Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-04-17Approved May 1, 1984 Re -approved as amended May 15, 1984 MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION Council Chambers - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California TUESDAY, APRIL 17, 1984 - 7:00 PM COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Porter, Erskine, Schumacher, Mirjahangir COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Higgins, Winchell, Livengood CONSENT CALENDAR: Frank Mirjahangir asked that the minutes of the April 3, 1984 meeting be changed to remove his name as seconder to the motion to deny Zone Case No. 83-10. ON MOTION BY SCHUMACHER AND SECOND BY ERSKINE THE CONSENT CALENDAR, CONSISTING OF THE AMENDED MINUTES OF APRIL 3, 1984, GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE NO. 84-4 AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE 84-51 WAS APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Porter, Erskine, Schumacher, Mirjahangir NOES: None ABSENT: Higgins, Winchell, Livengood ABSTAIN: None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None COMMISSION ITEMS: Commissioner'Schumacher asked for an update on the status of the Design Review Board and the Environmental Board. Howard Zelefsky explained the makeup of the Environmental Board and Secretary Palin informed the Commission that the Design Review Board is under review by staff for a report to the City Council. If the Council determines to restructure the Board it will be done prior to certification of the permitting process in the Downtown Specific Plan. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: Chairman Porter, with the consent of the Commission, determined to hear agenda item C5 at this time because of the large number of persons present in regard to the matter. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission April 17, 1984 Page 2 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 84-4/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 82-36 Applicant:. City of Huntington Beach Police Department To permit development of a permanent heliport facility for police use, with two landing pads and one double bay hangar on property located on the west.side of Gothard Street approximately 290 feet north of Ellis Avenue. Howard Zelefsky briefly reviewed the history of the proposed pro- ject. He informed the Commission that the City Council had directed that the number of landing pads be reduced to two, the fuel tanks reduced from 2 to 1, entrance taken from the Joint Powers Station as opposed to using Gothard Street, and the use limited to police only and on an emergency basis to other agencies. Lt. Morrison presented slides to illustrate the proposed use and discussed types of helicopters under consideration which will reduce future noise levels. He also described his efforts over past years to find alternative sites and explained the problems encoun- tered with several specific sites. Discussing the proposed condi- tion to. limit other agencies to emergencies only, he noted that the Police Department works with the FBI, U.S. Customs Office, and other enforcement agencies and such a restriction would severely hamper these operations. Commissioner Erskine asked if it would be possible to re -word that condition to make the heliport available as needed to other agencies but still avoid allowing it to become open for routine use by all the other surrounding cities. Lt. Morrison also said that reorienting the hangar opening would present a problem because of the direction of prevailing winds from the southwest, which would result in dust and dirt being blown into the hangar and making maintenance of sensitive aricraft parts more difficult. The Commission discussed cost of the present operation, hours per month flown, number of takeoffs and landings, and previous alterna- tive sites which had been studied with the staff and Lt. Morrison. The public hearing was opened and the following speakers addressed the proposal: Howard Kobayashi, 18411 Carnaby Lane. Mr. Kobayashi spoke in oppo- sition to the helicopter at the proposed location because of possible adverse impacts to the residential neighborhoods. Dean Albright, 17301 Breda Lane. Mr. Albright pointed out that the housing tract to the north across Slater Avenue has experienced noise from the existing helicopter operation as well as increased traffic flow on Slater. He said that the area surrounding the pro- posed site, although empty at present, would develop with industrial uses and another problem would result such as the City had en- countered with development around the Meadowlark Airport. -2- 4-17-84 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission April 17,'1984 Page 3 Floyd Belsito, 17111 Beach Boulevard, Suite 206. Mr. Belsito expressed concern about the effect the location of the heliport at.this site would have on the salability of nearby property to the south. He also discussed the legality of the use in an Ml-CD Dis- trict, the type of construction which might be the result of the "low cost" building, and whether or not required on- and off -site improvements would be made, closing by saying that he believes this heliport is incompatible with the adjacent indus- trial area. Glen Burkett, 19292 Carnaby