Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
File 1 of 4 - The Amstar Red Oak Project previously named Th
REDJbA February 25, 2009 Mr. Scott Hess Director of Planning City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 VIA E-MAIL: shess cusurfcit -hb.or Dear Scott: From this point forward, Red Oak Investments will refer to its Huntington Beach development as "The Amstar Red Oak Project" instead of"The Ripcurl Project." We request that you do the same. It's not an imaginative name, but it will serve until the building is done, at which point we will use some other consumer name for branding and advertising. In the meantime, this name change will prevent confusion between our mixed use development and the international surfing company. This is especially helpful as that company opens a "Rip Curl" store in Huntington Beach. As always, feel free to contact me with any questions about the project. Thank you, Andrew B. Nelson On behalf of: Amstar/Red Oak Huntington Beach, LLC CC: Mary Beth Broeren; Planning Manager mbroeren@surfcity-hb.org Herb Fauland, Planning Manager hfauland@surfcity-hb.org Tess Nguyen,Associate Planner tnguyen@surfcity-hb.org Linda Wine, Planning Department linda.wine@surfcity-hb.org Cathy Fikes, City Council Offices cfikes@surfeity-hb.org Joan Flynn,.City Clerk jflynn@surfcity-hb.org Members of the Planning Commission Members of the City Council 2101 Business Center Drive * Suite 230 * Irvine,CA 92612 Te1: 949.733.2000 * Fax:949.733.2005 Huntington Beach Independent has been adjudged a newspaper of general circulation in Huntington Beach and Orange County by Decree of the Superior Court of Orange County, State of California,under date of Aug.24, 1994,case A50479. PROOF OF PUBLICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) (fry OF NUNiINGTON BEAN ) SS. i LEGAL NOTICE ORDINANCE NO.3820 '� COUNTY OF ® Counccil on NGE ) Adopted Council on City � NOVEMBER 17,2008 ,AN ORDINANCE OF THE, I CITY OF HUNTINGTON' am the Citizen of the United States and a (BEACH AMENDING DIS-i I TRICT MAP 15(SECTION-I resident of the County aforesaid; I am over SAL DISTRICT MAP`14-5-) 11) TO REZONE, THE'' the age of eighteen years, and not a party ;R E.A L PROPERTY! to or interested in the below entitled matter. THEE SOU HEASTECOR I am a principal clerk of the HUNTINGTON STREET �NER OF D CENTER,, !STREET AND CENTER; BEACH INDEPENDENT a newspaper of !AVENUEFROMCGQ To! I MURWECIAL ATCD (MIXED USED- general circulation, printed and published in TRANSIT` CENTER DIS-' the City of Huntington Beach, AMEN County of 1AMEN> (ZONING MAP( DMENT No. 07-. State of California, and the �SYN Orange, SYNOPSIS: � ' ORDINANCE NO.'3820 attached Notice is a true and complete copy Z, O N I N G M A P )AMENDMENT NO. 07-,as . was printed and published on the 1001, AMENDS THE ZON- I ING DESIGNATION'FOR following date(s): THE REAL PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT (THE -SOUTHEAST. COR- NER O.F GOTHARD, STREET •AND CENTER, AVENUE FROM THE CUR-:! RENT CG (COMMERCIAL! .GENERAL) TO MU-TCD} (MIXED USE-TRANSITI CENTER DISTRICT) DES- IGNATION. November 27, 2008 bysthe'City CounOcil PT oft the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meet-!ing held November 17,! 2008 by the .following' roll call voter AYES: Hansen, Hardy,! Bohr, Cook, Coerper,� Green,Carchio NOES:None declare, under penalty of perjury, that the ABSTAIN:None ABSENT:None foregoing is true and correct. THE FULL TEXT OF THE'! ORDINANCE IS AVAIL- ABLE IN "THE CITY; CLERK'S OFFICE. ' ' This ordinance is effec-1 Live 30 days after Executed on December 2, 2008 adoption. CITY OF at Huntington Beach, California J HUNTINGTON BEACH '2000 MAIN STREET MUN71NGTON BEACH, CA 92648' 714-536-5227 f JOAN L.FLYNN, CI7Y CLERK Published Huntington s Signa e d Beach Independent No- vember 27,2008 114-166 Huntington Beach Independent has been adjudged a newspaper of general circulation in Huntington Beach and Orange County by Decree of the Superior Court of Orange County,State of California,under date of Aug.24, 1994,case A50479. PROOF OF PUBLICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF ORANGE - Cm OF I am the Citizen of the United States and a HUNTINGTON BEACH LEGAL OTI resident of the County aforesaid; I am over ORDINANCENO`E3819, the age of eighteen years, and not a party Ad°PCuncilton City NOVEMBER 17,2008 to or interested in the below entitled matter. "AN ORDINANCE OF THE am a principal clerk of the HUNTINGTON CITY H°AMENDINGGTHE BEACH INDEPENDENT, a newspaper of 'ZONING iHUNTINGA AND SUBDVI- SION ORDINANCE BY general circulation, printed and published in ADDING CHAPTER 218, , 'MIXED USE-TRANSIT the City of Huntington Beach, County Of ?CENTER DISTRICT (ZON- ING TEXT AMENDMENT Orange, State of California, and the NO.07-004) SYNOPSIS: attached Notice is a true and complete copy !ORDINANCE NO. 3819 - as was printed and published on the ;AMENDMENT NOE 07- 004„ ADDS CHAPTER following date(s): 218, ESTABLISHING THE MIXED.' USE-TRANSIT. CENTER DISTRICT ZON- 'ING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TO. THE HUNTINGTON, BEACH ,ZONING AND SUBDIVI- ;SION ORDINANCE. ,PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of !the City of Huntington et- November 27, 2008 ,Beach at a ovemr r 17, ling held November 17, 2008 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Hansen,. Hardy, Bohr, Cook, Coerper, Green,Carchio NOES:None ABSTAIN:None ABSENT:None THE FULL TEXT OF,.THE I declare, under penalty of perjury, that the ORDINANCE IS AVAIL- foregoing is true and correct. ABLE-AN THE— CLERK'S OFFICE. This ordinance is effec- tive 30 days after adoption. CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Executed on December 2, 2008 2o00 MAIN STREET,, at Huntington Beach, California HUNT CA 926 BEACH, CA 2648 714-536-5227 JOAN L.FLYNN, CITY CLERK a Published Huntington' ,Beach Independent No- vember 27,2008 114-165i SignatwW City ®f Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street - Huntington Beach, CA 92648 „,.. ._ OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK JOAN L. FLYNN CITY CLERK NOTICE OF ACTION ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 07-004 ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 07-004 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 07-003 ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO. 07-001 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 07-043 (THE RIPCURL PROJECT) November 18, 2008 Red Oak Huntington Beach, LLC Attn: Andrew Nelson and Alex Wong 2101 Business Center Drive #230 Irvine, CA 92612 APPLICANT: Andrew Nelson/Alex Wong, Amstar/Red Oak Huntington Beach, LLC REQUEST: APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF: 1) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 07-004: To analyze the potential environmental impacts associates with the implementation of the proposed project 2) ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 07-004: To amend the HBZSO by adding Chapter 218 that establishes the Mixed Use-Transit Center District zoning and development standards 3) GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 07-003: To amend the General Plan Land Use Designation from the current CG-F1-d (Commercial General-0.35 Max Floor Area Ratio—Design Overlay) to the proposed M-F7-d (Mixed Use-3.0 Max Floor Area Ratio—Design Overlay) designation 4) ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO. 07-001: To amend the Zoning designation from the current CG (Commercial General) to the proposed MU-TCD (Mixed Use-Transit Center District) designation Sister Cities: Anjo, Japan m Waitakere, New Zealand (Telephone:714-536-5227) 5) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 07-043 (THE RIPCURL): To develop and construct a mixed use residential and commercial development (approximately 382,700 sq. ft.) consisting of 440 residential units (including 11 live/work units), 10,000 sq. ft. of commercial uses, 705 parking spaces, outdoor amenities (pool and spa, fire pit and movie projection area), and indoor amenities (fitness center, business center, conference room, and clubhouse). The project would be six stories in height and consists of four levels of housing over three levels of parking. LOCATION: 7302-7400 Center Avenue, Huntington Beach, CA 92647 (southeast corner of Gothard Street and Center Avenue) PROJECT PLANNER: Tess Nguyen On Monday, November 10, 2008 a Public Hearing was held to consider an appeal filed by Councilmember Jill Hardy and Andrew Nelson, Red Oak Huntington Beach, LLC of the Huntington Beach Planning Commission's approval of Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 07-004, Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) No. 07-004, General Plan Amendment (GPA) No. 07-003, Zoning Map Amendment (ZMA) No. 07-001, Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 07-043, and CEQA Statement of Findings of Fact with a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the proposed Ripcurl Project located on a 3.8 acre site at the southeast corner of Gothard Street and Center Avenue. The following action was taken by the Huntington Beach City Council: Approved the Staff Recommended Action to: 1) Certify Environmental Impact Report No. 07-004 as adequate and complete in accordance with CEQA requirements by adopting Resolution No. 2008-66; and 2) Approved Zoning Text Amendment No. 07- 004 with findings for approval, and approved for introduction Ordinance No. 3819 with the following revisions: Visitor parking 1/5 units; minimum 75% of units with 60 sq. ft. balconies; up to 20% tandem parking for residential at half credit; Approved General Plan Amendment No. 07-003 by adopting Resolution No. 2008-67; Approved Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001 with findings for approval and approved for introduction Ordinance No. 3820; Approved Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043 with findings and conditions for approval to allow 385 residential units and 10,000 square feet of commercial uses; require a minimum of 50% of affordable units on-site; on-site affordable units may be moderate income and off-site affordable units shall be low income; a north/south public pedestrian/bicycle access on the site between Center Avenue and the southerly property line, with restricted access hours and, Approved CEQA Statement of Findings of Fact with a Statement of Overriding Considerations. Enclosed are the Findings for Approval for ZTA 07-004 and ZMA 07-001; Findings and Conditions of Approval for CUP 07-043; copies of Resolution Nos. 2008-66 and 2008-67; copies of Ordinance Nos. 3819 and 3820 approved for introduction; and, the Action Agenda from the November 10, 2008 meeting. If you have any questions, please contact Tess Nguyen, Associate Planner at (714) 374-1744. n L. Flynn, CMC y Clerk JF:pe c: Scott Hess, Director of Planning Mary Beth Broeren, Planning Manager Tess Nguyen, Associate Planner Jill Hardy, Councilmember Attachments: Findings for Approval —ZTA 07-004 and ZMA 07-001 Findings and Conditions for Approval - CUP 07-043 City Council Action Agenda for 11-10-08 Resolution Nos. 2008-66 and 2008-67 Ordinance Nos. 3819 and 3820 FINDINGS ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 07-004 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL —ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 07-004 : 1. Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004 amends the HBZSO by adding Chapter 218 that establishes the Mixed Use-Transit Center District zoning and development standards. The proposed change will be consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the City's General Plan because it fosters mixed use development that is optimally located near existing transit. 2. In the case of general land use provisions, the Zoning Text Amendment is consistent with the uses authorized in, and the standards prescribed for, the zoning district for which they are proposed. The proposed land uses identified in the Mixed Use- Transit Center District land use designation are consistent with the General Plan. 3. A community need is demonstrated for the change proposed. The proposed mixed use-transit center district zoning provides the standards necessary to develop a high quality of mixed use land uses complementing and enhancing surrounding land uses. The existing Commercial General Land Use and Zoning designations do not facilitate the development of mixed-use projects. The mixed use-transit center district land use designation allows for the development of a mixed-use project that produces an environment which is both attractive and sustainable by increasing housing options for diverse household types, promoting alternative modes of transportation, creating a local sense of place, reducing infrastructure and maintenance costs, and allowing for more efficient use of land resources. 4. The adoption of the Mixed Use-Transit Center District zoning is consistent with good zoning practice and was prepared utilizing a comprehensive approach, which included involving the public in numerous public meetings and reviewing the proposed development in terms of potential benefits of this type of development in the larger context of directing future growth. The adoption of this zoning design would implement the goals of smart growth and sustainable development. FINDINGS ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO. 07-001 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL —ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO. 07-001: 1. Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001 amends the existing zoning designation by changing the CG (Commercial General) zoning designation on the subject site to MU-TCD (Mixed Use-Transit Center District). The adoption of this amendment will establish the Mixed Use-Transit Center District zoning and development standards for the property and will be consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the City's General Plan as well as the proposed General Plan Amendment No. 07-003. The proposed Mixed Use-Transit Center District zoning is consistent with the goals and policies of the Land Use Element of the General Plan by allowing for the creation of a development compatible with, and sensitive to the existing land uses in the project area and adjoining properties. 2. In the case of general land use provisions, the Zoning Map Amendment is consistent with the uses authorized in, and the standards prescribed for, the zoning district for which they are proposed. The proposed land uses identified in the Mixed Use- Transit Center District land use designation is consistent with the General Plan as well as the proposed General Plan Amendment No. 07-003. 3. A community need is demonstrated for the change proposed. The proposed mixed use-transit center district zoning provides the standards necessary to develop a high quality of mixed use land uses complementing and enhancing surrounding land uses. The existing Commercial General Land Use and Zoning designations do not facilitate the development of mixed-use projects. The mixed use-transit center district land use designation allows for the development of a mixed-use project that produces an environment which is both attractive and sustainable by increasing housing options for diverse household types, promoting alternative modes of transportation, creating a local sense of place, reducing infrastructure and maintenance costs, and allowing for more efficient use of land resources. 4. The adoption of the Mixed Use-Transit Center District zoning is consistent with good zoning practice and was prepared utilizing a comprehensive approach, which included involving the public in numerous public meetings and reviewing the proposed development in terms of potential benefits of this type of development in the larger context of directing future growth. The adoption of this zoning design would implement the goals of smart growth and sustainable development. (STAFF RECOMMENDATION) FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. CONDITIONAL. USE PERMIT NO. 07-043 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL. - CONDITIONAL. USE PERMIT NO. 07-043: 1. Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043 for the construction of 385 residential units and 10,000 sq. ft_ of commercial/retail space 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 proposed transit-oriented development would produce an environment which is both attractive and sustainable by increasing housing options, promoting alternative modes of transportation, and creating a local sense of place. The adjacency to a variety of commercial, entertainment, educational, and transportation uses allows the project to have a more compact and higher density development while minimizing adverse environmental effects. The mix of land uses contemplated by the proposed project as well as those already existing in the vicinity would create a dynamic environment where people can live, work, and play within a walking distance. The population increase would enhance the economic viability of the area by supplying a customer base for the area businesses. In addition, the architectural treatment of the buildings includes numerous features that contribute to an attractive design and convey a high quality visual image and character of the development. The provision of centrally located courtyards and open space amenities add to the appeal of the development. Given these project features, the project would fit within the surrounding neighborhood. 2. The conditional use permit will be compatible with surrounding uses and anticipated land uses because the proposed mixed-use project is complementary to existing uses in the vicinity. The area in proximity to the project site is targeted for revitalization efforts, incorporating more intense mixed use development. Because of its unique location, the project will accommodate the proposed growth that is compatible with surrounding uses. The project is designed to convey a high quality visual image and attractive pedestrian atmosphere to harmonize with developments in the vicinity. Furthermore, compliance with the mitigation measures of Environmental Impact Report No. 05-01 and code provisions will ensure that the project will be compatible with other area developments. 3. The proposed mixed use project will comply with the provisions of the base district and other applicable provisions in the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located. The proposed development will comply with all code provisions, including setbacks, building height, open space, parking, and building design standards. Compliance with the development standards will ensure a high quality development that would be compatible with the surrounding land uses. 4. The granting of the conditional use permit will not adversely affect the General Plan. It is consistent with the proposed Land Use Element designation of Mixed Use on the subject property. In addition, it is consistent with the following goals and policies of the General Plan: Page 1 of 8 A. Circulation Element Objective CE 3.2: Encourage new development that promotes and expands the use of transit services. Policy CE 2.1.: Comply with City's performance standards for acceptable levels of service. Policy CE 6.1.6: Maintain existing pedestrian facilities and require new development to provide pedestrian walkways and bicycle routes between developments, schools, and public facilities. B. Growth Management Element Policy GM 3.1.8: Promote traffic reduction strategies including alternate travel modes, alternate work hours, and a decrease of vehicle trips throughout the city. C. Housing Element Policy H 2.2: Facilitate the development of mixed-use projects in appropriate commercial areas, including stand-alone residential development (horizontal mixed-use) and housing above ground floor commercial uses (vertical mixed-use). Establish mixed use zoning regulations. Policy H 3.1: Encourage the production of housing that meets all economic segments of the community, including lower, moderate, and upper income households, to maintain a balanced community. Goal H 5: Provide equal housing opportunity. D. Land Use Element Goal LU 4: Achieve and maintain high quality architecture, landscape, and public open spaces in the City. Goal LU 4.2.4: Require that all development be designed to provide adequate space for access, parking, supporting functions, open space, and other pertinent elements. Goal LU 7: Achieve a diversity of land uses that sustain the City's economic viability, while maintaining the City's environmental resources and scale and character. Goal LU 8: Achieve a pattern of land uses that preserves, enhances, and establishes a distinct identity for the 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 principles discussed below: b. Vary uses and densities along the City's extended commercial corridors, such as Beach Boulevard. Page 2 of 8 c. Increase diversification of community and local commercial nodes to serve adjacent residential neighborhoods. f. Site development to capitalize upon potential long-term transit improvements. Goal LU 9: Achieve the development of a range of housing units that provides for the diverse economic, physical, and social needs of existing and future residents of Huntington Beach. Policy LU 9.1.4: Require that recreational and open space amenities be incorporated in new multi- family developments and that they be accessible to and of sufficient size to be usable by all residents. Goal LU 10: Achieve the development of a range of commercial uses. Goal LU I1: Achieve the development of projects that enable residents to live in.proximity to their jobs, commercial services, and entertainment, and reduce the need for automobile use. Policy LU 11.1.2: Limit commercial uses in mixed-use development projects to those uses that are compatible with the residences. Policy LU 11.1.4: Require the incorporation of adequate onsite open space and recreational facilities to serve the needs of the residents in mixed-use development projects. Policy LU ILL5: Require that mixed-use developments be designed to mitigate potential conflicts between the commercial and residential uses, considering such issues as noise, lighting, security, and truck and automobile access. Policy LU 11.1.6: Require that the ground floor of structures that horizontally integrate housing with commercial uses locate commercial uses along the street frontage (housing may be located to the rear and/or on upper floors). Policy LU 11.1. 