "s" hatatol duty ackwvtedged by each said *w+now# and recorded it the offles of the ceanty recorder of the cowsty to vb1t% the sAtivo Property is situated* Nowvitbatandlege those Qwditlaw# Covenants end htAstrictieas swell not be sodiffea by the parties vithoat the prior vritroa aoosest of the City Attorneys' Office of the City 9: fta►tisgtan ssirb# state of 6allfurwia. g.2. This A asnded and Misstated beelarationg executed as of tbs data hatreds sbaell talcs effect mly wpm# fraw said after lets veaotrdi* Is the. elf tci of the county raaorder of the couty it Which the ghetto ftopotty to sit"ated. f.4� All of tka prowls oss of this IeMdod and sostated I �1 —^—/r��rl �ti � 1+�"1 's,r 4 . ,r •1 ��. /4i I., W r � .,�',C � �J wr ' � + 5 k dd 4 ' sly a l! Fx !T . r '�NI A.r�n • o ' ..G' i'J a+''i `� ilH�1 11',il�h y 1 J•> . Y '.1 �e 11 � '� M I ••, ' 'T .1 '�u.l}k!.*' I ) }r lf� 1 1 r'�Ih MV�d q/+{'�f��'G '''•,i1+ r'.,•` ' '� ,S � ' J1�. '�i' ;� ,N r ,y, ,0''� "el�;l. r.,t' r.. I 1 t"IWlw0. Mot Mr. Itrltwl tap owtieft I444 of tim Civil Giole ot tls ass of 0@11fornls. It tm enjormily vsteed tut oak r tt► ft Olt n(frais less dotrg son 649 0* the leed (4aner in + Mable *80 bereto) of tha eorraaruter (a) to for the beaafie of the Issd h "veasMt#s. (b) awas Sritb bath the lead owvwd by the aor►awser . , and a) shell it at be awll the laved aid by the corrante we Oki draw ws or" sech successive mot. r161# a porrtiao of the low •lf ctad heroby *ad wpm wash verses >offiAozod to Cho ptowlive psorty Is sub ashes oz proceeding. $asa This tended mW Restated Declaration oball meats it ftU f# Md sflett IWtvItIt8c4IWIv4 aay OMMO is aantesNlp of MW a ' 09 dio &Wo* /npanyt =M WMW WNMUW# TDID D6rCUUTICM AND dDAW is executed by • do 9mi" faunal so of tM day ow ytaw first alwwo written. 6 � a WANK WIMI UAM �r VM DUPM I►WPMtsd, A Caittorrsto LWtrd Partnership By INN COWMIU$ Two a Aff amoral srt"tt sy to -ICAL Molcop two s M Calilvtn a . ra rtetrr . 1 _ � yl�. ,fip��(�f•Y�� A�i�' l i�1t•y"�A,{,��L{'4�(?Yy�4�r'7`�� '~„`F '� ',;�i(. r� �F�Re+` �;�'! �•,1`� 'r "�'d.N�►l��. W.. p, r,y�-� 1T '�,L ,• V,• a�� +/�' ��,, 1 Mn M �1�� lr,�An{'�yy•w�' '�-J+4d i' �r �r S{-, � � M , 4 � i. y .'. 7 rr ,Ir n i �Y r, � p' , a. 1 ' ��, �� x� •..�7K'� ��°hl k }h ry ',� ; .1 ��J r,'� �A a y�.+1 �r ,'rat � � i �'F,��,R p'�'rl.�"• y' � . ,I t'�'� � j. M�'r rl r vv' nri " � 1• � � ti� 1 "^^'•V� �(,•'h !� � ti T � .� �l• � ',�r' '1� 1 r"�S'+ir► r 'F v }Zr. �.�� b��•. • N .: tS S� , •}T� �N�J' + .1 "1+�� !IY �yd G14 'M')' .r ^'fC�` J - � '�V.�,�', '��+.•r' `"„�.''„g ''7..• ,.�,+ i u 'i � �. � A, •'7'7��' �ti",!N'fi1��1:M,,.! ,.�ILSr.?"i�A•.# yr �'hY��'I '*� _••• "ti' .. M ,+�'�� fJSi`r' �•'•V'�iL�V�� 1 r ; A./•�M''.1.•d�,r��' • 1 Ir A- WAO loll + lk; � w :_ � •'� • IL —A�L,.,.ed• a N ii4 In h� r Ilk flat1 •iAUft �*!* rNi AAii1M* rtAfr , NOMA CAUPOOM • �yy 04 '��J�,•,�,,, , �� P f it � � '�",.; rMIR'. ,# •�IM �M of ks i t t r of *W^ I � �A'/T► ��:A11�1oltN1N �' � • , Ie..wM some w COI! NMAM 09AL OIL WA W h"i P �� r�r.r.lr��• ` ..�� ""'wow �t�A �i 'r' "'' MMrM� 1n Ili Itir 1Mi�IN�ifi rr Mdr i�■trr e+it «r bow C, (jow w be . *mpg ww Nor ►ru � a . .■ice � �dWrood�..dW.ems 416 .ram p.nMt 1 vrAte 4w CAAMUM to II �•.�� '� d Nrrr1� wow* �_.. .,� two% M go on WOARV OBAU Olt SPAN! 9 Irl "� M•r� �fir' �.�1 AN� f1 �M11�ira1 �IM�■�� M � � •. . `1 1 MK • • Mso a Werrel9 1 nmo #o 1 1 Aw 410 r- jowlI 1Aa@M 1�Y�YYr� • 1 � � M a 1x I k 0130 !, M . �3b 1 .a • 1� I ;. 1� 1• # ,li I a. Clio r �+y.ate dn .,•il;.. r ,jxyy ��x;,+1Kd�.' Wwi'fY•fi�rdYY T '''rVrRP111i1A1� 1 } 1 �� "?I. �- I �( �1 •r ZY !dv (F i y . r v 1' .�� } All �� ♦ :Ik1•yt�N �" v�, : V/' ��'"r. i}A ! l�'f v,'u�+ak i i >•�' rY�, K-.�j�'pF� ,• F��'^'..4'� ,4Y' Iri �, �1�� Id'J` f��,., V 11 +Z,'`, �d�° yy''� 1 M �" y�'!T '.'¢ �' 1y v� r � � If ��}�Tf ,• �f vJ 1 .. , •,�v��l'y�' �11 F'�r,5 1. 1�+ �� M rya :",�,^' `r�7��.F !, �i f�, �y �I�M1�;i�� +�,�i��4t•�} �°i��..," e��i`�f' r'1•« �t ��k��q; � , ..- ••�i' ��.vy�w i Qr'i• a ;.:r r kl. 11% .j•^ __- V L _t� r• .' 1 Awl f ' • r ism ZE flu : d 1rh1 S{ i i 1 ^ 1i .SUM. . t'1 t'•� Ixr41 ar',"�Y n '^f �I ' ''� � 1' • it •` ' �yG`. . 1 WAIP.i Al1 op"M�. '1Mr•rra4%p*f00':'y•'. e i .AIRCFL MAP 82sIddlIG76 1 / y •0A1a"W wR low m ws low t l �Mp}/► 1 f1 m.Imw"i" T• �. 4 ti MM ffT s 11Mr/ InoMff.too MIIfASTfls��f�MTi�11�ww '� 1'• fit , 1 . . •t 1 , ,, ,.. ,r , .wrT•PTfo 4� �� wad ear *4 Ha.as aw Ifa .l r"I4w, ",T Ipp.,A 11 W. }s. r0 04W AA -. ��,ya4�j.�r�.•�M.. �..Y� .w�.-1..1WIi•O .wwa+rai y, ,--.. _) 101110411,Ilpff VON I � • � �. � "� ' I Ofrr twwCt a�f1f.1A.M 1w low 94.ors s60 167is. 1w,1�Mw,♦.�.M. • , ~ � N '�,: : III 1, .�t�,r•Twa ten► A so A 1h aw b 41 dw w1,N 40 � WA w ma"•M,m 1r1 wb+i•* 4w aw M+ sic to.T'.$6.0 ab • + V4.4414i M 11A.440b G r dig v w _ !' 1 -� ...r_...� er 14.1a•w, FC1 il�'�• fart �..� ' r• f AaRiM t ti +grsi.w& wo Ina, 6 PAN:IL 1 PARCEL 2 �,► �r a ..08 mwm WF ��dill 46 _ � fit 01=1111 rso er�.wrd•r ... rr• �• ' bqf ILR 1' rh tr. +�.' «w.w•a+ . ..�..� .. ��. • (idN�1'• 1 IMw.M M /M11� iiT.hq CNg tIV% O.T %.*a 11 i�f i. 1 AA M,.,.+►a • w ON 0 s•f s V" 10*4• G#Wft.M1' a as 41 dw i w 06 4WK r TqA�� h+ir M M f �� '4,�:',� d' ,• ,, � F;1 f " t, • (k 'yf t J' r�1 . � . '1 I 1:''. 1:/$i 1' .�. 1. i yM•.1 •11'J i. ` •\' • l I N, •YY •I I 11 "�, 4 Y r r•{� 1'1 . .�", +, n , . , , )• rn`In I. ,' •' 1Yi i ;,11 ' v, A ,!^.'•••1 ,,, 'M . r yiSyy1.( W• r 77 .. ,I �,lfa�lar ', .,.,p ,F,y i..Alt ww rl*k!1'+lV". :w'll!1•, " . 1,�« , c _,;1 •. r „j n. 448 ,1 Y • ` t Mire. 1101mat !WtIst Church W,C , i Ift"Mn Avenue ltuntingtori Beach F'` ! * T ba Conditional use Pe caLt No. 82 -al ' construction of a 10 866 "mare loot sedic:al 'PM Du atI PTION r building In con j unction with a 8 F 100 mpare: �c�et nhtt�, _facility. LOC U . ATi011a yortherast cornerof Newnan Avenue and Van wren Street. �Y. The above described ,project vast Approved an October 19, 1992 Disapproved on By Planning ,Comissian 1� i1��Yiwi11■■y��1 tt;,'• , . discretionary Body ' project willl, �„ will not, have a significant effect on the *w1roaent. . , It approved, hafting a• significant effect, a Statement of overriding • 0e*iderations is attached. An Environaaental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CBQA (Silt I � . (1) h ""ativo Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant •. to the provisions of CEOA. A copy of thel,`Negative declaration . (Environmental Clearance Report) is atta►ciwed. '!'he SIR is available for review at the City of Huntington Beach Department of Development Services Environment Resources Secti n. '" dr 0%✓ me Pat* Nalled T.i tla ReMvel hate a ' OEM t ,wT . �-'��:, fig r�:'' ,r • '�' ' , F 1�'I r ''a�1 � A •� i ! f •.11}ate 5 ,, T\•' �•' Sri* •�� ^. • lye r WO J . is V. Is '•� 1 •• `S'•i aso `I lr ' �• •* 4S ; �i !�r.1,L ,1 r.Ir ry��'_�1 «'Ii r. f ; + jr •�R,•,ia,\' L'.'•'�r1,�� ' ty_ ,�••?S�� ;.. `, .{, '�f i,..,� �•/�Aw'�•./;� ,M� •�' , •' '}�� r Sf -•1�► . � ".�•� .1'' I', S. ".i` Jf yr' + r +:4 ' !� ,-•.. t �. rya• �� .a•�•i .'y ��"iy�;f�T •�}•.�"�'r`f� v� ;ftia`;.?�'A:��• �+ i46 'r..'f��l�.� � .� "(t••j�i�k • +IL •r '1.+• .� .y•h h,i+,.�, .a��r'•�•1.+{y Ayr�� 74 �� .. rw,' ws �,�', •�• • 41 �.1••.w'�•,1. •� r��'••'� ' -•.�1 7•r a17,�� T .t'.'. .: *'�. ._'! 'T.�� . •" ti�+•f" l�. !f . ' �0: •' ,'�'T•�YR1.j(U�•_-I�• ' , ! p N •ti •y •� ��: •. .r��, t`�•'t'. i.�:'S,r la'f i`�+•. (� (' }�.•,.. �•'.y.�A .• �,Fa'T manyt" ION 'l •iFM .yyr• �''f.., {r • ;• •• j. ;� r" C� •' .•�, i..t' .'•�- '. ti• �•. r•'•j .� . �..J1' f. 1�_. �•y. .a�� a �*s••,`. i1 J J'fir. Tr..,►•�,*'•'rj. '.'Ti ` .•ra/..• .L..•1: '1 . ':r .j� .p. rl+ .S i.�.✓IL •1 i'' "r• 11� .• ry -� -T, • : r r ;N�+'Y:. '��„ , .. '+ 'r... ,. . �iy_• . t � ...,i. tR• :•. 'T'.;•'•~., _�. . ri...Y±�i ,;.'; i zer •,�,�' �� • ,+ •. e,i �lor /t '�tlat � ..• '�•• •..• ��. ,i 1�•tr.; L. ',*;'I/fjl.;'y�,�• 14 ��:VZ� '.'_ ••',j• • Fe ^ �� • '• •• •f• ••�•1•��• V�~••'_I• - • r•: +wIV, :. i I ! '. •."�:w f �� ••'%�f1•`�, '• r ;'•";•+' • ,• A. •;+'f•• •+;�..al .1• rlft�. ,5 u•l, . ., "% ." ,�r,..d� +'w, 3,3q .' 'd i • jr::�.jr. '' I t 1�s '�� '�'' ir1�'r�,�.. , ' . . � '� 1. r �• l•'�. .. . .. "•'. .� •• • yi �s1 �. �1:;'t �� ''.,i1 •. '� � ;�� t o r�ci� 'i► �, 't 3aed16i1 bti ldi� 1i'�� :�w;i:;►: ; ; ' r f 'deanPin on' wit. •e 7 ,aq' `• fit cltairch' t c l '-w �•'�', . � ,. ��: c i , w Morthoa st coiner i�ewm�►n,:1 Venuo and voi 1 : :• ..��r�y .. � SWIM .d .. -� ..'.. 'L . ., .'r •, .• tti .. _ ' _.. � _ wi+..SO..;ti a. ..�....t...r� + L�iL.*!� �.;r„ Need on-the Steff'S Initial of this �:�: -�study of pr�, ett a Draft Negativi� Dectaretiori' ; ; '- s published Is' the 'local nswspiper' and posted in .the Office *Of .M City Clerk for. 10-driy public eiwlew period ending ' #%d ...x,,,�'I eAt r the site sss ftsraents were focelved, • , �' '�s.' t .. _ •The Envirdi'mWtal JtesovmGs_.%ctton.,recomt't i thA t .the_ ,�`;' : • � � ` ry�•' ► �t �, 41r P , •. f. . • /� MlgptIYe Mfi` ara •J'.: �. !I •.� I'' '.:}ti —,�� n propos pro ec w 1' ndt have a s'gnifiaant adve � e�`fec�aei Y''` -: ,. ••• I• { ,�, •. ;r y.- •shy• I '1 r1 �• . .'0AP t,: �'• ' .+ a /�"'r j�.•} 11l •.,j• a S r• ' •I'' '-� V• �''` .r7 ..P ,what, .• � .fla�' , .j.+ '•'!''��'' 1i'r-' 1,:/ yY� �T ' .��'.� .r•... �r '� -?. .Ir ;;:' -11.••,�•.•. s` . r. •.• •n..... t�a#t1011 s . I a-•+.. r��i�� ...r_:� AL _, ' '• .• 1 'r Y_" . ' . f •iM +r_ :1\• Pr ,I I M..•. L •, .•.• ..�•.•:t„•," .!•` M\'.7 ' ��'j� •J'� '1_ A�.a . *, i+•• ll f •. :. .'�ii '_. �.•:,i. r..M �; :L r •'1, �• ti .�.. r.•' ' t + ,,y✓ r d.; 'i�w.... Ia•. ;�•* t'••�L7••�r.r. 'y. .- ti �'i'r •�i•+ -+r• JI. .,L.ji: .;:.'�'isi:'P1.•i',1�_•� .+��: •j _ i� �F rjr. : ♦•.� 'Tha�attched ■itigatinjsurs111 reduce potential envy -V�-. hesu hirig ff1k%.the'::pr0ject and are i oesieirded 'as ' or�ditio' s of rohaie. VI . ec ' 4 T I• �,?,.a'3 . :t�,��• r `Y * .� =i1.�•.j , :+a �y'• �,..} ,''� ..Z• :�:...,t:• .. r. `, � 1 � 7 r ', ' . r [. 1• r l'+! R-: Mat••T+' M 1'.'T,•.,,f•\7.�: •,Ir �•� ttully y, � !' a 1 •�:-►'• ` R.+' 1 } ` fi t • :' • '',ti'�a-i` +,••`�r..,rr•. ! ►,', w I 1'ti �a '�••••�' ..ti .y• �•i.•.' • 'Is r•- :' T�� ':.y J'y•'1.�; �'•~r.r'� Is Is :tit r • ^-1•_�•r..`+1. •.1 �+ �': •' 1`7 t •!5 s�•.� � ,��`��• �. �f. �"»'•i;•y i''�I�•. ' J �''�a,�r.�{jt�i� � ' •�1•C`a�`11t;''l•�',� 'Yi j,••,',�i i ��f r :; a a- , OIL. j Is ImoMUM ' A.W. 71 � its sb Is �_i r' �•; • r 10 V. j �lrb and *all be abibedin it: the looatlian of 2. sF matural in doll be stAbsd in at Vo 1aa■da w of oolong twilit ise r water hu t , ad del hea1iq vani.ts. 3» JP EMI r QUM h"ft dmLU be used an all atra =$, 46 gF glmbudldl� sut� Ls ura�sabi�r lt�e�, wiret ter arsl Oddr r si�i, shed be Al Of of at an of4nt�#ar laoility igrsip W- bD 'tlwMld'+� llwes� 51 aft user on ft t pit, drothu erl:#actad, or detadrod, shall be M aansttuWtrd in with the stertet 4coustf coal starslJards set forth for wdto .foot &at, Ue wdtfida tM 60 CM ctontmm of the pvrperty. The interior naim laurels of all dmlling untts shall rrct w caed thr CaUfcrosin insulatin staoUnis of 45 dba CNL, Vvidmve of acapliranae tali deist of subaitW of an acowt.ical armlymis rrspoct, pmpeuced under the evpervisicin of a F +p-- ieeugad in the • fiend of etoa wi is a # with the appl, catim for building permit:(s) . All momm trds to mitigate raise to leveler owl be incrxrharate d into the sign of the y coje fte 6. xf li¢�t3nq is iraluW in the pa*Am lot a /oar recreationAmefficients shalt be umW (e.g. high pr e•rAim vapor, metal halide-l. outside shall be directed to psevant "spillage" onto ad jaaant properties. 'i. A dstet W soils analysis doll be prepared by a► xe4stmtW soils +t:raginser. This an ys.is shall 3 altsie on-site soil sanplirx ar c! laboratory t+osktnq of 'ton dmla to ptravl detai.Led reoa ►ti grading, dranrical and fill. partiemr ltiwrrclrt sr, wallet streets, and utilities. I. if fodl- i &WWWttLs&- is to be used, a fire retardant type sha 11 be imtalled eta marmebiv thi Ndb2 ng t o 9. An OW01m rim 99oxog3,st da1l be engaged to mbatit a report irtdicating the g mvd mxfem a Lsrcrt:i,on from earth mot: for the subject property. All atstsM ---a within thfs &"laprent dall be amtructed in imnae with the rfactDft as irk'litsited 1yy the coo is r+e m t. • C,aiculatiortis for and stsvcbuxsl tad*= to withstand an ted g-facWra etm►ll be sumndtted to the City fm review prior to the issutrncN of building petrmita. 10. A plarn four silt aontzol for all st om runoff fray the property during coon structictn wd dwbq Mitial operation of the project shall be, submitted to the C&hforr2 a Pagional Wktw m m kity Cmtl Bc*M staff !br their review priear t o the i�Rsve - e 11. xnfboonat Lon an a*dp amt or facilities which Wray generator air pollutants $gall be of wd,tted to the South Coast Air Quality Mnrtisgon mt District staff for their review prUW to the iseuwm of a Csxtif'icate of O=qmwcy fdr any use within the building 120 136 '• �'0�}'7' ', Y Sii M.,''�„ •,y{pr 4wv�A,A'11e � -� ,- M + .4 t h,'•� � 'v;'f ��3. Z 'k' MY{ as , ' s • k" 1 ��!� YWA 1 1 �A t S�1 A G v ', • : '. �;� 1�, e, 'A ,Irk I • r 1 r : 9 M1'Rdi`: !fir',�.-�`,, '!`r }J ! !'4� ; A y��t� .•' ,, . I,. t " � � y .,• tiq 01v1 f � r '�V'��'.1 ,�f''",. , ',w•�rr•�w. .V... /a:• •'i .y e.l i N, v,f -'fi r MA r. •.' Obi I �, I• 7F ► . XIIN d Sy L1VQ1'� AND SECONDED BY Nr1AIANC114 THAT "tON LLD ?MR CONDITIONS IMM62D BY TH3 .80ARD CW Ina � ' EdMIT vo p '83-2l 111TV THE 1XCRPTION C9 C vi TO 10 M XMIUM OF 16 MET IN 021 I'i'11 ' k' SV*�AI9Q WIT AS AYFFAY D BY THE DRpAR"IEtii'P. TKS ZING s Ni ins t ivengood, 11ir J aha ng it =1WiNkheii, SchuMcher mi ftmet, Porter farther dismusiaon followid. ON MOrM BY BI410INS ALK) 8 LXWNGOOD .THZ COMMON UPHELD TU COMITIONA OF APPROVAL I $RD BY THE 130ARD OF IONMG A=ST- IMM 00 08E PI MIT 92-23 DENIED THE APPEAL BY THE FOLLOWING t ASS$ Ri"ina, vrengooal, Winchell, Schumacher your t Kit Ja it A89MM; Pao Porter 'fAtbr ComaLs ner Live . � a�rhoihs No►t�ata dose»tidithlarttbar�ac�rdnel�f that a T on the * sat so that the applicant could pursue his appeal the City Council if her wished to do so. PP UnT 3 CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 82-11/ -32 (Continued from September 21, 1962) IUWLdants' e for A = cres►st Missions Ba Rtist Church Ta peac#dt •a seduction of 10 parking spaces within a proposed $ ,100 Sze foot church facility to be constructed in conjunction with a 10, 966 sggare foot sedical building with reciprocal parking. Subject propezty is located on the northeast darner of Newman Avenue and Van Murea Street, Savoy Eellavria reported that rking for the medical facility has been identified b staff as the major issue in this request. Although a reciprocal parting a�gremaent will be recorded between the two uses, the lack of adwu ate "parking to accommodate the major user would iustitY the staff f s recomendation that the plain be revised. He also rated thaat than landscapingon the total site is insufficleant and must be a�rnlarged. The Commisson and the staff discussed the status of the puling arevision$ to Axticle 979, Parking, -and the effect this revision aLtht have on each facilities am the subject ones Mr. Bella- via responded that aaccotding to present research there would appear: tO be• very little changer in the ftituse parking requirements for a �. x"icaxl facility of this size• as a rusult of the code chaange. --� - 10-5-82 F.C. ram, Ll ftmtsa �•�. P1 ng Counti ss ion St 1 f8� page y '! publics bearing was opened. rry Nye, applicant, addressed the Cramission in support of Me ropest. be pointed out that the parking short► a is a re- mlt of the w%dvrgroond portion of the medical building which, whoa calculated on a square toctrAge basis •only, accounts for the 10-9 vat difference. Her informed the Commission that the use of the basment aroe for a linear *ecelerator only would accommodate such a small num er of patients and staff at one time that the parking spaces would not be necessary when calculated on the basis of use rathojr than square footage. He noted, too, that the site can be made to conform with the landscaping xe- �uiacem+ent. There wore no otha� persons to speak for or against the proposal, aged the public hearing was closed . (' The Conaission discussed the parking and the applicant's rationale foe the shortage. Also raviewed was the elevation of the subject property above the property directly behind it, and the suggestion was made that because of that grade differential no heavy land- scaping be installed there to avoid a problem with drainage and that the exfstinq row of trees be allowed to constitute the land- soaping along that property line. 0 9MION BY BIGGINS AND SECOND BY LIVENGOOD NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1 00. 02-32 WM APPXMD BY THE FOLUMING VOM ATM Biggins* Livnngood, Winchell, Schumacher, Mi.rJaehangir NOM done ASSMT: Pao ,- Porter MMVAXN s none ON WTION SY• SIGGINS AND SECOND BY LIVENGOOD CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 82-11 WM APPROVED WITH THE POLLMING FINDINGS, BY THE FOIJLOW- rM VMS s FI .48 F.J APPROVAL: .I.r �...r�.■ .�..� 1. The P14nainq Comeairati.on determined that the proposed use of the basement area for housing a linear., electron accelerator, creating ae reduction in the number of patients and employees who will be using the proposed facility at one time, will rnfficiently reduce the parking demand to allow for the reduc- tion of the ten (10) parking spaces as requested. 2. The granting of the conditional exception will not constitute A grant of special privilege inconsistent upon other proper- ties in -the vicinity and under identical sane clrassifications. 3. The grauntinq of the conditional exception is necessary its Order to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial pr OPeerty righter. - 2 P.Ca �y• -• , ; i: - -ice -'��',� ,. { '•i i �' Mn yl ,' j ir ,•ww.;v, 1^T 1 i y i., ,r Yid rV). ,,•• +f •J, . r, „r �� J 'r r A i� ) •k t i,r' •' . i, ' • Ir Y)i "K. „. f,.c ,t rr R. ' t ,• J _ ,r •� . r ! K. f j r 1 e x � •' ' , ;• Q, AJf,y�,,l+,i. 11, •, , . . ,•hA `,, ••V a r�.• J{,, * 1 �.4•;f'yri .f�. 1 r ( tit ts 1*4 ) •"a i '�>a •(Y''C Y' �w ' ',Iwo 'va, �1. .. •_„ , •. , Ali �� • y u . pi.,s OU"Ai •lion ' ti of a conditional exception will not be materially ttax ,9 the public welfare or injurious to pro�+erty in.;r /1� ' r^ -alessitication e • Latin of tbq corAltional exception will not adversely of t the general flan of tho City of Huntington Beach. AM r pi"ina, Livengood, winchell, Schumacher, Mir jahangir "MS None ASSUMs Paone, Porter . Ad �Alx Sono an MOTx(* By L'JVZWA= AND SECOND BY HIGGILNS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 82d-23 WAS APPROVED WITH THS POLWWINC# FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, SY THE toutanxa Vo s Rlp Pgg _,iIPPAz.t s 1 . The proposal is substantially in conformance +with all applicable provisions of Division 9. 2. The proposed chu.ch'finedical facility is consistent with the zon- ing and General Plan demignations on the subject property. 1. The alto lain received and dated October S, 1992, shall be the approved conceptual layout subject to the following: i a. A revised site plan shall be submitted for review and Approval depicting the required ten (la) percent landscaping per Section 1331 (b) of the ordinance Code. 2* ftlok to issuance of building permits, a reciprocal parking and ac $$ Agreftent, between the two uses on the subject site shall be .submitted to the City for approval by the City Attorney and thereafter rcewrded with the County Recorder of the County of Qrce�e. 3. All building spoils such as unusable Jw9mr, wire, pipe# and other surplus or unusable materlal.s shall be disposed of at an of fnitee facility *quipped to handle: them. S. If lighting is includeA in the parking lot area, energy efficient lamps shall be used. All onsite lighting shah. be directed to pCOvent spillage onto adjacent properties. s. It foil-type insulation is to be used, a fire retardant type shall be inAltalled to the approval of the Building Division. i. A d*txilsd soils ana.a, sis shall be prepared by a registered soils engieeear. This gnalyeLs shall include onsite soil sampling and• ••_ ..• •'. ..�jfYj�t��.�ar:•''�-�•.�+M4►�'.s y..�ai�.. dl.r . .�r�s••.,. . y � ..i.. .+� .. . +•rr.... .�w'S�- .r 4 y X. 'il 71 , f' °,�� '? cam• ;. A y .1 � jet `+ •�, �,;,'�•••,}�' f�i .k. iy( 4 :lye' Ix P`k z', ,, u' �, ,,,;, r•,,, .„Id ,r. rr�,,;I r ,,l weal ',,' y . r, r'.,1,�„ Commission r ;t w,• � + n'm�o t�rsti�»»qq ot materials to provide detailed rea�- r ardinel grading, chemical and fill properties. ' :; / tflarir, zetanin nq wares, stroetr, and utilities. Livengood, Wiftehell, Schum0her, Kirjaba ngir . . �a 1PADOO, Porter '1 ►b USE PERMIT NO. 02-I4 �enera „.Te1s bona To po t construction of a 30 250 square foot addition to an i►oUn neral Telephone central office building located at the `r northeast rues of Main Street and Acacia Avenue►. The public ring was opined. 'j Xlenno . . Win Jr. architect for the proposed addition ad- th S p � • Oressed the Come ion 'to concur with the suggested conditions of a roval. oxoe t f the limitation of empLoycees to tore. He said =t there will be rary help in the building while the now r arip ot is being i ailed and perhaps from time to time there- ter 'ding on no and requested that the limitation be ` deletsd*, , He also into the Coaeeission, that the parking lot had tj o rigi"Lly been deswignea City standards and asked that the applicant be relieved of restriping as well . Thare. were no other parsons speak for or against the proposal, and the public hearing was crl . Staff explained that there are n pecific parking requirements av- 11- cah3e to projects such as the s ject requetst. The Commission diericum the parking needs of the ility at proposed and the Poosibility that this use might be ch qed in tha future to a use %Uob . aLght require additional parking reces. In response to this 00nosche the building engineer for neral Telephone assured that fto oast and logistics of moving the sat amount of electronic Muipwnt in the stricture and recabling• t nether location would � of foctively guarantee that this' would not ha n. Also taken ink � consideration vere how" the employee count co, be verified and new a lfeitat ion to a specific number of emplo s could be en- forced. ON MVZOU BY LI'V'ENGWD MD 0SC'cmD 8Y SCHUmACHER CO TIOMM USR pbMM NO. 01-24 'WAS APPP4MD WITH TOR romowm; hi NGS AND L0110=Tl , BY THE r'aLwwrma voTEs , Y SJPOR Agp��s 1. The proposed 1, f50 square toot addition to the existing .General Telephono facility is compatible with surrounding lard uses e►nd • 6017- 10-5-82 .. P.C. come 1 rr NX Uls Is I • •, fl i� +• ++�Vf . �� ,••�r+++y "�=• .f r,+ .�. r ..tJ 1N; :n1 .?r •�'• i� '•1 �t 9 ^ .S !• �. • _S Ij •� •! �•iti`-r, r + '+ r�. •r{ Jam, T. A. • �1 • ' •■.}• . �• •. rA,■ _% j • •.�. a,M i.: r •+ir,'f�•,•..•s.!- FA11+ �•F r- '•� �r iM•:�• y'- _ fit L .r..•: • • y• /• *r �• •`,�* .� •. , '•,: •• • . 1 `,Sl, i 1I. w,•-�•_�••?- '`. ; .�''Y�+ t*!.•: •�i,+Nt1. �+•• , y':.'• .,�•• lam 1� ram' .f• .: .., r1• , • •�• i• � .� .. -'�y' ••t•'•�_ . Or �!•13vireat: eabtia•t dla. - •'�r�'� �`'' ' ��+;:; ��,IY t�: �.•+:.: , Reg is : c0inatxuct 'it 4, 330 `s'• i � diaai buiad ,�• • can j nnct lcn wf th T, 9l9.:.q.' ft. alLurch l'Ac Y t i i • .. '� • ! y • = • .. ••� to { ��' • •;•• xor'thgaot eornor Newman. Avenus 'and Vaif Mari St. au�ti 4 :;F ;' ; •'1r� •r• . Based on,the Staff#$ initial st�dr of his - . � published in dMt 11 news project �' drift Me�ativi t�t�ctara+tiari• •.'• ,� •. : •' for 10-di 1 revie�r P�Per pasted in the Office of the City Cleric eAd Y Pam' i , period ends np ' - _.,L.i,so nti r the attached +C Mlr+e V! ,� • r JUSS - Ai rsantal aGesou ��ection Ai. Enviaia . rces ..ftcOpe�#• tMt the ,y a' '� . .,• .jpprove "tive Der aria ' : wo - Propfte-tproject-Mil not have a s4 nifieant a�dv • • '-'�9 _ • er\s�r a ec on do `•- !- wit! "•'' •`+ • `•t.•• 1 =• . •r'. �� J•\i . ,YS4�a F''•.. ,• :I" ,�' f`- j .•�':�' :! + f �i,r _ �ti Lion r;af ... ._�. a •t. , i...,..• _ ale. TlW WOW r�es�� ti ` ng measures rr111• reduce-potential envi roraenta•l�a !'itc "f ;project and a" r 0mw ended as-tonsil tiohs of. r:w- •;•:;� .�1. {,• ■ 7 MaA+I• � •t � , ~:. �, •y •f'• '''," i 7• ;....•�7.. � 1 r.i.••• •:f'�,• •r•..� V Y ,. 1!� •,• • F 't •�i► '1,��fff�•'. ' .+ I V i a►/ {a i.. .tom. R. :..' •,i t f ;y' s' S f t yi•{ . "• r • • YI J •••.: S, ••mow • ,•�+f�.�1•�,//+ �.^S•�'•1F• 1 •••�. �.-rl�'•+ �ff'r ,L• /S•.+ � •„��•� •j.,'�,�.�jTM.'w • L�^•��.a l� y' 4 j'-�t�,�, ,{.. , AD —161 IDA �. .:'r1y'�'.:�• 1'� �. . r�� M.• L` 74, r ` Wan AL'� Nc►'its! IM +� 1 .., LAP a o d 220t eleotriad *all be sbkbud 3n at the 1"*tio n of S. Ha al va shall be vtdbbed in at: 'the loaaticxns GE codtinq faci litie s i crates teaten, ad dal h tim units. 30 14w w1uee heaft stroll be used an all shawe". 4. All buLULM, s,� ouch as unusable liner, wire, pipe, atxi other surplus nrr or O MM612 , s vLU be disposed of at an offsite facility equipped to hodle dum .. S. • '1 * s ataims an the "Ject pit y, wtn+ether attached or ftt dw d, shall be =wtcxfrd In oaplianos with the state acoustical %ts &xc% not fbc for units that Ue vith.ia fire 60 COM r anbm s of the pipe ty. 7he interior noise levels of all dwIlin; units shall not e=ved the California msulation staff of 45 dbe CMM, Odder of coo iarne shall consist of submittal of an acuatical analyda repcwt:, prapared 1xWer the supervisiaa of a person experleromd in the • field of acoustical esygi , with tha application for bwLLdirg permit(s) . All to mitigate noise to a creptable levels *All be irx=Vorated I nbb the dssign of the pcojmt. . d.C if lightizq is incluxied in the parking Lot anWor recreat•icn area erWAW effic:i%,_ lass shall bis used (e.g. high prewure sodium vapor, metal halide) . All outside Lighting shal l be xected to prevwt: "spilLwpe" onto adjacent praperti es. 70 A detailod sells analysis shall be prepuW by a registered soils err.-ic eer. This analysis loll ineluNs cer-sitar soil sarepling and laboratory teat ihq of materials to prtrvi& detailedti+ans regarding ing, x denical and fill properties foutrra, tairix3 walls, streets, and utilities. A. if f U- Lum"t ie n is t o be used, a fire retardant type al.,: l L bei ir%staLted as by the MAlding pnrbaesnt. '. An angieti wing yoolc9ist stroll be engaged to submit a report frxli.c aticxr the g:ourkd Mrfacae anoorlsscat:ion fray aerch w7v= mt for the subject pIMperty. All stnrUCtn wid in this drm1c ant shall be ccmtructe d in cwVL1wxx with the rfactm as Indicated by the geologist's ropc rt. Calculations fox foortings and st obAul Mmbers to witfttarnd anticipated g►-factors shall be submitted to the City ZM deer prior to than imunm of buil,diny pezmits. 100 A Llb silt aotrtrol fr all shorn rumff f== the pzWerky, during camtzuction ate +d�tYttq" initial o at'--n of the project doll be sukxdtbad to the California 11 QhA1 Nstsr Onlity �tr�ol ke.-d staff fbr their review prior to the issvarKxa a 'grading Pan dts. .� lie Womtion an e*dpaent or facilitim which nay gsorrate air pollutants shall be sub Ratted to the Scauth Cmt Air ".ity 1- ongrermrnt Ddstrict staff Far their recvi 1Xar+ to the iormnes of a Oertificat* of Glancy for any use within the btAlding lZ. 23. .a •i0A'r wi• 'h J• i I y 0►10 � NOW* planni�m �rsi+on %~ `'�; •• Asp 44 . WTI(M OM M09 BY LIV1903000 "1,M SECONDED BY 1411VAHANGIR THAT M COWISSION VVH IlCLD TIM CONDITIONS OSED BY THS 90AAO Of elm � A tq�iT1 TB 00 USX PBF24IT NO. 82-11 WITH THR ShCZPTION o* C AND ALLOW TO QAPAG9 TO BS A WAXIMU14 OF 15 JPZXT Ili HEIG ITH TIE P140VISION OF A SPh1NXLEIRING S%STZN AS APPMMV BY THZ DEPAWKEN'T. MMtON FA11 BY 'THE POLLOWZY.3 VM s AYSS 2 tti"ine, Livenyow1 f 1Mir j ahang ix 1002st Viawhollr Schumacher AMNON: Pacee, ftwter ABSTAtn t tsone Furthor discussion follrAoed. ON WRION BY BIGGINS AM SZCON Y LIVSNGM THE COMISSION UPHELD THIS COMITICK Op APPROVAL • I SD BY THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUST- !tXM ON USX PSRKIT � 2-11 DENIED THE APPEA►t. BY THE FOLLOWING i iS r • AXSS: trig 3,tes, vengood, Winchell, Schumacher: "=t KirJa • it ASSSNTt Pats , Porter ABSTAINS Commis aer t1vengood directed that the record show that his second (�f t above �Aoti*n had been only for the purpose of takir�q an ac n an the xeq�aest so that the applicant could pursue his appeal the City Couaga �l if hs wished to do so* CONDITIONAL- P - 3 CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 92-11/ - (Continued from September 21, 1982) m : U_tv Wye for g cr est Miasion&EX b2t'ist Church To pemit a reduction of 10 parking spaces within a proposed 8 , 100 square loot fturth facility to be constructed in conjunction with a 10, 569 er* fbot medical building with reciprocal parking. Subject property is located on the northeast corner of Newman Avenue axA Van Buren street, savor seildwia reported that parking for the medical facility has been ide utiod by staff as the major issue in this request. Although a reaiproaat king ,agreement will be recorded between the two uses, the lack of to parking to acco oodate the major user would justify the Eta f• s rec omendati.on that the plan be revised. no also gated that the landscapingq on the total site in insufficient and munt ba enlargad. The Co mission and this staff discussed the status of the pettd!r4 reVISLOns to Article 979, parking, and the effect this revLsion w4ght have on such f4ellities as the subject one. Vx. Sella - Via respond-A that according to present remearch there would appear to be' little change in the futaie parking requ iresents for a Odio41 facility of this Mize• as a result of the code change. -6- 10-5-82 - P.C. My�4 :'T . • ' SI • •9{,• � '' • `fi` r t •� ,Air' r.. I y KLIMtos, HOBO pl 46 nq COMMfssion r 's, lsf2 The publics hearing was opencd. Larry Nye, applicant, addressed the Commission in support of his request. He pointed ou_• that the parking shortage is a re- sult of the underground portion of the medical building which, when calculated on a square footage basis only, acco•ants for the 10-space difference. He informed the Commission that the use of the basement urea for a linear accelerator only would accospodate such a small number of patients and sta'_'f at one time that the parking spaces would not be necessary wher, calculated *a the losie cf use rather than square footage. He noted, too, t that the site can be made to conform with the laWiscaping re- There were no other persons to speak for or against the proposal, and the public hearing was closed . The Coraaaission discussed the parking a ild the ,applicant' s rationale for the shortage. Also reviewed wan the elevation of the subject property Above the property directly behind it, and the suggestion was made thA,t because of that grade differential no heavy land- scaping be installed there to avoid a problem with drainages and that the existing row of trees be allowed to constitute the land- scaping along that property line . ' •a ON !MOTION BY HIGGINS AND SECOND BY LIVENGOOD NEGATIVE DECIAMTION j NO. 02-12 WAS APPROVED BY THE POLL INC., VOTE: Aynot Higgins, Livengood, Winchell a Schuaaachir, Mir jaharngir Now x None MMUTs Paoneer• porter AMMIXt bone • 0 I ICY ST HIGGINS AND SECOND BY LIVENG000' CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION ga. f;o-li 09 APPROM WITH THE POLLCKING M-DING8 , BY TEIE FOl. ON .LZMJM FOR JIPPHQVAL s wr�w■n i l* The 1?14n"inq Commission determined that the proposed use of ,kbo Usiament area for housing a lia r electron accelerator,, �r*at a re�duotion In the number of patients and employees . Pa wbe wi be using the proposed facility at one Une, will suffidLently reducrr the parking 4eepand to allow for thee re:duC- t1Q& of the ton (10) parking spaces as requested. 2* The granting of the conditt,onal exception will not constitute a grant of special privitago inconsistent upon other proper- fiss sa -the vicinity and under identical sates claasaifications . J. Thu grrantiaeq of the conditional exception is necessary in order to Preserve the enjoyment of ores or move miLbstantia l Property rights. yMy w 6 r r db tow 90 C P♦ Monist- !%araisoiOn tag* . A , �. The ranting of s conditional exception will not be materially 4etx ratai to the public welfare or injurious to property in the classification* i• The grantln4 ot ' the conditional exception will not adversely atg"+ the domerai Plan at . the City of Runtington Beach. i!d 4 hf :in ,,. veood, linchell, Schusa�l►oher, l�i•rjrringir posts # I tt Darter A" is:$ Bone C41 V T UVEPWO AND SECOMD BY HIGGINS COrtDITtON" USS PERMIT Ito. 13-•33 WAS APPWVZD WITH THE FOLLOWING PINVINCS An CONDITIONS, SP '!`h.E lMQLwftmc VD"1"E s rumogg, OR "Pam: 1 . Thb proposal is substantially in conformance with all applicable previsions of Division i. 7. The ptapose church/medical facility is consistent with the zon- ing and General Plan designations on the subject property. 1. The sit* plan received and dated October So, 1i82, shall. be the � approved conceptual layout subject to the following: a. A revised sate plan shall be submitted for review and approval degi`ct the required ton (ld) percent landscaping per to tiger- ' 131 (b) of the ordin&ncee code. 1. PA+at to, �isstafte of bui).dinq permits# , a reciprocal parking and afe• remit between the twee uses an the subject site shall bd; set: tad to :the City for approval by the City Attorney and thth*ftor recorded vLth the County Recorder of the County cif 3. All 'building sp*Lls such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and Other s plus dt unusable materials shall be disposed of at an offiit* facility equipped to handle theme i. It lighting is included in the parking lot area, energy efficient lamps shall be used. All onsite lighting shall be directed to prevent spillage onto adjacent properties . d • it toil-t insulation is to be used, a ,fire retardant t"A atoll be Mailed to the appsoval of the Building Divlslcon. i• A d4tai1e4 soils aaal cis shall be prepared by a registered molls � fftlamwo This analysis 'shall include onaite sail sampling and.— Pecs . • •'•'. + ";T"7�yl•Iti'�!i~�+1.4.41.�y/•�1�►` `Lam• M -'•w - r ti •`•,• • •, r. • Ad Commission i r xabor'atoey testing of "teerials to provide detailed recom- mendations regarding grading, chemical and fill propeertiss, foundations retaining walls, streets, and utilities . 6`I Aix RL99ins• Livengood, wi.nchell , Schumacher# lair jahangir � Iwo,r•; a licnar A00TS Psione, Porter lions ZTIeWAL USE PESMIT M09 82-24 �! t: General Tole hone Te pes t construction of a 3, 250 squarer foot addition to an c, a xistire neral Telephone central office building located at the northeast rner of Main Street and Acacia Avenue, The public ring was opened. lonneth S. Win Jr. , architect for the proposed addition, ad- dressed the Correa ion to concur with the suggested conditions of Approval •xieept f the limitation of employees to tan. He said . that there will be porary help in the building whiles the new e muuipwnt is being i talled and perhaps from time to tine there- &Ker dependizL4 on ne and requested that the limitation be deleted. He also info d the Commission that the parking lot had originally beeen• dasigned City standards and asked that the applicant be relieved of restripinq as well. There were no other persons speak for or against the proposal t and the publLa hearing war; cl d. Staff explained that there are cif is parking requiremanta ap- plicable to projects such as the a ect x*quest. The Commission iecussed the parking needs of the ility as proposed and the possibility that this use might be ch god in the future to a use whLeh might require additional parking aces, In response to We etimerno the building engineer for neral 'Telephoner assured that the cost and logistics of moving the Brat amount of ele ctrooleM �ipr~wnt in the structure &M recabling t nether location would ective l guarantee that thier would not ha en. Also taken into consideration were how, the employee count co be verified and how a limitation to a specific number of emplo s could be en- forceed. ON WTION BY L1VENGOOD AND SECOND BY SCHUMACMEE CO TIONAL USE PIIMZT NO. 82-24 WAS APPRMD WITH THN FOLLOWING FI Has AND CONDITIONS* BY TOR rOLLOW111 l VorE s • FtNORM FOR APPROVAL e The proposed 30250 square foot addition to the existing' General Telophoae facility is coq*tible wrath surrounding land uses aM 400 10-5- 12 - P 6 C. - •;Wifwj.lS�a,wt5+t y�,yf •t fy "nil' •..^ _^ I,,, S.-'R. r 1 r fled 4r! ` 4 7 � y,1 f'n .(t, ,R " + a ' '• ql' w ..1� 4.: t'•kr F o' '� a*s 1', ,,i Y - ., Y+ ''r, ' •r', •rY 4fi n r' 11, r r + r •+,,^ A rr M.r1' ^ , /, � •,.. `,` ;N, M , lam� • ,,+.�:'.. r ��I� LRh�� 't�•i1'' �'+; 'C � ,•'' M.1r S'f',•,o,• � �•"� 1 ^ ..r'�;'A,�."`+: !- �r it ,Mrs} ',,, y'r• ' , , , .� ��,•, . , y'. 114 r r•,r 11+ r +f��f y .. r�!a rrr �'i�' a,`y'F Pei fm a+ �. r•,1.�;`�i�' I� '1h'1 r � I d S,r n. ��'./, ��1 n, i . dRIFi' t.•r .y' �r . ..+a n ... . aw ask: tl�torr b"ch depwitmnAt community demlopment SrAff ,r :PORT-W �-', � Ce�uiRi �rrrelopa�r:t (CDNTIXM MW YA11 17* 1988 JwM. t)edrick MA Co. • 900 Muth San dabridl Blvd. Her 3, 190 San Gabriel # dk 81176 ItlB?�,.reesteO �; Van Buren Properties July, 3, 1988 2078 Palo$ Verde$ Dr. North Suite 316 : OP (office iita, CA 90717 Professional) $, ZT: 6i: To construct a 3- Iofessional Off i as ' start' 10# 567 sq.ft. medical office building with joint use of parrking with 64% of the SMigT1119, 11,9111: Vacant i required parking provided � on adjacent parcel located to tLe east. .28 acre CS: 1) Reduce layndscape (12,331 net sq.ft• ) planter width from 10 ft . to 0 ft.; x) Roduce oktatior sideyacd setback f.rear► 10 f t. to S .,to I t 001 man Avenue (Oortbasst corner of Xeman sad Van Buren) Approver ,Il+yarinisttative Review No. 87-29 with findings &rid conditions of taval and deny Cor4itional Exception (variance) go, 01- 68 with eqs � y7 On may 170, 1966, the Planning Commission continued Administrative Rtvierr Mo+ 87- 29 and Conditional Rzception (Variance) No. 87-68 and directed staff to work with the applicant in order to redesign the site plan and pxovide additional parking spaces on-site. A•R M�� I i k- a ,r a ^' �ry .•-� F • w,y{S y IJ'" � ' 1 r U�. ,1^M� �rT, r'�tl M�{f�,i,�k, ..a llf►• �' ' V'F�a, ,Y, ',iq'��•RI�I i t 1 4 s : a to order to address the parking concern the applicant has reduced the gross square footage of the medical office building from 10#567 sonar@ feet to 10#317 square feet . Also, the applicant teas ilintitted 766 square feet which will be used for a linear accelerator/simulator. This use will gencrate loss parking demand and 1s therefore x sting that the linear accelerator/siioulator floor aroe calc�ed at a lower parking ratio. The linear accelerator is a unique roar encased by Z to 3 foot thick solid A �i+Qt'•�A,1f a �B• hts use am is limited and certainly will not regLixe the parks daysead for typical office space (l space per 175 square loot) . 8t 9 supports parking the linear acceleration floor area at 4 ratio of Poe parking space per 500 square feet of gross floor area -Mcauas of its design and limited use. The following is g aatirix compering the orlginel plan to the revised plan: MAXIM xx AM IsmAlsO original gay-load 9300.4 parcel also 10,000 s.f 12, 332 s.f same Frontage 100 ft . 100 ft. same E' 9149. sq.Ft. 10, 567 s.#. 10, 317 s.f . (includes 766 . s . f . lineal accelerator groom) r 2200.5 Bldg . Haight 3 stories 3 station � 38 ft. 35 ft. now., 9200. 5 6ethacka s :rant . 10 f t. 10 f t. same lat . side 5 ft. 46 ft. same e side 10 ft. 5 ft. * same* Rear 5 ft. 5 ft. same 9602 Jofnt use of 36% on-site 39% on-site Ptl�irip 64% on 61% on adjacent adjacent Parcel** parcel** 9406 Parking spaces 1 space per 61 56 175 sq.ft. 100567 sq. ft . 9,551 5 175 =54 of floor 766 1 500 w 3 area Total Provided (hotN parcels) : bl 63 (7 ezcess spaces) Varianco Request ii JrOint Use of Parking Request Staff Report - 607/88 Z- (0693d) t: 1 � ni v f,• t y n WY 1 1 ?lw sun 9666 Landscaper Area 8% lot i0 (Combined 20199 sq.f t. f, 996 sq.f t . 1,125 sq. f t . Parcerxs) Laaftcepe 10 f t. 5 ft. * some* Planter width along Sian Ave. t�,; � �asianQi �eq�1est a� joint Vse o Parki.nq ituquest As tbo a strAx. illustrates, the gross square ' footage of the building boos boon. ceduceed b r approximated 250 square feet. This reduces the OrigiSsil r moU r of required parking spaces from 61 spacer to 99 sleces i �. applying the one space per $00 gross equate footage to t e liasarr. accelerator/sioulation floor area (766 square feet) , the required parking is reduced from 99 spaces to 66 $Pecos. The proposed church building layout on the adjacent site has been revisod to provide two (2) additional spacers which will be available for tb wedicel office use during weekdays for the church uwo, if necessary. yheteforer, with the reduction of the required parking spaces for the MA1081 offices building from 61 spaces to 66 spaces and the addition of two (2) spaces on the church site, a total of seven (7) excess parking spaces will be available during weekdays . dime the recorded Declaration of Establishment of protective coveensets, conditions and Restrictions and Grants of segments restricts hours and days of operation for the msdicol office building- to weekdays and the revised layout results is additional parkingo staff supports they applicant's requaest # 4 .�� Imo= r Staffs re cawwnds that the Planning Comission approve Administrative kevl�es►. . : li'l�k with the following findings and conditions of a :t9val 604 deny. conditional Raception (Variance) No. 87-68 with t felloving fi•adingss Tl� ga�tt AMid =in MO_ _ R7-2!t 1. The granting nt Administrative Review No. 87-29 for Conotsugtion of 10,917 sq6 ft. a►adical office building will not adversely effect the General Pl+as of the 'City of Huntington Rea0b4l 1 . The establisbnnt, maintenance and operation of 100717 sq. ft. medical office building will not be detrimental to: a. They general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity; Otof f deport - 6/7/89 1 1• y 1 ^i 14 goo jA AL KNEW • r Aft yl: b+ Property and improvements in the vicinity of such use or . building. r 3 . The iaoation, site Wovt, and design of the proposed medical Wice building properly adapts the proposed structures to streets, driveways# and other adjacent structures and uses in a barmosious Aannpr. 6 . The eoMbinMtibn sad relationship of the proposed medical office i'lding &ad the proposed use on the adjacent site are properly 8 * axe will be po conflict in the Operation hours and denands for, the propos4d 10017 s ft. icsl office building and the proposed church on the aidlacent parcel and will not create an onduo traffic problea since they. mill never be in use sLaults,neously, as agreed to in the CCiA•s and grants of $iiesl�At . -, CONDIfi ONA a=2rraN (YARX H�„rS )__f . a7-69 1. The 9988ting of Conditional Reception (Variance) No. 67-68 for a five (5) toot in lieu of ten (10) foot exterior sideyard building setback and a five (8) foot in lieu of a ton (la) foot plaeox width along Van Buren will adversely affect the general Pan of the City of Huntington Beach. 3# since the subject property can be fully developed within Feulawr established setbacks, Conditional Excerption (Variance) no. Ot-fie for reduced PAarior sid+eyalyd setback building an plant*►, width is not 04cessary for the preservation and enjo nt of substantial property rights. 3. The !cranking of Conditional Exception (Variance) MO. 87-68 for seAL. exterior sideyard building setback sad planter width will be detriomtal to the gowral welfare of persons working or r"' idino in t1a •icinf tr. a. The ra ►ti of Conditional Exception (Variance) ha. 87-68 for =tesiot sIdeypr4 building setback and planter width will be detris►dtal to the value of the property and Improvements in the bl et2 ►borhood. 6, ftopting of Conditional Exception (Variance) go . 87-66 for a.Airioar sidel►ard setback and planter width would constitute a special privilege inconsistent with limitations upon other Office Processional properties in the vicinity. 6. Because of the size, configuration, shape and lack of unique topagraphic features of the subject propertyl there does not appear to be exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or craditions applicable to the land, buildings cc promises Involved that does not apply generally to property or class of uses In the Office professional district . staff Report - 6/7/88 �e- (0633d) y —T•'{ Y +�•Y1'� r... .. ,r i'y 1 ./ f lrr {k ', t r... � �.. �,,lek r,i. L .* ' RY'r 4 f• 1+'•` /4 r, f i,✓Mls'� t,roi.rl' , •' 4 1, y i �`+�" • it' , :� �`, , , . = 'iF,'��.• r •r, �� r��, !�".j.��Ma\,+;�1,''ti ,�„'.:j6. •Wil''r• �,4-fit .. °/`•b'•��M'�':r •.� r „ 1 1(J 'Lw.,�J1..\Y+I +� i�/J '✓' 1 1 r . ..+a'M {\ site �a ,, Boor pleas and elevations dated May 27, 1968, J' be' he aceptuolly approved layout subject to the follo0inq iaodifiostionas on the site plan shall be reprised to seElect a t° exterior siderard setback from Namen Avenue. ( , � Mr �ij,,agge landscape lanter a long Ss�on she l l be b� l r6st iu width Prior to' ispudace of building permits, the oppite;ent shall a�i►tatit the te"��i�.,�a►g p1e��ra s C '` j6.4 A0$ , aE , irrigation plan to the Department of nit r Development and Public Forks for review and b. )Rooftop Napheni'cal Equipment• plan. Said plan shall tu4l�oa s teen aq of all rooftop mechanical 'equipment and 0bg-11 deliijrate the type 'of material proposed to screen '• • � acid nip�rnt� 6: car.. • projedt shall be reviews and approved by the Design $*view Board for design can patibilit� with the proposed AUreh to bs Updated on the adjacent parcel* drft6 Daaliitation `of brtablishment of Protective Covenant's, ftig6itiong and" Restrictions and grants of easement shall be una4ed to reflect the approved days and hours of operation j of.=t o : 1ic*1 Wilding and the church prior to ' f�reeor�lr�t:ies. , d. " ► itl '' ao Of Parking Ag resmat which wile easure the �litkide, otthe approved days and hours o: operation of thI ical office building and the church on thq tWO + 41, s'�whai 1 be arorovw ,, by the Department of Coa�uAitr I.l. o #jt: and tog City Attorney prior t•o recordation• �r b asking spaces shell be designated for o n atowtive church personnel during weekdays. a. Piiar to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall cowlete the following a . ' rtustallentire perking area as depicted on site plan dated . . , Key 27, 1988. ..Y E 1 b. Conatruct all Public Narks improve:aeut as required. 