Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976-09-28APPROVED 10/19/76 MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Council Chambers, Civic Center Huntington Beach, California TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 1976 - 7:00 P.M. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Parkinson, Gibson, Finley, Slates, Newman, Boyle Commissioner Shea arrived at 7:55 p.m. COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None NOTE: A TAPE RECORDING OF THIS MEETING IS ON FILE IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT OFFICE. Vice -Chairman Gibson called the meeting to order. MISCELLANEOUS: PARK SITE ACQUISITION Chairman Slates addressed the Commission concerning acquisition of surplus property currently owned by Caltrans in the City. He stated that normally when Caltrans declares property surplus they sell it at fair market value. The City has several pieces of property in the Oldtown Area, one being used as a park site on a lease basis and another one a potential park site. Caltrans has indicated that they would sell the leased park site to the City for approximately $318,000, while having paid only $50,000. Chairman Slates noted that Jim Palin sent a memo to Norm Worthy with information that Newport Beach had acquired a 2 acre parcel which the State paid $268,000 for in 1963 and sold for $170,000. There was a discussion on the need for parks in the Sunset Heights area and Acting Secretary Selic h stated that there were 2 parcels which could be used as park sites. Chairman Slates suggested that perhaps the City should consider the oss�ble rezoning of Caltrans property to _reduce intensity -as to altefnative land use. ON MOTION BY PARKINSON AND SECOND BY SLATES THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO INVESTIGATE ALL PROPERTIES PRESENTLY OWNED BY CALTRANS AND DETERMINE MEANS OF ACQUIRING PROPERTIES AT A MORE REASONABLE PRICE, ESPECIALLY THOSE PROPERTIES LOCATED WITHIN THE OLDTOWN AND SUNSET HEIGHTS AREAS BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Parkinson, Finley, Gibson, Slates, Newman, Boyle NOES: None ABSENT: Shea John O'Connor discussed the distinction between State owned property and Caltrans property. SCHEDULED ITEMS: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 76-12 "Oldtown Specific Plan" At the public hearing of September 21, 1976, the!Planning Commission expressed a desire to further examine the proposed Oldtown Specific Plan and explore possible alternatives. Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, September 28, 1976 Page 2 Al Montes presented the following three alternatives to the Commission for review and discussion: Alternative One: ENABLE PROPERTIES WITHIN DISTRICT ONE TO HAVE THE OPTION OF DEVELOPING UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF DISTRICT TWO. Basically, this alternative would allow all property owners the choise of either building single family homes or triplexes. It would consist of an overall reduction of allowable densities than that which would be generated under the existing zoning. It would also partially resolve the concerns regarding a reduction of density. Alternative Two: REDESIGNATE THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF DISTRICT ONE AS DISTRICT TWO. Alternative Two would allow property owners located south of Frankfort Avenue the option of building triplexes or single family homes. The area is predominantly zoned R3 and designated for Medium Density Residential on the City's General Plan. This alternative would also partially relieve concerns regarding reduction of density. Alternative Three: UPGRADE THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BASE ZONING DISTRICTS OF R2 AND R3 AND INCLUDE SUPPLEMENTARY PROVISIONS FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOME DEVELOPMENT IN EXISTING 25 FT. LOTS This alternative would serve to improve the development provisions of existing residential base zoning districts but would retain the existing allowable densities. Fourplex and triplex development would still occur. However, the provisions to allow development on 25 ft. or 27 ft. lots would promote construction of single- family homes. It would totally relieve any concerns regarding a reduction of density and would partially accomplish the objective of creating a diversity of housing types. Commissioner Slates preferred Alternative 3. Vice -Chairman Gibson inquired if there was a conflict between the Oldtown Specific Plan and the Redevelopment Plan. Acting Secretary stated that there was no conflict with the redevelopment plan. Tom Wickstrom requested permission to speak. He stated that he was a property owner and resident of the area. He felt that the zone change was in conflict with the General Plan and the Redevelopment Plan, particu- larly in the area of Chicago, Atlanta, Alabama,Huntington, and California Streets. He further stated that he took a personal survey in the area and contacted all but six property owners out of 76 in the area. Two Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, September 28, 1976 Page 3 people refused to sign the petition, 7 people could not be contacted, which left 89% disagreeing with the proposed rezoning. He stated that he made a house to house count of usage of the property in this one specific area and it is 66% multiple residential. Commissioner Shea arrived at 7:55 p.m. The Staff suggested that a community survey be made of the subject area