Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1972-10-24MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Council Chambers Civic Center Huntington Beach, California TUESDAY, OCTOBER 24, 1972 - Study Session COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: MINUTES Slates, Bazil, Kerins, Porter, Wallin, Boyle, Higgins None ON MOTION BY BOYLE SECOND BY BAZIL, THE MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 10, 1972 MEETING WERE ACCEPTED AS TRANSCRIBED, BY THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Slates, Bazil, Kerins, Porter, Wallin, Boyle, Higgins NOES: None ABSENT: None CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 72-15 (Continued from October 15, 1972) and ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 72-93 - Referred by Board of Zoning Adjustments Applicant: Southern California Edison Company Location: North of Pacific Coast Highway between Newland and the southerly extension of Magnolia Street in the M2-0 Heavy Industrial District combined with oil production. The Conditional Exception is to permit the construction, operation and maintenance of six combined cycle generating units having a height of 53 feet, excluding stacks. The Administrative Review is to permit the construction, operation and maintenance of six combined cycle generating units at applicant's Huntington Beach Generating Station pur- suant to Section 9551 of the Ordinance Code. Each unit consists of two gas turbines, two heat recovery steam generators and one steam turbine. The units are designed to use either natural gas or distallate for fuel. Also, as indicated on the development plans, construction of a shop and warehouse building of 40,000 sq. ft. Construction will,be of concrete block with a height of 25 ft. The Acting Secretary stated that the applications had been filed with the Board of Zoning Adjustments. The Board reviewed the applications and referred them to the Planning Commission with recommendations. The Planning Department staff received a report from the City Attorney's gffice dated October 13, 1972 recommending that the Planning Commission refer both matters back to the Board of Zoning Adjustments, to be held in abeyance until such time as a full and complete environmental impact statement has been filed with the City of Huntington Beach. The Southern California Edison Company has requested an opportunity to make a public presentation of their proposal The Chairman opened the public hearing on Conditional Exception No. 72-15, and invited comments on Administrative Review No. 72-93. -1- 10/24/72 PC SS J Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, October 24, 1972 Page 2 Mr. Paul Richardson, District Manager Coastal Region, Southern California Edison Company, addressed the Commission in support of the Administrative Review and Conditional Exception. He submitted a fact sheet concerning the proposed project and stated that Edison Company concurs with the recommendations of the Board of Zoning Adjustments resulting from the Board's review on October 19, 1972 and that Edison Company is prepared to comply with those recommendation. Mr. Richardson discussed the energy crisis and the need for the proposed expansion of the power plant. Mr. George A. Davis, Southern California Edison Company, addressed the Commission and reviewed the basis of the selection of the site for expansion, environmental considerations, and further elaborated on the energy crisis. He stated that an in-depth environmental impact statement is being prepared and will be submitted to the Public Utilities Commission in April 1973. A copy of the full and complete statement will be submitted to the City of Huntington Beach at that time. Mr. Davis displayed charts illustrating the generating capacity and the peak loads of the system, the generation dispatch on a typical day, and the Huntington Beach plant generating capacity. He discussed the power shortage projected to start in 1975 without this plant expansion, and described the proposed modification and expansion. He showed plot plans, photographs of the present installation and artist's renderings of the proposed combined cycle units with and without landscaping as seen from Pacificc Coast Highway and from Newland Street, and showed photographs of the new style trans- mission towers which will be constructed to replace the existing toConstruction is proposed to start in October 1973. He stated that some of the reviewing agencies are: Public Utilities Commission, State Water Quality Resources Control Board, Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Orange County Air Pollution Control District, City of Huntington Beach and others. Mr. Fred Bagwell, Southern California Edison Company, discussed air pollution factors. Mr. W. M. Wedesweiler, Project Manager, Southern California Edsion Company, discussed geological surveys. Mr. Michael Livingston, a homeowner in the area, addressed the Commission and asked questions concerning the transmission towers and number of additional lines, noise from the lines, clarification of present noise levels, total tonnage of pollutants now being emitted and what the view will be like from Newland Street. Mr. Don Buckland, a resident in the area, addressed the Commission and asked whether consideration had been given to the plant being constructed on a known earthquake fault, what compacting operations will be conducted and the requirements for dewatering. Commissioner Porter stated that construction traffic should not be permitted on local streets. Jim Mason, a member of the Huntington Beach Environmental Council, addressed the Commission and inquired as to the process by which Edison Company can work below grade without encountering problems with the ground water table. -2- 10/24/72 PC SS Minute:,: II.B. planning Commission 'Tuesday, October 24, 1972 Page 3 Mr. Al Baden, a resident, addressed the Commission and in- quired as to Edison Company's source of fuel for operation of the plant. Mr. Verle Morris, Costa Mesa, addressed the Commission in opposition to the proposed project on the basis of environ- mental and health concerns and introduced Mr. Chuck Griffin of Newport Beach who filed the "Friends of Mammoth action. Mr. Chuck Griffin, Newport Beach, addressed the Commission in regard to the reasons for the requirement for an environ- mental impact statement on the project. Mrs. Eleanor Rooney, a resident, addressed the Commission in opposition to the proposed project for health reasons. There being no one further present to speak, the Chairman closed the public hearing. Various representatives of the Ed -son Company answered