Lane. Mr. Burkett also opposed the proposed siting of the heliport, questioning the accuracy of the noise contour lines and the use of a consultant to prepare the noise study who had been hired to prepare the Master Plan for the facility, saying the noise study should have been done by a firm with no other interest in the project. He asked the City to reconsider alternate sites but added that, if the project is approved, it should be conditioned to restrict the parcel that is going to be sold so that it can never be used as a heliport and to impose CC&R's on the heliport itself that are enforceable by property owners within 1500 feet of the site and which would prohibit future expansion of the heliport to adjacent properties. Carol Lazar, 18291 Carnaby Lane. Ms. Lazar spoke to ask that if the site is approve the City address measures to protect nearby properties at the outset, not wait until the project has been constructed. Ed Bra dle , 7652 Taylor Avenue, spoke in opposition to any po ice heliport in the City. Tom MaXs, 6392 Gloria Drive. Speaking as a member.of the Neigh- borhood Watch Board of D rectors, Mr. Mays spoke in support of the heliport program and the subject site. He said that the existing program has had a beneficial effect on apprehension of suspects and on life safety, and that the rent being paid at present could be used to purchase the new state-of-the-art equipment the Police Department needs in the future. He also suggested that the cost of using the Orange County facility may increase even more in the future or the use of the county facility be lost completely. Ron Russell, 7711 Ontario Drive. Mr. Russell indicated that he supports the he sport program but opposes this particular loca- tion, citing several other uses which have adversely impacted the area in which he lives and asking that another not be added to that list. Sue Bartels, 18472 Carnaby Lane. Mr. Bartels informed the Commission t at the public has difficulty in contacting City Hall about the helicopter flights. Lt. Morrison said that he is the responsible party and offered his office phone number to those who may wish to call him. -3- 4-17-84 - P.C. Minutes,.H.B. Planning Commission April 17, 1984 Page 4 Pat Castellano, 7541 Danton Circle. Ms. Castellano expressed con- cern that the proposed site was so large and inquired if it would be possible, now that the facility has been proposed on a smaller scale, to restudy some of the.alternate sites which might have been rejected because of size. If the project is approved, she asked for stringent rules and regulations to protect resi- dents against noise and to protect property values. Diana Zimmer, 17121 Westport Drive.. Stating that there is prob- ably no perfect site, Ms. Zimmer cited.community safety as the basis of her support for the heliport facility. She noted that property values may rise and make the cost of acquiring land for such a facility prohibitive in the future. Don Griswold,-1906 California. Mr. Griswold addressed the Commis- sion to support the proposal. Fred Clemons, 7582 Gant Circle. Mr. Gant supported the need for the heliport facility but as ed that alternative sites be con- sidered. Carol Krantz, 18462 Carnaby Lane. Ms. Krantz expressed the fear that the.facility would not remain as a one -city program,but-would eventually.involve other county cities. Art Lambert said that economics indicate -the heliport should be built where it is proposed and should be built now. There were no other persons speaking for or'against the proposal, and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Erskine discussed other sites which had been investi- gated and rejected as too costly, suggesting the possibility that some type of trade off could be arranged, with intense use on the proposed site generating capital for purchase of one of the other sites. He also suggested that the Redevelopment staff could look into the financing aspects and come up with alternatives. Lt. Morrison said that sofie of the areas have developed since the earlier investigations and access and other development criteria may be inadequate at the present time. In response to questioning from Commissioner Mirjahangir,' staff replied that the heliport is allowed as an unclassified use -in all districts except residential and agricultural, subject to a conditional use permit. Chairman Porter noted that the proposed site is now 2.5 acres with the front half of the property proposed to be sold. Since some sites were rejected because of their small size and some of these.rejected sites might have a lesser impact on residential properties if large enough to be utilized, it now appears reason- able to re-examine them in light of the smaller scope of the -4- 4-17-84 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission April 17, 1984 Page 5 i project. IIe also said that adequate, up to date information is needed to make a determination on cost/benefits of the proposed sites and any possible alternatives. Commissioner Schumacher pointed out that the proposed site is only 500 feet distant from the former site and is probably the most centrally located site, a fact important to Police response time. The Commission reviewed the staff recommendations for changes to the site plan and made the following