HomeMy WebLinkAboutUse Permit 86-6 - Conditional Exception 86-3 - Foodmaker, In ,. .. .. _„v,.,_-.r..�lw:7•:_> .... _ .Jar.. ..,-,.:. 1-.:,:,u1jr�, .A.. .. ... - --.w...>...�,:
A010tizea to f uDeisn Agverlesernents of all rends includenQ pt:bl+t;
notrcet,`by Decree of the supenor Court of Orange County, . Art
California, Number A•6214, dated 79 ieplember, 1961, and
A•24841 1, doled 11 June, 1963.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of Orange rf 1
en ac. •�+•.a » as r, � Ao■►r .� V_ ) �S
- .ar eo au tong""..ern
' � t �?r: t'•f.��r tit
am a CitiZen of the United States and a resident of
the County aforesaid; I am over thr age of eighteen aq�t7�t �9
M�.�t IIAo;.,.�''e •1
years. and not a party to or interested in the below "> :•,,� tna• 4,�tJ •
entitled molter. I am a principal clerk of the Orange
l�I4t'10E%ir1��i h!E �tl �
Coe3t DAILY PILOT, with which is combined the hY etietahe - ¢ '
r�.a+.g7 cou�at,�
NEWS-PRESS. a newspaper of general circulation, aotcrreWfrgln;t� /�
printed and published in the City of Costa Mesa,
State of California, and that a ` '
County of Oran-ge;- .�
PUBLIC HEARING: , bdbelelt Uda�M 10 �Aie�f��`
Notice of erb�anMrwctfeileoleewer
Of en psr V"'W114%to be,
.wIL q -
of which copy attached hereto is a true and complete
p
1Ti0M 1NU1►dtiE�k
copy, was printed and published in the Costa Mesa,
,wq�c!onr
Newport Beach, Huntington Beach. Fountain Valley. �
L ri t
amp r
Irvine, the Sou Coast communities and Laguna una1 trq�it` l
9 N�id+srrf,,.lrfprffre•IAt eor..
ONE TIM "N".t '• 1wOlb�r/e(Id
Beach issues of said newspaper for .... ww�+eRr:Lrx
: Aft et�Or►�
consecutive weeks to wit the issue(s) of i tr+a�;w?�•.'
Pmffl
C+ctlar�'s#'�•!
Nil 06 MNtpeeet;`�aow f+l�a►. s
flo:31�11;:Tft yelp it ik to 4
CA MAnwta'=l�wrMrttelt�►,
September 4 198 6 it"ri, R w rrkdt;+ariwa�n+. fs
e•N►taNM�.Mbu'eye xi f
,�1=.rw;Jti�lMrd?rIwlMlet,at "
198
198_•. — pnaawtlMir. u�
+islet;72f Z
n* +! vF.
L' � y� fti
}, tir w-v IripelYadl!�,
a:tn�f:atflK►�niler
198 ter�r tee;:
i•; r�A
tua+t; �•ie,�t ��a�r� t w
I declare, under pei1alty of perjury, that the
foregoing Is true and correct. :M,
w: a
September 4 6iM i r�lwi
etecuted on 1198 ...__
AXTZsla' Mesa, Calif nla. Ietela f�l ;
natur000
e
PROO 0
j '+City, of Hungtington Beech
August 8, 1986
Page. 2
:
C; Other drive-thru facilities' on Beach Blvd. are enjoy.ng; the. use
of !heir land under characteristics proposed, _by';. ^our
develn&ent whicti, tie are being denied, .si3-►:1-as , Carlia Jr. kzm
Beach Blvd. . Yorktown 'Paco Bell an Beech Blvd. 0 Garfield;
AcDonald's on Beach Blvd. @ Rubtdoua .'.'and Burger ,.King an
Beach Blvd. 0 MocDoneld.
We appreciate the opportunity for appenl acid wish .to be scheduled for
your meeting to he held September 15, 1986.
Sincerely,
FOOD AK ER* INC.
I � t 1•
Joh ' A. Emanuelli
Re on ConRtruction Manager
JA K I1' THE 130X Division
JAE:bjs
•
•
f
a
C--3 APPEX TO THE BOARD OF ZONIAG ;.DSUSTMENT' S DE14XAL Or USE FERMIi
NO�I -9 AND Coyr.ITIONAL EXCEPTION -40.� 6--3
The appeal to the Board of Zoning Adjustm0n': ' s denial of Use. Permit
No. 86--6 and Conditional Exception No . 86••� wins cost;n�-a,J from the �
July 15 , 1986 Planning Commission meeting,;,wi.th the applicant' s
concurrence. Use Permit No .• 86-6 is a request for the construction
of an approximately 2, 500 square foot drive-thiru restaurant loiatea
at 16311 Beach Boulevard (northeast corner of Beach boulevard. and.
MacDonald Avenue) and Conditional Exception No. 86 -3,. is a t.hr.ee-fold
variance request . (1 ) to reduce the minimum 27 foot turning radius, '
( 20 to .reduce the ,mini :num 10 i:or•t wide landscape planter width to
feet; and reduce the required number of parking spaces from .42
Lo 29 spa c-
On May 21 , ,19a6, the Board of Zoning Adjustments denied Use .Permi t
No. 86-6 , Conditional Exception Nc. 86-3 by a vote of 5-0, The
Board or Zoning Adjustments iyreed with staff ' s evalu&tion that the
number of variance requested represented too great a de )arture frot:i
the .. provisionu in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code . Staff
indicated to the applicant that the proposed square footage for the
building needed to be reduced in order to comply with the provisions
of the Huntington Beach Code Ordinance.
The applicant r:eguested a continuance a%. the July 15,, 1986 Plant':ing
Commission meeting in order to submit a site plan which would
elimina�e most of the variance requests and also provide an unproved
� circulation &.id parking p),a" . Reciprocal access was obtained from
the property owner of the recently approved motel project located
adjacent t , the subject site and staff has encouraged the applicanL
to *htegra-e reciprocal access wits the motel site along the
MacDonald Ave>>ue frontage . In addition , staff indicated to the
ap' licasit that the proposed elevations for the new restaurant
building should be architecturally compatible with the recently
approved motel .
: I
15taft st.ated' that the plan does not provide for an adequate stacking
area fog: the drive-thru facility. This would have, a serious
negative, impact on Beach Boulevard when the $Super Street"
improvements are made. It would remove the p parking lane on Beach
Boulevard. Thus , are%► stacking onto Beach Boulevard would have a
serious impact.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS :
The proposed praQ eCal�iorniuptlas 2 Section 15" _-Z from the
previsions f the. i Environmental Quality Act .
THE PUBLIC HEARYNG WAS '"nENED
A represPnta rive from Jack' In Tie Box . spoke ;n suppor,t "of 'the
project He stated that .the facility has been redesigned';; . the
square footage reduced; and agreement from khe adjacent motel ou"ners
had been beefy received for reciprocal parking . He was.,surpr.ised' that
constraints had been recently placed on his project and that an '
already large investment had been made.
. i
PC Minutes .: 3 j 5/86 _9- (596 ld
.e ry...., n•-'it!+?xssxrti.«,rf{i.. ....n.... .......... .._:,-,r.. :,".waK. t..v. . . '..:..l,tvn.._.....at Y..,.. s..tn:'i: ------- .-,.-...
•
John' Emanuell.i , Regional Manager , .hack In The Box , spoke in support
of the project . He discussed his stacking plans for the project and - ' {J
showed comparable plans . He also stated that he is trying to
i"crease sit-down business .
There were no other persons present to speak for or against the
project and the public hearing wan closed.
The Commission felts that the egress/ingress on the project needed
re-addressed and that a low profile monument sign would be preferred
at the site . They were also concerned with potential stacking
problems . They suggested that a continuance be granted in order to
allow staff time to sit down with the applicant and produce a plan
which :could comply with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code and
address the concerns regarding potential stacking onto Beach
Boulevard .
The applicant did not choose to have a continuance .
I
k
A MOTION WAS MADE BY SCHUMACHER, SECOND BY PORTER, TO UPHOLD THE
DECISION OF THE BOARD Of ZONING ADJUSTMENTS AND DENY USE PERMIT NO.
86-6 AND CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 86-3 , BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES : Rowe, Winchell , Schumacher Livengood Erskine, Porter, " !
Mirjahangir
NOES : None
l
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
MOTION PASSED
FINDI►JGS FOR DENIAL OF USE PERMIT NO. 66-6 :
1 . The establishment , maintenance and operation of the proposed
2 ,100 square foot drive- thru restaurant will be detrimental to:
a . The general welfare of persons residing or working iii the
vicinity because of potential ingress , egress, and stacking
at proposed driveways on MacDonald Avenue and Beach Boulevards
b . Property and improvements in the vicinity of such use or
r building because the proposed project will not be compatible
with surrounding structures .
i '
2 . The granting of. Use Permit No . 86-6 will adversely affect the
General Flan of the City of Huntington Beach .
3 . Recent observations of similar drive-thru restaurants ,on , Beech
Boulevard have indicated an average of 13 stackingspaces ne' eded
,
for peak hours .
f s,
� ;pC•.,:MinuLes -• �,15/86
FINDINGS FOR DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 86-3 :
1 . Because of the size, configuration, shape and lack of unique
top,-)graphic 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 .
2. Since the subject property can be fully developed within the
required setbacks , such a conditional exception is not necessary
for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights.
3 . The proposed on-site parking and circulation plan is inadequate
and have the potential of creating a congestion and circulation
hazard at the proposed shared driveway located on MacDonald
Avenue .
4 . Ingress and egress to the site at .he shared drive�. 3y located on
MacDonald Avenue has :he potential of creating additional traffic
impacts .
5. The -possibility of stackin onto Beach Boulevard has the
potential of creating a malor traffic hazard because the existing
parking lane on Beach Boulevard will become a travel lane as the
result of the "Super Street' improvements .
