Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-05-05MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, MAY 5, 2004 HUNTINGTON BEACH CIVIC CENTER 2000 MAIN STREET, HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92648 7:00 P.M. — COUNCIL CHAMBERS (RECONVENE FROM 12:15 A.M. ON WEDNESDAY, APRIL 28, 2004) CALL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO ORDER P . P P P P P P ROLL CALL: Thomas, Scandura, Ray, Davis, Shomaker, Dingwall, Livengood PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE A. AGENDA APPROVAL A MOTION WAS MADE BY SCANDURA, SECONDED BY SHOMAKER, TO APPROVE THE MAY 5, 2004 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Thomas, Scandura, Ray, Davis, Shomaker, Dingwall, Livengood NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED B. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS B-1. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16338/ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.02-20 WITH SPECIAL PERMIT NO.02-041 COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 02-121 CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN (PACIFIC CITY) - (RECESSED ON APRIL 28, 2004 AT 12:15 A.M. WITH PUBLIC, HEARING CLOSED). Applicant/Property Owner: Makallon Atlanta Huntington Beach, LLC, Ethen Thacher, 4100 MacArthur Blvd., Ste 200, Newport Beach, CA 92660 Request: TTM: A request to subdivide approximately 31.5 acres into three parcels for purposes of developing a mixed -use project. One of the parcels will be for residential condominium purposes and the other two parcels are for a commercial/office/hotel development. In the residential portion of the project, there will be a 2.0-acre village park easement for public usage as well as a lettered lot for a private access road. CUP/CDP: A request to develop a mixed - use project consisting of retail, office, restaurant, cultural,'and entertainment uses (up to 240,000 sq. ft.), a 400 room, eight -story hotel, spa and health club; a 2.0- acre open space/park easement; 516 condominium units above subterranean parking and associated infrastructure including the extension of Pacific View Avenue. The request also includes outdoor dining, alcohol beverage sales, live entertainment indoors and outdoors, and dancing within the proposed restaurants and hotel development; carts and kiosks within the commercial and hotel development; and valet service, parking entrance gates, attendant booths, and/or collection of fees within the below grade parking structures. In addition, the (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 2 request includes a shared parking analysis which includes a reduction in the number of parking spaces required for the mixed -use project (retail, office, restaurant, cultural, entertainment, hotel, and spa uses), and tandem parking spaces. Included in the request is to permit development on a site that has a grade differential greater than three (3) feet from the low to the high point (approximately 25' from the lowest point to its highest point); and for development in the Coastal_Zone. Lastly, the request includes any additional soil remediation activities for the site to complement and complete the prior and on -going remediiation'activities, and may include but is not limited to excavation, temporary stockpiling, and on -site remediation. Three Special Permit requests are as follows: 1) to allow commercial buildings to encroach into the required setbacks along Pacific Coast Highway and Pacific View Avenue; 2) to allow three driveway ramps into the residential below grade parking structures at a slope of 15% in lieu of maximum 10%, and 3) to permit retaining walls and private patio walls in the required perimeter residential setback areas. - A Conceptual Master Plan is included that provides an overall buildout plan of the commercial and residential portions of the site. Location: 21002 Pacific Coast Highway (31-acre site bounded by Pacific Coast Highway, First Street, Atlanta Avenue, and Huntington Street). Project Planner: Scott Hess, Planning Manager - STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: A) "Approve Tentative Tract Map No. 16338, Conditional Use Permit No. 02-20, Special Permit No. 02-04, Coastal Development Permit No. 02-12, and the Pacific City Conceptual Master Plan with Findings, Staff Suggested Modifications, and Suggested Conditions Of Approval;" and, B) "Approve CEQA Statement of Findings and Fact with a Statement of Overriding Considerations." The Commission made the following disclosures: Commissioner Thomas spoke with Police Chief Small; Commissioner Scandura spoke with staff; Vice Chair Ray spoke with Barbara Boskovich, Ocean View School District (OVSD), Paul Arms and Don May; Commissioner Livengood spoke with Scott Hess; Chair Davis spoke with Scott Hess, Barbara Boskovich, John Erskine and other staff. Discussion ensued on the order items would be discussed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECONDED BY SCANDURA, TO APPROVE THE MODIFIED FINDINGS FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16338 (PACIFIC CITY) BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: - AYES: Thomas, Scandura, Ray, Davis, Shomaker, Livengood NOES: Dingwall ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED Discussion ensued on the findings for Conditional Use Permit No. 02-02. Vice Chair Ray asked staff to correct inconsistencies among parking space figures identified throughout the document. Vice Chair Ray asked about school districts and notification requirements. Staff stated that residential projects over 4 units require notification, and that mitigation (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 3 fees are paid to the respective district. Staff also explained how projects are subject to code requirements. Discussion ensued on affordable housing and mitigation measures (MM) related to school districts. Vice Chair Ray asked that an amendment be made to the last paragraph on Attachment 1.5. Commission Council explained state law requirements applicable to school district fees and mitigation. A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECONDED BY SCANDURA, TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.02-20 AS MODIFIED BY REPLACING THE TERMS "THE AFFECTED" WITH THE TERM "ALL" IN THE LAST PARAGRAPH ON ATTACHMENT 1.5 RELATED TO SCHOOL IMPACT FEES. AYES: Thomas, Scandura; Ray, Davis, Shomaker, Livengood NOES: Dingwall ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED Discussion ensued on the findings for Special Permit 02-04. Vice Chair Ray asked staff to explain the purpose of parking garage ramps at a 15% slope in lieu of 10%. Staff replied that the design allowed for more open space on the property. Vice Chair Ray voiced concerns related to one ramp off of First Street. Staff made reference to Attachment 2.22 and explained transitional slope and distance, stating that no safety issues are present and visibility is adequate. A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY SCANDURA, SECONDED BY SHOMAKER, TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS FOR SPECIAL PERMIT NO.02- 04. AYES: Thomas, Scandura, Davis, Shomaker, Livengood NOES: Ray, Dingwall ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED Discussion ensued on the findings for Coastal Development Permit No. 02-12. Vice Chair Ray asked staff to correct inconsistent figures within the document related to the project's total square footage. Staff identified the correct figure as 191,100 sq. ft. (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 4 A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE -BY SCANDURA, SECONDED BY SHOMAKER, TO APPROVE THE FINDINGS FOR COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO.0242. AYES: Thomas, Scandura, Ray, Davis, Shomaker, Livengood NOES: Dingwall ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED Discussion ensued on the Pacific City Master Plan (Attachment No. 4) and consistent information throughout all associated entitlements. . A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECONDED BY SCANDURA, TO APPROVE THE PACIFIC CITY MASTER PLAN WITH MODIFICATIONS FOR CONSISTENCY PURPOSES. AYES: Thomas, Scandura, Ray, Davis, Shomaker, Livengood NOES: Dingwall ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: • None MOTION APPROVED Discussion ensued on the CEQA Statement of Findings and Fact with a Statement of Overriding Considerations (Attachment 8), and the following comments and/or modifications were suggested: • Revise residential parking figures on Aft. 8.4 ■. Duplicate as a condition MM for Impact BIO-1 on Aft. 8.8 Comments on-MM for impact CR-2, archaeological resources on Att. 8.10 ■ Comments on MM HAZ-4, closure reports for "Area C" on Att. 8.13 ■ Strike terms "readily" and "and cost effective" on Att. 8.20 and Att. 8.22 ■ Strike "in the" repeated on Aft. 8.22 ■ Comments on Impact BIO-4, wetland identification on Att. 8.27 ■ Comments on MM BIO-2, rodents on Att. 8.28 ■ Comments on Impact HYD-3, drainage plans for Areas A &B on Att. 8.31 • Comments on Impact TRA 1, supporting alternative transportation on Att. 8.36 ■ Comments on providing a bike lane PCH on Att: 8.36 ■ Revise residential parking and square footage figures on Att. 8.39 Staff explained that the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) discusses Caltrans requiring a bike lane on PCH, and that staff met with Caltrans to discuss recreational trails and recent policy changes. (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 5 A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECONDED BY THOMAS, TO APPROVE CEQA STATEMENT OF FINDINGS OF FACT WITH A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS WITH MODIFICATIONS. AYES: Thomas, Scandura, Ray, Davis, Shomaker, Livengood NOES: Dingwall ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED Discussion ensued on the project's parking plan. Commissioner Livengood asked staff to identify the condition that enforces parking requirements, and what action is taken to ensure compliance. Staff referenced condition 1.b. of the suggested CUP conditions of approval. Vice Chair Ray voiced concerns about the project's parking plan, calling it a series of questions rather than an actual plan. He discussed issues related to traffic accessibility and ramp locations and suggested a condition be considered that requires additional review of the plan prior to approval. Chair Davis described the plan as a concept mechanism not completely formalized. Staff explained that the conceptual plan would be fine tuned before building permit approval. Staff also referenced information provided in the Parking Demand Analysis included as Attachment 6, and upper and lower garage detail included on Attachments 2.3 and 2.4. Staff also discussed meetings with the applicant and applicant's architects and consultants to address issues identified in Attachment 9, Parking Plan Review by International Parking Design, Inc. (IPD). The parking plans are conditioned to be revised to reflect the recommended changes; such changes will not be substantial. Vice Chair Ray voiced concerns about structural changes. John Waldron, Architect, informed the Commission that the information provided by IPD was reviewed in detail, and that all suggested modifications relate to internal and access issues. Vice Chair Ray asked about access to underground parking. Mr. Waldron stated that vehicles will not have to exit the structure to access underground parking. Commissioner Scandura stated that an infinite level of detail within a conceptual parking plan was unreasonable and unnecessary, adding that the conditions of approval incorporate the expert's opinion. Commissioner Livengood asked if major redesign to the parking plan would require Commission approval. Staff confirmed. Vice Chair Ray voiced concerns about mitigation measures for school district impact fees related to affordable housing on Attachment 11.5. Staff discussed student generation rates and nexus studies, and explained that state law doesn't (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 6 speak to cumulative impacts. Commission Counsel suggested adding language "consistent with state law" to guarantee that no contradiction'occurs. A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY RAY, SECONDED BY LIVENGOOD, TO ADD CONDITION #4 ON ATTACHMENT 11.5 WITH LANGUAGE THAT PROVIDES FOR MITIGATION OF THE CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH IMPOSING SCHOOL DISTRICT IMPACT FEES FOR AFFORDABLE UNITS BUILT OFF -SITE. AYES: Thomas, Scandura, Ray, Davis, Dingwall, Livengood NOES: Shomaker ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED - Commissioner Dingwall asked about government subsidies and establishing affordability requirements. Staff explained that the City establishes the number of affordable units within a project, and that government subsidies are not considered when calculating rent figures established by the County. Staff also explained that rent figures might be reduced if the market calls for it. Discussion ensued on Section 8 housing. Staff explained the developer's proforma, and that the developer may apply for funding through the