additions and amend- ments: No. 2 - This condition should be re -worded to require the fuel tanks to be reduced from 2 to 1 at such time as the need for aviation gasoline is no longer present. No. 3 - The Commission and Lt. Morrison reviewed this condition. Lt. Morrison asked that the condition be clarified, and it was determined that the wording should be: "The facility shall be.for Huntington Beach Police Department use or the use of other federal, state, or local policing agencies in the furtherance of assisting the Huntington Beach.Police, and by law enforcement of other agencies on an emergency basis only." No. 4 -.Add wording to the effect that the possible reorienta- tion of the hangar take into consideration the need of the Police Department to have a safe facility that is buffered from the prevailing wind. Add No. 8 - Construction of the hangar and on -site improvements shall be consistent with the CD standards in the ordinance code. Add No. 9 - The flight pattern proposed by the Police Department shall be specifically spelled out and rigidly adhered to. Add No. 10 - Expansion of the heliport facilities shall not pro- ceed until technology is improved enough so that noise problems can be alleviated. (The projected expansion for 1993 and.the year 2003 shall not take place until the technology for a quieter helicopter is developed ans utilized by the City of Huntington Beach Police Depart- ment.) • Add No. 11 - A report shall be prepared on the status of other possible sites and consideration of possible lease/pur- chase, trade, or other financial alternative, with an analysis of the availability of other acreage and its cost. The Commission reviewed the ,Council's direction to have this matter before it on the first meeting in May, concluding that -5- 4-17-84 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission April 17, 1984 Page 6 a continuance to the Commission's May 1, 1984 meeting would not interfere with that direction. Staff and Lt. Morrison agreed to have the required information available by that date. - ON MOTION BY ERSKINE AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 82-36 WAS ADOPTED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Porter, Erskine, Schumacher, Mirjahangir NOES: None ABSENT: Higgins, Winchell, Livengood ABSTAIN: None ON MOTION BY•ERSKINE AND SECOND BY MIRJAHANGIR CONDITIONAL USE PER- MIT NO. 84-8 WAS CONTINUED TO THE MEETING OF MAY 1, 1984, AND DIRECTION GIVEN:TO'STAFF TO MAKE'THE CHANGES AND ADDITIONS OUTLINED ABOVE AND'TO SUBMIT THE REQUIRED REPORT, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Porter, Erskine, Mirjahangir NOES: Schumacher ABSENT: Higgins,•Winchell, Livengood ABSTAIN: None Staff was directed to notify the absent Commissioners and to make a vailable.tapes of this meeting for their review so that they will be able to participate -in the May 1, 1984 discussion and determina- tion on this matter. USE PERMIT NO. 83-73 (Cont. from April 3,,1984) Applicant: Donald Perry To permit an addition to a single-family dwelling located on the west side of Second Street approximately 150 feet south of Orange Avenue. Mike Adams reviewed,the revision's to the plan.which,have been worked out with the applicant. Tom.Tincher discussed the proposed street circulation plan for,the area and reviewed the residents' options for participation in the redevelopment -effort. He recom- mended a continuation of the subject request until his.staff_has had 'an opportunity to contact all the property owners in the area; if the consensus of the affected property owners is that they do not wish to participate in a joint development concept then his division would, in essence, support the Planning.staff's-recommenda- tion in terms of this individual project. The public hearing remained open from the prior hearing. Donald Perry, applicant, agreed to the proposed conditions except -for the limitation of the office space over the garage to 750 square feet. He -also -indicated that he would agree to a continu- ance again, but asked for some kind of.time limitation to be placed on the continuance. 1 [1 -6- 4-17-84 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission April 17, 1984 Page 7 There were no other persons present to speak for or against the proposal, and the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Schumacher objected to approval of a project with a provision for a revised plan to be submitted, and staff was directed to amend suggested Condition of Approval No. 1 prior to the next hearing on the project. ON MOTION BY SCHUMACHER AND SECOND BY ERSKINE USE PERMIT NO. 83-73 WAS CONTINUED TO THE MEETING OF MAY 15, 1984, WITH THE CONCURRENCE OF THE'APPLICANT,*BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Porter, Erskine, Schumacher, Mirjahangir NOES: None ABSENT: Higgins, Winchell, Livengood ABSTAIN: None The Commission recessed at 10:25 p.m. and reconvened at 10:35. USE PERMIT NO. 83-60/CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 84-4 (APPEAL) Applicant: McDonald's Corporation To permit a drive -through addition to an existing McDonald's restaurant at 16866 Beach Boulevard. Mike Adams reported that staff has worked out a compromise solution with the developer with regard to landscaping areas and location of exit. A concern