C-4 NE CHANGE NO. 86-22/NEGATIVE DECIARATION NC. 86-39
After car ully reviewing the mechanism for adding suffixes in the
Huntington ach ordinance Code and the intent of this zone charige ,
i .e. to incr a the density so that an identical number of units are
permitted on t se lots after the additional right-of-way and
improvement of ' 1 Avenue ( between Beach Boulevard and Silver Lane)
is completed, sta has determined a more appropriate zoning
designation which wi ensure equitable zoning.
The method outlined i.n a code for adding a density suffix to the
district specifies that t number used regulates units per gross .
acre . With these particula lots , most of which are small in sawand .
are not normally entitled to se the gross site area, a problem
develops in ( 1 ) coming u with fair number of units
P 9 P per gross acre, �
and ( 2 ) one which re-suits in the ppropriate density being allowed for
a given lot . Further complicatin he problem is that the gross site
area would include the total 40 foo eil Avenue right--of-way as well
as another 30 feet of Alhambra Drive.
For these reasons , Staff has determined t t a 'Q' (qualified
clansification ) added to the R2 zoning is best , simplest,, and most
appropriate way to address the problem. The Q' would inc:iude only
one condition , that is,
PC Minutes - 8/5/86 -11-- 15961d
ur oses of . calculat,ing density, :where `.
(a ) For P P
Section 9120 . 3 of tt�e Huntington, Beach Ordinance
Code specifies that net site area shall be used,
• these lots shall be entitled to add twenty-five
feet of .the Heil . Avenue right-of--way to net site
area. due to the dedication and improvement
required to w•-c.en Heil Avenue.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission continue Zone Change
No . 86-22/Negative Declaration No. 86-39 to the meeting of August
19 , 1986 , to allow time for a zone change ordinance to be prepared
and advertised describing the change from R2 to (Q)R2 .
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED
There was no one present to speak for or against the Zone Change . ` I
A MOTION WAS MADE BY PORTER, SECOND BY MIRJAHANGIR, TO CONTINUE ZONE
CHANGE NO. . 86-22/NEGATIVE DECLARTION NO. 86-39 WITH THE PUBLIC
HEARING LEFT OPEN TO THE AUGUST 19, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION .
MEETING , BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
' Rowe , Winchell , Schumacher , Livengood, Erskine , Porter, h
AYES : �
s MirJahangir
NOES: .None '
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None aR
MOTION PASSED
C-5 CONDITIONAL EXCEPTI0t1 N0. 86--48 ' yw
1 ,
Conditional Exception No . 86-48 is a request to permit a building
height of 32 foot 6 inches and to allow for a 6 foot cut in the rear
t
# yard so that a swimming pool can be constructed.,;''The sabject
property is located in Country View Estates , east of Edwards and
i
south of Ellis Avenue .
:,he; property is zoned Q--RI-( 2 . 7 )-0-8, 000 . .,".In addition ' to the RI
. 82-3 and 'Tentaive
standards , additional development criteria for ' theproperty -is
contained in the Conditional Use Permit ` Tract
11473 .
ENVIROUMENTAL STATUS: ,t
i
` The proposed project is exemptA!'Class V Section 15305 from the
Provisions of the California!tnvi .onmental Quality AcL .
i THE, PUBLIC HEAPING WAS OPENED
S ,
'i
Eric' Mossman , architect , spoke in support of. the 'prvjeet .
'� PC' M1t111kE8 -12 ( 3961d)
F
AVt [DriREA
C4 c _ C2 I116.
cz
R3 r .
J 3
Lf-L J�a..�T; cr-R R7 -
CF-E R3law �.
R2 ci `
R I
a R
RI Rt Z - c� .rwf __.. -%Nord
..-a• _
Y
q Ott
RI +t RI
�� M ■ i
Rf Rt tri J RI nt ; s� sr to
l t� tltlR RI Rf '� 1
mi R C 4 ,
R1 1R1
i
m I RI ni RI a w� } nti.. Ri
YI t RI C 4 i Ott RI `2
s
1�J1�J1 Sys• � - �. . / �* � C
�jt Ali
p ` to
sum
-.. J.
mp rt >nk HACN
"UPJTWiGYC)N MACH PLANNING' DIVISIOPI
CITY OF HUNTIN ON BEACK
20M MAIN STREET CALIFORAEA 92648
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
September 17, 1986
Jahn A. Emanuelli
Region Construction Manager
JACK IN THE BOX Division
FOODHAKER, INC.
i 9040 Telstar Avenue, Suite 121
FA Monte, Caltlornia 91731
The CiVI Council of the City of Huntingtoa Beach held a public hearing on
September.i5, 1986 to consider your appeal to the Planning Comaission'9 denial
of Use PFrmit No. 86-6 aid Conditional. Exception No. ' 86-3. Council approved
the revised plans with findings and conditious of approval including modifica-
tion in the sign to be worked out with the applicant and staff. A further.
1 motion to approve a twenty-five foot sign failed.
If you have any questions re ardiA the matter lease contact Jim Palin,
y $ g �
} Director of the Development Services Department at 536-5271.
AIlcia 4. Ve;ntworth
City Clerk
A4. W:CB:ea
Enclosure ,.
CC: Jim PaliE, Development Services Director
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTQON
Date �;� September 15, 1986
Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City council-
Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson , City Adminiatratord i
James W. Pa iDirector ,
t p
prepared by, 1 n , Director . Development Services ♦�,
r
Subject: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION' S DENIAL OP USE QRMIT .110.
86--6/CONDITION L EXCEPTION NO. 86-3
Consistent with Council Policy? New Policy or Exception
Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments:
STATEME14T OF ISSUE:
Transmitted for your cc.ns16e:ration is an appeal by Foodmaker , Inc . to
the Planning ecmmission ' s denial of use Permit No. 86-6/Conditional
Exception No . 86-3 . Use Permit No . 86• 6 is a request to reconstruct
a 21100 square foot drive-thru restaurant . Conditional Exception No.
86-3 is a request to allow 32 on-site parking spaces in lieu of 35
required parking spaces .
I
RECOMMENDATION:
Planning Commission and staff recommend that the City Council sustain
the action of the Board of Zoning adjustments and Planning Commission
and deny the requests .
Ott MOTION BY SCHUMACPER AND SECOND BY PORTER, THE PLANNING COMMISSIO11
SUSTAINED THE DENIAL OF THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJtSTMENTS AND DENIED
USE PERMIT NO. 86-6/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 86-3 BASED ON FINDINGS ,
BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES : Rowe, winchelt , Schumacher, Livengood , Erskine, Porterr
Mirjahangir
ROES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN : None
FINDINGS FOR DENIAL -- USE PERMIT NO. 86-6:
1 . The establishment , maintenance and operation of the proposed
2 ,100 square foot drive--thru restaurant will be detrimental to:
a . The genera, welfare of persons residing or working'" in the
vicinity because of potential ingress , egress , and stacking
at proposed driveways on MacDonald Avenue and Beach Boulevard;
t
M Q 4/M
i
b. Property and improvements in the vicinity of such use or
building because the proposed project will not be compatible
with surrounding struct!1res .
2. ThQ, granting of Use Permit No . 86--6 will adversely affect the
General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach .
3 . Recent observations of similar drive-thru restaurants or. Beach
Boulevard have indicated an average of 13 stacking spaces needed
for peak hourr= .
FINDINGS FOR DENIAL - CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 86-3 :
1 . Because of the size , con-iguration , 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 j
same district.
1
2 . Since the subject property can be fully developed within the
required setbacks , such a conditional exception is not necessary
for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights .
3. The proposed on-site parking and circulation plan is inadequate
and have the potential of creating a congestion and circulation
hazard at the proposed shared driveway located on MacDonald
Avenue.
4 . Ingress and egress to the site at the shared driveik y locate3 on
MacDonald Avenue has the potential of creating_ additional traffic
p' m acts .
i
5 . The possibility of stacking onto Beach Boulevard haz the
Y h
potential of creating a major traffic hazard because the existing '
parking lane or. Beach Boulevard wiA1 become a travel lane as the
result of the "Super Street" improvements .
ANALYSIS:
On May 21 , 1986, the Board of Zoning Adjustments denied Use Permit No .
86--6 and Conditional Exception No . 86--3 by a vote of 5-0 . The Board
of zoning Adjustments agreed with staff 's evaluation that the number
of variance requests represented too great a `.departure from the
previsions in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code . Staff i.ndicated . to
the applicant that the proposed square footage for the building 'needed
to be reduced in order to comply with the prov isions of the Huntington.
Beach Code Ordinance.
i
i
RCA .; ,September .X 5 , 19186 -2-
t6144d )
_T
The applicant appealed the , Board of Zoning Adjustment 'denial to the
Commies on which on and submitted -a roposal .to the Plasining
Planning commies; p
i eliminaced most of the variance requests and also
provided an impro'led circulation and parking plan . Reciprocal access
was obtained from the property owner of the recently ,approved motel
project located adjacent to the subject site. In addition , ..staff
indicated .to the applicant that the proposed elevations for " the new
restaurant building should be architecturally compatible with the
recently approved motel .
The original request for Use Permit h . 86-6 was for the construction
of anapproximately 2,500 square foot drive••thru restaurant. The
proposed square footage of building for the original request: required
the need to deviate from the pa'Pking and landsca ,'e provisions in the
Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. The revised plan dated .' Septembe'r 5;
1986 , reflects a reduction of square footage of the building . The
revised plan indicates a parkxng 'space deficiency, of :three (3 ) spaces
which staff feels is a significan- improvement over: the original plan.
Staff has evaluated the revised plan and staff feels that if the
drive--t hru entry was modified to encourage better circulation this
woulc, serve. to mitigate staffs concerns regarding ,lpotential stacking
;a of automobiles on Beach Boulevard . In addition, the reciprocal ,ac,-ess
and parking agreement with the adjacent property .,owner Will serve to
off-set the three (3 ) parking space reduction request'. Staff has met
with the applicant on numerous occasions and' staff perceives that a
design solution is attainable . A revised plan illustrating the
drive--thru entry will be on display at 'the September 15 , 1986 City
Council meeting.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS :
.�+
is
The proposed project is exempt Class 2 Section '15302 from the
( previsions of the California Envirori "ental Quality Act.
