Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-04-22MINUTES CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 5:00 P.M. - Council Chamber Huntington Beach, California Monday, April 22, 1996 Call To Order Mayor Sullivan called the regular meetings of the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach to order at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber. City Council/Redevelopment Agency Roll Cali: Present: Sullivan, Dettloff, Green, Garofalo Absent: Harman, Leipzig, Bauer Recess - Closed Session The Mayor called a recess of the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency at 5:05 p.m. to consider the following closed session items: Closed Session - City Council pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.E to give instructions to the city's negotiators, Michael Uberuaga and Ron Hagan, regarding negotiations with the H.B. P.O.A. concerning the lease of the property located at 18221 Gothard. Instruction will concern price and terms of payment. Subject: H.B.P.O.A. Lease of Gun Range. (120.80) Closed Session - City Council pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) to confer with its attorney regarding pending litigation which has been initiated formally and to which the city is a party. The title of the litigation is regarding County of Orange, a political subdivision of the State of California, Orange County Investment Pools, an instrumentality of the County of Orange. Subject: Orange County Bankruptcy. (120.80) Reconvene The Mayor reconvened,the regular meetings of the City Council and Redevelopment Agency in the Council Chambers at 6:00 p.m. 2.1 Page 2 - Council/Agency Minutes - 04/22/96 City Council/Redevelopment Agency Roll Call Present: Harman, Leipzig, Bauer, Sullivan, Dettloff, Green, Garofalo Absent: None The Mayor announced the results of the April 22, 1996 Closed Session on the Orange County Bankruptcy and he also announced the results of the March 18, 1996 Closed Session regarding Orlando vs. City of Huntington Beach, as follows: (City Council) Plan Of Adjustment Approved - Orange County Bankruptcy - (Language Amendment Occurred Later In Meeting) The City Council and the Redevelopment Agency, in Closed Session, have approved the Plan of Adjustment in the Orange County Bankruptcy and have authorized the City Administrator to sign all appropriate City and Agency claim ballots approving said Plait and disapproving or modifying the treatment of certain claims where appropriate. (City Council) Settlement - Raymond Orlando v. City Of Huntington Beach - Approved The City Council, by a 7-0 vote, on March 18, 1996, in Closed Session, authorized Margaret Oldendorf, Esquire, the representative of the city, to settle all claims in the case of Raymond Orlando v. City of Huntington Beach, USDC Case No. CV 95-4337. The Complaint set forth causes of action for violation of civil rights, a tort action for defamation, and other claims. A final settlement in the amount of $45,000 with the relinquishment of all claims by both parties had been signed. (City Council) Crest View School Site - General Plan Amendment Consideration Deferred In response to the Mayor, Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director, stated that staff recommended that the Crest View School site not be considered a part of the General Plan Amendment consideration at this time. (City Council) City Administrator- Report Regarding Status Of Police Gun Range The City Administrator reported on the status of the Police Gun Range stating that there would be no action taken at this meeting and that he recommended it be deferred to May 6, 1996. 232 04/22/96 - City Council/Redevelopment Agency Minutes - Page 3 (City Council) "Earth Day" Announced - Recycling Recommended Councilman Harman brought attention to the fact that it is "Earth Day". He spoke regarding population growth and against efforts to weaken environmental laws. Councilman Harman urged all persons to make everyday "Earth Day" by leaving pristine areas as they are and by recycling. ITEMS CONTINUED FROM THE APRIL 15, 1996 CITY COUNCIL MEETING (City Council/Redevelopment Agency) Resolutions Adopting The Policies And Procedures Manual For Down Payment Assistance Loan Program And Acceptance Of Loan Agreements For Official Filing - Approved - Council Resolution No. 96-29 - Adopted -Agency Resolution No. 273 - Adopted - (600.10) Late Communications were received and announced as follows: Material from Michael Mudd entitled "The Arts are Vital to California's Economy'and petition listing approximately 97 residents opposed to the addition of parking meters on Main Street/Acacia Avenue and Sixth Street. The City Council considered a communication from the City Clerk and the Economic Development Director transmitting resolutions for the adoption of the Policies