remains with the opening onto Beach Boulevard north of the restaurant, but it is felt that proper signing will result in a minimum interference with traffic. The public hearing was reopened. Donald L. Nelson, representing the proponent, spoke to agree with the position presented by staff. Commissioner Porter suggested that the size of the existing sign is not consistent with the sign ordinance and asked if the applicant would be willing to accept a condition to bring the sign up to code. Mr. Nelson indicated the sign would be brought into conformity if there is a deviation from require- ments. The public hearing was closed. ON MOTION BY MIRJAHANGIR AND SECOND BY ERSKINE CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 84-4 WAS DENIED AS NO LONGER BEING NECESSARY, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Porter, Erskine, Schumacher, Mirjahangir NOES: None ABSENT: Higgins, Winchell, Livengood ABSTAIN: None -7- 4-17-84 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission April 17, 1984 Page 8 ON MOTION BY MIRJAHANGIR AND SECOND BY ERSKINE USE PERMIT NO. 83-60 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS: 1. The establishment, maintenance and operation of the use will not 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. The granting of a use permit will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. 3., The proposal is consistent with the City's-General Plan of Land Use. CONDITIONS OF.APPROVAL: 1. A revised site plan shall be submitted for review and -approval to the Director of Development Services,.prior to the issu- ance of building permits, depicting the modifications described herein: a. The two driveways on Beach Boulevard shown on the revised site plan dated January 25, 1984 shall be eliminated. b. One driveway shall be shown as marked on the revised site plan (midway between the two driveways on Beach Boulevard), with a minimum width of thirty five (35) feet. c. Retain the existing drivewav 25 feet south of Rubidoux. d. The revised site plan shall show on -site circulation rela- tive to the change in location of the driveway. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall file a parcel map consolidating all parcels of the subject site. 3. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit the following plans for review and approval by the Departments of Development Services and Public Works: a. Landscape and irrigation plan. -8- 4-17-84 - P.C. 1 Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission April 17, 1984 Page 9 b. Rooftop mechanical equipment plan. Said plan shall indicate screening of all rooftop mechanical equipment and shall delineate the type of material proposed to screen said equipment. 4. The development shall comply with all applicable provi- sions of the ordinance code, Building Division, and Fire Department. 5. Applicant shall pursue CalTrans approval of radius type driveway on Beach Boulevard. 6. Driveway approach on "A" Street shall be a minimum of twenty-seven (27) feet in width and shall be aof radius type construction. 7. The driveway on Beach Boulevard north of the existing building shall be clearly marked for exit only,and the driveway on Beach Boulevard south of the existing building shall be clearly marked for entrance. 8. The driveway on Beach Boulevard north of the existing building shall be clearly marked for right turn out only. 9. The applicant shall propose improvements to the median in Beach Boulevard and shall share in the cost of making all improvements as approved by CalTrans and the'City of Huntington Beach Department of Public Works. 10. Signage for the project shall be in compliance with Article 976 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. AYES: Porter, Erskine, Schumacher, Mirjahangir NOES: None ABSENT: Higgins, Winchell, Livengood ABSTAIN: None -9- 4-17-84 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission April 17, 1984 Page 10 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 84-6 (Cont. from April 3, 1984) Applicant: Joseph J. Nigro To permit expansion of an existing health club located at 8907 Warner Avenue. Mike Adams.reported that the facility exists in the Plaza Ciudad shopping center where recurring parking problems have been en- countered. The current site plan shows 205 spaces; based on the :square footage and uses, the requirement would be 236. Staff is recommending re -striping for compact to gain 20 to 25 spaces; it iti also recommended that additional analysis be applied for joint parking based on current tenants. The public hearing was opened. Joseph Nigro and David Burke, property manager, addressed the Commission. They stated that since the aerobic classes have been removed from the premises there has been no difficulty with parking. They agreed to a condition prohibiting aerobics to be included in the use in the future. Mr. Burke added that it is hoped that adequate signing to direct people to the back of the parking lot will help relieve any parking shortage. The public hearing was closed. After discussion, -the Commission concurred with a continuance to permit time to obtain a parking and traffic analysis as recommended. ON MOTION BY SCHUMACHER AND SECOND BY MIRJAHANGIR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT N0. 