County, State or Redevelopment Agency, depending on the development. Staff also cited examples of Section 8 units located throughout the City that are renting at or below the current market rate. Commissioner. Scandura suggested striking the sentences "Ideal property would be within the Oak View zone", and "Specifically, close to Main/Gothard/Garheld area and in the Center Avenue area" on Attachment 11.5. The applicant agreed to the change. A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY SCANDURA, SECONDED BY RAY, TO STRIKE CERTAIN LANGUAGE IDENTIFYING SPECIFIC AREAS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON ATTACHMENT 11.S. - AYES: Thomas, Scandura, Ray, Davis, Shomaker, Dingwall, Livengood NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED Discussion ensued on the County's current rent schedule. The Commission asked if the applicant could raise rents based on median average income changes. Staff confirmed. Vice Chair Ray asked if the City could require the applicant to build affordable units off -site in order to gain a 2:1 ratio as identified on page 3, Item #5 of the revised conditions of approval for the CUP. Staff stated that the number of units the applicant chooses is discretionary, and that State taw governs affordable units built outside a redevelopment area. Commission Counsel concurred. (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 7 A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY RAY, SECONDED BY LIVENGOOD, TO APPROVE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN. AYES: Thomas, Scandura, Ray, Davis, Shomaker, Livengood NOES: Dingwall ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED Vice Chair Ray asked if the project included a grocery/convenience use as identified on Attachment 7.1. Staff stated that the applicant is currently not in negotiations for such a use. Chair Davis followed by stating that even it the applicant wants to include upscale uses in the project, upscale uses must be interested in being included in the project. Commission Livengood discussed District 7 zoning conformance approved by City Council, and that it cannot be changed. Vice Chair Ray asked if the project included a rooftop bar or lounge as identified on Attachment 7.2. Staff replied no. Staff explained how the examples of permitted uses included in Attachment 7 serve as a guideline for proposed development within visitor -serving commercial zones. Vice Chair Ray voiced concerns about the applicant's ability to modify building heights, setbacks and minimum private open space as identified on Attachments 7.6 and 7.7 for consistency with code requirements. Staff explained that all modifications must be made prior to building permit approval. Staff also discussed parking exceptions related to affordable housing. Commissioner Thomas discussed a revision to condition 4.b. on page 8 of the Legislative Draft, and the applicant posting a minimum 15-year bond for the equivalent of 117 of the capital construction cost into an Urban Runoff Treatment Trust Fund for the First Street watershed storm flows. Vice Chair Ray presented the Commission with written modifications to the CUP, including a proposed condition that relates to wetlands delineation (condition c- 1). Chair Davis asked staff if comparable wetland language already existed. Vice Chair Ray referenced MM 13I0-1 on Attachment 8.8 where it discusses a "special status plant or habitat survey", voicing concerns that the survey timelines identified were too ambiguous Staff replied that although no formal condition speaks to wetlands delineation, a mitigation measure in the EIR speaks to a qualified biologist identifying wetland indicators. Staff also discussed new plants found resulting from water, grading or other environmental change, and that a condition was crafted that speaks to all applicable statutes (CCC, Department of Fish & Game, Clean Water Act, Army Corp of Engineers, etc.) Staff also explained that wetland delineations are done at any time of year with no limitations identified to expedite survey results. Chair Davis called for a 15-minute recess to allow staff and the Commission time to review Vice Chair Ray's proposed conditions. THE COMMISSION TOOK A 16-MINUTE RECESS. (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 8 Vice Chair Ray discussed illustrations within the EIR that identify areas subject to remediation and asked if wetland delineation studies were done in applicable areas. Staff responded that the areas were surveyed. Vice Chair Ray asked why staffs definition of wetlands references federal and state information that differs from how the term is defined in the Local Coastal Program (LCP). Chair Davis asked if staff had a problem redefining in accordance with the LCP and/or Downtown Specific Plan (DSP). Staff responded that the definition should remain unchanged with references to state and federal government guidelines. Staff also stated that the DSP is part of the LCP. A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY RAY, SECONDED BY LIVENGOOD, TO ACCEPT STAFF'S WRITTEN CONDITION OF APPROVAL ON WETLAND DELINEATION. AYES: Thomas, Scandura, Ray, Davis, Shomaker, Dingwall, Livengood NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED Vice Chair Ray discussed condition c-2, similar to MM AQ-3 on Attachment 8.20, suggesting that the terms "readily" and "and cost effective" be stricken in relation to alternative fuel construction equipment. Staff explained although they are supportive of minimizing emissions, that equipment readily available may be unreasonable to the applicant. Chair Davis asked if the terms "reasonably available" could be substituted. Vice Chair Ray asked who defines what is reasonable and cost effective. Commissioner Shomaker asked staff if the requests were feasible. Staff stated they were unsure. The Commission asked the -applicant to respond. Michael Gagnet responded that some grading equipment might in fact not be available; however, they are not opposed to the condition. Commission Counsel called for standards for reasonably available equipment, recommending some type of qualifier as to what is expected of the applicant. John Erskine, representative for the applicant, voiced concerns with assumptions related to the terms "reasonably available," and stated that heavy equipment representatives were available to address the issue. Discussion ensued regarding local availability of construction equipment in southern California, and associated shipping costs and transportation restrictions. (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 9 A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY RAY, SECONDED BY DINGWALL, TO ACCEPT COMMISSIONER RAY'S CONDITION C-2 CALLING FOR COST EFFECTIVE, CLEAN BURNING CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT AVAILABLE IN THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA AREA. AYES: Thomas, Ray, Dingwall NOES: Scandura, Davis, Shomaker, Livengood ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION DENIED A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY DAVIS, SECONDED BY THOMAS, TO AMEND COMMISSIONER RAY'S CONDITION C-2 BY REMOVING THE TERMS "COST EFFECTIVE" AND "AVAILABLE IN THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA AREA", AND INCLUDE "READILY AVAILABLE, LOCALLY". Discussion ensued. Staff recommended an alternative condition by modifying MM AQ-3 and adding the terms "locally available" in reference to construction equipment. Chair Davis accepted the recommendation and withdrew his motion. A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECONDED BY SCANDURA, TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITION THAT MODIFIES MM AQ-2 BY ADDING THE TERMS "LOCALLY AVAILABLE" IN REFERENCE TO CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT. AYES: Thomas, Scandura, Davis, Shomaker, Livengood NOES: Ray, Dingwall ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED Vice Chair Ray discussed condition 3 that duplicates and strengthens MM AQ-5 & MM AQ-6 by requiring trucks to be covered when hauling dirt, sand or soil onto or off the project. A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY RAY, SECONDED BY SHOMAKER, TO ACCEPT COMMISSIONER RAY'S CONDITION C-3 RELATING TO DIRT HAULING RESTRICTIONS. AYES: Thomas, Scandura, Ray, Davis, Shomaker, Dingwall, Livengood NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED Vice Chair Ray discussed condition 4 that references MM 13I0-2 and requires a 30-day notice to alert surrounding properties within a 300 foot radius of the project that the rodent population will be disturbed by grading activity. Staff provided information on vector control. (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 10 A'STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY RAY, SECONDED BY DINGWALL, TO ACCEPT COMMISSIONER RAY'S CONDITION C-4 RELATING TO RODENT DISPERSAL. AYES: Thomas, Scandura, Ray, Davis, Shomaker, Dingwall NOES: Livengood ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED Vice Chair Ray discussed adding a condition that specifies the number and location of bike racks throughout the project. Michael. Gagnet stated that Makar would work with staff. to consider the most logical spots, -and Vice Chair Ray suggested three areas for consideration.''' Commissioner Scandura asked if such a request was handled in this manner on big projects, and if the condition was necessary. Staff reiterated that it would work with the applicant to consider the best possible locations for bike racks. A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY RAY, SECONDED BY L-IVENGOOD, TO ADD A PROVISION FOR THREE BIKE RACKS IN _LOCATIONS IDENTIFIED BYSTAFF.AND THE APPLICANT. AYES: Thomas, Scandur4, Ray, Davis, Shomaker, Dingwall, Livengood NOES: None ABSENT: -None ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED Vice Chair Ray asked staff if the need arises, could Pacific View Drive be widened at a later date. Staff confirmed, adding that the angled parking would be lost. Staff also stated that the project area is better served with a pedestrian friendly road, further discussing angled parking, traffic calming, build -out problems and encouraging motorists to exceed the speed limit, Commissioner Livengood referenced condition a on page 4 of the Legislative Draft Conditions of Approval that speaks to widening of Pacific View Avenue. Vice Chair Ray asked about Pacific View Drive at Huntington Street, and the circulationlarterial traffic not stopping. Staff explained two-way stop standards, and that the City would consider a four-way stop as long as suitable service was provided at the intersection. Vice Chair Ray asked about pedestrian access into the development and the lack of a crosswalk at that intersection. Staff stated that it was legal to cross in that area, but that no existing marks are identified. Vice Chair Ray referenced the exit at the southwest comer of -Pacific View Mobile Park, and whether or not a condition or minute action should be considered that would extend the sidewalk and provide a crosswalk.. Staff identified the appropriate spot for crossing, -and expressed support for a crosswalk across Huntington Street. - Staff also stated that a minute action to the City Council requesting review by the Public Works Commission would be appropriate. (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 11 Commissioner Dingwall asked about the applicant's expense related to the 10- year bond for widening of Pacific View Drive. A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY DINGWALL TO FORWARD A MINUTE ACTION TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT CALLS FOR IMMEDIATE WIDENING OF PACIFIC VIEW. WITH NO SECOND, THE MOTION FAILED. Commissioner Scandura pointed out an incorrect bond term figure identified on page 8 of the Legislative Draft, stating that the Commission modified the 15-year to 8-year at their April 27, 2004 meeting. Chair Davis discussed the applicant's responsibility to fund sidewalk placement and associated striping, etc., along the south side of Atlanta Avenue during construction. Staff stated that there is sufficient right-of-way to construct a sidewalk in that area and explained that some minor private improvements may need to be relocated. Staff also explained that no mechanism is available to calculate the developer's fair share of bonded improvements, describing similar intersection costs. Chair Davis asked if the applicant could post a $50,000 bond for a period of five years. Staff stated that the applicant is already required to pay traffic impact fees. Commission Counsel cautioned the Commission not to impose costs on a developer until need or a nexus is established, and suggested a minute action to the City Council related to traffic impact fee dispersement. Staff questioned if the Commission assumed the project would be responsible for 100% of the increased pedestrian flow in that area. A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY DAVIS TO REQUIRE THE APPLICANT TO PAY 50% OR ISSUE A $25,000 BOND FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS ON ATLANTA AVENUE AND HUNTINGTON STREET DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF THE PROJECT. WITH NO SECOND, THE MOTION FAILED. Commissioner Thomas suggested a minute action to City Council for curb extensions at bus stop locations. Staff explained that the request involves determination of necessary improvements, and at whose expense. Staff also stated that the Commission did not have the authority to dictate how traffic impact fees will be spent, and recommended that a minute action be forwarded to the City Council for consideration of the improvements discussed. Commissioner Thomas suggested shifting funds from intersection improvements to other items for traffic calming measures. Commissioner Livengood repeated that the Commission had no authority to instruct staff on traffic calming measures. Vice Chair Ray discussed the nexus between new pedestrian and vehicular traffic within the residential area, including how new traffic lights will create additional traffic flow. He stated that the General Plan discussed mitigation of off - site pedestrian, vehicular and bicycle traffic, to the maximum extent feasible. Staff discussed the proportionate impacts, identifying 57% for First Street/Atlanta (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 12 Avenue improvements, and 59% for Huntington Street/Atlanta Avenue improvements. Commissioner Livengood asked for the dollar amount received from the developer for the project's traffic impact fees. Staff replied approximately 1.5 million. Commissioner Thomas asked if the applicant is eligible for reimbursement for fees. Staff explained General Plan goals, OCTA requirements, and how the formula works for improvements and reimbursements. Commissioner Livengood voiced concerns related to the legal problems associated with the Commission placing conditions on how traffic impact fees will be spent. A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY DAVIS, SECONDED BY RAY, TO REQUIRE THE APPLICANT TO PAY 69% OF THE ASSOCIATED COSTS FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS ON ATLANTA AVENUE AND HUNTINGTON STREET DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF THE PROJECT. AYES:' Thomas, Ray, Davis, Dingwall NOES: Scandura, Shomaker, Livengood ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED A MOTION WAS MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECONDED BY SCANDURA, TO APPROVE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO.16338, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT :NO. 0220, SPECIAL PERMIT NO.02-04, COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO.02-12 AND THE CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN FOR THE -PACIFIC CITY PROJECT WITH REVISED FINDINGS AND MODIFICATIONS CONSISTENT WITH STRAW VOTE ACTION. Vice Chair Ray asked that the following straw vote motions be considered prior to a final vote: A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY RAY, SECONDED BY THOMAS, TO REPLACE LOST, METERED PARKING ON PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY WITH ABOVE GROUND PARKING ON THE PROJECT SITE, AND PROVIDE SIGNAGE AT FIRST STREET AND OLIVE AVENUE. Staff discussed mixed -use zoning and stated that adequate parking was already available on the project site. Staff also suggested that the issue be forwarded to the City Council. Chair Davis called for a vote. (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 13 AYES: Thomas, Ray, Dingwall - NOES: Scandura, Davis, Shomaker, Livengood ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION DENIED A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY RAY, SECONDED BY LIVENGOOD, FOR ANNUAL REVIEW BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION THROUGH COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES. Staff questioned the format the Commission would prefer when reporting on the project's progress. Chair Davis voiced opposition to the motion, citing review of the Old World CUP as an example of a poor project review by the Commission. Vice Chair Ray explained that he didn't intend for staff to produce a detailed or complex report, just an update. Staff reminded the Commission that in past years project updates were provided during the study session portion of the meeting. Commissioner Scandura questioned whether other past projects provided an annual review. Staff also discussed the possibility of the applicant producing a quarterly newsletter that would update the community on project activity and status. Chair Davis called for the vote. AYES: Ray, Livengood NOES: Thomas, Scandura, Davis, Shomaker, Dingwall ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION DENIED A STRAW VOTE MOTION WAS MADE BY RAY, SECONDED BY SHOMAKER, TO REQUIRE THE APPLICANT TO DISTRIBUTE AN ANNUAL NEWSLETTER DURING PROJECT CONSTRUCTION TO ALL PROPERTIES WITHIN A 1,000 FEET RADIUS OF THE PROPERTY LINE. Commissioner Dingwall asked that the Commission consider amending the motion to include placing project information on the City's website. Staff explained that such a request would require City Council approval. Chair Davis offered opposition to motion, stating that the public should be directed to the project Discovery Center for information. Chair Davis called for the vote. AYES: Thomas, Scandura, Ray, Shomaker, Dingwall NOES: Davis, Livengood ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 14 A MOTION WAS RESTATED BY LIVENGOOD; SECONDED BY SCANDURA, TO APPROVE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO.16338, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.02-20, SPECIAL PERMIT NO.02-04, COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO.02-12 AND THE CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN FOR THE PACIFIC CITY PROJECT WITH REVISED FINDGINGS AND MODIFICATIONS CONSISTENT WITH STRAW VOTE ACTION. Commissioner Dingwall expressed opposition to the project and discussed problems' Wated to soil remediation; the oil overlay district (Pack Electric right- of=way and the appeal made to City Council related to the oil drilling site), and traffic issues on Atlanta Avenue. Commissioner Livengood discussed the project being in the planning stages for 4 to 5 years and expressed his support. He complimented the applicant for being flexible and willing to reduce the project by 50,000 square feet, discussed legal advice on eminent domain, and expressed disappointment with Commissioner Dingwall's comments. Commissioner Scandura expressed support for the project and stated that he disagreed with Commissioner Dingwall comments. He discussed overriding consideration, identifiable elements on a vacant 31-acre site, and the hard work by staff and the applicant on environmental impacts. He also discussed the storm water treatment plant, parking in -lieu fees and dedication of 2.5 acres for parkland. Chair Davis expressed support for the project and informed the public that the Planning Commission has a high regard for community's welt being. He discussed his respect for staffs hard work and the time spent by the Commission to review and discuss the project. He also expressed his confidence in the Fire Department to oversee soil remediation activity. Vice Chair Ray expressed support for the project but voiced concerns related to EIR issues,-remediation and nexus identification. He -also commented that the applicant was concerned about remediation and providing the best possible project. Commissioner Thomas expressed support for the project, calling it the best thing for the property. She was pleased with the applicant, staff, and the public's input and support. She discussed how concerns were communicated and addressed, and her confidence in the Fire Department's soil remediation efforts. Commissioner Dingwall criticized legal counsel and discussed abandonment of his own fiduciary responsibility related to Judge Cross and abandonment of an agreement related to drilling and the land below Pacific City. Chair Davis called for the vote. AYES: Thomas, Scandura, Ray, Davis, Shomaker, Livengood NOES: Dingwall ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED (04pcm0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 15 FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 163381 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.02-201 SPECIAL PERMIT NO.02-041 COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO.02-121 MASTER PLAN -- PACIFIC CITY MIXED USE PROJECT FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - TENTATIVE MAP NO. 16338: 1. Tentative Tract Map No. 16338 to subdivide approximately 27.8 acres (31.5 gac) into three parcels (a 17.2 acre parcel for residential condominium purposes; a 6.47 acre parcel for retail, office, restaurant, cultural, and entertainment development; and a 4.12 acre parcel for a hotel development); dedicate a 2.03 acre easement for a Village Green Park/open space, and a 20 foot wide pedestrian corridor easement with public access; and dedicate Pacific View Avenue per the Precise Plan of Street Alignment is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map designations on the subject site. The commercial portion of the site is designated CV-F7-sp (Commercial Visitor - Max. 3.0 Floor Area Ratio - Specific Plan Overlay) and General Plan Subarea 4C (PCH/Lake Street), and the residential portion of the site is RH-30-sp (High Density Residential - Max. 30 u/gac - Specific Plan Overlay) and General Plan Subarea 41(Atlanta-First Street). The subdivision will provide for a mixed -use project consistent with the design concept envisioned by the Downtown Specific Plan and General Plan, and will provide for necessary public improvements around the site. In addition, the applicant will pay the full City Park Land In -Lieu Fees. 2. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. The 27.8- acre project site provides the necessary area for a mixed -use development (191,100 sq. ft. mixed -use project with retail, office, restaurant, cultural, and entertainment uses, a 400 room, eight story hotel, spa and health club above two levels of . subterranean parking, and 516 multiple -family residential condominium units above two levels of subterranean parking) consistent with the intensity and density of the Downtown Specific Plan — District 7A (visitor -Serving Commercial) and 8A (High Density Residential) with a Coastal Zone overlay, the General Plan designations, and with the implementation of mitigation measures. 3. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not cause serious health problems or substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Planning Commission may approve such a tentative map if an environmental impact report was prepared with respect to the project, subject to a finding being made that specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the environmental impact report. 4. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision unless alternative easements, for access or for use, will be provided. The tentative map provides all the necessary easements and access requirements of the City for -the public and provides the necessary public improvements. The improvements include dedications, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streets, and easements with public access through the development and to a Village Green park/open space easement to adequately serve the site_ and adjacent properties. (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 16 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.02-20: Conditional Use Permit No. 02-20 to construct a 191,100 sq. ft. mixed use project consisting of retail, office, restaurant, cultural, and entertainment uses and a 400 room, eight story hotel, spa and health club above two levels of subterranean parking with 1,542 spaces; construct 516 condominium units within a mix of two, three, and four story buildings above two levels of subterranean parking with 1,291 spaces; permit alcohol beverage sales, live entertainment indoors and outdoors, dancing, 10,550 sq. ft. of outdoor dining; carts and kiosks in conjunction with the mixed commercial and hotel development; permit a reduction in the number of parking spaces required for the mixed use project (1,542 spaces in lieu of min. 1,776 spaces) and for tandem parking spaces; permit valet service, parking entrance gates, attendant booths, and/or collection of fees within the subterranean parking garage; permit any additional soil remediation activities for the site to complement and complete the prior and on -going remediation activities, which may include but are not limited to excavation, temporary stockpiling, and on -site remediation; permit associated infrastructure improvements including the extension of Pacific View Avenue; permit development on a site with a grade differential of greater than three (3) feet from the low to the high point; improve a 2.03 acre Village Green Park easement; and Master Plan will not be detrimental to the general welfare of persons working or residing in the vicinity or detrimental to the value of the property and improvements in the neighborhood. The project has been evaluated for compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood and includes perimeter buildings that provide transition and scale to adjacent properties, provides more than code required residential open space and open air commercial amenities, is designed on a pedestrian scale and character, provides the required parking to serve the uses on site, and meets the goals and policies of the General Plan. 2. The conditional use permit will be compatible with surrounding uses because the project is designed with a contemporary Mediterranean architectural theme which is compatible with the Downtown Design Guidelines and the project will provide architectural elements and features to enhance the pedestrian character and scale of the street scene surrounding the project. In addition, the project incorporates the proper massing and scale, the design features of the Mediterranean architectural style and the colors and materials recommended by the Design Guidelines for the Downtown. The project will provide public improvements to make the project compatible with other adjacent public improvements required of downtown development to provide a consistent streetscape for the project area. The project also is designed with buildings that terraces with the grade, especially along Huntington Street. 