and Procedures Manual for Down Payment Assistance Loan Program and authorizing the City Clerk to file on behalf of the City Council certain loan documents. Councilman Bauer questioned whether a repayment schedule, even if modest, is a part of this process. The Economic Development Director explained the process of the current loan program and stated that the staff would be making a presentation on the subject and other issues in the near future. A motion was made by Bauer, second Harman, to approve the following: Authorize the City Clerk/Clerk to file on behalf of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency, the 18 Down Payment Assistance Loan Program Agreements, as repaired to protect the city's interests pursuant to the previous direction of the City Council. 2. Adopt City Council Resolution No. 96-29 - "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ADOPTING THE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES MANUAL FOR QOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE LOAN PROGRAM.", and 233 Page 4 - Council/Agency Minutes - 04/22/96 3. Adopt Redevelopment Agency Resolution No. 273 - "A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ADOPTING THE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES MANUAL FOR DOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE LOAN PROGRAM." 4. Direct that any substantial revisions to the manual be approved by the City Council/Redevelopment Agency. The motion carried unanimously. (City Council) Art Center - Preliminary Operating Agreement And Funding - Community Services Director To Prepare Plan (265.10) The City Council considered a communication from the Community Services Director regarding a preliminary agreement on the future funding of the Huntington Beach Art Center reached between the staff and Art Center Foundation. The Community Services Director presented an extensive staff report. The Community Services Director responded to Councilman Green's question regarding why the Art Center cannot operate like the Visitor's and Convention Bureau. Councilwoman Dettloff stated that it seems that the presentation in this packet is very different than that of last week. Community Services Director Hagan concurred and reported further, stating that it had never been intended to go outside the budget process. Mr. Hagan reported on the revenue that could possibly be raised by parking meters/stickers to fund the center. Discussion was held regarding how to eliminate the parking fee from Main Street Library users and Mr. Hagan reported on the plan. Councilwoman Dettloff questioned if parking meters go in, has it been a part of the Downtown Parking Master Plan. Community Services Director Hagan reported on issues to be overcome, the need to meet with residents, library patrons and restaurant businesses. Community Services Director Hagan responded to Councilman Leipzig's concern regarding the manner in which the staff communication was written and presented to Council. Councilman Leipzig stated that he believed a motion should be made by Council restating the Arts Center value, however, that it must be recognized that the city is in dire budget straits and that possibly items like DARE etc. are being presented for possible cuts and that the Art Center cannot receive entire assurance of Council at this time prior to budget deliberations. 234 04/22/96 - City Council/Redevelopment Agency Minutes - Page 5 Councilman Bauer spoke regarding the issue including what he had understood from the meeting Councilman Harman and he had attended on operating and capital costs; that the $81,000 city contribution would continue with periodic evaluations. Discussion was held between Councilmember Bauer and the Community Services Director. Councilman Bauer suggested writing a contract that spells out city obligation and those obligations of the Arts Center so that there is a renewable option for both parties and that the fund raising obligations continue. Councilman Garofalo spoke regarding the issue including the past motions he had made on the matter, including a motion to receive a business plan. He spoke regarding the reasons why he did not believe a contract was feasible and if one was to be done there should then be a contract with the Council on Aging, the Library groups, etc. He suggested that integrating the other art programs held in the city into the Art Center Program be studied. Councilman Harman stated he favored a public/private partnership. The Community Services Director stated that he would return to the Arts Foundation with Council's request for a plan. Councilwoman Dettloff asked if there was a representative present who could give the Foundation's reasons for not wishing the type of arrangement proposed by Council. In response to Councilwoman Dettloff, the Community Services