FUNDING SOURCE:
i Not Applicable
1
r
ALTERNATIVE ACTION:
As an :alternative action , the City Council may consider a modified
plan which would depict a, defined y
would serve to miti ate. te forethe* drive-thru
p refined entrance
entrance. This he .concerns.. of staff
regarding potential stacking onto Beach Boulevard. At.,a `"meeting -.on `
September B , ,,1986, the applicant agreed to the modi'fcat+ion to. the
drive-Lhru entrance . Based on the `,agreement', staff -,would 'support
approval of Use Perl'hit N0'
. :86-6 and Conditional, xti N 86=3Ecep o
based on the following findings and conditions of approval .
iF
INDINGS FOR APPROVAL USE -PERMIT NO. . 86-6:
1 . . The establishment, ' mai"n�enance .and operation .'of the ; pxopoged 2100
sq
uare foot drive--thrif restaurant will not,.be detrimental to;
Se " lbmber 15 86 -3_
CA 1 _R 9 �1 a aa`
p
a'. The general welfare of persons residing or working in the
vicinity;
b . Property and improvements in the vicinity of such use, or
building.
granting of Use Permit No. 86-6 will not advers-al affe'
2 . The g y c:t :-the ,
General plan of the City of Huntington Beach ,
3 . The ro, os'al is consistent with • the Cit General Pl "of,
p P yrs eneraa •.•.-. L2nd
Use.
SUGGESTED CON DITIOtvS OF APPROVAL - USE PERM:."r' NO. 86-6 :
1 . A revised site plan shall be submitted depicting ; -he
modifications described herein ;
a . drive-thru entrance on Beach Blvd . shall be r-dified to
depict a .defined entry.
b . Trash enclosure shall be equipped with self closing doors and
location shall be subject to the approval of the Department
of Development Services .
c. Location of order station shall be subject to the approval of
the Director of Development Services.
2 . Elevations shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review
Board .
3 . Prior to issuance of building permits , applicant shall file a
parcel map consolidating .lots 116 th.ru 121 . Said map shall .be
recorded prior to final inspection .
a . Prior to issuance of building permits , the applicant shall submit
the following plans :
a . Landscape and irrigation plan to the Department of
Development Services and Public Works for review and
approval . The landscape plan shall depict appropriate trees
which would serve La soften the hardscape area immediately in ` .
front of tha Beach Boulevard 2-levation .
b . Rooftop Mechanical Equipment Plan . Said plan shall 'indicare
screening of all rooftop mechanical equipment anc3 : s4all -
delineate the type of material to screen said ,
equipment. proposed
5 . Landscaping shall comply with Section 960 of the ft'h tington Beach .,
ordinance Code.
I
p mp Y pp
5. Thr develo ment shall com l with all applicable ', of
the ordinance Lode, Building Division, and piie - Department.
. i l•r
'RCA September " 15, 1996 -a- ( 6144d)
•
8 . Service roads and fire lanes, as determined bar the Fire
Department, shall be posted and marked.
9. Applicant shall pursue CalTrans approval of radius type driveways
on Beach Boulevard.
10. MacDonald Avenue drive,..,-Ay shall be mi.nirwim 27 foot wide radius'
type driveway.
11 '0 An' automatic fire sprinkl:e system shall be approved and
installed pursuant to Fire Department" regulations.
12 . The major identification sign shall - be removed or altered to ';'
comply with Article 961 within ninety (90 )days of Approval of
Use Permit No . 86-6.
13. All s,ignage shall comply with Articles 961 of the Huntington
Beach Ordinance Code . The free-standing sign shall be
low -profile , monument-type . A planned sign program shall be
submitted and shall be subject to the review and approval of the
Director of Development Services.
14 . Natural gas shall be stubbed .:n at the locations of cooking
facilities, water heaters , ',%nd central heating units .
15 . Low-volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets .
` 16. All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and
other surplus or unusable material , shall be disposed of et an
off-site facility equipped to handle them.
17 . If lighting 's included in the pa-king lot, high-pLessure lamps
shall be used for energy savings . All outside lighting shall he
directed to prevcitt "spillage" onto adjacent properties .
18 . If foil-type insulation is to be used, ,a fire retardant type
shall be installed as approved by- the Building Division .
19, The subject property shall enter into irrevocable reciprocal
access and parking agreement between the subject site and
adjacent; property.
20. Provide an 8 foot high block wall along the rear property line
beginning directly across from the southern building ,face and
extending north to the interior property line ,
Z1 . The City Council reserves the right to revoke Use Permit. No. 86-6
if` anv violation of these conditions of the Huntington Beach
Ordinance, Code _occurs.
t
RCA - septemher 15, 1906 - 5- (6144d ) ,,
FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 86-3 :
1 . Because of the s{ze, configuration, shape and lack of unique
topographic features of the subject property, .there appears to be
exception or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable
to the land, buildings or premises involved that does not ,►apply
generally to property or class or uses in the same district .
2. The proposed structure will be compatible with adjacent
properties .
3 . The establishment , maintenance and operation of t:e , use will,:not
be detrimental to the general welfare of persons working in the
vicinity .
4 . On site parking and circulation will be adequate and will ' not
have the potential of creat••,ing a congestion and circulation
hazard .
5. Ingress and egress to the site will not exacerbate traffic
impacts to Beach Boulevard and MacDonald Avenue.
SUGGESTED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 86-3 :
1 . A revised site plan shall be submitted depicting the modificGtion
described herein:
a . Drive thru entrance on Beach Blvd. shall be modified to
depict a defined entry .
2 . All conditions of approval for Use Permit No. 86-6 shall apply.
ATTACHMENTS:
1 . Appellant' s letter dated August 8 , 1986
2 . Minutes of the August 5, 1986 Planning Commission meeting
3 . Area Map
4 . Site Plan dated September 5 , 1986
5. Planning Commission Staff Report dated August 5, 1986
JWP :kLF: jr
RCA -- Setember„p - 15,, 1986 6 ,,
`(fi144d ) • . 01
FOC�} . INC. 9040 Telstrlr Avenue.Suite 121, El tires!e. Colifemio 91731 (81,9)571-7667
August 8, 1986
City of Huntington Beach
Planning Department
P.O., Box 190
Huntington Beach. CA 92648
. RE: Conditional Exception No. 86-3
Use Permit No. 86-6 top �C2
Gentlemen:
6
We wish to appeal the Planning Commission's decaeion of August 5th to
the City Council for �ha following rensons:
A . The Planing Commission and staff have based their decision on
the trafficengineer's opinion which has no basis of fact .
B . City Ordinance No. 2828 . effective 5/21186 does not mondate a 1.3
car stacking lane.
C. With the reciprocal parking agreement imposed on the rdiecent
proposed hotel property , we mLet all City codes.
D . Rebuttal of questions asked to staff we's not permitted, and
therefore the Commission's understanding was not clear.
B. Mr. Pottel. the Developer of the hotel, would prefer that we
hove our own driveway on MacDonald. The removal of this drive
will adversely impact the driveway on Beach Blvd.
F A statement was made by a Commissioner that all the remodels
mode by 'Jack in ' the Box have Incorporated monument :°signs.
This statement is false. We have recea,tly completed rewodels in
Long Beach, .Inglewood, anti Sunset Bench, where our ..existing
pylon signs remained; and we have permits for our restaurant on
Beach 0 Bishop scheduled to start remodeling approximately
8/25.
1
• i
ti
... =Not)
•
ui
I � Q
a
. • i. •' �' • ems-_ !l, �.- f!. N- �'-�E tb-•1••t�.,L• V
r,
•.0 -w+u •.d••r�t
}, 1. +w•r.- �-.•t-.w twa•
_��. r ...•..t. �i3 ►i V ...tiw�
W
ft
VLituc j
-
t
a
-
Y: .��.�1� • ry. L' o t �'!y ,i0 ?ts ,`Tf,,.71 .ri1r �a .� ?0 , _�_ .lL. ]il , •w h •�:>t�r '3 .• i K� 1 ~• �L t '1 t am'. �r7-ri-�T.rtr f�T�T' �� �r r �•, ii
•t;
t �
HUNr[INGTON BEACH
UEVELOPMEiIF SERVICES 2
S t P O b 196b Cr
P.O. sux 190
Huntington Beach, CA G2648 'y i
d=�
0� i n
MLAID ol
DATE 6
---� a atva9�•TiN� l
ow
• _ _ter t.•r" f r._ __rt.__ - �.� MACt7OMMD AVECi
-
j r 1194MIGT'. 4 MACH CJk '
l _ i �r•Ir Ys fi
Iowa_"".1 ..o:..I• + r
_ � �. } � i � J i Io a.tre rSL •:st iaq•sa 1'
n[W
- 1 "t all
------------- -
Ll
fit::-t .,,,, . .____. � # •� .ram g !
i rr ssIo.+ r mro.
C13014ALD AVENUE �41
_. gCH M A T I C SITE PLAN
-
y
41
�ilY1�{ �����. 1".i.►�CZ .�• 1: ;..r�wi.w.+�'�.•.L+/3��.-�r•�� L � `,..ATV —t.1� • �.'�•
• t
hunfttor brech development services . d*;)11rtm10t1t ,
:
WAff
-REPORT
TO: Planning commission
FROM: Development Services
DATE: August 5, 1986
SUBJECT: APPEAI, I THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT' S DENIAL OF
USE PERMIT NO. 86--6t'CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 86-3
APPLICANT: Foodmai,er , Inc . DATE ACCEPTED :
9040 Telstar Avenue June 17, 1986
Suite 121 ,
E1 Monte, CA 91131 MANDATORY PROCESSING DATE
August 17, 1986
Appeal to BZA s den 1A: t, `of
Use Permit No . 86--6 and ZONE: C4 (Highway
Conditional Exception No. Commercial. District )
Use Permit No: 86-6:
86-3. ,
the cons-' rt"ucElon of an GENERAL PLAN: General
approximately 2 , 500 ,sq . ft . Commercial
drive-thru restaurant.