questions raised by the public and members of the Commission. ON MOTION BY KERINS SECOND BY WALLIN, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 72-15 AND ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 72-93 WERE REFERRED TO THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS PENDING RECEIPT OF A COMPLETE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND FOR FURTHER INPUT, THEN TO BE REFERRED BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BY THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Kerins, Porter, Boyle, Wallin, Higgins NOES: Slates ABSENT: None Commissioner Wallin requested the Chairman to inform Mr. Richardson of the Edison Company that the Planning Commission's action precludes the issuance of grading permits on the proposed expansion or any other action pertaininq to such expansion. Mr. Paul Richardson, Southern California Edison Company, addressed the Commission and requested approval contingent upon the approval of an Environmental Impact Statement. The Chairman called a recess at 9:03 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 9:20 P.M. Commissioner Slates departed the meeting. DISCUSSION USE PERMIT NO. 72-71 Applicant: Larwin-Southern California, Inc. A request to permit construction of a private recreation area within Tract No. 7596, a standard R1 subdivision. The Acting Secretary informed the Commission that the Board of Zoning Adjustments was concerned about the proposed location of the recreation areas within Tract No. 7596. He showed a plot plan and discussed these concerns with the Commission. It was the consensus of the Commission that the Board of Zoning Adjustments was correct in its concern and that a reconfiguration of the recreation areas is required. DISCUSSION Code Amendment Nos. 72-21 and 72-22 Proposed Multi -Story Structure Ordinance The Acting Secretary informed the Commission that the Citizens High Rise Committee had received copies of the proposed code amendments and the Committee Chairman and members of the Committee were present. -3- 10/24/72 PC SS CORRECTED Minutes : 11 .13. 11lann ► nq Conunission Tuesday, netobet 24, 1972 Page 4 lit, further informed the Conunission Lhat_ these c ode amendments are proposed to be discussed by the City Council and Planning Commission at a ]oint meeting October 30, 1972. The Acting Secretary reviewed the proposed amendments and stated that a map was posted showing possible locations within the city for high rise development. In response to questions of the Commission, the Fire Marshal stated that the Fire Code and Uniform Building Code are being revised to require life safety systems in multi -story structures. Mr. Art Knox, Chairman of the Citizens Hich Rise Committee, addressed the Commission and presented a preliminary report on the proposed code amendments. The Committee's general statement of philosophy includes: Adequate open space, density control, parking requirements, fire safety, architectural review and variation in spacing structures. The report outlined provisions of the proposed code amendments which do not coincide with the philosophy of the Citizens Committee in three major areas: The street and intersection bonus, whereby density calculation would include one half of the street, the bonus of additional units allowed which would allow an increase in density as additional lots are combined into one building site, and the blocking of the ocean view on side facing lots where the bulk of the building or depth would be parallel with the beach and block the view. The report further outlined the Committee's recommendations relative to fire safety system regulations, front, rear and side yard setbacks, increase in parking requirements, no open space credit for roof area usage for recreational purposes, density controls, architectural control, and a recommendation that the land use intensity system be replaced by another, more simple formula. Following discussion, it was determined that the staff will revise the proposed amendments giving consideration to the Citizens Committee's recommendations and will develop an alternate to the land use intensity system,possibly using a simple percentage instead. Additional charts and plot plans will be prepared for study by the Commission. The matter will be discussed further at the November 14 study session. ON MOTION BY KERINS SECOND BY PORTER, THE ACTING SECRETARY WAS DIRECTED TO INFORM THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS NOT PREPARED TO DISCUSS THE PROPOSED CODE AMEND- MENTS AT THE OCTOBER 30, 1972 JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION, BY THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Bazil, Kerins, Porter, Wallin, Boyle, Higgins NOES: None ABSENT: Slates DISCUSSION CODE AMENDMENT NO. 72-18, ARTICLE 931 Planned Residential Developments The Acting Secretary informed the Commission that the proposed revision to Article 931 incorporates the requirements for PRDs set forth in the Planning Commission Policy Statement adopted February 8, 1972; changes suggested at the September 25, 1972 joint study session between the Planning Commission and City Council; and other requirements that have been suggested by staff. Alternatives have been offered in the following areas: Maximum Density; Maximum Site Coverage; Setback from a Public Street and; Recreation, Leisure and Open Space Areas. 10/24/72 PC SS 4. Minutes: H.B. Planning.Commission Tuesday, October 24, 1972 Page 5 The Commission reviewed the proposed code amendment and made certain changes and recommendations. The amendment is to be redrafted and discussed further at a joint meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission to be held October 30, 1972. DISCUSSION Inasmuch as development has a direct bearing upon the several school districts, and because of the lack of response of the districts to notification by the city of pending residential development, the Acting Secretary was directed to prepare a tentative procedure for Commission consideration, requiring the developer to obtain a letter of response from the school districts effected by proposed residential developments, indicating the impact of such developments upon the district. COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS At the suggestion of Commissioner Wallin, the staff was directed to provide Planning Commission packets to the main and branch libraries. The Public Information Officer will be requested to publicize this information. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned to October 30, 7 P.M. �4. Kenneth A. Reynolds Secretary �arcusM. Por Chairman -5- 10/24/72 PC SS