6 . The medical office use shall be limited to hours between 6: 00 � Al to 6:00 PIS, Monday through Friday. Office uses beyond these hours shall be prohibited. These proviiiions shell be stated in � all lease agreements with tenants. r staff Report - 6/7/4d - - (06126) � ' n IM'Ph�w`. Y �irk{ 1 �. ...* ' H'U w�k ',, ',w •ai "• , .•.*1 r ry t i, �t •�)7 + � M •• °��I` 9�"1 'il ' °• •%1'rya yLl{ � fW' *�' 1.� � � � i }' {'." *i,tip. • x� .y.. y w i w . . r,f Fkk w VIC 2 r tip :^; f'?^,.s,'r�N�,M��„'1 � `��'�.:Y 'h� . 1•�"'t'7R �,''l, yl1N'" + I.y Should the linear accelerator be removerd, the floor area shall be restricted to storage use only$ 64' One on-atto Eire hydwant shall be provided at *art property line as specified by the Fire D92artment, 7. An automatic 'firer sprinkler srstem with combination standpipe I•,. "*too AINIZI angOV64 and instollerd pursuant to Fire ";` �Mperta�at iC •�i�t 4As. ra lam* an determined by the hire Departments, shall be posted and harked. 9. Derive eirciOletion ■hal,I be maintained from Van Buren to Newman tbry the parking lot with a minimum inside radius of 17 feet providw at wau 10. Driveway approaches shall be a minimum of twenty-seven feet (27 test) in width OW shall be of radius type construction . 116 All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and otber s*rpkus or unusable materials shall be disposed of at an off-sits facility. eglApped to handle theme lx* Loer-voltm heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets . 13. It lighting• ass .included in the parking lot, high-pressure sodium va�oor ls.rapa shall be used for energy savings. All outside Itghtin4 shall be directed to prevent •spillage" onto ad�agt prope�rtiera. 14 . All applicable public Works fears shall be paid prior to lasuwa of building permits . 1S. ' no Akw lopmant shall comply with all applicable provisions of ' 9r *a Cam, Buildinq Division, and Fire Departftnt . 16. k• hariierd moils aMnalirsis shall be prepared by a registered sails Dnginest. This analysis shall include on-site soil ssrVlinq and laboratory testing of materials to provide detailed t' sconwndotions regarding grading, chemical and fill ptopertiee, foundations' retaining Mulls, streets, and atilLti ese 17, Landscaping D q shall amply with Section 9608 of the Huntington "adh OrdinAnee code. 18 . The Planning Gomaeission reservers the right to revoke Lhis Administrative Review if any violations of these conditions or they Huntington beach ordinance code occurs. Staff Berpurt - 4/7/66 (u692d) - - � a 1 ,• Y M of f,aw ry 1 ) �r� 1 . r : fR s tiY �'� . r 1 1 ' �, •. a 4« " "Y Y,< Ir ji `r ° ' R l r f.r�- l rr„ ) Ir� � .. ;1•' , r* ? i`} - • 7'�i r �t n + �!. " �� y,7i•- r M fl Y ff i; A' V b . •e A,� Y "i ',V1 '' ' t : i` �nu - >' r r I S 1 1 M � ••i ' 'i . r 1 sir• f• f;1 r`. r.k'1- M.1. .. . 'VM� r. ',14's:� •ri' • .1,rr .. f .. "IL y TbO Plenaial CeN"ission may son Administrative 8eview so, 87-26 and Cohdi tit nal Sw*pt ion (Variancel X01 87-68 with findings 1 grgoti, of AftiniattatiVe hevf OW ear. 07-29 and COAGMonal it elr ( eri ) No. 87-68 for the con*truction of a +8q1, 999Wr building will adversely 0+1fect the general Flan ;,;h: •: z1bg City Or 1hAntington $each. < ; "w est bliOnent, maintenance and operation of the 50dicAl attic* bui ldinq w 111 be detrio wntal to: I a, I%* general welfare of persons residing at working in the vicinity' b. Property and improvemants In the vicinity of such use of ti building. r • 36 Ift locations alto layout, bulk and height of the proposed icol office building .does not properly adopt the proposed structures to streets, driveways, and other adjacent structures and uses Ist a harmonious manners 4. Joint use of parkiaq for the proposed nedical office building wi b the adjacent church facility is not sufficient* d i.,tional spaces for general maintenance and administrative procedures of the church, during the week, is not being p�tbrrided. [ ' 2 pp iuls►lratire Review No. 87-29 and Conditional Nxceptift +s #► � ft. $7-66 with findings and conditions of approval. . •t 1.1 sibs pIan, floor plans and elevations dated and received May 27" 1l62 8. 9X ended ner'atative dated receitad liar 27, 1.988 8 . �ghborhood letter dated received May 18, 1988 40 deaf'# deport slated May 171 1989 8p t i�1�:Itla i dtaff Report - 6/7/88 0%7*. (ai9rfd) n ^ xj�4►1W� �i1M�, �• � ,.,'��„�! 4,'•/� i� �r �r�rW�1�•�,. r4 �r hr ,, 1�� 11ti,1•�f /Y�•.�.." � �'' �:. 4 F `\ .,'� ',C', ;C��1 ly�r� .�h► i•dT r ,,",R,,� *a)yM,>_„ I°':.t',•'.{' ��,�Yh� � ��'�a7'1�y w TO IN • > .{�+ '7�'/q`�1+ y114 R.I ., r' i,,�0 IF `�,f„ ��'�, s� •awl. +i t - e rl• 1 � �1 � C r a . _ .� h i op-m �'� • OL 7. .._ .,. e• _ firmJ... h, � j r� y�1�,tip/ ��i ^� . .;�� 1�� .n•�.� .r,1 �� +7 �. • _ x . .� !w�� rP '4L> -rt+ T qi '� .:'.t. � a f'�r r-,��6!' �'1 ♦.:^ �,rMNr�w4•�. �� '� {� 1nh Jif"'j'1 w x' rrv� � �' � x r• �,r 1'K � ,y��a I•• i '.�Y^'yNYYrM�M r • 10 1 + n. f Y I r � let AidAL j. w .i r ' 16 � S 1 11 ; Q drd f* —Ome dif t I VIP.I, id 0 if a' `_IT r.r 1r I �r 1 it I Will •* _ T- ILE• IL I a ,. OIL— IBM%va i lrlmf� to It - �'r"r ._ II `� .• I I i I 1 E j 1 I j —t�'Y �j rr i._—ij-��T �'-•'1-�—��M+L� f1 � r:�ti—� fr� �:� —E_j_.1f � �i_�1_},.1y_s: _' y e�. �l �� ". r' I - 1E r op V.AA V6 V�M')lid r-------------...__ ._._._�._�_____...___-__.._ -.-'__. _ ....__..�-.__.. _ _.-_--•--fir-..._ - - 11 I-ITI - tl lei Ib V l �r • 1 t � y Y Y r........w ---�. _. . ... ._ _pp - --- --- Y, �I i Now � rs Olt wm*.Nft Mow t �+1�.ai _ �F+! �.� ..ems. s _ We s Ir r� -- — Surm - s • -Ell rr-u.w•. .-w w...w �M �Aa•M•+ r•Nr fto m t . GLAM•MI/Ml 4~ f[ - y �iFii1R + i paVEIL .�.. r TFT-W ,� +� / ! �' zt a -, ;SAW MERVATP)W . •A. • ,ArW SI NF IN N we v dEr 4 A 1 1 � � 1 "S 1 ,a r � 1 � ,idw�oM • �E/ ra A� . i R U01 RECEIVED 0 ID MAY � 7 198� 900 TH SM L NNAEVAaa SAN GAWL CAUFORMA 91716 dEPARTbiENt OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Hoy 26 , 1986 PL"141*; NViSION City of Runttagtoa Beach Departsent of Coesmudity Development Civic Center , 2000 Main $treat puutLngtoo• Beach. California 92648 Attentiou; Scott. Rrrs Ike c Adriniatrativv Review No. 87-291 Conditional exception (Variance) No . 81-68 Parking Reduction Dear Mr. Riess: au May 17 , 1988 the above mentioned subject vt� s brought, before j the City of Nuatington Beach Planning Conaission . Parties represe>stiag both the owners of the proposed medical building and residents of the eonsuoity rpoke to either support or oppose the proposed duvelopsent . After hearing all those concerned , the Planaisg Coww LtsLon asked the owners to rtvLAw and revise their plans it order to accosuodate are additional unspecified number of parking spaces. 1t was our understandL.ng that batreen seven and seine spaces would 1�e auifficLent . Tt,.e followLng in our proposal for providing the additional spaces : .1 . The adjacent Cburcb is relocating their Northeast stair shoving an add ; tonal two (2) spaces. 2 . The Lafo:reaatiao on staff report dated May 179 1288 •boas 19 ,56•square feet . We fral this figure ebo6ld act include stairs , otevators or air duct shaftr , which are not habitable spaces . This would yrsduce the building area to 10,021 square feet. 3 . I 'm ebe Southeast eosmer of the first floor lessieable tsea it a spoe La'! tseatmemt application area called out as the Linear Aesellerator/8imaiator Rooms . This entire suite , which would be occupied by Dr. f. g. Chas , one of the building ' s owners , in a 6iphly UO1MM Q"W4FM 1y 1 1 v 1 CLty of Buutiogtou beach Dep* rtueat of CommouLty Develops►eat Nay 26 , 1966 Page Z specialixed , low volume , cancer treatment center. The trcatwont application areas consist of s total of 766 square feet , which is enclosed by Z Foot thick concrete and steel wall # and ceilings or 1 / 4" lead walls and tailings . TbLs space is occupied by only ona ( 1 ) person at a time . On rha average , there are 14 (2 per hour ) patients a day that are treated on a pre -rat appointment only basis . Bach patient visit lost $ approzisattly 20 minutes and there is absolutely no "walk - in" traffic . Also , there Le practically no patient waiting . As a result , patients rarely overlap. In addition , only three (3 ) employees oeco%py the entire suite , one ( 1 ) physician , *no ( 1 ) teehui-. iao and a receptiouist . to summary , a maximum of only five ( 5) people would occupy a apace of 1 ,759 square feet $ ad wbould this conditLou occur , its would only be for a ssrsll fraction of time cLuce each patient visit Le only approsimstely 20 minutes long . Therefore , while f iv.�i ( 5) people mould be the ma: isua , iu reality the suite would rarely curtain ■ores their four (4) people total. The parking requirement of one , (1) spats per 175 square ft ,: would seas . that this s;?eeeiali%sd low volume cancer ' treatment center would hove appxoxiretely tin ( 101 I, parking apace* allocated to it. As demonstrated above , ton (ill) speces would in fact be double the amount required to amply accommodate the maximum parking needed (5) for the suits. Consequantl.y , we request that a ratio of one ( 1 ) space per 500 square feet of ' treatment application •tee (766 sq.ft.) be usedo It is our opiaiws that, a ratio+ of one ( 1 ) space per 500 square toot in this arda is reasonable. off ice hours are 8: 30 a.m. to 4: 30 p.m. + Monday through yriJay , with no exceptions. 4 . !i>sally , tPu additional section will be removed from the front of 'cbe medical office building totalling 250 square loot . This would locate the building 11 feet from the sidewalk. The preceding proposals would result in the following: kxiatimg Parting.. 61 spaces low spaces - Church •its Tetol 63 spaces •, c C i}y of Huntington Deacb. • *apartment of Community Development May 26 . 1988 1'age 3 Total Building Area 108021 Sq.Pt . Area Removed from Dui .ding - 250 8q.Ft . Linear Aecel. In. Z,1 Sq.Tt . 91,005 Sq .lt . I space per 175 $q.Ft. 51 .46 spaces required Linear Accel, Rm. I space per 500 8q.tt . 1 .53 spaces required Total Park!.ag .Spacer Required 53 Total Parkivs $paean PrOV1444 -a Spacer Over 10 It is our opinion that thi.a is a reasonable and fair solution to the pr.rkiag problem. We hope this meets your approval s long with everyote concerned* if you have say questions or suggestions which would facilitate approval by the Planning Commission , please do Ant benitate to call me st (018) 286-1101. i I thank you for your time and consideration of this matter. very truly yours $ ASSOCI i AR ECTURAL DESIGN GROUP MI AEL A. D0 DesiRs Director MAD/cc cc : RISSims Manker I ' ' 11 � 1 ' +•7�f 11 J 1 ' STEPHEN D. MIL'TON 8251 Newman Avenue Wuntingtrn beacn, CA 92647 (714) P347-.7123 RECEIVED May 14 , 1988 MAY Y 81985 Planningcommissiono�rMer��NT of COMMUNIrY DEVELOMIENr City of Huntington beach f►aNIhG DIVISION 2000 Main Stagiest Huntington beach, CA 9264b 5UWECT: REQMT FOR DENXAL of A4t 87-29 CONDITIOML ZXC19PTX0N (VARZMCE) 87-68 CUP 87-17 CONDITYONAL BXGLPTION (VARX"CU) 88-19 P mew mEDrcA L omcz 8 cmmm D6VEIQPxm Dear Members of the planning Commission: I an writing this letter on behalf of my family and other area homeowners living adjacent to and/car near the proposed medical off ico/church development. we are concerned that this project, as currently proposed, does not conform to the, high standards established by the City of Huntington Beach. We would like to bring to your attention our three primary concerns involving parking, setbacks, and traffic. 1. PAR]C UG -� `his rroject, proposes the joint use of parking between the office and church. We feel that trio quantity of available parking is not sutfic:Qnt to fully satisfy the parking demands of those two uses. Furthernaree, we feel th&t the agreement batween tho medical office and the church is not realistic given the normal courser of business for a church. The joint u.qe of parking is an accepts;ble concept when implemented properly. However, in this case there are not enough parking spaces to adequately and simultaneously support the parking Aet.ds of both uses. We realize that during the normal aparaslting hours for the medical office buildinq the church wl.11 have a lower parking demand than it will on Sunday. Now4ver, all churches do generate puking demand during the veekday. On-site parking must be provided for the minister, church sercretary# custodian, and for members of the congregation who will have appointments durir the day with the minister# These are not unusual activities for a church. on the contrary, churches server their congregation and in doing see met provide parkirq for these normal dally activities. a cook STEPHEN D. HILT09 8a,51 ?tewman Avenue t*untington Beach, CA 92647 REC El VED Hay 14 , 1988 MAY 181981 Planning Commission OEPAWMI ENT Of. Cityof Huntington Beach coMML'NITY DEVELOPMENT PLMMIMG 01VfsloN 2000 Min Street Huntington Beachy CA 92646 SUBJECT: RR(XMT MR MUM OF ,*A 87-29 CONUXTIONAL EXCEPTION (VARI]u CE) 5 7i88 CUP 87--17 CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIUCB) 88--19 PROPOSED MEDIC" OFFICE & CHU CH DMLOPMM Dear Kembeers of the Planning CosmissAan s I as writing this letter on behalf of my family and other area homeawners lining adjacent to and/or near t�,* proposed medical office/church dovmlopment. No area concerned that this project, as currently prop,�se:d, does not conform to the high standards astablisheed by tha City of Huntington Beach. We would like to hri , to your attention our three primary cor -,erins involving parkin, setbacks, and traffic. 1. PARUNQ - This project proposes the joint use of parking batwaen the office and church. We fecal that the quantity of available parking is not sufficient to fully satisfy the parking demands of theme two uses. rurthermore, we feel that the agreement between the medical office and they church is not realistic given the normal courses of businass for a church. The Joint use of parking is an acceptable concept when Lxplermenteed properly. Howeeveer# in this case there are not enough parkipn� spaces to adequately and simultaneously support the parkiW needs of both usas . We realize that during the normal operating hours for that medical office building the church will have a lower parking demand than it will on Sunday. However, all churches des generate parking demand during the weekday. On-site parking must be provided for the minister, church secretary, custodian, and for membeereu of the congreqration who will have appointsents durisj the day with the ministers The" are ;not unusual activities fog; a eohurch, on the contraary# churches serve their congregation and in doing so not provide parking for tUosee normal, daily activities. i f vlanning Commission 117 -29, (VARIANCZ) 97-68 CUP 87-17, (VARIANCE) 86-19 May 140 1998 Page 2 We conducted a brief telephone survey of churches similar to the one proposed. Six churches were contacted (each of which were Baptist) and asked than following four questions : A. Owes this church have regular activities during weekdays? a. Doer your church have regularly scheduled b+blee studies or evangelism studies during regular weekday work hours? C. Do you allow special interest groups such as ladies groups, senior citizen groups, atc. to utilize your faclli.tie s during weekday hour? 0. Do you share your facility with ether churches? Ts:alt I presents r suawary of the results of our survey. As shown in Table 1, s out of 6 churches provide services to . their mess;peers during the typical weekday between the hours � of 6: 00 AN and 6: 00 PH. Additionally, 4 out of 6 churches allow special interest groups such as ladies groups, senior citizen groups, etc. to use their facilitiie, dining the day. Also, 2 of the churches surveyed share their facility with � another church, which ,results in an even greater parking 1� demand throughout the weekday. t a►ra�cteer:stics of a church It Given the typical opera ing e:h Is unfair and unrealistic to pose conditions on this church (as propor- id by this pro j eet;--) that they ran not have any activities during the weekday. It the church As to thrive and prespeer Cicy must be allowed to pursue normal activities and parki;&g must be provided to support these normal activities. The current proposal reflects the provision of 61 parking spaces (total on both sites) . This proposed supply exactly e als the C'ity's requirement for the proposed medical � rice bwildingb Based on this parking supply and pursuant to the ewditiahs agreed to 1rl berth devealopmonts no parking ow are pro:+vided to support any weekday activities at the, r a 7 • Y.M III;L. I Planning Casmiss1on .rctW 57-29 , (VARIANCE) 87-68 CUP 87-17 , (VARIANCC) 88-19 May, 34, 1988 Page 9 We feel that it is only Pair to require a minimum of 1.0 parking spaces to support the normal and necessary weekday activities associated with the needs of the church . 'These 10 parking upaces were determined based on analysis our church telephone survey end the following assumptions: U S& Minister 1 Secretary 1 Custodian 1 small cgngreg8t3onA lire ihcx i 7 Total Weekday Parking demand 10 Assumes an average auto occupancy of 1 . 5 persons per vehicle for meeting of id people. Based on the above analysis,, we respectfully request that the Planning Commission require the redesign of the proposed projects to either 1.) increase the on-site parking supply by 10 spaces or 2) reduce the size of the medical office buildinq to 8 ,925 square feet, thereby reducing the required parkinq for the office to 51 spaces. This would provide a minimum of 10 parkinq spaces to support the weekday activities associated with the church. Z . SS'LBACIS - was agree with the ;staff Deports findings for denial of the Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 87-68 and No. 88-19 . There are no extraordinary circumstances which would necessitate a waiver for the City ' s requirement for wetbacks. Furthermore, since this Office Professional Zone in surrounded. on three sides by residential uses a reduction in the setback requirement mould only exaggerate the differences in land use type between residential units, a three story office, and church. Therefore, we request that the Planning Commission require the redesign of the proposed developments to reflect the standard 10 foot setbacks. a. lateg s><sion Co i Planning tam 87-29, ('V1 RIANCI) 8 7--68 CHIP 87-•17, (VARIANCE) 3e-19 May 14 , 1088 r Pag+a A 3 . TRIFPYC -- Although no traffic study was required by City Staff, it should be noted that a significant amount of new traffic will be generated by the proposed developments. Fable 2 attached, presents the generally acceptable tripe generation rates for a medical office building and for a church. using established trip generation grates published by the lnatituta of Transssport:at!,on Engineers. Table 3 , presents the resulting vehicle trips which would be generated by the proposed developments . As shows! in Table 3 , an additional 413 weekday trips will be added to the surrounding street system. This figure includes 52 daily trips generasted by the proposed church , further substantiating that a><cti.viti«ess do in fart take place at a church dw. inq typical weekday work hours . Table 3 has been expanded to present the projected trip generation on a Saturday and Sunday for co=parison purposes only. As shown in Table 3 , the daily vehicle trips are substantially less that those for a typical, weekday. However, AEI peak hour trips are significantly higher. This increase in peak hour traffic directly relates to the peak activities at the church. Based on ai cursory review of the adjacent !street: system, it � appears that there is sufficient capacity to adequately handle tho additional traffic which would be generated by these proposed projects. Howevez, it should be noted that frequent speeding is a common pr•o',,elem Along Newmann Avenue. The addition of a ssignificrAnt ah,ount of traffic tfN this otreet will result in increased numbers of vehicles speeding. Residents along Newman avenue are already concerned for the welfare of our children and increased traffic only worsen this poteratiall►y hazardous situation. In addition to the vehicular speed probl*2 we are faced with the illegal over- night parking of semi tractor-trailer rigs and moving vans along the south side of Newman avenue across from our homes. As we understand the city ordinance parking of tress la►rga trucks on public streets is forbidden. We therefore request that the planning Commission instruct City Staff to Investigate potential solutions to the srtpeedinq problem along our residential street and that the Police Department be requested to increase parking enforcement along Newman Avenue. Plannin9 Commission A4Z-AMV 87-29, (VARIAKCE) 87-68 CUP 97--17, (VARIANCE) 88-19 141 199E Pave S Relatives to the speeding issue I have noted that n Brous cities have instituted speed control devices such as "Speed Hun a" which have proven very effective in lowering veehicular speed. one such city is the City of Yorba, Linda who has adopted thQ use of "Spied Humps" as an official traffic control device with specific warrants for installation, "Speed Himps" differ from "Speed Aumpow in that they arw designed to slow vehicles without the potential hazard associated ,with "Speed Huzrs" . We the roneerneed residents of Newman Avenue Would , ve ry much like the City of Huntington Beach to install such speed control devices on our street and increases law enforcement activities in our neighborhood. Thank our requests our for consideration of our eats and for the �► Y � opportunity to present our conca:ria to the City of Huntington Beach Planning Commission. We take Prides in ou.: City as we know you do. sincerely, � 4, Stephen D. Hilton on behalf of the residents of Nawnan Avenue. enclosures: Tables 1, 2, 1 List of Concerned residents and their Signatures i I ENO& TABIZ 1 CHURCH ACrIVTT'Y 5UMMA,NY. (Based on answers to telephone survey) , RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS CENTRAL BAPTIST 600 xembers Y Y Y N MA tR AVENUE BAPTISE` 100 Nembers Y Y N N ST J S MISSIONARY 300 Members y Y y y CALVARY BAPTIST 200 Members X Y Y Y CrEATIM LIGHT MISSIONARY RAP'TIST 70 Members N N K N rim =19219N .BAWD. 0i._... 290 HombM Cs Y X_.Y_K Total Yas .responses 5 5 4 2 Krx To 11MAY. ORES TIONS A. does this church have regular activities during weekdays? B Does your church have regularly scheduled bible studies or ovangelism studies during regular weekday work � hours? � C Do you &).low spacial interest groups asich as ladies groups, senior citizen groups, etc. to utilize your iacilities during weekday hour? D Do you share your facility with other churches? �MMr r r +MM 1'p, Al r 1 TABLE 2 TRIP GENEPA'rIoN RATES MEDICAL OFFICE/CKTIRCH TRIP GENERATION MATES AN PFAK houR PM READS HOUR 74 HOUR GZNZAATCA IN OUT TC►T IN OUT TOT 2-WAY arwr�aw rW rwn r,w.r ------------ --------Mwdw-wJrWMw Mond a Friday Mod Office . 91 . 72 1 . 63 2 . 03 ? . 60 3 . 63 34 . 17 Church . 08 . ,03 . 11 . 16 . 28 , 64 7 . 70 a; Sa�.urday Medical Office 2 . 49 1 . 53 4 . 02 . 00 40 . 00 6 . 92 Church . 92 . 37 1. 29 . 00 . 00 . 00 4 . 90 sundae Mod yc,, Clti.ca . 16 . 1;. . 28 . 00 . 00 . 00 . 96 church 3 . 51 4 . 55 8 . 36 . 00 . 00 . 00 31 . 46 ' aYrrwww+�a101.r--✓•ir..w wrrA-w---�.rM.a w.--w..enrrwr ww..aw�.� �-a.rrrww-r1M4rw-�wrw gate* based on vehicle trips per, 1, 0oo square feet of GFA. Source: Trip Generation, Septeuber 1987 Institute of Transportation Engineers . k` y ' •, 1} Lu � , y dumb , TABLE 3 y TRIP GENERATION ESTIMATE MEDICAL OFFICE,/Ci CH ESTIMATED TR14, FD%I CENERATION AM FLAK HOUR PM WEAK HOUR 24 HOUR GENERATOR Ili OUT TOT IN OUT T 2-WAY i Monday - Friday Medical. Off ice 9 7 17 21 16 35 361 Church a 0 O 2 3, 52 r.r�rer ---------------- ----r—nawww—.►.. Total IM011dAy - Friday 9 7 17 3 3 17 42 413 �i Saturday Medical Offium 26 16 0 a 73 Church 6 2 6 0 0 0 33 �wsw�Ili1�W W�i'�LiwMM�N��.•�wr wa rw�YMpw�.�AIiAA Y�Y.r• +w�_w f�.ww swa.��w♦��\i.i11♦a�------mow♦_ ----w- Total Saturday 32 is 50 0 a 0 106 Sunday 1Meafcal OffiOa 1 1 2 0 0 0 10 Church 24 33 57 0 0 0 23.6 ��sar+��ra��Nra�sw��ww+rwN��ra�♦awua�rrr--...««...------- iar--------- Tota►1 Sunday 25 34 59 0 0 0 226 Based on the proposed aaedical office of 10, 567 grass square feat and the proposed church at 6, 868 cross square feet. e r• 1 A � 51 Z ! y 11, 'tikuntington be-ioh dNpertmen� it community development ffAf f EP0R�' w11�IMl��r�•r•sw�•� M....L.•�1 TO: Planning Commirsion FROM: Community Developmenit VATE : May 17, 1983 SUBJECT : ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. CONDITIONAL. EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO . 87--68 A TTI MART J. H. Hedrick and Co. PATE-ACCEP-tED 900 South San Ggbriei Blvd . May 3 , 1988 San Gabriel , CA 91776 i F 'Van Buren Propeirtii s July 31 1988 2075 Palos Verder Dr . North Suite 214 Ltd: OP (office Lomita, CA 90717 Professional) R Y �. •OIlEST To construct e 3— �F�NER�_�lrt. Office story 10 , 567 sq . ft . Professional medical office building with joint use of parking with 64% of the kT1& V5E: Vaoant required parking provided on adjacent parcel 8 �.�: j located to the east . . 28 acre CZ: 1) deduce landscape ( 12# 232 not sq . f t . ) planter width from ld fr . to 5 ft . ) 2) Reduce exterior sideyard setback from 10 ft . to 5 ft . LOCAT_IO_N_ : 8201 Newman Avenue (Northeast Corner of Newman and vain Buren) ; Approve Administrative Review No. 87-29 with findings and conditions of approval and deny Conditional Exception (Variance) Ro . 87,-68 with findings A GENB !N"MAT I QN: 1 Administrative Rfiview No. a7_29 is a request to construe : a 3-story 10#567 sq . ft . medical office but ?dinq on the northeast corner of Newman Avenue and Van Buren Street . Conditional Exception (Vsriancs) No . 57-66 ; is s request for an exterior sideyard setback Of 9 fscrt in lieuof 10 feet for the office building and landscape planter width WGCOM to parking along [Lawman Avenue of 5 loot in Idea Of 10 feet , Although the planter is actually on the adjacent anent APO ft A•RM4" .j r lot , it is part of this couvnon parking areas neceb4ary for this • project to proceed . In addition, the applicant is requesting joint use of parking between the proposed medical office and a proposed church on the adjacent parcei to the east (Conditional tree pexmit No . 87-17 ) . uRROUNU I N IABDUL ice. AKD_�ZfIERAL &ubzrx-t PZ,Q rat GENERAL 1?X►AN DESIGNATXON: Medium Density Residential 20F7E: R2 (Medium Density R-quident:ial) LAhU USE: Apartments CaRt.SI�` CFNEW, PLAN DESIGNATION : Office Fr feseion 1 ZONE: OP (Office Prafersional) LAND USE: Vacant (proposed Church -- Conditional ltase Permit No . 87-17) South aF Et�b., ect� ,�.��: GENERAL FLAN DESIGNATION: Public, Quasi- Public, Institutional ZONE : SP-1 LAND USE : cemetery Best... io¢ lubit" J+raoerty: %raw GENFItAL PLAN DES 1GNATION: Medium Density Residential ZONE : R2 (Medium Density Residential) L"20 USE: Apartments JAIL E IMMUT&-.STAZ't 6: The proposed project in covered under Negative Declaration No. 82- 32 which was approvz_-d by the Planning Commission for a similar project of the some size and intensity on October 5 , 1982 (see minutes for October S. 1982 Planning Commission meeting) . 5A OASTAI. STATUS: Not applicable. . 0 aEbF,.yELo=HT 6T.�: Not applicable . 7 .0 SpEC� PL 3: Not applicable . 849.190013119 98 Ci NI t: Not applicable., Afminl4trative Review No. 87-29 and Conditional Exception (Variance) NO* 67-66 is a request to construct a 3-story, 10, 567 sq. ft . "GICel offiC* building with a request for Joint use of parking with "%a:ar' haft Report - 5/17/88 (0566d) S k1 •r "r y4 , J � V' W WO the, adjacsnt propose, c:lurch use, with varianct for exterior 514ayurd setback *nd landscape plantex width. Although this application has been s%%bmitted independently From Conditional UF;cs Permit No . 67-17 (proposed church) . The applicants for both projects have teen cooperative in working togct:her to provide required parking and insure aesi. gn compatibility. A racipricol parking and access agreement has been recorded on the isub j ect site and the adjacent site. The following is a matrix outlining compliance with tho toning : 9200 . 4 Min. paircol site 10, 000 s . f 12, 232 s . f Min . fcontage 100 ' 100 , 9200 . 5 Max . bldg . height 3 stories 3 stories 39 ' 359 9200. 6 Setbacks Front 10 , 10 ' Int. side 5 ' 46 Ext . side 1C ' 56 * Rear 5 ' 5 ' 9606 Parking SFo+ces 61 22 (36%) on--site (one space per 22 ( 64%) on #dJ . 175 aq . ft. of parcel floor area) 61 Total �- 9606 Landscape Area 10% lot (Combined parcels) 2, 996 s . f . 20996 a . f . l Landscape Planter 10 , 5 ' Width Along street 0 variance Request *• Joint Use of Parking Request Busir's;s hours for the medical office use will be limited to 6: 00 AM to 6 :00 PW weekdays ,, The church will be limited to 6 : 00 AM to 11: 00 Plat on Sundays. Each use shall have exclusive use of both parking areas during their designated hours of operation as agreed to in the "Declaration of Establiahment of Protective Covenants, Conditiofts i Restrictions and Grants of Easement" as recorded by the County Recorder and approved an to form by the City of Huntington Attorney (Attachment 4) . Based on the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code Article 960 # parking requirement of one space for 175 squAre feet of floor area for medical offices, the medical building requires 61 parking spaces . The applicant in Providing 22 spaces (36%) can site and the remairnfr,g 39 Spaces (64 %) on the adjacent church parcel . Due tO the offset days staff riOport 5/17/88 »2- (0566d) A ■ i of .operation of the . .Jo uses , required parking All, be provided for C;Ich use. eduction _01—front gotbeWk_ The applicant is requesting variances for reduced building setback and reduced landscape planter width'm of. 5 feet in lieu of 10 feet along Newman Avenue . in November of 1987 , the Office PTofns.s iona l 'oni ng District requirement for front aetbeck changed from five ( 5 ) feet to ten ( 10) feet . As indicated in Section 4 . 0 , Environmental Status , of this report , can rict.ober 5 , 1982 aprof-:3ct very nimilar to thin project- w,ne approved by the Planning Cossmi3sion . The former project was approved with a five (5) foot front uetbpnh in 1982 which complied with tho Office Professional Zoning DistrA�f- . However , since that project never shoved for-ward , the entitlements became null ,end void . Front yard setback for the building along Van Buren is la feet an required by Huntington Beach Otdinance Code Article 961 . Overall landsca -i.ng exceeds the required 8 r.#ercent . Although the reduced setback would not create a major nogative impsct on Newman since it is across the street from a cemezary with a great deal of open space, there is not a land--related hardship to justify grdnti.ng the variance. The site meets the miniimam frontage and area requirements and is relatively flat and rectangular . To meet the e i men h building will have to be narrowed roared b 5 feet . setbackx 1. ry t , the y 9 g This would create a 10 feet wide landscape area along Newman consistent with the Van Duren frontage for more mature landscaping. 4 hi.lity with Surrounding,, s The proposed prcjec;t is surrounded by residential uses to the north and went . Medium density apartments located across Van Buren Street to the west are buffered by they street ; tha apartment units to the north are a minimum of 50 feet from the comsaon property line with little or no view of the proposed building due to an existing 6 foot masonry wall, mature landscaping , and a driveway along their property lime . The office will be compatible with the proposed church to the east Located across Newman Avenue to the south is an enclosed undeveloped � portion of cemetery. Across Newman, closer to beach Soulevard is the hospital complex which will be compatible with the proposed medical building . To insure architectural compatibility of the two buildings, Design Review Board approval is required as a condition of approval . a. 0 RECQ INnATIQI9 Staff recommods that the planning Commission approve Administrative Review No . 87-29 with the following findings and conditions of approval and deny Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 87-68 with the following findings : �.• staff Report - 5/17/88 -4� (0566d) y 'y p•t FINDINGS ..MR A,PER -A IYJi 1 „ The granting of Adeninistr&tive Review No . 07--29 for construction of 10, 567 sq . ft . medical office building will not adversely � affect the Gaveral Plan of the City of Huntington Bea-.-h. 2 . The establisNnent , maintenance and operation of 10 , 567 sq . ft; . medical cf•fico building will not be detrimental to : a . The general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity; b. propert;, and improvements in the vicinity of such use or building . 3 . The location, site laycut, and design of tha proposed medical office building properly adapts the pEop.)sed structures to streets, driveways , and other adjacent r, tr.uctures and uses in a harmonious manner . 4 . The combination and relationship of the proposed meadival office building and the proposed -ase on the adjacent site arc properly integrated. 5 , The access to and parking for the proposed 10 , S67 sq. ft , medical. office building and the proposed church on the adjacent parcel will not create an undue traffic problem since they will never bo In use simultaneously, as agreed to in the CC&R ' s and Gr.antes of Easement . EN IAL.. - CQ I T jQNAL Y JIQJj (VAR I J%N.0 )JQ, a •- s 1 . The granting of Conditional Exception ('Variance) No . 87-68 for a fives (5) foot in lieu of teen ( 10) foot exterior aideyard building setback and a five (5) foot in lieu of a ten ( 10) foot planter width along Van Duren will adversely affect the General Man of the City of Huntington Beach. Z . Since the subject property can be fully developed s4ithin regular established setbacks, Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 87-68 for reduced exterior sideyard setback building and planter width is not necessary for the prese xr gtion and enjoyment of substantial property rights . � 3 . • The granting of Conditional Exception (Varianevei) No . 87-68 for reduced exterior sideayard building setback and platter width will, be detrimental to the general -,►elfare of persons working or residing in the vicinity. 4 . The granting of Conditional Exception (Variances) No . 87-68 for eaxtorior sideayard building setback and planter width will be deatrimntal to the values of the property and improvements in the neighborhood. '`.; . B Mff ke8pork S/17l88 -5- . 1 S . , Granting of Conr... ciional Exception (warianc,. , po. 87-68 for exterior sideyard setback and planter width would constitute a special privilege inconsistent with limitations upon other office Professiinal propertieii in the vicinity. , i 6 . Because of the size, configuration, shape and lack of unique topographic features of the subject property, there does not appear to be exceptional or extraordinary circumstancea or conditions app.lic:ible to the land, buildings or promises invvilved that: does not apply generally to property or class of uses in the Office Professional district . 1 . The site plan dated April 27, 1988, floor plans, and elevations received and dated April 12 , 1988 shall be the conceptually approved layout subject. to the lollow►i.nq modifications -t IS . They building on the site plan shall be revised to reflect a 10 foot exterior sideyard setback from Newman Avenue. 2a . .he parking area landscape planter along Newman shall be increased to 10 feet in width . Z . Prior to issuance of building permits , the applicant shall submit the following plans : a. Landscape and irrigation plan to the Department of Commuglity Development and public Works for review and approval . b. Rooftop Mechanical Equipment Plan . Said plan shall indicate screening of all rooftop mechanical equipment and shall delineate the type of material proposed to screen said equipment . c. The project shall, be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Board for design compatibility with the proposed church to be located on the adjacent parcel . 3 . prior to issuarw ,:o of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall complete the fol' owing : a . Install entire parking area as depicted on site plan dated April 27, 1988 , b. Construct all Public Works improvement as required . 4 . One on-site fire hydrant shall be provided at; east property line as specified by the Fire Department . 5 . .An automatic fire sprinkler system with combination standpips system shall, be approved and installed pursuant to Fire Department regulations. %I,t. Staff ilepOrt 5/17/88 ( 0566d) y '1, 1� Y� r x ' 6 . Vervice roads ai. . Mire lanes , as determine% .5y the Fire Department , shall be posted and marked . 7 . Drive circulation shall Fie maintained from Van Buren to Newman thru the parking lot with a minimum inside radius of 17 feet provided at corner . 8 . Driveway approaches shall be a rdnirr.um of twenty--seven feet (27 feet) in width and shall be of radios type construction . 9 . All building spoils , such as unusable lumber , wire , pipe, and other surplus or unusable material , shall be disposed of at an off-site facility equipped to handle them. 10 . Low-volume heads shall be used or. a1i spigots and water faucets . 11 , If lighting is included in the parking lot , high-pressure sodium vapor lamps shall be used for energy Savings . A11 outsider lighting shall be uirected to provent "spillage" onto adjacent properties . I 13 . All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits . � 13 . The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department . � 14 . A detailed soils analysis shall be prepared by a registered Soils Engineer . This analysis shall include on-site soil Sampling and laboratory testing of materials to provide datailed recommndations regarding grading , chemical and fill properties , foun&tions , retaining walls , streets, and utilities . 15 . Landscaping shall comply with Section 960t ,;f the Huntington Beach Ordinence Code . 16 . The office use shall be limiter to between 6 : 00 am and 6 pro Monday through Friday. office uses beyond those hours are prohibited , 17 . The planning Commission reserves the right to revoke thir Administrative Review if any violations of these conditions or the Huntingtrn Reach Ordinauce Code occurs . 11 . 0 LTEgNATI VL gSJiS�i: The planning Commission may de,iy Administrative l.eview No. 87-29 and Conditional ftception ;Variance) No . 87-68 with findings . U0111 ftPOtt -7- (05664) PV,' ITACKMEW• 1 Area map Z . Site plan, floor plan and olevaLions 3 . Praj ct Narrative a . riar-laration of w.'sthblishment of Protective Covenants Conditions and Restrictions and Grants of Easement 5 . Minutes from they October 5,, 1982 Planning Commission mooting . KA : SH :PP: jr i i 4 Stott RSPOrt w 5/17!$5 (0565d) 1 ~ F �w ram r�xv All IPA I Rl PC I 1 -Ri�i I i I LI i i 0 I} � A IrJ >r1 7ry � 1 } !; r d t w c E a w< W3 OP R4- PD R I R E R 2 I i .. Rz -� LL s ' a 1 • ! ! l, r-----•� �• E � 11 R2 Ji. i CAP p-1 " :�- '--�"'• L RZml 4 � •l.R 7 Vf t11t �'..+ OP Rl TALaEpr AR Li7*14910E 674w69 J. IF , - ! J _ —-----—MA 1 rip •V..r.-ram 3 1 1 � 4 As mw- IF NA Am� it lit Ila _ r, r 1 1+ �.F11M 11•I�' R�� r ram- .- arw + .. - .. .--.._• •M 1 rYY�TJ�rw: -r.-- .q...ti i"D I Tf, !I ; I wl MH" &C^ •VJ/• 1 ` Sam rn"i 1 • 1�i M i� tt �• 1 ri AFAMM f + f ' I I ,��' � �w��'�.�w' .rn V1r�...rd••��iwr '� rr�..�iw,+.�a.�� w �,w+r. �.w r� � � ..�wa�aiWr v i ti ` •----.ram : _ ,.. • T!'�r' h i'1 N.�`�e� 1 7 r� 4•• 1 EiIL r � • r t a I + 1 t r � t _ � wl•s+r.a/��.� rr•".,no..•r,/ _R:sadc:.:.?r�� _„_� I ( I i • Ale 1 � . -;; �n � ��.�i -�-•�sir•_ =�a per•-•� ; •' � � • ' � Ell t '' r , { , eOR ,war arl r 1 � h•' J 1, 1- � 'ti, mow �+ Gwbrww �d� '�� 1'� I�(�1��` I� IIiII 1 t4ki:� r ! , �o+4w w•+w� �.rry• . � 1 I I •� � is ,. : L t pip . ,.. 1 t1.7— I i IL IL LAI • I I t I ti I rs; i7l I t y { 1 � ' .r: .. _ � ... - -•-- �- , •`..5..{�•`.ram*•��.�f _ . _ • .'••- _ __�-� i own IVAN r' ;,tea • � • ti. ' r•. ''a. - - --- _ -_ter T-7 16 .*am.=m . a � 1 f. _ _. Art �'•!�� _ � , ♦,a • TYer�f�� - - 16. 773,777 TFIT-71 !. Iw,Y �l .�i-.•�r mow_ - _ 4 Zrkr JY 7 ww�I+.��r 11 r •`.�� _� � may` ��•��•=•.-�+ � , EAST EMAT14W a:LVAmw 44 . �4�j W7•'npJ'��4,4raa,' ''.ib ''' r .yc �, y 1►M �. aVO.,sAMI eAiwsL,CALIFOANIA 91?4 010 201,9121 Isk— &COO Van Puten Medical Office Building In Response To The "Application Requirements" Item 09 We Offer This Narrative �'. (a) Site reason for initiatinq ',tiis applicatiun. We are proposing to construct a 3 story, 119109 (total) square foot Medical ` Office Building in a zones denoted as R-5 Office Professionei District. Since this zone does not allow for this type of building, we request a roue amend- ment fo, this pr 3ject. kh) Area description and population served by the proposed use of the project. The proposed proi-ct is located north and east of !-Ramona Hospital of Hunt- ington Beach as wall as FiQotington Beach Medical Towers and West beach Medical Associates. The project will serve patients who require radiation therapy for cancer, and will also provide office space for doctor,; to :gee patients outsides the hospital rr environment. The project will also he an advantage for local residents who may seek medical services on an out 1', ient basis. (c) Description of the project Services., Fundamentally, the projer:t will provide offices for doctors to treat patients outside the hospital environment. One of the project owners, Dr. F. K. Chen, Phd. will provide radiation thera- py for cancer patients- (d) Coscription of Surrounding Area. The property north of the proposed project is comprised of a number of 2 bedroom and studio spartcnents. To the east are single family homes, to the west are townhouse apartments. To the south is a large open lot that leads Into a park-like area. The lot consists of furrowed earth. Just west of the I projact site is the Hurrrana Hospital of Huntington Beech. Further west is Huntington Beach Medical Towers end beyond that is Meat Beach Medical Associates. t' 4, + ; ' r ,y +` a91111FINMI M01MA coo �. IM 6 9AM CWWWt IkYh.$AN GAdAilM.CAI IFORNIA AI 1l6 9121 ` In Response To "Application Requirements" Item #10: For Conditional Exception y (a) What excentional circumatances apply to petitioned property (including size, *1i , topography, location or surroundi.igs) that deprive it of privileges normally enjoyed? The two parcels that compose the lot are independently owned (Parcel #1 by Van &oren Properties, east of the property centerline and Parcei #2 by Millcre,;.. Missionary Baptist Church, west of the property crenterline). Ultimately, two buildings will be brill on this property. If the parcels were divided equally, the parking renuirelnents would make both projects unfensi- ble. Con�jininq the parking will satisfy all conditions, Since a Medical Office Btailding and a Church funtion st very different hours, shared parking is realistic and practical. Both owners have agreed to parking eaanements for each other on days they do not themselves require parking. (a) Will the request constitutes a grant of special privilege inconsistent with normal limitations? Since both owimrs have agreed on the conditions of the parking easements, they will not suffer any inc..roveniences. The parking condition will not affect the surrounding properties. This is are 11R-5 Professional Office District" propertyp Cara will be entering and heaving the site throughout the day, as would be expected. The densities of care In any appropriate venl:ure would be similar, therefore, the impact of this parking arrangement would not be any more detrimental than this area was predestined to experience by way of zoning. (c) Why is this request necr,ssaary for the preservation and enjoyment of one or more substantial pr"rty rights? It will satisfy the property right of use and development within the zoning t:oda. The property can be more efficiently utilized for the medical anti spiritual benefit of the neighborhood. (d) State reasons why the granting of this request will not be ma:terielly, detri- rm,ital to the public welfare, Sirs* the south portion of than propond building faces an empty lot, its mass Is not intrusive. The north faces property separated by: i A driveway and parking from the buiie-►g itself. R A concrete black wall. iii An allay driveway (for the residents of the apartment building). IV The carports for those apartrment tenants. On project Cannot be a detriment to any of Its neighbors. ti,_ 11t#1� 1 taq Y` ( r v ' a. r r W MEL•Lilt.,SAME fi OP01. CAUer UNIA 91/161618)M 9111 fJ' i. is r r' In Resparm To "Application Requirernont" Item 010: For Conditional Exception ro) What exeslptional circurnstartees apply to petitioned property (including size, shWer topography, lacati-in or surroundings) that deprive it of privileges normally etn joys, O The deaf of this project end all the parking requirements are extreme) R, � P � P n9I�y � y tight. For this project we wish to offer a 101-011 setback from the curbs (on Newman and similarly Van Buren) to the property line. Landscaping will compose 5'-011 of this dimension. In addition, we are setting back 5'-0" to the face of the proposed building with additional landscaping and in some in- stances 71-0" to the building. Since we are traversing the property line with vur 10'-0" wide landscaping (the purpose of this "Conditional Fxi:e3ption"), we are. also requesting relief from the 20" berm Code Suction 9600.17. (b) Will the request constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with normal limitations' Normal landscape setback is 10'-0" along tin public right-of-way at the property line. It is felt that our propo"I will not constitute special privi- leges. 1 (c) Why is this request necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of one or rmre subsiantisl property rights? Granting this right will allow the property to be efficiently utilized. (0) States reasons why the granting of this rez;uest will not be materially detri- rrwtal to the public welfare. The granting of this request will not be detrimental to the public's welfare b&Caure the lwxbc" mourMiing will visually create they same effect as the additional footage in the setback. APO M� r ,� ; 'a M � qd,r M � 1W AM WILM OF(Xmt V.CWA M r..,.,..