Conditional Exception No . EXISTING USE: An existing
41 86-3 A thr.ee••fol v� ari-- 500 sq . ft. Jack-in-the--Box
ante request : 1 ) to reduce drive- thru restaurant
the min . 27 ct . turning
radius ; 2) to reduce ACREAGE: . 52 acres
min . 10 ft. wide land-
scape planter width to LOCATION: 16311 Beach Blvd .
8 ft . ; and 3 ) reduce (northwest corner of .Beach
the required number of Blvd . and MacDonald Avenue )
parking spaces from 42
to 29 spaces .
1 . 0 SUGGESTED ACTION:
Uphold the near �
d of zoningAdjustment ' s denial of Use Permit No.
86-6/Conditional Exception No . 86--3 based on findings outlined in
this report.
2. 0 GENERAL. INFORMATION:
The ,appeal to the Board of Zoning Adjustment ' s denial of Upe,. Permit
No . 86--6 and Conditional Exception No . 86-3 was continued from :the
July 15, 1986 Planning Commission,.:neeting�fwQn3nheAapplirart 's
concurrence. On Mayi,, 21, 1986; the Boaird, uttmentg
.
Use,-Per. No. �6.-6; -Conditional Exceptio gt�o. �8:6�3°'hy�` "a v.otea
denied '
,
p Zoning �Ad jua menLs "
a e
of ' -- The : Board of
a reed with at '`ff
5
r
:
'' -C .
evalrtation bat ' ChE, n4mbez "a . variance` rEquests zepzesented :aoo �
} , 1 {, .t`
g
xet a 'rle ar t.ure.<from; the: ,provisions . 1 n' _the,.�iuntington : k�each ,
,,• a a e
P
Btaff,,:indxcted to , the applicant"ttih t'. i�he , pop
d nance: Code.. ,
square �foota e, fox i,the; buil'din ,needed to".,be-reduced_ca�' rdQic ;ha
r com�ly•°wgith , the provis ions "of ':`?he Huntington 'Beach, Code' ;arainance:
,.
t requested a continuance at the
'The applicant 'July 15 , 1986 Planning }
Commission meeting in order to submit a site plan which would;:
eliminate most of the variance requests and also provide an improved
circulation and parking plan . Reciprocal access was obtained from
the 'property owner .of the recently approved motel project located.,
adjacent : to the subject Site and staff has encouraged . the , applicaiit i
to integrate reciprocal access with the motel site along the
MacDonald Avenue frontage.
In addition , staff indicated to the
applicant that the 'proposed elevations for the new restaurant
building sbould be ar,,hitecturally compatible with the recently }
approved mote-1
3. 0 _ SURROMING LAND USE,_ ZUNING AND GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS..
S
l
Nortil of Subject Property :
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: General Commercial {
C4 ( Highway Commercial District)
ZONE;
I LAND USE: Muffler Shop
� i
( City of Westminster)
)
East of Subj_ ect Property. s
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
' ZONE:'
, LAND USE:
Retail shopping crenter
presently under construction
-South of Subject Property:
i
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: General. Commercial 1
� `ZOi4E
C4 ( Highway Commercial District`)
LAND USE: Retail
t West of Subject Pro2er;:
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: General Commercial „
ZONE : C4 ( Highway Commercial )
BLAND USE: Vacant (portion of recently approved
motel site)
4 .0 ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS.
The proposed project is . exempt , Class,. 2 Sectivn<<15302'y from the
p ity Act .
rovision.� .of ttre California Environmental Qual
5.0 'COASTAL,,STATUS:,''.,
-.Not, applicable . '
e'a'a tRI �• ; ,�
•r7VW�L Rep
I t t 1 f �P i) a•1 y t A t '�
tt .i'/ , .. :Jf .'+1 .{. ..• .\+ ,. i'1. a lE. •.., .. +.K, .. y... 4t .f _. —__ 4 �..�_..—....,ny tL+,.r _�� . ..iarw,a�1s-•e i..�il�
.era► ,,.. , ., :. , . :,; ,
6. 0 REDEVELOPMENT STATUS
T-he propse4' r'ro 'ect i.
P 3 located within the Beach Boulevard
Redevelopment Survey Area . The Redevelo ment 'staff recommends that
the proposed elevations. forthe project shrill 'be reviewed and
approved by the Design Review Board and shall be compatible with the
recently ,approved motel on the adjacent site . Redevelopment staff
deferred analysis of the circulation plan to the City Engineer . 7
7 . 0 SPECIFIC PLAN: ► „1.;, } � �
Not 'applicable. }
8.0 SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE: � � ,.�.t:,�. r-f�7���'�� j�� ��►�. ,1�,
� �,14,1.t.1.f,�•. �0 2,r1..
Not applicable . ,
9. 0 ISSUES AND ANALYSIS:
The original request for 'Use Permit No. 86-�6 wac for the
construction of an approximately 21500 square foot drive-thru
restaurant. The proposed square footage of building for the
original request required the need to deviate from the parking and
' landscape provisions in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. The :
footaee''of• a'theabuildin which has el'ilenatpa reductidn,"o'.f - equate
P y
plan' , 9 sts � 1 }
90 'The revised indicates. mpark'in;gVspacecde icie
a�
spaces"which sl,aff feels is- a significant improvement over: the
vri•ginal plan. The following is a matrix which illustrates
r
compliance with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code and the revised
plans which reflect the single vaAliance request .
Revised
Section I9aue Re uired Plan Comment
9220 . 5 -Height 50 , 18 , Complies
with code
-Front setback, 50 82'
-interior side setback 0 26 '
_Exterior side setback, 10 , 66 '
-Rear setback 0 16 '
9603 -No. of parking spaces @ 2100 33* Revised
1 space per 60 sq. f t . sq . f t . 3 spaces plan.,, re- ,
of gross floor area 35 quires
plus variance'
1 parking space per for. re--
23 lineal foot of duction
drive--thru Pane of 2
parking
spaces
-Turning radius 271, 27 ' Com
w�
th
:
Staff .Report" ''.8/5/86
,
Revised
R
Section Issue , Required Plan Comment -i
Al
9608 Landscape 8% on 11� Complies
Percentage site with code
Landscape berm
along street
frontage 10 , 10 " Complies
with code
exterior side- 10 , 10'
yard J'
*Variance request on revised plait for a reduction of parking spaces ,I
from 35 to 33 _
Al
The revised plan submitted on July 28, 1986 , has eliminated the need
for a reduction in the minimum 27 foot turning radius and the t
reduction of the 10 foot wide landscape berm along MacDonald . Street
(Variances #1 and 12 ) . The square footage of the building has been
reduced so that the request to allow a reduction of required parking
spaces from 42 to 34 has been reduced to a request to permit a k!
reduction of parking spaces from 35 to 33 parking spaces which is , a
two space deficiency. The revised plan provides a much improved.
circulation plan which is the key element to any drive--thru restaurant
proposal .
Staff -'has `r a
eviews , the : revised pliin and staff-:has deterj ed 'that., the y,
request.' to allow a two,,park;ng,,space. reduction would be eliminated if,'
the proposed:`driveway- on ' MacDonald ',was eliminated and:.converted' to two
( 2)', parking,', apaces'., The owner of the property on which• the 'motel "will '
be constructed has indicated to staff ,that: he is opposed to the shared ;
driveway . `Staff recommends that the proposed shared driveway on '{
MacDonald Avenue be eliminated and replaced with parking stalls, ' and
utilize the t'eciprocal access agreement with the adjacent property .
Staff recommends that the proposed curb-cut for the motel on MacDonald
Street be ' the only point of ingress and egress . This will alleviate
any, potential traffic hazards and will place the ingress/egress on �
MacDonald Street approximately 200 feet away from the intersection of
Beach `Boulevard and MacDonald Street. f
In it addion,' t»he City, :En§ineer and' Planning -'stag€;'have analyzed :'the,.;
�lmpact of the,•, stacking for, .the '.drive`-thru lane and we: have( cuetezmi� ed
that' tha, revised, plan, dated',July` 28, 1985�`:does ' n`ot provide ':enough;,
9• ; i r P _ing . '' `.The- p an refl.ecta' a `ma : 'mum
stackin space for, drive--thru ark
- r Aobi`Les,-._from the. order,- speaker; ta; khe.
. . ; . rea.,,. or three auto.
. laading� a ., , .f
S. ' fiat"r the'' plan ,f
ui tinate r Igh t of wa at. Beach:. Fouleva`r`o tobile st:ackin t`area� ,;for
Y
should . reflect at a miniraumY'a "seven ; aut
trans in or.deic to :'rait: 'gare any . aent:fal ssl:ackirig(rbn�tos
v ''d. Bv,entuall' the Beach 0oUl'eva�ra`.-Super St�ce tr`r 'i11 bar
A o�tlL �,
� ��emented ?,which wilh,'e imin$t a at`reet ;pa rk3,ng; ailoi}y',fReach ;w;
rl, !,•.1-. -• r i • • riyr fir'( x y^ ,, + 1r ��7'i
e a`ir ( t�taEE ' s ;:cnnceich , is ttirP ie t'wer� h3gh� pot~ al Ffor�
F3oul;,.v 1'�t4, , , v,r�� rd- rj
tracking bntoSBeach &�uleaard ;wh
.s ich xX 11rjtra Fic_ iaen r ;
°fbr modeate 'speeda :. „
ort 8
- Sit f f; Rep �, /5/86 -4
•
Immediately after the meeting with the City Engineer on Tuesday , July
29, 1986, to` discuss the .plans submitted on July 28, 1986, staff
contacted the applicant and 'informed him of our position. Staff
suggested . a.:meeting in order to discuss our concerns . The applicant
has not contacted staff regarding a meeting on our concerns and in
order to accommodate the necessary stacking area or, a minimum 'of seven
automobiles °a significant modification to the site plan is necessary.