7: Require that mixed-use development projects be designed to achieve a consistent and high quality character, including the consideration of the: a. Visual and physical integration among the commercial and residential uses (Plates LU-3 and LU-4); b. Architectural treatment of building elevations to convey the visual character of multiple building volumes and individual storefronts and residential units. E. Noise Element Policy N 1.3.10: Require that mechanical equipment, such as air conditioning units or pool equipment, comply with the City's Noise Ordinance and Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. Policy N 1.5.1: Require that commercial and residential mixed-use structures minimize the transfer or transmission of noise and vibration from the commercial land use to the residential land use. The design measures may include: (1) the use of materials which mitigate sound transmission; or (2) the configuration of interior spaces to minimize sound amplification and transmission. Page 3 of 8 F. Urban Design Element Goal UD 1.1: Enhance the visual image of the City of Huntington Beach G. Utilities Element Obiective U 5.1: Ensure that adequate natural gas, telecommunication, and electrical systems are provided. The proposed amendments to the General Plan and Zoning land use designations are a mechanism to achieve the goals of smart growth and sustainable development. The amendments would allow for a mixed use, transit-oriented, high density development thereby increasing housing options for diverse household types, promoting alternative modes of transportation, creating a local sense of place, reducing infrastructure and maintenance costs, and allowing for more efficient use of land resources. The area has a variety of complementary uses that are critical to any vibrant community such as commercial and entertainment uses, employment centers, a transit hub, and a school. Because of its location and unique features, the site would be appropriate in accommodating an infill development that is more compact in design and higher in density and compatible with the surrounding area. In doing so, multiple sustainable development principles are achieved, resulting in the social and economic well-being of the area. The benefits of mixed use developments include creating better places to live, work, and play, reducing dependence on the automobile, and lessening pollution and environmental degradation. Mixed use development is about widening the choices on where to live and how to travel, rejuvenating urban neighborhoods, bringing more people into everyday social interactions, and ensuring that communities continue to thrive. The proposed project would be a mixed-use, transit-oriented, and high-density development that offers a wide range of housing opportunities and options, accommodating different age groups, income levels, and household types. The project is required to meet the City's affordable housing ordinance obligations providing the equivalent of 10 percent of the units (on-site and/or off-site) as affordable. In addition, the project provides a concentration of living, shopping, entertainment, educational, and employment opportunities within walking distance of the Golden West Transportation Center. This development promotes the use of transit services as an alternative to reliance on the automobile as the primary mode of transportation. Because the project is located in close proximity to different activities and uses, it provides opportunities and convenience for many households to use alternate travel modes such as walking and biking to complete their daily routines and run errands. The structures of the proposed project are designed to convey a high quality visual image and character and ensure compatibility of residential and commercial uses. The project is designed with retail storefronts on the ground level and residential units above, incorporating design elements, building materials, and colors to differentiate and complement the residential and commercial components of the project. The proposed mix of retail and residential uses at the project site, along with high quality design and attractive pedestrian atmosphere, would activate the urban environment and revitalize community life. Page 4 of 8 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. - CONDITIONAL, USE PERMIT NO. 07-043: 1. The site plan, floor plans, elevations, and other site plan exhibits received and dated August 6, 2008 shall be the conceptually approved design with the following modifications. a. The project shall be revised to reduce the number of residential units from 440 units to 3 85 units and retain the 10,000 sq. ft. of commercial/retail space. b. The number of onsite parking spaces shall be increased to comply with the minimum parking requirements of the MU-TCD development standards. c. The minimum open space areas shall be provided to comply with the open space requirements of the MU-TCD development standards. d. The minimum private storage space shall be provided to comply with the private storage space requirements of the MU-TCD development standards. e. Architectural projections and recesses shall be provided on all building elevations except for the building elevations that face each other (i.e. the east elevation of the west building and west elevation of the east building). f. The height of parapet walls shall be reduced to two feet and maintain the score-line design. g. A walkability/pedestrian access plan within the project site and to adjacent sites and landscape plans shall be submitted for Design Review Board approval. The plan shall include a north/south pedestrian/bicycle access path extending from Center Avenue to the southerly property line between the two buildings. The access path shall be open to the public but may have restricted hours such as being closed in the evening/early morning hours subject to review and approval by the Planning Department. h. The recreation room shall be designed to have windows looking out onto the courtyard and the elevator waiting area to provide more visibility. (PD) 2. Prior to receiving a precise grading and building permit, the following shall be submitted and approved: a. The applicant shall prepare a site Grading and Drainage Plan containing the recommendations of the final Soils and Geotechnical Reports analysis for temporary and permanent groundwater dewatering as well as for surface drainage. (PW) b. A Shoring Plan prepared by a Civil or Structural Engineer shall be submitted to the Public Works Department (for reference only) with first submittal of the Precise Grading Plan. (PW) 3. During grading and construction, the following shall be completed: Page 5 of 8 a. Raker braces per the preliminary Geotechnical Report (dated December 12, 2006) shall be used for lateral support of the temporary shoring during the construction phase of the project as deemed necessary by the Public Works Director. (PW) b. Tie-back anchors will not be allowed in the public right-of-way (under Gothard Street or Center Avenue) or under any adjacent private property (Levitz and Southern California Edison) as deemed necessary by the Public Works Director. (PW) 4. Prior to issuance of building permits, the following shall be approved: a. The Affordable Housing Agreement shall be approved and recorded by the City prior to issuance of building permits. The Agreement shall provide for a minimum of 50 percent of the affordable housing requirement on-site. On-site affordable units may be rented at moderate income levels; any off-site affordable units shall be at low income levels, pursuant to the HBZSO, and the method and location of off-site compliance shall be set forth in the Agreement. b. The subject property shall provide an irrevocable offer to dedicate a reciprocal accessway between the subject site and adjacent southerly property. The design, location and width of the accessway shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department and Public Works Department. The accessway design shall consist of vehicular access, pedestrian access, bicycle access, and landscaping. The pedestrian and bicycle access shall be separated from the vehicular access and shall be attractively landscaped. The subject property owner shall be responsible for making necessary improvements to implement the reciprocal accessway. The legal instrument shall be submitted to the Planning Department a minimum of 30 days prior to building permit issuance. The document shall be approved by the Planning Department and the City Attorney as to form and content and, when approved, shall be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder prior to final building permit approval. A copy of the recorded document shall be filed with the Planning Department for inclusion in the entitlement file prior to final building permit approval. The recorded agreement shall remain in effect in perpetuity, except as modified or rescinded pursuant to the expressed written approval of the City of Huntington Beach. c. A public art element, approved by the Design Review Board, Director of Planning, and Director of Huntington Beach Art Center, shall be designated on the plans. Public Art shall be innovative, original, and of artistic excellence; appropriate to the design of the project; and reflective of the community's cultural identity(ecology, history, or society). 5. Prior to final inspection, the following shall be completed: a. The project developer shall construct an underground storm drain pipe along the east side of Gothard Street from Center Avenue to Edinger Avenue to connect to the existing, underground Edinger Avenue storm drain pipe as deemed necessary based on a Final Hydrology and Hydraulics Report. As deemed necessary, the new Gothard Street, underground storm drain facility sizing and design shall be targeted to convey the highest storm event exceedance flow rates along Gothard Street at full build-out of the General Plan, including contributions from any permanent groundwater dewatering system. The proposed Page 6 of 8 project onsite storm drainage system shall be designed to convey all water quality treated flow directly into the new underground storm drain pipe along Gothard Street, as deerned necessary. (PW) b. An antenna shall be installed within the underground parking structure to relay Police and Fire Department radio transmissions. (PD) c. Lighting in the parking structure shall be placed over and between parking stalls. (PD) d. Surveillance cameras shall be installed at the elevator areas, stairwells, and main residential lobby and recorded 24 hours a day, every day. (PD) e. Elevators and stairwells shall be adequately lighted. (PD) f. Products shall be attached to areas vulnerable to skateboarding opportunities near the northwest side of the building in order to prevent noise and damage to property. (PD) 6. The City reserves the right to require the property owner to dedicate a portion of the private onsite fire water system to become a future public water system that will be owned and maintained by the City; and shall require the property owner to dedicate a minimum ten (10) feet water utility easement (five feet on either side of the water pipeline and appurtenances) for any portion of the private onsite fire water system that will become public and any new water pipelines/facilities constructed within the subject property that will be part of the public water system. (PW) 7. The City reserves the right to require the property owner to enter into a Special Utility Easement Agreement (SUEA) with the City for any portion of the private on-site fire water system that will be converted to a public water system and any new water pipelines/facilities constructed within the subject property that will be part of the public water system. (PW) 8. To be consistent with the City's condition to convert a portion of the private onsite fire water system to a future public water system, backflow protection devices are required on all individual water service connections (domestic, irrigation and fire) served from the private on-site domestic and fire water pipelines. (PW) 9. The project shall comply with all mitigation measures adopted in conjunction with Environmental Impact Report No. 07-004. 10. The Development Services Departments (Building & Safety, Fire, Planning and Public Works) shall be responsible for ensuring compliance with all applicable code requirements and conditions of approval. The Director of Planning may approve minor amendments to plans and/or conditions of approval as appropriate based on changed circumstances, new information or other relevant factors. Any proposed plan/project revisions shall be called out on the plan sets submitted for building permits. Permits shall not be issued until the Development Services Departments have reviewed and approved the proposed changes for conformance with the intent of the City Council's action. If the proposed changes are of a substantial nature, an amendment to the original entitlement reviewed by the City Council may be required pursuant to the provisions of HBZSO Section 241.18. Page 7 of 8 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. Page 8of8 A C TION AGENDA MAYOR Monday, November 10, 2008 AND CITY COUNCIL d tJ,,949. DEBBIE COOK CITY COUNCIUREDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Mayor CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH KEITH BOHR CATHY GREEN Mayor Pro Tern Councilmember 1909 woos 6:00 PM - Special Meeting JOE CARCHIO DON HANSEN Council Chambers - 2000 Main Street Councilmember Councilmember Huntington Beach, CA 92648 httP://www.surfcity-hb.orcl GIL COERPER JILL HARDY Councilmember Councilmember CALL TO ORDER— 6:03 p.m. ROLL CALL Hansen, Hardy, Bohr, Cook, Coerper, Green, Carchio— AU Present ANNOUNCEMENT OF LATE COMMUNICATION PUBLIC COMMENTS PERTAINING TO SPECIAL MEETING ITEM(S) (3 Minute Time Limit) — None. PUBLIC HEARING — 40 Speakers 1. (City Council) Public Hearing Held to Consider an Appeal of the Planning Commission's Approval of Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 07-004, Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) No. 07-004, General Plan Amendment (GPA) No. 07-003, Zoning Map Amendment (ZMA) No. 07-001, Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 07-043, and CEQA Statement of Findings of Fact with a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Ripcurl Project located on a 3.8 acre site at the southeast corner of Gothard Street and Center Avenue. Planning Commission ReGommended AGtion! Council/Agency Action Agenda—Monday, November 10, 2008 Page 1 of 1 b) Approve Zoning Text Amendment No. 07 004 with findings fE)r appFeval Gity of Huntington Reanh Amending the H In4iR&R Beach Zoning-and DiStFi^rtGt (Ze a+ng T-e)Arnelldm ," G} Approve GeneFal Plan Amendmellt No. 07 003 by adopting Resolution No. 2008m67, 11 A Reselutoon of the Gity GGURGil of the City of Huntingten .11 , d) AppFeve Zening Map Amendment No. 07 001 with findings for approval 15 An 04nanGe E)f the Map 14_F 1 1) to Rezone the Real Property Generally 1 OGated at the (Zoning Map Amefla„meR ;" d e) Approve Gend4ienal Use Permit No. 07 043 with findings and GORditions oF appFeval to allow 330 residential units and 10,000 square fee Gommernial uses; and , f� Approve GF=QA Statement ef Findings of FaGt with a StatemeRt Of Staff Recommended Action: a) Certify Environmental Impact Report No. 07-004 as adequate and complete in accordance with CEQA requirements by adopting Resolution No. 2008-66, "Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California, Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2008011069) for the Ripcurl Project." Approved 7-0 b) Approve Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004 with findings for approval and approve for introduction Ordinance No. 3819, "An Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Amending the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance by Adding Chapter 218, Mixed Use-Transit Center District (Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004);" and, c) Approve General Plan Amendment No. 07-003 by adopting Resolution No. 2008-67, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Approving General Plan Amendment No. 07-003;" and, Council/Agency Action Agenda—Monday, November 10, 2008 Page 2 of 2 d) Approve Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001 with findings for approval and approve for introduction Ordinance No. 3820, "An Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Amending District Map 15 (Sectional District Map 14-5-11) to Rezone the Real Property Generally Located at the Southeast Corner of Gothard Street and Center Avenue from CG (Commercial General) to MU-TCD (Mixed Use-Transit Center District) (Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001);" and, e) Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043 with findings and suggested conditions or approval to allow 385 residential units and 10,000 square feet of commercial uses; and, f) Approve CEQA Statement of Findings of Fact with a Statement of Overriding Considerations. Items b-f approved 6-1 (Hardy-No) with revisions: Visitor parking 1/5 units; affordable housing-minimum 50% onsite (moderate), with no more than 50% offsite (low), to provide an incentive to build onsite; 75% of units w/60 sq. ft. balconies; 20% tandem parking for residential @ half credit;provide north/south public access between two buildings on project site, with restricted access hours. COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS (Not Agendized) ADJOURNMENT Council/Agency adjournment at 11.48 p.m. to Monday, November 17, 2008, at 4:00 PM in Room B-8, Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California. INTERNET ACCESS TO CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA AND STAFF REPORT MATERIAL IS AVAILABLE PRIOR TO CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS AT http://Www.surfcity-hb.org Council/Agency Action Agenda—Monday, November 10, 2008 Page 3 of 3 RESOLUTION NO. 2008-66 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH,CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH#2008011069) FOR THE RIPCURL PROTECT WHEREAS, Environmental Impact Report No. 07-004, State Clearinghouse # 2008011069, ("EIR") was prepared by the City of Huntington Beach ("City") to address the environmental implications of The Ripcurl Project (the "Project"). I. On January 18, 2008, a Notice of Preparation/Initial Study for the Project was prepared and distributed to the State Clearinghouse, other responsible agencies, trustee agencies and interested parties_ 2. After obtaining comments received in response to the Notice of Preparation, and comments received at the public scoping meeting held on February 7, 2008, the City completed preparation of the Draft EIR and filed a Notice of Completion with the State Clearinghouse on July 8, 2008. 3_ The Draft EIR was circulated for public review and comment from July 8, 2008 to August 21, 2008 and was available for review at several locations including City Hall, the Huntington Beach Public Library, and the City's website;and Public comments have been received on the Draft FIR, and responses to those comments have been prepared and provided to the City Council as a section within a separately bound document entitled "Final Environmental Impact Report The Ripcurl Project" (the 'Responses to Comments"), dated September 2008; and Public Resources Code 21092.5(a) requires that the City of Huntington Beach provide a written proposed response to any public agency that commented on the Environmental impact Report, and the Response to Comments included in the Final Environmental Impact Report satisfies this provision; and The City Council held a public meeting on the FIR on November 10, 2008, and received and considered public testimony. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, as follows: SECTION I_ Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15132, the Final FIR for the Project is comprised of the Draft FIR and Appendices, the comments received on the Draft FIR, the Responses to Comments (including a list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the Draft EIR), the Text Changes to the Draft FIR (bound together with the Responses to Comments) and all Planning Department Staff Reports to the City Council, including all minutes, transcripts, attachments and 08-1767.004/-17701 Iles. No- 2008-& references. All of the above information has been and will be on file with the City of Huntington Beach Department of Planning, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648. SECTION 2. The City Council finds and certifies that the Final EIR is complete and adequate in that it has identified all significant environmental effects of the Project and that there are no known potential environmental impacts not addressed in the Final EIR. SECTION 3. The City Council finds that all significant effects of the Project are set forth in the Final EIR_ SECTION 4_ The City Council finds that although the Final EIR identifies certain significant environmental effects that will result if the Project is approved, all significant effects which can feasibly be mitigated or avoided have been mitigated or avoided by the incorporation of Project design features, standard conditions and requirements, and by the imposition of mitigation measures on the approved Project. All mitigation measures are included in the "Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Checklist" (also referred to as the "Mitigation Monitoring Program") attached as Exhibit"A" to this Resolution and incorporated herein by this reference_ SECTION 5_ The City Council finds that the Final EIR has described reasonable alternatives to the Project that could feasibly obtain the basic objectives of the Project (including the "No Project" Alternative), even when these alternatives might impede the attainment of Project objectives and might be more costly_ Further, the City Council finds that a good faith effort was made to incorporate alternatives in the preparation of the Draft EIR and that a reasonable range of alternatives was considered in the review process of the Final EIR and ultimate decisions on the Project_ SECTION 6. The City Council finds that no "substantial evidence" (as that term is defined pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15384) has been presented which would call into question the facts and conclusions in the EIR_ SECTION 7. The City Council finds that no "significant new information" (as that term is defined pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5) has been added to the EIR after circulation of the Draft EIR_ The City Council finds that the minor refinements that have been made in the Project as a result of clarifications in the mitigation measures do not amount to significant new information concerning the Project, nor has any significant new information concerning the Project become known to the City Council through the public hearings held on the Project, or through the comments on the Draft EIR and Responses to Comments_ SECTION 8. The City Council finds that the Mitigation Monitoring Program establishes a mechanism and procedures for implementing and verifying the mitigations pursuant to Public Resources Code 21081.6 and hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Res® No- 2008-6 Program. The mitigation measures shall be incorporated into the Project prior to or concurrent with Project implementation as defined in each mitigation measure. SECTION 9. The City Council finds that the Final EIR reflects the independent review and judgment of the City of Huntington Beach City Council, that the Final EIR was presented to the City Council, and that the City Council reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR prior to approving General Plan Amendment No. 07-003, Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001, Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004, and Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043. SECTION 10. The City Council finds that the Final EIR serves as adequate and appropriate environmental documentation for the Project. The City Council certifies that the Final EIR prepared for the Project is complete, and that it has been prepared in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and CEQA Guidelines. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED, this 10th day of November, 2008 by the following roll call vote: Mayor REVIEW D APPROVED: APPROVED AS TO FORM: City dm' istrator City Attorney 1NITIA W D AND APPROVED: Planning Director ATTACHMENT Exhibit A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 3 Res. N®_ 2008-6 EXHIBIT "A" City of Huntington Beach T h R* ri Prwo%jluct Final Environmental Impact Report- S C H No. 200801 10 69 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Prepared for City of Huntington,Beach Planning Department 2000 Main Street, Third Floor Huntington Beach, California 92648 Prepared by PBSU 12301 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 430 Los Angeles, California 90025 September 2008 Res. No_ 2008-64 ® ® ® ® ® ® Fir® ® ® Aa INTRODUCTION The Final Environmental Impact Report for The Ripcurl Project (State Clearinghouse #20080 1 1 069) identified mitigation measures to reduce the adverse effects of the project in the areas of aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, noise, public services, and transportation/traffic- The California. Environmental' Quality Act (CEQA) requires that agencies, adopting environmental impact reports ascertain that feasible mitigation measures are implemented, subsequent to project approval. Specifically, the lead or responsible agency must adopt a reporting or monitoring program for mitigation measures incorporated into a project or imposed as conditions of approval. The program must be designed to ensure compliance during applicable project timing, e.g. design, construction, or operation (Public Resource Code §21081.6). Code Requirements (CRs) that were identified in the Draft EIR are required to be implemented as a result of existing City code and are not considered mitigation measures. Therefore, CRs would be implemented for The Ripcurl Project but these do not require monitoring activity, and are not included in this Mitigation Monitoring and Reportuig Program (MMRP). The 1vlMRP shall be used by the City of Huntington Beach staff responsible for ensuring compliance with mitigation measures associated with The Ripcurl Project. Monitoring shall consist of recieu of appropriate documentation, such as plans or reports prepared by the parry responsible for implementation or by field observation of the mitigation measure during implementation. The following table identifies die ttutigaaou measures by resource area. The table also pros ides the specific mitigation monitoring requirements, including i nplenientation documentation, rnoiutvri ng activity, timing and tesponsible monitoring party_ Verification of compliance with each measure is to be indicated by signature of the mitigation nionitor, together with date of verification. The Project Applicant and the Applicant's Contractor shall be responsible for Implementan ni of all mitigation measures, unless otherwise noted In tlne table_ City of Huntington Beach The Ripcurl Project Mitigation-Monitoring o • Rep.orting Program Mi#9qtiOnMo,0Wo • • • • • • • • O ImoomenfYrfion Responsible Compliance Mitigotion Measure __ DocumenfaMOn Monfforin A 7Timfn Monlfor Ven?ScaHonSignafure Date Aesthetics MM4,1.1 To the extent feasible, the Applicant shall use non- Project building plans Review and Plan check prior Planning reflective fapade treatments, such as matte paint or glass approve building to issuance of coatings. Prior to issuance of building permits for the proposed plans for inclusion building permit project, the Applicant shall indicate provision of these materials of features on the building plans. Air Quality MM4,2.1 During construction, operators of any gas or diesel Contract language and Review and Plan check prior Planning fueled equipment, including vehicles, shall be encouraged to turn notes on grading and approve contract to issuance of a off equipment if not in use or left idle for more than five minutes. building plans specifications, grading permit grading and building plans for Perform periodic inclusion field check during construction to ensure compliance MM4,2.2 The Applicant shall require by contract specifications Contract language and Review and Plan check prior Planning that the architectural coating (paint and primer) products used notes on building plans approve contract to issuance of a would have a low VOC rating Contract specifications shall be specifications and building permit included in the proposed project construction documents which building plans for shall be reviewed by the City prior to issuance of a building j inclusion permit Biologi cal Resources _ Biolog1 Nesting habitat for protected or sensitive avian i Developer shall submit