�. I AM S[P 13 '85 M C2 F1 AST AMENDED AIM MF.STATIO t1K LAlU TION OF hSTAIL1SH41 N? aF PI1OUCTIVIS COVENANTS CONDITIONS AND REST210Tii1NS AND GRANTS OF t rA214t TRIS FINST AHWXD MD R$STATIM DECLARATION AMh GWT is wads, by and between NILLICRBST HISSIEWxY BAPTIST CHURCH. Inc. , a California Cor.pozatlo*s %oreinafter called "Church, " and VAN BUREN PROP91TIL3, a California Limited Partnership, hare:lnafter called "Van Buren" and supersedes and torWnataa the previous Declaration of Wobliahitnt of Protective Cuvsaanta, Conditions And Restricrsons and Grants nt F.eseaents heretofore recnrded on or About May 2, 190, instrument Church and Van Buren Are owners of that certain real property --� In the City of Buntington beach. County ,of Orange. State of Califorala. kown as Fire and tot Parcel Map No. 82576 , recorded to book 179. Pass 1 end 2 of Parcel Napo in tb;. Office of the County Retarder at Ssxd County as deslgnat*d on Exhlbit "a" attached hereto. which parcels of land collentively comprise that certaLn property 1otats4 at Newnan Aeoe:c and Was Sum ftteat. !, For purposes of this Agreement. Said Parcels 1 and 2 are k lbereleatcsr callsctiwely called the "Rutirs Property.' 2. Church to the owner of Parcel Z. 3, Vset Buren to the owner of Parcel 1. 4. Ihs Batita Ptoperty is del inoated ow Exhibit "N." sttechod berate and by this rufnrence reeve a part borsof. Yhs purpose of this Declaration to to subject each and elvery partloa of the batire Property to the Covenants, Coalitions and * 2"girAttims hereinafter not forth, to catablish the appaxieMamt ease- A ti t r sla hereioatter described, and to provide the parthes hereto with thn assurance that tfiQ Entire prol-rrty will be -i*vrjuped M me-ardaDes vith s Plan of Tarirrovoinant and oparat*d for the x:tccZ basoiit of the owners of any ,&ad all portions of the Entire Property and their~ respective hoots, succossers. •asiins. grontares. Wrtgagssao tenants* and subtenants. Bald Plan of raproveownt is marked exhlbtt "A," attached tF, hereto and by this referent* incorporated harr*1n. 6. Church and Van bu ren do hereby earabliah the covenants, condit(ons and restri,;bons hertinatter met forth, and Brant to *&ch other tine easements herelna£ter deacribed. ]. Church dome hereby grant to Van Bu:,-en an axelualve ease- soot for the purposaps specified in Section 3 over, across shd upon the Parking Area of Parce L 1 dur l Rli "P r imotry Bun i ness Hnurs" its hereinafter WMIDA daffn*4 it Section 4/ � • ft S. Church doss he roloy at-ant to Van Duran an saserant over and across the Parking Area of Parcel I for the purpose of ingreas and ogress to the Park fin$ Area of Parted t and the Medical AuildinS. 9. Fan curers dooa hereby grant to Church an e2cluaive ease- mat for the parposes specified in Section ) ever. across. and upon the Parking Are,& of Parcel 1 during "Primary Church Activity Sours," as barainatter definod in Section 6. , 10. yarn Suren doom hereby grant to Church an ssrrs"ut over OW *crops the larking Area of Farce l 1 for the purpose of ingress mad eSrone to tiro leaking Area of Parcel f and than Church Suildtao. J ' 11. fte "Somata granted hermia shall to each lastases to arturteeme to rho building area of the parcel of the $Teats* of such earem,osmto rasa trt each instance shall be for the use and bensfit. 1n LIMNMei With othirrep of srrb grantee, its hslre, executors. ad ei*i- at roRatlr, Sweaasers e ses ips, tonant o. subtenants, custower<s asd 4 R' mo FM^ , b4isiooga Inwitr*a and i icensess. nud ilia cuerumirs and bus losso law Ices sow 11ro "16*04 of Ito 1.1eAe11 s. ,ra ' 12. Lxaept for such oncr.oachsenti ar nr• delalrnsted on ' `°; ihririlait "A$" no building &%oil be eroct@A or maintained over or upon any I•, of the pgoperty within the Entire Property which is. or betoosso subject to 44 ean►o+lannt for cex+wan purposes. f` 13. Charech and data Buren do hrrahy grant to each other --- *sqqjUW over those rest-active portions of that Parking Area Which are located on Parcel 1 and/or Parcel x, for the purpose of building and rekbeulldinj and repairing the "Parktog Arta" in the event of a partial or total diatructiun o3f all ie'pr•ovomeAts contemplated in Exhibit "A," This Easement ohol.l Include the right of reasonable ingress and egress over such other portions of Parcels 1 *n4 Z for purposes of building and rebuilding and -,spa ir. 14. Van Buren hereby grants to Church the option to purchase Parcel k , being a ;option of the Incite property as described on Exhibit "A" attaclesd hereto, including any laprovow*nts which have been orsa:trad tborson. 2%le option to purchase shall eowa*nce as follows: r ld the •vest that, Van Buren ahould decide to well Parcel +" I or racelva a bons tide of far to purchase the can at a prito ` i at Wbich they lire willing to sell, they shall Doti() Church in *' writing of the amount for Alch they will sell the property or the offering price which they are villing to accept, and Church Sf shall Waver thirty (30) days thereafter to which to exercise its � option to prarcl!arere I~rarecr:l of l8as pries of which Yszr Buren is t_ agreeable to sell or Cleo said oflertnR price which they aro willing to accept end Church upon exercise of its options shall immediately tutor into st. escrow in the usual tors providlag ire the purshea• of salrl pre patty at the said' price upon tM °: .eel V 1 d ,411M ' ; • usual coma+ which socrov shall provide for clostag within A _ thirty (30) days of the opening thereat. aito6rld 1.1tlicsh fail to exercise said option Von lure* iholl be fro* to salt the property of the price offered thaw. or at a higher pries* upon the same terro of payment to any parson or persons for a period of cis (6) wonths attar the expiration of the tl.ss at erhich Church may exercise its option to purchase. After the s,�piratlon of said six (6) months period. if Van Buren has not sold sold Parcel 1 . the right to sell Parcel 1 to poraone other than the Church shall expire unless and until they give a further Notice or roceive another offer they are willing to accept . as aforesati. 15. Church hereby grants to Van Surgery Clio option to purchase Prrzal 2. l:elag a pot t iutt of the Entire Property as described on Exhibit "s" attached hereto, fncluding a ,y ieprovepents which have been erected thereon. This option to purchase shall com.eoce as follows: � In the event the Church should decide to sell Parcel 7 or receive a bone fide r"for to purchase the dame at a price at which they are willing to sello they shall not>!fy Van surety in vrtttag of the anount for uhich they will •all the property or, the offering price which they are willing to accept. and Van Buran shall bane thirty (10) days thereafter to which to exerelse its option to purchgise parcel f at the pried at which Church ij agreasSis to mall or tbo said offering pries %hieh they arm !tilling Co strapt a.444 Valk wurert upotr •xarcisr at its e016% &hall t6r641at6ly► enter lots an oserm in tba usual fors PMUS84 tote the purchase of this raid property at the said price upon the Wool terra, vitich escrow shall provids for closAng within thirty (30) 441110 of the opening thereof. Should Van Suren fall to exercise sa><d sVtios Church shall b* free ter st11 the property fit the prime ry :h- r , ° wig • of fared ItWO. ar at a higher pr.ices upon the •aura tOfW of paYewent to eery ps!reon of persons fac s period of sin (4) renths after the exptrttiaa of tho tleM at vhic;, Van Duran any crerctas ite option to purchase. After the expir•tiou of raid six (b) 000th's period. it .' Ourc:h has sot sold said parcai 2, the right to sell Parcel 2 to persons r ' tether tbaa Van Buren shell expire unleaw and until ths►y give A further notich or receive another offer they are vtllln$ to accept. as aforesaid. Section 1 Use in General l. t. Par the purpooe of this Declaration, the Entire Property is divLded into tforgo categoric • which relate to up*. all of which are indicated an Exhibit "A" and era hereafter preferred to rfspoetively "Church 1luildtng Area.' "Kedical bu.tlding Area," and "Parting Area." �.. 1. 2. The Church Buildint shall be used fcr the construction operation and maintenance of a religious worship, assembly sill oducstional faclI tty. 1. 3. The Medical butlding sholl be usiw for the constructlr,,n, operation and malastenancs of a building to be utilised for any iwEul purpose. 11%40 the parking area •hail be used for parkiag and other Y egos as defined In Section 3 heroin. urch w�ldX A* a and Qwdicolildln At Ch at 2010 10 weildLAS shell be erected• pla"do rintrlmed, or 00botootelly altered on any pa,.rt of the Entire Property until of ►aalers , 014 rlttairlatt D Die. sppersracs and colerla►g tlrereot* r6sr11 bsvr been approved by the Church and by Vau Duren. Cbvrcb and Vsm Uwe* shall, givial cote approval, evidence the saw by on4orstat such spprovat A g ts" of the fteal speefficstleft WA the working drawings for such or Wd It tact iao ttesrsa�l. A �Nh�` `•I�YI.:+�ri.rrr: i__.1'iv i, 1Y. �MdL3+ - r w �Y•u� {yy{r1F i a 1, �'�:,J =.p, ewe cohetruo:tiorr, arstabllshearnto wlwd �iatarraocs cif MI"s and other structures, upon Own tot% rw troperty skeli be 'Yt n aeaetiped within tits liaos for Clio leads described respectivoly end eallerctivel as bul idles areas as depicted on 901bit "A," attached � d p btrato sad by this rcfor+nce tnearpetated herein. Such bends atra J bersoft4r retorted to as "Murch Ouilding Area." ON "1!e4ioal hluildiag Aroar. 3,3. Ilotvithertandtog the provisions of paragraphs 2. 1. sad 24. above, portions of they Entire Ptop-irty adjacent to building Arms may be wend tear: 1.3. (a) fe46 +trrian sl,dawal.ks. planting Containers and other A decorative and laodscoping fmatureis thereon; 2.3. W The farate#llatione rermovalg ropla%;*mant. arapair, use sad reoWenance of dowmrpoutat looms htbbs, yard or floodlightag ruby surface building foundations. and such identificattes signs of building oceupenrs as Tway be artarchad to or fion an Anttgrall part of a building at asy time situated upon any portion of the Building Areas; .3. (c) i'ho ripening tirsreanto of doors of eontiguo,*& ImildiSaX Area► which open outword; �•, 3.3. (d) the twWorary tractive olc ladders, scaffoldia g and A, F~ berrit*dea 4rrimig parrlvdo of construction, rraodeiiag. Tabuiidtag sr roar sSr of hwlldirnge sad baildierg sppaaraasncon. up" the torwditiowo I svorfo that Awh comrrrvactisab rewdoliaa,gs, eebaildlag at r-opafr to dIA146 rtty perfenOd Mi SOO laddorss ecaffelding sad lerrricades are w "or$*@ ps ly 16mved. 3.1. xhal portim of the Retire Property which 1• wars pertiewlrr Ohma on Rghlbit "A+" aeteschad herrote &ad by thte reference * 4040 g Part bo"of o Wall all pert lows of the Retire *raperty other t1hm ' AAAM11 At"gs 6111411 be used to* "h'srbine" %"rWMs-W few '1....4., 0&04 ►+ 4% J. .07 Fu,,,yq r .,rry :a arA for see other pwrpose, excepting those spectficall7 described nerstn. told portion of the retire property is herea`tar rs:e:red to Ma "Parking ' Area." 1.2, ?he term "Parking" as used heroin shall mean and be deemed to include and peml t the fallowings w 3.2, (a) T.a parking of passenger •ehicles# and the pedes— �` trlan and vehicular trrtffie, of 4he avners of sny and all portions of } the Entire Properkyo and their rompeetiv heirs, succsasors, aaaignso trantoes, uortt#goer, tenant and subtenants , and all parsons who now own, hold at hereafter otrn or hold, port•lans of real property Mithtn the Entire Property or any leasehold estate, or any other interest therein, or building space thereon; and the inspective tenants or subtenants thereof; anif the offlcars, dl:rcrnrw, agenrm, employees, cuntoners, � visitors and other liconneRs and invitees of any of them; 3. 2. (b) The ingress, egress and regress of any of the above destgostod persons, and the vehicles thereof, to any and from any portion of the Parking Area anti the public streets adjacent to the Parking Area; 3.2. (c) The installations swintanance rail operation, within two tontine• of the Parkins Area of public utilities sorvices •ervIng Cbe Wilding Araoa together with and includiag vsulta, manholes. asters. a r p10431mos. valves. bydraats, sprirklet controls, conduits and related facilities SEW @@wage facilities; 3.2. (d) The construction, astottawnrd, repair# replacemat. tarrar owst MW reconstrurtlon of parki■s, sites or stalls, 8148 ASO eta, drOv"Ay*. imwo. Curbs, gutters. Unda+rpround public srtllitias MW Odergrournd •avast .facilities@; �.r 3.2. (a) The construction, maintenance, repair, replsta•ant * MW MI'MPOCWtion of any landscaped area lacludfng planters. decorative �C�ihiaa. L: r. , 1 a,tC y „• 1 ; .1, F .34 28 wall• end sprinklers and valves, all is way be required by govermant it 1 authority i waving jurisdiction. - w 1. The Pstk9ag Arda shall not ,at any time be used for p tho pitrbis►g of trucks at the loading or unloading thorcof,, vicept for the, parkinge, loading or unloading of trucks during rod in connection r *jith the aarrstruction and deerdlittan of buildings upon the building Arco*, the servicing and sr+pplying of Building Arose ax the construction. ' repair or nointepance of parking rra.a and iwprovenants and facilities herein per'rittedi span the condit iron, howevar, that any such use shall he coatined to that uh1ch Is reasonably necreesary la connection with thr � "ttors herein specitled and shall he dLlisastly and promptly pexfottiaed.- Section 4a. ftelgrucal Use of Parkin Areas w�+wMrw�.ra.it.rii�rri 4. 1. Vnr tiro purposox elf thiw agreemout the tsar "PrIoary Phis lmess Mau e" Mhn I l be ale f 1 ned an the pu r i nil f rain 6:UG! AN to 6:UU PH on each Monday, Tues•',iy, Wsdnesddy, Tburwfay.. Fr Mar a rthroughouV the year. 4.2. For the purposes of thl.e agrceaent tha tam "Primary p1Mw...naw Church -Act IvIty_ Hour$" shal'J, be defined as the period from A:pd AM to i lisp PN on each Sunda . throughout the year. l 4.3. It is the intention of this sgroament that the rz shall haveal Siva +'135e of all "Pairkiag Areas" as herein defined � dada! *Frimry Church Activity Hours" as herein ds f road. at ' It is the intention of thin+ agreemat that Van Nurow � ' 1 va t>~elaslye a of all ~�►rkia:_ rr.a." as herein def load duriag swetsmss Ilrwr " of herals defined. • '�� . trrstr��t,rs�t a� It is the intentions of this Agreersat that the otnrere of Parcel i and Portal 2 obtain casualty and l iabli!ty issuraaes Policing no thelr respective Parcel* And all tapr&V"Wnre tberato upoe tm tits Oak eandltisns s*rt forth itl this 340t.on. n 1 rk,y a • .f. Tho ownerr of Parcel I and Parcel l shall obtain soporsts pollcies of Insurance providing to atroteL.tlatin i:n00 casualty. Jt*ltt 41mg but pot lioirod to Zire dam*&*, to nny' an4 all Improvooents an eaeh respective easel is a OUSbcs not load ODD ninety perceat (902) o! insurable Talus. 5. 3. The ownerr of Parcel 1 asid Paveal l shall obtain Svpsrste policies of Insurance pmviding for protection frcw liabittty reoultinq firm hays to others andjoin the property of othetts vriON liability limits of 1500,0000.00 mingle limkt or *are,, 9.4. The owners of Parcel 1 shall obtain a separate policy of Insurance providing for protection from canuatalty, lAtluding but not limited to fire divan. to than Aullding Access A:-ea In an amount owt lyuar than nlnety loorcent ;901) of Iranaarahle vatlus. 5950 The cwnerm of Pairrel ! maul Parcel ;i shall viach pay � for the lasursnte policlas applicable to IEO reaps ctive r'atcfl• :1.6 The owners of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 agrec that the otber ohatll be mowed as an additional ineured oa the aforementioned policies of Ansursote and thot the polieiaet @hall contain cross liability undorsemate. On securing time faaogoing coversgead tom+ parties shall mask give the other written notice tbsreaf to ether with at � � a I i certified e:opy of the ,rppropriate policies. Proof must alea be givto by the +Mora of !arrest i and Parcel z to the othere pursuant ti: the above. � Owt each of the policies providod for to this section expressly provide Oat the pollelat a shall not be cancelled ot• aelterard wltb*at thirty (30) y daW4 priaair v>rItetes ttrstice to the Other owner. if aarithor Parcel omeg ;;. as arty► win Owall iatl to oaecuoro at tte#ierta>ritt► the foxelsolas law OUTR OV ChO @labor Parcel weer shall be p rpi tted to obtain ouch Insurance in r e , the ati►4foult"S fatcarl ownet's nano or a4a the agent of tbo defet:Iting � # Raceatrl eer r sea shall be comp msated by the default Ala* earth owwr for r l�'' ,};,i'��y4� •,h 4a+i" ', th., POP,*,,Tyr I r Y ! y r 'L ♦ ', r 5 r r I .r•••r r �r a. �, T� 3� � -i L ,.r' '' d, u�' k, A,f1, ' iN ♦ ry.:I.�%I ,v, , L�r rx,ti i�•ti r 71�' Y"�� r 1 P'^ .e• v „ } : ; ;:` # '' ► of t thavromes promlood. The delaa'liltrg Parcel aMer shill :'!•:. ,: , it Ober !*meal Owner latersat on paid 146Mr401er proeimp at the 1 r annum coo ted from too do (lox) pa po fir rrcittett "tks4s satetved that the premiums have been paid. Upon written re"eat the owro>re of Parcel 1 and Parted 2 shall provide a lose payable mWorsawat to favor of any lenAq l tenholder, or other person or outlty haviol an interest in said property. r1 5. 7. All casualty and liability policies shall make "Alto Toterescas to the insurance interest of the respective parcal �{ ownera in any proceeds for purposes of repair or reconstruction. S.S. The ovners of Parcel L and latch x agriss chit In 'Ix ko the evonc of loss due to any of the perils for which they have agroad to provide laavranes, that each owner shall ]ook solely to its insurance for wraroveryt The owors of Parcel. 1 and Parcel 1 shall -obtain from Y their respective insurance compenies a weaver of any ri$bt of awbrotatl4n which said Insurance company may have against the owner of 1 Parcel ! or Parcel 1, as the ease may be. All, insurance compsnis• shall have a alninw rating 91 M class xll. Naiatpnan0.a 'end. Repair i. l. the owers of Parcel i and Parcel x do hereby agree to swintato and keep in good repair all portions of their respective property including but not limited to any and all laprovenents thereon and arils and all equipment or other Items of personal property. 11re patties shall pay the costs of said ■aintonancl avW repair separately so as" relates to its parcel and Inaprcvements tbaree�a. • ett� 1. W PCs llN,,0-nuw Provisions r. !• P-ach and all of the foregoing eovenalite, coed It ijina red r+�itrietirftst '� :� ., , r fi sy • ' t"1 � ,1 :�. �'b'11X �i :i..'^S=y ��i^"J�II .+ P,�7r ',�;.'' � r�• '�l�js,'� �i� Y y'Yf•�:`! ' ' '�' 4�i',, k ,, ,;tr •,Mr ". , .,: ,J=(/'"t; +�,�'i"'�� f.',GMNI r .� .'uy �u K.l}'F ., � 4�, R Y y I'r ''' k � '�, r .K1� �r yl.�y, L 4r r�,•� yf � , • �+ � r• r '� "r i' r ]r I � `,�yh.ky 4 C ti:.r •' }Y � 1 .R• f , I IS r • r•fv to) Aball ply to and hired eack rid 411 of two ownare ` , !` '::,, ., •1�,, s *� n, yutitO prnpert; / h a L �11 0�b J��''� ',,�;,,; s•�� e IIM�* �,* „d�f�w• serer�a r ist Rgeg�s. tswwar+ts, (b) Afire borrrby imposed pursuant to * 264*e41 plao for tbo ti • 4*rr"e" and use of the Entirrs ptops>rry and am d"iltnsd for the 014 bonefir~, of seed 0106ro, tenants and Occupants of any and all R Y. k' POW040 %%Groot; and 7.1o . (,t) $hall obl tgate, 3nvre top and page with esell ned entry, parts,0e Of the Matire Property, I.od shall remain in force and Woo so befa$ax(ter peovided. I'll Breach of airy of the cbvenauta or restrrietiaas et«t1�►d ned ,!t►; this Dotlatstian shell not defeat wit reader Invalid the lid: of any.rorctgsgp of dosd of trust made in good faith end for value �I as to the Mire Rrropsrty or any part thereof; but all of the foregoing 01"to.10mor restrictions mad covenants shall be binding iad effective apimot may owner of Bay of said Satire Prop,.+rty, or any parrs thereof. VbMW title thereto is acquired by foreclosure. trustso's sale, or Otlratvrio�e�. 70$. The term "mortgages." wherever used hareirt. shall be • + bid to iwncluda biaeficiarcles find tnotees under doe4s of treat*. 7.4. it shall be lawful ear any person of pereon# wMIng or baUlag any portion of Cho iCatire. Property to prosecute Any pawce"iwtrw at lawn or to equity against any person violating, or I 1 atteoMpting to violate. any of the covenants, conditions and restrictioes { herein and to prevent it. his or them from so doing nerd to recover 1 daww+rges frrara or On account of such naolation. • G, 7.5. lnvali•detion of any cne of the covenants, canrltiOse. ttstrtcttowe or other provia#ona herein -:antained by T i_� •" f A v r.. JJl.��' r�diR 1.♦ r :�i`y�t'w..i r1R'f ,�f n •4 4 '^W.VA lN1 hr}L' 4 r1 r {af 'M �, + , ''Ir y' y � r 1{• k Nr!','�n �/ i r M1T r«Y.w�, � try�l4w' " �I i 'y t' ti r 1(� 'L r g v1 +� K , ' 5m4 Fr r s «iLrj'P i r r a ti '•.{ kph ,�'� �•�F, rr �', P y�' i. ',v rM�� (�C $ �Md.•M }y 'li y„�,' •.,y�'�ry .. � ,.y �. , Z{W H'1 � '�Y r�ll pl �i��r' 6 V� Y ,,� #5�1'1 !11{ 'r' ' �..,�1r';i,��/f TrR�i,,l•, ti r�Y � + � i� " p., ` ~� .k 444uuu�+ .,^�'Iyl1 x / r ( r r �Ft F � ■ ��',=ry 7'S '�� A�� ,�Irjk��;,��7 ��rl"+�t�v .r� ,�a�ri ` • •. .yfi�� r4 r�'�hNy l. Lrv ,,� �' ,411,E +�! wdlir r�� 47^ • '1 Y y.� V I 1•: s 1`d 4WWJ ,Y u� n .�• '-a w•'� c )fit or s' rt nr4or rrbsl1 111 ISO way of fort ply of the Other -, ,,r a� tg� ca�l�t t � raatritt I�w�s :�r �+ro� I�iina burr, au�l tf� � ll 011 Ito to iMll force cad •t-fect. '!'M►ie Declaration shall create privity of costract :. all oc err art of the said and *sgtwt* with and �g all grant*** of y p "tire property. aid their respective heirs, executors, adsinistratorar SOMONMrs, wed assigns. In the event of a breach@ or attewpted or threstenod breach, by any owner of any part of said gatirs property# in any opt the taxawrj covenant@ and conditions heroof, any one or all such ot6r owners of the Entire Property shall bar entitled forthwith to full ai l adequate relief by injunction and at! such other available legal and 1tabLo resiodlmr from the consequences of such breach; and any deed„ " lease, saislpmat# conveyance or contract made is violation of this L. 1 ' leclsratUm *hall be void and may be set aside upon petition of one or bore of the owners of the Entire tropertlr. All coats and expanses of say such suit at piroceaVage including attorneys' fees, as hereinafter ptovtdod, shall be assessed against the defaulting owner and shall eonstitatc a lion against the real property or the interest thereto vrarrgfully deeded. leaeesl, assiineds conveyed or contracted for, until . 11 . paid, effective upon recording notice thereof in the office of the count recorder *f the county 1n which the Zati.re PropmIrty is loeated, but nay such lien shall be subordinate to any boas fide mortgage or dead of trust covering any portion of the hntire Property. and any purchaser ■t any foreclosure or trurtas's sale (as well as any gvontae of des►d iq lieu of foreclasate or trustee's sold) under any such mortgage qr dead of tnet aball take title free fro@ any such lie%r, but otbervise subject y to the provislons hereof. The remedies peri.itted at low or equity of any or all such owners specifled herein shall be cumulative as to eaeb mad as to all. 1201MB 7.70 In the event that suit is brought for the eafor**06 Vlp r 01'tiM,% i;, .3 K1•� 'S� „^ #'A ' s!/4 '7'; , •�i. �}' t! �'�`,yx ' L _� ,I ' 1�,• l Y' rw. f.�' y+�y �� r �y Y+„Y S— +i+�F+'1•�} !\rr!'•,R ,i� �� 1 � ,� �n rn�(� �, �w.f}n, r, ,7 AEe ��S 1`► i�,. ��Q'k � � .e� •,.r��"y�y r1 "'ti yw �•''��lr arr,..•"�r�w', 1� !'', ,, . „fy,', Y t'I �' �r.� '' w' +.'�� ,�•'nj'°.w it n 1 A � ' y lryr l{• IS 7S j, � 1, / � ,; '�.q` y'��1;4I1( 11,• . '+ ' RL r' .�;•I WY ,��`,� ' �'11Y•r� i,•+t�� LL Irn {�k� �V} '•,.Y 1• P n i,s A yy':R\i r )V ' � ' � '1 I}ARV � n? ' . ',r/! re �„ •�1 o h.;..'d 1 , ,;.f•'^ �> `' + Vr Y . : 4i ' °1 ' 'tie . ! " ��' ;�yl +�'''�� _ r V!'r' '..',°}•� .n'i rc'.�M1 .+W51'r a i'R C � r.r�. �1ynp �K,.�1. �,Irk,Yy',,,,.. •. r { �1{ I i,i '!* r .tat}i,'�{d ..y, Ap X ,, ",i.�'�y�'�M!'lb�'' r•mire",� 9+y /' • , ' "`•`. I�ir fM Mid �i1� arty per part loo eaua'Ir null shall be *pk ltiwl to he ',.`•3> " �,�I, IFMI+t +��1�10 slLr•IN11yye IorrM tits luNlut 1-tirtX at pirates, Mud auy i include dV dstr*� rs�lired shall award tlotrrrof.. The captions heading the various section* of this C+' beeiarat ism Mrd copvoojenco and identification only p and shall not be 404"d to Ito$& at define the contents of their reapattive sectf.osr6 s, r� T.l. Church and Van Buren each cooperated to the drafting sod preparation of thts Awaded and Restated Declaration. Nance# In any t tonstl'Vatlou to be made of this agreement. it shall not be construed a"hest eithar party on drafter. WW' i term and Termination The covenanta+ conditlone and restri:tiona contained is this Daelarstion oball run with the laird and shall be bindind upm � "ah MW all of than owners of any part thereof and upon all parmoss cxai*ia* uader them; and the same shall continue in perpetuity. 8.1. This Ascended and Restated beclaratloa may be amended of torrmleat*d only by the written ap,reawnt of the fee owner$ of the JMW area of Parcels 1 and xg as said Parcels era described on fthibit "g" bsesta. My acknowledged by each said aem-tr, &ad teaorded iw the office of the eminty recorder of the county in which that entire property ?, it situated. Fowl the toad Ing. thaso Conditions, Covenants and PastvItTlons shall noc be modlfled by the patties without the prior rrritren consent of the Ciry Attorneyee Office v'f the City of Huntiogtow beacbe State of Catifurou. 4.3. This Amendud and Restated Declaratios, executed as Of the date hereof. chall take effect only upon, from and after Its recording In the office of the county recardarr of the county in Which the Entlrre Property to situated. I * 8.4, All of the Vievislons of this Amanded and Restated DOtlAratlwn shall hs envwr+wntw ninninu with Fthr 1nwof morflaN Nt to r .f �a a �S!'' d'fy' a,5/� .�n f i '1k.. ■ _ 1 qq,` � ,��' . i�,•fRv+ �y.4y��}'m`�f a M � L �4 r �A , �t�• ,*j, 71�� ..�i�y`Vx 4v,. j`, 1� �,.�1,� '; ^ , NtP1L VW • 1�r� 1 � r A'^ an1Ri�,r�'f�N M N �'�' * t17, 0�ti - yi -S �}, ' ry i' Iw `ti,i11+'A �y' , �, ' r 7'« '� Y �{ y �4y0 7y.1 1: q i S,;' y OP1444414 loci 1me1lw1As, 1*6 sot 1181tod too seetlaN 1461 at the Civil rsdo at she state or C411( rrw146 1t to salprtarly wood Rat nook Visit ter 49 at refrain laalw coins no" act oa t6a IAIW (440dribOd ilk $phlbts Or hereto) of rthu a+avamantar (a) to tar the baaent, of the i+atd 7,4 do 40TOeentea, (b) "me with both the land OWD04 by the am tee and (c) ShOAL WWI% at be ,rmW the load erwed by the covenaacar ) s114MA1 a dit or W mom WOM us • bio#iap �► ► Vot1i voccttwira a�ner a ovare 6 *7 say portion of t%o lamed affected heiebp and upon each person rendered to the ptavallims party in moth action or rgoesedin`. • ' .b. This Awn4a4 rind Restated Declaratioa abalL temmIA fw ftjj Jorge mW effect netei,tfuttandinp anir ehnage in ownrrabip of may Part of the matire Property. ..� tx vrraus wf►Itl±A a THIS Dr6CLARATION Blip CILWt is executed by 10 the p rtlea hereto as of the dap and moor first aWme written. niLLCIEST Mlst'ioM V 11/1"IST C1HJ>l1C11O IN a lira ,.a gort as OVJKC =M er Mr C"W I-st" ate a. I= VAN 111Uil N PUPSRTISSM A Carliformlo Liaited Partnership By 7119 MOM COWA1IU. INC., a r' C fa A gaiaWal FaIrt-Ou'r By IOLOCICAL PHYSICS* TV, a CalirornOF . A Cane:a rtaer �2�� 1�;�..11 1•�S�,Wi��u,i),+1, r,� . .'I••.J ' .� ti �,� r rwi :� „� �. � �1 a. r 'I �r I �a4�' r''r,L J .�v,` ,`t,• �,��*�� 1�' . 1 �' Iw � ;t�,: �I� '��' Y��r d1�1 r r ,��.� ',• � vr(rl;; .A . :��f . h •vyl' �1 .1�� ',� ri,i,,°v r i 11„ iJ�4 �J�, � M e �• r,•,1�rtllrFv.. ,'V{�,. . ; { 1 ' � •�,,1' �< S, '*.,.pl 1 1I Y 7 f:r 1 YY • •' 1 Y . .��.n 1' i ' Y!'ly� oy 1 �^ 46 �r�r( 1 �s'F�:•.. t 'w'�' Ri",•�r��+Y/'1��rI' 1'.4t-r�w.rIMi:lf,ly�d+�4 a•�F+''wy�S1T"rlr\'1"'.�1.�ij.Y.1!' TT: i.l�h`• f , :,v M .1 . 1 �r y11 L 5 , ' i 110MIS cat �� IMMCM b. tCotrputruirtt► ��.;��.`~i�� a+�.rr.wr. WrA"m OF CA1 FORM)Orrrr sr. CoM1`I`tIOM Sept. 13. 198$ bciotr mt. the u aced. a Plaary lhlbiit in and • . A�: .�tIt1AY1�tt►#A*##bMA# #AII####�###M t lr iWWW to me to t1w bash Mmy ttaddim*to w IVl �►t0 executed as� R ICA ' .. .Imi9 Opp k XFJNNMXW 44 1Me on sCsw et+Mknre lu be t aw! tlllltl► tstfeww the wi" Itlatrm"m lu the tairyr of the f:wposuiwl OFFICIAL SSA1. do t� � t ' Mnit a rnarnt led acMwttrknlse+l • IItNMiNAt�1 F %UWY tM M,A1 /M b tflo0 llfi'E' ied Ilse witbip NIytI11- 11Qt#1!'►t1�IC+�AUEdItINA rooms ttttwam to r by 4m or • awWtinm of its dew 001O ,,,. , �Ny' arc_ ,j � �+► Itlrt. 16 (Tbw tMr I"$odd ata1M1•L KID watyw,.v. � t�� r� ....�� ._.. I�rlwa Al'. � Mwdrr.New�.t, ��...••• e 11 �tii t' 1 04 Saw. Me+mm+Nt y'� . �PI�!d �+•+r++�+4" ,......•.�_. ... ar.. , ti.rwwa M w� W • M'a .I�tirlltt, madftww. IfiDR fl�YAI dKAr. ORnAtMr w a.. k.. . tM niN tM.l +M� +IfIrl111 lwrts4rrst awl brwww BE mw ti Iw Mw lormwo . •1 ,+i tilr w M.ateli n an Mlrrll of wwl fm w do"o. S115y►I! C. 1 1R tr M wM .1 tlw p.e .+w ri WYA l#"%K.Cif a+a • ..Y a• • aW_�. w y... ... arc..�.r. .. �.h . w r . / dw w p+r it tb+t a ow AN wwwo i.+rrw~, and Iwiawk i or rod-ft tos-.l fob w ter Mrrt aw+ir ++MM+w.li� aa�w� d" . +r rn.'M p.rierr ...r n. .....r..-�r - 240 I�`!•,� -- - rw+. 60 r+Mii►mial wl. w •- • KMaey ltia4m, 0%4 RkWS# WA Mwt., jWt..►.rMV %WOW b d* M. �stc�s --�-� w�N »• .. . �.��w,,+wa w� w VON NOTARY MrAL 04 STAMP XI�¢11[ OR at 4w 00 doe 'M'�IM � 1� �t1�1}�E'!It Inc.Zf1Q. • � IMI+M�iMM eRA� +•..�V,�•1.��"y+"r+'.•.+ .r•..+w:�- r10O W4 tW *41wo 1FMewMwMl *Q Le"as 1 j wr is. to Ise if,, �!� 1 1t '1 tt�1,��..1'. ow tewwwoll so Iwbrtl .� M.al 1.11�81MN, �• +-i'. "� t�t1�'li�Il 'matme.1J�r� • � �`�♦�� '�� w rrw•r.� ter. . .. r�++� r +..•w• r .rrr r aia+w rww r! w �. • .��W Mrs.� f rrYarl.Try-+r�.n•+!•��.•Ip ! tp 1. iA / M � IfA f � � � • w .rw.+• a.ar. a r wr. r• y.r r►+..: �.r.r. • f tot. 4 M 1 1 N N • 1 ' ' mom IL W 30P y' 1 1 w 1 „ 1 1 i r. M qw,loom qR "m——w 4a : iALCIV yin 1 qmmllmmwv� V� oy 1� � •wr. �'I'Al1�.Y.±�i N •� 1 1 • • 1.7 7. Cad it 1 , rn i.M1�7r�.!.AIY�\'• Y�M�.�7� ^�ri� '�1 . . .h'n�(I�iI�\i.;•i.•rl'.In�M ' 1 r NR�',•.� Ni' "y' 1 Y,,, , A•' ' .} i ��I lyy a�1:;4'y,,roe •' � .l t `x kLka- r: ,arX 41'.1�R Lk�1.�8 Is' 'l� k r %�• 1 � � `1 4 ��ri , ,, �r iy,: 1 I f � { �rV�i�I r''� ,4 y, R I � '.'� y.Y t w �.c�V,, .� �/l �. �,�� IR '��31 Ir i�, Ml•T ti�yet 'i� �� t P�y,, � � < r �ty� � ; f 'R7' ,ri 4.� .. � �N �' 'r' •,�� N �l'N(M �! , � '7Nr�i +.7.. �rrY�� r,!„ „r � �'�Q � , Iyr 0/44 i ,4'� �+ t 4� ��r rv5'r 1 1 y 1 �,,. '� ��,�� >vT� � 't b t ''• C � ,{ •. � �ry 'V� Y•, f, ti 1,. W r r;.l MM � 1, t �r fir{ �� 4 , Jh•n ! , a•' #,+,+ !,,yy��.�.. ❑ ,f, �; yy Ih ,r•„�� (i,� +Y�q".;� � 7x,� ••"�t;lyI d g,y�" +v1 `�. i� Ry+urti ' ,• 1T•1 Sµ\St f 4kI�,Mr�`� et�^(M,d:,�y ; IIp � �•, t I +i.��,'j', t�,r�',�,. +.1r � y i�r ar✓.IF:�yy� ;,�,,,N,.'�./615�' "'�r'K.';�c "�s� d ,��w.,�r Z�"''�I�{�••�I �kw;�K �«r�",'� s,f�,��ya,�`��y`s,�{�N'y':,�MS' _� I• ;�#�^y ,` .� _ __ � �y��yrlrt,Y,,�i I�?.r yr a.'•+fir" i �Y�r t". r • i y f.„A+�'Y 54 hi ,�14 �Y rt 4 „ � '1� a�l:rr�� J.,��w �6 .'�A1, rt i r�,r' *'I. 'G�''•, ` � {, `.y-/'_7 irA4Sq'3b1 r} .}Iyy�� !S, fa�' r � r i 'M r� � '. r �'� 1"� •�i j�, Y7 �1 p� rr Yr r LF r �r, •.��'y,i�'l' .1'M' ,� >•,� r � 'r •') ! I, A• 4:�•.�r�* .!' '•1ii��,. ur 'w Pff�•�Iayr Al' -� r'�,. .a•' ' 'r�a..�•'r,.� 'r' r°�•1� ••� �'r �� •°Y�i I • Fr��'r+7,+ �r µr' � r� 4 'r$ I,�' . rd'.M!1� I � � � r•4'�"�ti ' ,� ,•, 'liJr4ar,�•.•jY�/,,,,r �4 • 151 :��,A.,Yi � ' '�� ' . Y r.1�: 1' • �i. r ' ;,�- •r�'� �� , ', .',,,�'7r�,rr,` twr �P�Y'; �':r,�''I':I►� '.i%•:�..,�1�:�o'T1.Jr '1•�y�.,;tilc' ' r''7'IA.R•'�!Mwv�„+•'•r�r' �.�� •,r� r: � r ,; '`' �► PARCEL MAP 82-9576 �,,;,:" � � � M1/ rl�r�rtriw ifllCM.CQIAl1► 01' fff►'AI+o►.it'1!1 Yi '.�►•.MaA1MM . .000 a son"at ta M so Mwt t&aK F0 w amm"M a taft 416 M or o1iwL.mko 0404IN M offm r 11r aw•t wa#wt11 do d#wM 60m",SALMO & s ovalk l f WNW Sri M.ifr*a r.a`�MM aIINWIW.10" 60r 9014 9^a I M Nook WL �!�M r1i�tL/7F-M •i#M! ws r 1 r Tip t, ..# H•1 v I to Ak .M w th RW fw•h% local tli, 1' to%.• R a•w.,b. 1111. ro 64 W "A rw 166/06. r j; *&-^Tom 14v*•.11,1ft "CLWMCP A6! .. 1�1rl�M sa+:+•1• • tllxaol' 1 KIN 1a11l.w -A 4001 w /i) lam• 4.0 *Wool 1 •MA•L.�C` rtd # M+ lot• $*1" M,W CNN 1 M Ai t /yt 111•W MA M M. n4t'r. detq ti 7%.on 4 W. f L. 4ub. FIN f Its itoile� a +lt or tow 1N 9 ae •w ya,0aC 1i•t aa. 0.11 WA,0 46M. rip iWal. Slow p1 . wlw• w�...rn,.+n� � w•� �1.f.�M1. MCC�f, Q A# ttiy •. �teL,1w1.� wri sa ao•• w a 1It al► �aJ*or wow y� � �'� 1t •tM-14«h W.Sft•w wrC 4W WW ww NC 2%."r bl.. r VO.4M��t11�11 W&)M I +�..ter... .. ..-..,..«.� �. ...�.^.�...- �� -� wag vp _ CID �l a —•--� v br 1.1A r0 ^W6• pin .. a1�thraw. 04 1•t wlws.�•1,r rail G tar rl. ► 1 � ►v ri.1 a k a w i g w�•� t /lip , 01"01• W W AdIc of• t LA w•w.wwwaw. dLW Aft=ON SAW Aftlig WR all V 46 rA I R s r.�•lw to, d� olcw�ao NRnLrb�.l sit M• 2Waf' F# riMI iiI11at.1 i•q r ... 1` M �r L,Tr waAPltifaf- M'11 -' f t t7 A! PLO 1-1% it 1 .�- irtA t 1• -•� w7 F"'1 4"' �, WiWM�AL•1 r111I�1W/� 14-ft iLri rr-a • 1•r1 1mWALM11LCJ w%a%.,o L.W&! 1a wf.L 1" P" I ' ,, yy�i, r - y, v < n a , •,• `+ ,r „ ,, ., 10I•, i,�a,� rti i, ,.,' ,R�.,, � ri• ,1• u . }. .�,, .. , .'1I�" .ti l' 'pr X�ri}.i�`, r,. � �� t<� d" ' i ^ �M��rn { � 1' � ^ ,',r, , i1f' ..� ,��. w„ •M r• � .1 *r , a • .1� A t��'+,�, i• 1 \„I+' f f r A raR" i 1 r, �yJ t P,, � rA ,4 Mr t �•� T• # �-r� �� )r(' . pr ��, A � `f!� 7f'�•i�ia� W,.i�ILY4rd4f�!x ,•s "r�'i• r•'�w".45"4"4*-'•� � .."�: •CE OF DNTERMI NATION ' C ice IN Hum (any 'i 1At A pL'1`ERMINAT10" » 1 1199H MADE WIT11 RUPECT TO THE 99L#0W lop PROJECT. ir •.u. ra Ceetnapt1st Church d.%i. ,� , 1.. 1i iY ry1YY �IM+•+b r+y++�+llr•F�� i��.. wnlu .�e .�rr.. i w Mewman Avenue, Huntington Beach Conditironal Una Perna No. 92-23 con strvoticm of a 10 , 56 square foot medical building in conjunction with a 8, 100 square J1'�j0lit t rthea t corner of Newnan Avenue and Van Buren Street. 7"! o ve,,dascriled project was: Approved On October 19 , 1982 ' Disapproved On E Planning Commission Discretionary Body Thp,,,praj ,"'i. . will, „X will not, have a significant effect on the Irliti if approved, having a significant e(fect, a statement of Overriding +dIN, t'M � is attach . '• 1 •, a r . f Art , Envir•omental Impact Report was prepared for this project t pursuant to the provisions of CEQA (EIR 0 ) . troy*'t'fV* Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to,•A ; visionot of CEQA. A copy of the Negative Declaration (ShvAlto'hr okal Clearance Report) is attached . � The HIR is available for review at the City of Huntington Bench iDeOaj•-tAeht of Development Services EnvironmenLResources Secti n. • ' i SOX, Pate Phi 1 le�l rc ? ti Title Removal a� a � .. - + ', '�, to +,• ', s � .h`'• a ,, � ' r ) ,,. 7r rti +•,i „+ r yR, „h i , 1 1. � r•{ "!. y. ,J y11'"'R•k t:' ' �l '�y'. � p t5 �r��1t� �.,raNpY�.�' fi,� �, .. • � r ,i r ' ( • ' .p .1'. k � ti " 1 by • !S';' .iM 4! '9• � ,�r' �a . .iy +y�Y1 .rJr,• r .' ' '�4l;Yld ;.4'96)�,�`�! ,. r' k' r ' �1 �lIFA1h'1.1+7M••.n �' r. l ,r 6 MITER PARTME + T COMMUNICATION 'Lola From X VIStOWSWAL MWOUR ES YA 7•,L' a r • , ..' ' C AMTia1 Date October 1 19A Z goes ApplitAot: Lamy Wyeo Hifloreat• Babtlat Churcb AmmesV, To constru--t a 4t330 sq. ft. nedical bu l4lng to unatlotr with a 719 9•:pq. ft. church factli~tye Latatigm: Yortheers►t oarnor Newman Avenue and Vari wren Str"t,%- j'• easeUfV%%W' 1A ter` Uff's initial study of this project • Daft Negative Declaration tM '1 1' reenpaper and pasted in the Office of the City Cleric fa R i0-dsy:lwblic mim period ending ..„ &W .�. ...:� #0• =Wapta .�..�.,� the attached criftents were race v %Mod Man The rovi roawrenta l Resources cers Section recmwnds that the approveNegative Dac a ra on 6* pr " pray ec w 1 not have a significant adverse effect on Ni._tion stia - t it;We►d mitigating measures will reduca potential environmental effects muTt4 frm toe proJe►ct and are mcmaended as conditions of approval . Respectfully subm t Assotlat* planner ..:'. . •t...y:` +. - '. • - .y. .'• � f.• _ J ..• _ • ._ .. �.'•, �+,ti"1•'La1G r't+r•M!••S+• ••••'a•My *•• NA l 14 4 r W F 'r `vY91/� J L'!�'i 4��a.►1M►r �r�su�Wv W Natural gar a,rd .22OV a ctrical shall be stUbW in At the loroettian Of clothes dryera s !. Sp Wtw4 WO mil he stubbed in at 'the lo=ti(-a► of cook*. facilities, water h"ta"l aW tral hsa" wAts. 3. Lew voturs t -m8e loll be wed an all dvwws '4. #J1 b": di la as amble lu r, win, pipe, o surplus Womb) INCLais sf�411 ? digxr. of at an offsite facility equipped to 1lae thee. ' . on s#ructut qs an do "Ject ;Yvperty, whether attached or detached, shall be cxm M� str in c d olianc a with the state almaticwl at s Aards set forth for units that Us without the 60 CNM contours of the property. The interior noise lever of all dwllincj units shall not exceed the California insulation standards of 45 dba CUM. rridmwe of ampslianoe shall axeist of aubMittal of an aicri wt.ical analysis report, prgxred under the s4pervision of a person experienced in the field of acoustLo%l engineering, with the application for building permit(s) . All sa>asv s to mitigate noise to ac cM. 7table levels *hall, be lUxx xporated into the design of the proms. d. if lighting is included In the parking lot ard,,/or rerreati on axes energy efficient � leaps shall be u (e.g. high pressure sodium vapor, natal halide) . All outside lighting shall be directed to prevent "spillage" onto adjacent properties. 7. A detailed soils analysis still be prepared by a registered sails engineer. This � auelyria shall it lu an-sine soil sailing and laboratory testing of mat rials to p•,.vvide detai led tuna reegaxdireg grading, cherdoa 1, and fill properties V fatnda►tiarm, retainlAq walls, streets, and utilities. S. if foil- inmUt:�ion is too be used, a fire retardant type sha.tl be installed �... are the Wadding Depto ...�, 9. Aa oVinsering +goologlat 11 be engaqwd to submit a report indicating the gX*XJ surface aaveel,eratdcn farm dearth eaweawnt: for the subject pr perty. All strums with this der nlopee nt shall be constructed in ompliance with the I*factacs as indicated by the geologist's reeirxt. Calculations for fa7tings and st,u t~m l nadws to withstand anticipated g-factors shall, be subsitted to the City for xwlew prior to the isstmxe of building permita. 10. A plan fcw silt control for all storm runoff from the property during ccnstrueti+or. ad &wing initial aeration of the project shall be sub ruined to the California a ftgia*l *tar Quality 0antral Wwrd staff for their review prior to the issumwe Of gredire4 patrextt s o 1116 Informaticn on equipment or facilities which may generate air pollutants shall be subndtW to the Smth Coast Air O ality Martiageetoant district staff for their reviek pricw to the iasuarwe of a Certificate o O=epancy for wW use within the bui ldin 12. r�rr.�w.w�. w.a..��•.ram.wrlr .�wly- - --- - sw�...� a�.�� 1 1w..��..w�� ..... 19. - `r.i��- .YY�.rr.P� Mi.� A.. M� F IF•+ Y gyp, 0,r,: tiP 1" 1 y IY • r _ IM�Ailyiiwr�`w°h+•ri10, ,,.r...,,, : _ . v _. ,w � sibukes, H0No planning-")mmissLon A MMIQN WAS MAN BY LIVENCMD AND SECONDSD By MTRJAHAMGGIR THAT t T- 111 o ;"ta UPHOLD THE CONDITIONS IMPOSED BY THE BOARD Or ING � USX PRRMIT NO. 82-23WITH 'THU EXCEPTION OF G AND AL 1! "I 0ARWX TO BE A MAXIMUM OF 15 FUT IN HI►IGH ITH THE pKWI&Jop of R SPRINKIpORING SYSTEM AS APPROVSD BY THE DEPARTMENT, MM N P IM BY TNR FOLUMING VOTRt Higgins, Livengo0de Hier jahangir Nots t wincholl, Schumacher .r ASSSM, . Paonee, porter ABSTAINt None Further discussion followed. ON JMMION BY HIGGINS AND SECON Y LIVENGOOD THE COMMISSION UPHELD THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL I SED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUST- MENTS ON US$ PERNI9T 82-23 DENIED THE APPEAL BY THE FOLLOWING VOTN: fir st� Higgins, vangood, Winchell , Schumacher N01 . Mir & it , ASSENT: Pao Porter ABSTAIN: G al ' Commis near Livengood directed that the record show that his second of t above motion had bean only for the purpose ,ref taking an ate: n on the request so that the applicant could pursue his appeal the City Council it he wishf d to do so. r"'• lcmxTftPB S 23 CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 52 -32 ontinued from September 21, 1982) cant: Larry N ea far H crest M;ssionar 8a tist Chi� . To permit a reduction of 10 parking spaces within a proposed 8 , 100 se�uaRro foot church facility to be constructed in conjurictfon with a 1.�1, 566 square loot medical building with recipro al rdrking. Subject r... ptoporty is located on the northeast corner of Netinuan Avenue and Van Buren Street, Savoy 9*11 via reported that parking for the medical facility has boon identified by staff as the major issuer in this request. Although a reciprocal parking agreement will be recorded between the two uses, the lack of adequate parking to accommodate the major user would justify the staffs recommendation that the plan be revised. He also !.r noted that the landvcaping on the total site is insufficient and must be eenlL%rged . The Connission and the staff discussed the: statue of the pending revisions to Article 979, Parking , and the effect :his revi$i*n might have on such facilities as the subject one. Mt . Bella- via responded that according to present research there would appear i to be year little change in the future Y 9 pa=king requirements for a medical facility of this size as a result of the code change , M4- 10-5-82 P.C. . _T =. rJ'�roM;,y„Jy�� tl'�,'4 �y ';.., •L 14N,�� ! ,�v. ° , ` a. e . '.M" OR`Y .. "gyp •.N "y I I I IfAL:A�rh �t,j`k�� tJ ,n A I � 'I. ', . �, + � " , .! +'F"1'M�•rT cy ' ; im 41 ,r UP IiViyrr ',.1. .4iY+W'i,ii'..,i. ..iJ�'C,,, .aid 1 ,pn •w�,. '.h'.ias ., •r •.J 'ti,> , yv J ': 1.;, Q�4 J 110toe, $4C Plai nq Cos�ission � r tuber 50 1982 Vag* 5 The btic Mating was openod. y,4 14try, jye, applicant, addrussed the commission in support of He potted out that the pArktnq shorta • is a re- o a ade tou rt1on of the medical build�nq which, 4r '� !� when balauisted an a square footage basin only, accounts for m s a difference. He informed the Commission that the use iAi-basement area for a linear accelerator only would '' aao rr d to such a small number of patients and staff at one time that the. parking spaces would not be necessary when calculated on the. basis of use rather than square fool-age. He noted+ too, the.t. t. * site can be wade to conform with the landscaping re- ' geirewetiwt.. There, were no other persons to speak for or against the proposal , aq4 the public hearing was closed . The r:!ommAssion di scuseed the parking and the applicant' s rationale for iiho hhortage. Also reviewed was the elevation of they subject : property above the property directly behind it, and the suggestion s node that because of that grade differential no heavy land- :se.aping use installed there to avoid a problem with drainage and that the existing row of trees be allowed to constitute the land- scaping along that property line. " •' 00 NOTION ISY HIGGINS AND SECOND BY LIVENGOOD NEGATIVE DECLAMATION 82-32 WAS APPFA MD BY THE YPOLLONING VOTES AYES% Higgins, Livengood, winchell, Schumacher, Hirjahangir "AHH.s !wane A55ANT s PaLone, * Forte r AJOIXI is None ON MMI(M BY HIGGINS AM SECOND BY LIVENG000 CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. gZ-XI WAS APPIMED WITH THE FOLL01ING PINDIN S, BY THE FOLLOW- I PURR � Fort APPROVALS IU�f ,lu IYi�� 4�1"uYYA�� lyi 1 . The P14nning Counisbion determined that the proposed use of the basement area for housing a lineair electron accelerator, creating a reduction In the number of patients and employees who wi11 be using the proposed facility at one time, will sufficiently reduce the parking demand to allow for the reduc. tion of the ten (10) parking spaces as requested, 2. The granting of the canditional exception will not constitute a grant of special, privilege inconsistent upon other proper- ties in -the vicinity and under identical zone classification*. 3. The granting of the c ond4tional exception is necessary in ardor to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. �5- 10-5-82 K P.C. T ' ( a ��°�"1��•'tm � }�' tij 4�, �� r•nM, t 1 I 'F Y IC� •�f�r=y,, 4 �� 1. i �( 11 '�-!��;, �r� ', � � —44 Lee Ja Lon ially ntt of a muditional exception will not be matex + tpubliv volrare or injurious to property in a V rsel�ng �� tho �litia�f+al �JC��f�i�11 Mi11 not a� � y 940% of the My of Huntingtork hOxah i winchollI Schumacher'. Mir jsha►ngir ,,Y• !' .''fir, .�'".J, i! ° ��'� � � I AST None 1611491400dO Aft SECOND' BY HIGGINS CONDITIONAL USS PERMIT 0, "FROVED WITH THE FOL WINO FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS , bh 'Aft h'.'. ' o sal. 1,8 substantially in conformance with all applicable of .00ision p. ' , e ohu 61A/mediCa1 facility is consistent with the xon- r;a ,,, "Q'r41 exeh dssignati,,ona on the subject propertyo 1r "reivaid dated Octohsr 5, 1982, gall lie the 'Y o.00deptum t layout subject to the ,foi lovi.ng : evisoo rite plan shall be submitted for review and approval at n the r iced ten (10) percent landscaping per�u tlon131 (b) of the ordinance code. i. z,..to issuange of building perrmitso areciprocal parking and pces; agreem rat between the two uses on the subject sits shall i tt the Ci Gy for approval by the Cl t Attorney and ra �tdsd Frith the County Recotdar of trie �tanty of 1` 36 3 b441dir" s0oilt , zuo th as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and .th4r ' oUrp►lu<s or unusable materials shrill be disposed of at an of tal to facility equipped to handle Blur'!!. 4 . If lighii.ng is included in the parking loL area , energy efficient lamps shall be used . All onsite lighting shall be directed to prevent spillage onto adjacent properties . S. If fail.-type insulation is to be used, a fire retardant type shall be fnitalled to the approval of the Building Division. 6+ A detailed soils analysis shall be prepared by a registered sails engineer. This analysis sllall include orsite coil sampling and. ��- 10-5-82 - p.C. S "*�" i" ,',, " V n 1 q �• "�ri �: f lr.1. a ,^, 4rw i:. r M i!A��', Y Y ti Vy ♦e a r , it Y ` "("1 r �lr :" i ',"t v ", •�.1� 4. r.} 'IL .ts,r '} 1.y J,� t ; r�r r S, � y�Y y 71.' iF r r•dM, F ,F' i, LJ 1 1 r�+' . T ^ � r, Y.)y �Y ,�i, ..Y�.�4. rm om " ,�',,.r"ua'y. ��R; '•a IN7 •w .i 'i1' '+.r:, t1 . a.a." t, ' ' �'r.'�i',✓. , �'! A.• 'h1S7.JIMS 'w!