3. - The conditional use permit for 1,542 parking spaces in lieu of the 1,776 spaces required per Schedule "A" in Section 231.04 of the ZSO for the Reduced Project Alternative Plan (191,100 sq. ft.) is substantiated by the Parking Demand Analysis prepared by Linscott, Law, and Greenspan dated October 15, 2003. This analysis is based on the proposed use of the buildings which will not generate additional parking demand than the proposed 1,542 spaces. In addition, a Transportation Demand Management Plan which exceeds the minimum required by Section 230.36 of the ZSO will be submitted prior to issuance of a building permit. 4. The proposed request will comply with the provisions of the base district and other applicable provisions in the Downtown Specific Plan and Titles 20-25 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. The proposed project with the (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 17 special permits provides a development that is consistent with the design guidelines, is compatible with the scale and transition of surrounding development, and provides consistent public improvements for the development. 5. The granting of the conditional use permit will not adversely affect the General Plan. It is consistent with the Land Use Element designation of CV-F7-sp (Commercial Visitor - Max. 3.0 Floor Area Ratio - Specific Plan Overlay) and General Plan Subarea 4C (PCH/Lake Street) for the commercial portion of the site, and RH-30-sp (High Density Residential - Max. 30 u/gac - Specific Plan Overlay) and General Plan Subarea 41(Atlanta-First Street) for the residential portion of the site. In addition, it is consistent with the following goals and policies of the General Plan: A. Land Use Element Goal LU 1: Achieve development that maintains or improves the City's fiscal viability and reflects economic demands while maintaining and improving the quality of life for the current and future residents of Huntington Beach. Policy LU 1.1.2. Promote development in accordance with the Economic Development Element. Goal LU 2. Ensure that development is adequately served by transportation infrastructure, utility infrastructure, and public services. Policy LU 2.1.7. Ensure that development shall not occur without providing for adequate school facilities. Goal LU 4: Achieve and maintain high quality architecture, landscape, and public open spaces in the City. Policy LU 4.1.1: Require adherence to or consideration of the policies prescribed for Design and Development in the Huntington Beach General Plan, as appropriate. Policy LU 4.1.2: Require that an appropriate landscape plan be submitted and implemented for development projects subject to discretionary review. Policy LU 4.2.1: Require that all structures be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the City's building and other pertinent codes and regulations; including new, adaptively re -used, and renovated buildings. Policy LU 4.2.4: Require that all development be designed to provide adequate space for access and parking. Policy LU 4.2.5: Require that all commercial, industrial, and public development incorporate appropriate design elements to facilitate access and use as required by State and Federal Laws such as the American's with Disabilities Act. Goal LU 7. Achieve a diversity of land uses that sustain the City's economic viability, while maintaining the City's environmental resources, scale and character. . Policy LU 7.1.2. Require that development be designed to account for the unique characteristics of project sites and objectives for community character and in accordance with the Development "Overlay' Schedule, as appropriate. (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 18 Policy LU 7.1.5. Accommodate the development of a balance of land uses that maintain the City's fiscal viability and integrity of environmental resources. Goal LU 8. Achieve a pattern of land uses that preserves, enhances, and establishes a distinct identity for City's neighborhoods, corridors, and centers. -- Policy LU 8.1.1: Accommodate land use development in accordance with the patterns and distribution of use and density depicted on the Land Use Plan Map, in accordance with the appropriate principles. Policy LU 9.3.1: Permit the development of master -planned residential projects that incorporate a mix of housing types, neighborhood -serving commercial services, schools, parks, open space, and other elements in areas designated for residential on the Land Use Map. Policy LU 9.3.2: Require the design of new residential subdivisions to consider the following: a. Establish a street configuration involving the interconnection of individual streets that emphasizes a pattern of "blocks" rather than cul-de-sacs. b. Integrate public squares, mini -parks, or other landscaped elements. c. Cluster residential units and, if possible, integrate small dusters of multi -family housing within single-family areas to preserve open space. d. Establish a common "gathering" or activity center within a reasonable walking distance of residential neighborhoods. This center may contain services, such as child or adult -care, recreation, public meeting rooms, recreational facilities, small convenience commercial uses, or similar facilities. e. Site common facilities around a public park or plaza to encourage a high level of community activity. f. Establish a continuous network of sidewalks, bicycle and pedestrian paths, and other elements that link all community areas and provide linkages to land uses in adjacent areas. g. Orient housing units to neighborhood and collector streets. h. Site and design of units and incorporate elements, such as porches, that emphasize front yards as an activity area and "outdoor living room," by locating garages in the rear or side yards. i. Consider reduced street widths to achieve a more "intimate" relationship between structures, to the extent feasible and in accordance with Huntington Beach Fire Department regulations. j. Consider an increase in front yard setbacks, sidewalk widths, and the inclusion of landscaped parkways, especially in neighborhoods where the street width is reduced. k. Include alleys or other means to minimize the dominance of garages along the street frontage. I. Include setbacks and other design elements that buffer residential units from the impacts of abutting existing commercial and/or industrial development. Policy LU 9.3.3- Require that -nonresidential structures incorporated in residential neighborhoods be designed to be compatible with and convey the visual and physical scale and character of residential structures... (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 19 The mixed -use project consisting of retail, office, restaurant, cultural, entertainment uses and a 400 room, eight -story hotel proposed for the site represents development that would support the needs and reflect market demand of City residents and visitors. The proposed development improves the project site, much of which is currently vacant, and provides additional destination uses that would attract and complement new and existing retail, restaurant, and hotel uses. The design of the project promotes development of commercial buildings that convey a unified, high -quality visual image and character. It is in conformance with the City's Design Guidelines. The City's Design Review Board has reviewed the proposed architecture, colors, and materials and recommends approval of the design concept. The project provides for adequate access along all public streets, and required parking pursuant to a parking analysis in a two -level subterranean parking structure. The proposed multiple family residential buildings are well articulated and have enhanced building elevations along street frontages. Ground floor units along the perimeter of the residential site are oriented towards the street. The design of the residential subdivision includes four district neighborhoods emphasizing a cluster of buildings around a 2.03-acre village green park with recreational areas and a 20-foot wide pedestrian corridor. Connecting the village green park to Pacific View Avenue is a 65-foot entry corridor that is accessible to either crosswalk on Pacific View Avenue providing access to the retail promenade. With subterranean parking, there are no garages to dominate the street scene and front yard/patios become activity areas. In addition, there will be a landscaped parkway adjacent to the curb around the perimeter of the site. The residential project is separate from commercial activities by Pacific View Avenue. There will be surplus parking for the project; a total of 1,542 commercial parking spaces and 1,291 residential parking spaces are proposed. The number of residential parking spaces is based on Schedule °A° in Section 231.04 of the ZSO, and the number of commercial/hotel parking spaces is based on a Parking Demand Analysis prepared by Linscott, Law, and Greenspan. The Analysis concluded the peak demand for the Reduced Retail Commercial Alternative Plan would be 1,372; thus, there will be 170 surplus parking spaces for the commercial/hotel development. There will be public improvements made in conjunction with the project to ensure that the development is adequately served with infrastructure. In addition, the developer will be paying required school fees and comply with a Mitigation Agreement with all affected school districts. B. Coastal Element Goal C 1: Develop a land use plan for the Coastal Zone that protects and enhances coastal resources, promotes public access and balances development with facility needs. Obiective C 1.1: Ensure that adverse impacts associated with coastal zone development are mitigated or minimized to the greatest extent feasible. Policy C 1.1.1: With the exception of hazardous industrial development, new development shall be encouraged to be located within, contiguous or in close proximity to, existing developed areas able to accommodate it or, where such areas are not able (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 20 to accommodate it, in other areas with adequate public services, and where it will not have significant adverse effects, either individual or cumulative, on coastal resources. Policy C 1.1.4: -Where feasible, locate visitor -serving commercial uses in existing developed areas or at selected points of attraction for visitors. - Policy C 1.1.7. Encourage cluster development in areas designated for residential use within the Coastal Zone. Obiective C 1.2:. Provide a land use plan that balances location, type, and amount of land use with infrastructure needs. Policy C 1.2.1: Accommodate existing uses and new development in accordance with the Coastal Element Land Use Plan and the Development and Density Schedule, Table C-1. Policy C 1.2.3: Prior to the issuance of a development entitlement, the City shall make the finding that adequate services (i.e., water, sewer, roads, etc.) can be provided to serve the proposed development, consistent with policies contained in the Coastal Element, at the -time of occupancy. Policy C 2.2.3: Maintain existing pedestrian facilities and require new development to provide pedestrian walkways and bicycle routes between developments. Policy C 2.4.1: Maintain an adequate supply of parking that supports the present level of demand and allows for the expected increase in private transportation use. Goal C 3: Provide a variety of recreational and visitor -serving commercial uses for a range of.cost and market preferences Obiective C 3.2: Ensure that new development and uses provide a variety of recreational facilities for a range of income groups, including low-cost facilities and activities. Policy C 3.2.3: Encourage the provision of a variety of visitor -serving commercial establishments within the Coastal Zone, including, but not limited to, shops,. restaurants, hotels and motels, and day spas. Obiective C 4.1: Provide opportunities within the Coastal Zone for open space as a visual and aesthetic