Review schedule Plan check prior Planning species. construction schedule and field survey to issuance of a — 1 Vegetation removal and construction shall occur between (including grading report, and as grading permit September 1 and January 31 whenever feasible 1 activities) as evidence necessary, review 2 Prior to any construction or vegetation removal between of construction overlap and approve plans February 15 and August 31, a nesting survey shall be with breeding season. indicating conducted by a qualified biologist of all habitats within If construction occurs construction limits 500 feet of the construction area. Surveys shall be during relevant During conducted no less than 14 days and no more than 30 days breeding developer Perform periodic construction Planning y prior to commencement of construction activities and surveys snall present a survey field check to e N O 2 City of Huntington Beach a0 e, s e e e e e e e e e a o a e 0 0 0 p O O A p 0 0dih O O A O Implementation Responsible Compliance _ Mih'gah'on Measure DocumentcHon Moni Mrig Acfiv' r1ming Monitor VerMcation S nature Date will be conducted in accordance CDFG protocol as report(prepared by a ensure applicabe !,`no active nests are iden(ifed on or avitnin consultant approved by compliance j 500 feet cf the construction s�te no further mit gatlon s the City) to the City recessar, copy of the survey shah be pnor to issuance of a s�bm!ttec t: tre City of H,,ntington Bean, If an active nest grading permit If nests of a MDT speC'!es is dent�fied cnsite ,pet are found developer estaeijshec ;'rreshoidsi a 250_-fool sl-e!l be sna i submit plans rTnalntalne(" ce meen the nest nd ccns:., c,n aC?Ivl'4 T'iis deniify!ng nest bu"er car _� educed cns.;ltat�c. „ tr ODF�ana' ocations and Iinrits of i uS-4VS construction actmties Completion of the nesting nycie sna i be cetern,,irec o�, j quaff ed or.,~olog�st cr bi0!o;lst Cultural Resources MM4.4.1 The Applicant shall arrange for a qualified professional Proof of retention of Verify retention of Plan check prior Planning archaeological and paleontological monitor to be present during archaeological and qualified monitors to issuance of all project-related ground-disturbing activities. In addition, all paleontological monitor grading permit construction personnel shall be informed of the need to stop work on the project site in the event of a potential find, until a Throughout qualified archaeologist or paleontologist has been provided the periodic field ground-disturbing Planning opportunity to assess the significance of the find and Implement check to ensure activities appropriate measures to protect or scientifically remove the find. monitors are Construction personnel wi'I also be informed that unauthorized present colleclion of cultural resources is prohibited N The Ripcurl Project Mitigation monitoring and Reporting Program 3 e a e e e e s a - e e a e a e A o Anvo Ar fino on'® A A A A o 0 Implementation Responsible Compliance _ Mr}igafion Measure _ J Documentation Mon;fon'ng AcIfAly Mon&r Verficafion S nafwe Date MM4.4.2 t` archaeolcg�cai or paleonrolog,cal resources are Notes on grading plans a Review and Plan check prior Planning discovered during ground-disturbing actv!nes alp construction l approve grading to issuance of activities within within 50 feet of the find shall cease until the plans for inclusion grading permit archaeolcg�st palecntoleg)si evaivaies the s,ignificance of the resource In the absence of a determination all arcnaeological i Throughout and paleontolegicai resources shall oe considered significant If : Research design and Review and ground-disturbing Peer review the resource is determined ic be significant, ine archaeologist or recovery plan, if approve research activities by three paleontologist as appropriate shall prepare a researcn design required design and County- , or recovery o` the resources in consultation rvith the State Office of Historic Preserva:+cn ,not saiisfies the requirements of � recover Y plan � certified Sectcn 2108? 2 o CEQ'4 The archaeclogist or professionals shali complete a report of the and `IIncwgs and shall j s, nmi; the recce for peer revev, c,p i"roe Cc„nay certrfied archaeologists cr paleontologists, as appropriate _�UCn approval o`the report the _-!ty shal'i submit the report tc ine Sou!n Central Coastal lnformai,on Censer ai Cal:fcrma Slate v;,,vers�ty, ullerton, and �.eep the report on file at me City of H�_,nt�ngton j MM4.4-•3 In the event or the discovery cf a burial human bone, Notes on grao�ng plans Review and Plan check prior Orange or suspected numan bone all excavation or cradma in the approve grading to issuance of County — — v cinity of the find shall halt immediately the area of the ?ind shall plans for Inclusion grading permit Coroner be protected, and the Applicant shah mmedlately notify the City & Planning and the Orange County Coroner cf the find and comply with the ��� Throughout ,orovsjons of P R C. Section 5097 If the human remains are ground-disturbing determined to ce prehistoric, the Coroner w notify the NAHC activities which will determjre anc notify a Most 1 Kely Descendent (MLD' The MLD shall complete the inspect:cn of the site 24 hours j i of notification, acd may recommend sc enihfc removal anc non- f destructive anaivs:s of human remar", and items associated with Native American eunals ---- ------ -- --- --- -- - ---� Geology and Soils MM4,5.1 The grading plan prepared for the proposed project I Notes on grading plan Review and Plan check prior Public Works shall contain the recommendations of the final soHs and and building plans approve grading to issuance of a geotechnical report. These recommendations shall be I and building plans grading permit implemented in the design of the project, including but not limited for inclusion of N 4 City of Huntington Beach Mifigpition JWonitori!jq and keportin• •• e Mitil o ationi Monitoring • • Reporting PrQgraM, lmplementaflon Responsible Compliance NINgah'on Measure Documentation Moni mli A Tmin Monitor Veritrcafi'on S' nahxe Date to measures associated will s!te preparaGcn, `ll placement, final soils and temporary shorn- and permanent deviatering, groundwater geotechnical Building and - — seismic des;gn features excavation stability founaaticns sal ! recommendations Safety stab�l�zahor es!aolsnmen, c' deep foundations concrete slabs I I and pavements surface drainage _ement :ype and corrosion measures erase control, shorinq a,nc internal ;urac:,p and plan review Hazardous Materials MM4.6.1 In the event that previously unknown or unidentified Risk Management Plan Review and Plan check prior Fire soil and/or groundwater contamination that could present a threat & Site Health and approve any to issuance of to human health or the environment is encountered during Safety Plan grading plans for any grading construction in the project area, construction activities in the inclusion permit immediate vicinity of the contamination shall cease immediately If contamination is encountered, a Risk Management Plan shall be prepared and implemented that (1) identifies the contaminants of concern and the potential risk each contaminant would pose to human health and the environment during construction and post-development and (2) describes measures to be taken to protect workers, and the public from exposure to potential site hazards. Such measures could include a range of options, including but not limited to, physical site controls during construction, remediation, long-term monitoring, post- development maintenance or access limitations, or some combination thereof. Depending on the nature of contamination, if any, appropriate agencies shall be notified (e.g., Huntington Beach Fire Department). If needed, a Site Health and Safety Plan that meets Occupational Safety and Health Administration requirements shall be prepared and in place prior to commencement of work in any contaminated area _ y z _ O N The Ripcurl Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 5 oe'o Mitioation Monitoring e • - •• • FF69rarn • • en'Mon'111toding and RepQOiing,Pilrogr'a.' m Implemenfotion Responsible Compliance _ _ M ofi'on Measure _Documenfafion Monrfodn Acfrv' riming Monitor VerMcafion at nure Date MM4.6.2 Pno, the issuance cf grading peril', !ne project I�lemane Tes(ing Plan 1 Review and Prior to Fire i sha!' comply rri:" �i6FD City 'Spe--ifiCaticn M42G P,lemane DislrlCI approval of testing co mmenCe —� Building Permit Requi;emen;s A play, for the, ;esiI,-g of soils for plan ment of sampling me eresence methane cas shaii oe orepared ano subm!t(ed by the Applicant ,-, the `o, re�ie,; and prCr to the �on'mencem� . _ mpi. if S�yf .. ant le,eis mieihane gas Prior to Issuance sa r aiscovere.. „ the sc I c:, !re �, ; r, _,te. , o iicant's Notes on buuding and Review and of any grading Fire ---- ? ' P, ' c ip 4., gracng builan_ and nethar'�a cuaf�s snarl referee e rust a s,:b urethane plans approve building permit and during and methane gas constr ?t 'he I uction site p�" '.w SpeC:h at! r�, �![ N lot v:�.,, aCC,.,,�,al i{ plans for req,Ired oy tre -EFD aaai;ionai rretnane mitiaalcr measu,es appropriate to reduce the lee! Ci methane •2a5 a,c.--op,anle i_;e1c c,ial! be 1 documentation mpiemented Hydrology and Water Quality CoA4,7.1 The project developer shall construct an underground Improvement Plans Review and Plan check prior Public Works storm drain pipe along the east side of Gothard Street from approval of to issuance of Center Avenue to Edinger Avenue to connect to the existing, improvement grading permit underground Edinger Avenue storm drain pipe Based on a Final plans Hydrology and Hydraulics Report, the new Gothard Street underground storm drain facility sizing and design shall be targeted to convey the highest storm event exceedance flow rates along Gothard Street at full build-out of the General Plan, including contributions from any permanent groundwater i dewatering system The proposed project onsite storm drainage system shall be designed to convey all water quality treated flow directly into the new underground storm drain pipe along Gothard Street MM4,7.1 The Applicant shall prepare a Hydrology and Hydrology and Review and Prior to issuance Public Works Hydraulics Report and Drainage Plan that incorporates Hydraulic Report and approve plan and of a precise stormwater attenuation to reduce project site runoff to meet City Drainage Plan documentation grading permit design standards for stormflow in Gothard Street. Prior to receiving a precise grading permit, the Applicant shall prepare an Hydrology and Hydraulics Report detailing proposed Prior to issuance project peak runoff rates for the 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100 year of a radin Building & design storm events to Gothard Street, including contributions Groundwater Review and g g Safety Z g 9 permit and Y c N O 6 City of Huntington Beach ono v e e e a e nq on,e '-s a e s e e • • o o • • O A - • o 01� rogird mv — lmplemenfaffon Responsible Compifance _ Mifigahon Measure _ _ Documenlofion I Monrfon'ng Acfiv' rr" Monitor Verr�calion ' nature Date ont any pefma,".err; gf�und'd�ater dewatenng teat "''.ay ue De.rafe''1C, Sys(eM approve following i �mplementee �v 'ne prcposee oro,ec! Tnis a.'-, dewatenng completion of Hydraulics Reoor; shall also iu"2n;,fy Ine existin'; ava,lable System ccnstructlon capacity for flo,N Street for the cesign storms anr,' activities evaluate the existing capacity in anu potential impacts to ire t Edinger Avenue system Murdy Channe! and East Garden j Grove-Wrntersburg Channel Based on the 'rtydrology and Hydraulics Repert the Applicant shall prepare a Drainage Pian that shall inccrpora,e sufficient stormwater attenuation such that the City design standards for flow in Gothard Street are not exceedee It is expected that this may require cetention facil,ties rowever oetention it undergrour,c parking structures snail not oe and surfaCe pondinq s!ral! be IlmiteG tc ?. maXimum ceps.'', of 8 Inches i Attenuation SI'a ,'e aesgned for back, to Lac,, 22»-h Lz Sl0'm : design storm e,ents that eeve�cpment of the proposes project ,vould increase teak runo"rates for I'either above-_round or below-ground detention 'aCiII,eS are proposed the r'cpiIc3n: snail consult with the Department of Public '�Jorks and vector control agency to develop a design that 1 wilt be sufficient for stormwater eetention but wild not present a roman health or environmental hazard A qualified engineer Cf lne Publ!C V Oaks Department snail approve mis Hydrology and Hydraulics ,Report and Drainage Plan prior to issuance of a precise grading permit. Tne site Drainage Pia,- snail be coordmated with the vbQ,MP tc maxlmiZe efficienCy of stem:rater runoff de'ertion%retentlofr a^d ',Vater quality treatme The Bwiding anc 'afe!y Deparrment shall evaluate any proposed cermanent grounoavater oewatenng system",, to ensure that it j would function as required Following construction the Buiidi:ng and Safety Department shaii verify that any groundwater I d_ewatering system has been implemented as required MM4,7.2 The Applicant shall design and lmpiement project site i Gracing and Drainage Review and Prior to issuance Public Works drainage feair,�es r mrnim12e stormwater runoff and flood waters Plan approval of of a precise e N The Ripcurl Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 7 Mitig e e e e e s a -s a • s e e O ♦ ♦ • ♦ O ♦ O"RO0 0 O O ♦ O In Implement&on Responsible CompKance Mi fgation Measure _l _Documenfaffon Moti Mng AcKv' 17m/tig Monitor VerMccrKon Signature Date from entering underground parkmg structures or otherwise j Grading and grading permit f contribute to hazards and stall incorporate flood proofing Drainage Plan ana nydrostarc cress,-- measures for D ;round - I structu,es Prior to recei,:,g a precise grading permit ,r�e,Arol�cant snarl orepare a site G,aci _ aftd Drainage Pia^ .•cerr!'Ay, ttesIcn elements to n�.�r�ze underground structure 7ne Grad rig and Drainage plan shall Implement design features to minimize under grourd structures such as but not limited to Grade areas to dram away from the structure entryways m Implement overflow prevention (e g berms or dlRes, grated inlets, or a combination thereof) to direct project site runoff and flood flows away from underground structure entryways ® Elevate uncerground structure entryways to t,Nc-feet above the existing grade (approximate depth of potent:ai flood,ng j from the East Garden Grove-Wmtersburg Channel! ® Implement sumps and pumps witrnn the underground structures to remove any runofff entermg the uncerground ! j structures ,tn,s measure shall also be subtect to and DAMP BM"1 reca�rements for discharge treatment anG disposal) ® .Additionally the Applicant shad incorporate flood-proofing measures to prevent seepage flooding underground structures materials and design shall be in accordance with FEMA floodplan development requirements and the 2007 California Building Code for structures subfect to flooding and hydrostatic pressures ® he geotecnnical engineer and,,or waterproofing specialist I shall prepare design requirements for f000-proofing the underground structures and ensuring that structures are Dulld to withstand nydrestatjc pressures e Any u;ii[ties located ur below grade structures sham oe pretecteo from ponding water and seepage in accordance d2007 with the gent � � � echrnca� engineer recommendat ons an N g City of Huntington Beacn 8 M it a cition"Monitoring e • '- s• a e• s Mifiqcttilion • • • • • Re' pqrfiriq • • • Implementofion Responsible Compliance Wigah'on Measure_ _ ! Documenfc6on Moni_fori Ac}rv' Timin Monitor VerrficaHon S nature Date a'�fornia 6ulaing �cde I �� � I The Applicant snail also Cesign on-site runoff to drain away from buddino foundaticrs ano snail no, alto„ for more in,-n a Inones of I ' oo.ndjng at an,, cca!!on o n-sIte _ ' i CoA4,7'2 Prior to rece,ing a precise grading or bui�dirg permit, Graa,nr,t zn Drainage ff Review and Prior to issuance Public Works the 4sciicant sna:! prepare a site G;raalnn a;ra C2ralnage Plan Pia:: approval of of a precise ------ �Cntal:^Ing = _c-nmiimenciatlons of ;:ne . ,ol!S and I Grading and grading plan veoteCnnical ",eCp'tS analysis fir temperarV a permanent Dralnacie Plan Qrbundr,ai,er as ,42i1 as fC, Surat,e Jralria��r Noise MM4.9.1 The Applicant shall require by contract specifications Contract language and Review and Plan check prior Planning that the following construction best management practices notes on grading and approve contract to issuance of a (SMPs) be implemented by contractors to reduce construction building plans specifications, grading permit noise levels: grading and ■ Notification shall be mailed to owners and occupants of all building plans for developed land uses immediately bordering or d!rectly inclusion across the street from the project site area providing a schedule for major construction activities that wlil occur through the duration of the construction period. In addition, the notification will include the identification and contact number for a community liaison and designated construction manager that would be available on site to moniv construction activities The construction manager will be I located at the on-site construction office during construction hours for the duration of all construction activities Contract information for the community liaison and construction manager will be located at the construction office, City Hall, and the police department ® Ensure that construction equipment Is properly muffled according to industry standards ® Place noise-generating construction equipment and locate I construction staging areas away from sensitive uses where feasible implement noise attenuation measures to the extent feasible, c N B O Tine Ripcurl Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Q� Res. No. 2008-66 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON. BEACH ) I, JOAN L. FLYNN the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City ®f Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on November 10, 2008 by the following vote: AYES: Hansen, Hardy, Bohr, Cook, Coerper, Green, Carchio NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Clerk and ex-offici Jerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California RESOLUTION NO. 2008-67 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH APPROVING GENERAL. PLAN AMENDMENT NO.07-003 WHEREAS, General Plan Amendment No. 07-003 proposes to amend the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan to redesignate an approximate 3.8 acre piece of real property located on the southeast corner of Gothard Street and Center Avenue, as more particularly described as Exhibits "A" and "B" attached hereto, from CG-Fl-d (Commercial General - 0.35 Floor Area Ratio - Design Overlay) to M-F7-d (Mixed Use - 3.0 Floor Area Ratio - Design Overlay). The amendment also includes removing the subject area from Subarea 5E of the Community District and Subarea Schedule of the General Plan. Pursuant to California Government Code, the Planning Commission of the City of Huntington Beach, after notice duly given, held a public hearing to consider General Plan Amendment No. 07-003 and recommended approval of said entitlement to the City Council; and Pursuant to California Government Code, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach,after notice duly given, held a public hearing to consider General Plan Amendment No_ 07-003; and The City Council finds that said General Plan Amendment No. 07-003 is necessary for the changing needs and orderly development of the community, is necessary to accomplish refinement of the General Plan, and is consistent with other elements of the General Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach as follows: SECTION L That the real property that is the subject of this Resolution (hereinafter referred to as the --Subject Property") is generally located on the southeast corner of Gothard Street and Center Avenue in the City of Huntington Beach, and is more particularly described in the legal description and sketch attached hereto as Exhibits "A" and "B", respectively, and incorporated by this reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION 2: That General Plan Amendment No. 07-003, which amends the General Plan Land Use Designation for the subject area from CG-F i-d (Commercial General -0.35 Floor Area Ratio - Design Overlay) to M-F7-d (Mixed Use - 3.0 Floor Area Ratio - Design Overlay) 08-1818/26371 1 Resolution No. 2008-67 and the removal of the subject area from Subarea 5E of the Community District and Subarea Schedule, is hereby approved. The Director of Planning is hereby directed to prepare and file an amended Land Use Map. A copy of said map, as amended, shall be available for inspection in the Planning Department. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the loth day of November , 2008. v XW.oZ4 64k----_ Mayor REVIEW APPROVED: INITIA D AND APPROVED: City A i trator Dire or o lanning APPROVED AS TO FORM: Ikity Atto y A'rTACHMENTS Exhibit A: Legal Description Exhibit B: Sketch 08-1818/26371 2 Resolution No_ 2008-67 Page 1 of 2 EXHIBIT"A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL 1, IN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 211, PAGES 25 AND 26 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 1; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 1 SOUTH 89032'15" WEST 605.52 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 1;THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL I NORTH 00039'08" WEST 287.89 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 32.00 FEET, THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 90011'23" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 50.37 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 1 NORTH 89032'15" EAST 231.71 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 396.43 FEET, THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 13021,461, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 92.46 FEET TO THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 1; THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 1 FOR THE FOLLOWING THREE COURSES: SOUTH 00'39'35" EAST 120.73 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89032'15" EAST 250.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00'39'35" EAST 210.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM A PORTION THEREOF 50% OF A 100% OF ALL MINERALS, GAS, OIL, PETROLEUM, NAPHTHA AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES IN, UNDER, OR THAT MAY BE PRODUCED OR RECOVERED FROM THAT PORTION OP SAID LAND BELOW A DEPTH OF 500 FEET FROM ITS SURFACE, WITH AND INCLUDING IN SUCH EXCEPTION AND RESERVATION, FOR THE BENEFIT OF THOSE ENTITLED THERETO, THE RIGHT AT ANY AND ALL TIMES TO ENTER UPON AND INTO ANY AND ALL PARTS OF THE PORTION OF SAID LAND BELOW SUCH DEPTH OF 500 FEET FROM ITS SURFACE FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXPLORING AND DRILLING FOR, MINING, DEVELOPING, REMOVING AND EXTRACTING ANY AND ALL SUCH 1_\08\8027\PR0D\Mapping\Lega1s& Plats\8027LEGAL.doc Resolution No. 2008-67 Page 2 of 2 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION SUBSTANCES BY SLANT OR DIRECTIONAL DRILLING OR OTHER OPERATIONS FROM OTHER LAND, ENTERING INTO AND PENETRATING THE LAND THE SUBJECT HEREOF, ONLY BELOW SUCH DEPTH OF 500 FEET FROM ITS SURFACE BUT WITH (AND THERE SHALL BE)NO RIGHT UNDER SUCH EXCEPTION AND RESERVATION OF ENTRY UPON OR USE OF THE SURFACE OR SUBSURFACE TO A DEPTH OF 500 FEET BELOW THE SURFACE, AS RESERVED BY DOROTHY THAYER PECK, IN DEED RECORDED OCTOBER 1, 1959, IN BOOK 4907, PAGE 389 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, CHARLES H. THATCHER AND TITLE INSURANCE AND TRUST COMPANY A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ALL AS TRUSTEES OF THE TRUST UNDER WRITTEN DECLARATION THEREOF BY CARRIE A. PECK, DATED DECEMBER 18, 1936,AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 25% OF SAID 100% INTEREST, AND BY DOROTHY T. PECK, A WIDOW, IN HER INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY,AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 25%OF SAID 100% INTEREST. ALSO EXCEPTING FROM THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING BELOW A DEPTH OF 500 FEET MEASURED VERTICALLY FROM THE CONTOUR OF THE SURFACE WITHOUT, HOWEVER, THE RIGHT FOR ANY PURPOSE WHATSOEVER TO ENTER UPON, INTO OR THROUGH THE SURFACE OF SAID PROPERTY OR ANY PART THEREOF LYING BETWEEN SAID SURFACE OF 500 FEET BELOW SAID SURFACE, AS EXCEPTED IN THE GRANT DEED FROM SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY RECORDED JUNE 30, 1986 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 86-277355 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. CONTAINING 3.82 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. THIS LEGAL DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION. oQRp1 ESS/ v�-PS w 0/1 z_ pg c`�a o No. 17706 z DOUG S W. MASSON DATE Exp. R.C.E. 17706 06-30-2009 EXPIRES: 06-30-2009 TF�F vl\ 1A08\802MROMMapping\Legals& Plats\8027LEGAL.doc Resolution No. 2008-67 SHEET t Of EXHIBIT 'B' CENTER STREET o R=396.43' ^=13'2145n i��•'�'`�A N8932'15"E 231.71' L=92-46' e-i00 h0 0 O N� O ti7 40' 40' w c,; _v3 o� N89'32'15"E 250.00' w 00 00 //�� pp N PARCLppi�L 1, O o 3: PM 85-296, a o BCC 211 PG 25-26 n ir rn 0 to o Co Z N 142-074-06 142-074-12 0 0 N8932'15"E 605.52' P.O.B., LEGEND: SE CORNER P.OB. POINT OF BEGINNING ALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN HEREON ARE RECORD PER PM 85-298, BK 211, PG 25-26 APN's: 142-074-06 AND 142-074-12 � SESS/� UP THIS PLAT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR c� o No. 17706 Z UNDER MY DIRECTION. a Exp. 0 50 100 200 * 06-30-2009 B 1-7 OB OF- CAL� �\� PSCALE IN FEET 160t— DOU W. MASSON. R.C.E. 17706GRAPHIC SCALE EX 06-30 2009 1 GRAPHIC S N - DATE. Aug 1 Z, OB 5:39pm b y Jgervals F11.E:1:\08\8027\PROO\Mopping\Legals do Plats\8027p1ct_dwg BOUNDARY PLAT FOR YASSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. PARCEL 1 , PM 85-2989 PLANNING o ENGINEERING o SURVEYING 200 E. WASHINGTON AVE. • SUITE 200-ESCONDIDO •CA 9 20 25-1 81 6 BK 211 , 1 , PG 25-26 TEL (760) 741-3570•FAX (760) 741-1786 v www.masson—assoc.com Res. No. 2008-67 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) 1, JOAN L. FLYNN the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on November 10, 2008 by the following vote: AYES: Hansen, Bohr, Cook, Coerper, Green, Carchio NOES: Hardy ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Cit�erk ex-officioc67rk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California ORDINANCE NO. 3819 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING THE HUNTINGTON BEACH ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE BY ADDING CHAPTER 218, MIXED USE-TRANSIT CENTER DISTRICT (ZONING 'TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 07-004) WHEREAS, pursuant to the California State Planning and Zoning Law, the Huntington Beach Planning Commission and Huntington Beach City Council have held separate, duly noticed public hearings to consider Zoning Text Amendment No_ 07-004, which adds Chapter 218, Mixed Use-Transit Center District, to the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance; and After due consideration of the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission and all other evidence presented, the City Council finds that the aforesaid amendment is proper and consistent with the General Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. That Chapter 218 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance is hereby added to read as set forth in Exhibit A_ SECTION 2. This ordinance shall take effect thirty days after its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 17thday of November , 2008_ 14 4ayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ty Clerk It Atto ney 11 1 1 b� ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: City trator DirecWlatainingg Exhibit A: Legislative Draft 08-1767-003I25776 2 Ordinance No.3819,Exhibit"A" EXHIBIT A ORDINANCE—ZTA NO. 07-004 Chapter 218 Mixed Use-Transit Center District Sections: 218.02 Mixed Use-Transit Center District Established 218.04 MU-TC District: Land Use Controls 218.06 MU-TC District: Development Standards 218.08 Modifications for Affordable Housing 218.10 Sustainable Development 218.12 Review of Plans 218.02 Mixed Use-Transit Center District Established The purpose of the Mixed Use-Transit Center District is to implement the General Plan Land Use Plan mixed-use land use designation. This district provides areas for high density residential and commercial uses within one-quarter mile of established transit centers as determined by the Planning Director. Transit centers, serving buses or other modes of transportation, are facilities where passengers transfer from one route to another. This district provides for pedestrian-friendly, transit oriented development in areas adjacent to existing transit infrastructure. 