Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-10-28Approved December 2, 1980 1 11 MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION ADJOURNED MEETING TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28, 1980 - 7:00 PM COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Schumacher, Bauer COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Greer COASTAL ELEMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN (Cont. from October 21, 1980) Consideration of a Coastal Element, a State -mandated plan. The element will be an addition_to the City's General Plan. June Catalano suggested that a procedure be used at this hearing which would permit first public input followed by Commission re- view and discussion with straw votes being taken to guide the staff in the preparation of the amended element and resolution. These could then be brought back to the Commission at its next regular meeting for formal action or continued again at the discretion of the Commission. She informed the Commission that, with the letters from the Edison Company and the Chamber of Com- merce submitted to them at this meeting, all comments and input received in regard to the element to date have been forwarded for the Commission's consideration. Chairman Porter questioned whether further discussion of the wetlands area would be of relevance at this meeting, considering the prior designation by the Coastal Commission. Praveen Gupta of the Regional Coastal Commission staff explained that in his understanding the designation as wetlands by the Coastal Commission leaves the City no other choice but to carry that designation in its Coastal Element. He further noted that the wetlands designation would not preclude the expansion of coastal dependent energy facilities in the area, but would permit little other development. "Coastal dependent" is defined within the Coastal Act, but in response to questioning from the Commis- sion Mr. Gupta was not prepared to say whether or not a facility expansion which would not directly manufacture energy but which would involve the preparation of other fuels for use in the manu- facture of energy would qualify as coastal dependent under the definition in the Act. The public hearing was opened. Minutes, H.B. Planning Comm:LsSion October 28, 1980 Page 2 Bill Compton, manager of the Huntington Beach office of the Southern California Edison Company, addressed the Commission to dis- cuss future plans Edison has for its property in terms of alternative energy sources. He noted that the company is interested in having their property available to them for expansion, and in their opinion the present terminology in the plan would preclude any possible ex- pansion of the plant for the stated purpose. He asked that he be allowed to meet with staff to work out a.designation agreeable to both Edison and the City and in accord with the provisions of the Coastal Act, suggesting that a designation of "resource production" instead of the present designation as wetlands would provide the necessary flexibility. Mr. Compton distributed copies of his company's com- ments on the plan and its proposals for possible future expansion of the plant to the Commission. Robert Moore, representing the Mills Land and Water Company, spoke in opposition to the wetlands designation placed on the Mills property and on the adjacent state-owned parcel which the company may re -acquire. He stated that in his opinion the decision made by the Fish and Wild- life Service, the State Department of Fish and Game, and the Army Corps of Engineers had been unilateral and unjustified by the actual conditions on the site. Mr. Moore asked permission to present an expert witness to testify to the existing situation on the property. Dr. Richard Vogl distributed a summary of his report to the Commis- sioners. He pointed out that wetlands in order to be viable must be restored and what occurs on adjacent properties has great bearing on whether a specific area can be restored or not. He said that restoration after the lapse of so great a time would be difficult, very expensive, and perhaps impossible. He described the Mills site as no different at present or historically from other nearby parcels which are not designated as wetlands. Dr. Vogl noted further that the recent jamming of the tide gates has permitted the land to be flooded with water from the flood control channel which has killed off the