Director stated that Mr. Goodrich, President of the Foundation, would call Councilwoman Dettloff. Councilwoman Dettloff spoke regarding the issue, stating the importance of the Arts Center going through the regular budgetary process and stated that the plan would have to meet all the criteria and standards that every other department will have to meet in this very tight budget. She stressed the importance of the Arts Center to the city. Councilman Bauer stated that he believed Mr. Goodrich would inform the Council that the Foundation does not yet have the expertise to assume operations. The Community Services Director reported that he believes the Art Center would agree that this year be the base year and that the base year would only increase in support if Council had a funding mechanism to increase that support in future years. Discussion was held and the Community Services Director reported that the Art Center Foundation could only contribute $150,000 per year and that the city would need to find a source to reach the $220,000 level. Councilman Garofalo stated that perhaps a Request For Proposals should be put out for operations. P3S Page 6 - Council/Agency Minutes - 04122196 A motion was made by Dettloff, second Green, to reaffirm its commitment to the Arts Center; that the City Council is committed to the continuance of the Art Center; and to request that the Community Services Director continue negotiations with the Art Center with the goal of transitioning the center to non-profit in the future. The motion carried unanimously. City Council) - Ordinance No. 3327 - Terms Of City Commissioners - Adopted (640.10) The City Council considered adoption of Ordinance No. 3327- "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING SECTION 2.100.060 OF THE HUNTINGTON BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING THE TERM OF CITY COMMISSIONERS." The ordinance clarifies code regarding appointment to partial terms. On motion by Leipzig, second Harman, Council, following a reading by title, adopted Ordinance No. 3327 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Harman, Bauer, Sullivan, Dettloff, Green, Garofalo NOES: None ABSENT: Leipzig (out of the room) (City Council) Continued From The March 25, 1996 Council Meeting • Public Hearing No. 2 - General Plan Amendment No. 94-2 - Environmental Impact Report No. 94-1 - Comprehensive Update Of The Huntington Beach General Plan - Continued Open To May 6, 1996 (440.50) Please note that designations and locations of Area Numbers in the text of the minutes can be located in the Minutes Appendix on Page No. 18 titled, General Plan Land Use Recommendations - City Council Review, Planning Commission Approved December 12, 1995, Staff Analysis and Recommendations, dated April8, 1996. The Mayor announced that this was the meeting set for a public hearing to consider General Plan Amendment No. 94-2 and Environmental Impact Report No. 94-1 which is the comprehensive update of the city's General Plan which includes the review and certification of an Environmental Impact Report. The City Council to date has conducted three study sessions and a public hearing on the update of the Draft General Plan. At the City Council public hearing on March 25, 1996 the Council took straw votes on eleven of the thirteen elements and the Environmental Impact Report. The City Council continued the public hearing open on the Draft General Plan to the meeting of April 22, 1996. A communication was received from the Community Development Director from Nossaman, Guthner, Knox, and Elliott, LLP regarding Cambro Manufacturing/Distribution Facilities at Clay/Huntington and Springdale/Skylab, General Plan Update supporting Subarea Nos. 70 and 9A. a36 04/22196 - City Council/Redevelopment Agency Minutes - Page 7 Councilmen Harman and Garofalo stated that they would be abstaining from consideration of Area No. 65. Linda Niles, Senior Planner, reviewed the slide report, including language changes, land use changes, and public hearing procedures. Discussion was held between Council and staff and it was determined that the staff presentation would be made and public comments follow. Herb Fauland, Senior Planner, reported on the Circulation Element. Bruce Gilmer, Associate Traffic Engineer, and Brian .lames, Senior Planner, reported on traffic issues at the request of Councilman Garofalo. Linda Niles referred to a schematic display on the wall behind the Council. Herb Fauland, Senior Planner, reported on the portions of the report which were recommended to be deferred to May 6, 1996. Brian James, Assistant Planner, reported on the Land Use Element and the issues involved and proposed language changes. He presented a correction to the material of an additional density factor (Page No. 239 of staff report) and proposed a revision to