Consequently, staff recommends that the Planning Commission uphold the
Board of Zoning Adju3tment' s denial of URe Permit No. 86-6 and
I Conditional Exception No. 86- 3.
I
1D. 0 RECOMMENDATION:
` Staff recommends that the Planning Cortimission uphold the Board of
Zoning Adjustment 's denial of Use Permit No. 86-6 and conditional.
Exception No. 86-3 based on the following findings :
I
FINDINGS FOR DENIAL OF USE PERMIT NO. 86-6;
1 . The establishment , maintenance and operation of the proposed
2,100 square foot drive--thru restaurant will be detrimental to:
!; a . The general welfare of persons residing or working in the
} vicinity because of potential ingress ;. egress , and stacking
at proposed driveways on MacDonald Avenme and Beach Boulevard
b .r Property and improvements in the' vicinity of-such `use or
building because the proposed project will not be compatible
with surrounding structures.
I
2. The granting of Use Permit No. 86-6 will adversely affect the
General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach .
NG
•T •
FINDx s E FOR DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO 8 6--3. .. •
1 . Because of the size , configuration, shape and lack of unique
topographic features of the subject property , there does not
appear to by 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 the
required setbacks , such a conditional exception is not necessary ,.
for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property ` ri'ghts.
3. The proposed on-site parking and circulation plan is inadequate
and have the potential of creating a congestion and circulation
hazard at the proposed shared driveway located on MacDonald
Avenue ,
40 Ingress and egress to the site at the shared driveway 'locate' d 'oni,- '
• i.r MacDonald Avenue ..has the potential � raf f i c `�!
creating additional .'
P
of ct tional � t
•
Staff Report - 8J5/86 ( 5616d !
:
,.. ..'i'w T 4.'r ,..if i7 .; a ,• ,fir. -+ .}.. .. u�lwCtiT ..... - _-. S
ata
ASA
5 .
Potential eking onto Beach eoul.evard has' the po ential of -;,
creatin5 a major traffic hazard`,
11 .0 ALTER
NATT�VE ACTION: '
St recommends `a continuance in, ordeL,,, to work with." the.4pplicant and
staff
produce a plan which complies with the 1�untington nee Code
and address the concerns regarding potential stacking !..onto Reach.
E
Boulevard ,
ATTACHMENTS
1 . Area Map
2. "Site 'plan. elevations, floor plans dated J41Y 28, 1986 ,
3. Staff report dated 7/15/86
JWF: RL : kia
lc j
s
i
a ,
Iy I A
}� Stjiff �R�p+�,A i oct'
0,�� ,, • .. 1A:.1 `Y . f I s i a 'A + R 4 - i , } . , f .. ` t j. t � -- — - — }f •j`S"•
? ` ,..E �, ' .• .r"n',�� r ) r;
i huntc�n beachvwtopm*nt o+�rvi� partrniht
�ffA F
REPORT
H . TO;, Planning Commission
rROM Development Services
. . DATE: July 15, 1956
SUBJECT: APPEAL To THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT' S DENIAL OF �
USE PERMIT NO. 86-61CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION N0. 86--3
APPLICANT: Foodmaker, Inc. DATE ACCEPTED:
9040 Telstar Avenue June 17, 1986
Suite 121
E1 Monte , CA 91731 MANDATORY PROCESSING DATE:
August 17, 1§96
RE2UEST: Appeal. to BZA' s denial of
the construction of an ZONE: C4 (Highway
approximately 2,500 sq. ft . Commercial District
drive-thru restaurant
and a request to reduce GENERAL PLAN: General
the min. 27 ft. turning Commercial
radius, min. 10 ft . wide
landscape planter width, EXISTING USE: An existing
' and the required nun
sq. t. Jack-in-the-Box
of parking spaces . drive-thru restaurant
LOCATION: 16311 Beach Blvd. (north ACREAGE: . 52 acres
west corner of Beach
Blvd. and MacDonald
Street )
I
1 . 0 SUGGESTED ACTION:
Continue the Appeal to the Hoard of Zoning Adjustment ' s denial, of
Use Permit No. 86-6/Conditional Exception No. 86--3, with applicant ' s
coneurrenc,e , to the august 5, 1986 Planning Commission Meeting .
►1WP: FW:RLP:pb
( 618d )
A•i11�3A
} •
. I
. J
. 444.••aaa l R
huntivtnn beach drnloprnent pff
artHi�rit ;`
E:
:,:S
t( I{t
rA
.. FOR .
Thi Planni'n' g , Commission
FROM: Development Services
DATE: ,July 1 , 1966
SUBJECT: APPEAL TO THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT'S DENIAL 'OF
USE PERMIT NOo 86--6/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION 804 86-3
APPLICANT: Foo dma k e r , , Inc. DATE ACCEPTED:
9040 Telstar Avenue June' 17r- 1516
Suite 121
E1 Monte, CA 91731 MANDATORY PROCESSING VATE:
rugusE 17, 1996
REQUEST: Appeal. to BZA 's denial of
' the construction of an ZONE: C4 ( Highway :.
approximately 2 ,500 sq. Et . Commercial District )
drive--thru restaurant
and a request to reduce GENERAL PLAN: General
the min . 27 ft. turning Commercial
radius , min . 10 ft. wide
landscape planter width , EXISTING USE: An existing
and the required number 500 aq .ft. Jack-in-the-Box
tcE of parking spaces . drive-thru restaurant
a.�
LOCATION: 16311 Beach Blvd. (north ACREAGE: .52 acres
west corner of Beach
Blvd . and MacDonald
Street
1 .0 SUGGESTED ACTION_
Continue, at the applicant ' s request , the Appeal to the Board of
Zoning Adjustment 's denial of Use Permit No. 86-6/Conditional .
exception No . tl6-3.
2 .0 GENERAL INFORMATION:
, the Board of. Zoning Adjustments denied , Use.; Permits.
On May `21 , 1986
No . 86-6/Conditional Exception No . 86--3 by a vote of 5-0. - The -
number of variat�ice requests represented too great a cepdrture -:from
':he provisions in the Huntington Beach Ordinance: Code.' -Staff
indicated that the proposed square footage for the` building 6ee3ed
to be reduced in order to meet the provisions of the code.
ASthk
• ' Y fr t��Li7 i }yi.`
, ., :..' .. '.Nrarr«"_'w.:r.ia+wc..,nwuaw,row.rw::.a•.a ., ,..,..c.,•.. -.
r �t t- ram-•.. 1 i •i I kl
4 .; T'ite , appl ic`ant has requested a continuance in order, to , subriit` a `a!ite
' h . eliminates most of the variance . requests and :,Aiso;` +:'o ;;, ,
P ,, n :whxc PI-at
redesign a better circulation and : parking ;014 �. �_ Rec'i.'procal, Adcesa t
was obtained from--,the ' recently ,approved motel project l�aa -
•,. . i
} ad acent�, to the ,-subject :site. The revised site plan - wi L,reflect
` thee' reciprocal :access . Alao, staff is working with thee - appl,icant
whi acing architectural compatibility -with tbe ;recentlx
, approvedxt,
el
`RECOMMENDATION:
. Continuer','-at• the applicant's request, - the .Appeal to the _'Board of
' ng j Conditional
r �
Zoni hd ustment s denial of Use Permit too. 86 6/
exception No. 86--3, 'to the ,duly 15, 1986 Planning'`' Commission :meeting .
ATTACHMENTS:
1 . Area map
2. Appear letter from applicant
3. Minutes from Board of Zoning Adjustments dated May 21, '1986
4. Letter from applicant requesting continuance
i
JWP s la
3
i
}
r l::
n
J
r •
Stsff Report. (Dd )
1 FY r
r `zz;',-;. ._r,`-p-,1F>�-5.�?r"a:Cl:f"'a,.;e.';.., „nlz r}�w 3�. ,tii' . - .s.. !k�'. �ar.� �•rra :, _ __ _ _ t,
.. l
- �� (• isms► _ � - -.
}. C2 p3 C2
_ C2 C�
- - ` C2 :t 4� R3
a ' A R ��►
R .tom _ ' s•►s. n,r R
---� R3
IFCF-C p s
w• Rt CF_ECA
R3
'L •�w 'rarer Z ' C4
ww
i Rt i At R2 CA
' R2 c. .
ttt �• ; . °f pis
1i wsc as . 9 Rt
1 p1 Ri W 4 w it �n R� rs m sus Ps m
1 I
1ti C' w ! R! I
Mi
il! r' �!
. RF CZ C4 aR� At
ml t
P96J.
gym»oft"
HUNTINGTON !EACH"PtAPMMG DIVISION
_
14
FOQCMAKER, INC. 9040'Telstcy Amos{ Site 1. E1 N ante, Colitomzv`91731 (818)571.7667
�lUM1l1KiTON 9EACN
DEVEIAPM P WNW
May , 30, 1986 MAY,3
PA.` Br�c 19b ;
- • City of Huntin'gion Beach Ha + ONCl1„`CA 9264
Pie nning' Department
' P.O.,..Box 199'
Huntington Beach CA 92648 ,
RE: Conditional Exce tion No. 86_3
atT e`Pe U o.
Dear Sir:
P ,..;. y f►P j p j ,hy
Wc• res eetfull rU tir•Rt to c� eal th+: denial of the ' dub eel' ttio eet
the Bnaml or Zoning And Ajustments. We will contact the Planning;
fitif'f 1n drim mini theneceAanry proeedures Hnd earliest dNte to he
:lit-mi n:y the hlonnhig Commission .
Sinrc,xrly .