218.04 MU-TC District: Land Use Controls In the following schedules, letter designations are used as follows: "P" designates use classifications permitted in MU-TC district. "PC" designates use classifications permitted on approval of a conditional use permit by the Planning Commission. "ZA" designates use classifications permitted on approval of a conditional use permit by the Zoning Administrator. Use classifications that are not listed are prohibited. Letters in parentheses in the "Additional Provisions" column refer to provisions following the schedule or located elsewhere in the Zoning Ordinance. Where letters in parentheses are opposite a use classification heading, referenced provisions shall apply to all use classifications under the heading. 11/12/2008 Page 1 Ordinance No.3819,Exhibit"A" MU-TC DISTRICT: P=Permitted LAND USE CONTROLS PC=Conditional Use Permit approved by Planning Commission ZA=Conditional Use Permit approved by Zoning Administrator Land Use Additional Controls Provisions Residential Uses (A)(1) Multi-family Residential PC Public and Semipublic Uses (A) Clubs and Lodges ZA Day Care, General ZA Day Care, Large Family P (C) Government Offices P Public Safety Facilities P Religious Assembly ZA Schools, Public or Private PC Commercial Uses (A)(H)(1) Artists' Studios P Banks and Savings & Loans P Catering Services P Drug Stores/Pharmacy P Eating and Drinking Establishments P w/Alcohol ZA (B)(C) w/ Live Entertainment ZA wl Dancing PC (D) w/ Outdoor Dining ZA (C)(E) Food and Beverage Sales P wl Alcohol Beverage Sales ZA (B) Office, Business and Professional P Park and Recreational Facilities P Parking PC (F) Personal Enrichment Services P (C) Personal Services P Retail Sales P (G) Visitor Accommodations PC MU-TC District: Additional Provisions (A) — All projects in this District shall have both residential and non-residential components. At least 50 percent of the building fronting public streets at the ground level shall be non- residential uses. At least 50 percent of the project shall be residential uses. 11/12/2008 Page 2 Ordinance No. 3819,Exhibit"A" (B) — The following businesses proposing to sell alcoholic beverages for on-site or off-site consumption are exempt from the conditional use permit process: (i) Retail markets with no more than 10 percent of the floor area devoted to sales, display and storage of alcoholic beverages provided the sale of alcoholic beverages is not in conjunction with the sale of gasoline or other motor vehicle fuel; (ii) Florist shops offering the sale of a bottle of an alcoholic beverage together with a floral arrangement. (C)— Neighborhood notification requirements pursuant to Chapter 241. (D) — See also Chapter 5.28: Dancing Halls and Chapter 5.44: Restaurants —Amusement and Entertainment Premises. (E) — Outdoor dining with alcohol sales shall be permitted with a conditional use permit to the Zoning Administrator. Outdoor dining without alcohol sales that is 400 square feet or less shall be permitted with an administrative permit. If over 400 square feet with no alcohol sales, Neighborhood Notification shall be required pursuant to Chapter 241. (F) — Stand-alone or other permanent parking structures not ancillary to the permitted uses listed above. Must demonstrate necessity of use and comply with the requirements in Section 231.18-G (Parking Structures). (G) — See Section 230.94: Carts and Kiosks (H) — Development of vacant land or additions of 10,000 square feet or more in building floor area; or additions equal to or greater than 50% of the existing building's floor area requires approval of a conditional use permit from the Zoning Administrator. The Planning Director may refer any proposed project to the Zoning Administrator if the proposed project has the potential to impact residents or tenants in the vicinity (e.g. increased noise, traffic). (1) — Projects within 500 feet of a PS District see Chapter 244. 218.06 MU-TC District: Property Development Standards The following schedule prescribes development standards for MU-TC zoning district designated on the zoning map. The first column establishes the basic requirements for permitted and conditional uses. Letters in parentheses in the "Additional Provisions" column refer to "Additional Development Standards" following the schedule. The floor area ratio is calculated on the basis of net site area. All required setbacks shall be measured from ultimate right-of-way and in accordance with the definitions set forth in Chapter 203, Definitions. 11/12/2008 Page 3 Ordinance No.3819, Exhibit"A" Property Development Standards for MU-TC District MU-TCD Additional Requirements Minimum Lot Area (sq. ft.) 43,560 Minimum Lot Width (ft.) 100 Minimum Setbacks Front (ft) 5 (A)(B) Side (ft.) 10 (B) Rear (ft.) 10 (B) Maximum Height of Structures (ft.) 75 (C) Maximum Wall Dimensions (D) Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 2.35 Minimum Site Landscaping (°I°) 8 (E)(F) Minimum Lot Area per Dwelling - Unit (sq. ft.) Minimum Residential Floor Area (I) Maximum Lot Coverage {%) 75 Minimum Open Space (J) Accessibility within Dwellings (K) Lighting (L) Fences and Walls (G) Off-Street Parking and Loading See Chapter 231 (H) Outdoor Facilities See Section 230.74 Screening of Mechanical See Section 230.76 Equipment Antenna See Section 230.80 (M) Accessory Structures See Chapter 230.08 Refuse Storage Areas See Section 230.78 Underground Utilities See Chapter 17.64 Performance Standards See Section 230.82 Nonconforming Structures See Chapter 236 Signs See Chapter 233 (N) Building Separations (0) Building Design Standards (P) Private Storage Space (0) Reciprocal Access (R) MU-TC District: Additional Development Standards (A) Multiple street frontage lots shall provide front yards on each frontage. (B) Projections into Setbacks (1) See Section 230.68: Building Projections into Yards. (2) Balconies and bay windows may project into required setbacks and usable open space areas subject to Section 230.68, provided that balconies have open railings, glass, or architectural details with openings to reduce visible bulk. 11/12/2008 Page 4 Ordinance No.3819, Exhibit"A" Balconies composed solely of solid enclosures are not allowed to project into required setbacks. (3) Awnings, canopies, covered walkways, covered patios, and uncovered arcades with no programmed indoor space may project into required setbacks and usable open space areas provided that a minimum 5 ft. setback is maintained to the property line. (C) Height Requirements. See Section 230.70: Measurement of Height and Section 230.72: Exceptions to Height Limits. A minimum of two stories and a maximum of six stories shall be allowed. (D) Maximum Wall Dimensions. All building wall surfaces shall be no longer than 250 feet without either: (1) a break, a recess or offset measuring at least 10 feet that vary the depth of the building wall by a minimum of 4 feet, or (2) a series of offsets, projections or recesses, including balconies, at intervals of not more than 40 feet that vary the depth of the building wall by a minimum of 4 feet. The Director may grant exceptions or allow these standards to be modified for exceptional or unique structures subject to Design Review, Chapter 244. (E) Planting Areas: With the exception of sidewalks, driveways, pathways and paved outdoor seating areas, required front and street side yards shall be planting areas. (F) Landscape Improvements (1) All landscape improvements shall comply with Chapter 232 unless otherwise provided herein. (2) General Tree Requirements. One 36-inch box tree shall be provided for every 45 lineal feet of street frontage planted within the setback areas adjacent to a street. In addition, there shall be one 36-inch box tree planted within the common open space areas for each ground or first level unit. Specimen palms may be substituted at a ratio of 1/2 foot brown trunk height for one inch of box tree inch required. (G) See Section 230.88: Fencing and Yards. (H) Off-Street Parking and Loading Provisions. (1) All off-street parking and loading provisions shall comply with Chapter 231 unless otherwise provided herein. Off-street parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with the following Schedule A: 11/12/2008 Page 5 Ordinance No. 3819, Exhibit"A" OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES REQUIRED IN MU-TCD ZONE: SCHEDULE A Use Classification Spaces Residential Studio 1 space per unit one bedroom 1 space per unit two bedrooms 2 spaces per unit three or more bedrooms 2.5 spaces per unit Guests 1 space per 5 units Commercial Per Chapter 231 Public and Semi-Public Per Chapter 231 (2) Compact parking spaces may be allowed but not to satisfy the minimum parking requirements. (3) Up to twenty percent (20%) of required parking may be provided by tandem spaces subject to conditional use permit approval. Each tandem space shall be counted as one-half space for purposes of determining the number of parking spaces that are provided. (1) Minimum Floor Area. Each dwelling unit in a mixed-use building shall have the minimum floor area of 500 square feet. (J) Open Space Requirements. (1) The minimum open space area (private and common) for mixed-use projects in the MU-TC District shall be 150 square feet per residential unit. For purposes of this subsection, open space shall mean an area which is designed and intended to be used for active or passive recreation. Open space may consist of private and/or common areas. Parking areas, access aisles, and driveways shall not qualify as usable open space. (2) Private Open Space. (a) Private open space shall be provided in courts or balconies within which a horizontal rectangle has no dimension less than 6 feet. (b) Minimum of seventy-five percent (75%) of the dwelling units shall be provided a minimum of 60 square feet of private open space. (c) Private open space shall be contiguous to the unit and for the exclusive use of the occupants. Private open space shall not be accessible to any dwelling unit except the unit it serves and shall be physically separated from common areas by a wall or hedge at least 42 inches in height. (3) Common Open Space. (a) Common open space, provided by interior side yards, patios, courts, and terraces, shall be designed so that no dimension is less than 10 feet, shall be open to the sky, and shall not include driveways or parking areas. (b) Projects with more than 20 units shall include at least one amenity, such as a clubhouse, swimming pool, tennis court, volleyball court, outdoor cooking facility, or other recreation facility. Such common amenity spaces shall count toward the common open space requirement. 11/12/2008 Page 6 Ordinance No.3819, Exhibit"A" (K) All habitable rooms in a dwelling unit shall be accessible from within the dwelling. (L) Lighting. Lighting shall be provided in all projects along all vehicular access ways and major walkways. Lighting shall be directed onto the driveways and walkways within the development and away from adjacent properties. A lighting plan shall be submitted for approval by the Director. (M) See Section 230.88: Antennae. (N) See Chapter 233, Signs—Commercial Districts, for applicable provisions related to signs in the commercial component of the MU-TC District. (0) Building Separations. Building separations shall be provided in all mixed-use projects in the MU-TC District subject to the following requirements: (1) The minimum building separation shall be not less than 20 feet opposite a window in a living room and 14 feet opposite a window for any other habitable room. (2) The building separation shall be open to the sky. Eaves may project a maximum 2 feet into this area on each side. (P) Building Design Standards. Buildings in the MU-TC District shall be built in accordance with the following requirements: (1) The maximum building length shall be 300 feet except as provided below. Building length is defined as the total length of a primary building mass lining a street. (a) A 20 foot inset of the building plane with pedestrian access may count as a break in the building length. If the inset varies by floor, then the average inset shall exceed 20 feet. (2) The maximum block size shall be 2,400 feet. Block size is a measure of the total length of the street-fronting property lines along all block faces enclosed within the nearest surrounding publicly accessible streets. (Q) Private Storage Space. An average of 50 cubic feet of private storage space shall be provided for each residential dwelling unit outside such unit. Such private storage space shall be fully enclosed and lockable. (R) Reciprocal Access. Reciprocal ingressfegress access with adjacent properties shall be provided for all projects. 218.08 Modifications for Affordable Housing The Planning Commission may approve a conditional use permit modifying the minimum property development standards in this chapter for affordable housing, as provided in Section 230.14. The proposed modifications shall be requested in writing by the applicant, accompanied by a detailed pro-forma, rental guidelines, deed restrictions, financial subsidies, and other types of documentation which will serve to demonstrate the need for a reduction of 11/12/2008 Page 7 Ordinance No. 3819,Exhibit"A" development standards. Modifications to the standards may include, but are not limited to, the parking requirements and open space. The specific standard(s) from which the applicant is requesting relief shall be identified and alternative development standard(s) proposed. 218.10 Sustainable Development Sustainable or "green" building practices shall be incorporated into the design of the proposed structures and associated site improvements. Sustainable building practices shall include (but are not limited to) those recommended by the U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Program certification or Build It Green's Green Building Guidelines and Rating Systems. 218.12 Review of Plans All applications for new construction, initial establishment of use, exterior alterations and additions shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review. Discretionary review shall be required as follows: (A) Zoning Administrator Review. Projects requiring a conditional use permit from the Zoning Administrator; projects on substandard lots; see Chapter 241. (B) Design Review Board. See Chapter 244. (C) Planning Commission. Projects requiring a conditional use permit from the Planning Commission; see Chapter 241. (D) Projects in the Coastal Zone. A Coastal Development Permit is required unless the project is exempt; see Chapter 245. 11/12/2008 Page 8 Ord. No. 3819 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) I, JOAN L. FLYNN, the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing ordinance was read to said City Council at a special meeting thereof held on November 10, 2008, and was again read to said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on November 17, 2008, and was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council. AYES: Hansen, Hardy, Bohr, Cook, Coerper, Green, Carchio NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None L Joan L.Flynn,CITY CLERK of the City of Huntington Beach and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council,do hereby certity that asynopsis of this ordinance has been published in the Huntington Beach Fountain Valle} Independent on November 27,2008. 5 In accordance with the City Charter of said City _ Joan L. Flynn City Clerk CoClerk and ex-officio 6erk Senior Deputy Citv Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California ORDINANCE NO. 3820 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING DISTRICT MAP 15(SECTIONAL DISTRICT MAP 14-5-11) TO REZONE THE REAL PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF GOTHARD STREET AND CENTER AVENUE FROM CG (COMMERCIAL GENERAL) TO MU-TCD(MIXED USE-TRANSIT CENTER DISTRICT) (ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO. 07-001) WHEREAS, pursuant to the California State Planning and Zoning Law, the Huntington Beach Planning Commission and Huntington Beach City Council have held separate, duly noticed public hearings to consider Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001, which rezones the property generally located at the southeast corner of Gothard Street and Center Avenue from CG (Commercial General)to MU-TCD (Mixed Use-Transit Center District); and After due consideration of the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission and all other evidence presented, the City Council finds that the aforesaid amendment is proper and consistent with the General Plan, NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. That the real property that is the subject of this Ordinance (hereinafter referred as the "Subject Property") is generally located at the southeast corner of Gothard Street and Center Avenue, and is more particularly described in the legal description and sketch attached hereto as Exhibits A and B, respectively, and incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION 2. That the zoning designation of the Subject Property is hereby changed from CG (Commercial General) to MU-TCD (Mixed Use-Transit Center District). 08-1767.002/25775 2 1 Ordinance No. 3820 SECTION 3. That Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Section 201.04B District Map 15 (Sectional District Map 14-5-11) is hereby amended to reflect Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001 as described herein. The Director of Planning is hereby directed to prepare and file an amended map. A copy of said District Map, as amended, shall be available for inspection in the Office of the City Clerk. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall take effect thirty days after passage. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 17th day of November , 2008. Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Clerk ity Atto ey G -lam.os REVIEW A APPROVED: INITIATED AND APPROVED: City dmi VKstrator Director OAPlanning ATTACHMENTS Exhibit A: Legal Description Exhibit B: Sketch 08-1767.002/25775 2 2 Ordinance No. 3820 Page 1 of 2 EXHIBIT"A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL 1, IN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 211, PAGES 25 AND 26 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 1; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 1 SOUTH 89032'15" WEST 605.52 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 1; THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 1 NORTH 00039'08" WEST 287.89 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 32.00 FEET, THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 9001123" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 50.37 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 1 NORTH 89032'15" EAST 231.71 FEET,TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 396.43 FEET, THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 13021,46" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 92.46 FEET TO THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 1; THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 1 FOR THE FOLLOWING THREE COURSES: SOUTH 00°39'35" EAST 120.73 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89'032'15" EAST 250.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00°39'35" EAST 210.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM A PORTION THEREOF 50% OF A 100% OF ALL MINERALS, GAS, OIL, PETROLEUM, NAPHTHA AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES IN, UNDER, OR THAT MAY BE PRODUCED OR RECOVERED FROM THAT PORTION OP SAID LAND BELOW A DEPTH OF 500 FEET FROM ITS SURFACE, WITH AND INCLUDING IN SUCH EXCEPTION AND RESERVATION, FOR THE BENEFIT OF THOSE ENTITLED THERETO, THE RIGHT AT ANY AND ALL TIMES TO ENTER UPON AND INTO ANY AND ALL PARTS OF THE PORTION OF SAID LAND BELOW SUCH DEPTH OF 500 FEET FROM ITS SURFACE FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXPLORING AND DRILLING FOR, MINING, DEVELOPING, REMOVING AND EXTRACTING ANY AND ALL SUCH I:\08\8027\PROD\Mapping\Legals&Plats\8027LEGAL.doc Ordinance No. 3820 Page 2 of 2 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION SUBSTANCES BY SLANT OR DIRECTIONAL DRILLING OR OTHER OPERATIONS FROM OTHER LAND, ENTERING INTO AND PENETRATING THE LAND THE SUBJECT HEREOF, ONLY BELOW SUCH DEPTH OF 500 FEET FROM ITS SURFACE BUT WITH (AND THERE SHALL BE)NO RIGHT UNDER SUCH EXCEPTION AND RESERVATION OF ENTRY UPON OR USE OF THE SURFACE OR SUBSURFACE TO A DEPTH OF 500 FEET BELOW THE SURFACE, AS RESERVED BY DOROTHY THAYER PECK, IN DEED RECORDED OCTOBER 1, 1959, IN BOOK 4907, PAGE 389 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, CHARLES H. THATCHER AND TITLE INSURANCE AND TRUST COMPANY A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ALL AS TRUSTEES OF THE TRUST UNDER WRITTEN DECLARATION THEREOF BY.CARRIE A. PECK,DATED DECEMBER 18, 1936, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 25% OF SAID 100% INTEREST, AND BY DOROTHY T. PECK, A WIDOW, IN HER INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 25% OF SAID 100%INTEREST. ALSO EXCEPTING FROM THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING BELOW A DEPTH OF 500 FEET MEASURED VERTICALLY FROM THE CONTOUR OF THE SURFACE WITHOUT, HOWEVER, THE RIGHT FOR ANY PURPOSE WHATSOEVER TO ENTER UPON, INTO OR THROUGH THE SURFACE OF SAID PROPERTY OR ANY PART THEREOF LYING BETWEEN SAID SURFACE OF 500 FEET BELOW SAID SURFACE, AS EXCEPTED IN THE GRANT DEED FROM SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY RECORDED JUNE 30, 1986 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 86-277355 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. CONTAINING 3.82 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. THIS LEGAL DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION. Ess/ BPS W. f� EL 2- O W c3 No. 17706 z DOUG S W. MASSON DATE Exp. R.C.E. 17706 * 06-30-2009 EXPIRES: 06-30-2009 9T ClV1\- £OF CAL�F� 1\08\8027\PR0D\Mapping\Legals&Plats\8027LEGAL.doc Ordinance No. 3820 SHEET 1 OF 1 EXHIBIT 'B' CENTER STREET o R-396.43' OZ�j— — -- — D=13*21'46r t=92•46 QLo�O�� 1 N89'32'15"E 231.71' �+ Z O NO O to 40' 40' _cr '(7) N 89'32'15"E 250.00' °ow co /� N PARCEL I, O PM 85- 6, cw Q o BK 211 Pia 25-26 0 1 p O O N Z — 142-074-06 1 142-074-12 0 O. N89'32'15"E 605.52' LEGEND: SE CORNER P.OB. POINT OF BEGINNING ALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN HEREON ARE RECORD PER PM 85-298, BK 211, PG 25-26 APN's: 142-074-06 AND 142-074-12 W. tp THIS PLAT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR a No. 17706 Z UNDER MY DIRECTION. an Exp. 0 50 100 200 06-30-2009 alfillan8 t 2 O$ 0jV1\ �Qc��� io"DOU AS W. MASSON, R.C.E. 17706 SCALE IN FEET OF apt\ EXP ES: 06-30-2009 GRAPHIC SCALE � 1"=100' DATE. Aug IZ 06 5-39pm by Jgervals MEA.