84-6 WAS CONTINUED TO THE MEETING OF MAY 1, 1984, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Porter, Erskine, Schumacher, Mirjahangir NOES:. None ABSENT: Higgins, Winchell, Livengood ABSTAIN: None CODE AMENDMENT NO. 83-30/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 84-5 (Cont. from 4-3-84) Applicant: City of Huntington Beach A proposal to add Section 9331(k) to the ordinance code, requiring a -conditional use permit subject to certain development criteria for excavation of a land disposal site in Huntington Beach. Howard Zelefsky reviewed the proposed change in language intended to clarify the definition of a landfill site; this revision was made after letters had been received from concerned organizations. In essence, the revision would limit the applicability of the ordinance to commercial sites charging a fee for waste disposal. -10- 4-17-84 - P.C. 1 Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission April 17, 1984 Page 11 Commissioner Schumacher discussed with staff how the ordinance would affect dumping sites on private property. 'the public hearing was opened, and closed when no one was present to speak for or against the proposal. A MOTION WAS MADE BY MIRJAHANGIR AND SECONDED BY ERSKINE TO APPROVE CODE AMENDMENT NO. 83-30 AS AMENDED AND RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION. MOTION FAILED BY THE FOLLOW- ING VOTE: AYES: Erskine, NOES: Porter, ABSENT: Higgins, ABSTAIN: None Mirjahangir Schumacher Winchell, Livengood Further discussion ensued. Staff explained that any excava- tions on private property would have to comply with State Health Department guidelines. Mike Adams added that in all likelihood private property excavations would probably occur in conjunction with development requests and could also be strictly conditioned at that time. ON MOTION BY MIRJAHANGIR AND SECOND BY ERSKINE NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 84-5 WAS APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Porter, Erskine, Schumacher,, Mirjahangir NOES: None ABSENT: Higgins, Winchell, Livengood ABSTAIN: None ON MOTION BY SCHUMACHER AND SECOND BY PORTER CODE AMENDMENT NO, 83--30 WAS APPROVED WITHOUT THE SUGGESTED AMENDMENT AND RECOMMENDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION, BY THE FOLLOWING' VOTE: AYES: Porter, Erskine, Schumacher, Mirjahangir NOES: None ABSENT: Higgins, Winchell, Livengood ABSTAIN: None RECREATION ELEMENT/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 83-5 Applicant: City of Huntington Beach A proposal to add a Recreation Element to the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach, containing an inventory of existing and proposed public recreational facilities, a discussion of the recreational needs in the City, and a set of policies for provid- ing and maintaining a system of public parks to meet the community's needs. Florence Webb inquired if the Commission would be interested in a study session on this proposal; it was the consensus of the Commission to hold a study session just prior to the next meeting. -11- 4-17-84 - P.C. Minutes, H,B. Planning Commission April 17, 1984 Page 12 ON MOTION BY SCHUMACHER AND SECOND BY MIRJAHANGIR NEGATIVE DECLARA- TION NO. 83-5 AND THE RECREATION ELEMENT WERE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT REGULARLY ADJOURNED MEETING, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Porter, Erskine, Schumacher, Mirjahangir NOES: None ABSENT: Higgins, Winchell, Livengood ABSTAIN: None CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 84-5/TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 11769/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 84-4 (Cont. from April 3, 1984) Applicant: Lindborg-Dahl Investors A request to permit the subdivision of a single 5 acre parcel of land into 15 lots for future development of single-family residen- ces on property located on the south side of Ellis Avenue approxi- mately 660 feet west of Goldenwest Street. Mike Adams reported that the staff has met with the applicant and the adjacent property owner and has come up with two compromise conceptual master plans for the total 10 acres. Staff reviewed the suggested conditions of approval and recommended certain changes and deletions. The public hearing was opened. David Dahl addressed the Commission to agree with the conceptual plans and to concur with the conditions of approval as revised by staff. Commissioner Porter discussed the landscaping of the cul-de-sacs, saying that in a private street even after extension to accommodate the future 5-acre development it would seem desirable to have some landscaping. The Commission determined to make maintenance for such landscaping the responsibility of the homeowners' association if Public Works says pavement width is adequate to accommodate it. There were no other persons to speak for or against the project, and the public hearing was closed. ON MOTION BY ERSKINE-AND SECOND BY MIRJAHANGIR NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 84-4 WAS APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Porter, Erskine, Schumacher, Mirjahangir NOES: None ABSENT: Higgins, Winchell, Livengood ABSTAIN: None ON MOTION BY MIRJAHANGIR AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 84-5 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: -12- 4-17-84 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission April 17, 1984 Page 13 FINDINGS: 1 1. Development of the site at this time is not premature pending completion of the Ellis/Goldenwest Specific Plan, since the subdivision is generally in compliance with the draft Specific Plan objectives and standards. 