add Mobile Home Park Overlay density. Assistant Planner James referred to major issues including surplus school site reuse and referred to the document titled Comparison of Existing and Proposed General Plan. He reported on comparison of build -out and reviewed this material with Council. He reviewed the Development Threshold. Councilwoman Dettloff left the meeting at 7:55 p.m. Using overhead slides, Assistant Planner James reported on the Meadowlark Plaza and Marina Village areas. He recommended the Huntington Center area be continued and showed a viewgraph report and photo slides. He covered the areas of disagreement between the Planning Commission and staff. Assistant Planner James reported that State Law does require that this Circulation System be correlated with the Land Use Plan to ensure that the potential growth that may occur under the maximum density can be accommodated by the infrastructure system. In response to a question by Councilman Harman, Assistant Planner James reported on the target of the Development Threshold and stated that if the capacity of the infrastructure can't handle that growth, then the infrastructure either needs to be increased to handle it or the type of development needs to be altered to reduce those potential impacts. 237 Page 8 - Council/Agency Minutes - 04/22196 Assistant Planner James referred to other area controversies including Area No. 52. He reviewed the Cambro issue on which a communication had been announced by the City Clerk later in the meeting. He stated the recommendation to add a new density category so it will not become non -conforming to density. He informed Council that this new density category can also be applied to the McDonnell Douglas site. Assistant Planner James spoke regarding Area No. 78 Termination of Bolsa Chica by Smokey Stables to keep as open space. Assistant Planner James showed Area No. 95 Crest View site. He informed Council that the Planning Commission and Planning Staff recommended no change to the General Plan designation; that the only change would be to add the "P" designation to identify schools and churches with the underlying "RL". Assistant Planner James recommended that Area No. 23 Cal Resources Site be deferred as well. Announcement By City Clerk Of Late Communications Received And Distributed The City Clerk, pursuant to the Brown Act, announced the following late communications which had been received and distributed to Council. Slide presentation pertaining to the General Plan regarding Development Threshold Communication from Bernice and Graydon Zwilling requesting commercial zoning for parcel No. 024-027-10, Comparison of Existing and Proposed General Plan Communications in opposition to density increase in Areas Nos. 81 and 82 from: Fran and Warren Holthaus, Jim Marshall, Building and Grounds Chairman, Evangelical Free Church Communications from Jon Ely, John Scott, and Roy McCord regarding the Circulation Element and the Santa Ana River Bridge crossings. Communication from Louise Federmann objecting to Area No. 52 being rezoned for commercial use. Jon Ely referred to his fetter faxed today and presented recommendations regarding the Santa Ana Bridge Crossings. He referred to the wording contained in documents on the subject by the City of Costa Mesa, Bob Eichblatt, City Engineer, responded to Councilman Harman regarding how Costa Mesa put language in their General Plan. He stated their General Plan language was written prior to when the meetings on the bridges began. P.38 04/22/96 - City Council/Redevelopment Agency Minutes - Page 9 Councilman Harman asked City Engineer Eichblatt to read Mr. Ely's letter and to report later on how, if his language were to be put in the General Plan, would it jeopardize Measure "M" Entitlements. Bob Meschuk addressed Council regarding Area No. 52 and referred to the many flyers he had received. He stated that these petitions and flyers have misrepresented the issue and not told the truth. Mr. Meschuk referred to similar parcels that he believed are being treated differently by staff. He stated he believed it was wrong to usurp property owners' rights. Georqe Naff stated that he took umbrage to what was stated by the previous speakers regarding lies. He distributed a flyer to Council titled Update - Commercial Center In Our Neighborhood (Farm House Lot - Bushard and Indianapolis). He showed a map of the area. He stated that they do not want commercial in general and are concerned with the long term effect; that if the highest and best use does not work out it will become a strip mall. He referred to another map with footage. Ted Mooers thanked Councilman Harman for recognition of Earth Day. He stated that he was adamantly opposed to anything in Area No. 52 except low density residential. He spoke regarding the dangerous intersection