�•�i' Ila +ArdrGb„ j ..iiik:k. r"ww'Ce- k .,r+.6-riu'�Aul, 'r,'iil pia, •tWrt T . /•, , , ' (•1 laboratory testirts of Materials to provide detailed recom- Mo ndstions regarding grading, chemical and fill propertriess fouMatlons, retaining walls, st�:eets, arsd utiLitiex • w.v , AY : Higgins. blvengood , winchelY, Schumacher, Mir. jahanv ir. ii S inns ` r Poono, Porter -24 gel T41 ephrone oft, t coftstraction of a 3,250 square foot, addi}ioa to -i:. +. ox•igt heral Telephone central of f is o building loca►teA at the rice a ..'it brner of Main Street and Acacia Avenue . r , p public ring wan opened. r . -0. Ni Jr . , architect for the propos-id addition, ad- I'' , essod -the Lour. for t concur with the suggested conelltiuns of o*a3 . exert f the liYmitatfv of employees to ten. Ile ssid xAIM # oft vi11 be rary help in the W!ilding:whila► the r►ew ntt is ,zing i tolled and perhaps f r<A time to time there- ' ds "ins on r;o and •_t4uested that the limitation be ' -00-1ked# no also In'fo . tho wassei ss ion that the parking .lot had .. e11y been desig n�diLy staswds and asked treat the �s,"t relieves of restriping as well 4; ;44:0 .40ca no other persons speak for or *gains,-, the proposal, s public hea zi was CL t9 !fit iaad that there sr"a Pe "a pa king 'requirements a p o, ".t4 ,1"040te iivah .is the s 4ect request. The Commiwalon nrrr of the i y its as pra00 sed and the Ailf.: fi t, ;�fo: tto� AiTht bs ch red in the future to a use iid0i(tional orking cnv. In response to sdto# th'. ' iLdLiq eniline* r for neral Telephone assured lathe►. cost an4 la9i�etic�s �f mcvinq the sat non•: of electronic ,. 1 'M In the strricw and recalbli ng t m2ther location W)uj* elutitront thistd not ha; ' n, Ai so takeninto ct.i amplt'yeo count cry► be v*rifttd and o Ibi Cation to a specific nunber of mOlo, r oweld be ani- VA it fum ar 101MOOM #AD $A"C'MD sit dCHWW"E f R i kl TltWlyw 'f tj 1n' NO* 112-14 WAS APPFA VW WITH THE 1POLLC ZING 1f1 NCS AND +'`mbstro"'t BY TUX IOLLOWING 'VMs The proposed 1. 250 squers foot addition to th* exiating General Tel he f4cililty Is eos"bi.blw with tukrroundinq land ussa &n,4 "�'T iq ♦ ir VIP"�1129 31 k lk- 0 k 4 ly 17 1' 1'7 do Jim •vyif r f d � r ,dnt,. �4 � � ?1 ,� i `I, x � r �Ifi V 1�,1 +�'�` r� } I �y r rr A r i '� ✓i�hF �< .a r°''�` '�� P f, h +� r�iti� �r"ti 1�j'rV 1-�"q�r Y� �•'' h t' 4 •�r.,f y�,�[� , � 7 '1'111�,4 'r� � .' ° �'� T •t S,k; �.} .� r �i•� a j �• �_rl '� ,' o,• 1;' i'�, Ty 1 �� Yo*a� f '' i r "- ti{a7y'4�+.`,�'�,lF '�+f h' � .i' i � ", i � i r �� ,r,"�• w. rr�r ut- � •ti �•r f vLl•��r rl,'' r T M L4 ` rr ti'� �'rF�Lr, � f .l � �• • � r � �n�fi�T � `rI4.' • 4 , i� iTr��r ! ••"r,;�;. *,�ML.!'v. •" rr'�i�: tL'•1hrw'; �„1My1, . +.�.►k11.i� r • r'i;J ,tip• �� '� M ` f �r Orly r.q r' SYATE 00 CALIFORNIA COLMty of 4ranp •vMK "@we ""wows sow*@ M► on owtM+M w W * r forty W" to ma tokn NOMA silo 1� 1 • Ctlsen of the United States and a resident Of the Courtly aforesaid; I arm Over the 60 of sight"" ywsts. wW W. a party to or interested in the below 8A01 der, 1 &A i p►intipai clafk of fho Oren" t l►1'#�• ' 04LOT, with wh h is combined the �+ Now a nowspapar of general circulallon, 0abhoW in Ito. City of Coats Mass, f sty of Qrenoop,, 150ato rif Caliterr la, and that aof '. t of wfMCh copy attached hereto is a true and complete copy, was printed and published in the Coats Mesa, Nowporl Beach. Huntington Elear h, fdourltein Valley. Irvine, the South Coati communities and Laguna Search issues of said newapapor for 'One time dansea utive weokli to wit the issue(s) of a'p Y y 9 Igo y 198 r 198�- -- •1 derf•are, Und-3r penalty of por)Ury, that the Wegaing tat true and CorrocI. at Cas lese, Cai;fornla. iignaiure f 1 ' rnooF op RULLICATIOtI I �� L IN N•+ Tr", .rMb rr+. 4, •r �•fl" .♦ '.Ya41 ll��'��K�'�f:4✓'Jrr Y •r , { � �• { TR �' �� .ayk{g5: r�• �l� I 9 , t,' I( 1, 1� �A t�� ` . ' �. 'ATM i15 tG 1ti!�,,• �, 1� 'y � .A�,r *17 , • r�' ti�� I� t`��♦r , a• �. 1 ,.�rl' , f1'ti' . M9+'ai�s �.^.�1��V�N�'w'F 'nM'ir *,,a, r{„ r,. ,-- .�.v.ti va'r it 1.,. 4 52 ! 7 io +'1 Ii�lli S IT CALIPGMIA '.'•' ,� wpsuqrt Qrive *j"U *n OP"h. AA 9"9 '(On joly 2G y 1987 the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach your *Wool to the Pl anninq Comission'$ �Vprovsl,,of Cosstal rwt .Permit 07-12 and Conditional Exception' 87-34-and soroved •rniith con0iti . •tl a call the Community Devel.o"e•tit Department 536-51271 for Awther information. 1101a M. Wentworth Ads - C ity aevelvt• Depsrlser+'' P � .�;��•�. fry' ': +•: + ' `„ `' � ' * � '� . r e ' .�'�� ",h' � � v fir•• ' �� 'Y. 'V �*r r 'Ohs. _ _ yi �� •�.r_ T y's ��A'Id�„A ��Rr ,��t1 rr�� f + f''� Y-r •'Y�,r�' r�' h,.-�� l ,•�:•y,� y i M,Q S7A/� , •,ii� ,IV y " 1 r J HUNM NEACH wpw anar,r CALIFORNIA a OFFMC OF TM OTY CLINK 7 ' rIr'• 0 NN, fsabh, CA 9264$ My 20, My the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach # 000 your epp eIs to the Planning Commission a approval of Coastal Remit e7-13 ON COWitionel Exception, 87-34 and approved Plan" `+oll the Cdmomity Development Department - 536-5271 for further h 1 ,Ir Allele M. Wentworth y ' Pty Clerk y PCs. $ Adeft 'Cdi k1hilty Dowelopiibot Departront i . 1 • t1+l�r*hw�: �11�l7iT1 �y°r�n{MI / '• rr '. .1�� a 4M�,'�, •�' } i: . ,'�rr +'y'.1 ,h yyM rag�v�M4!�� •r i�.FI �Fr i y �}'' '.`�I r I �r x ,ter IrP, yy�', },ii:\t 9r��tit, . `. � 10 10, 01 ' 04 R C E i FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION t • e Hanarab10 mow and City Council Y= Coles W. Thompson, City Administrator Pr+ rir+ d MICt Dad LaS Mlle, Director, Community Developmen Wool ;�;,' 4.r L OP PLANNING COWNMION'S APP AL CIF. COASTAL tER10T 14041 87-12, IN CONJUNCTION WITH w �. AL RXIMPTION (�►ARU NCE) NO. 8744 - WGUEL AND JA it jD 46mmod Wo on" "F; ( l Yes I4 New PPalky or EsospdW Ism, rnsndWoo Anrlysh, Funding Sour, Ahwne*s Actions, Atim*rnents: k A Trat>tmltted for c idertetion is an appeal by Mr. A Mrs. Charles Chisholm, at. al,. to ft PhRu ft�ualrsioo's approved of Coastal De':,relopment Permit No. 97-12 In with COWNtional Exception No. $7,M. Coastal Development Permit No. 87-12 If 4 reqmt to permit the coutrwtic a of a retainlrg wall over 6 feet in height for the pwpose of retataft mom than 100 cubic yards of fill material. Conditional excVdon No. 87-34 is a reow t to permit a wall to encroach into the hired 15 foot setback. i Pumft Commission action of June 16, 19117: ON MOTION BY LEIPZIC AND SECOND BY PIERCE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION AOVXMD COASTAL DEVELOPMFNT PERMIT NO. 87-12 AND CONDITIONAL ,EX nVN NO. 87-M BASED ON A MODIFICATION OF ALTERNATIVES A OR B AS P IN XMLUTIOM NO. 1381, BASED ON FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF A"ROTAL, BY THE FOLLOW DIG VOTE: AYE: Lsipslg, Pierce, Silva, Schumacher, HiSSIns t Surimemil, LivenXwd ,%)NOW: NbW . I►Ea/UN-. Now t APERML - QQAr � D=LQrjff0Nj EXRWI IKO. $7-12: I. The ,+fanciers wall/block wall combination conforms with the plans, policies, !I 11irsm nta and standards of the Coastal Element of thu General Plan. 2. The oveml development permit is consistent with the CZ suffix zoning require- ments, the R1 Zordng District, as well as other provisions of the Nw.tington Beach Oritimnm Cocks applicable to the property, because a setback variance has been granted. "OWN ,'1•(r(i,�i:.�.n„�,P lea ., � • • \ i NM L TM r ii I ii Id i i wall/bitwk wall combinatiaa conforms with the public access aM r�rawwaaiad policies of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act because it do^1 vat black seem to or views of the coast. OF "ER - rOQASTAL DEVELOPM NT PERMIT•. 87-12: 1. The site plan and elevations received and dated April 7, 1987, shall be modified as 4 1U sidsting retaining wall shall be a maximum of 8 feet in height and any or skmequm -1 fencing be constructed in accordance with Resolution : W 1381, Alter i tt" A or B. b. Aesthetk finitfs or treatment of the retaining wall (texture Crating, plants, M.)0MV be provided and subject to approval by Department of Community Deisi 'ML -- =l51T1OFAL EXCEPTION (Y RM90 NO, f4: 1. Because of special ch=mstances applicable to the subject property" including size, to VOY,, location er surrowindi ti►p, the strict applicatimt of'.the 74xdng Is foum d,to dgrive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other Mies in the Weinity and under identical sane, clamificatianr. The subject p mpe ty is a dale firamtege lot with a significant grade differential. IL The pmuft of a cadditional dxcc!otion is rsecmary in order to prewve the aftrnw of ant+ or snare nbstandal property rights. A retainft wall/block wall cosabinativa over six ,feet in height is necessary to tzsure privacy, due to the slope in the rear of this lot. 3. safe of Carditiaul motion(Variance) No. 87-34 will rot be materially Itai to the 9.61ie welfare, or ho%w to property In the same rate %4"NWM'At15O ems. The wO will step back from the street lever and will ftwAx samte a e. TIO W*.otkg of the conditiaml exception will not adversely affect the General Plan of do City off a Beach. 1. The site plan and elevations received and dated April 7, 1987, shall be n rAn d to Caeftna w:tb surfers reoomoiendations, in accordance with Resolution No. 1381, Attk=t1ye A or B. ' a.: The existing retainh qg wall shall be a mtudmum of 8 feet in height and any Wdtlonal or subsequent f.ne ft be aanstruoted in accordance with resolution ft 13810 Alterotive A or B. k 'A►aethetic finish or treatment of the retaining stall (texture coating, Plants, oft.) shall to onwided and subject to approval by Department of Community Development. 3 All building Spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pip.3, and ocher surplus or un ,sable. 610 materhil, shall be disposed of at an off-site facility equipped to ha-Mle thorn. 44 RCA - Jolt 20. 1987 4- (8575d) Y' • r 30 amwelrprauat shall comply with a'1 applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, MdWeg 1Nvislan, and Fire Department. Wro s+e mendation Is that the City Council approve f aastal Development Permit No. 37-13 rod CAWARtkftl Exception No. 17-34 in accordance with Resolution No. 1381, based = to fbWbgs And co-Atiamt of aPproval tMt are outlined In the Alternative Action eft- " of this report. Casatal Om ant Permit No. 37--12 is a noqusat to pwmit the construction of a rM�tgq w�►1l/filocic wall combitmtoa l l feet 3 inches In height along the rear of a double bts for the pca^p me of retaining more than 100 cubic yards of flit material. IRM ptiha (Variance) No. 87-34 is to perrv►It the wall to encroach into t 1 fo setback that is requix ed rwh»a rear yard abuts a street. The Board of Zoning sam tints, at ttmlr meeting of April 39, 1987, referred the matter to Planning Com- m1vois bmuse a mi mer of residents expresW concern receding the height of the wall aW mNb toed for constriction, erns the City's policy for determining the maximum Wight of such walls. In item yaara, a number of builds* permits have been issued for retaining wall and time txuabdnations over sic feet is height along rear property lines adjacent to streets. 'brio pe suits were rued without processing of height variances based on Carle Section 9770.9, which states, "the height of a fence may Le measured from either side. No por- tics�t of a retaining wall needs to be Included in determining overall height restrictim a." Thus, a 6-fout Idgh fence on top of an 8-foot high retaining wall was determined to be only a 6-lmot fence, requiring in variances. The definition of rear yard (Section 9080.137) has recently been amended to state that, "where s rear bard abuts a street it "I meet front yard recwy'prnents of the district." Thus, & dale frontage lot such as the subject lot must mairt'Ain a 15400t setback for Mictu ryes over 41 Inches high in both the front yard and the tear yard. Conditional EX (Variance) No. 87--34 is therefore required for the proposes Mall to be located at the stir property line abutting the strut. I The sub t lot fron on Ccord lane, and slopes downward in the rear to abut Westport i llrie�► � ta i Vplicants pw v;mxe to mostruct an 8 to 10 foot thigh retaining wall on the rear lines with a 4 to 6 foot high pnv' acy wall on top (see Figure 1 anvi P9 gore 2 -- orWW mW pmpowid eoaditions). Approximately 1 I feet 3 inches of the wall hoc already barn ted, *h violation of wmits issued for a 6 foot high retaining wall. At the 2cwd.of Zonins Adjustmem meeting on April 29, 1987, several neiShbortood was"as t taattffed in apposition to tha.proporal, citing among their primary ern thy: Alva height of dw wall as viewed from homes aloes Westport Drive (facing the retcltt walla). the materials used for construction, the visual change caused by the loss of tat tpord slope area, and the lack of uniformity anion similar walls that have bitconstructed in the neigt-1 -thood (nee attached minutes). The Board raawl swot Item to P1annlog Commission because they determined that there was a need R>s 6tWisht a politic regarding the construction of walls In areas where there Is a sigaifk=t gZ%de differential. RCA - July 30, 1937 -3- (8575d) r' Qp sty►3 1987 tM P%Mft Commission adoated Roolution No. 1351 establishing ' 1�t,�rlt for Row lkwk 'Walls on Double Frontep Lots in Huntington Harbow" (fts attar. Tha raeolution allows for two alternstives, both of which require a tdrp hr beck the street when retarinft wall/block wall combinations exceed six feet Altermave A calls for a twos-tiered gall with one planter area, and Althetrlth►tr R for a three-tierd wall with two plater areas (see Flom 3 and 4). loth rris altetlras sbo rnqutre a S foot by 5 foot tree well cut-out every 60 feet (i per �xat t pwW line, and allow for additional height u need with materials pswrga iEt t"M or glow. At tbo JOW 169 19 7 a numbrt of ruldenu testified in opposition to the walls as dw q out, and alto in apositbo to the altmatives pramted in No. 138 L The appellats sutes in their sppesl letter dated Jum 24t 19279 that tbeir request is to preclude mW stalls at the rear property line of a double frontage lot. TIO welia cite t t and cotruction matey Pals, lass of greenbelt area, Is r--d rAW loveU, � ns werim of property values as their basis for apposition. 'u S:1, '1e ism 1 Pea is exempt Class 3 Section 15303 and Clam 5 Section 15303 from the Of the California FaWrrxuaental Quality Act. r Not available YJXA.- ACM The City Council may take one of the following Altertrative Actions. 1. Appr we Coastal Development Permit No. 87--12 and Conditional Exception No. 87-M in e►ccor+dance with Resolution No. 1331, based on the rollowinS findings and ooedhtions of approval: FOR APPBWAL COMAL QEYFLQphIMI ]!ERA XQ- 12-12: L na retahft wralllbl watt embination conforms with the plans, policies, requinsments and standards of the Coastal Element of the General Plan. 3. 1U contal development permit is consistent with the CZ suffix zoning require- M the R1 Zoning District, as well as other~provisions of the Huntington Beach Ckd1nawe Code applicable to the property, because a setback variance has been 3r 'Iris roftidft wall/block Mall combination conforms wi•,,h the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act because it does ,trot bhoek access to or views of the coast. RCA -- July 209 1 M -4- (8575d) 11 y� . ;A f I �1 1, Us sits ow &W alwafto dived and dated April ;, 1987s sMII be revised to 0 WOm with h staff or .s remmxmdefta, in accordance with Il> lutian No. 1381, 2. All c,anditioas of Conditladal Exceptive No. FINU dell apply. I. Room of l cW=mstawes appilicoble to the subject pr*", iWladit size, r locetitrn lap' rldinpr gy ",the strict applicatim of the Zonft C and d r+r►et the =cal p of privileges dyadby otlmrPMOWt �i in the victy under zone classifications. Tier subject Pr" is a I-Ar ible fhmtap lot with a significant grade differential. Z. Ito g#raatistg aE a ow, I excgW,a t is necessary in order to preserve the of we or more rnebatantial property rights. A retaining wall/block wall trot► over six feet in height is imessbry to ensure privacy, due to the slvVe In dw rrw of the lot. 3. The granting of Conditional Exception(Variance) No. 87-34 will not be materially detrimental to dw pO:lc welfare, or inWous to property ii the same zone clan- s$rmtlaw. The Nall will step back from the street level and will incorporate a phiMr am. 4. The &tasting of the conditional exception will not adversely affect the General plan of the City of Huntington 3mch. CCHDt?` MS OF ARZR►ML -..Q2HD ONAL EXCEP'I'IOIV &CE) NO, 87-34: I. The site plan and elevaticin received and dated April 7, 19670 shall be revised to caefom with staff`5 recomme wlattorm, In accordance with lkpsoiution No. 1391, Alteertmti" A or H. Z, All budWft such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, s �d other aurpLa or unusable metetialt be dirpceed of at ai: cif!- site facility equl.pad to handle them. $. The 4mlopment slrarlt comply with all applicable provisiora of the Ordinance Code, b't lkft IXVWioo, and Fire MpaMrtment. metal Development permit No. 87-1 Z and Conditional Exception No. 87--34 based on the following tint hW: MMU !COASTAh DE NI F1�.,..BM.11L,..A2_-12* 1. The p mpoml wall is not consistent with the CZ suffix zonh* mquirements, the itl Zonbg Distr ct$ as well as other provisions of the Huntington Reach Ordbumce Code a�arable to then .rty bwattse it don not er form with the 151 setback required the rear of a duble frontap lot. N •�o UA - July 30, 1987 - - (8S759 ir•.u� WaJ ! 4 , ,. n'� T •M'��1`YhM1+ 'I I n � ,,{{ "\ .t, t,.• � � .,.. M� 't. K NI .J ' ,. tik,•x:�� \J�,d7i11}�11kr.�I�Y,',N'-�nn.�IF`'.`•.. �t . .ef�, ti. T �1�.0.' ...r�,. .. ;a Of. „•, r 1 " ! Y 11 dw can bar f11 V Mve'l 9W within felt iw atoblioW �ft =aft= y exception it not teary f tba preaer`rsttoe of , t M1 to the nor, itw comparatively law size allows for 1096 Wit "I be detrlmentNl to the value of in ft v!clty. PIP VA mr so*uk is rat compatible with ietbacb eatabli"d for 'ts Mt• maw tIt dated dune 240 1987 3. Arn Mop 3. pipmft CommWm Staff Rapat darted .tune 16g 1987 L • T . 11 . ' 1 I RCA J* 20,1 1987 -6- (857Sd) 01 -10-ja oleo 7 -19 gem � � i +�' � �• ', / yll` Mom/ I _- - v A �•� ` _ _ g_ -- VL% t. cam- R 3 R2 R2 _ -Gtiw� most all FM c. ir Lid rlcr C C2 E , rr a lu t! i • •< R3RSf R3 R cs R3 M-CZ a WR-Cl-FPZ -ems - - ftl � �are f R!C?i -C7 cz •Y G.� flli�C R ~ � � a*c� � i IF.C? � t�'•- 1 RI-CZ R RI-CZ .� - Rf-Cz F -O • „E Wadt�R A� CE 67-0� cof ep Oilft rm MUM JL t*4QTQW blACN ftAN"40 Q i� • I ` R rLANNIWC IMISSION DECISION BY RESVOI&S OF WESTPORT DRIVE �. We arcs brinliurg thia' 'App9al to the City Council for reversal of a decision Arch wa i passed by the Planning Commission on June 16, 1987 ra861r,dinz the yetaipin# walls hui 1 t on Concord Dr. by Mr . and Mrs . Mismel C 411a and Mt. and firs . Arthur Ascolesi end facing residattts of Westp�ott fir. ' We 'fael that the Planning Commission did not address ;he jp�e�pific proolemp that face us because of their decision to ac-• oipt,'��Iti':jjl$P1 ketaltelug wall (with conditions ) . ' w We a*e cilft*lw that the construction of the 12 ' cement block wall over ", tb ' p� fit:• . sdlt as an set of blatant disregard for both the ra- +rts'#I it t b ��pg code abd th eit neighbo" ' rights to an at- tractive etAiirb�jaeftt and protected property values. Additional reasons fog our appeal- ste as fol lows : 1 s t issued ,for b' stall �+wRI. M a) guilder disregarded limit and went up to 12 ' in order to r-- level tote wall with their backyards . We feel this was an ,- ac't of d citption. b) Et ou h ceahrnt blocks were delivered for a 12 ' well.. Tho bUtl& did not groat over 8 ' wall in anticipation that the 121 4al l would ha%ft to be shortened to 81 , - another act of dssobpC t•an. City inspector erred in signing it off at 8 ' when only a 6 ' permit was issued. • As stated on page 4 of the Staff Report to the Planning `%i m»ission dated June 16 , 1987, "Staff -�mamber, r • tAura,. Phillips ' .•tp�orted that the applicants obtained build- ing permits to- t�uild a 6 ' hi retaining wall; however, the wall was constructed higher than 61 . " After the inspect- iort, the wall continued growing to 121 . 2. t�i ta�wlls nat built to code - (Safety Factors) �P�YIi� ..4 lls n Wl In 1�1�/i..� �lllr•1.. , a) 'The 121 gall rear not built to City Standards for retaining 1*11s•. As stated bK Virgil Sistanick, a ragi,stered profes-- sional engineers " e foundation as built, does not conform ' even to the requirements of a 7' reataining ,call . " b) City at risk in case of even a minor earthquake with this * arngwallpassedbytheCity6 Irig).evooad-Newport Fault goes right through Westport Dr.we are even more at risk. i Afttsion at the Planning Commission Meeting �1w�`�r1�4�+.\III y.11A ��\�.�R AI1 Yr�.�� ' I■ II�IrJIrYili ,- a) Cotsmiasiorters were not aware of the building codes, safety standards and unique circumstances of our streets (Westport Dr. and R.oundhill Dr. ) where the sloping, terraced property a* .F 1 aw .}i71, ObN J4"��+i F lt "4i`.iw. . .'} `` 1i; M. `•Y + repraiented our greenbelt in lieu of a i►et-back of lawns , b) gy their unfair vote we lost the original- concept of a 15' ust-back for those lots . � >M . -�,- •. - �rg',upsUboly coofte blodko �res ng '; �► � Ville or prison wall 41, 0 :swe to the c::r :- gibing st aet an alley- j d) L040, a.9 veantwlt OL* An i1m cease, of :UOi-Ile uVil'01 ;t ail ) PrOpgtt, )(aloes a t aV'pd ; the,.,value of our, homes is alb , i�oot ►t}.�t�' .t�e.� , ply.. Meyer hrt'� the same �rieltle `i�a�,�i VITI. ;t)r 0 •41,, !:he hideous wal'lee': .Real -46t4t'e brokers ha , ' .r, r' told us that we , are 'affected, by," the existanc• and aica4' *. th4 retaining walls. , Hr. and. Macs Ascglesi � y er�d ,�. . a 1�,o , b►ave enter► � � ► �C ;Oropsrt y `' � t to i rneighi;'Iks" expense. Who ie going a:o -gvdrantee that land " acAping, ate, prints will fft-,ever cover the cement block walls? 5, What we MA' , WA ! .•a...�r w•r.r (�rw i e) Tea dawn the walls (which are illegal at best ) and restore the, slope to the original condition of a terraced greenbelt . ' 0) . cause : the walls were illeggally built end do not comply to 06, .they should be .ordered to be removed . � ,lr firaeit Wing, slumpstone. volls , should die built to replace ,�jr1a' . , atAii. fo Cos witty the'. legal -sev-back %nd lagal tor, 1 i4:4 . Retalrring walla should not be allowed. groat said i-a , his "The. Mending Wall", "Good walls make � We foal that bad walls diminish us all r _ lt 9'... . .. ` J ` ems. Charles, Chi kholm, 16901 Westport Dr. fir` � Jaft:•'gtillsan� 16911 Westport Dr. ,t Sladmicks 16921 •ftdtppdrt Dr. • "s,. Arthur deHerse, 16941 . Westport ' br. Russel Spears 16951 Westport Dr. r" * rgsret Bromberg, . 16471 Westport Dr. > Cittuitl 169$1 Westport I?r. N1r- , hll�V�e C•r'r1+r 'ks'h CSares5, r ang krs . Al Geiger, 17001 Westport Dr. Jot! r �} I L-Vton beach day*10pFft, Aq$orvIces department STAf EPOR TO I; Planning Commission FROM: Development soxvices DAM. June 16 , 1987 SUBJECT: COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERNI T NO, 8 7--12 IN CONJUNCTION WITH CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO. 87 -34 AzP1JrJkW Miguel and Sonja Cuello PATE Acc��: $: 16951 Concord Lane April 7, 1987 Huntington beach, CK 91649 To pereait the constructionji' P$dCESSY�IQ 1�ATE of a retaining wall over Waived by applicant six feet (61 ) in height for the purpose cf retaining ,ZQIM: Ill.-CZ (Low Vensity more than 100 cubic yards Residential District- of material, and to permit Coastal Zone) a wall to encroach into t the required 15 ' setback nENLRAL PLAN: Lost wnrisity . Residential on.: 16951 Concord Lena (west side of Concord Lane EXIST09 USE: Singlet approximately 200 feet family dwelling south of Dav"nport Drive) MM SIZE: $120 a-quare ft . 1.0 E� �lCl'YOi�: Approver Coastal Development Permit No . 87-12 and Conditional Exception (variance) No. 87-34 as modified by staff in accordance with Resolution no. 1361 based on the findings and coLditions of approval outlined in this report . Coastal Development Permit No . 67-12 is a request to permit the Construction of a retaining wall/block-wall combination 11 feet 4 inches in height along the rear of a double frontage lot, for the purpose of retaining more than 100 cubic yards of fill material . Coaditional Zzcsption (Variances) No. 87-34 is to permit the subject well to encroach into the 15 foot setback that in required when a teat yard abuts a street. These itw%u were continued frook the May i9• 1987 Planning Commission suing at the aprlioant 's request. Board of storing Adiustmernts, at thoir meeting of April 29, 19878 "dab it reterasr*d than matter to Planning Commission because a number of residents expressed concern regarding the height of the wall and mattrissalssss used for construction, and the Ci.ty ' s policy For deterssaininq the maximum height of such walls . 3.a► z.ii .I 1 .' 1�.. D --rj ERAL PLAN DE.SIGi 'IONS : GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION : Low Density Residential ZONE: R1-CZ ( Single! Family Rejidential-•Coastal Zone) LAND USE: Single family residences The proposed project is exempt Class 3 Section 15303 and Mass 5 Section 15305 from the provisions of the Califdrnia Environmental Quality Act . The wall in quesssatign is located within the coastal zone boundaries . Prior to any action on Conditional Exception No . 87-34 , it is necessary for the Planning Comsmi--pion to review and act: can the coastal development permit . The coastal development permit may be approved only after it has been found to be in conformance with the Coastal Element of the General Plan by making the following findings : (a) L - that the pzoJect proposed by the coastal development pess:tisit application conforms with the plans , policies , requirements ind standards of the Coastal Element; (b) Zoning ,gegglAt,ions - that the coastal development permit application is consistent with the CZ suffix, the base zoning district or specific plan, as well an other provisions of the Huntington ®each Ordinance Code applicable to the property; (c) AdIkUuate Service& - that the development can be provided with inf rant ructure in a manner consistent with the C- LUP ; (d) CMIJEorgla ,Cog atal ACt - that the development conforms with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act . In t eat years, a number of building permits hove bees!, iasaued for rota log erall ass'>,d fence cossasabination$ over six feet in height along root property, lines adjacent to streets . That* permits were issued Pea, , •' ' Tuff Mitt •- 6/16/87 ( 6360d) k ' ,� ; ... •Al C E . w •t ' without procassing of height variances based on Cade Section 9770 . 9 , which status, Otte height of a fence may be measured from dither side. Po portion of a retaining Mail needs to '-► included in detexulain►7 overall height rerstrictiona ." Thus, a 6-foot high fence on top of an 8-foot high retaining wall was determined to be only a 6-foot fence, requiring no variances . The definition of rear yard (Section 9080 . 137) has recently been amended to state that, "where a rear bard abuts a street it shall meet front yard requirements of the district . " Thus , a double frontage lot such as the subject lot must maintain a 16--Foot setback for structures over 43 inches high in both the front yard and the rear yard . conditional Exception (Variance) No . 87-34 •is therefore required' for the proposed wall to be located on the rear property line abuttiing the street . The subject lot fronts on Concond Lane, and slopes downward in the rear to abut Westport .),rive . The applicants propose to construct an 8 to 14 foot high retaining wall on the rear property line, with a a to 6 foot high privacy wall on top (see Figure 1 and Figure 2 - original and proposed conditions) . Approximately 11 feet ? inches of the wal.'. has already been constructed , in violation of permits issued for a 6 foot high retaining wall . At the Board of Zening Adjustments meeting on April 29 , 1987, several neighborhood residents testified in opposition to they proposal , citing among their primary concerns the excessive height of the wall as viewed from homes along Wastpn:t Drive (facing the � retaining walls) , the materials uaed for construction, the visual change caused by the loss of landscaped slope area , and the lack of uniformity among similar walls that have previously been constructed in the neighborhood (see: attached minutes) . The hoard re3feirrpd the item to Planning Commission because they determined that there was a need to establish a policy regarding the; construction of walls in areas where there is a significant grade; differential . On May 8, 1987o the planning Commission adapted Resolution No . 1381 establishing "Design Criteria for Rear block Walls on Double Frontage Lots In Huntington Harbour" (see attached) . The resolution *flows for two alternatives, both of which require a �;tepping back from the street when retaining wall/block wall combination3 exceed cis feet in height. Alternative h calls for a two-tiered wall with out planter area, and Alternative B for a three-tiered wall with two Planter areas (sere Figures 3 and 4) . Both alternatives also require e S foot by B foot tree well cut-out every 60 feet ( 1 ppr property) at the property Line, and allow for additional height as needed with Astetials such as wrought iron or glass . staff. raeom"Ads that the PIS.-Aning Coeraission approve coastal s Development permit So. 87-12 and Conditionbl Etcepticra Ill . 87-34 an Wdlfiesd by staff in accordance with Resolution No . 1361 based on khe following findings and conditions of approval . r dtaff " art - 6/16/67- -3•- (8360d) { KV0, v NJ1MI105 EON A-PROIZAL COASMNN PZRMIT NO B7 11. 1. The retaivi.ng wall/block wall combination conforms w{.th the plsns , policies , requirements and standards of the Coastal Blomnt of the General plan. 3. The roasted development permit is consistent with the CZ suffix zonings requirements , the R1 toning district, as well as other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code applicable to the property, because a setback variance has been granted . 3 . The retaining wall/block wall combination. conforms with the public accaus and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act because it does not 'block access to or mews of the coast . 1 . The site plan and elevation., received and dated April 7, 1.487 " shall be reviled to conform with staff ' s recommendations, in accordance with Resolution No . 1381 , Alternative A or B. ' a . All cu,..ditions of Conditional Exception No . A7--34 shall apply. fiX�NGl Z4EL. PE .'So .l'��IT�I�NA �� TY�N. �°► I # ES ti0 82-31 : 1. Because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size, shaper, topography, location or surroundings ,, the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zones Classifications . The subject property is a double frontage lot with a significant grader differential . I 7 . The granting of a conditional exception is necessary in order � t,o preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. A retaining gall/block mall combination over six feet in height is necessary to ensure privacy, due to the slope iii the rear of the , lot . 3 . That granting of Conditional Exceptior (Veriance) No . 67-34 will not be materially deetrimbntal to the public welfare, or in urious to property in the same zone classifications . Thewall will step back from the street level and will incorporates a plontew area . - 4. The granting of the conditional exception will not adversely affect the General plan of the City, of Huntington Beach. 1. The site plan and elevations received and dated April 7, 1987, shall be revised to conform with staf f 'a recommendations,endations, in &cebrdance with Resolution Be. 1361, Alternative A or B. $taft ftpoct 6/16/97 -s- (8360d) r� 2 . All building spoils , such as unusable lumber , wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material , shall be disposed of at An i off-site facility equipped to handles theca. 3 . The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code , Building Division, and Fire Department . 11 . 0 ALJ2RtJATrVX A IQN : The Planning Commission may: (1 ) Approve Coastal tevelopment Permit No . 87-12 and Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 87-34 as proposed by the applicant ' s plans , based on findings and conditions of approval . (2) Deny Coastal Development Permit No. 87-13 and Conditional Exception (Variance) No . 87-34 Lased on the following findings . JJIgQIJJGr2 rQJ& " - COHDITrQUALL EXCEPIYON SQ. 67-34 : 1 . Since the subject property can be fully developed within ' regular established setbacks , such a conditional exception is not necessary. for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights . 2. The subject property was legally subdivided and developed in a mariner consistent with applicable zoning laws . 3 . Encroachment into the required setback is not compatiLle with setbacks established for properties in the vicinitIr and would I constitute a special privilege inconsistent with limitations upgn these properties . 4 . The proposed structure will not be compatible with adjacent properties to the west . ZNUINGS =a DENIAL - COAST&_Q LQEMNT...PE J: __NQ- 8 -12 1 . The wall does rat conform with the plans, policies , requirements and standards of the Coastal Element of the General flan because it does not conform to Code . 2 . The coastal development permit is not consistent with the 91 zoning district because the wall -,-.ctoaches into the minimum required 13 foot front yard setbse:/t. - staff ]Adport _ 6/16/67 5- �A3frOd a �T 1a Arua ri*p 2. 'Figure* 1 *nd 2 (original and proposed condition) 3 . Minutes of the April 29 , 1997 BZA meeting 4 . Rasolutiov No. 1381 5. Figures 3 and 4 (staff, alternatives) 6 . Ots2f report dated May 5, 1987 7. Staff report dated Wap 19 , 1987 8 . 3uilding permit for 6 foot high retaining wall I a pow it's ti r {: Ift C f—R R 3 R2 R2 RC R2 i fJtI ba . ` RI « "` 1..�.`' �' R2 f IR2 R2,-,� ,�r • .t r R • t1E _ �l lr Y Mi« l C4-C yI - ,.A ... iC� it _ � . WNW •. a � .-- - r C` ' r 11 to L cc } � am RIDS WR-CZ-FP2 a cr Fr N v� c / Rl c7 .«p..s.ec�K.►. i. C./ ! -Rt-C1 . R,-C� Ri Ricz AM ►WA�'JER — AyE ('RI-C2 _ � Rl-Ci '�.+ 6 E i " I HUNTINIGTON MACH PtANNINICs g)FVISioN Ill..rsl��°t�cN w ISM, 111I till=- 111l h 1MWO.now i IWA, At . — Z1 =.=r1 ..,.... ,. 14 III lll-AW-MIA IAJ c i I f l waft V'OL 0 ..... �r s 7 . All. building spo: �- such as unusable lumbe re, pipe, and other surplus or us. able materials shall be p� os d of at an off-site facility equipped to handle them. AYES : Evans s Godfrey, Kreeq ^ , Poes Smith NOES - None AUNT: yona T101I� 12 A S JED C0AST'A1 DE1iEL0 MENT k1tMr T NO. a 7-,11 &D*1�n-LL..,Juza and Art ur ,_ sco1es1 A request to permit- construction of a retaining wall over six feet ( 61 ) in height for the purpose of retaining more than 100 cubic yards of material . The subject property is located at 16931 Concord (west side of Concord Lane approximately 140 feet Sough of Davenport Drive) . This request: is covered by Categorical Exemption , Class 3 and ,Class 5 , California Env ronmental Quality Act , 1986 . Les Evans au est9d - that Coa.tal Development permit No . 87--11 and g9 P No . 01-12 be considered at the ,game time due to the request for the wall l)ee#.ng identical as the properties are adjoining . ` The. applicants were present and agreed to the suggestion . COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 87-12 Aogliagab: Miau121 and agnia CoSlIg A request to permit construction of a retaining wall over six feet (61 ) in height for the: purpose of retaining more than 100 cubic yards of material.. The subject property is located at 16951 Concorn (west side of Concord Lane approximately 200 feet South of Davenport Drive . This request is covereeel by Categorical Exemption, Class 3 and Class 5 , California Environrhental Quality Act, 1986 . Staff member, Laura Phillips , reported that the applicants; obtained building permits tv lbui 'ld a 64 high retaining wall ; however , the wall was constructed higher than 6 ' . When a complaint was filed with the City, the' work was stopped. She said that staff had � received numerous telephone cells from residents objecting to the height of the wall and the lack of uniformity. The issue that has come up effects other walls in the Harbor and in the City; theereeEoree, staff iS attempting to establish a standard for wails whe.re there are slopearn . ...3twEf -reco,rgraeended the Boacd to bpean' trees r public hearing, heat the public testimony and contxnuee to allow steeff time to do further research. Ike) �dllidj -4- 4/29/87 - 97.A Based membo Godf rey� ��ed that the building � " t clearly Stated a sir (6) foot wall onAd to be allowed . The wair"'ias engineered and approved for eight ( 6) feat but the applicant was aware of Plannings cencarn for any wall in excess of sit ( 6 ) feet . The applicant further ezceuded even the eight ( 8) foot wall by another four ( 4 ) feet ; thereby compounding the violation . Hoard member Smith felt that the requests probably would end up at the Planning Commission and recommended the items be referred directly to the Planning Commission . f The public hearing was opened . applicant for CDP 7�► The pp 8 11 , June Ascolesi , was present and spoke in support of the requests . She said they were told by the City that they could build an 8 ' retaining wail atd the measurement would be taken from the inside of their property . The wall was inspected and approved by City inspectors three t'mes at the 8 ` level . She went on to say that when the contractor finished the S ' wall , he advised they could go higher because of the inside measurem€;it . They did not coma back to the City for approval and she realized that was a mistake . She also said the Huntington Harbor Hotieowners Association and the neighbors had given approval for the construction of ,the wall . t The applicant for CDP 87-12 , Miguel Coella , was present and spoke in support of the requests . Ruth Swift , 17089 Westport Drive , spoke in support of the requests . She said the wall would look very nice when completed with the vines that were planned to cascade over the wall . John Stillman , 16911 Westport Drive , spoke in opposition of the requests . Mr. . Stillman ' s home is directly across the street from that gall . He said lie had signed on agreement prepared by the; topiicants to build a slumpstone not a plain concrete wall . He requested that the items be referred to the Planning Commission and that a policy decision be made . Russel Spears , 16991 Westport , sl.oke in opposition of the requests . He said the wail is poorly built and that it would bring down the property value in the neigl*-orhood . Al Geiger , 17001 Westport , donated his time to Mr . Sitnonick. Simonick, 16921 Westport Drive, spoke in opposition of the requests . He said Le was oppos6d to the height and said the gall does not conform with the Cityr ' s standards . Chuck Chisholm, 16901 Westport , spoke in opposition of the requests. He said the wall is not aset:hetiely appealing . He was comearned if there were~ aVea;:thquike; the wall would fall half way across the street , 4!29/07 DZA z y ..N& Shttley de Maras , 16y istp ;;ort Drive, spoke sr position of - the - requests . She also 9%, `' ,he value of the homes •.�,1.� be decreased tMCauae It looks like a prison wall . tlfriode Geiger , 17001 Westport Drive , spoke in oppcsition of the requests . She had not given approval to the applicants for the construction. Sha was concerned because if this type of wall was permitted to continue , he. property could face a 20 foot wall . D . J . Chisholm, 16901 Westport Drive , spoke_ in opposition of the requests . Requested that something be done to prevent walls over six feet . Margaret Bromberg , 16971 Westport Drive , spoke in opposition of the requests . She way concerned that other residents might. want to build similar walls which would decrease property value , Ruth Swift , 17089 Westport drive , spoke in support of the requests . She said the wall is not unsightly . Arthur Ascol931 , applicant, spoke in support of the requests . Joyce Goldenson, 16831 Haruna Lane , a Huntington Beach Realtor , spoke in opposition of the request . S, 'e said the concrate and the haight would decrease property value in the area . Russel Spears , 16951 Westport , spoke in opposition of the requests . He indicated that he had not signed the agreement for the construction . He went on to �kay that the street was beautiful before construction of the wall but nov, look3 like an alley . June kscolesi , applicant, reported that the concrete type wall was chosen because she had been advi-ied that concrete was the strongest typer of wall . Sae said the wall , when completed , would be covered with greenery and would be beautiful . Arthur de Heras , 16941 Westport Drive , spoke in opposition of the requests . Ruby Devin, 3561 Aquarius Drive , spoke in support of tLe requests . She said the wall is attractive . There were no other persons to speak for or against the requests and Beard discussion began with the public hearing left open . The Board discussed a reed for a city-wide policy on how future walls are going to be built where there are slopes . r . 4 i • 1 ago 4 A N6 loll WAS MADF. 8f .. i-H AND SECOND BY GOD*-XE CCN'1°sl ux COASTAL VXV="MHT PERMITS NO . 8 7-11 AND 4 7-12 TO THE ME... I NG OF KAY 131 1487, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE; AYE'S : Godfrey, Smith NOR-S : Evans , Krejci , Poe , ASSENT'.* Norte l - MOTION WAS MADE BY EVANS AND ,SECOND BY GODFREY TO DENY CO&STXL 'AF IELOPMENT PERMITS NO . 8 7-11 AND 87-1 Z , BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: A`US : Evans , Godfrey, 11015: Krejci , Poe , Smith ASIEDIT: Nona JT, JJ. FAILED A NOTION WA5 MADE BY SMITH AND SECOND BY POE TO REFER COASTAL. DEVEIOPMEFT PERMITS NO . 87--11 AND 87-12 TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION# BY THE FO'JLOWI NG VOTE : AYE : Evans , Krc jci , Poe , Smith, l Was: Godfrey ABSENT: Norte �lO�'TIO�l�pAS„�„ED C"STAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 87-13 Aglicant ; &a11v .RXJ.Q X request to Pa rmi t construction of a single f. ami l; dw ing . The subject propv:ty is located at 17191 Marina View P e (West side of Marina View place approximately 200 Feet Souch Warner Avenue) . This vegliast is covered by Categorical E . ption , Class 3 , California Environmental QuAl,ity Act$ 86 . Staff member , Laura Phillips, re rted that the applicant has conformed to all requirements the zoning code , view corridor and ' a6tbac:k requirements . 5taf recommended approval with conditions to the Board. The public gearing opened and the applicant , Sally Price, was prexent6 She aai hhquirem-ents . hood been warkin4 with staff veYy diligently to meet all the ity That* were othat persons to speak for or against the project and the publ !tearing was closed. �d#1Sd1 -7- 4/29/87 9ZA 1 RFSOLUVOR NO. 1381 A RESCI" T on OF IME PL,AMNING COMISSION OF THE CITY OF K[MINGTON BEACH ESTABLISHING THE DE31GN CRITERIA FOR REAR RLOCK WAr LS ON DOUBLE FRONTAGE LOTS IN HUNTINGTON qARBOUR WHEREAS # there are double frontage lots within the Huntington Harbour area of the City where a significant grade differential nawesssitatas construction of retaining wall and fence combinations over six feet in height , within the rear yard setback adjoining a public street , and WHEREAS, the Planning Coarmissicn has found that currently permitted retaining wall and Fence combinations over six feet in height are aesthetically undesirable , and WHEREAS , the purpose for which the retaining wall~ are ,intended can be attained in a manner that is nompatible and harmonious with surrounding land uses , NOW, TMEFORE, BE IT RESnLV'Z'D , that the Planning Commission states that Staff Alternative A and H per attacrment shall be the standard for construction of retaining wall and fence combinations over six feet in height in the Year yard setback adjr.ining a public street . PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Huntington Beach, California , on the 5th day of May, 1957, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Silva, Schumacher , Higgins , fierce , Leipzig , Summerell , Livengood NAM None ABSZI T: Fyne ABSTAIN: None AT=ST: Mass N. Palino Secretary planning Commission Chdirman • . ;.. e#f Report - 5t1.l87 •ii• �.v.�. lw+..�r+l�.wla►..�•++rw�Yr..�ii�i ..w.w...ir��.r�...w .�.www..r ww•.�!•Ww�.... •�.Y.�.i ...YtiwuiFKi�.wi��w.. Pl .FI•l M....�. b i 1 �1 i i I 1 I I a��wa I1,111P i w w ... h &06 .. yg�� ;i Ji ' a tX ngtoti beech devolopmei. . Wimrvi ces department t EPORT...�� TO Planning CvTirriss4an Fite(; Development saj vices Lu1't'Z: may S , 1987 SUBJECT; REAR BLOCK WALLS OIL DOUHLE MONTAGE LOTS IN HUNTINGTON HARBOUR Tn recent years, a • number of building permits have been issued for retaining wall and fence combinations over six feet in height along rear property lines adjacent to streets . These permits were ii!.,iued without processing of conditional exceptions ( variances) based on Code Section 9770 . 9 . which sti.tes , "The height of a fence may be measured from either side . No portion of a retaining wall needs to be included in determining overall height restrictions . " Thus , a 6 foot high fence on top of. an 8 foot high retaining wall was determined to be only a 6 Boot fence, requiring no special permits . The recent construction of a retaining wall/block wall combination on two lots along Concord Lane in the Huntington Harbour area has evoked some controversy regarding this code interpretation . The lots in question are through lots , which front on Concord Lane and slop" downward in the rear to abut Westport thrive ( see Figure 1) . The homeowners wish to construct 8 foot to 10 foot high retaining galls on the rear property lire , with d toot to 6 foot high privacy walls on top (see Figure 2) . Neighborhood residents are concerned about tho excessive height of the walls as viewed from homes along Westport Drive ( facing the. retaining walls ) , the materials used for construction , the 0-sual change caused by the loss of the landscaped slope area , and the lack of uniformity ammo similar wal1w that have previously been. constructed in the nt i q hbo yrhood . Staff is submitting, For the Planning Commission ' s consideration, two alternative designs for retaining wall and fence combinations that will address these concerns . Staff Alternatives A allows for an initial six foot high retaining wall at the property line , topped by a 5 toot wide planter area steppi.n►y back from the back of side wall . Another ti,x foot high section of retaining wall could, then be placed It the rest of the planter (seen Figure 3) . Staff Alt rnative a also allows for an initial 6 foot high Y i A•1f M J • IF .