2. The proposed subdivision is compatible with the draft Ellis/ Goldenwest Specific Plan to as great a degree as practical. 3. The proposed development is.in conformance with the policies and development standards contained within the City's General Plan. The General Plan has set forth provisions for this type of land use as well as setting forth objectives for im- plementation of this type of housing. The project complies with the Land Use Element and all other elements of the General Plan. 4. The proposed subdivision of this 5± gross acre parcel of land zoned Q-R1-(3)-O-CD-6,000 is proposed to be constructed having 2.8 units per gross acre. 5. The property was previously studied for this intensity of land use at the time the land use designation of Estate Residential was placed on the property. 6. The lot size, depth, frontage, street widths, and all other design and implementation features of the proposed subdivision are proposed to be constructed in compliance with standard plans and sepcifications on file with the City as well as in compliance with the State Map Act and supplementary City sub- division ordinance. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. Residential streets shall be privately owned and maintained. Said streets shall not exceed forty (40) feet in width, including rolled curbs. 2. Grading activities including grading for lots and building pads shall not involve more than 2 foot cut and 2 foot depth of fill on a maximum of 65 percent of each lot. Exceptions to this condition may be granted by the Director of Develop- ment Services on a lot -by -lot basis pursuant to a showing of sufficient hardship. 3. Horse trails shall be improved in accordance with the following standards: a. Trail tread area should be graded smooth, free of weeds, stumps, roots, debris and large rocks. Adequate drain- age shall be provided when grading. b. The trail shall be clear of all obstruction from ground level to a height of ten (10) feet. -13- 4-17-84 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission April 17, 1984 Page 1.4 c: All trails shall be lined on both sides with a wood rail type fence. 4. Common open space and private streets shall be guaranteed by a restrictive covenant describing the open space and its main- tenance and improvement, running with the land, for the benefit of residents of the development. The developer shall file with the Department of Development Services for recorda- tion with the final subdivision map, legal documents which will provide for restricting the use of common spaces and com- mon facilities for the designated purpose, as approved on the final development plan. The City may also require that the homeowners' association relinquish all development rights in common areas to the City. All common improvements, including but not limited to trails, project fencing, and common open space landscaping, shall be made by the developer prior to the sale of any lots and/or units. 5. Gasoline powered engines on existing oil pumping units shall be converted to electric motors prior to occupancy of the first unit. The developer shall establish a fund prior to rec- ordation of the final map to be administered by the homeowners' association to cover the cost of landscaping well sites at the time they are abandoned. The amount of the fund shall be determined by the Director of Development Services. Fencing around the perimeter of any oil lots shall be set back fifteen (15) feet from the internal collector street and twenty (20) feet from Ellis Avenue. The setback area shall be landscaped . in.accordance with the City's Oil Code. 6. Ali fencing within the development shall be subject to devel- opment standards contained within the Ellis/Goldenwest Specific Plan. Fencing -shall be installed by the applicant on both sides of the public equestrian trail prior to conveyance of the first lot within the subdivision. The height, materials, and location of said fencing shall be subject to the approval of'the Department of Development Services. All fencing adjac- ent to public streets must be of a wood slat design as depicted.in the Ellis/Goldenwest Specific Plan dated August, 1982. 7. Building setbacks within the subdivision shall be as follows: a. Front Yard Setbacks: 22 feet for front loading garages and 15 feet for side loading garages. b.' Interior Side Yard Setbacks: An aggregate of 15 feet with a minimum of 5 feet on one side, provided further that the opposite side yard shall be 10 feet clear to the sky. -14- 4-17.-84 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission April 17, 1984 Page 15 C. Side Yards on the Local Collector Street: 20 feet, but may be reduced to 10 feet if intensive landscaping is provided. d. Rear Yard Setbacks off Ellis Avenue: 30 feet from the property side of the equestrian trail provided, however, that the setback may be reduced to 15 feet for 50 per- cent of each single -story structure. e. All accessory buildings shall conform with the setback requirements of the main dwelling. 