with cars and many children using the street to go to school. He stated that his assessment came in low because of uncertainty over property behind him. Jeff Clitheroe stated that he lived on the corner of the property in question. He spoke regarding noise and light problem that already exist there with cars traveling through Bushard Street at high rates of speed; accidents with ambulances and an accident where an ambulance got into an accident. He stated that the commercial development there and the way that the house currently sits on the corner blocking the view of the south bound traffic on Bushard Street and the east bound traffic on Indianapolis Avenue would make the corner even more dangerous than it is already. Rose Riccardi nearby property owner in Area No. 52 stated that her reasons are very similar. She stated that the business would pose a threat to the children as when the lease is over, anyone can rent space; traffic effect on children business would bring; effect on already established businesses and safety of children going to Sowers School. Ms. Riccardi stated that she has not spoken to one family who favors commercial. Steve_ Thompson, Cambro Manufacturing representative, stated his agreement with the recommendation relative to his area. Jeff Metzel, Huntington Seacliff resident, spoke regarding their support of the recommended action on the area between Palm Avenue and Pacific Coast Highway and between Goldenwest Street and Seapoint Street (Cal Resources). He also supported the two little one- half acre parks in the neighborhood being designated open space park as recommended by the Planning Commission. 239 Page 10 - Council/Agency Minutes - 04/22/96 John Scott stated that he believed the bridges were "dead in the water". He reported on a meeting with the Public Works Department staff regarding traffic count for traffic modeling. He questioned the traffic counts and stated that he believed the modeling counts are seriously flawed and stated his area of disagreement with Traffic Engineer Otterson. Steven Dow, Crest View Neighborhood representative, addressed Council regarding the Crest View site stating that he was thankful the recommendation has been changed to keep the designation as it is and has been. He stated he hoped Council would stick to their present designation and not that wanted by the School District. Mr. Dow spoke regarding the detriment to the area if the land use changes, stating there would not be a school in the area and there are new children in the area. He requested that the site remain for a future school use, for sports activities or children to play. Duane Cosby stated his opposition to a land use change in the Crest View area and stated that city staff had not answered the residents' questions which staff had requested residents to ask during a meeting between the School District and city staff. He stated his questions were relative to what effect would the Seacliff Development have on Talbert Avenue; also the question of open space specifically. He reported that Lambert Park is behind locked gates and the city is planning maintenance for a park that is not open to the public. The Community Development Director, at the request of Councilman Green, stated that she and Senior Planner Fauland were at a meeting and did not remember that written question but would have responded. Les Jones, Public Works Director, reported on Lambert Park and stated he would return to Council; that this park was located on a private road. Dale Hoover stated that he hoped Council would stick to their guns and not change the Crest View site. He gave the reasons for moving to the Crest View neighborhood on Talbert Avenue and stated that commercial property would make the traffic even busier. He stated that Traffic Engineer Otterson could not answer the removal of parking in front of their houses on Talbert Avenue other than that one or two persons had made a complaint and that he did not understand why the problem was not addressed of people speeding up and down the street, instead of taking away parking in front of houses and giving people no parking option. Mr. Hoover stated that it seems if there is a house on the street, the maximum speed limit should be 35 mph not 45 mph and that in this instance it is 45 mph one way and 40 mph the other way. He spoke regarding the increase in trucks at all hours at night, the house shaking; that maybe the speed limit is too high and a speed limit would certainly help. He stated that all day on Sunday the church is so busy that it is often a traffic problem, people making stupid turns. Mr. Hoover stated he believed the General Plan should require the developers to pay for the relocation of people who feel infringed upon by such development. 