•*.., - ret O ninq wall at the property lint but stepped back with two plonterx ane- two additional tier3 of retaining wall ( see Figures 4) . ZSCA layout would also require a 5 ' z 5 ' tree well cut- out every 60 ° (one per property) at the property line . Bath alternati, )es proride visual rel.iox from the street level , and vould allow for planting of shrubs and vines . Should additional f6nco height be required on tap of the highest tier , materials SuCZ1 4s glass or wrought iron could A.,e utilized and should not be wre than 50% solid . JW:LP : gbm MOMM 1 . Draft Resolution 2 . Figures l S 3 3 . Figures 3 & 4 I , I i &oleo --- � i SV •fit r T m�r r i I i ' lington beach derveiepme ' ervices department ' STAf EpokT - TOO Planning Commission FROM: Development Services DATE: May 19 , 1987 SUBJECT : COASTAL D LOPI XNT PERXI`i NO. 87- 11 IN CONXUlICTION � WITH CONDITIUNXL EXCEPTION (VARIANCE) NO . 87-33 UPLlCAR T/ June and Arthur AScolez i DATA; ACCEPT : Lg: 16931 Concord wane H%:ntington Beach , CA, 92649 April 7, 1987 To permit the construction MAjiDATot y 2RQCE55IN0 DATE of a retaining wall ovtr siz feet ( 6 ' ) in height for Waived by applicant the purpoae of retaining more than 100 cubic yardu of material , and to Permit ZQNFO: RI-CZ (Low Density a Wall to encroach i.1ta Residential Distzict the iequirsd 15 ' setback Coastal. 'Lone) yQ,CATION : 16931 Concord Lane (west 99NERAId PLAN : side of Concord Lane Low Density Residential approximately 140 feet south of Davenport Drive) 1 LOT glu : 7935 square ft . &USj:1NQ LIU: Single Family Dwelling On April 29 , 1987 , the Board of Zoning Adjustmez:ts referred the above-referenced items to the Planning Commission meeting of May 19 , 1987 . The applicant has r~ quested that Coastal Development ' Permit No . 87-11 and Conditional E=pption No . 87-33 be c+ontinuad to the JUne 2, 1987 Planning Commission meeting . The appl!cant has also waived the mandatory processing date . Staff recommen6a the Planning Commission open the public dear' =,g and Continue Coastal Development Permit No . 87-11 and Conditional Zzdeption No . 07--33 tomJum 4, 1982 . .. 1• Utter from applicant dated May 4 v 1987 imp 9b -7 Sal R r 1 A•IY `- • , 10, 177 �r•k i t ?S' era 44V� 1 C too "'1 1 May 4j, 1987 Kiss ,.,aura Phillirar City of Huntington Beach . Caliiorni& C/O woa°►ttal Davelamant Permit No . 877-12 I Dear Hiss Phillips: ` As per our tel.ephonre conver. satioo of this afternoon, this well confirm my request to postpone the Coar•tal T)ev>elopusnt permric No, 87w12 hearing scheduled by the Planning Commission For the May 19. 1987 mee_ing. We ate requestLng a postponement for the following meeting on June 2, 1987. This request is dta to a very important business meeting I will have to a t t ind .in Toronto, Canada the week of Kay 18 and which I t,rtve not been able to rescaedulce . if there are any conflicts concerning this request , please Iet us know. -= adso 404t x- r4wdawwy Sincexe lye LV - % M. A. Coello W151 C.olncor-i Lana Huntingtop Rarbeur. CA 92649 � d t t trC - r - �✓ l / 7 dy w Y 1 womb BUILDING PERMIT AppliWO to fill in area within heavy lines only. • CITY OF HUWnMGT6IN BEACH DEPARTMENT OF S E> DEVIFLU MEt1rT t3OVICU P.a..Cx RXIA �4 l L04 NO � ��✓ troct NC �L, �"� B►cK� No �khA� /�rd¢Few � Mr �.11� P1iA C,fMCM NO Now e�i r x Cl L G �,.,,C e. e- �c uDanC`y( ♦77 Innd Ca.11fuCItOn Q4e L,+ad �► ,. let o Use Z" use Park'N Saf>.f:ell Resi►rreG Un 51ate bp Pletining Acl*m coulal t+fetrnt Zara M GSlrttracrfaf '—"'T'i ftd U ti+r.d FEE•t: a . r C-c L L D �,i l i P 7.J L S � ,_. ft++fr v.rfnrt ; Ir- ! r�etiraaz _ t c&�-X �1 / State L►c NO Permfl �� 1 'gon, � , CA%y U t9c No Parmrl I 7 /f UAI,1+,�i i�trar 1 fi N tP^Z/��• Ili a t:Orpetvalror+ S Arcrtrfact of Erlq•atfef lei Na Aeeetof Nu az TOUL S wo- wu..,.�..r ♦ v�.�K Aodfet+s Lit: Na - rfsrf►murfrty Ennanment _.., _........_._._ Library F" S,3 Ff ty Stara ZV Rarnarra CttafrR / t t Living Na of Na of Of" ___._..�...._ �, �1� 510fles Families Ft Yurage DeunPfron -2 r NEW v P c— ,( ' �I t l -C %f,' i Ail l�, & 1.,1_L+t.. l� .� ALTER — -- IntpWtloe Asawd ONG REPe IR Dale Inftotrtltn j"10 S{/rkln` �r Foundattar OEMOL And LOW OM V+nrettrn RELOCATE Floor 'Slats t1��Cfwtnp Door 3 Mal ) IV70 1 roue toed this appbf eltan ino apref-fd dwTi6sy ruin art►xw a►.o state laws !W*c4*i to buogatf,;cansltuWKW% Shlfathr�r9 1 I am yalydty 1"16ter110 AIM ItCaA604 U I&QJrrrd bt' the C41Y Ar �•�^•� — HU"molar buaCh and yfte stile of C41iforroa.fsf FramtnC, m 1 r Mfpr rlv ttrYe f MN r rnD LAM Or_� _.••• 1 A cerldrCalm 0 CotoWl to ION-*?sure #$UXd by the Director of In"frtel FWattprra tM Drywall $ A carldtcatR V. WOrkefa CCMnpa"SAI rl InaUrinCt f*atlad by �... an aprtutled~of.or @rtAlrrt czat r S An exact copy or 0&cftelrt Irwf@V t+r doc by hta Drfattor of the f uraf. for Ke I Cehtty that in yo Walfhance of tfte WWII hat Whrch tMa Parking PG . of a taaura I *hall opt Vow" it"prlrson in arty rrtirfnet ._..... p e1a 10 b"crtte eugat:l fo tt* yro+u" c*V pW"eaUO►l tetra of LanftcapwV nta >3111N or calrtorflla t ""WV fIW trteelatel Wider p"Woly of pe ry WWI Nis breQ" it trim &V —� WWI I vtd MR dKISIVIton WU OMMM art Ihe..�loft ��_,1 Land Live'' el MlfrfNN•r�lOtt�aCK.C.�l,fpltte At„4rtdtltorta —�� pffl"W M r. Ftrtyl If U&Ik it rw conrr+erw:ed i0o e.va from oete Of IWA of a taernlr, aY if uIL lwy I watt to abe•tdo►tid for"tore than 190 dove fMe tierrm well AVI1 104 rofo INSPECTION . r3 , v 7. 2" Publish 7 /9/87 0 iOTICS 0P PUBLIC BEAkING % l ' • I ' f APPIAL TO PLj AXNING COMMISSION APPIOVAL ! of COA82AI, DIVRLOPNINT PIRMIT 87-12 6 CONAITIONAL EXCEPTION 87-34 NOTICY, IS NEREEY CIVE9 that the HuutiuStc,n Beach City Council will hold a public heetriag In the Council Lh+s<sbex at the., 'iuntingtna Beach "ivic Cadet, 2000 Main Strut. , Huntington heacho Cal.tf, .aia , on the date and st the time indicated below to receive and convider the aratevante of all petaous wbo wish to be heard relative to the apnlicat:iou descrIbed below . DA�`�St Monday , Jul f 203 1987 TAM 7 :00 P .M . APPXLLANT: John Stillman, et al ` Bttb T: Coastal Development Permit No . 87--11 Lu conjunction with Conditional Exception ( Variance) No . 87 -34 - Appeal b,PtLTs Mig,jel Coella LOCATIONS 16951. Concord Lane (west side of Concord Lane approsrimarel,y :00 feet south of Davenport Drive ) p10108AL : To permit the construction of a retaining wall over six feet ( 61 ) in height for the purpose of retaining more than 100 cubic yards of material , and to permit a wall to encroach into the required 15 foot setback . X -UNINTAL STATUS : Eiempt Class 3 , Section 15303 and Class 5 , +A�+� Sectiaa 15.3n5 from the provisions of the California Environmental quality Act . ON ILI : A copy of the appeal is on file in the Department of Community Development , 2000 Main Street , Huntingtoo Beach , California . ALL INTERESTED PERSONS "re invited to attend said hearing and express � opinions or submit evidence fax or against the application as outlined above . All applications, exhibits, and descriptions of this proposal are On file with the Office of the City Clark , 2000 Main Street , Huntington $each , California , for inspection by *he public . - HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY COUNCIL Syt A7icla K. Wentworth City Clerk Phan@ (714) 536-5405 Dated 7/6/$.1 • y:4 r 116-333--03 170-321-01 178--322-03 Artbuir Asco.lesi rlea G. Chis,31m 315 ter E. Haentzschel 16931 Concord Ln. .a ,)01 .Westport Dr. Roundhill Dr. Runtig9ton Leach, CA 92649 Huntington boaeh, CA 92649 Huntington Reach, CA 92649 i q 178�33?-04 18. 321 -()2 178-322--04 Miguel a Sonja Coel.lo John A. Stillman Norman Chu 16951 Concord Ln.. 16911 weetpart Dr . 1.6923 Roundhill Dr. Huntington Rech, CA 92649 Huntington Reach,CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 17R--321--02 178-333-05 178-w32.1-03 178-322--05 Jams if. Hull Virgil F. S�i.�nonir;r' John S. stance 16961 Concord Ln. 1692.1 Westport hx . 16931 Roundhiil Dr. ,t Puntington Beach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 f 178-333-06 1.78-321-04 178-322-06 Robert A. Batchelor Arthur J. betteras Gorge W. Wright • 1697a. Concord Ln. 16941 Westport Dr. 16939 Roundhill Dr. P Huntington Beach, CA 97649 AuiO-ington Beach,, CA 92649 Huntington Beach. CA 92649 II 178-333-07 178- 321--05 R,Aby A. Devin David A. Sullivan Russel 1 T. Spears 3561 Aquar.f ug Ln. 4162 Windsor Dr. A69*1 �►estpvrt I3r. fluntinyton beach, CA 92649 qHuntington Beach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 178-362-07 James J . Taylor, 178--321-06 Ruth 1). Swift 16651 Phelps Ln. Robert V. Frishman 17089 Westport Dr- . Huntington Berach# CA 92649 15961 Westport Dr. Huntiton Beach, CA 92649 tfuntingtGa Beach, CA 92649 178-362-1.2 1.7$-3G2-OS Joyce Goldenson Grant: 0. Grave:tte Gerald L. Landsman 16831 Haruna Ln . 16852 $dgevater Ln. 16861 Phelps Ln. Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 178-362-11 178 -321 07 Shirley de Heras Margaret Castro Margaret Ann Bromberg 16941 Westport: dr. 16862 adgewater. Ln. 16971. Westport Dr.. Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach, ci 92649 178-10- 178-321-08 Al Geiger a Hlf'rfede Gelgei Mike R . Cimmarrusti 17001 Westport Dr. 16981 Nestport Dr. Huntington Beach, trA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 178- 362-10 178-�22-02 Margaret Bromberg Robert L. Heisler Boyd A. Johnson 16971 Westport or. 16872 Ndc.1"ater Ln. 16907 Roundhill Dr. Huntington i` 3chp CA 92649 Huntington leach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92i.49 .,. :y p ►03 J: Auchanan 174-332-02 4172 Windsor Dr. 1 titan G. Haddad funtington. Bench, CA 92649 1.011 Bedford Ln 178-333-08 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 178-333-09 178-334-07 1i8-332-03 Frank J. Hori.uchi George Gholduian Howard Gieenbatin 4192 Windsor Dr. 170:1 Neutpoxt Ur. 169ki Bedford Ln, Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Huntington B3each, CA 92649Huntington Bcact, , CA 92649 118-333-10 178-341-01 1, 78-332-04 Bert Pagtse William R. Collins 'Pi,rooz Mlaehood 4202 Windsor Dr. 1.6872 Phelps Ian, 16941 Redford Ln . Huntington Jeaeh, CA 92649 Huntington beach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 178-°323-11. 178-341-02 178--332-05 Kenneth V. Schiebe James G. Nic.kle Vera J. Tolmachoff 4212 Windsor Dr. 15862 Phelps Ln . 16951 Bedford Ln . Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 9264a Huntington Beach, A 92649 17c:-334-01 178-341.-06 178--332-06 Charles D. Kenyon Jim F. Settle Stanley G . Harris 17081 Wentpt;rt Dr. 16361 Stiles Cidr. ? 6962 Concord LN. Huntington Beach. CA 92649 Huntington Beech, CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 178-334-02 118-3.32--07 Robert 9. Cummings 178-341-07 George G. Hatson 17071 Westport Dr. Brent R. Scheerer P.C. Box 2705 Huntington Beap;h, CA 92649 16371 Stiler Cir. . Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 178-•334-03 17aw'191-08 1.78-332--08 :George 14. Smalley Michael Reynolds John P . Stevens •17061, Westport Dr. 16872 Stiles Cir. 16922 Concord Ln, Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Huntington Reach, CA 92649 i 178-341 09 17B-332 -09 178-334-04 John H. Simonton Tobenette Boltz Joseph A. Perricone 16862. Stiles Cir. 16912 Concord Ln. 17051 Westport Dr. Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 178-334 -05 176-341-15 178-332-10 Butter Perryman Milton H. Schneider Richard J. Shaffer 17041 YOut; rt Dr .. 16412 Sundancer Ln. � 16871 Morse Cir. �Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach# CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 176-334-06 178--333-01 � Daly M. 174l-362�09 Cullop Albert Newberg Joseph F. McAnif'f. 17031 Westport &t- 16871 Phelps l�tn. 16901 Concord Ln. Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach# CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA. 92649 178-332-01 Delmer 178-333-02 William A. Robert A. Batchelor • 16901 Bedford Ln Huntington Beach, CA 92649 16911 Concord Ln. Huntington Beach# CA 92649 1 1 r.j NOTICE TO CLERK TO SCHEDULE PUBLIC HEARING ITEM , 0 W TO: CITY CLERK'S OFFTLrE 13ATE : PROM: 6 ' PLEASE SCHEDULE A PURL ,C HEARING USING THE ATTALHED LEGAL NOTICE FOR THE DAY OF 1981 wok ' s are attachcd AP' s will fo' 'aw No AP s Initiated by: Planning Cmwission Planning Department Petition * Appeal . Other Adopti(..,: of Envir,onmoriial Staters (x) Has City Attorney' s Office been YES informed of forthcoming public hearing? Refer to �, Pl annir.g Department - Extension 0 for additional' information. * If agMal , please transmit exact wording to be required in the legal . 1S THIS AN APPEALABLF DEVELOPW4T (COAS T AI. DEVELOPMENT PERMIT ? YES NO ,1 t' ' I vt;'r 4 V. s�. Wnics OF IWJELIC HEARIbc L D� XMICI IS HEREB1 GIVEN that 'the Hu' nt,ipigton btiach City Counci1_.'4i1T----..___—__,_..,. hold a public heaving in the Council Chambers at the Huntington NeSCh Civic Kanter , 2000 Main Street, Hu.tington Beech, California , on the date and at the ti" indicated below to za+ceive and consider the statements of all peracons who Irish to be heard releativo to the application described below. ITS: Monday, July 20 , 1987 7 : 00 pLxI��q �: Coastal Development permit No . 87'�-12 ,in PK - -41 *A!d conjunction withCan�liti.onal Exception _r r,,., ,,,, 04,Aiv (Variance) No . 87-:34-Appeal IMAT ON." 16951 Concord Lane (west aide of Concord Leine approximately 200 feet south of Daveriport Drive) 88Q QSAL: To permit the construction of a retaining wall over six feet (6 ' ) in height for the purpose of retraining more than 100 cubic yards of material , and, to permit a wall to encroach into the required 15 foot: setback, M ROMMUL STATUS: Exempt Clans 3 , Section 15303 and Class 5, Section 15305 from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act . C1( Fri. A Copy of the-*a* ra-o%" appeal is can file in the Department of Community Development, 2000 Hain Street, Huntington Beach, California ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are inwdted to attend said hearing and }� express opinione or submit evidence for or against the application an outlined above. Ala applicati.unas exhibits and descriptions of this proponai sre on file with the Office of the City Clerk, 2PO4 Maim Straet, Huntington Beach, California, for inspection by the public. HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY COUNCIL By: Alicia N. Wentworth City Clerk Phone ( 714) 536-5405 ($503d) •fry. .. � . fi 1 r R4,t MAW 1 a . • .3080 APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION BY RESIDEZ'S OF WESTPORT DRIVE We ore bringing this appeal to the City Council for reversal of a decision 4h•ich was passed by the Planning Coniassion can June 16, 1987 regarding the retaining walls huilr_ on Ooacord Dr. by Mr . and Mrs . Miguel Coello and Mr. and Mrs . Arthur. Ascolesi and feting residents of Westport Dr. We feel that the Planning Commission dial not address the specific problems that face us because of their deeiston to ac- cept an illegal retaining wal L ( with conditions ) . We are certain that the construction of the 12 ' cement block wall over the 6 ' permit Limit was an act of blatant disregard for both the re- strictions of the building code and thet r neighbors ' rights t;-.1 an at-. tractive environment and ;protected property values . Additional reasons for our appeal are as follows : 1. Permit issued for 61 wall a ) Builder disregarded limit and went up to 12 ' in order to level the wall with their backyards . We feel this was an act of deception. 'I r� b) Enough cement blacks were delivered for a 3.2 ' wall . The builder did not grout over. 8 ' wall in anticipation that the �':: '- •? 12 ' wall would have to be shortened to 8' - another act of -I- deception. y= C tij c ) City inspector erred in signing it off a4 ' ' when only a 6 ' -- •`= permit was issued. As stated on page 4 of the Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated June 16 , 1987 , "Staff member, Laura Phillips , reported that the applicants obtained build- ing permits to build a 6 ' high retaining wall ; however, the wall was construc -id higher than 6 ' . " After the inspect- ion, the wall contini 3 gruwi.ng to 121 . 2. Retaining walls noG built o code ( Safety Factors ) a ) The 1.2 ' wall was not ,wilt to City Standards for retaining walls . As stated b, Iirgil• Simonic;k, a regititered profes- sional engineer, "T . foundation as built , does noc conform even to the require ints of a 7 ' reataining wall . " b) Pic at �. .'.sk ir", case of even a minor earthquake with this retaining wa'.i passed by the City. c) Inglewood-Newport fault goes right through Westport Dr. we are even more at risk. 3. C,Mf4si n at the Planning _Commi.ssionl"Mee_ting a) ComLesioners were not aware .of the building cedes , safety standards and unique circumstances of our streets (Westport Dr. and Roundhill Dr. ) where the sloping, terraced property F .'...+Lre w• laiLd q ul ' is, r + eliia L...,:r eku .t Llaa.d�.d•� J'n r' 01141�41, 1 ` 1 represented our greanbelt in lieu of a set--back of lawns , trees , plants , etc . b) By their unfair vote we IosC the original concept of a 15 ' set--back for those lors . 4. Appearance of walls a ) Too high b ) Material - inferior, unsightly cement blocks resembling a 12 ' garage ur pri sun wall c ) Walls built too close to the curb giving street. an alley-- like appearance d ) boss of greenbelt and an increase of noise level I e ) property valley lowered - the value of ovr homes is all important to us . We will never have the same resale value with the addition of the hideous walls . Real estate brokers have already told us that we are affected by the existence and appearance of the retaining walls . Mr. and Mrrs . Ascolesi and Mr. and Mrs . Coelto have enhanced their property at their neighbors ' expense . Who .is going to guarantee that land- scaping and vines will forever cover the cement. block walls? 5. What we want - NO MORE WALLS ! i a ) Tear dawn the walls ( which are ill.egaL at best ) and restore j the slope to the or. i.ginal condition of a terraced greenbelt . b) Because the walls were i l legal l.y built and do not comply to code , they should be ordered to be removed. c. ) Only freestanding slumpstone walls should be built to replace the grapestake fences with the legal set-back and legal height for backyards . Retaining walls should not be allowed . As Robert Frost said in his "The Mending Wail ", "Good walls make good neighbors" . We Feel that bad walls diminish us all . Mr. and Mrs . Charles Chisholm, 1.6901 Westport Dr. ----VMr. and Mars . John Stillman , 16911 Westport Dr. M r, I'- Mom`. Virgil Simonick, 16921 Westport Dr . %/Mr. and Mrs . Arthur deHeras , 16941 Westport Dr. Mr. and Mrs . Russel Spears , 16951 Westport Dr. Mrs . Mar aret Bromberg, 16971 Westport Dr. Mars. Gert Cimma%uBti , 16961 Westport Dr. 4 �� , N�.v�: C ,�n�ro►rks+� Cyr .��) Mr. and Mrs . Al Geiger, 17001 Westport Dr. .rM rft U$F BALL POINT PEN ONLY PRESS FIRMLY CASH RECEIPT ` H0N CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH P.O. RM 711 ►t JNTINGTON W-Ar-H,CnLIFCFNHr,rJW (7l4'M,-A11 CRY 1(*A1SVF%Fi-"#-,,*N Q. WL � h'�NFtf F#KJ11__._....,.._�r�irL'-C:�'L.- •! _��J�"'�-+'�� -��,.. of ADDWW- AMOUNT AWFrAj A9A.4 ACCOUNT AMOUNT TOTAL uw. f y� `O�7 NoA14240 r, ` ' rY��„ P l 9'7 LOTES An, (0MLEMt. SLY MME IS MICRARL DFL.50N. I LIW AT 16931 CON(YIR-1 T.AXR TV RIJAPfTIUf:TMw 1AMNIP WM MY AI NT ANM UNCLE 50KJA AND HIG r SINCE MY RKIATIL",1L.� I .� ��/ �.��`" `" ��' r� � r �, � "'J)f 'BRAT THEY HAVE LFFT� Ht1NtiRABL$ MAYOR AN17 AS AN APPLICANT OF CCI�ZI?'t`..vIATG THE SUB J; 1 � rti� .•�. -f. '. � .� ON '�. 1 D PART NMREQ MALL RESPECT I ` WITSOL'T DISCUS THAT WE NEEDED .� ,� .�' ✓. 2. AMR TU PERM BUILD TU 8' R r -�•�� WROUGHT IRON T0; IN THE NEIC I09 • / /�/ /�/ � WITH A GREY Ca*h �f IN COLOR TO0[JR., �`•' � ,G+ 1 I 3. THE CITY INSPEC f .� 4. THE ClTi INS?Ed " 1 5. THE CITY INSPECl `� ' FEET ON 2126/87 MORTAR UP TO TH / 6. SINCE OUR YARD ' FOLWVING ANRId OUTSIDE OF THE ; FPW. 2 TO 3 ADD SINV,w. Wit AGREIld V • �' �,�, - ACKNOWLEDGE OU NOTIFIED OF THU 1 • w , G v 4 ;`^u: � %�r • ''�/ ��'� + -r,,,1� +�' -'. ram,"' /� ��_/� :'`r' S� 1 w , lJ /+r��r_/�/I�L+' "r`� j�� ♦J f J,�� i+ � .r:, � ,,,ice► �.�.;�.��.`�'�✓ �•'1� -'f�--r��'�': t,� � ... Vic...•. 'a.• �r i �V�.�,'j.+��,{�• vl/ Yam' 4'4� �'e 1.- � 1 ,� . �y y' i JA damp w� Aw r 1 ++ t 1 4 i r - .� At --- y yet" lop 0 r4 8742 4- -7� b-0 LAUISS AND GENTLOW MY NAME IS XICMU DEMON. I LIVE AT 16951 OON^ORD LANE IN HW-INGTON ILUBOUR WITH MY AUNT AND UNCL$ SONJA AND MIGUEL COBLLO i APPLICANT,S OF PERMIT 87-12. SINCE MY RE AT11M LU BAI,-, FAST I JUST WILL RRAD A FEW STATMCMTS THAT TREY HAVE LEFT WITH ME. HONORABLE MAYOR AND HIMERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. AS AN APPLICANT OT PERMIT 87-12 1 W01nX LIKE TO ISSUE ONLY FACTS CONCERNIN'.# THE SU4,LCT. I� 1 . ON JANUARY 279 1987 MR. A. ASCALESI AND I WENT TO THE PL414NING DEPARTMENT REQU�.=`1'TNG A PERMIT FOR A 69'X8 ' WALL AND A 70'X3' WALL RESPECTIVELY. OUR DIAGRAMS 'M REQUESTS WERE APPROVED ` WITHOUT DISCUSSION OF ANY CHANGES. NO INDICATIONS WERE MADE TKAT WE NEEDED ADDITIONAL PERMITS. 2. ArMR THE PERMIT APPROVAL WE ARRANGED WITH THE CONTRACTOR TO BUILD TIM 8' RETAINING WALL 114 THE ""XK AND SIDES WITH A 4' � WROUGHT IRON TOP, .JUST THE SAME AS -,dX OTHER RETAINING WALLS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. LIKE THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORS, WE ENDED WITH A GREY CONCRETE WALL DESIGNED TO RETAINV DIRT AND DIFFEFv IN COLOR TO OUR SIDE WALLS. 3. THE CITY INSPECTOR APPROVED THE FOOTINGS ON 2123/87. 4. THE CITY INSPECTOR APPROVED THE FIRST LIFT UP TO FOUR (4) FEET ON 2/25/8 7 9 S UBS EQUENTL,Y THE WALL WAS FILLED WITH MORTAR. 5. THS CITY INSPECTOR APPROVED THE SECOND LT.FT UP TO EIGHT (8) FEET ON 2/26/87, SUBSEQUENTLY THI: WALL WAS FILLED WITH SOLID MORTAR UP TO THAT HEIGHT. 6. SINCE 00, YARD WAS STILL H,1GMM THAN THE WALL, THE CONTRACTOR+ VOLL NING AIOIGUOUS MULES OF 7M READUC nM TES rNSID1 OR OC1Ml`DE OF THE M MttTIES, lWCREA.SM TEE UIGHT OF THR WALL FM 2 To 3 ADDITIGNAL FART AT AN EXTRA COST OF OVIR $7 j 500.00. SD1XZ Wl rAGR= WITH THE CONTRACTOR AND PAID THM EX'CItA COST, WE AMOWL M &A MISTAKE S INCE THS PLANKING DEPARTKCNT WAS NO`T NOTIFIED OF THE EXTRA tEtGHT. i E . 7. DUR 'SO MULAINTS FROM SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS (90% HAD APPROVED THR PROJBOT) TiM CITY STOPPED THE WORK ON 2/27/87. S. AGAINt AT CITY HALL VE VKRHALLY ACKNOWLI GED OUR MISTAKE AND AGRW TO GO BACK TO THS LIGHT (8) FOOT HEIGHT LOSING THE $7,500.00 ALREADY SPENT FOR THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT. 9. THE kLAMING COMMISSION MET ON 6/16/87 AND RULRD FOR f.N EIGHT (8) PLOT WALL WITS ADDITIONAL WALLS IF NECESSARY AS PER THE PLANNING DEPARTMW S RECOMMUDATIONS. 10. WE ARE WILLINw TO FINISH THE WALL AS PER THE APPROVED ORIGINAL DIAGRAMS AS SOLIN AS POSSIBLE SO WE CAN IMPROVE THE PRESENT 11 . '.:.HAT SINCE THE STOP OF THE WORK LAST FEBRUARY WE ARF. LIVING UNDER PRECARIOUS CON'DIVIUNS SUc3JECT TO PEOPLE COMING FROM THE OUTSLDE JEOPARDIZItIG OUR PRIVACY AND SAFETY. 12. THAT SINCE LASS' FEBR.JARY WE FIAVE BLFN DEPRIVED OF THE PROPER USE OF OUR LAND AND IM COMPLZTION OF BUILDING PERMITS ALREADY ISSUED EQUAL TO THE OITF i IFISUtRD To OTHER NEIGHBORS AND WHOSE WALLS HAVE BEM CCMPLE M. SINCERELY, M. /q . `6 .g., M. A. COELLO 1. r .y N 1 y do 37 1 V i"• 1 ; r �r ri .M }r 111�v i •.i,a.k.:'iXi�r11.i1L,hr'.�+5:.. ...,��,.. _ .....,... ,. .,..u,i� 1 ._a . r + '0.� ,,,... ... } Alb 1� L,t A �� tq 1�YeMh A"in&nwWs of aN kindt lhG*Amq PUDK 44 bras of the superior Court of Orange Counly, 4,40 1,*16d t t Am. t3• I K; STATE OR CALIFORNIA cownty of O&VO wws a..+►.+ ....r wo ft* d fN 111 r y�N1! ' W1M ��/�11 fMr�►�� 1 urn a Citizen of the Undod States and a resident of mo F the County *ta►ceid; I am aver the ape of eighteen ' yearc and not a party to or interested In the below • 4 �'1 antitled matter. I am a principltl clerk of the Orange Co"I DAILY PILOT, with which 11 combined the � a NEWS-PRESS, a nowgmper of general circulation, printed and published in the City of Costa Mesa, County of prangs. Stato of California, and that aA Nopce of of which copy atlached hereto is a true and complete was printed and published in the Costa Mesa, NqWrt Beach. Huntington Beech, Fountain Valley, Irvina, the South Crust communities and Laguna Beach issues of said newitpaper for _c n e t i m e_ consecutive weeks to wit the issue(s) of ---- --, 198 -— I dCCltwr©, .ct• dcr penalty of perjury, that the foregoing is true and correct. EXOcuted o r1 - July 9 t. 11t �15 Mesa, CellfOrnia. S gnmure M ��; F 1'600F OF P14 .!CAT I OIL 4•ri � tip, •.•''� r' Aa,► EtMt P'YioMe#n Adwartjoo ss of 101 kindA including AubwC peels" aN Itio i4o+e l Court of Orenge County. i, M1caN�+11K A•6,114. dented 29 Uplerilbee', 1961, And +w ITATE OF CALIFORNIA County of t7ea a .�. • N,,..,..�„ �...... was smeam N Ne in t r,wN wm I0 pea siMrww Wdo f am a Citillen of their United States and a resident of .� 1 the County afore*aid; 1 am over the age of eighleen ` years, and not a party to or interested in the below► entitled mailer. I am a principal clerk of the Orange f� Coast DAILY PILOT, with which is combined the NIEWS-PRESS, a newspaper of goneaMraatl circulation, printed anrJ published in the City of Costa Mesa, County of Orange. State of California, and that a Notice of —_ x t of which copy attached hereto is a true And complete c was printed and puNished in the Costae Mesas, i NgWrt Seatch, NuntinUton Beach, Fountain Valley, � Irvine, the South Coast communities and Laguna i Beach issues of said newspaper for . q n e t i m e consecutive weeks to wit the issue(s) of jul'l 9 198 198 198-- - — , 198 t ,. 1 deCtare, a. ndcr penalty Of i. arjury, that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on _��x_..�—.�. .___ , 1�8 7 pit Cob Mesa, California. w �e•.�atu e Proop OF te� fi a: p; ��,, � '•tip; � ff CITY OF HUNTINu iBEACH 20M MAIM STREET CALIFORWA 9260 { OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK c; i July 24, 1967 Mr. John Stillman 16911 Westport Drive Huntington Beach, cA 92649 Ck: July 20, 1987 the City Council of the Cite of Huntington Beach denied your appeal to the Planning Commission 's approval of Coastal Nvelopment Permit 87-12 and Conditional Exception 87-34 and approved same with conditions. Pleaae call the Community Development Dcpartmcnt - 536-5271 for further information. Alicia M. Wentworth City Clerk AMW;CBsJs cc% Mike Adams - Community Development Department } r r `Ir J7 ti y ' IT'S'`' OF HUNT"Ir'1►I BEACH r� 20M MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92848 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK , July 24, 1987 Arthur AEcolesi 16931 Concord Lane Huntington Bosch, CA 92649 On July 20, 1987 the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach denied the appeals to the Planning Commission' s arsproval, of Coastal develoW,ent Permit 97-12 and Conditional Exception 87-34 and arrpro%jed awry with con-!i t i ons. Please call the Community Development Department - 536-5271 for further information. I Alicia M. Wentworth City Clerk AMW:C8:js cc: Mike Adams-Community Development Department a• + rrd Yw lJr ,:. PHOTOGRAPHS DISTRIBUTtD TO CITY COUNCl'j Cr. 87 r� JL ' ' Ile 1! I` � ��\ •.aa�' f i � 'y'� �. - -- . ��,7� ..ter/ 'zti•*-�'�:'•�• 4-.._3�. ,_�..� arm ��A � r �� .+w•w .r f 1 i r 'S•+ T f• a , � M t � �I • -YT?i �, ;n r. 1 ` j •A - • a� i' I� w ' I W t� 1 "�,/4 � r Ia•11��!11 r. } � R ' Y , i 1 ` 7 - w r - ter •1 '�� 4 1'J1 4 { r{PPP-"' �`,-i �`��r�.1� � ell Ir v,.. •.glovT r aI ' 7 14 •' r 7 • �Fr-• � y� 1•�.� - �. _may I Y..� �'� 1. • - ..• ♦'1- �' it y •! i ♦ I r ' ,- - � _. Try+•�� l J r !• .. :a• r 710 T ON -� � . - . fa Aske AL l Ir r 1' �:+x� ��r a, .� i ,.Y-��;.{,•�j.�•r�arc�-,•��y;� 11. rj ' i Y' F ' t r 1 apt :� _ •:"' ISM � y ;��r:�. ► �• itiI Mf - �rF��F�i� • � 1 rt � r Y' ..j Y tA tr - `. +� 1 V16 .' .a 1.' 1.ti• i. 1 - 1 - r w r � � 1 ---'1 71 i ` s' 1 • n ' 1 r i i _ r , i_ F.� '�, -e � r •fir }� . �iF � 1 eI T +� t ti , .w A l ll -Ir J 1 tf 1, A ti r 1 y ' 1 t 1 %� � _�� •fir w G Y AS t t r +• 044�- F Il v'"1�i;,gay" 'Mrr�'� «Yp. + 1� ':I Y , 'J, .I .I,• � , :• ,w *'•, 1',. .�,•«.. y , Goo '' Sa `� q'a a� �4 v � I' .t ' f"• Mr yy r4 •" r: di S'1�C; ntq ],P :, 1 �'�!i hC'gi,,fF(f"••whYrr F P r � . f Y .,,, r •1 t ef�OR, CITY COUNCIL CTION , r t r�'rble MAW Old City Courmcil City Adtairdstnnt't/ y � LeBrllr, D1wwp CommWdtlr DevWopment Wit: APMg11.1. OF PLAWMG CO iIONIS APPROVAL OF COASTAL 0MLOPMENT PERMIT NO. 87-11 IN CONJUNCTION WITH CQlIiDi7WAL EXCZMON (VARIANCE) NO. 87-'33 - ARTWR AND r J= ASCOL M *&Visow Wft OWA iMoti" Ya Nrw F*Uw or Eearptiw- �.._ RMarnMwrd@Wne AmMysis. Funding &mra, Aidnrnstiw Aatt m,Aftechn a: MM Tr iRW, for emsiderat it an appeal Mr. 1 Mrs. Charles Chisholm, et. al,. t"to o � GmWwlsian app mal of Coastal Development Permit No. 87-11 In I-nil Ci01 tenth CAonffi0=a1 X=eptian No, 47 313. Coastal Develxnent Permit ft 87- 11 is a to p+sral t the mntructiaa of'e ret hit wall over 6 fuet in freight for ttae rpsra erlubft nKn thou IW cubic yards of till ,material. C4nditb=1 exception No. 87 3 is a regOW to permit a wall to encroach into the required IS toot setback. P Wit Cook ades1an Mien of Jwe 16, 1"7: ON MOTION BY LEIPZIG AND SECOND BY.PIERCE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PEST NO. 87--11 AND CONDITIONAL. EXCOMM NO. 87-33 BASED ON A MODIFICATION Of ALTERNATIVES A OR B AS PRESENTED IN RESOLDMN NO. 1381, BASED ON FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF AI''PROVAIi. BY THE PLDLLOWING VOTE: J A•W: WPM& i 114911 Vim, SiIV41 \r , 141".q NOS: .8nmi tl, L.ivangpW I AASENI": Ito" ABSTAIN: Ie l LZ EM APPROM,i• O ST .DEMELOEMNI PER= KO..A7-11• I 1. 7.' a retaining wall/block wall combination conforms with the plans, policies, requ*emenu and standanis of the Coeste•l Element of the Genaral Plan. 2. The ooWot development permit Is consistent with the CZ suffix zoning require- ants, the R1 ZmIng ,0tatrict, as well as other p:•vvisionm of the Huntington Beach Ordhwica Code applicable to tl±e property, because a setback variance has been Wanted. news I\ . r 11 N I `Yyy Ir « r� � 1 i rr 1 A! r + 1r 1 f A'ti1; wrstl + Comblatm OWGM with tba pok mom eye! ttM California, Coastal Act bwaie it &as $two to W Vrw+s Garrat. h „ � ! pW ad 01m r rweivad mW dated April 7, I9871p shrill be mcdtfled as "`tM Oftith retalnft wall shell be a maximum of a feet In height acid ww :r addtloeal at subugont tasking be emtructed in accordawe with Resolution 1381 r Alter=tive A ar . b. AWdWk fist or tmtomt of tM reetahft wail (texture Maating, plants, Ma.)alwll.be provided sad a **wt to approval by Department of Community . velopNgaant` ERML-. Ili Ij&L P-IC 'E=,MA t N .9% 8,7-* . 1. Somm of VecWl cft=mst&w= applicable to the "Ject p mWVp including size, 94960 tttpwopI-W► location or the strict applicatko of the Zorft is faso to dWtw the vA t prop wW of privilega ajoyed by other (,III,w4w`des im the rfcindty&W wd*w khwtiral zone clsadneatkms. The iublaot q4 a doubt* fmtap lot with a significant grade differential. 2i at a oarditiottal earaeptioa is wry in other to pre rver the + ltaot et an or I= a6ftantial p vpwty rights. A retaining wall/block wall combbsOm ewer sift felt in height is necessary to etwure privacy, due to the slope to the tom'of ttra tat. 3. 'tube "aft of Cotyditia wl Exemption (Variame) No. $7-33 will not be materially de►tritnaatrl►t to rho public welfaft, or Injurkm to property in the same zone elasai# stic w. The wall will stop hack from the street level and will incorporate a Pb~ era• 4. 'Y 1w wmtit of tls crQaditional exception will not adversely affect the General Plan at the aw of ilawaft B"Cb. L The site plan and a lemtiona received and elated April 7, 1997, shall be revised to cadd►farcn wtth staff's reoomm*Wntkxa, In accor*we with Resolution No. 1381, Alterative A or 11. a. The existing retaining wall shall be a maximum of 8 feet in height and any additinal or subrequent fenclt to conmicted in accordance with Resolution Ha. 1331, Altomtive A or B. b. Aesth is finish or treatment of the retaining wall (taextum coating, plants, etc.) doll be prorrided and subject to appmwal by Department of Community Development. 3. All bulktiarg spolis, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material, shall be disposed of at an off-41te facility equipped to handle therm. RCA - July W, W -2- (857M) � ,)y ur ;;`�,:. ►►' with all applila ptndvislctae the tlr�dln�rrtt,�r , 1 ?IN wo I not. Is tWt to Chy Cell apprwe Comm) Dwelopment Pwult No. ,+ M. $ to accm+ndartos with Resolution No. 138 i, based approval that are uAlbud.in the Alternative A.a'tlon WL &Wftl st►ek"Ot Pereait ft 47--11 Is a request to permit ttre axwtmtiaa of a i 11/b 11 Id Istt C*Oftntft 4 feet 8 inches in height alo * the fors of a double •fir far do pwpere of retainit mwe thtsn 100 CM_26"0 of till Material. faoepdan (ilarriarm)ifs. 87--U is to permit the � wall to oncroach into fad sum that in rs quirted whan a rear yard abuts a street. The bard of xaning at amptift cf April 29. 1917, referred the matter to Planning Cam- rdgissl tt skew a somber of nwMents aapreasmi concern regarding the height of the wall 00,0mmeftV tW fbr owstruction, and the City's policy for determining the maximum �y hat at sum walls. L.. parm�hivicomt "It a ►+ptber of bulW rtg its have been issued for retaining gall and taaa ooetbtarttkm over six fact in bdjght akrng rear property hear adjacent to streets. "W.�-.wa* issued without prro :sing of height variances based an Code Section 9� '�.99 wfti stator, "the height of a fence may be measured from either side. No pw- On of.a`.1 Inift wall Heads to be Included in determining overall hel jht restrictiots." '1 W6 a 640at high tense on top of an 6daot high retaining wall was determined to be ady* 64Wti trequirksno variances. ')% tlan of nm Yard OWtion 9090.157) has recently beem amended to states that, "whew a rear ywd stuta a street it shall meet front yard requirements of the district." Tom,a 4*04 ftwntsp lot auch as the subject lot must maintain a 15-foot setback for suvetrsR cr*w 41 in- -- hillh in broth the front yard and the rear yard. Conditional Eaceptian(Variar") No. 57-3�1 Is therefore required for the prep ad wall to be located on tho rasp'prmperty line abuttft the straw. The submit lot fronts an Cora%W Lane, and slopes downward in the rear to abut Westport DrIm -The"Olcants $9 c+ trtuct an B to 10 foot high retaining wall an the rear Him, with a 4 to foot pith privacy wall on tap (see Figure 1 and Figtare 2 PA pnvpe id a nAtkm). Approximately 9 feet 8 inches of the wall has already boo owaveted, in vialation of permits issued for a b foot high retai,ttirtg wall. At the ft ord of Z*Aft Adjustments meeting on April 29, 1987, several neighborhxd realdsytrts teatttfled In opposition to the p mpctal, icitiag among their primary concerns the e lve her t of.the wall as viewed from homes along Westport Drive (facing the retain wet )� the materials used for construction, the visual change caused by the lass of laAdrr*pod slope am, and the tack of uniformity among similar wells that have p oviawilrbow txarsmcted in the trove bborhood (see attached minutes). The Board rrefe TW the item to Plannit Commission because they determined that there was a need to esrtatbiioh a policy rcprdinS the c=truction of walla In areas where there is a significant grade differential. RCA - July 20, 1987 -2- (857" dim On lM, tlb � Caormisslan Momed Resolutiatt No. 1381 establisi ft ;: . "� t t� for Rear Hta* Walla an DmMe Frontag+a Lots a Huntington HarbW WOOF whsob@4 The raadutlon allows for two alteratives, bih of which require a 1r this street wasw!retaitdng walVblock . Both wF01 combintions exceed six feet �1 tbo A calls for atwo-tiered Nall w dS a'** planner area, and live at a tbxwa�ti�rtred arcl with two plant areas (axe i s 3 and 4). go req** a S fact by 3 foot tree well cutout every 60 feet (! per Bt the 11m, and allow for additkml height as rweded with materials ;Ova Carom At do June 16, M hearing, c-number of residents testified in opposition to the walls as + s , by do applicant, and also 1n opposition to the alternatives presented in tim Noe 1M. The appellants state, in their appeal letter dated Juno 340 1907, that their request is to preclude any walls at the rear property lime of a double frontage lot. The a ellants cite the height and cimtruction materials, loss of greenbelt area, irk rraise levels, and lowrerlr4g of property valuer as their basis for opposition. w, The psepos pro)W b wwmpt Class 3 Section 1 S303 arul Clam S Section 15303 from the pmrrisioi i of the California E vlraa=ental Quality Act. 1� CE Not aveileble The City Council may take one of the following Alternative Actions. UNrAthe 1. Aplx M►ve Coastal Development Permit No. 87--11 and Conditional Except!on No. 87 in accordance with Resolution No. 1381, based on the following Findings and candf tione of approval: ENDR(G�EQR APERQ CQMTBLr DFt LQ2MENT RERMIJ Na. 87-11. 1 The retsdft wall/block wall combination conforms with the plans, policies, requirements and standards of the Coastal Element of the General Plan. Z. The coruetal development permit is i:tent with the CZ suffix zoning require- ments, the R1 Zoning District, as well as other provisions of the Huntington Beach OrdUance Code applicably to the property, because a setback variance has been F! gtantdd. 3. The retsi:dng walVblock wall eomblAwtion conforms with the public access ar#J public recreation policies of Chapter .3 of the California Coastal Act because it does not Mork access to or views of the cons,.. a s RCA - July ?A, M7 (SS75d) •r 1'•:y. Fr: r 1 ��raIY•�I Mirr 1�'' °' �`A1r ',•,1� �Ir4 a,yr r � r •I 1}' ^ +-k , 'z., :,Y L•'�' ."q+�k°• ,A. M ��M ` �• 'Y ! M Y rto ' ' t M r+ ivad grad datW April 7. 1"79 dkell, be r~ to r; rt • *MO with Irolut a No. 1381, No. 67-33 shall apply. 1 cmmouacraprim - no. ma itt l t tr icable to'tha svbJm sty, includfng size, t bra p►, 10 Clod or , the strict application of the Zo dris �► found�d , . v� tbo� Sct ,prapercy of privilega mjoytld ► � 1t1 w #nd` identical tt clastifleat . The subject c � r lot tat with a sWf'cant grads dlfferaatfal. I, of a vanditiottil exception is necessary to order to preserve the eft i4f cm Or tea sAwtantial property rights. A r+etalaft wall/block wall otr ' s1 t filet in height is necessary to ensure privacy, due to the slope ar the lot. 30 �t i ft of ConditionalPaKesption (Variance) No. d7-33 will not be materially r tal to to public welfare, or usurious to property in the same zone clas•- dfIcatt wo. The wall will tcep back from the street level and will mate a r ice° area. 4. The Wooft of the oon ditional exceptimi will at adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Hunt on leach, Q M1'�I�1�OE -MEMAL.wCONWKWL EUEPTIMLMRfANCE) XQ, 97-33: 1. The aft*plan and elevations received and dated April 7, 1937, shall be revised to oadfarm with staff's recommendations, in ac r.ardsnce with Resolution No. 1381, Alternative Agar B. 3. All btri� lsI awls as unusable lumber, wise, pipe, aW other surplus or wiusable ts�ttas`ta1, doll be dl,t+poead of at an calf-site facility equipped to handle them. ;;. 3. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Card num Code, '{ Wkit Division, and titre Departments r Casual 13evolapment Permit No. 87-11 and Conditional Exception No. 87-33 based ua 'the followit fin np: FII�b QS EQ& DENU�L C�' ASIA IIOPMEN1 PERMIT NO, 8.7-1.I: wilww•w�o��•�wwwrlww�wlw w w•w wew ww .� i 1. The oposed Drell is not omistent with the CZ suffix zoning requirements, the R1 Zoe Dhalete r~t well as other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordnance Code applicable to the property became it does not conform with the 151 setback required along the rear of a double frontage: lot. R" .. Jnly 20, 1987 -2- (8575d) .. ._`�i.'+�_��.f4 " n � b�kb�� 1r'e - �� V•:.�l� � � �' .•,' 'r "�" �\ 4' •r i� .� i,� � ��` y, i5 r r r r,}'.V,.� �.Y 1� 1 '�{�f.� � 1 !,x ' 1�,_ h' ;�. •; ! � � � M . V i1P. 11111, }� tiV u •�r• 'a ;� � 'Jib► x r /��• / � � f �,.h f.N�MM�4+ka� #4(•' :a-Y�4�'.�a�rl.i.�.o,.+a�. �'Mu,�� „I`�,..�,y. 1��. '�� x� � �.'1Mf� .r 1 MOM rogwar ft" pt lrs 1� r�r for ft prow�ratla4 if co'dil,t'IM o its 0ri p oil, 44ows fbir S. na001 1 will be doulmontal to the value of �' tr to the vlchdtj► =CbRW bm tM reW Wbui Is wt congatihle with setbacks estabibbod for to.the W'WC 1 t s 1"ter Wdi auce 24, M? o PWO Commbdm Staff Rat dated June 16, IM O , �• 1 71•' , I f RCA — July 20p 1987 -2— (857Sd) ' RI A 1. #`�' ,�� •'fir � •W ,: } WIZ r •1��M.\ 1►\tirl. an _ '. Pow E s 1 ��•Cz Ali" � I��•GX � � �r R-c= r ^i RI-CZ h r RI-CZ a C � zy $tf-CZ ... !v+ FBI-CZ ' (r+ iiiiio- rr- ±� i �. •........,..mac' - -�_+----.+�...r.=�-an--.-_ .ice_.._i+•/v._1]s�Y.f.. _ �_ _ = - _ __-_ _�-_----.-.��-�—. _ - __ _ _ __ ~3p as law mods - t�► N 2 -a+s ar. Ax _ r - R3 R2 Rid R2ff-E RI CUR LT Fre- R2 R2 f it Y * ft cs FH_CZ cc V- RS � �. WR-C FP2 v 1R�-1r ' �G r r RkCZ RI-Cr elb-cz RI-a ,.s lAlIIRs AVE OTA + .► •� � 4 M •* � �, � �, y'�Y r,� y V�f, k}1 j r�{!' i ','Aa . ,t .i i. n .r{yy' Vie mob 40 1� «� d -LIC& IMS19 C,gCISION gYS1DLA S OF wEsTtT DRIVE We are brr ' in; this appeal to the City Couneil for reversal of a decision ch was passed by, the planning Cosmission on ,curie 16, 1987 re vdi.ng the retaining walls built an Coneord Dr. by Mr. and Mrs. Higual Coolto and Mr. and Mrs . Arthur Ascolesi and i`aCLn residents o rtpo:t tire, We feel ►:hat the Planning Commission did not address ;be spgpific problems that face us because of their decision to ac- cept air illegal retaini.rtg wall (with conditions ) . s' .'• We dre certain that the construction of the 12 ' cement block wall over the 6' pelt limit +,was an act of blatant disregard f2prr- both then re- striotio'ns of the but lding code and their neigbbbrs' rights to an �rt- tractiva environsent and protected property values. Additional reasons for our appeal are as follows : 1 . peer _ issuer) for 6 ' wM.all ifta) guilder there arced limit and went up to 12' in order to ' level the watt with their backyards . We feet this was an act of deception. `.� b) Enough cement blocks were delivered for a 12' gall . The '~ builder did not grout over 8 ' wall in anti.cLpattbn that the 12 ' wall would have to be shortened to g' - another wet of deception. 0 City inspecto-r warred in signing it of at 8' when onl a 6 ' �- permit was issued. As stated on page 4 of the Staff _%eport to the planning Commission dated June 16, 1987 , "Staff member, Laura PhUli'_ps , reported th&V the applicants obtained build- tug permits to build a 6 ' high retaining wall ; however, the wa1L was constructed higher than 6 ' ." After the inspect- ion, the wall continued growing to 12 ' . 2 . Retaining walls not built^ to code ( Safety Factors ) a) The 12' mall was not built to City Standards for retaining walls. As stated by Virgil Simonick, a registered profes- sional on$sneer , "The foundation as built, does not conform even to tF�e requirements of a 7 ' reataintng wall . " b) City at risk in case of even a miner earthquake with this retaining V411 passed by the City. CI Inglewood-Newport Fault goes right rhroug.h Westport Dr. - we are *gene, more at risk. 3 . Confusion at the Planning.Commission Meeting_ ��r�MnlMYww� w.�w�in �n a) CommLssloaers were not aware of the building codes, safety standards aztd unique eircumatances of our streets (Westport tire, and Roundhill Dr. ) where the sloping, terraced property ff r l 1r R Ib r.'•rIW�� rC: `ffYy��,�"•ya W`S.:'r y, � �v,; � M.�y .�`:'tr�'; .}•' M (+!��lw ",•r1.4• -l. -,I ` , YA` . " I ,I ! rr /a` • ,.I• r�t,Y .; A.. . , sr 1YI presented our greenbelt in Lieu of a sot-back of Lawns, treeso plants, etc . b) by their unfair vote we lost the original concept of a 15' set-back for those lots . 4. 1 A YYrance . cif walls a��wJw iY'�rK J a) Too high I r ' • b) MatertAl - infeerior , unsL htly cement ►.docks resembling a 12 ' garage or prison wall Walls built too close to the curb giving street an alley- like sppr;3rancwe d) Loss of greenbelt and an increase of noise Level e) ftoporty values lowered - the value of r)ur homes is all is rt4nt to us . We will never have the same resale value with the addition of the hideoc.s walls . Real estate brokeez s have .alresdy told us that we are affer.ted by the exristance and appearance of the retaining wallr,. Mr. and Mrs . Ascolesi . and Mar. and Mrs . Coello have enhanced them- property at their ! neighbors' expense . Who is go•-Ing t,.) guarantee that land- scaping and vines will forever covr=r the cement block galls? S. What w want - NO MORE WALLS ! a) 'rear down the walls (which are Lllegnl at best ) and restore the slope to the original condition of a terraced Sreenbelt . b) Because the wales were illegally built and do not comply to code, they should be ordered to be removed. el , .(1#;y frnastanding slumpstone wads should be built to replace , that ap 1 take fences with the legal set-back and Legal 114 t for backyards. Retaining walls should not be allowed. As Robort Frost said in his '"rho Mending Mall", "Good Walls make 56a4 twexgh'oors". Ve reel that bad walls diminish us all. blr. ik>W Mks ChArle-, Chisholm, 16901 Vestpoirt Dr. Hr. ! . John Stillman , 16911 Westport Dr. PAOVi�r,Bil SinbnLck. 16921 Westport fir. vim. &M Mrs. Artlsur deHeras, 16941 Westport Dr. Hro a>d Mee. )tusial Spears, 16951 Wl stport Dr. Mrs. Mr arat Bromberg, L6971 Westport Dr. its. Ciniarusti , 16981 Westport Vr. C �6s Mr. and Mrs. Al riaiger, 17001 Westport Dr. � r . r ,W' rwwrtM l l th dmlopmetst servic*s department F 001t planing Commission 'dlopment Services dU" If a987 -32 . W and 1tbui Arcolesi11=PTIM: COAMd Lane April 7, 1987 yap. Huntington Beach, CA 93649 T permit the 'construction of a retaining wall, over Maived by applicant Six foot (80 ) in height for the pine of rat b i ring SM: 21-CZ (Low Density more than 1100 cubic yards Residential District- Of Liateri'al, and to permit Coastal zone) r *:,ee l l to encroach into �.• t3ft regal red 18' setback Low Low Density R.'. Residential 18931 Concord Lane ("sot side of Concord Lane IRS NG UBE: Single arptoXIMatelr 140 feet family dwelling south of Davenport Drive) UftSIMS 7939 square f t . D N: 11WM6 ,0640t81 Development Permit no, 87"11 and Conditional ' •" tleme) Not, 87-33 'so modified by staff, in accordance ,;.,' ► tb' 13,91 based on the findings and conditions of t riht1lMd' In 'this report. • 1lIM �,i��r Utai elrapWmt Permit No. 87-11 is a request to permit the r�tiotioz at a retaining wall/block Mall combination feet '; IMIum is height along the. rear of a double frontage lot,, for ' Wpase of retaining more thee: 200 cubic yards of fill 9Wt*ttp3 . Conditional Zzception (Variance) No. 87-33 is to permit im erect Imll to encroach into the 15 foot setback th it is replred women a rear yard abuts a street . These items were .