\08\8027\PRO0\Mapp1ng\Legala & Plato\8027p1at.dwg BOUNDARY PLAT FOR MASSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. PARCEL 1 , PM 85-298, PLANNING v ENGINEERING v SURVEYING �/ 200 E. WASHINGTON AVE.o SUITE 200 o ESCONDIDO•CA 9 2025-1 81 6 BK 211 , PG 25-26 TEL (760) 741-3570 v FAX (760) 741-1786.www.masaon-0ss0C.CQm Ord. No. 3820 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) I, JOAN L. FLYNN, the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven;that the foregoing ordinance was read to said City Council at a special meeting thereof held on November 10,2008,and was again read to said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on November 17,2008, and was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council. AYES: Hansen, Hardy, Bohr, Cook, Coerper, Green, Carchio NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None 1,Joan L.Flynn.CITY CLERK of the City of Huntington Beach and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council,do hereby certify that a synopsis of this ordinance has been published in the Huntington Beach fountain Valley Independent on November 27,2008. In accordance with the City Charter of said City Joan L. Flynn, City Clerk CoClerk and ex-offfcio erk Senior Depute City Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California T, 166 A)A&95 I) a7 d Council/Agency Meeting Held: Deferred/Continued to:A&P/ C 11- 1- -Joed, ' Approved ❑ Conditionally Approved ❑ Denied ¢ity ler s Sig a ure Council Meeting Date: 11/10/2008 Department ID Number: PL 08-12 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMB RS OF CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED BY: FRED WILSON, CITY ADMINIST PREPARED BY: SCOTT HESS, DIRECTOR OF P N IN SUBJECT: APPROVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 07-004, ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 07-004, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 07-003, ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO. 07-001, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 07-043 (THE RIPCURL) (Appeal of the Planning Commission's approval) Statement of Issue,Funding Source,Recommended Action,Alternative Action(s),Analysis,Environmental Status,Attachment(s) Statement of Issue: Transmitted for your consideration are two appeals of the Planning Commission's approval of Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 07-004, Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) No. 07-004, General Plan Amendment (GPA) No. 07-003, Zoning Map Amendment (ZMA) No. 07-001, and Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 07-043. The applications represent a request by Red Oak Investments to construct a 382,700 square-foot mixed use residential and commercial development on a 3.8 acre site at the southeast corner of Gothard Street and Center Avenue. The proposed project consists of 440 residential units and 10,000 square feet of commercial uses. The project is proposed to be six stories in height consisting of four levels of housing above two levels of above ground parking and one level of subterranean parking. Councilmember Jill Hardy filed an appeal to allow the City Council an opportunity to review The Ripcurl project and all associated entitlements in its entirety. Red Oak Investments, applicant, also filed an appeal of certain conditions of approval imposed with the Planning Commission's approval of the project. The Planning Commission approved EIR No. 07-004 and ZTA No. 07-004 on September 23, 2008 and the remaining entitlements at a special meeting on September 30, 2008, with modified conditions (Recommended Action - A) for a 330 unit project based on findings that the project is compatible with the surrounding uses, is consistent with good zoning practice, implements the goals of smart growth and sustainable development, and is consistent with the General Plan goals and policies. Staff is recommending that the City Council also approve the request with staff recommended changes (Recommended Action - B) for a 385 unit project as supported by the EIR. REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 11/10/2008 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL 08-12 Funding Source: Not applicable. Recommended Action: A. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Motion to: "Certify EIR No. 07-004 as adequate and complete in accordance with CEQA requirements by approving Resolution No,.� IkA Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California, Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2008011069) for The Ripcurl Project (ATTACHMENT NO. 1)." "Approve Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004 with findings for approval (ATTACHMENT NO. 2) and adopt Ordinance No. 381 , An Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Amending the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance by Adding Chapter 218, Mixed Use-Transit Center District (Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004) (ATTACHMENT NO. 3)." "Approve General Plan Amendment No. 07-003 by approving Resolution No,?9-6, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Approving General Plan Amendment No. 07- 003 (ATTACHMENT NO. 4)." "Approve Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001 with findings for approval (ATTACHMENT NO. 5) and adopt Ordinance No.,,38do, An Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Amending District Map 15 (Sectional District Map 14-5-11) to Rezone the Real Property Generally Located at the Southeast Corner of Gothard Street and Center Avenue from CG (Commercial General) to MU- TCD (Mixed Use-Transit Center District) (Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001) (ATTACHMENT NO. 6)." "Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043 with findings and conditions of approval to allow 330 residential units and 10,000 sq. ft. of commercial uses (ATTACHMENT NO. 7)." "Approve CEQA Statement of Findings of Fact with a Statement of Overriding Considerations (ATTACHMENT NO. 9)." B. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Motion to: "Certify EIR No. 07-004 as adequate and complete in accordance with CEQA requirements by approving Resolution Not? vR 4A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California, Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2008011069) for The Ripcurl Project (ATTACHMENT NO. 1)." "Approve Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004 with findings for approval (ATTACHMENT NO. 2) and adopt Ordinance No. 3819 , An Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Amending the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance by Adding Chapter 218, Mixed Use-Transit Center District (Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004) (ATTACHMENT NO. 3)." -2- 10/28/2008 1:06 PM REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 11/10/2008 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL 08-12 "Approve General Plan Amendment No. 07-003 by approving Resolution No2oot, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Approving General Plan Amendment No. 07- 003 (ATTACHMENT NO. 4)." "Approve Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001 with findings for approval (ATTACHMENT NO. 5) and adopt Ordinance No.38'w , An Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Amending District Map 15 (Sectional District Map 14-5-11) to Rezone the Real Property Generally Located at the Southeast Corner of Gothard Street and Center Avenue from CG (Commercial General) to MU- TCD (Mixed Use-Transit Center District) (Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001) (ATTACHMENT NO. 6)." "Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043 with findings and suggested conditions of approval to allow 385 residential units and 10,000 sq. ft. of commercial uses (ATTACHMENT NO. 8)." "Approve CEQA Statement of Findings of Fact with a Statement of Overriding Considerations (ATTACHMENT NO. 10)." Planning Commission Action on September 23, 2008. THE MOTION MADE BY SCANDURA, SECONDED BY SHIER-BURNETT, TO CERTIFY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 07-004 AS ADEQUATE AND COMPLETE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CEQA REQUIREMENTS BY APPROVING RESOLUTION NO. 1624 CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: DWYER, FARLEY, LIVENGOOD, SCANDURA, SHIER-BURNETT NOES: SPEAKER ABSENT: SHAW ABSTAIN: NONE THE MOTION MADE BY SCANDURA, SECONDED BY DWYER, TO APPROVE ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 07-004 WITH MODIFICATIONS AND FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL AND FORWARD THE DRAFT ORDINANCE TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: DWYER, FARLEY, LIVENGOOD, SCANDURA, SHIER-BURNETT, SPEAKER NOES: NONE ABSENT: SHAW ABSTAIN: NONE MOTIONS PASSED Planning Commission Action on September 30, 2008. THE MOTION MADE BY SCANDURA, SECONDED BY DWYER, TO APPROVE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 07-003 BY APPROVING THE DRAFT CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION AND FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: -3- 10/28/2008 1:06 PM REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 11/10/2008 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL 08-12 AYES: DWYER, LIVENGOOD, SCANDURA, SHAW, SHIER-BURNETT NOES: FARLEY, SPEAKER ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE THE MOTION MADE BY SCANDURA, SECONDED BY LIVENGOOD, TO APPROVE ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO. 07-001 WITH FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL AND FORWARD THE DRAFT ORDINANCE TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: DWYER, LIVENGOOD, SCANDURA, SHAW, SHIER-BURNETT NOES: FARLEY, SPEAKER ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE THE MOTION MADE BY SCANDURA, SECONDED BY DWYER, TO APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 07-043 WITH MODIFIED FINDINGS AND MODIFIED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (FOR 330 RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND 10,000 SQ. FT. COMMERCIAL) CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: DWYER, LIVENGOOD, SCANDURA, SHAW, SHIER-BURNETT NOES: FARLEY, SPEAKER ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE THE MOTION MADE BY SCANDURA, SECONDED BY SHAW, TO APPROVE MODIFIED CEQA STATEMENT OF FINDINGS AND FACT WITH A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: DWYER, LIVENGOOD, SCANDURA, SHAW, SHIER-BURNETT NOES: FARLEY, SPEAKER ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE MOTIONS PASSED Alternative Action(s): The City Council may make the following alternative motion(s): 1. "(Applicant's Request) Approve EIR No. 07-004, ZTA No. 07-004, GPA No. 07-003, ZMA No. 07-001, and CUP No. 07-043 with 440 residential units and 10,000 sq. ft. of commercial uses." 2. "Deny EIR No. 07-004, ZTA No. 07-004, GPA No. 07-003, ZMA No. 07-001, and CUP No. 07-043 with findings." -4- 10/28/2008 1:06 PM REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 11/10/2008 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL 08-12 3. "Continue EIR No. 07-004, ZTA No. 07-004, GPA No. 07-003, ZMA No. 07-001, and CUP No. 07-043 and direct staff accordingly." Analysis: A. PROJECT PROPOSAL: Applicant/: Andrew Nelson/Alex Wong, Red Oak Huntington Beach, LLC, 2101 Property Owner: Business Center Drive #230, Irvine CA 92612 Location: 7302-7300 Center Avenue, 92647 (southeast corner of Gothard Street and Center Avenue) Environmental Impact Report No. 07-004 represents an analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with proposed Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004, General Plan Amendment No. 07-003, Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001, and Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043 for the construction of a mixed-use development consisting of 440 residential units and 10,000 sq. ft. of commercial uses on an approximate 3.8 acre site and associated infrastructure. Associated entitlements are described below. Zoninq Text Amendment No. 07-004 represents a request to amend the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance by adding Chapter 218 to establish the Mixed Use-Transit Center District zoning and development standards. General Plan Amendment No. 07-003 represents a request to amend the General Plan Land Use designation on 3.8 acres from the current CG-F1-d (Commercial General-0.35 Floor Area Ratio—Design Overlay) to the proposed M-F7-d (Mixed Use-3.0 Floor Area Ratio— Design Overlay) designation and to remove the subject area from Subarea 5E of the Community District and Subarea Schedule. Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001 represents a request to amend the Zoning designation from the current CG (Commercial General) to the proposed MU-TCD (Mixed Use-Transit Center District) designation. Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043 represents a request to develop and construct a mixed use residential and commercial development and associated infrastructure that consists of 440 residential apartment units (consisting of 11 live/work units),10,000 sq. ft. of commercial uses, 705 parking spaces for residents and visitors, outdoor amenities such as a pool and spa area, fire pit, and movie projection area, and indoor amenities such as a fitness center, business center, conference room, clubhouse. B. BACKGROUND: Historical records indicate that the project site was first utilized for agricultural purposes sometime prior to 1938 and the site continued to be utilized for agricultural purposes until at least 1953. As early as 1969, the site appeared to lay empty. The project site was cleared -5- 10/28/2008 1:06 PM REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 11/10/2008 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL 08-12 and developed as a shopping center in 1979. The project site is currently developed with a shopping center known as the College Country Center. The shopping center contains approximately 60,000 sq. ft. of commercial and office spaces located in four one-story retail buildings and one two-story office building. The shopping center is approximately 80 percent leased with 45 tenants. Existing tenants include Ruby Nail & Spa, Taste of France French Bistro, Dinner's Ready Home Cooking, Kathy May Coffeehouse, College Books, Allied Hearing Services, Heritage House Center, Cloud Mover Day Spa, an antique store, a liquor store & market, a tanning salon, a hair salon, and various office tenants. Del Taco fast food restaurant and the United States Post Office anchor the shopping center. Application Process and Timelines APPLICATIONS DATE OF APPLICATION DATE OF COMPLETE MANDATORY SUBMITTAL APPLICATION PROCESSING DATE(S) Environmental June 26, 2007 July 8, 2008 Within 1 year of Assessment/Draft EIR complete application General Plan Amendment October 3, 2007 Not Applicable Not Applicable Zoning Map Amendment October 3, 2007 Not Applicable Not Applicable Zoning Text Amendment October 3, 2007 Not Applicable Not Applicable Conditional Use Permit February 21, 2008 August 5, 2008 Within 180 days from EIR Certification C. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AND RECOMMENDATION: On September 23, 2008, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the environmental impact report, proposed zoning text amendment, proposed land use amendments, and the request to develop a mixed use project with 440 residential units and 10,000 sq. ft. of commercial uses. Comments at the hearing were received from 20 individuals; 14 spoke in support of the project, and 6 spoke in opposition. Speakers in support of the project discussed the positive benefits of the development, including the increase in economic vitality, revitalization of the area, generation of tax revenues, incorporation of green building features, reduction in vehicle trips, provision of a variety of housing opportunities, and improvement in quality of life. Speakers in opposition of the project discussed a myriad of concerns with the proposed development, including density, traffic, population growth, infrastructure and public safety impacts. The Planning Commission reviewed the environmental impact report and zoning text amendment. Some issues of discussion included traffic impacts, water impacts, impacts of proposed zoning on surrounding properties, density, location of proposed mixed uses, compact and tandem parking, reciprocal access between properties, private storage area, building height, setbacks, and unit sizes. The Planning Commission certified the EIR as adequate and complete in accordance with CEQA requirements and approved the ZTA with modifications to the maximum building height (max. 75 ft.), maximum floor area ratio (max. -6- 10/28/2008 1:57 PM REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 11/10/2008 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL 08-12 2.35 FAR), minimum dwelling unit size (min. 500 sq. ft.), compact and tandem parking (eliminated), private storage area (average of 50 cu. ft.), and reciprocal access. The Planning Commission continued the project to September 30, 2008, with the public hearing closed. The Planning Commission reviewed the request for amendments to the land use designations and the request to develop a mixed use project. The Commission discussed a variety of issues, including impacts to public safety, payment of park and recreational fees, density, traffic impacts, water impacts, walkability, affordable housing, and reciprocal access between properties. After lengthy discussions and a series of straw votes on residential density, the Planning Commission approved the GPA, ZMA, and CUP with the following revisions: ■ the number of residential units to be reduced from 440 units to 330 units (87 du/ac) ® a walkability/pedestrian access plan within the project site and to adjacent sites and landscape plans to be submitted for Design Review Board approval • the subject site to provide an irrevocable offer to dedicate a reciprocal accessway between the subject site and adjacent southerly property. A complete list of conditions approved by the Planning Commission is provided as ATTACHMENT NO. 7. D. APPEAL: On October 10, 2008, two appeals of the Planning Commission's action were filed. Councilmember Jill Hardy filed an appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of the proposed project to allow the City Council an opportunity to review The Ripcurl project and all associated entitlements in its entirety (ATTACHMENT NO. 13). Red Oak Investments, applicant, also filed an appeal of Conditions of Approval No. 1.a., 3.a., 3.b., and 5.a. imposed with the Planning Commission's approval of the Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043 (ATTACHMENT NO. 14). Condition of Approval No. 1.a. relates to the reduction of the number of units allowed for the project. Conditions of Approval No. 3.a., 3.b., and 5.a. are conditions from the Public Works Department relating to raker braces, tie-back anchors, and underground storm drain pipe. E. STAFF ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION Appeal No. 1: Councilmember Jill Hardy's Appeal The analysis below focuses on the appeal filed by Councilmember Jill Hardy on October 10, 2008. The primary reason for the appeal is to allow the City Council an opportunity to review The Ripcurl project and all associated entitlements in its entirety. A brief summary of each entitlement is presented below. -7- 10/29/2008 2:53 PM REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 11/10/2008 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL 08-12 Environmental Impact Report: The EIR provides a detailed analysis of potential impacts associated with the proposed project. It is intended to serve as an informational document for decisions to be made by the City and responsible agencies regarding the project. The issues discussed in the EIR are those that have been identified in the course of extensive review of all potentially significant environmental impacts associated with the project. The EIR discusses potential adverse impacts in 14 issue areas. The direct, indirect and cumulative impacts of the project are addressed, as are the impacts of project alternatives. Through the use of appropriate mitigation measures identified in the EIR, the majority of the potentially adverse impacts associated with the project can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level. However, there are four adverse environmental impacts anticipated from the proposed project that cannot be completely eliminated through mitigation measures. The adverse environmental impacts are in the areas of population and housing and traffic/transportation as follows: Population and Housing ® The project would have a considerable contribution to the cumulative population growth, exceeding the SCAG population projections for the City for 2015. Because of this substantial increase, the cumulative impact is considered significant and unavoidable. Traffic/Transportation ■ The project would have a significant contribution to the deficiency of the 1-405 northbound loop ramp from Beach Boulevard in both the AM and PM peak hours in 2014. ■ The project would have a long-range significant impact, at the project level, at the intersection of the 1-405 southbound ramps at Center Avenue during the PM peak hour in 2030. In addition, the project contributes to traffic deficiencies on 1-405 in 2030. ■ The project would have a long-range significant and unavoidable impact, at the cumulative level, at the intersection of the 1-405 southbound ramps and Center Avenue during the PM peak hour in 2030. The EIR documents that although an adequate mitigation is identified for the second traffic/transportation impact, it is deemed significant and unavoidable because implementation is dependent on Caltrans. Caltrans has since submitted a letter indicating its agreement with the mitigation measure. The EIR also documents that the third traffic/transportation impact becomes less than significant if the General Plan Amendment for The Village at Bella Terra is approved; this project received initial approval from the Planning Commission on October 14, 2008. The adoption and implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, notwithstanding) approval of the project requires that a Statement of Overriding Considerations be adopted, finding that the economic and social benefits of the proposed project outweigh its potentially adverse impact. Prior to certification and adoption of the EIR by resolution, the City Council -8- 10/29/2008 2:53 PM REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 11/10/2008 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PE 08-12 may amend the document. It should be noted, however, that removal of any of the recommended mitigation measures will require findings and justification. Consistent with CEQA requirements, the EIR includes an analysis of alternatives to the project. Four alternatives were selected for detailed analysis. Alternative 4, consisting of 385 units and 8,500 sq. ft. of commercial uses, was deemed the environmentally superior alternative because it would reduce traffic impacts associated with the project, including eliminating the cumulative impact. Staff is recommending a modified Alternative (385 units and 10,000 sq. ft. of commercial uses) for City Council approval. A complete overview of EIR No. 07-004 is provided in the Planning Commission staff report (ATTACHMENT NO. 15). Staff and the Planning Commission concur that the EIR meets the requirements of CEQA and recommend the City Council certify it accordingly. Zoning Text Amendment: The Zoning Text Amendment represents a request by the applicant to amend the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance (HBZSO) by adding Chapter 218 to establish the Mixed Use-Transit Center District zoning and development standards in order to facilitate development of The Ripcurl project. However, the proposed ordinance has applicability beyond The Ripcurl site. The analysis takes this into consideration and evaluates the proposed ordinance on its merits, independent of The Ripcurl project. The analysis focuses on 1) the overall objectives of allowing mixed use development, 2) the location criteria recommended by staff, and 3) the proposed development standards. A complete analysis of ZTA No. 07-004 is provided in the Planning Commission staff report (ATTACHMENT NO. 16). Staff concurs with the Planning Commission's action on the ZTA and recommends the City Council approve the request as modified. Mixed Use Development The growing trend towards mixed land use development in Southern California is part of the larger shift in thinking about managing future growth. As the population continues to increase and protecting the environment takes on new importance, smart growth and sustainable development have become more vital as communities consider their futures. Smart growth focuses on sustainable long-term strategies for managing the growth of communities. It is designed to create livable cities, promote economic development, contribute to a wider range of housing opportunities and options, minimize dependence on auto transportation, reduce air pollution, and make infrastructure investments more efficient. Sustainable development has become more critical in the face of dwindling land and environmental resources. By moving closer to efficient use of existing resources and conserving energy through reduced reliance on the automobile, mixed use developments would ensure that communities continue to thrive. The City of Huntington Beach has