resource. The proposed project would develop a mix of commercial and residential uses on parcels contiguous to similar uses in an established, urban, downtown area. Public services are currently available to the project site, as well as the surrounding parcels, and the project includes improvements to existing infrastructure to ensure adequate service after project implementation. The project includes a 2.03-acre Village Green park easement, 65-foot Village Green park entry corridor, and a 20-foot wide pedestrian easement corridor from Atlanta Avenue to PCH which will be available to the public. Residential units are designed in building clusters. Parking is provided for the residential and commercial uses in two level subterranean parking structures. With the reduced commercial retail project alternative plan (191,100 sq. ft.), there will be surplus parking spaces for the commercial/hotel uses based on a shared parking analysis that will allow for a future demand for increased parking. Views of the beach/ocean will be (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 21 available from locations along the public sidewalk along the inland side of PCH and from terraced lookouts within the retail promenade walkway and the hotel. C. Economic Development Element Goal ED 2: Aggressively retain and enhance the existing commercial,industrial, and visitor -serving uses while attracting new uses to Huntington Beach. Obiective ED 2.6: Expand and enhance the existing visitor -serving uses. Policy ED 2.6.1: Encourage the attraction of coastal and inland visitor -serving uses to offer a wider spectrum of visitor opportunities Policy ED 2.6.2: Encourage visitor supported commercial development to concentrate in selected areas of the City, thereby creating identifiable visitor -oriented centers. Goal ED 3: Enhance Huntington Beach's economic development potential through strategic and land use planning and sound urban design practices. Obiective ED 3.1: Maximize the economic viability of commercial and industrial use through the creation of specialized districts and nodes. Policy ED 3.1.1: Create differentiated clusters or nodes of retail, industrial, and office uses. Policy ED 3.2.1: Create commercial -recreation nodes along the inland side of Pacific Coast Highway. Policy ED 3.2.2: Encourage mixed -use (retail/office/residential) structures on the downtown area and at the visitor -serving nodes along Pacific Coast Highway. Policy ED 3.2.3: Attract visitor -serving uses near the beach in order to create better linkages between the beach and visitor -supporting retail uses. The proposed project promotes development in accordance with Huntington Beach's Economic Development Element, as retail, office, restaurant, cultural, entertainment uses, and a 400 room, eight -story hotel development will broaden and stabilize the City's economic base and further diversify the range of overnight accommodations. In addition, the visitor -serving retail and commercial uses would further support the economic needs of the City. D. Housinq Element Policy H 3.1.1: Encourage the provision and continued availability of a range of housing types throughout the community, with variety in the number of rooms and level of amenities. The residential portion of the project is designed for 516 residential units in four different neighborhoods. There will be 15 varied floor plans in a townhome and stacked flat design. The floor plan sizes range from an average of 850 sq. ft. to 2,450 sq. ft. with one, two, and three bedrooms. Also, 15% of the total project units will be affordable for low to moderate -income families. These units will be on -site and off -site. (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 22 E. Circulation Element Policy CE 2.3.1: Require development projects to mitigate off -site traffic impacts and pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular conflicts to the maximum extent feasible. Policy CE 2.3.4: Require that new development mitigate its impact on City streets, including but not limited to, pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular conflicts, to maintain adequate levels of service. The applicant will be constructing Pacific View Avenue, improvements to Atlanta Ave., Huntington Street, First Street, and PCH, and a bus turnout on PCH. The EIR included a detailed traffic analysis to document potential impacts associated with the project. Mitigation would be required for the intersection of PCH and Seapoint, and PCH and Warner, as well as a traffic signal at 1st and Atlanta. Mitigation Measures'TRA through TR-3 require the developer to contribute its fair share of the cost of these improvements and construct the signal. F. Recreation and Community Services Element Goal 5: Provide parks and other open space areas that are efficiently designed to maximize use while providing cost efficient maintenance and operations. The residential portion of the project is required to provide 4.81 acres of open space area based on 25% of the total residential floor area. The proposal is for 9.28 acres of common and private open space which represents 53.8% of the site. Some of this common area will be accessible by the public including a 2.03 acre Village Green park/open space easement, 65 foot Village Green park entry corridor, and a 20 foot wide pedestrian easement corridor from Atlanta Avenue to PCH. In addition, the applicant will be paying the full (100%) City Park Land In -Lieu Fees. G. Subarea Schedule Subarea 4C PCH/First Street (Commercial Notel Component): • Permitted Uses: Visitor -serving and community -serving commercial uses, restaurants, entertainment, and other commercial uses. • Density/Intensity: Maximum 3.0 FAR; maximum height of eight stories • Establish a unified "village" character, using consistent architecture and highly articulated facades and building masses. • Require vertical setbacks of structures above the second floor. • Incorporate pedestrian walkways, plazas, and other common -open spaces for public activity. Provide pedestrian linkages with surrounding residential and commercial areas. • Establish a well-defined entry from PCH. • Maintain views of the shoreline and ocean. The mixed -use project consists of retail, office, restaurant, cultural, entertainment uses (live entertainment and dancing) and a 400 room, eight -story hotel. The commercial buildings are two to three stories clustered along a crescent shaped pedestrian walkway with a series of gathering areas and plazas for public activity and views to the ocean. A unified, high -quality visual image and character is created by the unique building designs and architecture. There is a 20-foot wide pedestrian walkway through the commercial project from PCH to Pacific View Avenue and then it continues through the residential area connecting Pacific View Avenue to Atlanta Avenue. Along the PCH (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 23 frontage is a meandering walkway with defined entries at First Street and Huntington Street. Subarea 41 Atlanta -First Street (Residential Component): • Permitted Uses: Multi -family residential, parks and other recreational amenities, schools, and open spaces. • Density/Intensity: Maximum height of four stories; Maximum 30 units per net acre. • Requires the preparation and conformance to a specific' plan or master plan. • Establish a cohesive, integrated residential development in accordance with the policies and principles stipulated for "New Residential Subdivisions" (Policies 9.3.1 — 9.3.4). • Allow for the clustering of mixed density residential units and integrated commercial sites. • Require variation in building heights from two to four stories to promote visual interest and ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses. There are 516 multiple family residential units proposed at a maximum density of 30 units per net acre in accord with the Downtown Specific Plan. The units are in two to four story, well articulated buildings with enhanced building elevations along street frontages. The residential development is consistent with the policies of 9.3.1 to 9.3.3 as noted under the Land Use Element of this section. Incorporated into the project is a 2.03-acre Village Green park easement, 65-foot Village Green park entry corridor, and a 20-foot wide pedestrian easement corridor from Atlanta Avenue to PCH, which will be open to the public. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL — SPECIAL PERMIT NO.02-04: 1. The granting of Special Permits pursuant to Section 4.1.02 of the Downtown Specific Plan in conjunction with Conditional Use Permit No. 02-20 is for the following: a. Encroach into the minimum building setback along Pacific Coast Highway (30 ft. in lieu of min. 50 ft.) and along Pacific View Avenue (15 ft. in lieu of min. 20 ft.); b. Exceed the maximum slope percentage for three driveway ramps into the residential below grade parking structures (15% in lieu of maximum 10%); and c. Exceed the maximum height for retaining walls and private patio walls in the required perimeter residential setback areas (3.5 ft. to 6 ft. in lieu of maximum 3.5 ft.). These Special Permits result in a greater benefit from the project and will promote a better living environment because the arrangement of structures, parking, circulation areas, and open space areas relate to the surrounding built environment in pattern, function, scale, and character. The commercial portion of the project is a blend of the reduced building setbacks along PCH north of the site and the greater setbacks of the hotels along PCH to the south of the site. The placement and design of structures along PCH and Pacific View Avenue with reduced setbacks, except for the hotel, results in a better project because it facilitates and encourages pedestrian activity and conveys a visual link to PCH and Pacific View Avenue. The reduced setbacks, except for the hotel, allow for clustering of buildings to create unique plaza areas throughout the project envisioned by the "Village Concept" of the DTSP. The hotel would not result in better land use planning so therefore it is conditioned to be redesigned to have a minimum 50 ft. setback from the PCH right of way consistent with the DTSP and the Waterfront Hilton development to the south of the subject site. (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 24 The increased ramp slope is an acceptable standard for driveways without parking on either side. The increased ramp slope allows for a more efficient use of land and more usable open space area resulting in abetter project. There will be private patio walls, retaining walls, and landscaped planters along Pacific View Ave., First Street, Atlanta Ave., and Huntington Street separating the .,ground floor private patios with the public sidewalks around the perimeter of the residential project site that will exceed the max. 42 inches required by up to two ft. six inches (2' 6"). This special permit is necessary -due to the grade differences between the ground floor patios and adjacent public sidewalk grades, and that there is an EIR mitigation measure that requires walls and barriers around patio areas and open space areas be shielded by at least a five ft., six in. (5' 6") high block wall or Plexiglas sheets to minimize exterior noise levels to these areas. 2. The granting of Special Permits will provide better land planning techniques with maximum use of aesthetically pleasing types of architecture, landscaping, site layout and design due to the use of appropriate site planning by the arrangement of structures, parking, circulation areas, and open space areas. 3. The granting of Special Permits will not be detrimental to the general health, welfare, safety, and convenience of the neighborhood or City in general, nor detrimental or injurious to the value of property or improvements of the neighborhood or of the City in general. The project has been evaluated for compatibility with the,surrounding neighborhood and includes perimeter buildings that provide transition and scale to adjacent properties, provides more than code required residential open space and open air commercial amenities, is designed on a pedestrian scale and character, provides the required parking to serve the uses on site, and meets the goals and policies of the General Plan. 4. The granting of Special Permits will be consistent with objectives of the Downtown Specific Plan in achieving a development adapted to the terrain and compatible with the surrounding environment. The project does include the arrangement of structures, parking, circulation areas, and open space areas'that relate to the surrounding built environment in pattern, function, scale, and character. The commercial portion of the project has varied setbacks along PCH that is similar to the existing developments to the north and south. The reduced setbacks allow for clustering of buildings to create unique plaza areas throughout the project envisioned by the "Village Concept" of the DTSP. The incorporation of the special permits into the. project benefits the overall design and therefore provides a better living environment for the resident, tenant, customer, and visitor to the downtown area. 5. The granting of Special Permits is consistent with the policiesofthe Coastal Element of the City's General Plan and the California Coastal Act. The project is consistent with the Coastal Element goals, objectives, and policies as noted under the Conditional Use Permit Findings. The proposed project would develop a mix of commercial and residential uses on parcels contiguous to similar uses in an established, urban, downtown area. Public services are currently available to the project site, as well as the surrounding parcels, and the project includes . improvements to existing infrastructure to ensure adequate service after project implementation. The project includes a 2.03-acre Village Green park easement, 65- foot Village Green park entry, corridor, and a 20-foot wide pedestrian easement corridor from Atlanta Avenue to' PCH which will be available to the public.