to determine property owners' preference toward single family or multiple unit development. The Commission concurred with staff that a detailed land use map of the subject area should be prepared. CODE AMENDMENT NO. 76-8 "Projecting Decks and Windscreens - Waterfront Lots" Jim Palin discussed the background information on this Code Amendment stating that two amendments have been proposed. The first is an amend- ment to Section 9103.4 of the Ordinance Code and the second is to Title 17.24 of the Municipal Code. He further stated that an effort had been made to solicit input from those homeowners affected by the proposed code amendments. The Huntington Harbour Property Owners' Association had been unable to publish the code amendments in their newsletter and would not be able to do so until late September. Commissioner Newman stated that she was a member of the Huntington Harbour Property Owners' Association and had determined from the other members that they would like the matter set for public hearing. ON MOTION BY BOYLE AND SECOND BY NEWMAN STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO SET CODE AMENDMENT NO. 76-8 FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON OCTOBER 19, 1976, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Parkinson, Finley, Gibson, Slates, Shea, Newman, Boyle NOES: None ABSENT: None PACIFIC ELECTRIC RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY: REPORT ON ABANDONMENT POLICY The Southern Pacific Transportation Company has filed an application with the Interstate Commerce Commission to abandon the Pacific Electric Railroad right-of-way south of Garfield Avenue. As a result the California State Transportation Board, who by law must determine possible alternative transportation uses, has requested that the City of Huntington Beach indicate its interest in the right-of-way. They have requested that we respond by October 5, 1976. To facilitate preparation of a response, staff prepared the following information and recommendation. Monica Florian stated that the staff recommended that the City indicate to the California State Transportation Board the following: 1. The City desires to acquire that portion of the Pacific Electric right-of-way between Garfield Avenue and Mansion Avenue for the Lake Street extension project. Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, September 28, 1976 Page 4 2. The City desires to insure that any transfers of ownership occurring for the abandoned right-of-way not create unusable parcels. 3. The City still supports the extension of a mass rapid transit corridor as adopted by the Orange County Transit District but cannot preserve the Pacific Electric right-of-way for this purpose solely with its own resources. Bob Hartwig, representing the Orange County Transit District, stated that they had an interest in preserving the right-of-way for future transit purposes. The Commission requested that the staff meet with OCTD in the near future to discuss the potential of the corridor. ON MOTION BY SLATES AND SECOND BY BOYLE THE COMMISSION APPROVED THE ABOVE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE STAFF BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Parkinson, Finley, Gibson, Slates, Shea, Newman, Boyle NOES: None ABSENT: None Chairman Slates was excused at 8:35 p.m. PACIFICA COMMUNITY PLAN: SENIOR CITIZENS RESIDENTIAL MULTI -STORY Al Montes addressed the Commission and stated that proposed Pacifica Community Plan evolved in response to a proposal by a developer to develop a large portion of the subject area. Included in the plans are proposals to (1) enlarge the Pacifica Hospital, (2) develop new resi- dential health care facilities, (3) construct new office/medical buildings, and (4) erect two residential multi -story structures of 14 and 15 stories intended for elderly housing units. A lengthy discussion ensued touching on problems which might arise in parking requirements should the use be converted from senior citizens to regular apartments. The Staff was directed to investigate how other cities have taken care of this. Bob Zinngrabe, applicant, addressed the Commission and discussed the proposed project, and the need for it. He felt it would be best to go with a specific plan because typical high rise ordinance would not apply. He stated that a portion of the project would be approved under Section 8 and he would be working with HUD and FHA. Vice -Chairman Gibson suggested that the Staff investigate the possible requirement of a public vote on housing projects related to low cost Section 8 programs. Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, September 28, 1976 Page 5 ON MOTION BY BOYLE AND SECOND BY PARKINSON STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO PURSUE BOTH THE SPECIFIC PLAN FOR THIS PROJECT AND DEVELOP A CITYWIDE RESIDENTIAL HIGH RISE ORDINANCE BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Parkinson, Finley, Gibson, Shea, Newman, Boyle NOES: None ABSENT: Slates The Staff was directed to come back one more time before a public hearing. CODE AMENDMENT NO. 76-15 The Planning Staff at its meeting of September 8, 1976 was requested to provide the Planning Commission with input on a request for the development of a permanent single family residence in conjunction with a temporary horse facility. John Cope addressed the Commission and stated that he had researched the proposal and discussed with the attorney's office and it was determined