long recognized the importance of Mixed Use as a land use tool to manage growth and stimulate economic activity within specified areas. As early -9- 10/28/2008 1:06 PM REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 11/10/2008 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PI_ 08-12 as 1983, the Downtown Specific Plan was envisioned to implement many of the smart growth, mixed use principles discussed above. Moreover, the City of Huntington Beach General Plan currently contains three Mixed Use land use designations, which apply to numerous areas throughout the city, as well as many objectives and policies that are fulfilled by and foster mixed use development. The proposal to develop mixed use development standards is consistent with the General Plan and has been a needed addition to the HBZSO since the General Plan update in 1996 to provide a zoning category consistent with General Plan policies. In addition, the State Department of Housing and Community Development has acknowledged the importance of mixed use in the provision of needed housing in a community, and the City's recently adopted Housing Element contains a program requiring that the City adopt mixed use standards by 2008/2009. Transit Oriented Development and Location Criteria The proposed Mixed Use-Transit Center District development standards require proximity to transit. Generally referred to as transit-oriented developments (TODs), they advance smart growth goals by creating mixed use, higher density communities and providing a concentration of living, shopping, entertainment, educational, and employment opportunities within walking distance of transit stations. TOD neighborhoods typically occur within one quarter mile, or a five to seven minute walk, of a transit station but can extend to within a half-mile radius. By requiring high quality urban design and attractive pedestrian connections between uses, TODs create a vibrant sense of place. The proposed Mixed Use-Transit Center District is targeted to a very specific area where development could occur with minimal impacts to the predominant character of the city of Huntington Beach and the surrounding area. Consistent with the more restrictive industry "standard" referenced above, staff is recommending that the proposed zoning category only be available for properties within one-quarter mile of an established transit center, after processing a general plan amendment and a zoning map amendment (ATTACHMENT NO. 17). Currently the Golden West Transportation Center is the only such center in the city. As such, the radius does not extend south of Edinger nor does it extend all the way to Goldenwest Street or Beach Boulevard. Specifically, the one-quarter mile radius includes portions of the Bella Terra specific plan area, portions of the North Huntington Center specific plan area, and portions of the area proposed to be included in the Beach Edinger Specific Plan that would allow mixed use. In addition, the radius includes part of the Goldenwest College campus. In terms of properties that could more realistically benefit from the zoning category, the radius includes The Ripcurl site, the Levitz site, the redevelopment agency- owned property east of the Transit center, and the commercial property at the northwest corner of Gothard and Edinger. All of these properties are located a reasonable distance from detached single family neighborhoods such that redevelopment of these properties pursuant to the proposed zoning standards would not result in compatibility issues, nor undermine the suburban, and urban fabric of the city. The restriction of the proposed Mixed Use-Transit Center District zoning to within one-quarter radius of the existing transit center is consistent with the current planning efforts envisioned -10- 10/29/2008 2:52 PM REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 11/10/2008 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL 08-12 for the general area such as the Beach-Edinger Corridors Specific Plan and The Village at Bella Terra proposal. Planned for more intensive growth, the vision of the revitalization effort is to transform the area into a hub of high-density, mixed-use development that fits within its urban context. Proposed Development Standards The table below summarizes the development standards of the Mixed Use-Transit Center District originally proposed by the applicant, originally recommended by staff, and approved by the Planning Commission and agreed upon by staff and the applicant. The legislative draft, containing the entire chapter, incorporates the changes made by the Planning Commission (ATTACHMENT NO. 18). The applicant has provided a letter indicating agreement with some of staff's originally recommended changes (ATTACHMENT NO. 19). In reviewing the applicant's proposed Mixed Use-Transit Center District standards, staff compared the proposed zoning and development standards with the current HBZSO and the draft standards being considered for the Beach-Edinger Corridors Specific Plan (ATTACHMENT NO. 16, PAGE 4-1). Staff also researched Planning literature and other mixed use ordinances from similar cities in size and development pattern. The development standards are summarized in the table below: CHAPTER 218 (New) Originally Originally Approved by the, Proposed by the Recommended by Planning Commission Applicant Staff and Supported by Staff and Applicant Minimum Lot Area 43,560 sq. ft. 43,560 sq. ft. 43,560 sq. ft. Minimum Lot Width 100 ft. 100 ft. 100 ft. Setbacks Front 5 ft. 5 ft. 5 ft. Side 5 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. Rear 5 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. Maximum Height of 76 ft. 80 ft. 75 ft. Structures (a minimum of 2 stories (a minimum of 2 stories and a maximum of 6 and a maximum of 6 stories) stories Maximum Floor Area 3.0 2.5 2.35 Ratio FAR Minimum Site 8% 8% 8% Landscaping Minimum Lot Area per 335 sq. ft. -- -- Dwelling Unit Minimum Residential Floor Area Studio 450 sq. ft. each dwelling unit shall each dwelling unit shall One Bedroom 550 sq. ft. have a minimum floor have a minimum floor Two Bedrooms 800 sq. ft. area of 450 sq. ft. area of 500 sq. ft. Three+ Bedrooms 1000 sq. ft. -11- 10/29/2008 2:55 PM REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 11/10/2008 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL 08-12 CHAPTER 218 (New) Originally Originally Approved by the Proposed by the Recommended by Planning Commission Applicant Staff and Supported by Staff and Applicant Minimum Open Space Per Residential Unit 150 sq. ft. 150 sq. ft. 150 sq. ft. Private Open Space -- 60 sq. ft. 60 sq. ft. Minimum Dimension 5 ft. 6 ft. 6 ft. Off-Street Parking and Loading Studio/One Bedroom 1 space per unit 1 space per unit 1 space per unit Two Bedrooms 2 spaces per unit 2 spaces per unit 2 spaces per unit Three+ Bedrooms 2.5 spaces per unit 2.5 spaces per unit 2.5 spaces per unit Guest Parking 1 space per 10 units 1 space per 4 units 1 space per 4 units Compact and No compact or tandem No compact or tandem tandem spaces shall spaces shall be spaces shall be allowed. be allowed. Tandem allowed. spaces shall be counted as 'h of a space. Not more than 25% of the parking requirement shall be met by any combination of compact or tandem parking spaces. Building Design -- 1) the maximum 1) the maximum building Standards building length shall be length shall be 300 ft., 300 ft., with exceptions with exceptions for a 20 for a 20 foot inset foot inset 2) the maximum block 2) the maximum block size shall be 2,400 size shall be 2,400 feet. feet. Private Storage Space -- A minimum of 50 cu. ft. An average of 50 cu. ft. per unit per unit Reciprocal Access Reciprocal ingress/ egress access with adjacent properties shall be provided for all properties. Development standards are used to limit the intensity of activity, size, and location of buildings on a piece of land. The use of floor area ratio and density are two different approaches used to determine the intensity of land use on an area of land. Floor area ratio (FAR) limits how intensively a lot may be built upon, by regulating the bulk and mass of buildings. FAR is the floor area of the building divided by the area of the lot. Density limits the number of dwelling units which may be built on a piece of land by requiring a minimum number of square feet of lot area per dwelling unit. FAR is a more useful control in -12- 10/28/2008 1:06 PM REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 11/10/2008 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL 08-12 determining the character of an area because it regulates the bulk and mass of buildings through development standards such as setbacks and height limits. Because density only affects the size of dwelling units, it does not provide consistency in the size of buildings as the same density limit could result in a smaller building mass if the units are small or a larger building mass if the units are large. If the intent is to achieve the consistency in the development character of an area, FAR is the appropriate method to implement that vision. General Plan Amendment: The request is to amend the General Plan Land Use designation on the approximately 3.8- acre site from the current CG-F1-d (Commercial General-0.35 Floor Area Ratio—Design Overlay) designation to the proposed M-F7-d (Mixed Use-3.0 Floor Area Ratio—Design Overlay) designation and to amend the General Plan Land Use Element by removing the subject area from Subarea 5E of the Community District and Subarea Schedule. The existing General Plan Land Use designation for the site is Commercial General (CG), which permits a range of commercial activities. Subarea 5E, "Student Center", allows community-serving commercial uses in two-story high buildings that achieve a unified "village" environment with common courtyards and pedestrian areas. The maximum allowable floor area ratio is 0.35 (57,934 sq. ft.) and the development is subject to special design standards. The proposed General Plan Land Use designation is Mixed Use (M), which allows for townhomes, garden apartments, and mid-/high-rise apartments and a range of commercial uses. To permit greater design flexibility and to address the uniqueness of a particular area, the exact density, location, and mix of uses are not specified. Staff proposes a maximum allowable floor area ratio of 3.0 and that the design overlay remain on the property, indicating the development is subject to special design standards. The proposed amendment for the General Plan Land Use designation to mixed use for the subject site is a mechanism to achieve the goals of smart growth and sustainable development. The subject site is surrounded by a variety of uses that are critical to any vibrant community such as commercial and entertainment uses, employment centers, a transit hub, and a school. The site allows an opportunity for an infill development that is more compact in design and higher in density. In addition, the area in the vicinity of the project site is targeted for revitalization efforts. The draft Beach-Edinger Corridors Specific Plan includes a vision of smart growth and sustainable development, incorporating more intensive mixed use development for the Edinger Avenue segment specifically. The Village at Bella Terra, the site east of the project site, is also proposing a mixed use project. Furthermore, the site is located at the intersection of two arterials and in close proximity to the 1-405 freeway. Because of its unique location and in light of the current planning efforts, the project site is an appropriate location to accommodate the proposed growth while minimizing off-site impacts to other areas of the City. Close proximity to a variety of uses offers convenient opportunities for people to live, work, and play utilizing alternative modes of transportation such as walking or biking. -13- 10/29/2008 2:56 PM REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 11/10/2008 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL 08-12 Zoning Map Amendment: The request is to amend the Zoning designation on the 3.8-acre site from the current CG (Commercial General) designation to the proposed MU-TCD (Mixed Use-Transit Center District) designation. The Zoning Map Amendment would provide consistency with the proposed General Plan Land Use designation of Mixed Use. The existing Zoning designation for the subject site is Commercial General (CG). This designation permits a full range ,of retail and service businesses such as but not limited to: Group Residential, Community and Human Services, Convalescent Facilities, Day Care, Heliports, Hospitals, Religious Assembly, Schools (private or public), Utilities (minor or major), Animal Sales and Services, Building Materials and Services, Commercial Recreation and Entertainment, Eating and Drinking Establishments, Maintenance and Repair Services, Offices, Retail Sales, Vehicle Equipment Repair, Visitor Accommodations, etc. Development standards permit: minimum lot size of 10,000 sq. ft., minimum lot width 100 feet, maximum building height of 50 feet, maximum floor area ratio of 1.5, and minimum of 8% landscaping. Additional requirements are identified in Chapter 211, Commercial Districts. The proposed Mixed Use-Transit Center District Zoning designation is a new zoning designation that currently does not exist on the Zoning Map. As proposed, this designation permits multiple-family residential uses and a range of retail and service businesses such as but not limited to: Clubs and Lodges, Day Care, Religious Assembly, Schools (private and public), Eating and Drinking Establishments, Offices, Personal Services, Retail Sales, Visitor Accommodations, etc. As approved by the Planning Commission, development standards require: minimum lot size of 43,560 sq. ft. (one acre), minimum lot width 100 feet, maximum building height of 75 feet, maximum floor area ratio of 2.35, and minimum of 8% landscaping. Additional requirements are identified in the draft Ordinance for Chapter 218, Mixed Use- Transit Center District (ATTACHMENT NO. 3). The amendment of the Zoning designation for the subject site from Commercial to Mixed Use-Transit Center District implements the proposed General Plan Land Use designation of Mixed Use. This change is related to the focus on smart growth and sustainable development mentioned in the General Plan Amendment section above. Mixed use development is a strategy to meet the goals of smart growth. The benefits of mixed use development include producing an environment which is both attractive and sustainable by increasing housing options for diverse household types, promoting alternative modes of transportation, creating a local sense of place, reducing infrastructure and maintenance costs, and allowing for more efficient use of land resources. Transit-oriented development is about widening the choices on where to live and how to travel, rejuvenating urban neighborhoods, and bringing more people into everyday social interactions. Conditional Use Permit: The primary factors to consider when analyzing this project are compatibility with surrounding land uses, density, site layout/design, compliance with the proposed Mixed Use-Transit -14- 10/28/2008 1:06 PM REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 11/10/2008 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL 08-12 Center District standards, and affordable housing. A detailed discussion of these issues for CUP No. 07-043 is provided in the Planning Commission staff report (ATTACHMENT NO. 20). Compatibility with Surrounding Land Uses There is a mix of land uses in the vicinity of the project site such as commercial and entertainment uses, employment centers, an educational use, a transit hub, and mixed-uses. Because of the project site's location, it allows an opportunity for an infill development that is more compact in design and higher in density while protecting the residential areas of the City. The project site is an appropriate location to combine housing and economic activity to provide both living and employment options for a wide range of people. The mix of land uses contemplated by the proposed project as well as those already existing in the vicinity would create a dynamic environment where people can live, work, and play within walking distance. The population increase would enhance the economic viability of the area by supplying a customer base for the area businesses. Not only would the proposed project be compatible with the surrounding land uses, it would generate synergy by creating better places to live within an urban context. Density The current General Plan and Zoning designations of Commercial General do not allow multi-family residential uses. Part of the request is to establish a new zoning designation and category of Mixed Use-Transit Center District (MU-TCD) in order to implement the proposed project. This new zoning category would allow for high density residential and commercial uses within one-quarter mile of established transit centers. The intent is to provide pedestrian-friendly, transit-oriented developments in areas adjacent to existing transit infrastructure. The proposed Zoning Text Amendment does not specify a density limit. Although there are no specified density limits, there are development standards that would restrict the mass and bulk of the project such as setbacks, building height, maximum floor area ratio, maximum site coverage, minimum open space, parking requirements, and building design standards. The Environmental Impact Report for The Ripcurl project identified Alternative 4: Reduced Project Alternative—Option 2, consisting of 385 residential units and 8,500 sq. ft. of commercial/retail space, as the environmentally superior project. Implementation of this Alternative would reduce the cumulative, significant and unavoidable traffic impact caused by the proposed project to a less-than-significant level. Alternative 4 would satisfy all of the identified project objectives related to developing dense residential uses within close proximity to transit, schools, and regional activities as well as retail opportunities. Staff is recommending approval of a modified Alternative 4 project with 385 residential units but 10,000 sq. ft. of commercial/retail space. The density of the recommended project would be approximately 101 units per net acre (385 units) as opposed to the applicant's proposed project of approximately 115 units per net acre (440 units). Since the area surrounding the project site is targeted for revitalization efforts that include more intensive mixed use -15- 10/29/2008 2:58 PM REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 11/10/2008 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL 08-12 development, the more compact design and high density of the proposed project is appropriate for the site and is supported by the environmental analysis. In addition, the proposed MU-TCD zoning regulations do not include a density limitation, but incorporate other development standards to shape the bulk and mass of the project consistent with the intent and vision of the form-based planning effort along the Beach/Edinger corridor. Site Layout and Architectural Treatment The proposed project is designed as a vertical mixed-use development with the retail and live/work component on the ground level and the residential component above. Having this separation between residential and commercial uses would ensure compatibility of these uses on-site. Access to the development will be taken from both Gothard Street and Center Avenue. Pedestrian access to the retail stores and live/work units is provided along the project frontage on Gothard Street and Center Avenue. Pedestrian access to the residential units on the podium level is provided by two secured lobbies at the street level. Primary access to commercial parking is from Gothard Street and to residential parking from Center Avenue. This layout is designed to mitigate potential conflicts between these uses such as noise, security, and access. The first residential or podium level is designed to have residential units that surround two central courtyards that are open to the sky. This level includes amenities that are available for the tenants' use, including a pool and spa area, fire pit, movie projection area, a fitness center, business center, conference room and clubhouse. There is also a creatively designed lounge/roof top deck element on the fifth level that allows interaction with the streetscape below. The open space amenities are centrally located and provide a variety of recreational options for tenants. The layout of the open space areas provides a focal point for the development and facilitates social interaction among neighbors. The architectural treatment of the buildings includes numerous features that contribute to an attractive design, such as building offsets, distinct entries, courtyards, balconies, varied rooflines, and window treatments (ATTACHMENT NO. 21). The architectural theme of the project is a coastal Mediterranean design. The project is utilizing a variety of building materials, design elements, and colors to differentiate and complement the residential and commercial components of the project as well as to accentuate the corner of the building. The use of building materials, colors, and paving materials are designed to convey a high quality visual image and character for the development. The Design Review Board recommended that architectural projections and recesses be provided on all building elevations except for the building elevations that face each other and the height of parapet walls be reduced to two feet and the score-line design be maintained. Incorporation of the Design Review Board's recommended changes will enhance the building's architecture and make it more compatible with the character of the surrounding area. -16- 10/29/2008 2:59 PM REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 11/10/2008 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL 08-12 Compliance with Proposed Mixed Use-Transit Center District Development standards The project would comply with the proposed Mixed Use-Transit Center District development standards in the following areas: ■ minimum lot area and lot width . minimum setbacks ■ maximum building height - maximum floor area ratio ■ minimum landscaping - minimum unit size ■ building design standards The project as designed with 440 units would not comply with the minimum open space, off- street parking, and private storage space requirements. If the proposed Mixed Use-Transit Center District development standards are adopted, the applicant would be required to modify the design to comply with all development standards, including minimum open space, off-street parking, and private storage space. At the Planning Commission public hearing, the applicant indicated agreement with the modifications to the development standards as approved by the Planning Commission. The table below is a comparison of the recommended MU-TCD requirements and the proposed project. However, if the staff recommendation for a 385-unit project is approved, the open space and off-street parking totals will change. Developlment Standards Proposed MU-TCD., Tfi'e`YRpcurl Minimum Open Space Per Residential Unit 66,000 sq. ft. (150 sq. ft./unit) 60,443 sq. ft. (137 sq. ft./unit) Private Open Space 26,400 sq. ft. (60 sq. ft./unit) 22,000 sq. ft. (50 sq. ft./unit) Minimum Dimension 6 ft. 4 ft. 6 in. Off-Street Parking and Loading Residential 151 studio units 151 spaces (1/unit) 151 spaces (1/unit) 190 one-bedroom units 190 spaces (1/unit) 190 spaces (1/unit) 88 two-bedroom units 176 spaces (2/unit) 176 spaces (2/unit) 11 live/work units 11 spaces (1/unit) 11 spaces (1/unit) guest parking 110 spaces (0.25/unit) 44 spaces (0.10/unit) Commercial (10,000 sf) 50 spaces (1/200 sq. ft.) 50 spaces (1/200 sq. ft.) Extra 83 spaces Total Required 688 spaces 705 spaces tandem and compact parking 518 standard spaces spaces are not allowed 105 tandem spaces 82 compact s aces Private Storage Space per Unit 50 cu. ft. 0 cu. ft. -17- 10/29/2008 2:59 PM REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 11/10/2008 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL 08-12 Affordable Housing The proposed mixed-use development would be required to provide affordable housing. According to the HBZSO, all new residential developments are required to provide the equivalent of 10 percent of the total units (44 units for the 440-unit proposed project, or 39 units for the reduced project of 385) as affordable. Affordability and income levels are based on Orange County median income levels and whether the affordable units are for-sale or for rent. The applicant provided a draft affordable housing plan (ATTACHMENT NO. 23) that proposed to provide the affordable units in the following manner: • affordable units will be made available to very low, low, or moderate-income households ® at least one-fifth of the total required affordable units will be provided on-site ■ up to four-fifths of the total required affordable units will be provided off-site at one or multiple sites within the City using some combination of the following: building new units, renovating existing units, acquiring existing units, subsidizing the construction of another affordable housing project, partnering with another group to create affordable housing. As part of the Mixed Use-Transit Center District zoning text amendment, staff is recommending that the proposed project comply with all the requirements set forth in Section 230.26 of the HBZSO, Affordable Housing. The applicant has submitted a letter in conjunction with the Zoning Text Amendment report indicating their agreement with