�:Uohtbivad ttas they May 19. 1957 planning Commission meeting at they appliaantlo request . The Board of Zoning Adjustments, at their i A•RM%tSA , hIr'' 50. jir .. .. AP cii 29, 1947, teferred the tatter to #tanning because a SuMber of residents expressed concern regarding WW i t• of tl:e w011 mad Material$ used for construction, and the City!'N 90licy for deterriimIL9 the wx1mm height of such walls , �.i; IMti_Lrm ,1►1Efl L E�Y�►p ��BI�►Ti��: 'AW. �10PATION: 1.ow Density Residential • Wiwi gl-C& (Sinpie Family �� r,• f *id�etial- Caastal done) Bing le family residences so NSA= � F", 04ed project is exempt Class 3 Section 15303 and Class 8 tiom 13508 frgm the provisions of the California Environmental Quality act* TWO aWeli in,,question is located within the coastal zone boundaries . IP91�. to am action .on Conditional Ezception No. 87-33 , it is eesaw for the planning Commission to review and act or the coastal development pment permit . Tom, aDeetal deyelopmient• permit amy be approved only after It has boon tou . to• tm in conformance with the Coastal Element of the peaeral IPian by asking the following findings: (8) • L i th4t the ptroJect proposed by the coastal development purer t Opplication conform with the plans, policies, requirements mad standards of the Coastal Zlement; (b) gigning &&g11JsLJ&U .. that the . coastal developmant permit applicatioe 10 consistemt with the C3 suffiz, the base zoning district or specific plan, as well as other provisions of the ftatington Beach bttdinance Code applicable to the propextys (c) Mate - - that the development can be provided with ihtrastructure in a manner consistent with the C-LUP; d) C�i1eri14 Casite Aqt - that the development conforms with t pub c aevess and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 Of the California Coastal Act . �..�� a:u►�.�nrs: As In recent years, a nuW mr of building permits have been issued for retaining wall and fence combinations over six feet in height along rear property lines adjacent to streets. These permits were issued staff Report - 6/16/87 -2- (8343d) o-r f kr : I. 1 ' r f io r Y isitftot. processinq of height variances based on Code Section 9770691 Which ststes, 'tbe bright of a fence spay be masured frm either * « No portion of a retaining Mall needs to be included in MONNEA RO OVO rsll height restrictioas.0 Thus, a 6-foot high EQMM of tog of on 8-foot high retaining Mall was determined to be 01113r a d-foot fonoe. requiring no variances. 40i"AeMOM Dig rear yesd (Hection 9080. 137) has recently been ndqA to state that. "ire a rear yard abuts a street it shall 3*9# -.reVdr4Mnts; of t1w distrust. ' Thus* a double ` f0" ,10t ,aft so the subject lot must saintain a 15-foot setback lfiR e o n ofty 42 imbes high in both the front yard and the roar yard. Conditional, Zsception (variance) no. 07-33 is therefore uirt ' #ttr the proposed wall to be locoteb on the rear property line abut eg the street. The subject lot fronts on Concord bane, and slopes downward in the rear to abut Westport Drive. The apVlicent,',• propose to construct an . i to 10 toot high retaining pall on the roar property line, with a 4 to 6 foot high, privacy well on top (sae Figurer 1 and Figure 2 - ' original and proposed conditions) . Appro�amately 9 feet-6 inches of the wail has already been constructed, in violation of permits ' issued for a 6 foot high retaining wall . At the board of Zoning Adjustments meting on April 39, 1987. several neighborhood residents testified in oprosition to the proposal, citing among their primary concerns the excessive height of the well as viewed from booms along Westport Drive (facing the retaining galls) , the naterials used for construction, the visual change causod by the loss of landscaped slope area, and the lack of unifermitr &wag similar walls that have previously been constructed in the neighborhood (see attached minutes) . The Hoard referred the item to Planning Commission because they determined that there was a need to establish a policy regarding the construction of wells in areas where there is a caignificant grade differential . On My 8. 1987, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No . 1381 establishing 'Design Criteria for Roar ®lock Walls on Double f`rontags Lots in Huntington Harbour" (see attached) . The resolution allows for two alternatives, both of which require a stepping back from tho. street when retaining wall/block gall combinations exceed six fist is height. Alternative A calls for a two--tiered wall with one planter area* and Alternative B for a three-tiorecl Mall with two planter areas (see Figures 3 and 6) . Both alternatives also require a S foot by 5 foot tree well cut-out every 60 feet (1 per property) at the property line, and allow for additional height as needed with materials such oa wrought iron or glass . Btaff Report - 6/16/e7 -3- (8363d) a 'ri� t tr:•,. .,Ihr, 7{{'P1/—.•1'Q'" ail— � .1 '• y�1 iAt 7Y"•' , , ' r � �I fit• r ., ; y L ' � e rs RYA Stott s a es o that the Planning Commission approve Coastal of Perit No, d7--133 and Conditional Exception No. 87--33 as Mid Staff, In aceordance with Easol�ution no. 1381 based on r , t•" 99110�ng fiadings and condition@ of approval. I. tahhih#ag waxi/blook wall combination conforms with the 'POUG1446 requireamts and standards of the Coastal 21LOAM tt''4f.1 fte General Pljkn. 1. iq►astai- developa6nt permit is consistent with the. CS suffix iebi40 •:requirements,-the R1 Zoning District, as well as other ,Y. r+ vioicas of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Cade applicable to pre908tto because u setback variance has been granted. 3. The.' retalolnq wale,/block wail combination conforms with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of thM -California Coastal Act because it does not block access to or V16"s of the coast. t 1 . The mite plan and elevations received and dated April 7, 19871 shall he revised to conform with staff ' s recomnetndatl i ns, In amorGance with Resolution No. 1381 , Alternative A ur 4. 3. All coiditions of Conditional Exception no. 87-33 ahall applyal sir=UL .=XzTJgJ r..A,)r.go. a Z_a U : 1* 10e08use of special circumstances applicable to the subject vxoporty, including six** shape, topography* location .or serrrOUDdinga, the Strict;: application of the Zoning Ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by ether prytties In the vicinity and under identical aoine. classifi►catious. The subject property is a double frontage lot with a significant grade differential . 1 3 & she granting of a conditional exception is necessary in order to ppreeer,ve the en joymrmt of one or Mors substantial property rights.'' A retaining wall/,lock wall combination over six fiat in height is necessary to ensure privacy, due to the slopes is the rest of the lot. 3. The gianti:rng of Conditional BxQeption (variance) No. 87-33 will not be mate:rialty detrimental to the public: arelfare, or injurious to p:opertr in the same sons classifications $ The Mall will stop back from the street level and will incorporate a planter area . staff Roport - 6/16/87 -'t- (8343d) Y�• + a AJ gob 00. j� a � . The granting of the conditional exception will not adversely affect the General plan of the City of Huntington Beach. 1 . The site plan and elevations received and dates! April 7, 1987, shall be revised to conform with staff' s recommsndetions, in .tl accordance with Resolution No . 1381, Alternative A or H. 3. All building spoils, ouch as unumable Luriaber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unus6ble material, shall be disposed of at an '1r off-sites facility equipped to handle them6 _* The 4evelopment xhall comply with all applicable provisions of ` the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department. ALZUUTrNZ ACTIM the planning Commission may: (1) Approve Coastal Development Permit No. 87-11 and Conditional RxCeption (Variance) no . 87-33 as proposed by the applicant 's plans+ based on findings and conditions of approval; or (3) Deny coastal Development permit No . 87-11 and Conditional Xxceptibn (Variance) No. 87-33 based on findinge . 1 . Since the subject property can be fully developed within regular established setbacks, such s conditional exception is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights . 3. The subject property was legally subdivided and developed in a Manner consistent w► th applicable nan3ng lawn. 3. Racroadhment into the required setback is not compatible with setbacks established for proportion in the vicinity and would constitute a special privilege inconsistent with limitations upon these properties. d . The propaied structure will not be compatible with adjacent pwopertio-s to the Nest. IBRIEN=.,, 0911AL :.. UTAL.,.,DXVAWU yl'r'-PFAMIT NO, B 7-x 1 1. The mall does not conform with the Mans, policies, requirearants and standards of the CoL=tWal Llerwant of the General Plan because it does not conform to Code. Steff Report -- 6/16/87 -6- (6343d) . r F Y $toy, 4er►410"nt permit In not consistent with the Al rIM l q diMtrict NW&USS the wall encroaches into the sinit rlrod 15 loot tsont Tardl setback. r.. •:�; :�,' �••ol'e6! 2 '40iYig�gr11967 � ting conli.tiona fats rat _ tat! 0-terngtiwes) 119 t t dot g S, 1997 Ito 1047 :11 p* t for 6 toot high ret#ining well IJ 1 Btaff Re"rt - 6/16/47 -6- (5343d) Ve CF-E R2 ftz � CF-Q ` i _ 1r-Ct -R .♦ '�s �'.-. z R R3 R2 RZ R2 R2 � ,• _ x ' IF i ' f IIFi7 .c1 R2 R2 R2 no-CZ c Ell C4 -cz t •+� , � � 3 ��:____�� R3 R3 R3 R K R3 f !-cz Rj-cz `} sc -- 3 R R2 R3-i9 E R2-Q • Ri RlARL l • tears i rc CZ w /c, 4� - 1tiF �cz Rf-CZ f�� • j - +rE �� 1 AVE �� •r w - Cof 67*011 $7AW;53 �'�i'BI ill Nill MACHa s i � i• "e^w� ��P '�.rq'.�d'S. �t�� h, j��• d'+'";ykN+��'jf yeti. .e�' �',�� '�YN� "�7i ;'•� � � a�'t .. �7, i.,�;,,;•^�F,,.„ ..w �,, � '!ti .. a .. k .�, } d , �i ago op While plum- 1 .mo6w �.. do MIA I Wx L_.a to cow% sir it �� _. 1 (� i. Y • d 'p Air' A•.,,y;' ,. r R r , n �1., yyll '1 ••1 I W 1 )T � AJYn. t��M !�"�► J' w y n, My slur '� {1!}kf't tfY�l:R� I _ +.:i;r��N w'!�^y > i� a r49•R„ �tr �1, i ( 4 r I ..r, r y` T+S ',�` ` Y ° q Y ri v�, ' : . Y. �'ttiV .. � r i11.1. M ., rY r. r w .al• . .. r. .r {. . ra 1 1 i ouch as unusable 1 , r ire, pipe. and Ot r 44 . et 4U'Useble matetial, shall be dispaa of at an dito doility dipped to handle tom. " n" Sva04• ftaf rey, Ere oe t Bmi th _ base Ur n Li n AL •"r'1 - 'to,' pit or►nstruction of a *Draining wall over ,ri,s feet S h for t u;Aose of retaining more than 100 cubic l � p 0 lit for �a sub'act property is located at 18131. Concord Odw of Concatd Lena approximately 180 feat South of Davenport Df , � .., ie ulpst it covered by Cstagorio*1 Examption. Class 3 and Class t ;. 41iiais Enviroentaivaiity Act. 1986 . iM goestad that Coastal Development permit No . 6'�-11 arm Vie, -d ► ConsWered at' the sane time due to the requeat for the wdl� baLng identical as she properties are adjoining. "d atpplIdA tts wait present and agrerad to the suggestion. `AL DVMWPMM PERMIT NO. 67-12 ��aoeliaret: s[i�uaM�t1li a , g A request to petmit construction of a retaining wall over sic feet (41 ) in height for the purpose of retaining more than 100 cubic 1% s: � .,pratiriel . The subject proparty is located at 16951 Concorn sidw of Concord Lane approximately 200 feet South of Davonport �h3,s r t is covered by Categorical E:emptiont Class 3 and Class S, Cali orwia "Environmental Quality- Act, 1996. r dtoff der, Laura Phillips, re orted that the applicants obtained building permits to build a 8' high retaining wall; however, the wall was oonstruat*d higher than d ` . When a complaint was filed with tho ditr, the wank was stopped . She said that staff had r wed numerous telephone halls from. sesridents objecting to the beigat of the wall ano the lack of uniformity. The Issue that has cosws up effects other walls in the Harbor and in the City; therefore, staff j,s attempting to establish a standard for walls where there are slopes.. Atvff •reconmaded the board to Open• the public hooring, bear the public testimony and continuer to allow staff time to do further resoarch. 400 01164) 4/29/87 - SZ► _ y �q ✓�+' W t r q r ftdfr,listed that they building t clearly stated ;.: 40 *19 (i) toot w811 only to be a l lowerd. The wall was engineered and *"tavod for eight (8) feet but tries applicant was aware of Planning$ 4OR"CA for any wall in etcoss of Six (6) fret. The applicant Z Reus• f e�Ce r efd even the eight (8) foot wall l by another four (6) toot; tbeeroby Compounding the violation. ioard member Smith felt that; the requests probably would end up at the Planning Connission and recommended the items bea referred Oiroctly to the planning Coaraission . 11W public hesaxing was opened . 40, lfcSot fear COP 57-11, Julie Anc.0lesi , was present and spoke in :Mgppott .9f they requests . She said they were told by the City that they rsould Wild an 6 ' retaining wall and the measurement would be taken from the inside of their property. The wall was inspectod and spprOV City Inspectors three timers at the 89 levesl She went an tax eay hest when the Contractor finished the So wall., he advised . they could go higher because of the inside measurement . They did not dome back to the City for approval and she realised that was a mistake. She also said the Huntington harbor Homeowners Association and the neighbors had given approval for the construction of the rterl�,. The applicant for CDP 87-.12 , Miguel Coello , was present and spoke in support of the requests . Ruth Swift , 17089 Westport Drive, spoke in support of the requests . ; She said the *tall would look very nice when completed with the vines that were planned to oascade over the wall . JOWL Stilloo' n, 16911 Westport Drive, spoked in opposition of the requests , Mr . Stillman ' s home is directly across the street from the wall . He said he had signed an agreement prepared by the applicants to build a slumpstone not a plain concrete well . He ieteluested that the items bereferred to the Planning Commission and ghat a policy decision be made. nudse% Spoors, 16951 weastport, spoke in opposition of the requests . He said. thb wall is poorly built and that it would bring down they property value in the neighborhood . Al Qeigdr , 17001 Westport, donated his time to Mr . Simonick. Mr . Simonick, 16921 Westport Drive, spoke in opposition of the requests . He said he was opposed to the height and said the gall doom not conform with they City' s standarfla. Chuck Chisholm, 16901 Westport, spoke in opposition or the requests . Her said the wall is not aset:heticly appealing . He was concerned if there wem aVeaxthquike; the wall Mould fall herlf way across the street . (8116ei� -5- 4/29/87 - HZA i r ilk /f �b 1' 1Ri+ J, Xi •i. � ' r , "T 1+, ,1�N' . Y y ,J +NCI r r1,' , c; , P #►# l lbrtpe►rt Drive, spnke k Ak os i t ion of •the �•'y a is* 101t thR VA�u• Of the homas NOUN be decre4844 prison we'll , 440SWO lblri 0t, 17001 Mestport DCiM spoke in opposition 0,f the to. 814144 not given approval to the applicants for the sUotiaht OW Maet Qoneetned because, if this type of wall, was t*d to Continue, hot property could face a 10 foot asl:l. iaMlfto 16901 Westport Drive, spoke in opposition of the uested that saMekhing be loner to prevent walls over t• 1rt04 16071 went 2att DiIVe, spoke irf Opposition 61 the dt►e Mop . conrernebd that othe t residents might w»nt to lwilar wells which would decrease propor�y value. loth" ,1ft, 17489 ltiattrarr Driver spoke in support of the requests . '4414 the wall is not unsightly. Otbot jk4caldsi, applicant, spoke in support of the requests . Joyce doldensons 16931 earuna Lane, a Huntington Beach Realtors a( spoilt. 1st opposition of the request. She said the aoncrote and the hal4htt would decrease property value in the area . Mussel fposter, 16951 Westport # spoke In' opposition of the requees�eea NO- Aadieslteed that he had not signed the agreement for the 00"t*uction.••' he went on to say that the street was beautiful beteCro' construction of the wall but now looks like an allay. 4� June As- colusi, applicant, reported than the concrete type wall was chosen because she had been advised that concrete was the strongest type of wall. . She said the wall, when completed, would be covered with greenery and would be beautiful. Arthur jje nitres , 16941 Westport Drive, spoke in opposition of the requests. Ruby Dovin, 8961 Aquarius Drive, spoke in support of the requests . She said the wall is attractive. There were no other persons to speak for or against the requests and Hoard discussion began with they public hearing left open . The Board discussed a need for ar city-wide policy on horn future walls are going to be built where there are slopes. amok (8ildd� �6- +129/87 8ZA A► NOTION WAS MADE bi SMITH AND SECOND BY GODFREY TO CONTINUE COASTAL D"ZLOPMENT PERMITS 90. 8 7-•l: AND 8 7-12 TO THE MEETING OF MAY 131 19871 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE : AYES : Godfrey, Smith NOES ; Evans , Krejci , Poe , ABSENT : Norge JW A NDTION WAS MADE BY EVANS AND SECOND BY GODFREY TO DENY COASTAL DSVELOPKENT PERMITS NO. 8 7-11 AND 8 7-12, BY THE FOLLOS�I NCB VOTE : AYES: Evans , Godfrey, NOES: Krejci , Poe, Smith ABSENT: None TQN rAILED A NOTION WAS MADE BY SMITH AND SECOND BY POE TO DEFER COASTAL DZMOPXZNT PERMITS NO. 87-11 AND 87-12 TO THE PLANNING COMMISS100 f BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: j AIMS : Evans, Krejci , Poe, Smith, NOES : Godfrey yy ABSENT: None F COASTAL DEVELOPIYXNT PERMIT NO. 87--13 A►gglic.anraSally -='.D.a A request to permit construction of a single family d ing . The subject property is located at 17191 Marina View P e (West siege of Marina View Place approximately 200 feet South Warner Avenue) . This request is covered b;# Categorical E ption, Class 3 , California Environmental Quality Act, 86 . Staff meunber , Laura Phillips, re rte S that the applicant has conformed to all requirements the zoning codes, view corridor and setback requirements . Staf recommended approval with conditions to the Board . The public hearing opened and the applicant, Sally Price, was present . She sai he hAd been marking with staff very diligently to meet all they f ty ui rernents . There were o other persons to speak for or against the project and the: publ hearing was closed . (a116+d) �7- 4/29/67 - BdA �� ti F RESOLUTION NO. 1381 i A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NUNTINGTON BEACH ESTABLISHING THE DESIGN CRITERIA FOR YEAR BLOCK WALLS ON DOUBLE FRONTAGE LOTS IN I UNT I NMN HARBOUR WItEREA+�, there are double frontage lots within the Huntington Harbour area of. the City where a significant grade differential necessitates construction of regaining well and fence combinations over six feet in height, within the rear yard setback adjoining a public street, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has fotind that currently permitted retaining wall and fence combinations,over six feet in height are seathaticelly undesirable, and WHEMS, the purpose for which the retaining walls are intended can be attained in a manner that is compatible and harmo►:ioua with surrounding land uses , WW, -MEREFORE, BE IT ALPSOLVED, that the Planning Commission states that Staff Alternative A and B per attachment shall be the standard for construction of retaining wall and fence combinations � r over six feet in height in the rear yard setback adjoining a public street PASSED AND ADOPTER by the Planning Commission of the City of Muntington Beach, California, on the 5tn day of May, 1957, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Silva , Schumacher, higgins, Pierce; I:eipzig, Sunntnrarell , Livengood NAYS : none ABS : bone ABSTAIN: bona ATTEST: mes W. Dalin, Secretary --� Planning Commission Chairman Staff Report - 5/1/87 (e03ed) t.�� ► ' ► or` 161A 10 ; � N or 116 1 i i .j F r VAAa �' 1 aim huntWilton beech development services department STAf f EPORT TO : Planning Coiwissio.r. FROM: Development Services DATIZ: Nzy 5, 1967 SUBJECT: RUR BLOCK WALLS ON DOUBLE FRONTAGE LOTS IN HUNTINGTON HARBOUR 1n recent years, & number of building permits have been issued for retaining wall and fence combinations over six feet in height along rear property lines adjacent to streets . These permits were Issued without proceasing of conditional escaotiona (variances) based on Cade Sect;ou 9770 , 9, which states, "The height of a fence may '-,e measured from either side . No portion of a retaining wall needs to be includad in determining overall height restrictions . " Thus , a 6 foot hi-gh fence on top of an 8 foot high retaining wall was determined to be only a 6 foot fence, requiring no special permits. The recw—nt construction, of a retaining wall/block wall combination on two lots along Concord Lane in thn Huntington Harbour area has evoked some controversy regarding this code interpretation: . The lots in question are through lots, which front on Concord Lane and slope downward in the rear to abut Westport Drive (see Figure 1) . The homeowners winh to construct 8 foot to 10 foot high retaining walls on the rear property line, with 4 foot to 6 foot high privacy walls on top (nee Figure a) . Neighborhood residents are concerned about tha excessive height of the walls as viewed from homes along Westport Drive (facing the retaining walls) , the materials used for construction; the visual change caused by the Loos of the landscaped slope area, and the lack of unif;,rmity waonq aimi lar walls that have previously been. constructed in the , neighborhood . a a- Isca M pDg cog: Staff is submitting, for the Planning Commission' s consideration, two alternative designs for retaining Nall and fence combinations that will address these concerns. Staff Alternative A allows for an initial sis foot high retaining mall at the property line, topped by a S foot wide planter area stepping back from the back of side well. Another six fopt hf_gb section of retaining Mall could then be placed It t e- rear of the planter (see Figure 3) . Staff Alternative B also allows for an initial 6 foot high Aft -J A•FNaA -sum t 4j�,1, :. retaining wall at the property line, but stepped beck with two planters and two additional tiers of retaining wall (,see Figure 4) . Bach layout would also ragwtire a 3 ' a 3 ' tree well cut--out every 6o ' (one per property) at the property lime. Both alternatives provide visual relief from the street level, and would allow fcr planting of shrubs and vines . Should additriona,i fence height be required on top of the highest tier , materials such as glass cc wrought iron could be utilized and should not be more than 50% rolid. tJNP s LF:gbm AMORUMA 1. Draft llesciution 2. Figures 1 & 3 3 . figures 3 & 4 i Staff Report - 5/1/87 -2- (80386) ' wonY . ' 1 w Publish 719/87 XOTICP OV PUBLIC HEAR190 APPEAL TO PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL 0P COASTAL DEOELOPMENT PERMIT 87--11 & CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION 81-33 NOTICE IS HEARBY CIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public hearing is the Council Chaaber at the Huntington Beach Civic Centex, 2000 Main Street , Huntington Beach, California , on the date aqd at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persoas who wish' to be heard relative to the application described below. r Dot Monday, July Z0 , 1987 T MIS 7 :00 P. M, APPULANIt John Stillman , at al SUBJECTS Coastal Development Permit No . 87-11 in conjunction with Conditional Exception (Variance) No . 57-33 - Appeal . APPLICANTt Arthur Ascolasi f.00A?'Y1�Nt 16931 Concord sane (nest side of Concord Lane approximately .140 feet soath of Davenport Drive ) PROPOSAL: To permit the construction of a retaining wall over oar feet (61 ) ir.. height for the purpose of retaining more than 100 cubic yards of material , and to permit a wall to dacrearh into the required 15 foot setback . ENVIROUNEN'T&L STATUS; Lzeupr.. Class 39 Section 15303 and Class 5 , Section 15305 from the provisions of the California Enviroawental Quality Act . nit:: A copy of the appeal is an file is the Department of Co3mmunity Development , 2000 !lain Street , Huntington Beach , California . ALL INTED•E$TSD PERSONS are invited to attend said hearlag and express opinions or submit er•idence for cr against the application as outlined Above . All applications , szhibits , and descriptions of this proposal are on file with the Offica of the City Clerk , 7000 Main Street , 8untington Beech , California, for inspection by the public . BUNTIrCTON SEAC® CJTY COUNCIL Bye Alicia M. Ventrortb City Cleric Phone (714) 536-5405 Dated 7/6/87 NOTICE TO CLERK TO SCHEDULE PUBLIC HEARING ITEM_ c: wl�a►1 �.�,,dtd�{e nab 1Rt� �� TO: WIYY CLERK'S OFFICE DATE : TAtwo _ FROM: PLEASE SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING USING THE ATTACHED LEGAL NOTICE FOR THE j WW 7. _DAY OF 198 ✓0's are attached i AP's will follow No AP s Initiated by: Planning Commi ,sion Planning Department Petition Appeal Other+ Adoption of Environmental Status (x) —aR ND- NONE Has City Attorney' s Office been YES informed of forthcoming public nearing; Refer to i92 _ , Planning Department - Extension I� for additional information. * If appjat , please transmit exact wording to be required in the legal . IS THIS AN APPEALABLE DEVELOptIENT (CO S';'AL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT ? YES NO 1 i111� NOTICB OF PUBLIC tlEARIBG NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public hearing in the Council Charnbers at the Huntington Beach Civic: Center , 2000 Main Street , Huntington Beach, California , on th& date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. : Monday, 6uly 20 , 1987 i : 0 0 per! APPLIQ=0A W MHEfi: Coastal Develoynent permit No. 87•-11 in conjunction with Conditional Exception (Variance) no. 87--33-Appeal 1 Y log: 16931 Concord Lane (west aide of Concord Lane approximately 140 Feet south of Davenport Drive) PMEDSAL: To permit the construction of a ret,>;ining wall over sit feet (6 ' ) in height for the purpose c f retaining mrrr+i than 100 cubic yards of material, and to permit a wall to encroach into the required 15 foot notback. ZNXIEMMULIST�: Exempt Class 31 Section 15303 and Class 51 Section 15305 from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act . IIS: A copy of the proposed appeal in on file in the Department of Community Developmant: 2000 Main Street, Huntington beach, California ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invoted to attend said hearin4 and ezpreas opinions or submit evidence fnr or against the application as outlined above. All applications , exhibits and descriptions of this proposal are on file with the Office of the City Clerk, 2000 Fain Street, Huntington Heac ;,, California, for inspection by the j public. HUNT I NGTON BEACH CITY COUNC I L by: Alicia X. wentmoxth City Clark Phone (716 ) 536-5405 i (8503d) r P V.w bitchanan V '1 ' +` 1-I R-332-02 I�Z. +tind�sor Dy . U �f�� N 'Ran G. Haddad flo 'lcingtou Reach, CA 92649 /"7 16.411. Bedford Ln ga-333-08 Huntington tan Beads CA 92649 -333-09 178-334-07 178-332-03 k J. NoriucLi George Gholdoian Howard Greenbaun 192 Rindaor tar. 17021 Westport Dr. 16921 Bedford Ln. Antington Reach, CA 92649 Huntington B3each, CA 92649Huatington Beach, CA 92649 -333-10 178-341-01 178-332-04 . t Pegrse William A . Collins Firooz Manhood 2 Windsor Dr. 16872 Phelps Ln, 16941 Bedford Ln. .�tiheltoB Beach, CA 92649 Huntington Reach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA Q2649 V-323_11 178-341-02 178-332-05 Oaneth V. Schiebe Jambes G. Fickle Hera J. Tolmachoff 02 Windsor Dr. 16862 Phelps Ln. 16951 Bedford Ln. M::ti.ngton Beach, CA 92649 Huntington Seach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach, LA 92649 A-334-01 178r-341-06 178 -332 -06 h8rlea D. Kenyon Jiv F . Settle Stanlev G. Harris � ?WI We;3tport 0r. 1.6861 Stiles Cidr .. 16962 Concord LN . *tingtisn Beach, CA 92649 luntington Beach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 ?;?-334-02 178-"33 ' PL,rt B. Cutnriings 178-341-07 G•sor,ge G. Matson ?671. wee tport Dr . Brent R . Scheerer P .O. Box 2705 W%tington Mach, tg 92649 16871 Stiles Cir. Huntington Beach, CA 9. ,49 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 MI-334-03 178-341-08 178-332-08 Wrge M. Smalley Michael Reynolds John P. Stevens XX1 iiestpoit Dr. 16872 Stiles Cir. Hun6922 tington wBeach, CA 92549 inslton beach, C A 92649 Funtington Beach, CA 92649 178-341 09 178-332 -09 0- 334-04 John H. Simonton Tobenette Holtz 1h A. Perrirone 1.6862 Stiles Cir. 16912 Concord Ln . 1/estport fir• Huntington Reach, CA 92649 Huntington Bauch, CA 92649 44OAgton Reach, CA 92649 '34-05 170-341-15 178-332-10 oftir Perryman Milton H. Schneider Richard J. Shaffer `Z*.. Westport Dr. 16871 Morse Cir. 16412 Sundancer Ln . ( n*ngton Deacd, Cal 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Huntington beach, CA 92649 0 334-06 178-362-09 178- 333-01 Pdr X. Cw11Qp Albert Newberg Joseph F. McAni f f OWostport Dr. 16671 Phelps Ln. 16901 Concord Ln. ingtou Deachr CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 178-332. 01 William A. De! ., 178�-333-02 16901. bedfora 'i�n lc&er.t A. Batchelor ntingtan q',..49 16911 Concord Ln. buntington beach , Cal 92649 dIMb • , tie 8+f33-03 +Aar Ascolesi CAMrIes G. Chisols Lester E. Haeiitxschel �9:11 Concord Ln. 1t 1 Westport Dr . 915 Roundhill Dr . Patiggton Beach, CA 92649 Huutington Beach, CA 92649 &. ..ntington Beach, CA 92649 ►S- 333-04 16 -321-02 178-322-04 4gue 1 b Q,on j a Coe l to John A. S tz L lm an Norman Chu S951 Concord Ln. 16911 Westport Dr . 16923 Roundhill Dr . antington Becht CA 92649 tffuntinggton aeach,C.A 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 178-321-02 18--333-05 178-321-03 178-321-05 bnea W. Bull Virgil F. Sisoricr John S . Rance 6961 Concord Ln. 16921 Mestpor.t Cr. 1.6931 Roundhill Dr . Untington Beach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach , CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 108-333-06 178-321-04 178-322-06 ;pert A. Batchelor Arthur .7. Detteras George W. Wright �6971 Concord La. 16941 Westport Dr. 16939 Roundhill Dr . Untington Reach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 '3- 333-07 178-321-05 Ruby A. Devin Iskvid A. Sullivan Russell T. Epears 3561 Aquarius Ln. �tS2 Windsor Dr. 1.6951 Westport Dr. Huntington Beach, CA 92649 U-ntington Beach,, CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 rgaes J. Taylor 178-321--06 Ruth D . Swi--t 16351 Phelps Ln . RC 'rt P. Frishman 17089 Westport Dr. ROjItingtcn Eka.a h, CA 42649 1696'J Westport Dr. Huntiton Beach, CA 92649 Hut...ington Beach, GA 92649 -?8-362-1? 178-362-08 Joyce Goldenson front O. Gzavattt Gerald L. Landsman 16831 Beruna Ln. 16852 Edgewater La. 3L6861 Phelps Ln+ Huntington ,Reach, CA 92649 Wtttj.ngton Beach, CA ';2649 euntinut+)n Beach, CA 92649 1-362-11 1.8 321 07 Shirley de Berns 1AR 3aaret Castro 9 M�arg p artt Ann Bromberg 169,11 Westport Dr. �i2 Edgewater La. U97.i Westport Dr. Huntington beach, CA 92649 fi,Atbington Beach, CA +92649 Huntington (leach, CA 92649 -lp . 178-321-08 Al Geiger i $'L�ri� le Geige � !like R. Cimarrusti 17001 Westport Dr. 16981 Westport Dr. Huntington Beacht CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 -362-10 178-322- 02 Margarat Bromberg �Oert I. 6eirlar . Boyd A. Johnson � 16971 Westport Dr. 6072 Zdjew3tez Ln. 16907 ltoun hill Dr. Huntington beach, CA 92645 �gnti.ngton Beach, CA 92649 Humtington Beach, U. 92649 iA� :ti 1 Ida, 1 , li i I f + l Authwilod 10 puhksh Adverlis,*"rit/ of ail kinds rncludi� PUNK ROOK*$ by or004 of th* t�uperrOr COMM of Orange (fumy, yM�nN.�Numb�r A•6214, doled 29 SiplembOr. 1961. and A-1401, doled 11 Jurw 190 STATE OF CALIFORNIA � t� County of Orange 10w8-C loom •...►,,." gwoz� a ., M" .tee.." � .� � ► � 00% PC cwom W""1k .0 ai Cower, of the. United States and a resident of ' the County of o►esAio. I am over the age of eighteen 91101.111111110 f � a1 t7k Mw e►• years and not a party to or Interested in the belowmr entitled mallet I am a principal clerk of the Orange ><b CORM DAILY PILOT, with which is combined the + ,�,�► NEWS-PRESS. a newspaper of general circulation, printed. and published in the City of Costa Mesa, 1 County of Orange. State of California, and that a ,, � ArN3Y1.t.AN Notico of P u �. �a.�itz .— ew11111.n.ate- rc rewrorl Of which copy attached herelo Is a true and complete "PL CANT: COwa8 printed and published in the Costa Mesa, cWA�; N it Eeach. Huntington Beach, Fountain valley, odrett +�°t ' Irvine, 1ne South 'oast communities and Laguna 1Dirivol rrorr' a one t i i.e PROPO&AL- Te it Sesen issues of Said newspaper for ttla 60"Mum"a a r consecutive weeks 10 wit the Issue(s) of 11orINo ofow ON" waft Yoft (11 And 10 ` p~ a Mme to Mr"fl e h NO 1110 Fr VA a4 It sot ow 6NV1"011WENTAL July_ g gg aTATtla. f:fCIkK, i�ewn 6, Motion 15M troth Gw at min f�1I1111ra 198._ n m ONIg1A �itMMe 11111100011111 is eh Ills a 11" a►• wer10MIR1+M Oanwrr.Mb UP. ftsk llilipmm �r uck cawwvdL (10" a+11 or"us 40 rJ..ijUt•y, th1•it Ur noose" Wy try ar At CO€* CAE nla. Tom e� • i:a . as .r J� �y.:,,.,. s• L ti Y REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION %%b►mitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Submirtsd by: Charles W. Thompson, City Administrator ald PrWered by: James W. Palin, Di rector, Development Services Subjct: RECONSIDERATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ' S D kIALF SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 86-16 Ah'D CONDITIONAL EXCEPTq F"6, �� NO. A6-103 oi-1 Consistent with Coundi Policy? M/Yu ( ] Now Policy or Exception /� Statmw-t of Ime, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attechinants: a►TT OLD ZSSun: Transmitted for your consideration is the reconsideration of the Planning Commission' s denial of Site Plan Rev4.awr Nn . 86-16 and Conditional Exception No . 86-103 . At the March 16 , 1987, City Council meeting Councilman Green made a motion to reconsider . The motion to reconsider wa,- approved by a vote of 5-2 (Winchell and Bannister voting no) and set the hearing date for April, 6 , 1987 . LON Planning Commission and staff recommend that the Cite Council sustain the prior action to deny tho requests based on findings for denial outlined in the staff report dated March 2, 1987 . Site Plan Review No . 86-16 is a request to establish dual access from Fr nkfort Avenue and an existing alley. Section 9600 . 11(c) , &q&ZjMj states that when o ' lot abuts an alley, access shall be from the alley unless a different access is approved by the planning Comminsion. Conditional Exception No. 86-103 is a request to permit a; 5 foot sidayard setback in lieu of 10 . 5 feet for the proposed carport. A request to allow a 19 foot driveway in lieu of 23 feet has been withdrawn by the applicant as in indicated in the applicent 6 o appeal letter dated Januarl• 30, 1987. The applicant will provide a 33 foot driveway should the reconsideration be granted by the City Council . At the March 1, 1987, City Council meeting, Councilman Erskine, seconded by Councilman Mays, made a motion to agprOve Site Plan Review No. 86-16 and Conditional Exception No. 86--:.03 . The motion "OWN 01 to approve failed becamne, of P. tie vote (Ves Minutes for Harch 2 , 1987f City C-juncil meeting ir. Attachments) and the action of the Planning Coimnission to deny the Items prevailed . At the March 16, 1087, LO.ty Council meeting, at the request of the applicant , Councilman green made a motion to reconsider the ]twits which was approved . The hearing date was set ior. April 6 . 15 ,37 City Council meeting . t The proposed project is exempt pursuant to Class 1 Section 15301 and 15305 from the, provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act . V Not applicable, As 3n alternativoi action, the City Council could approve Site Plan Revieov No . 86-16 and Conditional Exception No. 86-10;: Lased on the following findings and conditions of approval outlined in the staff � report dated March 2, 1987 . W , 1 . Minutes from March 2 , 1987 City Council Meeting j I . City Council staff report datei March 2, 1987 CWT:JWP:RLF: jr RCA 4/6187 --2- (7659d) .rem 1 W l= REQUtgt FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Date March 2 , 1987 &brnittod to-. Honorable Mavor and City Council r Submitted by: Charles W, Thompson , City Administrate,O.j•f to PAW bi: James W. Palin , Di ,• actor, Development Services Subject; APPEAL TC THP. PLANNING COMMISSION ' S DENTAL OF TE PLAN REVIEW NO. 86-16 AND C:ONDrTYONA.L EXCEPTION NO. 86-10:3 )Mixtmnt with Cc anvil Policy? [%o(Ya [ 1 New Policy or Exceptimi Statement of Ism, acn;ommmdetian, Analysis, Funding Source, Aiternetive Actioos, Atteohmsnts: STATEMPNT OF ISSUE : Tlairismitted f-)r your consideration is an appeal by Academy Builders to the Planninq Commission ' s denial of Site Plan Review No. 86-16 and Conditional Exception No . 86-:103 . Site plan Review No . 86-16 is a request: to establish a new driveway on Frankfort Avenue with an existing alley . Conditional Exception No . 86-103 is a request to allow a 5 foot sideyard setback in lieu of a 10 . 5 foot sideyard setback . RECOMMENDATION : Planning Commission and staff recommend that the City Council deny the appeal and sustain the Planning Commission' s denial of the requests. ON MOTION BY SCHUMACHER AND SECOND BY HIGGINS , THE PLANNING COMMISSION DENIED SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 86-16 AND CONDITIONAL, EXCEPTION NO . 86-103, BASED ON FINDINGS , BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE : AYES: Leipzig, Schumacher , Pierce, Higgins NOES; Livengood, Summer,ertl, Silva ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None FINPINC-3 FOR DENIAL - SITE PLAN REVIEW NO . 86-16 : 1 . The establishment, maintenance and operation of the proposed driveway may be detrimental to: a. The general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinityl b. Property and improvements in the vicinity of such use or building. V I' I� now i 'i y,ra fir:` ., .• 1 t, f 2 . The granting of the ,site plan review will adversely affect the General Plan of the City of tfuntingt:on beach . 3 . The granting of the site plan review is not necessary in order to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights beciuse adequate parking can be provided on site without taking access off of Frankfort Avenue. FINDINGS FOR DENIAh - CONDII"IDNAL EXCEPTTON NO . 86-103 : 1 . Because thy. 9 , 000 sgvare foot lot does note exhibit unique configuration , shape or topographic f-iatur. es , there dOfts not apperar to be exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the land, buildings or premises involved that dc,es not apply generally to property or class of uses in the same district . 2 . Since the subject property can be fully devsloped within regular established sr�ttacks, and all parking requirements can be met, on site, such a Conditional Exception is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights . 3 . Granting of Conditional Exception No . 85-103 would constitute a special privilege inconsistent with limitations upon properties in the vicinity. 4 . Exceptional circumstanccc do riot apply that deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the same zone classifications since it can be fully developed with the maximum number of units allowed by code . ANALYSIS : Site Plan Peview No. 85-16 is a request to establish dual access from Frankfort Avenue and an existing alley. Section 9600 . 11 ( c ) , Access , states that, when a .lot abuts an allay, access shall be from k r _aTley unless a diffe.-crrt access is approved by the Plarnin- Commission . Conditional Exception No . 86-103 is a request to permit a 5 foot.- sideyard setback in lieu of 10 . 5 feet for the proposed carport . A request to allow a 19 foot driveway in lieu of 22 feet has been withdrawn by the applicant . The applicant will provide a 22 foot driveway should the appeal request be granted by the City Council . The applicant is proposing 4o add two unity to the site with an existing single family dwelling . The addition of two one-bedroom apartments in the rear portion of the site will Greet the Huntington Bleach Ordi,natncc Code ercept for a proposed carport adjacent: to the existing dwelling in front of the property and the request to estsb.lieli a driveway on Frankfort Avenue. The variance request has been generated because Qi-' the applicant ' s desire to have a carport adjacent to the front dwelling . The proposed gat-ages in the rear RCA " --2- ( 7420d) 1. lei. mum will provide the required parking for the existing and proposed at,ruc>'urea . '"he carport and tandem space in the proposed front driveway will be extra parking spaces beyond the requirementa of the Huntington Heath ordinance code . Comments from the traffic engineer recommend dental of the new driveway on Frankfort Avenue. According to the traffic engineer: theare is no justification for a nc,q Jri veway . The effect of s new driveway will eliminate can-street narking .for the co:.venlence of the development. In view of the fact that: L-Le driveway - -4 evs and th(* reduced sideyard setback request igvi tha result of ! 'f•�,ilehting extra parking spaces on ,site an6 tie i e, op" :.'sed to the dual access; btaff recommends of boti, kNVIRONMENTAL STATUS : The proposed project is exempt pursuant to Class I Section 15301 and 18305 from the prcv4Ls1 �n,9 of the California Environmental Quality Act: . FUNDING SOURCE : Not applicable . I ALTERNATryl ACTION: As an alternative action, the City Council could approve Site FA an Review No . 86-16 and Conditional Exception No . 86-103 based on the foll.owinq findings and conditions of appr:)val . FMING" FOR APPROVAL - SITE PLAN REVIEW NO , 66-16 : 1 . The establishment, maintenance �.nd o_)zration of the r-oposed driveway on Frankfort Avenue will not be detrimental to : a . The general welfare of persons residing or workinq in the vicinity ; b •• Property and improvements in the vicinity of such use or building. 2 . The granting of the site plan review will not adversely affect th (;eneral plan of the City of Huntington Beach . 3. Site Plan Review No . 96-'1.6 is consistent with the Ci 4y' s General flan of Land Use. FINDINGS FOUR APPROVAL CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO . :16-lV, 3 : 1 * because of the size, configuration and unit Baiting of the subject property, there appears to be exceptional or extreerdinary rixcumstances or conditions applicable to the land, buildings or premises involved that does nut apply generally to property or class of uses in the same district . ACA 3/2/87 -3 - (74200 ) `y 4 y v: �y 1 . Since the subject property cannot: be fully developed as per the i applicant ' s request , within regular established setbacks, such j a conditional exception its necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial propert_, rights. 3 . The establishment ,, maintenance and operation of the tire will not: be detrimental to the general welfare of per.;ions working in the vicinity . 4 . Granting of Conditional Exception No. 86-3,03 would not constitute a special privilege incovs:istent, with limitations upon properties in the vicinity . CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL : 1 . The site plant floor plans , and elevations received and dated January 9, 1987 , shall be the approved .layout except that the 19 foots driveway shall be reprised to depict a 22 foot driveway. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall file a tentative parcel map consolidating Lots 6 , 7 and a portion of 5 . Said map shall be recozded prior to final {nspection. 3. Driveway PNpxoach shall be a 12 foot minimum width and driveway shall be full co;,crete not ribbon type . II 4. Natural gas shall be stubbed in aL the locations of cooking I Z;)cilit:ieF . wa.ter heaters , and central heating units , 5. Low-volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets . 6 . All building spoils , such as unusable lumber, wirer pipe, and other surplus or unusable material , shall be disposed of at: an j cuff-cite facility equipped to handle them. I 7. The developtnent: shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division , And Fire Department . 8 . Pro «ide two and cane-half foot ( 2-112 ' ) -Iley dedication prior to issuance of building permits. 9 . Submit soils report and grading plans to the Depar6rent of Public works. 10 . Const ;:uct sidewalk along Frankfort Avenus per Dnpartment of Public Works Standards. ATTACHMENTS : I - Area map 2 . Appellant 's letter dated January 30, 1987 3 . Minutes of January 21 , 1987 Planning Commission meeting 4 . Planning Commission staff report dated January 23 , 1987 JWP:P.LP : kla RCA 3/'2,/87 - 4 (7420d) at .. I LLJ ' !W 11] C� u i7 g If ~� ill Al � OL l � �?ULJ e• a �{I � i m .. Ri ` F 1 Rl S 01 FA M raAl Rf 1 Ph Ri 1t! R! ! 11! I w R l tL._ Ott R e va i I 11E , Rt Ri — ..M.a.a.r IS H] lk { R I -t It] a F RI Ra #. a FPI lw 16 I 1 J;- -�.� SLO Rl , R j I ti m E RI Rf fad 1 Rt�O•S'.Z cm jR)lOak � R2_CZ V I�) al It1 R� Rf �r•t :'^Ri tip r — A7L1MU1ERG; = ATL "TAX t KILLM ■rl,i cc flLINTI GW"MA US MUKMGTON UACH TLA1+ POWI& MORON - r comb ++ d, zyC+rij ,�q ... 1 Board of Zoning Adjustments Minute.) July 3 , 1985 Page 1 Daryl Smith suggested a cnnditior. for roll up garage doors which # in his opinion , would eliminate the 2-41 requirement for park inc, in, the driveway . CAPON NOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY CRANMER , CONDITIONAL EXCEPTi*ON NO. 85-34 AND COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO . 85-13 WAS APPROVED WITH � THE FOLLowrNG FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS , BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: Findings for Conditional Excejtion No . R� 5_3_4 : �wwwr r. 1 . Applicant 's backyard faces onto a channel and because of that , at public walkway along the back of this property i--as required by the Coastal Commisjion . hs they have no privacy in their esar yard, it is necessary to allow applicant to fence off open b2ace in his front yard to Allow privacy by encroachment of five feec ( 51 ) into the front yard setback . 