8. All prior oil well abandonments on the property shall be improved in accordance with the City of Huntington Beach and State standards. 9. The swale design material for nuisance water flow as well as areas for flood protection shall be subject to the review and approval of the Department of Public Works. 10. The applicant shall initiate a zone change application to remove the "O" suffix from all areas on the site that will not remain in oil production, prior to recordation of a final map. 11. Full disclosure of the conditions of approval adopted for Conditional Use Permit No. 84-5 and Tentative Tract 11769 shall be stated in the Department of Real Estate Report sub- mitted to property owners within the development. 12. Natural gas and 220V electrical shall be stubbed in at the locations of clothes dryers at the time of development. This requirement may be waived provided that the applicant will install a more energy efficient alternative subject to the review and approval of the Department of Development Services. 13. Natural gas shall be stubbed in at the locations of cooking facilities, water heaters, and central heating units at the time of development. This requirement may be waived provided that the applicant will install a more energy efficient alternative subject to the review and approval of the Depart- ment of Development Services. 14. Low -volume heads shall be used on all indoor faucets at the time of development. 15. All building spoils such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material shall be disposed of at an offsite facility equipped to handle them. 16. A fire sprinkler system shall he designed and installed in those structures as deemed necessary by the Huntington Beach Fire Department. -15- 4-17-84 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission April 17, 1984 Page 16 17. The conceptual master plan dated April 17, 1984 fot the sub- ject property and the adjacent five (5) acres shall be revised to include the layout of lots and equestrian trails; said revised conceptual master plan shall then become the approved plan .for development and shall be agreed to in writing by all involved parties. 18. A Homeowners' Association shall be established for the perm- anent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreational areas, communal facilities, existing oil-moperations, and private streets. The Association shall be required to be expanded to accept the same responsibilities for the two 5-acre areas to the west when they are developed. Reciprocal covenants, con- ditions, and restrictions and reciprocal management and main- tenance agreements shall be established which will cause a merging of increments as the adjacent properties are devel- oped and embody one hoirecwners' association with common areas for the total development. AYES: Porter, Erskine, Schumacher, Mirjahangir NOES: None ABSENT: Higgins, Winchell, Livengood ABSTAIN: None ON MO'.CION BY MIRJAHANGIR AND SECOND BY SCHUMACHER TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 11769 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: FINDINGS: 1. Development of the site at this time is not premature pending completion of the Ellis/Goldenwest Specific Plan, since the subdivision is generally in compliance with the draft Specific Plan objectives and standards. 2. -The proposed subdivision is compatible with the draft Ellis/ Goldenwest Specific Plan to as great a degree as practical. 3. The proposed development is in conformance with the policies and development standards contained within the City's General Plan. The General Plan has set forth provisions for this type of land use as well as setting forth objectives for implemen- tation of this type of housing. The project complies with the Land Use Element and all other elements of the General Plan. 4. The proposed subdivision of this 5+ gross acre parcel of land zoned Q-R1-(3)-O-CD-6,000 is proposed to be constructed having 2.8 units per gross acre. 5. The property was previously studied for this intensity of land use at the time the land use designation of Estate Residential was placed on the property. -16- 4-17"84 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission April 17, 1984 Page 17 6. The lot size, depth, frontage, street widths, and all other design and implementation features of the proposed subdivision are proposed to be constructed in compliance with standard plans and specifications on file with the City as well as in compliance with the State Map Act and supplementary City subdivision ordinance. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. A fifteen (15) foot wide equestrian trail shall be provided adjacent to the public right-of-way along Ellis Avenue; said trail shall be offered for dedication to the City. 2. An internal collector street shall be dedicated in conform- ance with the alignment shown on the attached tentative tract map. The public right-of-way shall include an eight (8) foot earthen equestrian trail. 3. Grading activities including grading for lots and building pads shall not involve more than 2 foot cut and 2 foot depth of fill on a maximum of 65 percent of each lot. Excep- tions to this condition may be granted by the Director of Development Services on a lot -by -lot basis pursuant to a showing of sufficient hardship. 