F ODK KER . INC. r'
• hn A. Emenuelli
egton Construction Manager
ACX IN THE PDX Division
JAR:bjoj
i
•
i• '2",hl
i
4
v 1
.. ... ...-.:y...4-.w-...,•w+r �a1C...•. {. >• ., Ae.,...:. „. .. .,r.,. .v t; ..+.ew....�n..n......n. M.o r,, :. .17.:. .i. vri .....Y'M[i�4� .kz..
00
Minutes, H. B. :Boa'cd of Zoning Adjustments
X "210 198
ay 6
` Pa g• 2
'r.
This reQusst,, is covered by. Categorical Exemption,
CA10ornia tnvironmental Quality Act, 1904 . z
Kr . Frankli.. reporte'dl Pl annin'g ' and public Wo a Staff members had ..
reviewed the ma and recommended that
p- pro alley dedication be , 3
made ' to Public Works standards.' j
Les Evans stated the property owns s now deve,lopin the' parcel , and
there will be other : requirements ch as installation of- public
street lights, :oil we.il proice ve equipment,- etc. Mr. Evans ;
I . further stated the Tentativ areel Map could be approved but not
the Waiver. Glen Godfre uggested continuing the request until
after Planning Commiuir action on the proposed development , ; !
UPON MOTION BY p0 DID SECOND BY SMITH, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
TENTATIVE
`NO . 66--197 WAS TINU'ED, AT THE APPLICANT 'S REQUEST, TO THE MEETING
OF JUNE 4 0 1 ! BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE;
Evans, Godfrey, Poe, Smith
AYES : ,
NOES * None i
AB T: None
TAIN Krejci
CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION N0. 86�-3
USE PERMIT NO. 86�-6
Apulicant roodmakar, Ipc . - r
CE RE UEST : To permit a reduction of turning radius, landscape
planter; less than ten feet ( 101 ) , and the number of required parking
apacea' proposed for a 2,, 500 Square Foot Jack in the Box restaurant .
" UP REgUEST : To demolish existing Jack in the Box restaurant and
r e�uild an approximate 2 ,500 Square Foot building. �
Subject property is located at 16311 beach Boulevard (Northwest
corner of Beach Boulevard and XcDon4ld Street ) ,
These requests nre covered by Categorical Exemption, Class 1 ,
California Environmental- Quality Act, 1984 .
staff stated the request is to demolish in exiting fast ' food
establishment And rebuil3 it The akpplicant proposes obtaining an
adjacent lot and• expanding the buildingt however, Staff feels the
applicant is attempting to 'overbuild the site , Starf `zecoirrida ' 1
denial og both the Conditional Riception.' and Vas Pernit; regaesti.
le.nfQodtr,ey. asked about . the. proximity of residential - units an`d; `
of explained there were . commercial : propertiea on two-, aidea with
apErkment' building within fifty feet (541 ) at the rear.
BtA
F .. fi�21�85
2..
1,1 i .', .. .. .,., �... �— _ r.a ..^'. Na+.Yr.'.lt .• __`'+rtt3+i"C tYJH'AS1Ni�
MAW
i -
i1 4
,
xinutes, ` H. e. Board of Zoning Adjustments `
?Ray , 21 , 1986 l
pag! 3
-Public Hearing was opined by ,Chairman Tome Poe and , the
arplEm htu is ' iepcesentative, Sohn EmanuellL , :waa . present.
stated ny had core before the'.Soard of Zoning
Adjuatmenta: ap roximatelycone., ear previously.- relative to this'.
' . p ,. :j � " g t
ro ect and.,.t a Board had adv aed. ac acquiring additional. adjacen
propert Their company re reaaentatives halve , according to Mr .
yy pp
Emanuetli , obtained a tentative agreement, to sell their property to
-the adjacent property-,,owner, in exchange for 'a least The
.applicant a representative ` state:d - they had not reduced the size' of
• `the building 'because it would not be' econonically feasible.
'Anothe:r company representative, Howard Nath reiterated their
efforts : to: satisfy the City ' s: regvirement.s . Daryl Smith
re-emphasized ;taff ' s statement that the buildable parcel . 'could not d
accotmmoda.te as large a project as the applicant wished to build, and
that 'the Board had snot encouraged such expansion. :' further
-
diacusaian was conducted about the applicant' s possibilities fo r
this location.
Thece was no one else present wishing to speak for or against the
project so the Public Hearing was closed .
UPON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY EVANS, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION
No. 86-3 AND USE PERMIT NO. 86-8 WERE DENIED WITH THh FOLLOWING
PrUDINGS, 'BY 'THE FOLLOKNG VOTE:
FINDIVGS FOR DENIAL -- CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 88--3 :
1 . The lack of required par%ing spaces , proposed `reduction.:in
j.. minimal turning radius , and proposed reduction in minimum
landscape planter width will be detrimental to:
a. The general welfare of persons residing or working in the
vicinity;
b. :property and improvements in the vicinity of *such : use or
building .
2 . Because there are no of special circumstances applAcable. ..
< aub ect propertyr including site, shape, topography,..:' location
or surroundingsp the:-strict application of the. Zoning :- Ord inance:.
will not deprive the, sub je:ct ' property of privileges " en jayod. by
t d under ldentleal sofas
othrr ,proFerties ' in the vicinity a►n
Y
classifications,
i y n
3 . . r .The. granting of a conditional , exception to ,not necessar ,i
order ,t=o nre�erve the ern joyaent of 'on• yr more subrkartial. `
property :t'ights.
,
t
1
3 .
�-
��tli.;� iS: :,t, ��'�•'!�",�4"o7Kxs,.r. .... .,.,:..r «....+ . ...::... ,.-i!:'!'; r'rt;:':t+►....w.... r.+�+rr..rr.a•,�.+.�+++r..- _ —......... ...w►' ....,.�.H..l L4f. .J�1�r'
}
Minutes . H S. Board of Zoning Adjustments
Page . ; r
4. The granting of Conditional Exception No .. 86-3 will be
materially detrimental to the public w*lfa:e#, or injuxio`
L
us to
k property in , the . came zone - classifications. ? '
�
5 . The granting of'. the conditional exception will , adversei y' affect t;
f
the General Plan of the City of Huntington `Beach.
>h INDINGS ' rOR DENIAL USE PERMIT NO. 86-�6
1 . The establishment , maintenance and operation of the proposed
2 ,500 Square foot building will be detrimental to :
d . The general welfare of persons residing or working in the
vicinity:
t
or-
b, property and improvementu in the vicinity of Ruch use
building .
2� The granting of the use permit will adversely affect the '
General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach,
3 . The proposal is not consistent with the City' s General Plan of
Land. Use .
4 . The granting of UGe Permit No. 86-6 will be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property in !
the same zone classifications.
i
G
AYES : Evans, Godfrey, RreJci, Poe, Smith
NOES: None
ABSENT : None 5
_ t
_ t
U PERMIT NO. 86- 27 t
MEGA VE DECLARATION NO. 86-2
a lic t: 'Hopkins Development Company
ton �ercial ,
Foot.`com
building be r catednon rthe Southeast�cernvruof Naeil Avenue
g
and Hushard Skre•
im covers Negative Declaration No . e6-29:
� This request
Staff reported the. rrquest ` i or .
construction of• a� ret�eil _building
o vacant site which is ad face t a 7 - Elev�en1° sho ing .. ,
ff ,,ssesbera" in an
� center, ,and the. app]ticant has aork with many sta _
n
attespt . to satisfy Code stipulations. ere are adequate` parrki , g
paces . to' 'Meet Code require"nts but Sta s concerns, over the ;
parking arr&n9v%8ent, and existing driveway at ht rear of. :the ,
r
axf!F
,
4
l
FOODMAKER. WC. 9040 Telstor Amn e. Suite,121. El Monte.ColifomiG.P11 31 (818)5714 7
•-
- June' 28, 1986 HMNG TOM EACH -
t
Hob T'ranklin •JUN Z u lyc,)
City of Huntington Peach �.0, hlot i90
PJnnrinl; Department 'CA 04
PO: ` Aax 19Q
1 ,
'Huntington '.Bench, CA 92648
RE: Conditional Exception No. 86--3
Use Permit No. 86-6
Dear Bob:
Due, to 'the recent approval of C.V.P. 56--24, the property to the
Nnrth and west of us, we would like to have our •project contfnued;
to allow us sufficient time to incorpornte the access agreement.
At that time, we will Address our concerns re erdhn treatment of
' Y K K
lnndscaping. 1 would like to hove the colors proposed by the
dove, lopment adjacent tn us in order to determine whether"they will'-be
rompntible with nurs.
Yoiir cooperation in this matter will be greatly aprrecinted.
' - Sincc�rely ,
q(`DAiAKER , INC. J
n A. Kmanuelli
rSon , Crnnstrucaon;MAnagerCK JN, THE BOX Division ,.
JAE sbjR +.
,l
i• ,
i"i 1 ' 1 1 i '• trf + wcyrA 'I
ty, ,u ,yy ' '� c a , 1 i X; it 'i. i '.ate 4 •*. �."fit' r 'IA� I�,i,
-
l. ..A _,,. .., if .V,t ,.. ..,i. ..,- n.,l. ._... 1...l:-�. s'^%- SrS: .1.. .1 r,♦. _ l `.G'� +- .rrA1� ".��' 1 —, L' .•��T 'it.'�Lr' '7
r
r rrr
' r
K)0D(VtWP, INC. %40 Telstor Avenue, Suite 121, El Monte, Coilforria 91731 (818) 571-7lx}7
August 8, 1.986
City of Huntington Beach
Planning Department G
P.O. Box 190 "
Huntington Peach, CA 9269$
RE: Conditional Exception No. 86-•3 N ;ram
Use Permit Na. 36_6 u; •^ rn
Gentlemen
We wish to appeal the Planning Commission's decisinn of August 5th to
the City Council for the following rensons:
A . The Planning Cnnimission and stuff have 'based their decision on
t the traffic engineer's opinion which has no basis of fact.
c
B . City Ordint+nc:e No. 2828, effective 5/21/86 does not mnndnte n 13
car stacking lane.