2. The granting of the conditional exception will, not constitute a grant of a special privilege inconsistent upon other ' properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classifications as there are other homes in the area that have either a attucture or wall at a tern foot ( 101 ) front yard setback , 3. The granting of a conditional, exception is necessary in order to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights . 4 . The granting of a conditional exception will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to property in the same zoSe classifications . 5 . The granting of the conditional exception will not adversely affect the General plan of the City of Huntington Beach . Findinge for Coastal, development Permit No . 85--13: 1 . The Coastal Development Permit application ie consistent with the C$ suffix, as well as other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code applicable to the property. 3. The proposed single family residential is located on a site where the existing street patt4in is consistent with the Certifier] Land Use Plan . .63- i 1 Board of Zoning Aejuetme!ita Minutes July 3 , 1585 Page 4 • 3 . The development conforms to the publics access and public recreation policies of Cha��aat'er 3 of the California Coastal Act because of Lhe existing wM way system abutting the rear of the property. 4 . The project conforms 'with the applicable plans , policies , requirements , and rtanwards of the Certified Land Use Flan except as provided for, by conditional Exception 85-34 Condit r+no fCo;�ditional Exception No. 85�34 : 1 . The site plan , floor plans , and elevations received and dated June 10 , 1985 shall be the approved layout with the following Modifications : aM The garage shall be constructed with automatic roll up doors on all garage doors .as shown on the plan . b. .An elevation of the block wall and a landscape plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Development Services prior to construction . AYES: Cranmec , Smith , Vincent NOES: EVane, zele€sky, ASSENT: None Daryl 1-iith stated for the record that the action taken was for the block w,11 . The pool was discussed but not included in the Corisidera::ion . TENTATIVE P'1�4tCE�L MAP 85-266 Applicant : ` car darner A request to permit consolidation of two s into one parcel . This request is covered by Cate . al Exemption, Class 5 , California Environmental Qua Act: 1970 . Staff recommended ape 1 of the extenai,)n subject to the standard conditions . Les Evans d staff why the parcel map was not presented to the eoardr ich Scott Hess reported that the mays had been waived . Mr. a stated that Development Services staff can not waive e rements of pivision 9 and if the Board acts on the request , it 14 be in violation of Division 9 . 4 4', , a2!1 ..,� lie T,li'1 I AM 1 y y I I Hinutea, H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments Eiecember 31 1.986 Page 16 00 7 . The acrxrd of Zoning Ad justment 1 erves the right to revoke Use Permit No . 86-•78 if olmt : on of theses conditions of the Huntington Bea riance Cade occurs . AYES: Eva If rey, Krejci , Toe, Smith 05 NOES: AB:: None dopP CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 86--94 Apeltookot : Carolyn L . Deden ■� il.il/IIIY II 1� nnn•�Mwlli A request to permit a six foot ( 61 ) high block wall to encroach five feet ( 51 ) into required fifteen foot ( 151 ) front yard setback . Subject property is .located at 3402 Venturi Drive ( ,South side of Venture Drive Approximately one thousand thirty feet. ( 1 , 0301 ) West of Sundancer Lane) . This request is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 5, California Environmental Quality Act , 1986 . Staff said this request would involve the wall on the East side of the property and the applicant is requesting that a six foot ( 6 ' ) high wall be allowed . Previously, the Board had approved a wall on the opposite side of the property foi privi�::y because of the public walkway along the rear of the lot . Th.tis request for a wall on the Saint side does not fall under the same ,hardship and Staff is recommending deniu.l . Chairman Poe opened the Public Hearing and Carolyn L . Deden was present . Mrs . Deden said she would like to know why it was necessary to have a hardship in order to do something on your own property. She further, said she would like to show Staff and the Board a petition which she had circulated to her neighbors and also picures she had taken of other walls located within the fifteen foot (151 ) setback . She also added they were concerned abort the aesthetics and all they were asking for was to he treated in the sem* way as others on the street . Daryl Smith asked what Mrs. Deden was asking the Board to compare. She replied they had gone up and down the street and meas.:red walls over forty-two inches ( 420 ) in height and then had the owners sign the petition. Mr . Smith asked Mrs , Deden if she was saying that all these people had obtained permits from the City car all the walls were allowed under the Code when they were built . Mrs. Deden replied she did not have that information . Ali 12/1J85 - NSA " µ, i !' Minutee, H . S . Board of !oninq Adjustments December 5 , 1986 Page 17 Mr . Swith then added that some places in Huntington Harbour were granted variances by the Planning Commission or City council when built originally because of lay of the land or where the Coastal Commission required dedications for public right-of--wry, Mr . ,smith further stated he could not recal'. a time since Pie had been on the Board that such a variance had been granted where an adjacent property owner was objecting ,. only when neighbors had been notified and had no complaint3 . Mrs . Peden asked what the complaints were and eaid maybe she coiUd show how they could take care of the complaints . Mr . Smith reminded Mrs . Deden that Mr . Goodyear , the adjacent property owner , had helped pay for the block wall and that theiz 'understanding " had ultimately turned into a *misunderstanding * when the additional 'courses" had been added to the wall . George Deden stated that Mr . Goodyear was aware tha'. a permit had been pulled for a six foot (61 ) high block wall . 'ie added that Dick Luneford had checked the wall for height and Georgi rendlin had been cut~ later to also check the wall . Mr . Deden said .hey needed the wall for security purposes becaus(i they had previously iiad three break-ins . Calvin Droege said he was an Attorney representing Francis and pegi Goodyear , the adjoiri.ng property owners at 3422 Venture Drive,. Mr. Droege stated Board was aware that this was a party wall and the initial permit !s issued by the City for a six foot ( 51 ) high wall . Mr . Droege c itinued that the two property owners in question had agreed to build :he wall five feet (5 ' ) in height and it was built , inspected, a proved and sighed off at the five foot ( 51 ) height . The appli , .nt thereafter increased it by two ( 2 ) courses and moved it forwz I five feet ( 5 ' 1 _ Mr. Droege added there utas no permit obtained f, the height Increase nor for the encroachment and my client object, . to th&t . Also, a request for permission for this construction was not submitted to the Trinidad Homeowners Asaocia. :.on r:rd Mr . Droege submitted a letter from their Architectur,il Committee. He added further that the wall is obstructing the view from the Goodyear ' s residence. The need for a wall on this side Is not the same as on tie opposite side where the awimming pool is located, and they feat the strictest applications of the Zoning Ordinance should be applied in this case . Daryl Stith asked Mr. Goodyear if he had wanted the 'staircase" altuatton . Mr. Goodyear reflied he had told George Deden he did .got want that because it would tunnel vision* his residence. Mr. Smith reminded Mr . Goodyear that he rind stated at the last meeting that this will was built and capped off and everyone was satisfied with it. You (Nrt Goodyear ) went away and, when you returned, there rrece area again Vacking on the wall . Mr . Goodyear verified Mr. Smith 's I -27- r Ohl Ft i , Minutes, H . B . Beard of 'Zoning Adjustments December 3 , 1986 Page l8 statements and added that he had instructed the. wc�rkrnen to stop because the wall was nlso on his property . Joe Robertson , owned of the property on the opposite side of the Goodyear ' s home , stated he had lived at that location prior to the time the Goodyears had built their residence . He said they had "closed" him in without any consideration for his needs . He further stated Mr . Goodyear ' s garage extended farther out than the wall the Dedens built . Mr . Robertson added that the Goodyea.-a were registering a complaint in this case but were not living by their own rules . He said he was sure the Board would want fairness to all parties in a case such as this . Mr . Deden said that, when he chipped the top off, tart had talked with Leroy Grove because the original permit was for a six foot ( 61 ) high block wall . He added that George Aend.lin came out and said he had a right to build it six feed: ( 61 ) high for privacy and security . Also, Mt . Deden added , Mr . Goodyear signed the application which shown a ninety-six foot ( 961 ) wall of six (6 ) courses in height . There was no one else present wishing to speak for, or against the project so the Public Nearing was closed . Lees Evans stated there had been a lot of testimony which was irrelevant to the issue and the Hoard needed to get back to what they had to work with - the Cade . The issue that needs to be determined is whether or not there is a land-related hardship, and Daryl Smith agreed . Mr . Smith added that the original plan which the Board had reviewed and approved was for the swimming pool site and there was a hardship in that case. Now the Dedens are asking for the same thing on the other side and there is no hardship. UPON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY EVANS, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 86-94 WAS DENIED WITH THE POLLOWING FINDINGS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE : FINDINGS FOR DENIAL : 1 . Because of the size, configuration, shape and lack of unique topographic featuren of the subject property, there does not appear to be exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the land, buildings or premises involved that does not apply generally to property or class of uses in the same district . 2. Since the subject property can be fully developed within regular established setbacks,► such a Conditional Exception is not necessar for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property tights. -i.e- 11/3/e4 - e:A 1 Ri 1 , Minutes, H . B. Board of Zoning Adjustments i December 3, 1986 Page 19 3 . Granting - of Conditional Exception :Jo. 86-94 would constitute a special privilege inconsistent with limitations upon properties in the vicinity . AYES : Evans , Godfrey, Krejci ,, Poe, Smith NOES : None ABSENT: None ONDITIONAL IXCEPTION NO. 86-95 olicant : Marbert M. Lee A r uerst to allow fifty-four percent ( 50 ) site coverage in lieu of requ ed fifty percent ( 50% ) maximum and 2 ) to permit reduction in requi d open space area . Subject property is located at 942 Eleven t Street (South side of Eleventh Street approximately two hundred fty feet ( 2501 .1 West of Lake Street ) . ThLs reque is covered by Categorical Exemption, Class S, California Aronmental Quality Act , 1986. Staff reporters hat , in reviewing. this request , it was determined that a Use Perm was needed to acccmpany this Conditional Exception . The a 1 ieant has been informed And has filers for the Use Permitr howeve it required advertisemenio. for a Public Dearing eo Staff is recomme ing a one 1. 1 ) week con':inuance . UPON MOTION BY SMITH 'D SECOND BY GODFREY, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION No. 86-95 WAS CONTINUE n THE REGVT,AR MEETING OF DECEMBER 10 , 1986, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Evans, Godfrey, K ci , Poe, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: None MISCELLANEOUS AGENDA ITEMS : USE PERMIT NO. 86-i84 Applicant : Country CottaSe A request to Change the date on previous approved Use Permit No, 86-84 to December 13, 19860 to permit ly a one ( 1 ) day Tom porary Outdoor Event in lieu of three ( 3 aye . Subject property is located at 6885 Warner Avenue ( Portion of a Northwest corner of Warner. Avenue and Golden West Street ) * staff explained that a request had been received on the applicant to change the dart• on a pr*viously approved pro jerc for a Temporary Outdoor gvant and staff rocotamended, approveal . w . • 1 , M v .l LIO ,�• C-1 A'PEAI. TO THA_ OM 02 ZON IHt c CEM ION_No_ aL,qA.--( RV T(:UELY &C=. S? aRUARX 6 . -U ... 'JANNING QQM 101f1N JZETI N!91 APPLICANWAPPELLANT: C ROLYN CEfJ M Conditional Ex4eption No. 86-94 is a request to permit a six foot high block wall to encroach fire feet into the required fifteen foot: front; a'ar'd setback at 3402 Venture Drive ( south side of Venture. Drive approximately 1 , 000 feat west of Sundancerr Lane) . On December 3 , 19860 the Hoard of Zoning Adjustments denied Conditional Exception No. 86-94 by a vote of 5 to 0 . The applicant has initiated the appeal becaune in her opinion full consideration was not given to all the facts that were available at. the tinin of the hearing . On April 11 , 1986, a permit was issued for the east wall which j required a 15 took: front setback. The property owner extended the east mall 5 feet into the required front yard setback which was not ir: compliance with the building permit issued nor in compliances with an approval foe a wall on the west side by the Doard of Zoning Adjustments . A prior entitlement , Conditional Exception INn . 85-34 , permitted a five ( 5) foot: encroachment for tlhe wall on the opposite wide of the property in order to provide a security wall around a front; yard swimming pool . Conditional Exception No . 85--34 did not allow a fives ( 5) foot: encroachment for }:+ey east wall . In addition, as of December 31, 1986 , the unpermj cted fence extension has not: been reviewed or approved by the Trinidad Island homeowner ' s Association ' s architectural review committee . Staff advised the applicant that: in order to obtain a building permit for the encroacaunesnt, a variance would need to be approved by the HZA. On December 30 19861 the 8ZA denied the applicant ' s request for a 5 foot encroachment for the east wall. The proposed project is exempt pursuant to Class 5 Section 15305 from the provisions of the California Environmetstsal duality Act . Pursuant to Section 989 , 5 . 3 , 13 (g) , the proposed project is categorically excluded from a coastal development permit . RTAFFg$ I�ArI`tCIAI: Uphold the Shard of Zoning Adjustment ' s denial and deny the appeal based on the findings outlined in the report dated January 6, 1987 , PC Kinutes - 1/21/87 -3- (72364) r . r `�Y "iX PU16LIC HURING WAS OPZM Csr+ellrn Dodesn, applicant , spoke in support of her request . She pftsnnted Vomits issued to her by the- City to construct s stall, She does ihor foal that full consideration rtas given to her by the Board of toning Ad justmantn because all of the facia were not pregentw. Vrst:cia Goodyear, 3422 Venture Drive, spcu in opposition to they request. He paid for tines half of the wait before construction and hay stated that he objects to the height of the wall which is 7 feet high In p34ces and its encroachment, into th front yard setback. doorge De dean, opplicant , st ited that the block wail in over six feat high in some places ; however, the top cour�, 2 is level and does comply with the height requirements depe riling on the point at which it is %assur+ed it one includes thq groding within the planters . He turthir stated that he cannot sect; appaovai from tre horneowner ' s association until. he nets approval from the City. There were no other persons available to speak for or against the project and the publlc hearing was clo,,iedi. A NOTION WAS 1 ADE Wi SIL'VA, SECOND BY SUMMERELL, TO APPROVE CONDITIOVAt� EXCEP'"T1'CN NO. 86-94 , %EMT iy":NDINGS AND CONDITIONS Ob APPROVAL;, BY T14E FOLLOWING VOTE AYES: Pieyr;;e, Summere l l , Si.lv�! W)ES : Leipzig , Schumacher, ,.ive ngoo(-' , Higgi,n;; ABSENT: None ABS`I`A'rN : gone C+ammlosioiter Livengor,,d suggeste l th tit an aMi t iona l finding bt:. included in they findings for denial furt-hE�,_ rtai:i,ng tiny position of the Planning Commission. A NDTION WAS 74ADE BY LtVENGOOD, SECOND 13Y LF-MIG,- TO DENY C01MITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 8 6�-94 .11TH FI. .7)t yGS, BY THE FOLLOWING Arts: Leipzig, Schumacher, Li.vengood , Pierce, Higgins , Sutwprell , Silva NONS: None MWXXT: None AMAIN: MorePAS ft Xinutes 1✓21/07 -4u- (7236d) y y, t t , "LN,08 FOR DENIAL : ! . because the subject property is an average sizb lot (6, 400 * $gU&ro feet ) X has a normal rectangular configuration, and lack& unique topographic features ( the site is flat accept for normal grading rtqs�uirenonts) , there does not appear to be exceptional or extra►erdinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the lands buildings or promises involved that does not apply generally to property or class of uses in the same district . 2 . As the evidence presented showed the ,subject property can be fully developed within regular established setbacks , such a Conditional Exception is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment: of substantial property rights . 3. Granting of Conditional Exception ran . 86-54 wouldconstitute a special privilege inconsistent with limitations upon properties in the vicinity. A2,PjTIQJ! At,, UNDING, F PLANNING COMMISSON: 1 , Eased on written documenta ;ion the 5 fo*t ericroachmenL and t},%! finished thiioht of the existing) wall is not in compliance with the variance granted July 3, 9885, nor does it comply with the Fence permit and site play, isnued April I10 1986 . C-2 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 86--58 AND CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO . 86-110 _ �wT.w��V�IFw LICANT: ARCO PETROLEUM PRODUCTS Condition Use permit No. 86-58 is a request to alter an existing gas -station adding a canopy and gas pumps at 18572 Beach Boulevard, al the Garfield avenue side of the property. As required by the ping code the gas station moat be brou-=-•ht into conformance with I current code requirements for service stations. Conditi 1 Exception No. 86-110 is a request to maintain A 200 square foot pla er at the corner of Beach Boulevard and Garfield Avenue .;.n lie f 600 square reet , and a 5 foot wide planter along Beach Soul rd in lieu of 10 feet . L�AiVrRONMENTAL STATUS: The roposed project ;s exempt u r Class 1 , Section 15301 from Catli�ornia 8 virunsental Quality JA gz2mv3EMQEJEhT STMS: Th* subject proporty is within the Zeach levard Redeve?apment ,project Area. The Redevelopment scoff has iewed the request and enecurages inthe roved landscaping and signage. evall landscaping proposed for site exceeds the required mini 100 and condi.tionx of approval require an architecturally mpat{ble soannent: beat be installed on the existing froescan q corner pole sign. pC Minuten - 1,/21/67 -5- (7236d) p' M 9/C0 }C0 C. cepro 3 4 - „ 1 Hnw no AM MY /XWAGW mr em moxmv� w tv*gw m r m nW ili T.n sA..,.ti� ��rrH�•� ,t �r��f//� r 1 Mal10 1 r FZNXFzpr '- W7 P a i r PzRnXF2ZrPND R t 77 T i II R1 ! is f L;' h A# >f ;'4 i}` !o 'ip 401 ti R 1.0 Aje { ay ':i ... . _BVI PrAWEklerti .t 1 ; �h- 1 I { li I I� f�T fY,�J�i�i�•'u r ++ J :? f s i; hpY s t - 1 _ r4b l: �r�•�� .��.� �! ' j �1p j'!iisib is f i a1.•-y. 'a t.�..r• ..-s.i '�—... — arLY.��Vi��-�` .. _ •.��,:�.,73s._,S.- _ ., . Q� . • ,�C t p+ ov r• lb r , t ti 3 _ • lam.a'S' `i �•Yom C ;• ,r ., 5�+• " 1`ijL fir:•r 4.1 }I '♦♦ � '� ► ,��- R mot. �• y,T t _4 t +� � 1 1�•' �'T• Mr f ` L -Ir . _ •/ �. :�• ��`fit y '�_ IF I Y r Y , , A : / � 1 - r - ;a Af 1. .Z hlttt '� `T �. �• f AM All -- Ef k •i , Iris^ L' it + ' j n � 4 � .h `i•,try: ", � .1 � . � r IT � r • ipp ��. y t ..' _Q Ll r r 14 i ' � y Y• 1 11 I i x t • ,� 1,L��; 1 �1 ar/�1��)i- � � F .M��F tt• - /, t -( 7f: , r +� •:r , ., +#;,.; :y� �� ,,' Y' 1. T K •9 tYw r S r- 0 Ar y,a •�v Arm►! ,Lt.�� ` ^�•... �moo' � r,, -� _- •�'� At- �,I•.`%:":1"J � �.!•^ � �} ..+4 -S Itp. �I Mf. Jam► � � ' w TJ�11 M � ` 1 `, ,� � .��,• _� � as ,{ '. • AA L � 4 M AN ophd 46 ti AL WK �y 4 {• � �- � � ♦ �- i 1� In .. • ��`r � {,;/i ;��1I,� �} ,�10 ,•�' _ate,_ - '_4r +��*��'��. •� 1. 4fo - � � C! l.�Y u'�';•�� ,� +i .. - r ''• - �r ♦ S 1 o, e y t s?',� , ��: �, , � r � `� ..`Syr ' Iln•+� 71. �yry 'z( i IyMfl'iy I i •r �� r ' ' + r CITY OF HLJWIN%gN noidw---Vw�w f' 200 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA " CFFICIx OF TW airy CLERK ti r March 5, 1987 :^ Aox& Builders 1p W thrope, Suite N ,a Pi tia, 92670 tM City Cal of the City of Hlmtington Beach at its regular meeting held Mo y, March 2. 1997, failed, by a tie vote, a motion to grant your appeal to f the Plowing Commission denial of Site PIULUvienand Conditional tweptfon 26-•103; therefore the actin-not the &Ming Commission standa. ;., 'Phis it a fiwl decision. You are herttby notified that pursuant to provisions of Suction 1094.6 of the Cade of Civil procedure of the State of California you ,.rt "' have ninety days from March 5, 1987 to apply to the counts for judicial review. If your have any questions regarding this matter, please contact our office -- $36•-5227, Alicia M. 'Wentworth City Clerk AMii/:CD:es �cloeu� cc: City Attorney Development Services Director ` depbow. 7144014MI r� rr �nf�LLl" ,V'i frµ ,,,, . �., r ,W.. y � •. rl' �.,s -fie='T'' w ` r•y�. .y. F �,. w � ✓wA 1 r y c •. ;� S .� 1l�Y r.f'A �,�M' +rfyr , ... . r • . .,e.,r. . ..,. {',K.,,„r•,,i. .,,iy .. •, ^X: ' 'll�,' � w' '. 4 1 J'i QQ Oy too ih ofth A"Wtfti"s of 611 WWO + ab" v" at "0 #0N+wr Cowl at 0►"" "Alt,, "t A-"04. dew $ to Molentim. 106 1, And zhos elbow+sir ON f am a 1 of.04 United States sewd it resident of ,• w . #0 COM* afQ► M: 1 am &M the sp at olghlow ! VWs. and not a party to ar IpWasted in the below ohiltled mauler. 1 am a pr%dpal clerk of the Orange Crust DAILY PILOT, with which is combined the NEWS-PRESS, a newpalw of pw'►e M chculati n, i:• pr*tod and publiatlwd in the City of Coals Mew. ' Cout%ty of Cramps, State of California, and that a No " of Public Hearing 1 of which copy attached hereto is a true end complete copy, was printed and published In the Costa Mesa, Newport 84rssh, Huntington Beach, fountain Valley. J Irvine, the South Coast Communities and La°una Beach Issusa of said newspaper for 011a t:im�„ aa�t1 -1 WE *M to wit the Isstue($) of February. 1 9 , 198 7 a 1qa los— t declare, under penalty of perjw fir, that the foregoing Is true and correct. Executed on 1+`ehriary4 at Costa Mesa, Californlai. $Ipnature PROOF OF PUBLICATION Mai k 36 O M. L. 1 l `' ►`t`�` � TPA-Frlam. +- �`•- ... l . ■ M' �' r'�t i t t....�•� '>i'C'��'�`�T D,�.� � �-.�► + �',p��-� t� �- �t�i.,� C'�..J`'f"�1 �► .,'�o ' .a O VA c�.. 15 FC-�-' Pe,> 5''PlE c—Z ,A L, ' ^,'` (� �1� tom.l 1�7\,>'�' �� '-P�.�. �' �' � .,.�;' • . ..y'��F�,�, k PA t—tJL AC, t�4-j Ji3 � pub11. . 2/19/87 i s R Wncs W x� ISSION' L OF E PLAN REVIEW N0�S DENIA SIT 86-16 AND CONDITIONAL r �■. ■YN II Yr i■1.■O��I ■ I■Mfw- r ww11■ !' Qx{ thdt the 5datLeStm beach Clay Council will hold +M 00414 SUS to the Cowell Cbamber at the euatington searh civic , t. 2000 walk Istnots *Atinstan beach, California, as tb* date a w $e4t,9ate4 belee to r eive et and a east der the scaremlata of all glob to be bran! relative to the li app action described belo�r. n, Syr Merch 2. 1987 7.00 P.M. �t Appeal - Site Plan Review 86-16 and Conditional Exception 86-103 ' 4t MiF. APPE LARTf Academy Builders ` `r 3113as 811 Frankfort Avenue (west side of Frankfort Avenue approxir,�ately 150 feet north of Hill Avenue) i y . � An ap al has been submitted to overturn the Planning Commission's dent of Site Plan Review No. 86+-16 and Conditional Exception No. 86-103 which states that new driveway cut will not disrupt traffic and that the request for a 5 foot sideyard setback does not represent a' special privilege. M . . STATUS: Pursuant to Class I , Section 15301 , this protect is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental ^' Quality Actf 1986. Ai A copy of Site Plan Review No. 86-16 and Conditional Exception No. 86-103 are on file in the Department of Development Services. i ALL 1r1f1'MSTXD PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit evidence for or against the application as outlined above. All applications, exhibits, and dedcriptlons of this proposal are on fife with the Office of the City Clark, 2000 Main Street, Huntington •each; California; for inspection by the public. HUMPINGTCN BEACH CITY COUNCIL By: Alicia Me Wentworth City Clank (hone (714) 536-5405 Dated 2/12/87 lrp�f .r S �'11°ryrl�frF°I y71� 'r �•'. i r+ � L i- M wr r A'� .w y r1L � + � A�, .r .� *, • R r 4 W� rS•� !�p r L r �',.,,� 'A d 1`,r,. i Y � rf � r�.�. � • }r `e � i . :111 r r ^ Ifi r , �' 7L�1��• �Y I ` /'^ 1� ~".+�.��. r r .„ I r� .9+�r'1' i�. 1 ti. � � ",y �• 1 i , In��'�r�. � ,�A, � �M�r : ;� 4,r��' .+T� �,r• r •A 1t 4, t'�I• �. 7T - I�fl�j 4,,�.•' ^. .per'+ \ �' 'i�R' !'• .Rr�, r7 r �r� h h 1 1' l'. 'N f' 1'�-n '1 �•, � ! � Ti'SN /y�:i�{r' /y„'!�(,F�,.`. ��}f' r `� � '� ,If,",. ✓• � � � ; p ri'�,1 ;, •� 1r�1� r ',11f. ��(,.•.�r'„ {..,• r ..� 'tr � �,. ^ •' r 1 •,� r r ' M'N � « �. . �..,. ' 1 r �� 1 1 j 1 'rrrpGn-7- 1 f y r r -i a„C� :�b r� �' e/Yd:{�,, .;sir ry''ry�dw��''A,-�.�M �W.�. :�'.1'. ,'� r„/. 11 �.r y^• ...hc w y ,fA S ' OF-SITE PLM REV NI). 66-16 AND CONDITIONAL ol 1 6 ! the hotlastao Beach City Cotmeil Wih hold f lte is the Oameil chowbor at the Mutttington leach Civic e` a stwooto 9021441 A fefth. California, an the date and ► r t4w IsWkomd Wow to reaeiare *ad ams#tdor the statements of sal ;q+U h4e0 "1441 o to the a pl.iaatift described below. R• a Meth 2 ti 1967 �,. lot 7:00 P.M. r: Appel - Site Plan Review 86-15 and Conditional Exception 86-103 to r, 1 PEi.laNrs Acade" 8ui 1 dare 911 Frankfort Avenue (west side of Frankfort Avenue approximately 150 feet north of Hill Avenue) ' r.• I won: ft appeal has been submitted to overturn the Planning Commission's denial of Site Plan Review No. 86-16 and Conditional Exception No. j 66-103 which states that new driveway cut will not disrupt traffic and that ttie request for a 5 Moot sideyard setback does not represent a special privilege. i t 101I. gTA�`gs: Pursuant to Class I, Section 15301 , this pr6 ject is r--tir..r •— rrirr..�.a... exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, 1986. { t K: A copy of Site Plan Review No. 86-'16 and Conditional Exception No, 86-103 are an file in the Department of Development Services. ALL tOTUSSM PUSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express 00610ts or submit evidence for or 4gainsrt the appitcatioa as *atIicsed above' All applicati,00s, exhibit&, and descriptions of this proposal are an file with the Offitt of the City Clank, 2000 Main Street , Huntington sewn; California, for inspection by the public. HMINGTON MUCH CITT COUNCIL Sys Alicia N, Wentworth City Clark fhaae (714) 336-5405 Doted 2/12/87 rR .,'T r' �I 'S1� r:r,{ i: r':, .+,� �� r��f ! �i. �� 1 . ,� t �y A. •:rl:�.v ' +• �� Q`+M•' i r r9 'i rl h ,''., Y 4 7 ?ti ��w M Y� 1 r r �� r 11 �dr �I ,1 'Y• ti F ',r_rl r �, r .,, }rl ry, ,.,� � .e, hear 1Sf r d �'" I f �}y��y •�f, 1 � 1 ��TT 1 y l,al lfi( brv.. �r 1L r#Oak 1 h1 Nr ✓ 1� �..e�J� • Y � � ..4 r+r1„ � •��• 1 rlil l�',y •' • r � �'_ •., I { #{, �A��M, .l�`l�'.�' ,�.P 1*� Y.,1 •• .T� .�♦ A.,',r •��r.�+l�yl;. � '� 1 '+1 r,�'^r'"/' i'1 A "^ '•y 1• •,, X ^1� k' �'F�✓'� '.h ^•1'r r7•.11 .y,• ♦ .. titi'Jj`�...r,rryy�� .,1-. ••` f •(r ',,yy , ', •G r.r. � �rt. '♦ !,sir', ftbUsk ti77^..7Lr1 •�• �F., � r �t, '�:1; r+1,+IG, �,i,':I. " . I .' 1� T w 1.i:�r r • ♦ r � 1 •�, '�1e• I,;�' j a+ I.r{ '1 , tiVr if {; �, is I �F'!'•1.. 'y ., 1 ;1~ 14�..tiA_� .� i� >'* �''� �li�i LL nr 'f :%�'• t•,F,1 �' 3i �Gr�t ry".1 • Ff,t -, "o COMICU, chadber At the ftatingtoa "Mb "via punt, MAt ton Donb. Ca lfenia, ft the dsts lid 6hopia ' a�rtog Wow to stceivi and coasidev the statements of LU pax,smo Ao tlab to he beard ralative to the application dewribed beLow. { MIN ' i� r - • 4 &041 41 ot&41 dt t T i APv bM 106d 490 �tn�� t air ► 3 df-AAL-It v v� t�04 vjt i , �' �4/jtp"' +' �G Ir. �� o► 11 ,prI �l1 l j,c - ��t,,i�y�' "t"o G�a�►>r 1 �J�l. �� a r �'t�h �'e •�G�" 1� ?411 It ILL DffEUSM PERSONS are in-4ted to attend said heazing and express opinions at submit evidence for or a$airist the application ex outlined abase. All applications, exhibits, sad descriptions of this proposal axe on file rith the Office of the City Clerk, 2000 Main Street, Nuutl oldton Beach, Call ofrnssi for luspectloc by the public. iitTN'fINC1DN BEACH CITE COMIL P7: Alicia M. Wentworth City Clerk Phone (714) 536-5403 " . 'S r�� ,ML. ir � av '•'o 3 J ., � r:.dt '! +rf r ;1 1 � ;; J* r '� • r• 'Pill�1 r 1 'r }p1y6� ' 1, V XF v/K` ., �i *Yr.{',-• q h�,, r i. Ar w t err�,+ q ,�i i�{�iN ,) �Y N 1'w �' ' I , 'Y' r r �• ! �l�j � r,J r ��r ` 'v tin•{'.� •}?i, „w �� ti �� + 1 �+{� S� 4 •r iv il..y •II1��!/'/'� "•'�1,� '� '1�17S�YN'�N.v`lM1r�''� `iW'�'�ti a ' 1' .�V'!ti,.�r ,, ��► ldsYs 633 frankfort 167 V, M„msetb we ON" ltuatieagton Bch,C.4.92848 Pl "0Co.926" 024-232-16 72.B.Peterson 002 Indianapolis b+ iratingt Msh�Ce.92648 Huntington bch.Ca.92648 024-232-04 0$4 ` N 024-232-18 Y 1 • ' .a 11� for ws Apt.A 23.,I.2araten 4712aeva tp Mustlagtcn� Hch,Ca.82648 Hun Gngton 8"1 ,CA.90760 Huntington Seh,Ca.9Z648 024-211 -25 OZ4�232�3 024•-232-19 13.H.Dunn �ufaan 3AA t 24.H. Y1801 2tiaatall 822 Geneva837 FrertScfr�rt Garcia Grove Ca.92645 Huntington Beh.Ca.92648 024-232-06 Huntington, Bch,Ca.92648 024M231-28 024-232-21 14.P.Todd 4. swra�ausar 2062 Crown Raaf 25.D.Thoses P.0, b0Y 1295 827 Frankfort Brom.C6.92621 Huntington Bch,Ca.92646 Huntington Bch,Ca.92648 024-231-34 024�232-07 024-232-27 °;.J.Topollwski 15.D.Pate 26.Webb Investninets Huntington Bch,Ca.92649 10051 Beverly Dr. 81S Gaasrs See M.Huntington bch,C4.9Z+�413 024-232-06 024-232-30 024-231-30 x0 #7 6.G.C1ark 16,28,31. B. Webb 27.K.Meyers 806 Florida 26 Pony Ian. 801 Frankfort Huntington Beh,Ce.926113 Rolling Hilla,Ca.90274 Huntington Beh,Ca.92648 024-231-40 024-232-10,24;242-12. 024-232-31 7.b.Na recta 17.C.Renn*r 29.H.Vander ' 823 Frankfort 807 Frankfort � Huntington Bch,C,e.92648 808 1'lasida Huntington Uh,Ca.92648 024-232-11 Huntingtdp 8ch ,Ce.9264$ 024-231-�41 024-232--25 84.Huff 18.Y.Vidal 30.H.Hegrin 3 Hill St. 811 Frankfort 628 hartford Huntington Beh,Ca.92648 iuntington Bch,Ca.92648 Huntington 8ch,Co. 92648 024-Z32-01 024-232-12 024-241-13 . 9.C.Darden 19.N.Dolan 32. J.Levis 808 Gei:eve 819 Frankfort 637 Frankfort Huntington Bch,Cw.92648 Huntington &.-h,Ce.92648 Huntington Sch.Ca.92648 024-232-02 024- . 32-13 •. ' 024-242-20 104.1vans 20.R.Deadmn 33.H.Stovall 10552 81 Mansano 829 Frankfort 948 11tn St. Fountain Vs11ey.C4.92708 Huntin ton Bch,CA.97648 Huntington bch,Ca.57648 I►uoig-ni 024-231-15 mA.AAI-14 1 r %•"' , r'L P �;�� r{ytSj'��'' " „r �.� r � W ,yy r y� t1 �` ��.. r �'J•.` �� 1 YYY rl 1 �I- } �S 1��''$�,i ' iJll r y�'iWF:+ i �� Y " "� rt �IY71•i'�'1' '�I .� a1 S . WA rl'��{Apj, b ;,r�� `,, �'.I yr �': ��'1,• ', '� > w�,,�( I�y f�» '�;p� tj�' AI fFr�,. � � + ,r•�fF yf r% J 1' y !"r `LN 111��4 1 " y� I''4�•{I�1 r 1�,'�} � � . �/ 1 r. I al' �' 1 4 j'J�J.. .�y•, Y' � ' r � y � { ",Sfi " J �'�' , r ��( e•r J, T r" I r11' .1, r r 1 _ �S r + '4:,v t' �r'r, 4 ' +#• :1 ��, A,� FA' N 4 'Ilk 414 v+ a�*, rilk' ■ 1 V 'h 1'W Y r �1 1 r I'1 1 r i y• kk-.L& � 1 L I/p ' �A, ,1 /fit 1%� •/�,�I�: r . �{i• . � , I 9�i�. r r,�,yY,4��j1C it J•.�,i, 11 ��('.,�„^ � ''�� ,1 r I' r 1 � �1tlort SI.M.Mrc XIGY 1�,:• r - 7 Frankfort r Nuctinston Sch.Co.92644 024-242- 43 r 'l h 38.R M 8ahra Brothers • 1511 1. Santa Clara $ants AnatCa.92701 0 -250- 72 , 4�• J � ' `•1 1,r� l I • I.1 ), r S . 1 I / i T9t `��. ��; ,• y,�r.�,� ra' 7k y. A"�� '�;•xp+ �,F,�` 'Y '` • � � lh�i S a, it i� tl 'h i f 0 1 �.� To L MUC RING N. MA DAM T ty• 1 �, � � 4 4 h 1 r'• . � V1 & RURIMF VNIM THE ATTACM VML WrICS ,pax Ila Y Of WOAF 1 it •�. t altiated tIy: Planning Commission Planning Departmert Petition Appeal _ Other Adoption of Environmentsl Statue (x) YES NO 1 1 LVI=grf*t to JL1246L.6�pk �, Planing Department - Extension # 27 r fvr additiogal information. # If ep.64LIt please tre+nsm�t exact wording to be required in the legal . .; .. •-- Y' ELyw� ,�t+ r � *W `,n`'t•• �y+C!�•M�jyw•�r��J $��' � 1 T��. ..�� or��(' • r r r L�� t ' 1.a r,, I !G,N��S. •� ..' h�•,rw �'� { y�_'� ,•' ,} � ,�,�, ,fir ,�' �# .�R �� x�, "'�t � •�, �4�C-� � �, O"T Y , � 1 n f ��tL � ��• 1 . ki y4+'� � M'r � 4 1,,1 1 1"� � ''11, ( /�"I�S Lei V�'�y.•{'' 3�'1, 'I�,J`i4�' ';�� "r �'� �� 1 •f,'f� 4 11 1� 1 � f�"��f � •� ' 1 � y.''^l '� •II 1V��i �'� d!�' � 'r`.Y �y i '! iYjl',/1 1• '�{� �•.1 i.Mn�M1 .� y. r. . ' iA �� 11' liii� "�1� y •1 ••�,,Y 11 ', 1• 4 f OP OF IM M ) 7.� 70rangathorpe, Suite N PTA*antis, CA 92670 I1, n` f City COUAai l of they City of Huntington Beach owierruldd the decioion of the Planning CoYmnis,eien and aWroved the decision F' lTdq*m , 71"M4MI F- Y' �IN�� ' ti' I i,f,• r � � 'Y MS I ''r r ., L. � ' t � 'l + ki r' 4 5 rl r A % �' , '• S 40, r ,fir I.•r, �. � r. i 9I � ' .! 1 ti'.. ! '1 ,.y ram.•.r '. l ' ; . i S .1 y• ' f AtAD Pul 16, Ar S I 10 99 ) to Usior ao6osoibiility to the resitsaae. go WjU •&11pv.. for impler off s ree pa Yirig for the f rii'i* WOO else.* �• Will,' pr6vt clOser access to the h q for late of the ` 4. the ** pit ;& rch o�►rrrheAg will provide shelter 9'x+'m 1�'4s00r, Lee* , groceries children urns •te. lksir L a s to a prade stall from the oQU �rm the lido. (b) dwelling Cage of three its m lot) will t sguests for the thin cat* sMe frog► Fraratfort Stroet which is e 0 read off' 811 Frankfort. Pr th oposer! s curb w out for �k # rit an cement drivevey to aarport* y *U residential properties o Loa (a) ', fuot 'tot we& the proposed units are developed, there wi.'tl na to be' a cc venient erntree to the main twit $ auto* umit famllr will have to `continually enter t h the *ner, park wul walk to the main unit. This P dsturb the rear =it residences. It vi11 also be InconvWdent if there are items to carry areas the ladf at the house will way hays to do a short distamee if there w a an, access to the front* It ftu 42.80 provide easy offpstreat parking for guests who visit the ma►ia vomit, especiany for zT grandparents. (bb) My r TLre a special pornit for a curb cut, but baciciout ofa proposed driveway (across the ne'w curb out) is cato a vex.. slow traffiaked street] to the northq Frankfort. (a) As I towhsd on In (a) it will provide private and vndis- tubed auto scoess to tee Front Uat. (d) Ourb eat will `oe the oW.r thing regid.red. It 411 not got:Mse the public safety as I 've s*a a seireral drly ways e ait Aitcluding coo recently approTed for a frontal se►d�,/res + �r reme atg3q FrwWort, only three doors awrjr (to ND th an au -4e- sac) . M A x' t!� r day v131 r�oT aa`ide a logil, easy and off- street �►� 34 fog the fend ly ivasts of the wLa unit. ,� ,�RY�� 4�1� �j .� , � �� 1� nR�1'M}r •�ri�l'�,''�,��'•r L:�°M X�'v •`T� '��"��+� , t + 4 , II•, l o _ .\r.. r r I f•. I 1'I Is I��•�T�Y.M ii Y• .ai •rmi ,A IW --M• �'\. i1.�,. .� �••.,, .ir♦ • ♦, • .• i.i.a• ^ .•, �. •• •� � r ��., t.. � I ,��'rid � ,j� •��Jj. �r �,.• ��,lS� y M '� �h•, �a��.. v��r� ,� r'•.er� F� � � i �+:i y r r r i r KI r rT .*; R e, y. �*�j}7 .i r � rl n ru ,iK �, �t /1yy4 �A ,r .11 ° 'C A,"• �*`! f Z It 51 � t+mr. , l r+r 1 ';6, � :A M� � ,r 1� 4.w i r ,�, + �•r �- w r � �I r �� t � r � ��r� a. 'G��.. � n . �� .,,• i +.•1Krh �� .e•� '' �l5lrr�a � � .W .U• ;.Nlaw .. ,,, r r" .M ti •� s.• �' .,5 a,ylM• 'r' k�c• .lam=' rry, .Yr� • or TK u �v th,a • r' !larch 23, 1"7 Academy Guilders 187 k. Ormpthorpe Suite N Plocentiev CA 92670 The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at its regular meeting hold Mandey, March 169 1987 voted to reconsider its action on March 2, 1987 regarding denial of Site Plan Review No 86-15 and Conditional Exception ft-M. The Couniil scheduled reconsideration of this matter for its ril 6, 1987 meting. f: If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact our office- 536-5227. Alicia M. Wentworth City Clerk ccc City Attorney Developmat t Services Director `."_?� + It ;4 y �� e� cd ��1 ^•�t�)�.,"'�'''� . � .. �- r. � n � � 1 • yy�'n• .� 1 I r nJ � III, y. ! r Yf� � • ! Y 1 •a Li +r LLI.. }• , 4` 'n , [n„ I ■�■wiJt r. tt• ,r�wfstsrrdwlM'rtl�`'{,'.• .,-.,�'�V . , .. . ..� ------- ��..�r.rr -- —— — --- --_-- 1J' Fi, ,•mil , 1 , A • �II 'J �r Yyl 1 1,rJ �' ' ' , y z hMrat+orr Ipn�nt rvices ospartnN�rnt f9poltil iv was Plarming Commission ".': t ► 1 Davelopm*nt hetvicis 11'tp a January 6, 1.987 APpRAL TO TRIS BOARD 4P ZONING ADJUSTMENT'S DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL OURPTION HO. 86-94 w AV XC"IT/ Cmroi a aeden DATE ACCEPTED: moo ; 449 e��tut* Drive ecom or , 1986 tAn Hunt. %each, CA 92647 a MANDATORY !LOC. SING DACE v;rmit a six foot ( 6 ' ) r , AM hill . block wall to encroach fiw'a feet (51 ) into the ZONE: Rl-CZ (Low Density rehired fifteen foot ( 151 ) Res dential District- • _ f t ont yard setback . Coastal zone) T�2 3441 Venture drive (south GENERAL PLAN: Low Density side of Venture Drive ResideRial approximately 1 , 000 feet west of Sundancer Lane ) . EXISTING USE: Single family '•' gls 1l'tt� f ho lisp 6, 480 squarer feet 1 .0 .VlOWND ACTION: Uphold the board of zoning Adjustment ' s denial and deny the appeal bond on the findings outlined in this report. On D646, r A4 1986, the Board of zoning Adjuatments denied EXception No. 86-94 by a vote of 5 to 0. The applicant N in tiit*d the appeal becAuge n her opinion full consideration ! not given to all the facia that were available at the time of r; AND VSEj XONING AND GENERAL PLAN D1581GRATIONS: •�` .,.�.r..,•,.1..:.,• .ter. gn.,.i ns...Mw.�..� ndr- nest -of Subjeot property: 099MAt PLAN DE$1014ATION: Low Density Residential t1 = R1-CZ (Low Density Residential District-Coastal Zone) UND tissI Single family dwellings _;jkfi1We 1' ' r, Ok r 'R 0000Mb FLAP DJ RIONATI ON s Open Space-water S1 1tt WK -Cz (Water Recreation District-Coastal zone) UM Vol: Harbor Channel e , 04d. to ject iA exempt purcuant to Class 5 Sel.t ion 15305 bwcnar of the California NnvirDnnontal C:uality Acto putsusht to tion 989. $. 3. 11(g) , the proposed project is categarj Golly 6valuded from a coastal dtvelopment permit . r Not applicable. met apvl-1 cmbllb 9 t O 1W6E AIM MA1.6.SI„a t ', u ftargtl�i�cof 8xiartiae Remarks 9110. 12 Front yard iS feat 18 Fret East wall setba ek for enorotiches 5 foot all atructureas into front yard 44 iota s setback O 1 ttl Up 1996t at permit was issued for the seat wall which r4g4t. 6d a ,15 foot front setback ( so* site plah datod April 11, 19 ) rho ,xwarty owner extended the east wail 5 foot into the tf r t ,.yard setback which was not its noopliance with the chi ari ,, the aZplicMat than in brag to obtain • building Mtoti 108 k .. t�cwhaert, variance would naed to " ajpproved. by ►. O ftvoi6er 3i 1966, the BSA derrfsd the b lidant ' n request far at 9 Foot aenoroafihoont for the "at wall (see BSA minutes for ak. 9 i 1516) . A p tiaer -entitlaeaaat+ Conditional Exception No. 85-34, pern1tted a fiwo Of foot oner"chloont for the wall on the opposit* side of the prop*rty in order to provide a security wall around a front yard Siff Report - 1/6/87 1 r/r , / J i ,fit h ' .,y swiming pool. Conditional Exception No. 85-34 did not allow a . five (3) foot encroachment for the east wall * In addition, an' of December 31, 1986, the illegal fence extension has not been reviewed or approved by the Trinidad island Homeowner 's Association 's architectural review committee. 1009 XMCOMME jDAT;--,oN: based on the facts that the east wall extension violates the appr,*,y Ape 1•ir, 1986 building permit, . Conditional exception Not 05 >l . d44.; Flat, grAnt a five (5). foot. encroachment .for. the **at wall an; artditional lxcaption Not 86-94, a request to encroach five ( 5) K; feet r6i the east wall was denied, staff recomme nds,.that the Planning Commissi,on uphold the Board of Zoning Adjiistmernt ' s denial r and deny, thw appeal based on the following findingarg r; !JXDI,KG8 FOR DENIAL: 1 . Because of the sxse, configuration, shape and lack of unique ' topographic features of the subject property, there does not appear to be exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or . conditions applicable to the land, buildings' or premises involved that: does not apply generally to property or class of , uses in the same district . j 7. Since the subject property can be fully devel.,oped within regular established setbacks, such a Conditional Exception is ��• not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights. 3* Granting of Conditional Exception No. 86-94 would constitute a i special privilege inconsistent with limitations upon properties In the vicinity. 1�4.t�:,A TBMAT1VL_AC -Overturn khe board of zoning Adjustment ' s denial and approve the appeal to Conditional Exception No. 86-94 based on the following fludirgs and conditions of approval. yhOXFO, , 9'LR A ESL: 1 , App4tcant 's backyard faces onto a channel and because of that , a public walkway along the back of this property was required by the Coastal Commission. As they have no privacy its their rear yard,-It is necessary to allow applicant to fence off open space in bid. front yard to allow privacy by enciroach+nent of five feet (9 ' ) •intro the front yard setback V 2. The granting of the conditional exception will not constitute a grant of a upecial privilege inconsistent upon other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classifications as there are other honer in the area that have anther a structure or wall at a ten foot (101 ) front yard setback . Staff Report - 1/6/87 -3- ( 7006d ) :.;, �,y ter' r ,:�r:fJ;',I • t •ttry',; "p • � 1� lift ing of Conditional Exception 00. 66-`M will not be mSterih Y detrimontal to the public welfare, or injurious to �N to erkr $n the iraae sons classifications because the necessary ook corner outo-off !or pedestrian and traffic visibility 11 bb provided: gruiting of the Conditional Exception gill not 4kdversely ' act;. t�+6 mineral elan of the City of Huntington ReAcho Aga god . -TA-z x t i Low: Itldor plane, and alevations 'reealved and dated rr' 12, 19h61, • shall be the approved layout . 3. A1.1 bOilding spoils, such as unusable 1 mbsir, wire, pipe, ♦nd ,. oth+M' buf lus or unusable Material she I be disposed of at an btf-situ ecilit equipped to handlb them. 1, Ths' d0e4o ply with all applicable provisions of Dt shall bom the brbihdride Cbddp Building Division, O'd tits Depattment . litea map 2. atte plan dated December i2, 1966 3. Lettet from applicant dated December 10, 1986 Letter , from Trididad pntaeowner 's Associated dated Wovember 28, 9. "mutes tram the' - July 3, 198S BSA meeting j 6. Minutes 9COO the Deee�ber 1, 18h6 BSA meeting, '). Suildihq p�blrmit. and a►pptobed site plan dated .;r rii Ill, 1986.0 which required• 19 foot setback for east wall i .JNP. t kla, r i ' Staff Report w 1/6/67 } 1 y,1i �.. � •� 1. �, 3� �, •� '�� ,y `'' f� r'• ti ! w 4f > �` � +Y NA 41 1 V l ty �� gihC2 �r a�' i'A y 4aember la, 1986 +` Too, plaming Co.. isnion in the City of Huntington Beach q d of ZoningAdjustments meetings on July �� 198 S g 43 mawAn CoWitional Exosption No. 85-13 and 85- 34 0 and another apoling and resulta thereof held on ,December 3o 1986 ooncerning CorAitional Bacoeption No . 86-g49 Derr Nem berg s Thin fetter is being written to requeat a hearing with the •plwmi hg Comiaei on# and myself (,Ira. Carolyn Ceden ) a property► owner of x eirigle-family dwelling in the city of Huntington Bemoh, concerning aotio taken the Board of Zoning Adjustments against , as a lioant � � g � � U9 pP e for ,c*rUln rviancon on .property looated at 3402 Venture Drive in the City of Riotington Beach. t Tba gotidpo taken by the Board of Zoning Ad justmwits in my opinion were Unfoir due to the fact that full •aonsideration'-Vas not given to all pertinent facts that were available to them at that time. I sincerely hope that you will grant me thin hearing and that you will feel 'free to take advantage of the fact that I will be available ' o you in any capacity) so that you will have gull and complete first hand knowledge of the facts from the beginning. This inaluda-.� %ny on-site visits by any and all of the Commiasiona " Members at their woi�veniOncet Sincerely, Carolyn L. Deden (Applicant) ppMENT �1 � DEC 1 ' 19g6 P.O. IN 120 fiva��ta� Bwh' LA P yes , l rs TFUNIDAa ISLAND HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION • p 0. BOX 1761 - NUNTtNGTON BEACH, CALIF. 92647 TRINIDAD ISLAND •4 hriallCto sand ilargaret +lnodyear 1422 ` oontu e' 9rive Huhtington Fleacho CA 3264cl �r Dean Mr. and Mrs. Goodyear: It as ter underat4ndlnA that ycu are i ntereeted in knowing whether the wrought iron fence along the walkway behind the Dad:)n residence has been approved by the Architectural Review +C,o+mi t tam, and whether the block wall between your home and' that of 11r6 and firs., neden has been approved as to its height j And its extension into the front set back area•. 1 The wrought iron fence has been approved. Tho height and ' erxtension tit' the block wall has, not been fcirmally reviewed or approved by the Aithitectural Re view Committee. In future, please do not h si tate ,do contact me, or any other Hoard member, oersonallw on such matters. oil 4` Cole ' ;Chairman, Architectural Review Committee Y' I 1 ,,opv to : "eorge and Carolyn Dede:n r p�4 80ard of loninq Adjustments Minutes � July 1, 1965 DAtyl Smith suggested a condition loc roll up garage doors vhich , in a hi pp4nlan, ' would eliminate the 220 requirement tot parking in tho MflTIOM ET $0111H AND W091? ISY CRAMNSIt,• CONDITIONAL '9XC9FTION 80, 8544 APO 1C0A4TAto, A2V t0PMtNT MWIT 00. 05r-13 WAS APPROVED WITH TqM• FOLL01111tt' PINh'1INGS AXII CONDITIONS, BY THS FOLLM NO VOTE: ^'one a: �fot 11i .. a guano " -34t . 10 Applicrant s backyard faces onto a channel and because of that , i a public walkway along the- back of this property was required by. the, Coastal Corayais*ion . As they have no privacy in their rear ratd, ' it is necessary to allow applicant to fence off open space in his front yard to allow privag by encroachment of five feet (51 ) into the front yard setbac . 