240 04122/96 - City Councit/Redevelopment Agency Minutes - Page 11 Hugh Waterman addressed Council and stated that he bought a house at the Crest View location so that his daughter could go to school without crossing a busy street. He stated that he believed it would be a poor place to have commercial development and instead that current commercial sites should be improved instead. Debbie _J_osephson urged Council not to rezone. She stated that she is aware of mismanagement and waste in the School District and stated that she had expected that schools for which she has always voted for taxes should remain as schools. Ms. Josephson requested that Council look at all alternatives and that Lambert Park is not even worth mentioning as a park. She stated that the Ocean View School District should not be behaving like they are mere private land owners selling to the highest bidder with no consideration for surrounding residents and the church next to the Crest View property. Marvin Josephson stated that they are glad the Crest View site was pulled but that they know it will be back. He stated that city staff had recommended that it be rezoned. Mr. Josephson stated that the wrong slide was shown tonight. He referred to the General Plan for commercial causing traffic flowing on to residential streets and taking short cuts to go elsewhere. He stated the need for affordable homes for various segments of the community. Mr. Josephson stated that there is no school to where a child can walk; that the neighborhood will lose the only viable accessible open space they have without being subjected to crossing a major four plus lane street. He stated Holly-Seacliff is getting a new school and parks and how can it be justified when an old neighborhood will have it taken away. Pat Evans spoke on behalf of five families. She thanked Council for removing the Crest View Site. She stated that they are not receiving notification of meetings. Ms. Evans stated that she is afraid when the Planning Commission and School District get together again they will not be notified. Tran stated that just across the street is Five Points and up north is Huntington Center and Westminster Mall and it does not seem reasonable to build another commercial center if it may have to be shut down because of competition. He stated that he believed another school• should be built; that it is a place to study and play. Sheila Cools implored Council to have status -quo remain at the Crest View site. She stated that they had elected the Council for this purpose. Robert Cronk referred to the language regarding closed schools in the General Plan and urged Council to be sure it is more restrictive. He recommended that Terry Park and Lambert Park have a land swap with the Ocean View School District and acquire the Ocean View School site for activities such as were planned under Measure GG - Youth Sports Complex and fields. Bill Holman addressed Council regarding Area No. 23 and requested action at this meeting and not to defer to May 6. Mr. Holman stated that his company concurred with staff on all areas. He addressed Councilman Gamfalo's concern regarding the environmental issue on Area No. 23 (Cal Resources). Mr. 4:clman commended staff on the General Plan Amendment for their work and Jeff Metzel, representative of Seacliff.) 241 Page 12 - Council/Agency Minutes - 04/22/96 Dennis Holtz, property owner Area No. 52, corner of Bushard Street and Indianapolis Avenue, stated that the flyers and petitions and the speakers create hysteria which is the sole reason why the Planning Commission changed their original recommendation. He spoke regarding the history of the property dating back to 1966 and how he cannot understand how the property right and agreement can be reneged on. He requested that the present zoning be retained and if and when any commercial project is proposed it will be channeled through the usual and customary procedures including notification of the area residents just as in 1967 when "CN" was approved; that specific concerns regarding a specific project can be addressed, not the myriad claims now occurring. He also requested that the General Plan be reviewed as to how his property came to be zoned inconsistently and also when that occurred. He spoke regarding the financial loss if the zoning is changed to residential based on sales prices of the past few months. The City Administrator spoke regarding the staff's and his desire for communication with a committee from Crest View regarding any meetings staff may have with developers or School District staff. He spoke regarding staff doing everything they can to be sure notification of the residents is sent regarding any public city meeting; however city staff cannot be responsible for meetings of the School District. Straw Vote - Circulation Element - Language Changes - Approved A motion was