pickleweed, thereby effectively destroying the value of the area as a habitat for the Belding savannah sparrow. In response to questioning from the Commission, he replied that no one really knows whether or not the pickleweed would regenerate if the tidal gates were repaired and drainage restored on the site. Dale Dunn, 17302 Almela Lane, addressed the Commission in support of the adoption of Alternative 3 for the downtown section but with no reference to a height limitation. He expressed the opinion that flexibility is the key to good development in this area. Lillian Myketuk, resident of Huntington by the Sea Mobilehome Park, spoke in favor of retaining the wetlands designation as out- lined in the draft element. Oscar Taylor, downtown property owner, urged the adoption of Alter- native 3 in order to allow private development of properties in the downtown. -2- 19-28-80 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission October 28, 1980` Page 3 Ed Chadowski, resident of Huntington by the Sea, spoke in favor of retaining the wetlands designation as delineated in the draft document, saying that from his observation the area is definitely affected by tidal action and is inhabited by a bird population. He suggested that the proper body to consider removal of that designation would be the State Coastal Commission rather than the Planning Commission or the City. Ellen Trent, also a resident of Huntington by the Sea Mobilehome Park, addressed the desirability of protecting and enhancing the wildlife habitat designated as wetlands. Jack Chalabian, KTJ Properties, Inc., addressed the Commission to request redesignation of an area at the end of Edinger Avenue near Countess Drive from commercial to residential. Gary Mulligan, 117 Main Street, expressed preference for the Alt- ernative 3 plan for the downtown area with height reference deleted and the broadening of the mixed use designation. Eldon Bagstad, downtown property owner, also favored Alternative 3. Will Woods, 316 Main Street, presented the following comments: 1) If the wetlands designation remains, some government entity is responsible for its restoration and maintenance; 2) Alternative 3 should be selected for the downtown area; and 3) the City should not automatically accept any State designation within its bound- aries but should contest any decision it may feel is not correct. Richard Holt, downtown property owner, urged the adoption of Alternative 3 for the downtown area. Ed Zschoche addressed the Commission in support of a combination of Alternatives 1 and 2 for the downtown with a height limitation of not more than three stories. He said that it is imperative to take an aggressive approach toward transportation development in the downtown area, including a commitment to the already existing transportation possibilities, using the abandoned railroad right-of-way as a trunk for branch transportation throughout the community. He also spoke in favor of the retention of the wet- lands designation and the protection of the existing mobilehome park. Mr. Zschoche encouraged the Commission to take a position on the Bolsa Chica to enable the City to take a role in the development of the County's Local Coastal Plan for that area. Dr. Peter Green, Amigos de Bolsa Chica, addressed the issue of the Bolsa Chica, asking approval of the recommendations submitted by the Local Coastal Plan -Citizens Advisory Committee, particularly Policy 9 to include Bolsa Chica as in the sphere of influence of the City of Huntington Beach and Policy 10(b) to provide for the participation of County, State, and federal agencies in plans for the area. He also recommended that all references to roads, bikeways, etc. into the Bolsa Chica be eliminated from the element. -3- 10-28-80 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission October 28, 1980 Page 4 Gordon Smith, representing the Environmental Board, commended the draft Coastal Element if supplemented by the addition of the policies recommended by the Citizens Advisory Committee. He believes a strong statement should be made by the City recognizing the ecological value of the Bolsa Chica and the importance of its preservation. In regard to the downtown, Mr. Smith stated that the Environmental Board feels that Alternative 3 should not be selected. He also urged preserva- tion of the old railroad right-of-way. Leonard Wright, 606 15th Street, spoke in favor of Alternative 1 for the downtown