16' Tb* . granting of the conditional exception will not constitute a grant of a special. privilege incohsistent upon other psoverties to the vicinity and under identical: zone claaerlfidations as there are other horses in the area that have`, oitheir a structure or wall at a ton foot ( 101 ) front yard setback . 3. The granting of a conditional exception is necessary in order to preserver the enjoyment of one or more substantial ptopecty , nights . r' #� ' Tho , +'ranting of a conditional exception will, not be materially detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to. property in the 8416e zone classifications . The 'grarnting of the conditional exception will not, odversol.y affect the 'General Flan of the City of Huntington aatach. Eind t 9i� • tot So42tal 22veloLsont Permit lto, 05-131 it 'fie coastal Development Permit application 1s consistent with the CZ suffix, as well as other provisions of the Munti:ng'CQn Neacb OrdinAnce Code applicable to the property. 2. The proposed single, family residential is located on a site wheat tho existing street pattern in consistent with the COC ki f iced Land Use Plan. ' 1 now r cd of toning AdJustmonts Ninutsrs July 9, 1985 pa" 4 1. the development confogms to the public access . and publiq S o i icl ar of Chappter of the Cal i Eorcnia Cortst&1 Act 5 O o e ex sting walkWay system abutting the roof of ptop*ttro �, •� +` I + �l�i '�l011 o 'xr� `rMith the appl iCMitbl'9 . pJana,_ po!' ie:es , .. ,• n•tip. ."06onti ,, find s t-jiu tr4s of the Certified Land Use Flan '.4tWAWpb;' d, p*^'vidod for by Conditional Rxception 05-34 922 A oC o• w x� The site plan , floor plans, and elovakions received and dated Ipot 10j 1965 shall be the approved layout with the following '' . �E�aotlanes 46 The. garage, shrill be constructed with automatic roll up �. ` doors on all garage doors as shown on the plan . { .I h. An elevation of the block wall 'and . a landscape ' plan shall be ev* viewed and approved by . the birecta t' of Development BeIiVicss prior to construction, , $Ir #fit gt.anm*r p Smith # Vincent �r WM Evans, t+elefsky SST: [done , 0*r 1 •h stated for the s`ecord that the act;•ion to ken was for the p Arai . Thi pool, was discussed but not in',;laded in the , dahai.�catfon. r. �-A goo , A. litrat to t c�onsbl idation of two nto one parcel . ' hie r"i *st is covere Cat kcal 9zemption, Gass 5, California SnvironOW61 Act, 1970. ?r x staff recommended roVai vt the exte n subject, to the stanfard • Los Ev asked staff why the parcel snag+ was not pro ted to the R R to whi Ch Scott Roca reported that the map had be a wed . . 'arris�a stated that Development services staff can not war EoyuireMants cf Division 9 and if the Board acts on the rtguee it would be in violation of Division 9. %0 ,4 (f9s9d ) r a 10 1 '. Td 414 =too U jusuants Minutes y +rece• 410 othor persons to speak for oR 4261nat the i tea and the x N+ +ttatsd he Mould be voting amln t t onditioml ' mouse tho pin s ua►uid b+i t�odxd btcull inter §` bdt sc'd 1014faiky. a d he- would be vn g against the conditional oxesot ion booause it 14 be more xopriate' to ApVly to the Planning Commission for ndit 8 us* permit. Daryl Mith stated that it ad the project would be 46nied by thh, 06 and 4sk*4 the a< can f h* would 'like to- request a continesit46 and cod ape b a now no The appl pant requested a � cam t i ntr�r�t�. • JyFn UPON NOTION Y C fR An MOO EY IELRY CONDITIONAL EXCayTION 000" 85-30 M IMUED TO TNs MISTING OF d01 70 19185' NY THE EOI LOW I MQ : ATkS: Cranmer , lra)ns, Smith, Vincent, 8414faky .:None OA 1 IEL0 MENT pX N clonditional Exemption No. 65 -34 is a request to permit a 11 eneroaahmont into the 221 garage **tbag.k and a wall � to setctoaft ` int+a tM,,-i it94 1-51 front sotboi;k p Coasted bevoxopperit revolt No * nt ' ko' &Ilow construction ,of a single family idlr4fting, T t* .,requist.- it cotter#d by Categorical Exemption , class 1 , ;,.441stotal& ' flvitofi*4itS1 Quality 4et , 1070. so t ;, s O' rtrd thnk"-staff riceownds Approval of that coasinj . ale ,44"*1 t lanld apOroval four , tie block gall portion of the aRoditi ►41 exception$ however , re40moundn denial fort the 1 ' dt�gfpSebWot Lnto the Sar4pe setback. Saitb opined tbo Vuf'lic hearinq and Carolyn Dodetti; the 30111104n.te was prosdnt . She presented p►botographs to the Eoard Of homes With. up to a 59 encroachment into 04 Required garage x*tpigk* she. Astated that the reason for the encroachment was due to the IM' Mk ion oat ' the common walkway, 1 NiAlMtes, �. 8. board of Zoning Adjustments � 14womber 30 1386 pate is F'.V , �'• the Board of Zoning Ad just eatervarat the right to revoke gee Permit No' 86-7a violation of these conditions of the �lNAtinig! an d�nance Cods occurs. , 47 Ayood I. "RgYf Kr*j doe l�ai h N� #, hold I-Q400t , ? ' X ,request to permL,t a oix foa •, (6' ) high block wall to encroach five �. : `` , fee �5' igto req�ai,rod fifte�a foot ( 151 ) front yard' setbo�k. . : $401pot twx4Y; is ,located A 3681 Venture Drive ( South . side of V'ogture Drive approximately one thousand thirty feet ( 1,0301 ) West of Nundancer Lane) * < Calrequest: in , covered oY Gate9otical exemption, Class 90 ifornia Environmental Quality Act , 1986. ptaff said this xequeat wound involve the wall on the East Bide of Iy/1j1 r: the property and the ap;lic4nt is requesting that a . six foot ( W ) high Ala 1 be allayred. eeviou�e�.y+ the Boar had approved a Mall art .' .. the oppasltn side of the property for privo.ey because of - the public wall�war aI the rear of they lot. This 'request for a gall on the Font side floes not fall under the same hardship and Staff is recomending denial ppAn. -Rpe opened the Public Haaii'i q and. Carolyn L. D*dern was t. It Deden said she would l$WO', to know; why ,-it was. A.. a�r4oh#: in otdo' to ' do do something on our oast Imo*. ,� p 1 9 Y • ehi furthet sold ,,she' would lilt* to show Staff and tho n, 'a po.tWon which she had citdulated to her neighbors and 'also pid ureal she had taken of other walls located within the fifteen foot (131 ) setback . She Also added they were cohaerned about: ' the a � ltx . end ail ter arerd ask'iaq tor was to be treated in the • 0 VOYCA4 ckbers ,g�m the st'rset. ftcyl. Mith asked what Mrs, Deden Brae &eking the Board to compare fte replied they had gone up and down the street and measured walls over forty-two inehos t420 ) in height and then had the owners sign the pet,i 1cwt, lir ;i 841th e.fted Mrso Deden if she was saying that all these p"ple had i tainod permits from the City or all the galls Were 4119wed carder the Cade when they were built . Mrs. Dedon ropl ied she did not have that information* -16- 13/3/86 - 8ZA ww � f 1;i�•r,,r W�•# . 1 Minutes, be do board of soninq Adjustments December 11 1614 - Page 17 ft v •:ftltb thop added that r+ama places in Buntington Barbour w*ro fatteo w4ftanres by the Planning edevoission or City Council when Sit erlg4n411y because of lay of the land or where the Coastal 4. O"I'VOLore '°Mulled dredlcations for publia right-of-tray. ter. Smith #�ti Ir r blot*# b� :a¢a1d not recall a time since he had been •ori 'the no*" that .,,Ouzh a vie r ianco had been granted where An ad9**n &cent 4ke r%# ows** ,wrote objoeting only when neighbors had notified ,�''t ;mod ;had• ha °�oa�laintr. 1- Nts, bedew .-Ooked Oast the ca"nP laints were and said maybe she could &NW 660 th+r could take cage of the complaints . Mr. Smith romihded Nrso beden that Mr. Goodyear, the adjacent property owner, had het 4 pay for the block wait, and than their "underwtandih • had 01t oartaly turaid into a 'misunderstanding`' when the ,addit onal I'do a r'OO#16 had boon added to the wall, N Go4cle Deden stated that Mr . Goodyear was aware that a 'p4rmft hid bad* pellad for A six foot (i I ) high block *all . Be Added Ghat Dick � tuAa fd had chockod the wall for height and ' George Bfndlin `had - t,etn oot hater to also check the wall . Mr. Deden said they needed the -,. w$11 for 'security puroosev because they had previously had three blCeak-in�e. Calvin broe re said he was an Attorney representing Francis and Pegg Xt �r, the adjoining property owners rt 3411 Venture, Drives .egge stated the Board was aware that this was a party wall aad the initial porsrit wars issued by the City for ai six- foot (6' ) high 1M, Dr'O be & cont•inu#ad. that the twro froporty owners in question IOWA the wall .five foot (S ) in height end is -was '. � Vai r approved and signed off at the fine iogt (S' ) ' a applicant thers4ftorr increased' it by two, (3) acmrses and akOif4 it forward five facet (51 ) . Mr. Droego added tbaro was no � per* t Obttln4d for, the height inbroase nor for the aft-f6eahnient `•Ahd 01 ,41086 Objoattd to that. Also, a request fat peraiteion for thLo +Coostruet ion was not, sabsi.t red to the Trinidad Homeowners Asdoclstian and Me,, Droege Bubalttad a letter from their AithitecturaNl Committee . Be added further that the' wall Is. obstructing the view from the Goodyear 's residence. , The need for a WA+ll' a►n this $I dr Is not the same as on the opposite side where the s4lofti;ng pool to located,,, and they felt the etriotest applications of the Zoning- Ordinance should be applied in t.Nis case. Darryl Smith asked Ile, Coody,eatr if he had Vented 'she "staircase" Situation . sr. Goodyear reflied he had told George D*den he did not want that, because it would tunnel vision' his residence. Mr . Smith reminded Mr. Good oar that he had stated at the .last meeting that t' it wall was .built and capped cuff and everyone was satisfied with Lk. You (Mr . Soodyear) crept away arid, when you returnode there were non again working on the wall . ter . Goodyear verified Mrs SsithOs •�t7 12/3j86 - i�A 1 • ,11iY, y�y 1 r4 ti. I� RWtesr N. f!. soard of Zoning Adjustments beannbet J, 1966 a page It stUounts and added that he had instructed the workmen to atop h + 4l ae the wall was also on his prop+rtys owner of the property on the opposite side :of the -stated he lead lived • at that location pries to tho 1'kw' h y+srd ,hgd built their residence. Me said thiry. had in without any consideration for his needs. , He further et4t6d Mr. deadyear 'b ' 'garage extended farther out than the wall the Iodshe built . Mr. Robertson added that the Goodyears were V J#t*ring a • complaint in this case but were not living' by their 40�0 .fie (said, ho' was sure theBoard would want fairness to all part10606 ,go in , a case such as this. M dt. men raid that,. when he chipped the top off, he had .talked with Larayy Grove because the original permit was, for a six . foot (61 ) high block wall , Be added that George Bendlin Came out and said he had a ii, bt a build 14 six feet (61 ) high for privacy and security. ' 14 0. ., Poden , atdded r Mr. Goodyear signed the ap-1 scat i on which � s ai ninIty-sit foot (961 ) wall of six (6) courses in height * Thirorwas cc one also present wishing to speak for or against the project so the public Hearing was closed. `I re bvan*, ;stated there hard been a lot of testimony which was reti ak— to •the issue and the Board needed to get back to what .bhey . ha4. rto work ,with - the Code. The issue that needs -to be ftormined is whether or not there is a land-related hardship, and• •001*41,•;, tb agreed. . . Mr, Smith added that the original plan which We -ro,viewed and approved was for tho swiiming pool site un4Oto WAS . a .hardship in that case. Now the DedenB are asking } to -th Jb a tbino on the other side, and there is no hardohip. . i; 'Xdp pY I,SMITB AND SECOND BY,,BVAXS,r CONDITIONAL EXCspTION W, 'rid-i4 Mid 62MIND WITH I'NE FOLLOWING ?ZNDIHCS, BY THE YGLLowrn Von I 6'iND1NGN AUAW. ,1'. JWcsase, of the size, configuration, shape and lack of unique topopraphi,c features of the subject property, .there does not appear to b* oXceptional or extraordinary circumstances or .conditions applicable to the land, buildings or premises involv*4 that does not apply generally to property or class of user in the some district. X» bince the subject property can be fully developed within regular established setbacks, such a Conditional Hxception is not necessarx for the preservation and enjoyment of substantiwl -` Peopertx rights. -1�9- 12/3/86 - BSA 64483 BUILDING PERMIT Applit:snt Po fill in sr" within heavy Unt s only. CITY OF HUNTINGTO N BEACH � DEP"TMLNT OF • , AIi a01 # 0EVEL0.901ENT t1EAVIC P.O. AOX 100-CAUFORNIA Ali 1,01 a _j Trott No.�r t3kx:kN Bud*%Add(*% L0�VRW70 n� Plan Criock Nd owner 7 Occuponaf -T Ty"co C�cxrstn+Ctwn Occ. Low _ G% M _ Acid► �`/ T +A u uM Pamm"M 9irecew ArcN+rred Id . Gty Stafe hI Actonh �"'1rdr� .,1 . a fatal Perirwt 2c>-e No J Contra alo. . Lord U FEES: W ILI il4drfrosa �� tsfate Lrc, No Per 8 Fun Crack Cav — Efy l,r:. No. Perrnit IaMAO Da I Car+aerwtro++ a B Jlrth;tet+ a ErrgrrMlar et. Na. Fle f ce�pt No, �� r<r TGTA4 = Addrrtr#s I.M.No Corrltmurrrty Enf1CVWI Lrbfa Fee. So FI Fee $ Cay Slow zip Remarkr, t og -54 _ 6taret Fsenrlra�t trhecll 4f+e � r ,_,_r?`l•,�1 J.t � • .� r t i,.iargt dead ran NEW ❑ wpm- 0100 ALTER C Ins�IMsM►llearrd REPAIR �aval We to Iw UK of purl0rflp Founclation DEMOL. ❑ and LMS11 VAWIG++ , r F RELOCATE ❑ bor $lade 1lrrollr Nng Labor i Me1.f / ' � �..�� I have rind:hre apolrcat'"and Sgfee 10 Compgr wrttl oil local end%tale lewd 3heaihing s abie to(A orvol wwn4f a�+- 1. I Sm M91111ated arw Ikan&W as repurrad by the Oty of llkglon Hutr B«ch and the Stated Cstdoriva,or Frarning C Z. rt p 1 have W C t. A WrSIfICaN b1 K to W04nTiur� rtast:ed by the DireC1M Drywall „� Of IOr r1b tNrr1 IMltttttinil.W A aenAie49e 01 rror«fra' coelprna won insurance issuotJ by V "a an ednvtted M&M,V grown Coal 32 W 3 Aft fam otr W fIpMCy1e Mlerev Crlrt"d by ow 009clof i � r/ IV C a 4ert�iR hN paA0ft11Mrilr pl t o wOtk W whiC�il th:9 Par"* ( O Pam"b leo�eo. 1 Mlalli to we WCKW�evri��w liwrr of the is Is o Nloflius 1 comfy ;a dleffrel www Qtr that --- r ,t for foci.WW Me OtiCla uta0 c�A Ifo �1 tend use rt tfu►+ufgtan/eeClt, t rpndrtwns �. 1I rrorll is no bofnt/1! "Ila 00 bill d"of *am of ites W mi.it N IrerM MI alltir+dgr'wd fbr Male thltii 1 �.t1111 pM11Ml d►rM bR rN/M erld word pie . .+�. . 411 ff t,aaTN�r>R�r�I I' i L I Minutes+ H. B . Board of zoning Adjustments December 30 1906 Page 19 3. Granting of Conditional Exception No . 86-94 would constitute a special privilege inconsistent with limitations upon properties in the vicinity. AYES: Evans, Godfrey, Krejci , Poe, Smith NOES : None ABSENT: None CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 8$-9$ Al2 2� ice: Herbert M . Lee A request to allow fifty-four percent ( 54% ) site a rage in lieu of required fifty percent ( 501 ) maximum and 2) to it reduction in required open space area . Subject property is cated at 942 Eleventh Street (South side, of Eleventh Stree approximately two hundred fifty feet ( 3501 ) West of Lake Stre . This request is covered by Categorical Ex tion, Class 5, California anvironmental Quality Act, 1 Staff reported that, in reviewing th request , it was determined that a Use Permit was needed to acc a►ny this Conditional Exception. The applicant has bee nformed and has ;filed for the Use Permit; however, it required vertisement for a Public Hearing no Staff is recommending a one ) week continuance. UPON MOTION BY SMITH iND SECO BY GODFREY, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 86-95 WAS CONTINUED TO REGULAR MEETING OF DECEMBER 10, 1986p BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES : Evans, Godfrey, rejci, Poe, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: None MISCELLANEOUS AGEN ITEMS : USX PXRMIT NO. 84 A liC t CoE r Cottage A regUost to hange the date on previously approved Use Permit Not 86-84 December 13,• 19850 to permit only a one (1 ) day po rary tdoor Event in lieu of three ( 3) days. Subject property is ocat at 6885i Warner Avenue ( Portion of the Northwest oo.vaer at warner emu* and Golden Nest Street ) . Stwt xplained that a request had been received from the applicant td► 8age the date on a previowsly approved project for a Temporary Oii eor ftont and Staff eecorerended approval. 12/3/86 - XZA slMltE !�MlL.: FAMILY FAM 1 L Y Q�E Li.IN� Ia�ELLI N i . FRONT FRONT ir 0EJ&T PLAN 3 PLOT PLAN *4 APPROV !iM*�.E !!ItlLE RAW LY FAN ILY QWELLINS DW9LLin* ti 4TTt�NEa Its t SEE �EIiR�E I FRONT � � C11rV ONE H INTER-DEPARTMENT COMM TION FEB I "VWWKW OWN CITY GF HUNTING19N REAGFI ADMINISTRATNE OFFICE Charles W. Thompson James W. Palin , Director To City Adminictrator r Development Services PLANNING COMMISION DENIAI, Subject CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO . 86-94 vats �:h�rusry 3.�r 198! CUOLY.'N1 DEDEN Attached is a memorandum from Commissioners Pierce, Silva and k Summerell regarding their vo�e on Conditional Exception 86-94 . The Planning Commission denial has been appealed to the Council and will be heard on March Z , 1987. The Planning Commissioners have requested the attached memorandum which explains their vote be I forwarded to the Mayor and Council members . i JWP: JI i �l •.o I J/ C I TV OF HUNT1NGTON HKAW H INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION � rwC",wUCH Commissioners Pier e To JmwB W. Palin, Director From Silva and Gummerell. PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL Date 6 , 1987 Subject CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 56--94 Data CA.ROLYN DEDEN At the .1anuary 21, 1987 Planning Commission meeting, the Deden ' s had requested, on appeal from the Board of zoning Adjustments denial, a variance to allow a 6 ' high block wall to encroach 5 ' into the required 15 ' front yard setback. We agreed that the beden ' s had adequate justification for approval of this wall . Commissioner Silva made a motion which was seconded by Commissioner Summerell to approve the request with findings . The motion failed with the vote of 3 aycs (Pierce, Silva, Summerell) and 4 noes (Leipzig, Livengood, Higgins , Schumahcer) . Chairman Pierce moved on to the neat item and during that discussion Commissioner Livengood suggested that the Planning Comm.issien should take direct action and deny the variance. A motion was made by Livengood and seconded by Leipzig to deny Conditional Exception No . 86-94 with findings with all 7 commigsi4::ers voting aye . There was a misunderstanding by Commissioners Pierce, V-Llva and Summerell as to the intent of that motion . Our intenti.in was to vote NO c', the motion to deny which would have been consistent wi'wh the vote to approve the variance on tre first action . We wish to go on record to be in support of the variance . EP: JS:KS: jr (7324d) Publ_ 2/17/87 y) KITICL OF MBLIC 11 "UG APPEAL TO PLMNING UMMISSION' S DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. B6-94 NATICB IR RMSY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chamber at tt. Huntington Beach Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, on the date and at the time todleatsd below to receive and consider the statements of all persons who wish to be hakrd relative to the application described below. iAII: Monday, March 2, 1987 7:00 P.M. IUVJ=: Appeal - Conditional Exception No. 86-94 APPLICANT: Carolyn Deden APPELLANT: Councilman Pete,' Green WCATION: 3402 Venture Drive (south side of Venture Drive approximately 1 ,000 feet west of Sundancer Lane) P10103a: Appeal to Planning Commission's denial of Conditional Exceotion No. 86-94 because of lack of clarity as to Section 9110.12 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Conditional Exception 86-94 is a raquest to permit a 6 °-.ot high block wall to encroa...h 5 feet into a required 15 foot front yard setback. MVI 0 111WAL sTAxvs : Pursuawtt to Class S Section 15300 this project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, 1986. A copy of Conditional Exception No. 86-94 is on file in the Department of Services Office. ALL INTRUSTED PgirsONs are Invited to ,attend said hearing and express opiaioua or submit evidence for or against the application as outlined move. All applieations, exhibits, and dese riytions of this proposal are On file with this Office of the City Clerk, 2000 Main Street, iluetiagtan !►each, Califor*iae for inspection by the public. E AITINGTON BACK CUT Q=CIL By : Alicia M. Wentworth � City Clark Phoee (m) 536-540S �u'+ Dated /l /�7 "i frtbllsh NOTICM 13 MMXAT MIX that the Mmtinptoa Beach City Council w111 hold a VaWc h-Aarinp in the C.4)4=11 Chmbrs at the Wantington beach Curia Cauterp 2000 Meta Streat, Huntington eescbt CaLlfozvda, to the date and *t the time indicatod below to r«ceive atd cauxider the statements of all persoaaw vha Mich to be heard relative to the application described belov. OM: �Asvgk TIM: OM AAl I11 jam ) +9 friontif ill.l��70 fh+�► '� f A- I , ,� -to Vem 4u vmt r i ti�e j�v a 4 h )e v UnA 4U Of 4, -�Wj d e- .4 P&Y I" � I I OV 114e--1 a UA4AM Gam'- 6-, ) 4 tv, ? 1" &4 & -m o" 14 ey e vv% j 6r r � 0, i4 14 0 4W 4% 45 Mv ---SUM I i 4 Ad, el 0&, UL MTEUS'Cf1D lSUM are invited to attend said besting, and express opLaims or saWt er1d4me for or splast the application as eutlisad above* All appliaatimap a t"bits, and deccriptiona of thie ptoposal are an file wit3k *be Offite of the City Cltslrs, 2000 Main Stkreetq ftntUSton 0awbo ilenAar for Inspection by the public. WI1'tIMGM UA(X Cln CWNCIL By: Aug" M. Veatt watthmme III CSty Cxerh I ,lhJ Y ` Mai NOTICE TO CLERK TO SCIILDUI.E PUBLIC HEARING ITEM i h AA 141W M A 14, TO: G:TY CIZRK' S ')F"F ICE DATE: VROM: .�...C.r. .C..1L` 1' /r FLEA5E SCREDME A PUBLIC HEARING USING THE ATTACHED LEGAL N(YrICE FOR THE DAY OF A A t'e- r APIs are attached AP's will follow NO AP' s 'Initiated by: Planning Commission, Planning Department Petition * I.ppea l Other Adoption of. Environmental Status (x) YES N8 I i Refer to Planning Department - Extension # f for additional information. * If appof, elesse transml,t exact wording to be requireC in the lagsl . : r l N� , ,w Publx 2117/87 NOTICI Or Pt UC U"XNC APPEAL TO PLANNING COMM I SS ION'S DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL LXC ERT I ON NO. 86-94 NOTICE IS =EBB CIVU that the Huntingtm Beach City Council will hold • publ•' c hearir-8 In the Council C esbar at the HuntI ngton Beach Civic Centa., 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, L'alifornia, on the date and at the time Indicated below to receive and comsider the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application deseribed below. = Monday, March 2, 1987 TDIX: 7:00 P.M. 3 : Appeal - Conditional Exception No. 86-94 APPLICAMT: Carolyn Deden APPELLANT: Councilmen Peter Green UWATtON: 3402 Venture Drive (south side of Venture drive approximately 1 ,000 feet west of Sundancer Lane) PRO : Appeal to Planning Commission' s denial of Conditional Exception No,86-J4,because of lack of clarity as to Section 9110. 12 of the H fington Beach Ordinance Code. EM IDERMAI. STATUS : Pursuant to Class, 5 Section 15305 this pvoject is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, 1986 . CO FUR: A copy of Conditional Exception No. 8E-54 is on file in the Department of Services Office. ALL XWIMST19D PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions at aubmit evidence �+or or against the spplicatioa sa Outlined above. All applications, exhibits, and deseriptlone of this proposal are GO file with tba Offtee of the City Clank, 2000 Naift: Street; Huntington *each; California, for Insprection by the public. AiJ11'I'IMCT+Olf UACM CUT OMMCIL BY: Alicla H. Wentworth City Clark ?Done (m) 536-5405 bated /i187 I • Y Y �Y MR. & ;S . B. STEINBERG 3332 VENTURE DRIVE hUNTIN(XTON BEACH, 178-712-28 CALIFORNIA 92649 Par~, Johnny K 3422 Quickstep Cir. Huntington coach , CA 92649 170 -712-29 MR. & M.RS . STRATTON Phi lhips, Mark 16321 Spartan Ciro 3342 VENTURE DRIVE Huntington Beach,, CA 92649 HUNTINGTON 3EACH, 178-712-30 CALIFORNIA 92649, � Torn, Sherry Lynn 16331 Spartan~ Cir Huntington Beath,, CA 92649 179-712-31 Shuwter, Gary D 16341 Spartan Cir Huntington Beach, CA 92649 178--712-32 Doliinoy, Pauli J 178--712-26 � 16351 Spartan Cir Smith , Stephen Huntington Beach, CA 92,649 3441 Quickstep Cir. Huntington Beach, California 92649 , 178-712--27 Alban, Rubert 3432 Quickstep Cir Huntington Saiach, CA 92649 I , ,'f Fib j . MRS. KIRSHir•PTt MIR. MRS.. R. MULLANEY � • b 3421 VENIA , AE DRIVE 3)52 VENTURE DRIVE h�tTN��'YNGTON� BEACH HUrt'�INGTCI� BEACH, CALIFORNIA` 92649 CALIFORNIA 92649 MR . & MRS . HIGMAN AIR . do MR6`1 . CHANG KIEU 3401 VENTURE DR"" 3372 VERTt U DRIVE HUPITINGTON BEA►CHo HUW'lNvT0ll BEACH, CALIFORVIA 92649 CALIFORNIA 92649 e MR , AND MRS. J. KIMBALL MR. do MRS. JOE ROBERTSON 3432 VENTURE DRIVE 3371 VENTURE DRIVES HUNfiINGTUN BEACH, HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649 CALIFORNIA 92649 I i i i MRS . CAROLINE COSTELLO MR. & MR S. D. LEE 3442 VENTURE DRIVE ��], VENTURE DRIVE N10TINGTON $EACH, �N'IIf�4R�AN BEACH, CAL.TPORNIA 92649 CALIFORNIA 92649 MR . & MRS . M. SILVERMAN )471 VENTURE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BFACHo CALIFORNIA 9264y) . 1 . r M. 1 •.+.emu � 77 j MRS . CAFI''"-� N DLDEIV (APPLICANT ) JgRS , RUTH FISHW 3462 �/P�tTURE DRIVE 340� VENTURE DRIVE HUNTISGTCN BF'ACH, HVNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNTA 92649 CALIFORNIA 92649 MR. & MRS . NEWHALT M . SY KIMBALL (KIMBALL 4: ASSOCIATES ) C/O -701 SEASCAPE DRIVE �43�- VENTURE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH HUNTINGTON LEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649 CALIFORNIA 92649 (OWNER LOT AT 3382 VE VTtiR2 DRIVE) MR. & MRS . N. KOSTA DR. & "S STEVFY GRAbOFF 3362 VZNTUKE DRIVE 3441 V TUR,E DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH, HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 9264.9 i CALIFORNXA 92649 MR . & MRS . D. SNYDER MR- & MS. R. BRANSTETTER 3452 VENTURE DRIVE 3411 VLNTURF DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA CALIFORNIA 92649 92649 MR. & MRS. S. HOW MR. & MtRS. FR,AsiC I S GGODYEAR 3391 VENTURE DR I YE 3422 VENT= DRIVE HUNTINOTON BEACH • HUT11MON MACH, CALIFORNIA 92649 CALIFORNIA 92649 L i .. Y ..... ..L..�.+a...w�.^��^ .ter. ti• . .�... ... .. ...• i .. - .. ... ^ Cam.• . J-I. p `WE '1�1{E t*DERSIC�ED tiIDENTS OF VENTURE DRIVE, 1 3 WILLINGLY SIGNED THIS PETITION EXPRESSING OUR OPINIONS WHETHER TO ALLOW OF DISALLOW THE WALL AT THE CURRENT ?IVE (5 ) FOOT ENCROACHMENT IN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK, AT A HEIGhT OF SIX (A) FED' WHICH NOW EXISTS SETWE + T THE DWELLINGS AT 3402 VMTURE DRIVE AND 34^j VENTURE DRIVE. WE HAVE BEMI APPRAISED OF THE, DESIRES OF THE HOMEOWNERS OF 3402 Y&TURE DRIVE, (MR . & MRS. GEORGE DFDEN ) , AND OF THE GRIEVANCES OF THE HOMEOWNERS OR 3422 VF!TURE DRIVE, (MR . & MRS . FRANC I S GOODYEAR) . SOME OF U S, AS A POINT OF REFERENCE, HAVE SIMILAR EXISTING CONDITIONS) ON OUR OWN COMMON PROPERTY LIN 33, AND HAVE NOT EXPERIENCED ANY PROBLEMS RESULTIIIG FROM HAZARDS CAUSED B'Y'VISIBILITY OF TRAFFIC OR FEDESTRIANS. RI '.tJFt ADDRESS ALLOW DISALLOW WALL 1F A.r'� _. Uextw "Al/K op c f , .. .. r . �--- PA 04 No 1 ale 2- as ir CAN /r e. . ,8a mt 6-�4- o/�z pl- tp 44 fG ti rrr V � I,LOW WALE,S.F APP, I ALLOW r..wr.�•+AM'.�F.� ;' i1�-w...�� ....- 1 �-^"-�� __mow M Ile, i a 1 -,bled to rtiblesn ('11 °111 K,"Idt "11C"pi1l;11 pUhlic I ti" Il dy 00crne (if the &Ilpallor c'oult ut 01 togs .ounty, � 41410 nee. N"iftitm A 6114. iji9d 79 1969, and ,iPe6i 1• Islod 11 June. 1963 L STA E OF CALIFOHNiA Cor unty of Orange Pgl+w hjbjWa+ Ad.M11W.0 fovMMl 1 61 ih•I 1 !N w1 1 W 1 ,min •)�►..�caArrm I.*p{!r k♦; �'' am a Citizen of the Unded States and a resident of the County alcresaid; I am over the are of eighteen + years, and not a party to or ipterested in the below ' entitled malter. I am a print;ipa! clerk of the Granges Co&st DAILY P11-0r, with which is combined tits �� ' ��-• W:wS•PSESS, a newspaper of genciral ci(culation, • printed and published in the City of Costa -Mesa, ;4"47. '�' �- County of Orangz• State of California, and that a Notice of Pub t i c Hearing i of which copy atta~ hereto is a true and complete pY P ;.�1. copy, was printed and published in the Costa Mesa, Newport Beach, Huntington Beach, Pcuntair Valley, ar Irvin), the Souih Coast communities and Laguna Beach issues. of said newspaper for camoA1:et10r'l sl% to wit the issue(s) of �.._.... ._ FebruaxY1_9_.. 198 a•L i, 198. : c d .f t , t declare, under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing is true and correct. " Executed on ___x'.aba.az r_ . 198 ? r at Costa Mesa, Califol nia. ` signature �J q era ?1441 GW PROOF OF PUBLICATION SI CITY O - HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STPEET CAI.IFORNIA 926M OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK March 4, 1967 Mrs. Glyn Uadw 3402 %4nture Drives Muntitigt m Bewh, Ch 92649 AttaC W is a Statement of Action of the City Council of the City of Huntftrgton Beach ,pertaining to the wt.icn taken on March 2, 1987 restive to yaur appeal to the Pla:,riing Ct=lssiow s denial of Corr litiaral Fkuxption 86-94. If you have any questions please call the Levelopnant Services t�epartment - 536-5271. Al f ciVa ML Wentworth City Co ark ANT:C33 i es 1�x:Y�txr�r 6ct 0ml opumt Serviaaa Director t�r1r�Yt4i1 Y ' r� + •4. REOUEbT FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTlC►N DM March r 1957 Submittedt-): PonorabYe Mayor. and City Council $ubrhitt4d by: clhorles W. Thompson, City Ndm.ini .strator ��`"�� '�� Ptaprraei by: Jame,q 14. Pal tn , Director. , Development Services ' subjw: APPEAL, TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ' S DENIAL O CONDITrONAL EXCEPTICil 140. 86--94 Consistent with Council Policy? (d! yor ( ] N-Aw PE.;?icy D. Ex"'P00ra Ststenwt of Im a, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, AlOwnstiveM Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE * Transmitted for your consideration is an appeal by Councilman Peter Green on behalf Of Carolyn Deden to the Planning Commission ' s denial of Conditional. Exception No . 86-94 . Conditional Exception No. 86-94 is a request to permit an existing 6 Foot high block wall to encroach 5 feet into the required 15 foot front yard setback , 1RECOMMENDATIRtl: Planning Commission and Staff recommend that the City Council sustain, the action of the Board of Zoning Adjustments and Planning Comr,issl.on and deny the request . ON MOTION BY LIVENGOOD, SECOND BY r.EIP?,IG, THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUSTAINED THE DENIAI, OF THE BOARD OF 2014ING ADJUSTMENTS AND DENIED CONDITIONAL. EXCEPTION NO . 86--94 BASED ON FINDINGS , BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE : AYES: Leipzig, Schumacher , Liv-angood, Pierce, Higgins , Summerell , Silva* NOES : None ABSENT : None ABSTAIN : Norms * (see attached memo dated February 12, 1987 , which indicates that Commissio,,ers Pierce, Summerell , and Silva intended to vote NO. ) FINDINGS FOR DENIAL : 1 . Mecaume the subject property is an average size lot (6, 480 square feet ) , has a normal rectangular configuration, and lacks unique topographic features ( the site is flat accept for normal "ago 1 ' 1 r r dodo , ' r ter.Vr• yr. N'INM�4 r`� rl grading requIrementsl , there does not appear to be exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or- conditions applicable to the lend, ouildings or premises involved that goes not. apply generally to property or glass of user in the same district . 2 . As the evidence presented showed the subject property can be fully developed wf thin regular established wetbackev such a Conditional Exception is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of stibstantaal property rights . 3 . Granting of Conditional Exception No. 86-94 would constitute a epecial privilege inconsistent witn limitations upon properties in the vicinity . j 4 . Based on written documentation the 5 Foot• encroachment and the finished height of the existing wall is not in compliance with the variance granted Lluly 3 , 1985 , nor does it comply with the fence permit and site plan issued April 11 , 1986 . on k1uly j, 1985 , the Board of Zoning Adjustments .approved Conditional Exception No. 85-:;4 which permitted a fivF .15 ) foot encroachment for the wall on the west side of the property in o.7der tc provide a security wall around a front yard swimming pool, . conditional Exception No . 85--34 chid not allow a five ti5 ) foot ,encroachment for the east wall ( see Board of Zoning Adjustment ' s minutes for July 3, 198511 . On April 1.1 , 1986, a permit was issued for the east wall which required a 15 foot front setback ( see site plan dated April II , 1986 ) . The property owner extended the east wt— l 5 feet into the required front yard setback which is not in compliance with the building permit issued . Staff advised (;he a_.1plfcant that in order to obtain a building perrait for the encroachment , a vAriance would need to be approved by the Board of Zoning AdjuFtme. .ts . On December 3, 1986 , the Board of Zoning Adjustments denied the aplicant ' s request for a 5 foot encroachment for the east wall ( see Board of Zoning Adjustments minutes for December 3 , 1985 ) . The applicant initiated an appeal to the Plar• iing Commission becaase in her opinion full consideration was not given to all the facts that were available at the time of the Board of Zoning Adjustment ' s hearing . On January 21 , 19871 the Planning commis nion sustained the action of the Board of Zoning Ad jusL.ments and denied the appeal . The applicant has initiated an appeal to the City Ccuncil based on the applicant ' s assertion of lack of clarity in Section 9110 .12 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code which pertains to front yard setbacks. RCA 3/2/8 f —2- ( 141 d) n i r r v i 1 ON ti The vppeal to the City Council. its bayed on the applicant ' s opinion that tr:ere is a 1AC.k of ClaL'ity In Secs 911G . 12 which states as follows : 91.10. 12 SETBACK (FRONT YA1Rd) ,, The minimum setback from the rVnt property lines kar af-structures exceeding forty- two ( 42 ) Inches in height shall he as follows : Dwelling: Fifteen ( 15 ) feet Front entry garage or carport : Twenty-two ( 22) feet Ride entry garage : men ( 10 ) feet Section 9110. 12 clearly spa +. that structures shall maintain the setback of 15 feet measureu -f,:ow the back of the sidewalk . The applicant is aware of this Provision and was advised many times by staff while rocee in entitlements d fence e • 5 P s t an _n .. permits .t g . The foot 9 P encroachment of the east, wall was built without entitlement and Foes not conform " o the fence permit which was approved and issued on April 11 , 1986 . ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The proposed project is enempt pursuant to Class 51 Section 15305 from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act . COASTAL STATUS : - - i Pursuant to Section 989 . 5 . 3 . 1.3 ( g ) , the proposed project is categorically excluded from a coastal development permit . FUNDING SOURCE: Not applicable . . ALTERNATIVE ACTION : As an alternative action, the City Council may approve Conditional Exception No. 86-94 based on the following findings and cunditions of approval : PINDINGS FOR hpPROVAL : 1 . Applicant ' s backyard faces onto a channel and because of that , a public walkway along the back of this property was required by the Coastal Commission . As they have no privacy in their 1 rear yard, it is necessary to allow applicant to fence off open space in his front yard to allow privacy by encroachment of five feet (51 ) into the front yerd setback. ItCA - 3/2/8 7 -3- (7 419d) A. l 2 , The granting of the conditional ezcception will not constitute a grant. of a special privilege inconsist^l nt: upon other properties in the vicinity and under identical 7,une classifications aq there are ether homes in the area that have dither a structure or wall it a ten foot (101 ) front yard setback . 3 . The granting of Condit-ions) Exception No . 86-94 will not be materially detrimental to t:ht public welfare, or injurious to property in the same zons: r_iassif scat: ions because the necessary 10 foot corner cut--off fo, pedestrian ,and traffic visi.b.ility will ne provided , 4 . The granting of the Conditional Exception will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach . > • - CONDITIONS OF AI-. PIt�VA1J . 1 The site plan , floor plans , and elevations received and dated December 12 , 1986, shall be the approved layout . 2 . The applicant shall obtain approval from the architectural review committee of the Trinidad Island Homeowners Association prior to obtaining a fence permit for the 5 font encroach-meat , i ATTACHMENTS 1 . Area map 2 . Appeal letter from Councilman Green 3 . Appeal letter from applicant dated January 27, 1987 4 . Memo dated February 12 , 1987 , which explains Commissioners Pierce, 5ummerel .l and Silva ' s change in vote 5. Minutes from July 3, 1985 and December .3, 1986 Hoard of zoning Adjustment ' s meeting 6. Minutes from the January &1 , 1,987 planning Commission meeting 7. Planning Commission staff report dated Janur•y il , 1987 JWP :RLP :kl,a RCA - 3/2/87 -4- (74 9d) r AIIY�A �: �`•� fir./ \ � '._ .�.w� � , � � bum ho I�19 ' I i• � 4•• �i��^` ,� �'`'# , J �``�� mod+ i� gad' L al NN. dr 1 ,; AV NEWpq -91 i I, , /S• 1 r •i i� y • r w `OV < IV <c Y ION 10 41 W �� ; '• �• TO 1 ff f%C. s ; { I CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH � CITY COUNCIL COMMUNICATIO % . �. TO HONOKABIX CITY COUNCIMEKBERS FROM COUNCILMAN PETER GREEN ATTN: CITY CLERK ' IUBJECT APPEAL TO PUPWING COMMISSION VA'rE January 27 , 1987 DENIAL Or CE 86-94 Please accept this memorandum ,as an appeal to the Planning Commission ' s denial of CE U6-94 of January 211 1987 relative to al single-fatuity dwelling located at 3402 Venture Drive because of lack of clarity a9 to section 91.10. 12 of the City Ordinance. Kitab . . ,r .:1 i I 1 y liiVr4 }•h�'•� t N ri fi,l,�• r. m V. 4• 1 ,jai 'ry 27 , j967 To z Members of City ;uurir ; 1 in t •e city of' r'llu lt;ing"v"on Beach , Fie : Appeal of prop.,eedinq,3 of Ja:,Aar', 21 , :L9`7 meeting of the itunl-ingtcn £each 'P'11a,nr,.n,, //�� 7 ��,,y�y. �.�g,,.-�..,,�1 , .�-- F Cam'►'`� r`�' �" ' , .Mr?2:' L:3 v(r!;i:; N::'= ; ~21: to x @qta� t $ (:F'a7'..IZ;� D�'t'��x'b t':e Ci ty � ::�.1:-.CLi (:;,i :;1�'. , ��ii.L'�+' . ;�.L'C:r��1�": i.'CI.�E':. � , ci �r'l7�'t�Z•'+f ��W112:' �7i �. Wili'ly��.,. t`a�ni.iy dweil,int; Local;ed at ` entllr� Drives in the city of lion tinj*or• This rr�ques. is bp.ing made 4o appeal actions taken ag'3inst Ile at the ll1'r.�nnll r"K; Commissivl2 me.atin, held :in January These is pion •Here T believe. , unfair dui to z5everal aiiicigi-i 11 in -D d.. .ance 91.10 . 12 'Nri .oh Z -eel was a di -ect influence in the Plannyng i t•i�� 1?c 1:'1 Ons . r •:'= '-=?1,� 'io e t::a': ;yo w" 1.1 rran : me �r11 :3 hear, and t!•?ali y'ou rHii1 a:: r ,a+ -ha - �-�.rtn Willi *,a�fo _°.Z1�. 32'?d .:umpl�i;e _'iz^�� iyoa may L, Ded`r. (ApplicantCITY OF 1 CITY GFFICE 4 1 r 4 ' • f 1 y 1• (1 4 = J ' f r c HUMINOTON SKACOI IrMFt-DEPARTMENT COMM TION . Cl�srlos W. TY►oa�paon James W. Palitt, Director o City �inistrator. Development SeLvices sublan 1CTI � "LCPTxahpIALl �6-9A ate P�7uer ]:x, 19b'1 CONDVX tUDW Attacbsd is a ,rw"Candwa from Comigaioners Pierce, Silva and Owmerall regarding their vote on Conditional Exception 88-94. The Plaaalsl Cowission denial has been appealed to the Council and mill be board an March 2, 1987 . The Planning Commissioners have requ*sled the attached memoraadti;m which explains their vote be f foEwardmd to the Mayor and Council nombers. i i 1 INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION Cormissioners Pierce TO jams W. Palin, Director _ From Silva and Sun nearell PLAMING Ca1MISSX0A DENIAL ?February 6 , 1907 Subject CONDITIONAL =CEPTION NO. 66-94 date Ca1ROLY14 DEDEN . At the January 21, 1987 Planning Commission ueetir:g, the beden•s had requested, on appeal from the Board of Zoning Adjustmaats denial ,' a variance to allow a 6 ' high block wall to encroach 5` into the !required 150 front yard setback. We agreed that the Deden' s had adequate justification for approval of this wall . Commissioner Silva made a motion which was seconded by Commissioner lSummerell to approve the request with findings . The motion failed with the vote of 3 ayes (Pierce,, Silva, Su merell) and 4 noes (Leipzig, Livengood, Higgins , Schumahcer) . Chairman Pierce moved on to the next item and during that discussion Commissioner Livengood suggested that the planning Commission should take direct action and deny the variance. A motion was made by Live ngood and seconded by Leipzig to deny Conditional Exception No . 86-94 with findings with all 7 corarrissioners voting aye. There was a misunderstanding by Commissioners Piercer, Silva and Summerell as to the intent of that motion. Our intention was to vote Na on the motion to deny which would have been consistent with they vote to approve the variance n the first action. We wish to go on record to be in support of -e variance. hP:JS+Kg: j r (7324d) ore ` Y I'1 wIIF`hM Board of Zoning Adjustments Minutes aul.y 3 , 1985 Page 2 There- were no other persons to speAk for cr against item and the public hearing was closed. Ross Cranmer stated he would be doting agair, the conditional exception because the plans could be modi d and brought into conformance . Howard xelefsky stated he would h oting against thLa conditional exception because it wrjuld be m appropriate to apply to the Planning Commission for a co ional use permit . Daryl Smith stated that appeared Zhe project would be denied by the BrarJ and asked t applicant if he would like to request a continuance and com p with a new plan . The applicant requested a continuance , UPON MOTION CRANMER AND SECOND BY ZELEESKI', CONDITIONAL EXCspTION NO. 85-36 a CONTINUED TO THE MEETING OF JULY 17t 1985 , BY THE FOLLOWIN OTE: AYE C:.anmer , Evans , Smith , Vincent, Zelefsky N : None SENT: None CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 8:3-34 ZCOASTAL DEVELOPMENT PEPMIT 85-13 Applicant: Carolyn I,. Ueden Conditional Exception No. 85-34 is a request to permit a 1 ' encroachment into the 22 ' garage setback and a wall to encroach 5 ' into the required 15 ' front setback . Coastal Development Permit No . 05-13 is a request to allow construction of a single family dwelling . This request is covered by Categorical Exemption , Class 1 , California Environmental Quality Act , 1970. Scott Hasa reported that staff recommends approval of the coastal development permit and approval for the block well portion of the conditional exception ; however , recommends denial for the 1 ' encroachment into the garage setback . Daryl Smith opened the public hearing and Carolyn Deden, the applicant , WAs present . She presented photographs to the Board of hom*s with up to a 5 ' encroachment into the required garage setback . She stated that the reason for the encroachm ant was due to th• location on the common walkway . 'I1 S#. MS- l ism, L • l ' I r7 - 11'. TI ti 1 } CITY F HUNTIt� `�'`�. N BEACH MW MAIN S",'RiET CALIFORNIA 91 OFFtCE OF THE CITY CLERK March 20, 1987 Jerome 8ame, Attorney at. Lew 213D Mein Street: #140 Huntington Be:-.ch, CA 92648 The Huntington Beach City Council on March 16 , 3987 granted your appeal � relative tp Conditional Use Permit 86-62 and Cand i t ional Exception 86-107. Please call the Development Services Department for further information - 536-•5271. Alicia M. Wentworth City Clerk AMIW:C8:js cc; City Attorney Development Services Director memo F CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STREET CALI FOR NI a 82640 OFFICE, 0r I'HE CI'r Y CLERK March 7-0, 1987 Pen Nan J Corp. 444 S. Flower Street 4100 Wells Fargo Bldg Los Angeles, CA 90071 The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at its regular meeting held Monday, March .16, 1987 overruled the planning Conmission 's recom- nsendetion of approval of Conditional Ueze Permit 86-62 and Conditional Exception 86,-107 with deletion of Condition 06 (reciprocal access agreement ) . The Lit,v Council approved the staff recommendation which included retention of Condition 06. lhip is a Final decision. You are hereby notified that pursusnt to provisions or Section 1094 .6 of the Code of Cavil Procedure of the State of California you have ninety day:; from March 20, 1987 to apply to the courts for judicial review. If you have any questions this matter , p) ease conterf our office - 536-5227 . Alicia M. Wentworth City Clerk AMW:CB:Js enclosure CC: City Attorney Development Services Director Jerome gaim, Attorney at Law 2130 Mein Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 L) • -dW IT+Melr��rt rill ny y 1 u T 7 -�•T JY'4 r 4 , A4AWwr W to PuM+4h Advoliserrwntt of MI 111110111111 InOWMV NO "Ka etr purse n! tn@ Super,dr Court of OrangsCounfy, COMOMN. NuMbM A•8714, doted 29 ciOQI@rrlbsr. 1961, And 100 A•743I. demo 1 t 1wa. tM r STATE OF CALIFOANIA County of Orange •,,err M,496 7n W nw Mr► C O �I r.v —' aa� ,. rw C/ en Id OK•ca1�M�n .ww.,ti Io I aryl M Citizen of the united States and a resident of tho County 0.0resold; 1 am ever the arse of sighte9er, ),WON yown, and not a party to or mteresied in 1ha t;elovv 4011110d M$ttflr. I am a prinCi�,ai Clerk of the Orange 40 Co"t OAiLY PILOT, with which is combined th(- NEWS-PRESS, a newspaper of generel circulation. printed and :)ubliShed in tree City of Costa Mesa, County of Orange. State of California, and that a Noklee of PUBI,I;,'_ HEAkING of wh;Ot copy attached is a true and comp!eif; copy, was printed and p-Alished in the C(,ats Mest;, Newport Beach, Huntinclton Beach, Fountain Valley, Irvine, the South Coast communities and La 11 Beach Issues of said newspaper f--ir cOnseCutive weeks to 'Nit the issue(s) of �t s tr _.--- ----_... _.—_---- -- . 196...� r ' 4 t d *Aare. under penalty of perjury, that the ^� kwoon9 is true a1d correct. August"; 21 6 � y.z��• �� tee on �.�� 198 .....� tri a Mesa, California. PROW OF PUKJCATI" F�Jli •X' r 1 'rah. -ON CITY OF HUhMIN E36ACH Lo I w 30 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 929E UFFICE of THE CITY CURK �y r October 22, 1486 Jack Broberg i �2211 Eucalyptus E1 Toro, California 92630 The City Council of the City of Huitingten Beach at its regular meeting held October 20, 1986 accepted the withdrawal of your appeal relative to Conditional Exception 86--44 and Tentative 1'ract 12756. Alicia M. Wentworth City Clerk AMW:CB:bt j� rwti i �� 7i4� trta'1; LLLLCt rp y �iR x00 r.J ~' (rw AV '1• is , addLL AddML. ' . '�• OAF A -P W AAO 1A P519 do?YAV 40r At a 40# izvO(044e OA*ff~ ra 14W C. 4 ye �� .�din ni r "i.. � • ;GY &sue.Pwv rein �, '� �� ,,�"� ��c raft' .r4 �" ►`.�s.�.� �.5 �� ,.�.► �• A64W ooW:O"d.C' AWE.. A MARAA lF ftA.P r . .+FO• dF 'f ail .9