made by Garofalo, second Leipzig, to approve the Language Changes - Circulation Element relative to Technical Synopsis (Page Nos. 265 and 268 of the staff report and on Table CE-1 Page No. 267) adding the "Principal Arterial" designation to the designations of streets; identifying that any street or alley not falling as a Freeway Principal, major, primary, secondary or collector is classified as a local street; adding the "Principal " classification to the Roadway Classification Table CE-1; and rewording of language regarding retaining eligibility to receive "Measure M" funds, being the last 2 paragraphs of the technical synopsis as noted in bold on page No. 268 of the staff report. The motion carried by the following straw roll call vote: AYES: Harman, Leipzig, Bauer, Sullivan, Green, Garofalo NOES: None ABSENT: Dettloff The City Engineer stated that he would like to comment on Mr. Ely's letter after contacting the county staff. 242. 04/22/96 - City Council/Redevelopment Agency Minutes - Page 13 Straw Vote - Circulation Element Approved With Exceptions A motion was made by Garofalo, second Leipzig, to approve the Circulation Element with the exceptions pointed out by staff which were levels of service, discussion of John Scott's letter of April 19, 1996 and the bridges over the Santa Ana River. The straw vote carried as follows: AYES: Harman, Leipzig, Bauer, Sullivan, Green, Garofalo NOES: None ABSENT: Dettloff Discussion was held between Senior Planner Fauland and Councilman Leipzig regarding the state law requiring a yearly review and the scope of the task involved. Councilman Leipzig stated his concern that the General Plan cannot be reviewed on a yearly basis due to staff and time constraints and that he believes the language should be clarified so that in future years someone reading this language will not think that Council did not comply with this intent. Councilman Leipzig referred to the long paragraph regarding the impact of development on school facilities and how developers would mitigate their impact and questioned if the wording could be put in an implementing ordinance. Planning Director Zelefsky reported. Community Development Director Fallon reported on the reasons why the staff believed the language is appropriate to put in the General Plan. She stated there could be an additional enabling ordinance. Councilman Leipzig requested staff to give reconsideration. 2.43 Page 14 - Council/Agdncy Minutes - 04/22/96 Straw Vote - Language Changes - Land Use Element- Approved A motion was made by Garofalo, second Harman, to approve the Language Changes in the Land Use Element as follows by straw vote. LU 4.2.5 (Page No. 260 of the Staff Report) Regarding Compliance with State & Federal laws to facilitate access; LU 15.6, LU 15.6.1 (Page No. 259 of the Staff Report) Regarding the addition of a mobile home overlay for mobile home parks; Table LU 4, Subarea 8A (Page No. 262 of the Staff Report) Deleting reference to permitting recycling for residential; 1-LU 18 (Page No. 261 through 264 of the Staff Report) Adding a section to allow administrative amendments to the General Plan for certain minor corrections or changes, and Table LU 2 (Page No. 289 of the Staff Report) adding the - i=2A category to the commercial/industrial permitted density/intensity table allowing a maximum floor area ratio of 0.75. The motion carried unanimously by straw vote with Councilwoman Dettloff absent. The following was reported: Mixed Use - Not voting - Area Nos. 34 through No. 37 and No. 72. Continued Disagreements - Area No. 2, No. 34 through 37, No. 40, No. 72 and No. 74 and Disagreements between Pfanninq Commission and Staff, Areas No. 2, No. 40 and No. 74. Discussion was held regarding the method of voting. Senior Planner Niles referred to letters received (late communications) on Area Nos. 81 and 82 which were in agreement. Straw Vote - Various_ Areas Approved With Exceptions A motion was made by Leipzig, second Garofalo, to approve by straw vote all items but Area No. 95 where no disagreement between the Planning Commission and Planning Staff existed, also excepted from approval were Areas No. 2, No. 40, No. 74, No. 34, No. 37, No, 72, No. 25, No. 43, No. 46, No. 50, No. 51, No. 52, No. 25, and No. 58, The motion carried by unanimous straw vote with Dettloff absent. 