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