C . With the reciprocal parking agreement Imposed on the ndjocent
proposed hotel property , %tie meet all City codes.
i
D . Rebuttal of questions asked to stuff was not permitted, and
therefore the Commission's understanding was not clear.
� t,
E. Mr. Pnttel, the Developer of the hotel, would prefer that we
have our own drivewny on MacDonald. The removal of this drive
will ndversely impect the driveway on Peach 131'vd.
' F. A statement was made by a Commissioner that all the remodels
made by ,Tuck in the Box have incorporated monument signs.-
This statement is false. We have recently completed ,remodels An
T-ong Beach, ; Inglewood, one. Sunset Bench where our -existing t
pylon signs; remained; and we have permits for our restnurant on
Bench @ Bishop scheduled to start remodeling approximvtely
8/25.
1
r
-
r
r
;
r
,t City, of Nungtington Beech
"August
Page 2
C3: 'Other drive'thru facilities � on. Beach Blvd, ere enjoying the use
'theiror lnd under similar cha'racterlstles proposed by our
Bevel
p nf we be
ing.ei ng. denied, such as Carl's' Jri vn
Beach •Blvd. @ Yorktown; , Taco 'Bell, on Beech Blvd, @ Garfield;
l McDonald's on Beach Blvd. @ Rubidoux; and Burger King on
Beach .:'Mvd. @ MacDonald . .�
We 'appreclate the opportunity for appeal and wish to be scheduled for
i Y61r meeting to be held September 1.5, 1986.
Sincerely ,
FOOD AKER , INC.
Joh A. Emanuelli
Re on Construction Monnger
JA K IN THE BOX Division
JAE:bjs
t
!
Y?
-n wi.J i..as..! ..}ir x ....t.etti,]siwwY..O 4 h. ,.. ...n. ,. . ., _ —._�_ _ — �.,._—_. •3 r �,. },. ...
iii
, r
41
J
1 City ,of :HungttngtotY Bench
,
t August- 8, 1986
.Page 2
,
G. Other drive-thru facilities on Bench Blvd. are enjoying . the use
+ of their o , land under similar �chnracteristics proposed by our
de ve
l Pme nt tehich we are being denied , such as ,Cnrlls 'Jr. on ;rY
= R h Blvd. 0 Yorktown; Taco Bell an Beach Blvd. @ Garfield;
cD ;x
` onu�ld's on Beach Blvd. @ Nubidoux; and Burger. King 'on
Beach Blvd. @ riTncDonald.
8
We npprecinte the opportunity for nppenl and wish to be scheduled for
your meeting; to be held September 1q , 1988.
Sincerely,
'FOOD AI{Efl , INC .
Joh A. Emanuelli
Re on Construction. Alonager
JA I{ IN THE BOX Division
7AE:bjs
t
a
7 `
rr,
A
1
7
Pubph 'Airgtis t 28, :1986 �
WrICE OV PUNtIC VARIM '•
1,. r ';�`� SEr''
APPEAL -10 PLANNING C"1SS1 N ,S._DENIAL QF USE ?ER�4I'T, NO'8b-6`:'AND"CONDITIONAL.
' S
R EXCEPTION .NO' 86-3
ing ch'`Ci ou ncil xill hol
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Hunt tan Bi.a t C
C ncer h2000 Hain 'Stre'ets Huatiagto'nrBe' ch, Cae, Hlif orruulaD on theCi-vic
, � 8 , , date aad,
at the time indicated belo'w to receive And consider the starrments of all
persons who Irish to be heard relative to the application 'described''biiew.
DATE: Monday, September 15, 1986
TM: 7:30 P.M.
APPLICATION N MI3FR: Use Permit No. 86-6 and Conditional , Exception' No. 86-3 - Appeal
LOCATION: 16311 Beach Boulevard - Northwest corner of:, Beach Boul diiard and MicDdnal d
Avenue.
PgoPOsu. an appeal by 1=oadmakers, Inc. , . to the. P1a'nning Commiss_�• p f. ice's Aden ai ,
of Use Permit No. 86-6 and CondiItional`liception
request is to construct an approximatelyi2100 squirie'foot`drive„-thru
restaurant which creates a two parking space reduction .j n�,the,,requi red :
• number, of parking spaces as required by Article 960 of the Huntington
Beach Ordinance Code. The appear is based on a 'number 6f,'Atems
regarding. stacking of automobiles on Beach Boulevard, signage ' ;
and realignment of a driveway,
Lyimormaml STATUS: The proposed project is. exempt; from` the, provisions' of
the California Envfrorunental . tcuality Act.
dcription and a copy of the proposal o!i KILE: A ..legal i s on file in' the ;.. '•
Developmentrvices Department.
v
A`.L IN•IEUSTED PERSONS are invited to attend sald hearing and express
opimians or submit evidence for or against the application as outlined .
above. All applications, exhibits, and descriptions of this proposal, 'are .,
on file with :he Office of the City Clerk, 2000 MI. in Street, E{uatington`.
Beach, California, for inspection by the public.
HL'?i'IINCTCN BEACH CITY COUNCIL
By: Alicia H. WeaLworth
City Cl`e be
Phone (714) 536-5405
Dated: August 20.
p i ,i4
P%ibliab .Septaeber',!4 1986
WrIC1 of MBLIC' HFARNG
APPEAL ,TO PLANNING` C0l�IISSION'S DENIAL OF USE PERMIT N0 8b-6 AMD CONDITIONAL
4
EXCEPTION HO 86 3
Nofid IS R REBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach Cite„Council rill. bold a
pu ag' n. [he Couac
l c hears it 'Cbsmber at the Nuntinston Beach Civic
Ccntcr; 2000 `lain iStreet, Huntington Beach, 61.1f ornia, 'on ,'the date' and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the, statements'. of,;sd
persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described' below.
DBE: Monday, September '15, 1986
TL'4?s 7:30 P.M.
.,. I
•
APFLICATION NrMBER: Use Permi t No. 86-6 and Conditional Exception ' No. , 86-3. - Appeal
LCC.ITION. 16311, Beach Boulevard - Northwest corn• er of Beach Boulevard and MacDonald
Avenue.
PROPOSAL. A n a sal by Foodmakers , Inc. , xo the Planning Ccxrr,�ission's: denial
pA ,
of Use Permit No., 86-6 and Conditional Exceptio'n:. No. 86-3. ,;The '
' e;.fo.o drive- r red
request' is to construct �+n approximately Z100 squar ru
restaurant which'creates� a two parking ' spac'e reduction in, the requ'
number.o P '"Arkin9paces: as required by Article 960 of ,the'. Huntington
Beach Ordinance Cade The app6al is based on ,a number of items
regarding-stacking 'of`iiitomobiles on Beach Boulevard, signage
and realignment of a driveway.
�.• .IN�to J�TUS• Y .
proposed P p�
MliENTA.L ST�� he ro osed project is exem "t from the rovisions of the California En4ironmental Quality Act.
t
ONFI3.E. A iega1 descripVjt,ns Oand arcopy of the proposal is on ` file in the r I
Development Services Department.
hI.L L .R:SZED PERS
ONS
O2a ar
e invited to attend
said hearing and express s
oplsainas or submit evidence for or against tba, application as 'outLined :,I
above. An applications, ezhiaits, and descriptions of Chia proposal-are
on file with the Office of the City Clerk, 2000 Main Street, Huntington
Beach', California, for insFection by the public.
HUN7INGTON BENCH CITY COURIL
970 Alicia M. Wentworth
Cxty 'Cherk
Phoue (r 14) 536-5405 i
E
Dated: August 20, 1986
. Y...wvw+i,—«.n:�:t t::'rAL�iiNl�a�+.i4iiTii►f+Z1���MYw.:�...:.ar-..wr�.i��- .�.........r+.�'wr+�rr�N""«.:,..r.t.�.�+.w.+w^..-
F
r NOTICE To CLERK T6 SCHEDULE`PUBLIC NEARING
ITEM ; t S
T0: ,`:CITY CLERICS OFFICE DATE:
PLEASE' C,.
EIED1)LE APUBLIC HEAPING USING T11E�ATTACHED .LEGAL `NGTICt~ F�iR THE
DAY OF
AP's aye attached
AP s Will follow
No AP'e
Initiated by: r
Planning Commission
Planning Department
Petition
* Appeal
APP ,
Other
Adoption of. Environmental Status (x) "
YES NO
Refer toL2.�- d Planning Department Extension
£or- additional information.
* If �i , p lense transmit exact sword ing to be. required ' in 'the legal .
• ,- j"�!,
Publ i sh
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEA
RING. age,
r ,
t
NOTICE , IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public 'h car inq- will be held by the City Coui
nci 1
�of the Ci ty of tlunt"ig ton ,on ,beach , in the Council Chamber of t. he" Civic Center,.
. Huntington •Beach, at the hour of ' o-J P.rl. , or as soon thereafter as
possible on Me day of
for
the purpose' of considering
� Q
a
� oapt
u ecfcf
a -- �w
, ,
rc�
COpp
� • /)
AIR
Ap.
All interested persons are invited to attend said hearing and express their
opinions for at- a9ditist saiel
..
further infor(otition may be obtained rom t e `Office of the City Clerk , 2000 1•lain
Street. fiuntington Beach , !"l i fornia. 92648 ( 714) 536-5227
OATF:U C ITY OF HUNTINGI'Ut; SLAG,
BY: Alicia 14. Wen3.Worth f
City Clerk
` a A• t r, r 1�1+""...a... !. .. ,.. ..rr�';' .. r i...y�.�,A.Tvt+`r .r •i•. 7 a i, . `•,.•, .��tiw ,.:.,lT.T. 'tr...