244 04122196 - City Council/Redevelopment Agency Minutes - Page 15 General Plan Amendment No. 94-2 - Area No. 2 - Report Presented Area No. 2 - Senior Planner >=auland reported On Area No. 2. Slides were shown by staff and he referred to an area map in the agenda packet. Councilman Green asked if Council was exposing the city to a lawsuit. The City Attorney reported on the area of the city purview. Staff was requested to return with analysis of Councilman Leipzig's concerns regarding feasibility of the proposed zoning due to size. Councilman Bauer stated he would like to meet with his Planning Commission appointee. Area No. 40 - Senior Planner Fauland showed slides. Discussion was held regarding traffic. Straw Vote - Area No. 40 - Commercial Zoning - Approved A motion was made by Harman, second Green, to support the Planning Commission recommendation for commercial zoning. The motion carried by unanimous straw vote with Councilwoman Dettloff absent. Straw Vote • Area No. 25 - Current Zoning To Remain Area No. 25 - Senior Planner Niles responded to questions from Councilman Leipzig and reported on site specific issues as they pertain to historic aspects. A motion was made by Leipzig, second Green, to approve by straw vote the staff recommendation to leave "as is" and historic overlay to come later as part of process. The motion carried by unanimous straw vote with Councilwoman Dettloff absent. Straw Vote - Area Nos. 45 and 46 - Current Zoning to Remain Areas No. 45 and No. 46 - A motion was made by Bauer, second Green, to approve staff recommendation to leave "as is". The motion carried by unanimous straw vote with Councilwoman Dettloff absent. Area No. 50 - Senior Planner Fs.:'!.. - clarified that Area No. 50 has been re -delineated to cover an existing apartment complex. � -5 Page 16 - Council/Agency Minutes - 04122/96 Straw Vote - Area No. 50 - Current Zoning to Remain - Except Existing Apartment Complex A motion was made by Garofalo, second Green, to approve re -designation to cover an apartment complex only the remainder to lease "as is". The motion carried by unanimous straw vote with Councilwoman Dettloff absent. Straw vote - Area No. 51 - Current Zoning to Remain Area No. 51 - A motion was made by Bauer, second Harman, to remain "as is" - Commercial General - Flood Plain. The motion carried by unanimous straw vote with Councilwoman Dettloff absent. Area No. 52 - Considerable discussion was held. Straw Vote - Area No. 52 - Residential Low Density - Approved A motion by Harman, second Green, to approve the Planning Commission and Staff Recommendation - Residential Low Density. The motion carried by the following straw vote: AYES: Harman, Leipzig, Sullivan, Green, Garofalo NOES: Bauer ABSENT: Dettloff Straw Vote - Area No. 58 - Staff Recommendation - Approved Area No. 58 - On motion by Bauer, second Garofalo, the Council approved Staff Recommendation by unanimous straw vote with Councilwoman Dettloff absent. Straw Vote - Area No. 61 - Staff Recommendation - Approved Area No. fit - On motion by Garofalo, second Green, the Council approved Staff Recommendation by unanimous straw vote with Councilwoman Dettloff absent. Straw Vote - Area No. 81 - Staff Recommendation - Approved Area No. 81 - On motion by Bauer, second Garofalo, the Council approved Staff Recommendation by unanimous straw vote with Councilwoman Dettloff absent. 246 04/22/96 - City Council/Redevelopment Agency Minutes - Page 17 Straw Vote - Area No. 82 - Staff Recommendation - Approved Atea No. 82 - On motion by Bauer, second Green, the Council approved Staff Recommendation by unanimous straw vote with Councilwoman Dettloff absent. Straw Vote - Area No. 74 - Deferred To Planning Commission For Review Area No. 74 - On motion by Garofalo, second Green, Council deferred for Planning Commission view point and density details by unanimous straw vote with Councilwoman Dettloff absent. A Study Session was scheduled on the General Plan Amendment for May 6, 1996 at 4:00 p.m. The public hearing on the proposed General Plan Amendment was continued open to May 13, 1996. Bankruptcy Plan Of Adjustment - I_anquage Modification Approved The City Administrator, during the meeting stated that he had received a FAX regarding the claims in the bankruptcy. He stated the City Attorney recommended amended language to the action on this subject taken earlier in the meeting in order to modify treatment of certain claims where appropriate by adding that in "disapproving or modifying the treatment of certain claims where appropriate; that the city may wish to deny in the Plan of Adjustment the way the county is treating some of the city claims but approve the Plan itself which will give the City Administrator flexibility when signing agreement on the plan; to do so if appropriate". The City Council approved unanimously with Councilwoman Dettloff absent. Adjournment - City Council/Redevelopment Agency The Mayor adjourned the regular meetings of the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach to Monday, April 29, 1996, at 5:00 p.m. in room B-8, Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California. City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, and Clerk of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach California ATTEST: e `%j , City Clerk/Clerk Mayor/Chairman 247