* Residential (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 25 units are designed in building clusters. Parking is provided for the residential and commercial uses in two level subterranean parking structures. With the reduced retail commercial project alternative plan (191,100 sq. ft.), there will be surplus parking spaces for the commercial/hotel uses based on a shared parking analysis that will allow for a future demand for increased parking. Views of the beach/ocean will be available from locations along the public sidewalk along the inland side of PCH and from terraced lookouts within the retail promenade walkway and the hotel. The proposed special permits in conjunction with Conditional Use Permit No. 02-20, Coastal development Permit No. 02-12, Tentative Tract Map No. 16338, and the incorporation of and implementation of adopted conditions of approval and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program of Final EIR No. 02-01 will comply with State and Federal Law. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO.02-12: 1. Coastal, Development Permit No. 02-12 for the development project conforms with the General Plan, including the Local Coastal Program. The proposed project would develop a mix of commercial and residential uses on parcels contiguous to similar uses in an established, urban, downtown area. Public services are currently available to the project site, as well as the surrounding parcels, and the project includes improvements to existing infrastructure to ensure adequate service after project implementation. The project includes a 2.03-acre Village Green park easement, 65-foot Village Green park entry corridor, and a 20-foot wide pedestrian easement corridor from Atlanta Avenue to PCH which will be available to the public. Residential units are designed in building clusters. Parking is provided for the residential and commercial uses in two level subterranean parking structures. With the reduced project altemabve plan (191,100 sq. ft.), there will be surplus parking spaces for the commercial/hotel uses based on a shared parking analysis that will allow for a future demand for increased parking. Views of the beach/ocean will be available from locations along the public sidewalk along the inland side of PCH and from terraced lookouts within the retail promenade walkway and the hotel. 2. The project is consistent with the requirements of the CZ Overlay District, the base zoning district, as well as other applicable provisions of the Municipal Code except for any special permits approved concurrently. The proposed is consistent with the design guidelines, is compatible with the scale and transition of surrounding development, and provides consistent public improvements for the development. 3. At the time of occupancy the proposed development can be provided with infrastructure in a manner that is consistent with the Local Coastal Program. The proposed project will provide all necessary infrastructures to adequately service the site and not impact adjacent development. In addition, the project provides the necessary public improvements such as dedications, curb, gutters, sidewalks, streets, easements and reciprocal access between properties to adequately serve the site and adjacent properties. 4. The development conforms to the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act. The proposed project does not conflict with any public recreation policies and it will add opportunities for access by improving the perimeter sidewalks and creating lookouts that are consistent with the City's General Plan, Coastal Element, and Downtown Specific Plan as referenced in the Conditional Use Permit Findings., (04pcm0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 26 The proposed project would develop a mix of commercial and residential uses on parcels contiguous to similar uses in an established, urban, downtown area. Public services are currently available to the project site, as well as the surrounding parcels, and the project includes improvements to existing infrastructure to ensure adequate service after project implementation. The project includes a 2.03-acre Village Green park easement, 65400t Village Green park entry corridor, and a 20-foot wide pedestrian -easement corridor. from Atlanta Avenue to PCH which will be available to the public. Residential units are designed in building clusters. Parking is provided for the residential and commercial uses in two level subterranean parking structures. With the reduced project alternative plan (191,100 sq. ft.), there will be surplus parking spaces for the commercial/hotel uses based on a shared parking analysis that will allow for a future demand for increased parking. -Views of the beach/ocean will be available from locations along the public sidewalk along the inland side of PCH 'and from terraced lookouts within the retail promenade walkway and the hotel. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO.16338: 1: Tentative Tract Map No. 16338 and associated engineering exhibits received and dated February 13, 2004 for the subdivision of 34 gross acres into three lots, one of which is for condominium purposes, shall be the approved layout with the following modifications: . a. Identify gross and net acreages for each lot in the summary table. b. Fully dimension the Village Green park area, and identify it as open to the public. c. Identify Lot No. 1 as a lot for residential condominium purposes. 2. Prior to submittal of the Final Tract Map to the Public Works Department for processing and approval, the following shall berequired: a. At least 90 days before City Council action on the final tract map; CC&Rs shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval by the Community Services Department, Public Works Department, and the City -Attorney. The CC&Rs shall reflect the common driveway access easements, and maintenance of all walls and common landscape areas by the- Homeowners' Association. The CC&Rs must be in recordable form prior to recordation of the Final Tract Map map. 1) - The CC&Rs shall include language to address the right of •the public to use the 2.03 acre Village Green park easement, pocket park, minimum 65 foot Village Green park entry corridor, and 20 foot wide pedestrian easement, and further that the right to meander off of the easements, and to walk over, traverse, and otherwise use, for recreational purposes, the areas identified as pedestrian public circulation areas depicted on the Wall & Fence Plan as approved by the Planning Commission, and the right for City to erect signs on the easements or pedestrian public circulation areas designating such property as being open for public use and access. 2) Grantor may not make any improvements to the easements or the pedestrian public circulation areas (including, without limitation, the installation of entry gates, signs prohibiting or restricting entry, or other improvements), or take any action (excluding normal maintenance), that would affect, in any manner, the right of the public to the unimpeded use of the easements or pedestrian (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 27 public circulation areas without the prior written consent of Grantee, which Grantee may give or withhold in Grantee's sole and absolute discretion. The CC&Rs shall include language that requires the Master Association to maintain the 2.03 acre park easement open space, and public access corridors as identified in the Final Tract Map and approved Improvement Plans. 3) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, Grantor shall have the right to install privacy gates to prevent public access to the portions of Lots 1, 2, and 3 which are not identified as pedestrian public circulation areas as depicted on the Wall & Fence Plan as approved by the Planning Commission. - 4) The CC&Rs shall include the formation of a Master Association that shall govern, oversee, coordinate, and control all individual Homeowner's Associations and all Business Associations that include all areas of the proposed development for the primary purpose of coordinating and control of uniform maintenance, liability, repair of all common areas, public walkway easements and "A" Street. The Master Association shall also be solely responsible for the maintenance and replacement of the required landscaped medians in First Street, Atlanta Avenue, Huntington Street, and Pacific View Avenue, the decorative pavement within public streets adjacent to the project, and those items specified in the Maintenance License Agreement between the Master Association and the City. 5) The CC&Rs shall address the maintenance of all awnings and rails for the commercial and residential portions of the project. They shall also define allowable uses and structures in the 20-foot pedestrian corridor for the commercial portion of the project; fences and other permanent and temporary barriers shall be prohibited. Exclusive use by any business, carts, kiosks, and tables are not permitted. Benches, potted plants and similar amenities may be permitted subject to the approval of the Departments of Planning and Public Works. 6) The CC&Rs shall refer to the Special Utility Easement Agreement. (PW) 7) The CC&Rs shall refer to the Maintenance License Agreement. b. A draft Affordable Housing Agreement Plan received and dated Dec. 23, 2003 shall be the conceptually approved plan. It shall be modified as necessary to reflect the requirements below and shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval prior to recordation of the Tract Map. The agreement shall provide for affordable housing on -site, or combination of on -site and off -site. The contents of the agreement shall include the following: 1) Minimum 15 percent (78 units) of the total units shall be affordable to families of very low-income (less than 50% of Orange County median), low-income level (less than 80% of Orange County median), and moderate -income level (less than 100% of Orange County median) for a period of sixty years. Section 1 Requirements of the Plan is acceptable with the clarification that it shall be for a period of 60 years. 2) A detailed description of the type, size, location and phasing of the affordable units, on -site and off -site. (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 28 3) Off -site affordable units (new or rehabilitated) shall be proportionate in size and bedroom mix to the proposed one, two and three bedroom condominium units, and under the full control of the applicant. 4) The affordable units shall be constructed and/or acquired prior to or concurrent with the market rate units. The affordable units must be entitled, approved, and building permits obtained (and/or restrictive covenant recorded) concurrent with the following development phasing: PHASE RESIDENTIAL AFFORDABLE (Exhibit D-007) UNITS RESIDENTIAL UNITS Ila 68 10 III - ' .125 20 IV 203 30 Va 120 18 As an example, concurrent with issuing permits for any of the 68 units in phase Ila, at least 10 affordable units must be identified, entitled, approved, and building permits obtained, and/or covenant recorded. All affordable units must be made -available for occupancy prior to issuance of building permits for the last phase of development unless such units are included as part of that phase; or evidence of the applicant's reasonable progress towards attainment of completion of the affordable units for the respective phase. 5) A minimum of 50% of the required number of affordable housing units shall be on -site and the remaining number of units can be on -site or off -site. An option to the minimum 50% on -site is that the applicant may elect to build these units off -site, provided that the number of units is increased on a 2:1 basis and located within a redevelopment area. 6) If units 'are located off -site, the applicant shall consider sites located throughout the City and provide documentation thereof to the Planning Department. 