area with a three-story height limitation. He ex- pressed the opinion that the downtown area would not support intensive commercial and residential development and that Alternative 1 would preserve the general characteristics of the old town, which is the desire of the majority of the residents. John Gable, 210 9th Street, strongly urged the approval of Alterna- tive 1 for the downtown area. Dennis Catron, representing Lindborg/Dahl Corporation, addressed the Commission to encourage adoption of Alternative 3 for the downtown. It was 4is feeling that this alternative would provide more flexibil- ity for the development of the area if amended to allow for the mixed use commercial/residential as suggested. He pointed out that the recent earthquake safety survey will result in the eventual demo- lition of most of the downtown buildings and a concrete plan of development is needed to allow rebuilding. William Stamm -addressed the Commission to support adoption of Alter- native 1 for the downtown area, saying that adoption of either one of the two other alternatives presented would lead to future problems, while the first alternative will create a safes environment for family housing yet bring about adequate commercial and business oppor- tunities. There were no other persons to address the Coastal Element, and the public hearing was closed. The Commission recessed at 9:25 and reconvened at 9:35 p.m. Discussion began with the downtown area of the Coastal Zone. Areas of discussion included allowed densities, provision of affordable housing and what percentage should be required within the zone, traffic patterns, ability of the area to support high density and com- mercial/visitor serving uses, height limitations, setbacks, open space, eventual ordinances or specific plans which could be used to implement the coastal element, the expressed desires of residents of the area, and the possibility of providing a mixed use in the commer- cial areas by allowing residential use of stories above the ground floors. Several Commissioners stressed the importance of the City taking a positive step in the area which could provide the impetus for private development of the downtown. -4- 10-28-80 - P.C.* 1 -1 Minutes, H.S. Planning Commission October 28, 1980 Page 5 ON MOTION BY PORTER AND SECOND BY BANNISTER THE COMMISSION SELECTED ALTERNATIVE 3 AS PROPOSED BY STAFF FOR THE DOWNTOWN AREA, MODIFIED TO DELETE ANY MENTION OF HEIGHT LIMITATION, TO ALLOW MIXED RESIDENTIAL/COMMERCIAL USES IN THE COMMERCIAL AREAS, AND TO REFLECT MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IN THE AREAS NORTH OF 12TH STREET AND SOUTH OF HUNTINGTON STREET AS OPPOSED TO THE HIGH DENSITY SHOWN IN THE DRAFT ELEMENT, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, NOES: Winchell, ABSENT: Greer ABSTAIN: None Kenefick, Porter, Bauer Schumacher The policies recommended by the Local Coastal Program -Citizens Advisory Committee were reviewed. ON MOTION BY WINCHELL AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER THE POLICIES RECOMMENDED BY THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM - CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE HOUSING POLICIES, WERE ACCEPTED FOR INCLUSION IN THE COASTAL ELEMENT, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Winchell, Porter, Schumacher, Bauer NOES: Bannister, Kenefick ABSENT: Greer ABSTAIN: None ON MOTION BY WINCHELL AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO AMEND THE ELEMENT BY DELETION OF ALL REFERENCE TO SEWERS, BICYCLE TRAILS, SCENIC ROUTES, OR ROADS INTO THE BOLSA CHICA IN THE MAPS DEPICTING THE BOLSA CHICA, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Schumacher, Bauer NOES: None ABSENT: Greer ABSTAIN: None Chairman Porter directed staff to make the corrections to the element by means of insertions into the document. ON MOTION BY BAUER AND SECOND BY BANNISTER THE STAFF WAS DIRECTED TO REVIEW THE PROPOSAL OF THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY AS SUBMITTED AT THIS MEETING AND RETURN TO THE COMMISSION WITH A RECOMMENDATION ON THAT PROPOSAL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Schumacher, Bauer NOES: None ABSENT: Greer ABSTAIN: None -5- 10-28-80 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission October 28, 1980 Page 6 Commissioner Bauer led a further discussion of the request of Mr. Chalabian for residential designation of his property in the area of Edinger Avenue and Countess Drive. Staff was directed to open communications with the Coastal Commission and attempt to ascertain what its intent might be in that regard. This item will be taken up at the next regular meeting of the Commission. ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY BANNISTER THE COMMISSION AD- JOURNED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE AT 11:10 PM. Marcus M. Porter, C an 1 -6- 10-28-80 - P.C. *I, s b� 31 o� a)I a) C C u)JDC � DC-•traJ—C l�Co�.JC� ����C OC,J ��nF— IL_JL�aFuL��j I f i I Lu L— C7-71 F . ILuu�ur_u�u uuE:IuF �Cu C C-I C IULuu r- - l�u In--nF- -luuuuu H 0 r. rd rd Ul •r1 ri v �•ri+) .,A rd 44 44 0 b 44 O O U 04 m bdP v ri V' PW 4j O .. b) U W M O 4J al a)romai a -iU) H • +-) v H03 � LP xM cai —1 rn ro Id U � A I.1 U) O v v M �4 v Ul z t;) U O a .1.1 C. 4+ U 0 O O >1 •r1 H .. rt 4 4 0 r-I v - UI •r1 b'i 9 O U rd • -rl O m a% w Ul 4.) ­4 i~ a•1 a-1 O A G -1 0 W >4 v d-1 Ra v 1l Ul O +l O v 4 I~ x9Ulw O w rn O N a w 0 H 8 z O O H Ul U] SHH E U z H a x H av a w H w En 0 0 z H a w ul RECOMMENDED REVISIONS TO THE COASTAL ELEMENT - TEXT CHANGES Page 141 Building Heights Footnote The three land use alternatives which follow indicate Added appropriate heights for various areas.! It should be noted that the six and twelve story limitations would not necessarily mean that the entire area would be built to the designated limit. A specific plan, or other zoning device, would be necessary to include open space, setback and other considerations. A "step down" approach, diminishing heights nearer the ocean may be desired, along with phasing of development. This will be considered in the implementation phase of the plan. References to height limitations have been deleted from the description of Alternative Three to reflect Planning Commission recommendations adopted on October 28, 1980. (Recommended by Planning Commission.) Page 146 ALTERNATIVE NUMBER THREE - HIGH INTENSITY The intense nature of this concept encourages high rise structures, especially in the core area. The Downtown is relatively small, however, and develop- ment there must be compatible with the character of the entire City. Thus, the implementation of this alternative would require controls which ensure set- backs and open space to protect views, provide adequate parking and circulation, and prevent one or two structures from capturing the entire market potential of the area. phis-alte�nai�e-enisiene b�iidin�9-e�-a�-te-t�e��e-s�e�ies-te-e�eate-the deai�ed-n�ban-atmesphere-and-�ain�ain-a-eehesi�e Bewn�ew�. A visitor -serving commercial designation is applied to the first block fronting Pacific Coast Highway between Tenth and Lake Streets and to the Municipal Pier and adjoining restaurant. BeiidiRg-heights-ef ap-te-three-ste�ies-wenld-be-agg�ep�ia�e-in-phis �isite�-ee�e�eiai-area-inia�d-e�-Paei�ie-Eeas�-High- ���es. (Recommended by Planning Commission.) a -2- Page 147 The remaining areas, a total of 225 acres between Goldenwest Street and Beach Boulevard, are re- served for residential uses. High density residen- tial is applied to the old Civic Center site. High -density Medium density residential is applied to the first block fronting Pacific Coast Highway between Twenty-first and Twelfth Streets, to -the aid-etvie-eenter-site, the 44-acre area bounded by Pacific Coast Highway, Delaware Street, and Atlanta Avenue, �i-mee�it�m-densttp-residentiai-e�esigaatien is -applied and to approximately 148 acres between Lake Street and Beach Boulevard. and -primarily re�ieets-existing-iane�-uses. (Recommended by Planning Commission.) Policy Change Water and Marine Resources Page 157 8e. Prior to approval of any new or expanded seawater pumping facilities, require maximum geasibie encourage the provision of maximum mitigation measures to gi:Eveeb minimize damage to marine organisms due to entertainment: in accordance with state and federal law, (Recommended by Staff) r. 0 Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission October 12, 1980 Page 17 ON MOTION BY KENEFICK AND SECOND BY WINCHELL THE COMMISSION AD- JOURNED AT 1:10 AM TO A SPECIAL MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 7:00 PM, OCTOBER 28, 1980, FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONTINUING THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE COASTAL ELEMENT: MOTION CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THOSE PRESENT. :df 1 Marcus M. Porter, i an ny - '1 ^I — n . — ,P ,^ - , -