�'��� .�r,11z'i��7:R'{! wy `•''} .: � •..• a _�:ti-' _'... �._.� .:t -- '
r
,J
1 z OB l 142-091-27 12 L ��
Lt�ki Kwf aun� lcim Pa rlcur,, Restaurants • .
r13716 a Barman` Dr.`' 160` Hoiaaid; 8t./3ard Floor '
y Crrito8 G . 90701 San Francisco, CA 94105
,• . .. •,; ,: ' ,; ,;: '; • r �"', ,..;• :;•` '�; fir;'
I 2 142=091�-28 13 142-092=0242LO832
l A /� r y 1 � • � L y I 1.' 5 r
' `• ' S,�Kan• �4 Sons ,', •, , .• '(':- .. �•'• i 'yl J.t:
• Howard ;'E. stein : Fredrick `J. Trui�apler
' r 15 •Hunter St. i ,
Y 7862.` Holt St. 1 7@62:.MecAonald
f .2rvine, CA 92 I ; Huntington Bch, CA 92b47 ' Huntington Soh, CA 9264T
• 142-0831@ 3 ! 142-091-29 14 1142-092-03 24
:B S Xbn` sons Mih'sin ,,H. , DAdah Danon Wa�sEy'`& Danon
-15 Hunter St. . 2068• Glenview Ter.
Irvine, •CA 92714 ; Altadena CA 91001 1621 Kensing Lane'.,,
Santa' Ana, CA 92705 ..
142=083=19 4 ; 142-�091-30 15 142-09244 25
Yong Do `Chan Chen ; Manuel -E. , Comic ,
. ;
9 i Harry U. Hirao ,
2031 E.I Nutulood Ave, 22952 -1�l, Toro Rd, ; 7850• MacDonald St.
Fullert6n, CA 92631 El Toro, CA 92630 s Huntington Bch'; CA 92647 ,
r
.. ` C.
l42 083 20 5 i 142. 091 31 16 142-092-06 26
Young H. Kim Manuxl .E. Comia . James ' �F. Reed 17522 Beach -B1./4209 ; 22952 El Toro Rd. P.O. Box ' 294 f'.•
Huntington Bch, CA 92647 E1 Toro, CA 92630 Huntington Bch, CA 92648 ti+ '
142-091-04 6 142-091-32 17 142-092-07 27 }'
.y;
Edwbrd :C. . Loh ' Mervyn St. Clare •• i Alex Wilkey
+3812 :Baywood .Dr. 16271 Beach Blvd 20572' Pebble Jane
Huntington Bch, 'CA 92646 Huntington Bch, CA •92647 Huntington Bch, CA 92646
142=091-05. 7 ! 142-091-33 18 142-092-08 28
Cloys Frandell Donald P. Jones Tashi G.. ZouiA `t
15442,'Wagon Wheel Circle 17931 Beach B1vd/1M 7932 MacDonald St
. . Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Huntington Bch, CA .92647 Htintington Bch*' CA 92647;',,
1 142-091-06 8 142-091-34 19 142092=13 79,'.^,
Mardesich Marchese GWMN4
cs Inc.
,:Thoma g A. Chan C. .Lee7942itNolt Avenue �7 , L•�i a 772.6 Finevile Dr.
t�kt_
:Huntington Bch, 'CA 92647 �•, �j (�� Downey, CA 90240 >,.f
142M091••-09 9 j 142-091--35 20 142-092-14
Batty G. Stone Richard T. Wu Wilber' D. Smith
s 4537 Agnes; Ave.; 7311. Stone Creek 8212 . 20th St. `
No . ` Hollywood, CA 91604 Anaheim, CA 92807 Weatminater, CA 92683�
142-091-25 10 j142-091-36 21 142-092-lS 31 .
Dang Long Thuy Phan I James F. Reed Et Al Burcon Properties Inc.
7892. Bolt Sc. P.O. Box 294 P.O.,, Box 520783
Huntington Bch, CA 92647 Huntington Bch, . CA 92648 ` Biscayne Annex • , 1
it
Miami, FL 33152
14�-091-26 11 142-092'-01 22 142--101-08 32
` Eugene. J Quchene Gery Flogarzi Stephen' A. Hangal• ,
Bu e i Fytl. BaX 80A2 �.
r '
;untin+�Eon J�ch,: CA 9264 Huntington,
ngton,MacDonaldch# C y,-'CA 9270E
3682 a ue,rius Dr.
9 tluntin tan Bch GA 92G4 / Fountain Valle
f i
lie" r
Z M
94, y . 3.3 , ,..ff, ., t i,• , t � S 1
107-224-681.44 ?;
,i oyd; Cra Ocean',Viev.: School .'Dist.
' + 7891:;G1+ncoo Aw•
Huntington'•Bch; CA: 92647 HuntiriBtonrBct 91 6 g h; CA 2 4 7 3
,• 1
i 142-101 -10 r_ 34 ; 107-401�-04 45 if
! C
Charles e. Cruzat Kvirtia', y;*Sanho#f'' �f
`�17252 1walon,,Lane 12600. -arookhurNit/ 101
untington: Bch, CA 92641 "rden' Grove CA 92640 ` r ► '
14Z=10 L-11 c: 35 107-78242: 46 `
�Daan El' Wiltton,j Scarteen , Corp./Property Taxi ; t
895:.8. Cedarw+aod St. ' P.O., Box ,7600
rai'i a 'CA 92669
d � , � Los Angeles,.. CA 90054 y�
i
z t
•'t
- w t
� 142 lbl 14 36 , 107 782 03 47
-{Rori'.E. Luaero. Second 0 la Properties
j89Z1'• Fry'`Circle Will,
eyy
Huntingtdn Hch, CA 92646 723 Via M Hans
Santa Barbara, CA 93108 I
2 2 7 14 10 15 3 107 7 2 0
l
8 5 48
"pi�rek Ho Trickdtt Norbert 01ber .
1672 New kiampehire br. ` '16242' Beach Blvd: {`
'Conta` ',Hesa, CA 92626 1 -Huntington Bch, CA 92647 • ,,':.
142. 102 16 38 ' 10 7 06
tt .. , -782� 4 9
[ 2 3't t
�G P" Huildin' terprises Norbert 0lbera
17266. F�lin' er Ave/�H 16242 eaach Blvd''
#
} i 'Huntfngtcn Bch, CA 92647 Huntingt6n` Bch, CA i. 92647 i
i 142-102' 19 39 ; 142-091-18 50'.;
1 '.1 '7 :'.fir. ...!� ti' • I -
' Jeannes, 1dmak
or Ic,
�,
' uzanne; Jordan , 9040 TelstarnAvejl2l : ,.k�,
.18601„ Newland St,,
Hun tin, `Hsh CA �42646 E1 Monte, CA 91731
s 142=-162=20 .40
• 7,,r
,:Jeanne Suzanne Jordan
•� �186�1 Netilland St' �'
I "t Y
Hun tington ech, GA 92646
142-10 41
2-52 � ►, ,
G,•P Building Enterpxiaea
6.6 ;Edinger Ave/1H ! `,
Huntiaigton Bch, CA 92647
141-102-53 42
Hale ne K. Goodman ti
6932 Ctiurch Cirlce
Huntin ton' Bch, "CA 92648
107-220-48 43
;: 'borothy' T. -Pack { f
' 1`115' S. !'lewer/7th Floor
I,oa AngtlMe cA 90017
1
't Publis Se'pt6m66r 4, 1986
NOTICE-,OF :PUBLIC..HEAR,I:TtG
y , '• f-"y" ` •�'' x, 1�J:'�
1. APPEAL".Tb PLANNING COMMISSION IS DENIAL'":Of 'USE PERMIT NO-,86-6 AND'CONDITIONAL
EXCEPTIOP�-'ND'86-3
x
S
i NOTICE .IS, HEREBY, r^
rt,IYEPI that the Huntingt`on'Besch City ,Council will hold��a
p blic hearing to the Council'Chamber, at the Huntington Reach Civic
Center,; Z000 Main.Street; ,Huniington.Beach, Cal.ifornia', '.an the' .date And ',
at the time indicated below .to receive'and consider the statements' o.f all
#, .. persons who wish to Abe heard relative to the app lcation described below.
ATE: Monday, September 15, 1986
TIME 730 P.M.
APPLICAT10h NUMBIIts Use Permit No. 66-6 and Cond itional Exception No. �6-3 •- Appeal
LOCATION: 16311 Beach Boulevard - Northwest corner of Beach Boulevard and Mac Con ald`
Avenue. ;.
' PROPOSAL: An appeal bye Foadmakers, Inc. , to "the Planning"Co*iss`ion's .denial
re nest' s' to � construct an a roximate1t 210 No.of�Use Percni t, No. $b-ta and c6n,ai tional- ' ion' 86=3. The
arks ' s ace reduction is t Q re uir
rest p Y, 0 square .foot 'drive-thru
aurant which creates a two
ng p n h q ed
number of ,arking spacesas required quired by Article 960 of the •Huntingtan
Beach Ordinance Code. The a eal is based on a ' number; of items "
regarding stacking +of automobiles on Beach Boulevard, signage
and realignment of a driveway.
NVIRfJN2iDiM STATUS : The propbsed•project is Exempt: from the. provisio
"ns of
the Califora Environmental Quality Act.
A �1 legal description and a c -
ON FILE: P oPY of the proposal is an file in the
Development Services Department.
,%LL INTER—ESTED PERSONS are invited to s,'.' ;end said. hearing and express
opiaions or submit evidence for or against the application as outlined
above. Al! applications, exhibits, aild descriptions of 'thin proposal are
on file with the Office of the City Clerk, 2000 Main Street, Huntington
Butch, California, for inspection by the public.
HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY COUNCIL
By: Alicia N. Went4orth r
City Clerk
Phone (71•i) 536-5405
Dated; August 20, 1986 , l
• Y E
x ;.^i. : } 'ai4{<!t x 4ff.C+i`iM+SnT,1"1.*x»I.xxftM P•',t N.f..:p>.- ., .r.^....+•.. : — .� ... ...w... • K-i � _ _ �•:_u ,.