that the ordinance would have to be amended. It was the staff's recommendation that the Commission direct the code amendment be set for public hearing. Donna Colbert addressed the Commission and inquired as to the necessity of the proposed yard setbacks. John Cope indicated that the proposed setbacks were the result of anticipated setbacks for the Estate Residential District which is the area where the temporary commercial horse stables are located. . The Commission then discussed the setbacks and directed the staff to further review the setback requirements. ON MOTION BY BOYLE AND SECOND BY PARKINSON THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO SET CODE AMENDMENT NO. 76-15 FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON OCTOBER 19, 1976 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Parkinson, Finley, Gibson, Shea, Newman, Boyle NOES: None ABSENT: Slates COM14UNICATION FROM PUBLIC WORKS - OLD CITY YARD SITE The Public Works Department requested that the "Old City Yard Site" at the northwest corner of Memphis Avenue and Alabama Street be declared surplus property. The site is presently zoned CF-C and is surrounded by property zoned R3 and R3-0. The staff recommended the Commission find a declaration of surplus property on the Old City Yard Site in conformance with the General Plan. The staff further recommends initiation of Zone Change proceed- ings on the subject site to R2 Medium Density Residential. Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, September 28, 1976 Page 6 Commission discussion ensued. ON MOTION BY BOYLE AND SECOND BY PARKINSON THE COMMISSION FOUND THE PROPOSED DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY AS BEING SURPLUS AND AS BEING CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Parkinson, Finley, Gibson, Shea, Newman, Boyle NOES: None ABSENT: Slates ON MOTION BY BOYLE AND SECOND PARKINSON THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO START PROCEEDINGS TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO R2 MEDIUM DENSITY RESI- DENTIAL BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Parkinson, Finley, Gibson, Shea, Newman, Boyle NOES: None ABSENT: Slates ZONING DESIGNATIONS FOR THE BOLSA CHICA AREA The City Council, at its regular meeting of September 7, 1976, approved Zone Change No. 76-20 to prezone.portions of the Bolsa Chica to RA-02 Residential Agricultural combined with Oil Production, ROS Recreational Open Space, and ROS-01 Recreational Open Space combined with Oil Production. The Planning Department was further directed to investigate and recommend an alternative zoning designation for consideration, the substance of which would allow oil production and uses which would not have a long term impact upon the land. The staff suggested formation of a limited use district to implement the desires of the Council. This zoning designation would be applied to properties such as the RA portion of Bolsa Chica for the purpose of maintaining a low level of development in order to afford a reasonable time period to culminate planning and environmental programs which would address long term development. Commission discussion ensued. Commissioner Finley asked if the 02 designation could be included in the ROS zoning and staff advised that it could not at the present time be applied to such a zoning designation. ON MOTION BY FINLEY AND SECOND BY BOYLE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO AMEND ARTICLE 968 TO ALLOW THE COMBINATION OF 02 WITH ROS AND TO SET CODE AMENDMENT NO. 76-16 FOR PUBLIC HEARING.. AYES: Parkinson, Finley, Gibson, Shea, Newman, Boyle NOES: None ABSENT: Slates GENERAL PLAN DISCUSSION Monica Florian addressed the Commission and stated that the staff would not be making a presentation on the General Plan document itself, but would appreciate comments from the Commission. She stated that the Minutes: H.B. Planning Commission Tuesday, September 28, 1976 Page 7 General Plan is an effort to combine previous elements into one document. Vice -Chairman requested a time frame and perhaps a PERT chart. Mrs. Florian stated that the optimum schedule would result in its being adopted by the December 6, 1976 City Council meeting. Vice -Chairman Gibson suggested that a format for the Planning Commission study session be prepared for discussion of the General Plan. MISCELLANEOiTS : Jim Palin presented a metal panel and some color chips for viewing by the Commission. He stated that Weiser Lock has requested permission to use the metal panel in the first phase of construction of one of their buildings. ON MOTION BY SHEA AND SECOND BY PARKINSON THE SAMPLE OF METAL PANEL AS PRESENTED (PROVIDED IT IS ANTI -GLARE MATERIAL) TO THE PLANNING C014MISSION WAS APPROVED FOR PHASE ONE OF CONSTRUCTION OF THE BUILDING WITH EARTHEN TONE COLORS TO BE USED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Parkinson, Finley, Gibson, Shea, Newman, Boyle NOES: None ABSENT: Slates ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None STAFF COMMENTS: There was a discussion on the bus tour which is tentatively scheduled for October 16, 1976. Commissioner Shea requested if possible that it be arranged for another date since she will be out of town on that date. COMMISSIONERS'COMMENTS: Vice -Chairman Gibson presented "Planner" awards to Commissioners Parkinson, Finley, and Shea. ADJOURNMENT: 11:10 P.M. J 70'Y Edward DfI �Selich`� Acting Secretary 61671�4- 12/� Charles Gibson Vice -Chairman