7) Modify the Off -Site Units section of the Draft Affordable Housing Plan as follows: Section 2.A. (second bullet) — delete last sentence referencing Oak View area. Section 2.13. — delete last sentence referencing the Center Avenue area. Add Section 4. — Applicant shall notify affected school districts of all projects intended to satisfy the off -site affordable housing requirements so that the school district(s) may identify cumulative impacts. Projects will be required to mitigate impacts to affected schools districts consistent with State law. 3. The following conditions shall be completed prior to recordation of the Final Tract Map unless otherwise stated. Bonding may be substituted for construction in accordance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act. (PW) a. Dedicate a minimum 2.03 acres easement for Village Green park purposes to the City of Huntington Beach. The minimum 2.'03 acres shall be inclusive of the (04pcm0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 29 public park entry corridor between the park and Pacific View Ave. The loop road may be private and include vehicle gates; it shall remain accessible to the public for pedestrian access. The Village Green park entry corridor shall be a minimum of 65 feet in width at its narrowest point and shall be a public easement dedicated on the Final Tract Map. b. An agreement shall be executed between the City and applicant prior to Final Tract Map approval that binds the Master Association and individual Associations in perpetuity for the conditions stated herein and that the Village Green Park will always be for public use and not changed to be for private use. c. The developer shall provide a Maintenance License Agreement to be a part of the Master Association agreement for maintenance of the medians, landscaping in the medians and adjacent to the project for Pacific View Avenue, First Street, Atlanta Avenue, Huntington Street and "AA Street if public. The agreement shall state that the Master Association shall be responsible for all costs associated with maintenance, repair, replacement, and fees imposed by County, City, and the Orange County Sanitation District for pumping, inspection, or other related fees for the dry weather flow diversion and First Flush Water Runoff Treatment Control System approved by the City. Furthermore, the Agreement shall address the Master Association's responsibility for the maintenance of the 2.03-acre park easement, all enhanced paving adjacent to public streets, "A" Street, pedestrian easements, sidewalk, parkway landscaping, Edison -owned street lighting and street furniture located behind public street curbs within the project site. Maintenance shall include but not be limited to sidewalk cleaning, trash cans, disposal of trash, signs, the regular maintenance and cleaning of all angled parking areas (i.e., markings, street sweeping) along Pacific View Avenue between First Street and Huntington Street, etc. The Master Association shall be solely responsible for paying the cost of maintenance, inspections, cleanup, operation, monitoring, replacement planting, and equipment replacement of all improvements required for this project. (PW) d. The sewer and portions of the storm drain systems located within private streets shall be private and maintained by the Homeowner's Association. e. A bond shall be posted for the potential conversion of Pacific View Avenue to a 4- lane divided roadway as dictated by the General Plan. The bond shall be maintained until such time that the roadway conversion improvements are completed and accepted by the City, or a General Plan Amendment is approved to eliminate the requirement of the conversion, or 10 years from the date of tract acceptance, whichever occurs first. The amount of the, bond shall be determined by a preliminary design of full -width street improvements for Pacific View Avenue (in conformance with the Precise Plan of Street Alignment) and cost estimate prepared by the applicant and approved by the City Engineer. (PW) f. The two intersections of °A° Street and Pacific View shall be designed as enhanced intersections per the approved conceptual plan and shall be depicted on the Street Improvement Plans. (PW) g. Agreements with appropriate school districts intending to mitigate the impact on school facilities shall be executed. The Planning Department shall be provided with a copy of the agreement prior to recordation of the final tract map. h. A Letter of No Further Action (or Letter of Closure) shall be obtained from the Fire Department regarding the soil remediation of the entire site prior to recordation of the Final Tract Map, or issuance of any grading permits, whichever occurs first. (FD) (04pcm0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 30 4. The water system for the entire project shall be a public system; except, any portion of the fire service water system that is not public shall be maintained by the HOA in accordance with the language to be provided by the Fire Department for the CC&Rs. (FD) 5. - Prior to commencing soil remediationi or grading operations, the name and phone number of an on -site field supervisor hired by the developer shall be submitted to the Departments of Planning -and Public Works. In addition, clearly visible signs shall be posted on the perimeter of the site every 250 feet indicating who shall be contacted for information regarding this development and any construction/grading- related concerns. This contact person shall be available immediately to address any concerns or issues raised by adjacent property owners during the construction activity. He/She will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the conditions herein, specifically, grading activities, truck routes, construction hours, noise, etc. Signs shall include the applicant's contact number and the City's contact number regarding grading and construction activities, and "1-800-CUTSMOG" in the event there are concerns regarding fugitive dust and compliance with AQMD Rule No. 403. (PW) 6. The applicant shall notify all property owners and tenants within 500 feet of the perimeter of the property of a tentative grading schedule at least 30 days prior to such grading. The project sponsor shall designate a "disturbance coordinator" who shall be responsible for responding to any local complaints regarding construction noise; the coordinator (who may be an employee of the developer or general contractor) shall determine the cause of the complaint and shall require that reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem be implemented; and a telephone number for the noise disturbance coordinator shall be posted conspicuously at the construction site fence and included on the notification sent to neighbors adjacent to the site. (PW) a. At least 30 days prior to grading, a notice shall be mailed to all property owners, residents and businesses located within 500 feet of the project site notifying them that the rodent population on site will be disturbed during grading and construction and may create a temporary nuisance to the neighboring area. This notice may be included in the notice of commencement of grading operations as required above. . 7. A third party consultant, approved by the City, shall be responsible for. monitoring on -site activities during the grading and construction phases of the project and shall serve as an agent for the City. The developer shall reimburse the City for all costs associated with this third party monitoring as determined by the City. 8. A third party remediation consultant will be retained by the City from the Fire Department's approved list of qualified consultants, for the purpose of providing review, recommendations and oversight of future remediation, sampling and closure reports. The consultant's scope shall include review of all documentation of work performed to date, review of any new reports and data, and field and laboratory oversight. The consultant shall work at the direction of the City of Huntington Beach. The applicant shall reimburse the City for all costs submitted by the third party consultant. (04P=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 31 9. During the project construction phase, the applicant shall publish an informational newsletter annually and distribute to property owners, residents and businesses within a 1,000-foot radius of the project. 10. Final on -site grades and elevations on the grading plan may vary by no more than two (2) feet from the on -site grades and elevations, except adjacent to the perimeter of the site which shall vary by no more than one (1) foot from the street grades and elevations on the approved Tentative Map with the approval of the Planning Department. 11. The Departments of Planning, Public Works, Fire, Building & Safety, and Community Services are responsible for compliance with all conditions of approval herein as noted after each condition. The Planning Director and Public Works Director shall be notified in writing if any changes to the Final Tract Map are proposed as a result of the plan check process. Permits shall not be issued until the Planning Director and Public Works Director have reviewed and approved the proposed changes for conformance with the intent of the Planning Commission's action and the conditions herein. If the proposed changes are of a substantial nature, an amendment to the original entitlement reviewed by the Planning Commission's may be required pursuant to the HBZSO. — CONDITIONAL 1. The conceptual site plan, floor plans, and elevations for the reduced project alternative plan received and dated December 23, 2003 shall be the conceptually approved layout, with the following modifications: a. The retaining wall/fence combinations along PCH shall not exceed 42" in height. b. The below grade parking structures for the residential and commercial developments shall be redesigned to address the detailed comments identified in the Parking Plan Review by International Parking Design, Inc. dated January 14, 2004. Drive aisles for parking spaces shall be minimum 26 feet in width. Signage shall be provided for residential guest parking areas and guest parking spaces shall be clearly marked and accessible. Identify electric vehicle charging station parking spaces. The redesigned parking structures shall comply with the new 2005 Title 24 regulations (and any subsequent revisions, and shall include °variable volume exhaust fans with CO2 sensors" subject to review by the Departments of Planning, Building & Safety, Fire, and Public Works. c. Revise Exhibit D-006 as follows: provide minimum 25' setback from the property lines at the intersection of PCH and First St. for carts and kiosks; provide continuous eight foot wide sidewalk along the PCH frontage without any encroachment of carts and kiosks; provide minimum 20 foot wide entryway (without any carts/kiosks) to the project from the PCH/First St. intersection; and the minimum 20 foot wide public pedestrian easement shall be consistent with the tract map without any encroachment of carts and kiosks. d. The outdoor deck/dining areas for the hotel restaurant along PCH between the Porte Cochere and Huntington Street shall have a minimum setback of 25' from PCH. e. The hotel at the podium level shall be setback 50' from the PCH right-of-way and the hotel tower (above the podium level) shall have an upper story setback of (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 32 minimum ten feet from the podium level consistent with the General Plan, Subarea Schedule. f. Maintain minimum 10' free and clear (without obstruction) pedestrian path along Pacific View Ave. from First Street to the Porte Cochere entryway for the hotel. g. Identify three areas for bike rack installation. on the site plan subject to the review of the Planning Department; one shall be in the residential portion of the site. 2. The project shall comply with the Mitigation Measures of the Pacific City Environmental Impact Report (EIR No. 02-01). 3. The project shall be developed in accord with the Phasing Diagram (Exhibit D-007). Phase Ila (Residential) and lib (Commercial Parking Structure) shall be developed concurrently. Building permits for Phase III (Residential) and other residential phases shall not be issued until Phase Ilb and Ilc are completed, or evidence of the applicant's reasonable progress towards attainment of completion. 4. A forma( wetlands delineation will be conducted prior to the initiation of construction activities associated with project development and after the completion of hazardous waste remediation in Area B (see Figure 3.7-1 in the draft EIR), which includes filling of the remediation pits and restoration of the area to its natural, pre-remediation conditions, consistent with the requirements of California Coastal Commission (CCC) Coastal Development Permit 00-09: If potential wetlands are identified at that time, the Applicant would be required to obtain all necessary permits required by the City (as trustee for the CCC), the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (USACE), and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) in order to achieve compliance with all relevant laws and regulations, including, but not necessarily limited to, the California Coastal Act, the Huntington Beach Local Coastal Program, Sections 160 et al of the Fish and Game Code of California, and Section 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act. While the final conditions of these permits would be determined through permitting coordination with these agencies, at a minimum, compliance with current law_ s and regulations would require that no net loss of wetlands would occur. 5. Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the following shall be completed: a. The applicant shall submit to the Director of Public Works a project WQMP that: 1) Addresses site design BMPs such as minimizing impervious areas, maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, and creating reduced or "zero discharge" areas 2) Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMPs 3) Incorporates Treatment Control BMPs to treat all dry weather flows and the first flush of a storm event (the volume of runoff produced from a 24-hour, 8e percentile storm event) 4) Generally describes the long-term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs, (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 33 5) Identifies the entity that will be responsible for long-term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs 6) Describes the mechanism for funding the long-term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs 7) Describes the following management of dry weather, first flush & storm flow discharges: Dry Weather Flows: The system shall be designed to divert all Pacific City dry weather flows into a structural filtration facility for treatment. Drainage areas A., B and the First Street watershed shall then be routed to the Atlanta Stormwater Pump Station (ASWPS) for discharge into Orange County Sanitation District's system First Flush: The drainage system shall be designed to treat the first flush (the volume of runoff produced from a 24-hour, 8e percentile storm event) with a structural filtration system. Following treatment, first flush flows from drainage Area B shall then be discharged into the First Street storm drain; first flush flows from Area A will then be routed to the ASWPS for discharge into the Huntington Beach Flood Control Channel. Storms Flows: Storm flows above the first flush from Area B will be discharged untreated into the First Street storm drain. Storm flows from Area A will be routed untreated to the ASWPS for discharge into the Huntington Beach Flood Control Channel. b. The applicant, at their expense, shall develop concept and design plans and costs estimated for a regional urban runoff treatment solution for the First Street watershed storm flows. Upon review and approval by the City, the applicant shall post a minimum 8-year bond for the equivalent of 1/7 of the capital construction cost into an Urban Runoff Treatment Trust Fund for the First Street watershed storm flows. Additionally, the applicant shall include in the Pacific City master CC&Rs that the project shall pay for 1/7 of the on -going annual operation and maintenance cost for this First Street regional treatment system. Upon implementation of this system the Pacific City Homeowners Association will be relieved of the obligation to maintain their on -site treatment system. 6. Prior to issuance of a precise grading permit, the following conditions shall be complied with: a. A Pedestrian Accessibility Plan for the entire project site, depicting on -site and off -site improvements, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Building & Safety and Public Works Departments and by a third party consultant. The applicant shall reimburse the City for the consultant's review. (B & PW) b. At no additional cost to the developer, the City reserves the right to increase the water main pipe sizes necessary to support the proposed development, for the benefit of the City. For example, the City will require that the 12-inch water pipeline in Huntington Street, as required by the approved hydraulic analysis, be increased to an 18-inch pipeline: The City will pay the incremental difference in materials cost between a 12-inch and an 18-inch pipeline. (PW) (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 34 c. The Village Green park area, pocket park, and entry corridor shall be designed and a detailed park improvement plan shall include typical neighborhood amenities including but not limited to tot lot play equipment, open turf play area and picnic tables and benches. All amenities must conform to current Consumer Product Safety Guidelines with certain amenities in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. The entry corridor to the park (from Pacific View Ave.) and all other corridors must incorporate an architectural feature that properly identifies the area as public space. The plan shall identify play equipment, architectural features, plant material, ground cover, sidewalks, lighting, etc, and shall be reviewed and approved by. the Community Services Commissiori, Community Services Director, and Public Works Director prior to installation. (CS/PW) d. The median in Atlanta Avenue shall be designed to provide a solid landscaped median barrier through the intersection of Atlanta'Avenue and Alabama Street, unless otherwise modified as determined by the Public Works Department and/or the Public Works Commission. e. The landscape plans shall incorporate native and/or drought -resistant plants consistent with what is permitted by . the City of Huntington Beach Design Guidelines and Downtown Specific Plan. 7. During grading activities, the following shall be adhered to: a. The project developer(s) shall require contractors to utilize alternative fuel construction equipment (i.e., compressed natural gas, liquid petroleum gas, and unleaded gasoline) and low -emission diesel construction equipment to the extent that the equipment is readily available in the Southern California area and cost effective. Contract specification language shall be reviewed by the City prior to issuance of a grading permit. b. All trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil onto or off the project site are to be covered. 8. The following conditions shall be completed prior to final building permit inspection, or occupancy, of the first residential unit: a. All existing Washingtonia robusta located along Pacific Coast Highway within the existing Caltrans right-of-way shall be relocated or replaced with an equivalent total trunk height either within the project, or relocated off -site as approved by the City Landscape Architect, (PW) b. The applicant shall satisfy the project's fair share contribution of 22 percent of the cost of the installation of a third northbound through lane on Pack Coast Highway at the Warner Avenue intersection. The County. of Orange and Caltrans will be responsible to complete this improvement. The costs will be based on estimates .prepared by the County of Orange for completion of the project or through a separate preliminary design and cost estimate prepared by the applicant to specifically address the requirements of this condition. (PW) c. _ The applicant shall satisfy the projects fair share contribution of 26 percent of the cost of the installation of a second.westbound right turn lane at the intersection on Seapoint Avenue at Pacific Coast Highway. The City shall ensure completion of this improvement by providing funds for the balance of the cost of the (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 35 improvement. The applicant shall prepare plans and obtain appropriate permits for the installation, including obtaining encroachment permits from Caltrans, as needed. Final determination of fair share contribution shall be based on the actual design and construction of the improvement. The City shall complete the improvement as a capital project. (PW) d. The applicant shall construct a new traffic signal at the intersection of First Street and Atlanta Avenue unless an alternative intersection design including traffic calming measures, which achieves the same objective as Mitigation Measure TR-3, is reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department and/or Public Works Commission. The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City to clearly indicate the applicant's responsibility to fund 57% of commitment to the cost of the improvement and the City's reimbursement to the applicant for the balance of the costs. (PW) e. The applicant shall construct a new traffic signal at the intersection of Huntington Street and Atlanta Avenue unless modified to include traffic calming measures such as a roundabout as reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department and/or Public Works Commission. The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City to clearly indicate the applicant's responsibility to fund 59% of the commitment to the cost of the improvement and the City's reimbursement to applicant for the balance of the costs. (PW) f. The Village Green park, pocket park, and corridor shall be improved prior to the occupancy of the first residential unit (other than the model homes). (PW) g. The applicant shall be responsible for 59% of the costs to improve street and sidewalk conditions on the south side of Atlanta Avenue within the existing right- of-way, between Huntington and Delaware Streets to improve pedestrian and vehicular safety conditions. 9. Submit detailed plans of the following for final review and approval by the Design Review Board: a. Elevations, colors and materials of the hotel. b. Final colors and materials of the commercial and residential buildings. c. Public Art Concept Plan. d. Landscape and hardscape plans on private and public property. e. Planned Sign Program. f. Furniture and utilities throughout the project 10. At least 500 parking spaces shall be available for self -parking (not valet) in the commercial parking structure. 11. Parking meters shall be provided at all on -street public parking locations within or fronting the project frontage. Meters shall be installed according to City requirements and standards and shall meet the specifications of the City. The City will be responsible for the collection of revenue and maintenance of all parking meters. A plan depicting the location and design of the parking meter layout shall be submitted for review and approval by the Community Services and Public Works Departments. (04p=0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 36 - 12. Hours of. construction and related activity shall be limited to between the following hours: Construction: Mon. -Fri. 7AM — 6PM; Clean Up/Securing Area 6PM-8PM Construction/ Clean -Up: Sat. 7AM — 5PM Pile Driving: Mon. -Fri. 8AM — 6PM Truck Hauling: Mon. -Fri. 8AM-5PM; early delivery trucks must park on -site (not on street) with engine not idling between 7AM-8AM 13. An employee entrance and parking plan during construction shall be submitted to the Planning Director for review and approval. The entrance and parking is to be located - in an area that minimizes impacts to surrounding residents. 14. The applicant and/or applicant's representative shall be responsible for ensuring the accuracy of all plans and information submitted to the City for review and approval. 15. The Departments of Planning, Public Works and Fire are responsible for compliance with all conditions of approval herein as noted after each condition. The Planning Director and Public Works Director shall be notified in writing if any changes to tract map are proposed as a result of the plan check process. Permits shall not be issued until the Planning Director and Public Works Director have reviewed and approved the proposed changes for conformance with the intent of the Planning Commission's action and the conditions herein. If the proposed changes are of a substantial nature, an amendment to the original entitlement reviewed by the Planning Commission's may be required pursuant to the HBZSO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL —PACIFIC CITY MASTER PLAN: 1. The Pacific City Master Plan received and dated July 10, 2003 shall be the approved conceptual plan or as modified herein. INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS CONDITION: The owner of the property which is the subject of this project and the project applicant if different from the property owner, and each of their heirs, successors and assigns, shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Huntington Beach and its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action or proceedings, liability cost, including attorney's fees and costs against the City or its agents, officers or employees, to attack, set aside, void or annul any approval of the City, including but not limited to any approval granted by the City Council, Planning Commission, or Design Review Board concerning this project. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and should cooperate fully in the defense thereof. C. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Ken Malone, Huntington Beach, thanked the Commission for their work on Public Hearing Item No. B=1 (Pacific City). (04pcm0505) PC Minutes May 5, 2004 Page 37 ADJOURNMENT: The Commissioner adjourned at 11:59 p.m. to the next regularly scheduled meeting of May 11, 2004, Huntington Beach Civic Center. APPR Ho Zelefsky, Secretary Ron Davis, Chair (04p=0505)