4. The developer shall provide the design of street grades for Ellis Avenue from Edwards Street to Goldenwest Street for Public Works Department approval. 5. "A" and "B" Streets shall be private and be improved Per Public Works Department standards and requirements. Ingress/ egress access rights shall be provided on these streets for properties to the west and appropriate agreement recorded prior to recordation of the final tract map. 6. Developer shall provide City with agreement from westerly property owner for cul-de-sac extending onto the westerly property. 7. The cul-de-sacs on "A" and "B" Streets shall be temporary. When streets are extended westerly the standard street width shall be constructed through the cul-de-sac area. Landscaped areas will be allowed in the center of the cul-de-sacs pro- vided adequate pavement width is available per City specifi- cations. Center turnarounds are to comply with City specifi- cation. S. Lots No. 1 through No. 4 will not be permitted access onto Ellis Avenue. 9. Developer will be responsible for all signing, striping, street lighting, etc., on all streets including Ellis Avenue as deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works. -17- 4-17-84 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission April 17, 1984 Page 18 1.0. Developer shall construct the required asphalt concrete trans- ition for traffic from "C" Street onto Ellis Avenue. 11. Water mains shall be dedicated to the City of Huntington Beach. 12. The 21-inch dead-end water main in Ellis Avenue may not pro- vide sufficient fire flows, depending on Fire Department flow requirements, and may be required to be upgraded by developer. 13. The sewer mains in "A" and "B" Streets shall be private and the sewer main in "C" Street shall be public. 14. Drainage from the project shall not enter the surrounding prop- erties in a concentrated fashion, but the flows shall be spread out in a manner to be approved by the Department of Public Works. 15. Adequate protection will be required for the property surround- ing the oil operation on Lot 15. 16. All surface access roads and hydrants shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of combustible construction. 1.7. Water shall be provided through the City of Huntington Beach water system. 18. All landscaping in the public right-of-way shall conform to adopted standards or be approved by the Department of Public Works. 19. All sewer_ facilities shall be constructed in accordance with Department of Public Works standards. 20. The developer shall provide, as required, any applicable sewer easements. 21. All storm drain facilities shall be constructed in accordance with acceptable Department of Public Works standards. 22. All storm drain facilities (i.e., pipes, swales, and ditches) shall be privately maintained. 23. The maintenance of any landscaping items in the street rights - of -way shall be the responsibility of the homeowners' associa- tion. 24. The developer shall install any traffic devices as deemed necessary by the Department of Public Works. 25. The developer shall grant to all adjacent property owners an access easement across private streets within the development if access to their properties would otherwise be obstructed by this subdivision. 1 -1?3- 4-17-84 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission April 17, 1984 Page 19 26. The tentative tract map dated April 17, 1984 shall be revised to show only the subject five (5) acre tract and omit any reference to the conceptual master plan, subject to the approval of the Director of the Department of Development Services. AYES: Porter, Erskine, Schumacher, Mirjahangir NOES:, None ABSENT: Higgins, Winchell, Livengood ABSTAIN: None ON MOTION BY SCHUMACHER AND SECOND BY MIRJAHANGIR THE COMMISSION ACCEPTED THE TWO ALTERNATIVE CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLANS FOR THE ADJACENT FIVE (5) ACRES, FINDING THAT EITHER THE LOOP STREET SYSTEM OR THE CUL-DE-SAC SYSTEM IS ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY AND CONSISTENT WITH THE DRAFT ELLIS/GOLDENWEST SPECIFIC PLAN, AND DIRECTED THAT WHEN THE ADJACENT PROPERTY APPLIES FOR ENTITLE- MENT FOR DEVELOPMENT IT WILL BE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT ONE OF THE ABOVE TWO OPTIONS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Porter, Erskine, Schumacher, Mirjahangir NOES: None ABSENT: Higgins, Winchell, Livengood ABSTAIN: None Due to the lateness of the hour, the remainder of the agenda (Items C-7 through C-10 and all Items not for Public Hearing, Discussion items, and Pending items) were continued to an ad- journed meeting to be held on April 24, 1984 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. ON MOTION BY ERSKINE AND SECOND BY MIRJAHANGIR THE COMMISSION ADJOURNED AT 11:45 PM TO A STUDY SESSION AT 6:00 PM ON APRIL 24, 1984, AND -A REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING AT 7:00 PM ON APRIL 24, 1984 IN THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Porter, Erskine, Schumacher, Mirjahangir NOES: None ABSENT: Higgins, Winchell, Livengood ABSTAIN: None James W. Valin, Secretary :df Marcus M. Porter, man -19- 4-17-84 - P.C.