that recommendation. Staff would note that the only portion of the applicant's plan that does not currently comply with the HBZSO is the request to be able to provide some of the units at the moderate income level. The City's existing affordable housing ordinance requires that affordable rental units be provided to very low or low income households. In practice, the City has only required the affordable rental units at the low income level due to the fact that very low income units can realistically only be provided with significant subsidy from a governmental or non-profit agency. The ordinance also states that for-sale units can be at the median income level. Based on recent direction from the City Council Ad Hoc Committee on Affordable Housing, staff is working on revisions to the affordable housing ordinance to remove the language regarding very low income units and to increase the median income level to moderate income, which is what the City's affordable housing policy had been for more than a decade. The revisions to the ordinance are tentatively scheduled for Planning Commission and City Council action in the next two months. Based on the nature of the project and the fact that the affordable housing ordinance may be modified prior to The Ripcurl applicant receiving a building permit, or even final approvals, staff recommends a condition of approval that is reflective of that modification. As part of staff's recommendation to approve the project with 385 units, staff recommends that 33 percent of the affordable units be provided on-site. This condition would result in a minimum of 13 low income rental units and 372 market rate rental units on the project site. -18- 10/29/2008 3:00 PM REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 11/10/2008 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL 08-12 The remaining 26 affordable units could be provided off-site as (currently) median-income level for-sale units or as low-income rental units. While staff's recommendation of 33 percent of the units on-site results in a greater financial burden on the applicant than their proposal of 20 percent, staff believes that this is reasonable given the greater density that is being recommended for the site. With the Planning Commission's action approving the project with 330 units, the required on-site affordable housing requirement was reduced to 25 percent. Finally, staff does not think that a more restrictive affordable housing obligation should be imposed on the project in recognition of the important contribution that this project will make to the City's rental stock. As documented in the recent Housing Element update, the City's vacancy rate for rental housing is approximately two percent; however, industry standards call for a five percent rate. This is indicative of how needed rental housing is in Huntington Beach. The City has not had a new rental project of the caliber and size of The Ripcurl project in over a decade. Even market rate rental housing provides an affordable housing alternative for a variety of household types, from single person households to empty nesters, and is an essential component in accommodating the housing needs of the diverse population in the city. Appeal No. 2: Applicant's Appeal The analysis below focuses on the appeal filed by Red Oak Investments, applicant, on October 10, 2008. The letter includes an appeal of Conditions of Approval No. 1.a., 3.a., 3.b., and 5.a. imposed with the Planning Commission's approval of the Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043. Condition of Approval No. 1.a. relates to the reduction of the number of units allowed for the project. Conditions of Approval No. 3.a., 3.b., and 5.a. are conditions imposed by the Public Works Department relating to raker braces, tie-back anchors, and underground storm drain pipe. Condition of Approval No. 1.a.: The Planning Commission approved the project on September 30, 2008 with the revised condition of approval 1.a. that states: "The project shall be revised to reduce the number of residential units from 440 units to 330 units and retain the 10,000 sq. ft. of commercial/retail space." In analyzing the proposed project, the Planning Commission compared the project with similar mixed use projects that the applicant had built in Pasadena. Citing the residential density limit of 87 du/ac for one of the mixed use projects in the City of Pasadena, the Planning Commission approved The Ripcurl project with the same density or 330 units for the 3.8 acre site. In filing the appeal of the 330 residential unit limitation for the project, the applicant is concerned that there is insufficient evidence or reasoned rationale to support the imposition -19- 10/29/2008 3:00 PM REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 11/10/2008 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL 08-12 of the unit limitation. The applicant would like to have the ability to build up to their proposal for 440 units, allowing them the choice to develop a project that responds to the current market demand. In addition, the applicant has indicated that the reduction in residential units would have an impact on the financial feasibility of the project. Staff's recommendation of 385 residential units for the project is based on the environmentally superior project (Alternative 4: Reduced Project Alternative—Option 2) identified in the Environmental Impact Report. Implementation of this Alternative would reduce the cumulative significant and unavoidable traffic impacts caused by the proposed project to a less-than-significant level. Alternative 4 would satisfy all of the identified project objectives related to developing dense residential uses within close proximity to transit, schools, and regional activities as well as retail opportunities. Conditions of Approval No. 3.a., 3.b., and 5.a.: Conditions of Approval No. 3.a., 3.b., and 5.a. are conditions imposed by the Public Works Department relating to raker braces, tie-back anchors, and underground storm drain pipe. These are technical requirements that are project specific and rely on the outcome of technical studies such as the Geotechnical Report and Hydrology and Hydraulics Report. The applicant is requesting to modify the conditions to allow the Public Works Director the ability to amend the conditions administratively in the event of changed circumstances or new information. This would provide the applicant with some flexibility in implementing these conditions to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works. Staff is recommending that the Conditions of Approval No. 3.a., 3.b., and 5.a. to be modified to read as follows: 3.a.: Raker braces per the preliminary Geotechnical Report (dated December 12, 2006) shall be used for lateral support of the temporary shoring during the construction phase of the project as deemed necessary by the Public Works Director. 3.b.: Tie-back anchors will not be allowed in the public right-of-way (under Gothard Street or Center Avenue) or under any adjacent private property (Levitz and Southern California Edison) as deemed necessary by the Public Works Director. 5.a.: The project developer shall construct an underground storm drain pipe along the east side of Gothard Street from Center Avenue to Edinger Avenue to connect to the existing, underground Edinger Avenue storm drain pipe as deemed necessary based on a Final Hydrology and Hydraulics Report. As necessary, the new Gothard Street, underground storm drain facility sizing and design shall be targeted to convey the highest storm event exceedance flow rates along Gothard Street at full build-out of the General Plan, including contributions from any permanent groundwater dewatering system. The proposed project onsite storm drainage system shall be designed to convey -20- 10/29/2008 3:01 PM REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 11/10/2008 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL 08-12 all water quality treated flow directly into the new underground storm drain pipe along Gothard Street, as deemed necessary." In addition, staff is recommending two new conditions of approval be added to the approval of The Ripcurl project. Condition of Approval No. 4.c. would implement the goals and policies of the General Plan in strengthening community identity. Condition of Approval No. 10 would allow the Director of Planning the ability to approve minor amendments to plans and/or conditions of approval as appropriate based on new information or changed design. Condition of Approval No. 4.c. reads as follows: 4.c. A public art element, approved by the Design Review Board, Director of Planning, and Director of Huntington Beach Art Center, shall be designated on the plans. Public Art shall be innovative, original, and of artistic excellence; appropriate to the design of the project; and reflective of the community's cultural identity (ecology, history, or society). Condition of Approval No. 10 reads as follows: 10. The Development Services Departments (Building & Safety, Fire, Planning and Public Works) shall be responsible for ensuring compliance with all applicable code requirements and conditions of approval. The Director of Planning may approve minor amendments to plans and/or conditions of approval as appropriate based on changed circumstances, new information or other relevant factors. Any proposed plan/project revisions shall be called out on the plan sets submitted for building permits. Permits shall not be issued until the Development Services Departments have reviewed and approved the proposed changes for conformance with the intent of the City Council's action. If the proposed changes are of a substantial nature, an amendment to the original entitlement reviewed by the City Council may be required pursuant to the provisions of HBZSO Section 241.18. F. SUMMARY: The proposed project furthers General Plan goals, objectives, and policies that achieve a diversity of land uses that sustain the City's economic viability, while maintaining the City's environmental resources, scale, and character. In addition, the project facilitates mixed-use development that produces an environment that is both attractive and sustainable by increasing housing options for diverse household types, promoting alternative modes of transportation, creating a local sense of place, reducing infrastructure and maintenance costs, and allowing for more efficient use of land resources. The project is compatible with adjacent commercial, educational, and transportation uses, and the site is physically suitable for a higher-density, transit-oriented development with a mix of residential and commercial land uses. -21- 10/30/2008 3:57 PM REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 11/10/2008 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL 08-12 Staff recommends that the City Council certify the EIR and approve the project based on the suggested findings and subject to the conditions of approval as recommended by staff with 385 residential units. In addition, staff is recommending the approval of modified CEQA Statement of Findings and Fact with a Statement of Overriding Considerations to reflect the approval of 385 residential units. Strategic Plan Goal: Strategic Plan Goal: Establish the vision and create a land use plan for reuse of critical parcels so that the next phase of the community investment and improvement can begin. The proposed project will be consistent with good zoning practice and implements the goals of smart growth and sustainable development. The amendments to land use designations and creation of a new Mixed Use-Transit Center District zoning focus on the long-term strategies for managing growth in the community. The proposed mixed use project will contribute to the overall vision of the area to create livable cities, promote economic development, provide a wider range of housing opportunities, minimize dependence on auto transportation, and make infrastructure investments more efficient. Environmental Status: The project's potential environmental impacts are analyzed and discussed in Environmental Impact Report No. 07-004. Although the project results in adverse cumulative impacts to the environment that cannot be mitigated or avoided, the City Council may still approve the project if a Statement of Overriding Considerations is approved. CEQA requires decision makers to balance the benefits of the proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project. If the benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the City may consider the adverse environmental effects acceptable. In this particular case, staff and the Planning Commission believe the benefits of the proposed project outweigh the adverse impacts to population and housing and traffic/transportation. The cumulative adverse population and housing impact is a result of the considerable contribution to the cumulative population growth, exceeding the SCAG population projections for the City for 2015. The adverse traffic impacts include: 1) the project's significant contribution to the deficiency of the 1-405 northbound loop ramp from Beach Boulevard in both the AM and PM peak hours in 2014; 2) the project's significant impact, at the project level, at the intersection of the 1-405 southbound ramps at Center Avenue during the PM peak hour in 2030 and traffic deficiencies on 1-405 in 2030; and 3) the project's impact, at the cumulative level, at the intersection of the 1-405 southbound ramps and Center Avenue during the PM peak hour in 2030. Approval of the project will facilitate the development of a mixed use project that produces an environment which is both attractive and sustainable by increasing housing options for diverse household types, promoting alternative modes of transportation, creating a local sense of place, reducing infrastructure and maintenance costs, and allowing for more efficient use of land resources. -22- 10/30/2008 3:58 PM REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 11/10/2008 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PIL 08-12 Prior to any action on Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004, General Plan Amendment No. 07-003, Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001, and Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043, it is necessary for the City Council to review and act on Environmental Impact Report No. 07- 004. Staff is recommending that Environmental Impact Report No. 07-004 be certified as adequate and complete with Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. -23- 10/30/2008 3:58 PM REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 11/10/2008 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL 08-12 Attachment(s): • - NUmber -88 • tiori 1. City Council Resolution No..666, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California, Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2008011069) for The Ripcurl Project 2. Suggested Findings for Approval—Zoning Text Amendment No. 07- 004 3. Ordinance No.32, An Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Amending the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance by Adding Chapter 218, Mixed Use-Transit Center District (Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004) 4. City Council Resolution No. , A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Approving General Plan Amendment No. 07-003 5. Suggested Findings for Approval—Zoning Map Amendment No. 07- - 001 6. Ordinance No jkAP An Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Amending District Map 15 (Sectional District Map 14-5-11) to Rezone the Real Property Generally Located at the Southeast Corner of Gothard Street and Center Avenue from CG (Commercial General) to MU-TCD (Mixed Use-Transit Center District) (Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001) 7. Suggested Findings and Conditions of Approval for Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043 (Planning Commission) 8. Suggested Findings and Conditions of Approval for Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043 (Staff) 9. CEQA Statement of Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations—EIR No. 07-004 (Planning Commission) 10. CEQA Statement of Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations—EIR No. 07-004 (Staff) 11. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Pro ram—EIR No. 07-004 12. Environmental Impact Report No. 07-004—Not Attached—(Available at City Hall-3`d Floor Planning Department) 13. Appeal Letter from Councilmember Jill Hardy dated October 10, 2008 14. Appeal Letter from Red Oak Investments dated October 10, 2008 15. Planning Commission EIR Staff Report dated September 23, 2008 16. 1 Planning Commission ZTA Staff Report dated September 23, 2008 �! - 10/28/2008 1:06 PM REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 11/10/2008 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PL 08-12 17. Properties within One-Quarter Mile Radius of the Transportation Center 18. Leqislative Draft of Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004 19. Letter from Red Oak Investments Regarding Proposed Standards dated September 16, 2008 20. Planning Commission GPA, ZMA, and CUP Staff Report dated September 23, 2008 21. Site Plan, Floor Plans, Elevations, and other site plan exhibits dated August 6, 2008 22. Proiect Narrative dated February 21, 2008 23. Draft Affordable Housing Plan dated August 1, 2008 24. Letters Received Regarding the Proposed Project 25. November 4, 2008 Memo Regarding Public Hearing Notice 26. PowerPoint Presentation Slides -25- 11/512008 12:18 PM ATTACHMENT # 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2008-66 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH#2008011069) FOR THE RIPCURL PROJECT WHEREAS,Environmental Impact Report No. 07-004, State Clearinghouse # 2008011069, ("EIR") was prepared by the City of Huntington Beach ("City") to address the environmental implications of The Ripcurl Project (the "Project"). 1. On January 18, 2008, a Notice of Preparation/Initial Study for the Project was prepared and distributed to the State Clearinghouse, other responsible agencies, trustee agencies and interested parties. 2. After obtaining comments received in response to the Notice of Preparation, and comments received at the public scoping meeting held on February 7, 2008, the City completed preparation of the Draft EIR and filed a Notice of Completion with the State Clearinghouse on July 8, 2008. 3. The Draft EIR was circulated for public review and comment from July 8, 2008 to August 21, 2008 and was available for review at several locations including City Hall, the Huntington Beach Public Library, and the City's website; and Public comments have been received on the Draft EIR, and responses to those comments have been prepared and provided to the City Council as a section within a separately bound document entitled "Final Environmental Impact Report The Ripcurl Project" (the "Responses to Comments"), dated September 2008; and Public Resources Code 21092.5(a) requires that the City of Huntington Beach provide a written proposed response to any public agency that commented on the Environmental Impact Report, and the Response to Comments included in the Final Environmental Impact Report satisfies this provision; and The City Council held a public meeting on the EIR on November 10, 2008, and received and considered public testimony. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, as follows: SECTION 1. Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15132, the Final EIR for the Project is comprised of the Draft EIR and Appendices, the comments received on the Draft EIR, the Responses to Comments (including a list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the Draft EIR), the Text Changes to the Draft EIR (bound together with the Responses to Comments) and all Planning Department Staff Reports to the City Council, including all minutes, transcripts, attachments and 08-1767.004/27704 1 Ices. No. 2008-66 references. All of the above information has been and will be on file with the City of Huntington Beach Department of Planning, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648. SECTION 2. The City Council finds and certifies that the Final EIR is complete and adequate in that it has identified all significant environmental effects of the Project and that there are no known potential environmental impacts not addressed in the Final EIR. SECTION 3. The City Council finds that all significant effects of the Project are set forth in the Final EIR. SECTION 4. The City Council finds that although the Final EIR identifies certain significant environmental effects that will result if the Project is approved, all significant effects which can feasibly be mitigated or avoided have been mitigated or avoided by the incorporation of Project design features, standard conditions and requirements, and by the imposition of mitigation measures on the approved Project. All mitigation measures are included in the "Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Checklist" (also referred to as the "Mitigation Monitoring Program") attached as Exhibit "A" to this Resolution and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 5. The City Council finds that the Final EIR has described reasonable alternatives to the Project that could feasibly obtain the basic objectives of the Project (including the "No Project" Alternative), even when these alternatives might impede the attainment of Project objectives and might be more costly. Further, the City Council finds that a good faith effort was made to incorporate alternatives in the preparation of the Draft EIR and that a reasonable range of alternatives was considered in the review process of the Final EIR and ultimate decisions on the Project. SECTION 6. The City Council finds that no "substantial evidence" (as that term is defined pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15384) has been presented which would call into question the facts and conclusions in the EIR. SECTION 7. The City Council finds that no "significant new information" (as that term is defined pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5) has been added to the EIR after circulation of the Draft EIR. The City Council finds that the minor refinements that have been made in the Project as a result of clarifications in the mitigation measures do not amount to significant new information concerning the Project, nor has any significant new information concerning the Project become known to the City Council through the public hearings held on the Project, or through the comments on the Draft EIR and Responses to Comments. SECTION 8. The City Council finds that the Mitigation Monitoring Program establishes a mechanism and procedures for implementing and verifying the mitigations pursuant to Public Resources Code 21081.6 and hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring 2 Res. No. 2008-66 Program. The mitigation measures shall be incorporated into the Project prior to or concurrent with Project implementation as defined in each mitigation measure. SECTION 9. The City Council finds that the Final EIR reflects the independent review and judgment of the City of Huntington Beach City Council, that the Final EIR was presented to the City Council, and that the City Council reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR prior to approving General Plan Amendment No. 07-003, Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001, Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004, and Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043. SECTION 10. The City Council finds that the Final EIR serves as adequate and appropriate environmental documentation for the Project. The City Council certifies that the Final EIR prepared for the Project is complete, and that it has been prepared in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and CEQA Guidelines. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED, this 10th day of November, 2008 by the following roll call vote: Mayor REVIEW D APPROVED: APPROVED AS TO FORM: City dmAstrator � City Attorney INITIA D APPROVED: Planning Director ATTACHMENT Exhibit A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 3 Res. No. 2008-66 EXHIBIT "A" City of Huntington Beach The R*i curl 0 Project Final Environmental Impact Report: SCH No. 200801 1069 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Prepared for City of Huntington Beach Planning Department 2000 Main Street, Third Floor Huntington Beach, California 92648 Prepared by PBSU 12301 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 430 Los Angeles, California 90025 September 2008 Res. No. 2008-66 MI kgotton Monitortng Program A. INTRODUCTION The Final Environmental Impact Report for The Ripcurl Project (State Clearinghouse #2008011069) identified mitigation measures to reduce the adverse effects of the project in the areas o£ aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, noise, public services,and transportation/traffic. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that agencies adopting environmental impact reports ascertain that feasible mitigation measures are implemented, subsequent to project approval. Specifically, the lead or responsible agency must adopt a reporting or monitoring program for mitigation measures incorporated into a project or imposed as conditions of approval. The program must be designed to ensure compliance during applicable project timing, e.g. design, construction, or operation (Public Resource Code 521081.6). Code Requirements (CRs) that were identified in the Draft EIR are required to be implemented as a result of existing City code and are not considered mitigation measures. Therefore, CRs would be implemented for The Ripcurl Project but these do not require monitoring activity, and are not included in this Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (NIMRP). The MMRP shall be used by the City of Huntington Beach staff responsible for ensuring compliance with mitigation measures associated with The Ripcurl Project. Monitoring shall consist of review of appropriate documentation, such as plans or reports prepared by the party responsible for implementation or by field observation of the mitigation measure during implementation. The following table identifies the mitigation measures by resource area. The table also provides the specific mitigation monitoring requirements, including implementation documentation, monitoring activity, timing and responsible monitoring party_ Verification of compliance with each measure is to be indicated by signature of the mitigation monitor, together with date of verification. The Project Applicant and the Applicant's Contractor shall be responsible for implementation of all mitigation measures, unless otherwise noted in the table. City of Huntington Beach The Ripcurl Project Mitigatib onitoring,and RPOofflng e• • Implementation Responsible Compilance Wigoffon Measure Documenkrfion Monitoring A&W 'riming Monitor VenWcation Sianafwe Date Aesthetics MM4.1.1 To the extent feasible, the Applicant shall use non- Project building plans Review and Plan check prior Planning reflective fapade treatments, such as matte paint or glass approve building to issuance of coatings. Prior to issuance of building permits for the proposed plans for inclusion building permit project, the Applicant shall indicate provision of these materials of features on the building plans. Air Quality MM4.2.1 During construction, operators of any gas or diesel Contract language and Review and Plan check prior Planning fueled equipment, including vehicles, shall be encouraged to turn notes on grading and approve contract to issuance of a off equipment if not in use or left idle for more than five minutes. building plans specifications, grading permit grading and building plans for Perform periodic inclusion field check during construction to ensure compliance MM4.2.2 The Applicant shall require by contract specifications Contract language and Review and Plan check prior Planning that the architectural coating (paint and primer) products used notes on building plans approve contract to issuance of a would have a low VOC rating. Contract specifications shall be specifications and building permit included in the proposed project construction documents, which building plans for shall be reviewed by the City prior to issuance of a building inclusion permit. Biological Resources _ MM4.3.1 Nesting habitat for protected or sensitive avian Developer shall submit Review schedule Plan check prior Planning species: construction schedule and field survey to issuance of a — — 1. Vegetation removal and construction shall occur between (including grading report, and as grading permit September 1 and January 31 whenever feasible activities) as evidence necessary, review 2. Prior to any construction or vegetation removal between i of construction overlap and approve plans February 15 and August 31, a nesting survey shall be with breeding season, indicating conducted by a qualified biologist of all habitats within If construction occurs construction limits 500 feet of the construction area, Surveys shall be during relevant During conducted no less than 14 days and no more than 30 days breeding,developer Perform periodic construction Planning prior to commencement of construction activities and surveys shall present a survey field check to Z N O 2 City of Huntington Beach 00 1Ai.fl§4ti6nMonitprJng, e • Rqportin• Prqarckirri Report ing Pro, Implementation Responsible Compliance Miti on Measure Documentation Monitorin Activ' riming Monitor Verficafion Signature Date will be conducted in accordance with CDFG protocol as report(prepared by a ensure applicable. If no active nests are identified on or within consultant approved by compliance 500 feet of the construction site, no further mitigation is the City)to the City necessary. A copy of the pre-construction survey shall be prior to issuance of a submitted to the City of Huntington Beach If an active nest grading permit. If nests of a MBTA protected species is identified cnsite(per are found, developer established thresholds)a 250-foot no-work buffer shall be shall submit plans maintained between the nest and construction activity. This identifying nest buffer can be reduced in consultation with CDFG and/or locations and limits of USFWS, construction activities. 3. Completion of the nesting cycle shall be determined by qualified ornithologist or biologist. Cultural Resources MM4,4.1 The Applicant shall arrange for a qualified professional Proof of retention of Verify retention of Plan check prior Planning archaeological and paleontological monitor to be present during archaeological and qualified monitors to issuance of all project-related ground-disturbing activities. In addition, all paleontological monitor grading permit construction personnel shall be informed of the need to stop work on the project site in the event of a potential find, until a Throughout qualified archaeologist or paleontologist has been provided the Periodic field ground-disturbing Planning opportunity to assess the significance of the find and implement check to ensure activities appropriate measures to protect or scientifically remove the find. monitors are Construction personnel will also be informed that unauthorized present collection of cultural resources is prohibited. 0 N O The Ripcurl Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 3 0�0 01 e e e e e e • • -a e a s e e Mitigatio Mon' o s s • Repoffin, • Progra Implementation Responsible Complionce MftigaHon Meosure Documentation Monitorin Activ' riming Monitor Venftation Si nature Date MM4.4.2 If archaeological or paleontological resources are Notes on grading plans Review and Plan check prior Planning discovered during ground-disturbing activities, all construction approve grading to issuance of - — activities within 50 feet of the find shall cease until the plans for inclusion grading permit archaeologist/paleontologist evaluates the significance of the resource. In the absence of a determination, all archaeological Throughout and paleontological resources shall be considered significant. If Research design and Review and ground-disturbing Peer review the resource is determined to be significant, the archaeologist or recovery plan, if approve research activities by three paleontologist, as appropriate, shall prepare a research design required design and County- for recovery of the resources in consultation with the State Office recovery plan certified of Historic Preservation that satisfies the requirements of Section 21083.2 of CEQA. The archaeologist or paleontologist professionals shall complete a report of the excavations and findings, and shall submit the report for peer review by three County-certified archaeologists or paleontologists, as appropriate. Upon approval of the report, the City shall submit the report to the South Central Coastal Information Center at California State University, Fullerton, and keep the report on file at the City of Huntington Beach. _ MM4.4.3 In the event of the discovery of a burial, human bone, Notes on grading plans Review and Plan check prior Orange or suspected human bone, all excavation or grading in the approve grading to issuance of County vicinity of the find shall halt immediately, the area of the find shall plans for inclusion grading permit Coroner be protected, and the Applicant shall immediately notify the City &Planning and the Orange County Coroner of the find and comply with the Throughout provisions of P R C. Section 5097. If the human remains are ground-disturbing determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the NAHC, which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendent(MILD). activities The MILD shall complete the inspection of the site within 24 hours of notification, and may recommend scientific removal and non- destructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials. Geology and Soils MM4.5.1 The grading plan prepared for the proposed project Notes on grading plan Review and Plan check prior Public Works shall contain the recommendations of the final soils and and building plans approve grading to issuance of a geotechnical report. These recommendations shall be and building plans grading permit implemented in the design of the project, including but not limited for inclusion of N O 4 City of Huntington Beach o0 aN Mitigpti•n Monitoring • o ReppFfingftog ram Mitigation Monitoring: • O • • • • O • lmplementaHon Responsible Compliance Wgcrfion Measure Documentafion Monifodng AchWty Timing Monitor Venftofion Signature Date to measures associated with site preparation, fill placement, final soils and temporary shoring and permanent dewatering, groundwater geotechnical Building and seismic design features, excavation stability, foundations, soil recommendations Safety stabilization, establishment of deep foundations, concrete slabs and pavements, surface drainage, cement type and corrosion measures, erosion control, shcring and internal bracing, and plan review Hazardous Materials MM4,6.1 In the event that previously unknown or unidentified Risk Management Plan Review and Plan check prior Fire soil and/or groundwater contamination that could present a threat &Site Health and approve any to issuance of -to human health or the environment is encountered during Safety Plan grading plans for any grading construction in the project area, construction activities in the inclusion permit immediate vicinity of the contamination shall cease immediately. If contamination is encountered, a Risk Management Plan shall be prepared and implemented that (1)identifies the contaminants of concern and the potential risk each contaminant would pose to human health and the environment during construction and post-development and (2)describes measures to be taken to protect workers, and the public from exposure to potential site hazards. Such measures could include a range of options, including but not limited to, physical site controls during construction, remediation, long-term monitoring, post- development maintenance or access limitations, or some combination thereof. Depending on the nature of contamination, if any, appropriate agencies shall be notified (e.g., Huntington Beach Fire Department), If needed, a Site Health and Safety Plan that meets Occupational Safety and Health Administration requirements shall be prepared and in place prior to commencement of work in any contaminated area. y O N The Ripcurl Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 5 0®0 �.A�Itjgotkih Monitotino and e e a o e Mitigation • • o • s - • • o • • • Implementation Responsible Compliance Mill on Measure Documentation Montt n AcA riming Monitor VenWcation Signature Date MM4.6.2 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project Methane Testing Plan Review and Prior to Fire shall comply w th HBFD City Specification #429, Methane District approval of testing commence- -- — Building Permit Requirements. A plan for the testing of soils for plan ment of sampling the presence of methane gas shall be prepared and submitted by the Applicant to the HBFD for review and approval, prior to the commencement of sampling. If significant levels of methane gas Prior to issuance are discovered in the soil on the project site, the Applicant's Notes on building and Review and of any grading Fire ----- grading, building and methane plans shall reference that a sub- methane plans approve building permit and during slab methane barrier and vent system will be installed at the and methane gas construction project site per City Specification #429, prior to plan approval. If plans for required by the HBFD, additional methane mitigation measures j appropriate to reduce the level of methane gas to acceptable levels shall be documentation implemented L— Hydrology and Water Quality CoA4.7.1 The project developer shall construct an underground Improvement Plans Review and Plan check prior Public Works storm drain pipe along the east side of Gothard Street from approval of to issuance of Center Avenue to Edinger Avenue to connect to the existing, improvement grading permit underground Edinger Avenue storm drain pipe. Based on a Final plans Hydrology and Hydraulics Report, the new Gothard Street underground storm drain facility sizing and design shall be targeted to convey the highest storm event exceedance flow rates along Gothard Street at full build-out of the General Plan, including contributions from any permanent groundwater dewatering system. The proposed project onsite storm drainage system shall be designed to convey all water quality treated flow directly into the new underground storm drain pipe along Gothard — Street, MM4,7.1 The Applicant shall prepare a Hydrology and Hydrology and Review and Prior to issuance Public Works Hydraulics Report and Drainage Plan that incorporates Hydraulic Report and approve plan and of a precise stormwater attenuation to reduce project site runoff to meet City Drainage Plan documentation grading permit design standards for stormflow in Gothard Street. Prior to receiving a precise grading permit, the Applicant shall prepare an Hydrology and Hydraulics Report detailing proposed Prior to issuance project peak runoff rates for the 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100 year Groundwater Review and of a grading Building& design storm events to Gothard Street, including contributions permit and Safety c N O 6 City of Huntington Beach o®o Mitilgcifib efiftfiha • d Reporting'Pr6gram Mitigation O • • O • Rep-ortingi • • • Implementation Responsible Compliance WigafionMeasure _Documenfaffon Monitoring Achv' riming Monitor Vermcation Signature Date from any permanent groundwater dewatering that may be Dewatering System approve following implemented by the proposed project This Hydrology and Plan dewatering completion of Hydraulics Report shall also identify the existing available system construction capacity for flow in Gothard Street for the design storms and activities evaluate the existing capacity in and potential impacts to the Edinger Avenue system, Murdy Channel, and East Garden Grove-Wintersburg Channel. Based on the Hydrology and Hydraulics Report, the Applicant shall prepare a Drainage Plan that shall incorporate sufficient stormwater attenuation such that the City design standards for flow in Gothard Street are not exceeded It is expected that this may require underground detention facilities. However, detention in underground parking structures shall not be allowed and surface ponding shall be limited to a maximum depth of 8 inches. Attenuation shall be designed for back to back 24-hour storm design storm events that development of the proposed project I would increase peak runoff rates for If either above-ground or below-ground detention facilities are proposed, the Applicant shall consult with the Department of Public Works and vector control agency to develop a design that will be sufficient for stormwater detention but will not present a human health or environmental hazard. A qualified engineer of the Public Works Department shall approve this Hydrology and Hydraulics Report and Drainage Plan prior to issuance of a precise grading permit. The site Drainage Plan shall be coordinated with the WQMP to maximize efficiency of stcrmwater runoff detention/retention and water quality treatment. The Building and Safety Department shall evaluate any proposed permanent groundwater dewatering system to ensure that it would function as required. Following construction, the Building and Safety Department shall verify that any groundwater dewatering system has been implemented as required. _ MM4,7.2 The Applicant shall design and implement project site Grading and Drainage Review and Prior to issuance Public Works drainage features to minimize stormwater runoff and flood waters Plan approval of of a precise Z -- o N The Ripcurl Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 7 00 ' Mitis or lion-Morfitoring •and, - oo • ?!Og,raml Mitigation. • m • and: - e o • • s • Implementation Responsible Compliance MHfgcrffon Measure Documentation Monliloring Acftvhly Timing Monitor Verfication Signature Date from entering into underground parking structures or otherwise Grading and grading permit contribute to flood hazards and shall incorporate flood-proofing Drainage Plan and hydrostatic pressure measures for all below-ground structures Prior to receiving a precise grading permit, the Applicant shall prepare a site Grading and Drainage Plan identifying design elements to minimize underground structure flooding The Grading and Drainage plan shall implement design features to minimize flooding of under ground structures such as, but not limited to: • Grade areas to drain away from the structure entryways. ■ Implement overflow prevention(e.g., berms or dikes,grated inlets, or a combination, thereof)to direct project site runoff and flood flows away from underground structure entryways, ■ Elevate underground structure entryways to two-feet above the existing grade(approximate depth of potential flooding from the East Garden Grove-Wintersburg Channel). ■ Implement sumps and pumps within the underground structures to remove any runoff entering the underground structures(this measure shall also be subject to WQMP and DAMP BMP requirements for discharge treatment and disposal). ® Additionally, the Applicant shall incorporate flood proofing measures to prevent seepage flooding. Underground structures materials and design shall be in accordance with FEMA floodplain development requirements and the 2007 California Building Code for structures subject to flooding and hydrostatic pressures j ■ The geotechnical engineer and/or waterproofing specialist shall prepare design requirements for flood-proofing the underground structures and ensuring that structures are build to withstand hydrostatic pressures. ■ Any utilities located in below grade structures shall be protected from ponding water and seepage in accordance with the geotechnical engineer recommendations and N 8 City of Huntington Beach e• ion. oni • e • e Reporilling PfOgrjoyn Mttigat iono 0 o dhd'Re�porting FrograMi Implementation Responsible Compliance Miligolion Meosure Documentation Monitoring Acffvhly rimin Monitor Ver9cation Signature Date California Building Code, The Applicant shall also design on-site runoff to drain away from building foundations and shall not allow for more than 8 inches of ponding at any location on-site. CoA4.7.2 Prior to receiving a precise grading or building permit, Grading and Drainage Review and Prior to issuance Public Works the Applicant shall prepare a site Grading and Drainage Plan Plan approval of of a precise containing the recommendations of the final Soils and Grading and grading plan Geotechnical Reports analysis for temporary and permanent Drainage Plan groundwater dewatering as well as for surface drainage. Noise MM4.9.1 The Applicant shall require by contract specifications Contract language and Review and Plan check prior Planning that the following construction best management practices notes on grading and approve contract to issuance of a (BMPs) be implemented by contractors to reduce construction building plans specifications, grading permit noise levels: grading and ■ Notification shall be mailed to owners and occupants of all building plans for developed land uses immediately bordering or directly inclusion across the street from the project site area providing a schedule for major construction activities that will occur through the duration of the construction period. In addition, the notification will include the identification and contact number for a community liaison and designated construction manager that would be available on site to monitor construction activities. The construction manager will be located at the on-site construction office during construction hours for the duration of all construction activities. Contract information for the community liaison and construction manager will be located at the construction office; City Hall, and the police department ® Ensure that construction equipment is properly muffled according to industry standards ■ Place noise-generating construction equipment and locate construction staging areas away from sensitive uses, where feasible Implement noise attenuation measures to the extent feasible, c N C The Ripcurl Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 9 0�0 Res. No. 2008-66 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) I, JOAN L. FLYNN the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on November 10, 2008 by the following vote: AYES: Hansen, Hardy, Bohr, Cook, Coerper, Green, Carchio NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Clerk and ex-offici lerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California ATTACHMENT V--2 ,, , ., SUGGESTED FINDINGS ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 07-004 SUGGESTED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL — ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 07- 004 : 1. Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004 amends the HBZSO by adding Chapter 218 that establishes the Mixed Use-Transit Center District zoning and development standards. The proposed change will be consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the City's General Plan because it fosters mixed use development that is optimally located near existing transit. 2. In the case of general land use provisions, the Zoning Text Amendment is consistent with the uses authorized in, and the standards prescribed for, the zoning district for which they are proposed. The proposed land uses identified in the Mixed Use-Transit Center District land use designation are consistent with the General Plan. 3. A community need is demonstrated for the change proposed. The proposed mixed use-transit center district zoning provides the standards necessary to develop a high quality of mixed use land uses complementing and enhancing surrounding land uses. The existing Commercial General Land Use and Zoning designations do not facilitate the development of mixed-use projects. The mixed use-transit center district land use designation allows for the development of a mixed-use project that produces an environment which is both attractive and sustainable by increasing housing options for diverse household types, promoting alternative modes of transportation, creating a local sense of place, reducing infrastructure and maintenance costs, and allowing for more efficient use of land resources. 4. The adoption of the Mixed Use-Transit Center District zoning is consistent with good zoning practice and was prepared utilizing a comprehensive approach, which included involving the public in numerous public meetings and reviewing the proposed development in terms of potential benefits of this type of development in the larger context of directing future growth. The adoption of this zoning design would implement the goals of smart growth and sustainable development. z. Tz. Y' C ,,, }, ORDINANCE NO. 3819 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING THE HUNTINGTON BEACH ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE BY ADDING CHAPTER 218, MIXED USE-TRANSIT CENTER DISTRICT (ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 07-004) WHEREAS, pursuant to the California State Planning and Zoning Law, the Huntington Beach Planning Commission and Huntington Beach City Council have held separate, duly noticed public hearings to consider Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004, which adds Chapter 218, Mixed Use-Transit Center District, to the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance; and After due consideration of the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission and all other evidence presented, the City Council finds that the aforesaid amendment is proper and consistent with the General Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. That Chapter 218 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance is hereby added to read as set forth in Exhibit A. SECTION 2. This ordinance shall take effect thirty days after its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 17thday of November 2008. 4ay4or ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ht. � ty Clerk ty Attolney ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: City strator Director f Manning Exhibit A: Legislative Draft 08-1767.003/25776 2 Ordinance No. 3819,Exhibit"A" EXHIBIT A ORDINANCE—ZTA NO. 07-004 Chapter 218 Mixed Use-Transit Center District Sections: 218.02 Mixed Use-Transit Center District Established 218.04 MU-TC District: Land Use Controls 218.06 MU-TC District: Development Standards 218.08 Modifications for Affordable Housing 218.10 Sustainable Development 218.12 Review of Plans 218.02 Mixed Use-Transit Center District Established The purpose of the Mixed Use-Transit Center District is to implement the General Plan Land Use Plan mixed-use land use designation. This district provides areas for high density residential and commercial uses within one-quarter mile of established transit centers as determined by the Planning Director. Transit centers, serving buses or other modes of transportation, are facilities where passengers transfer from one route to another. This district provides for pedestrian-friendly, transit oriented development in areas adjacent to existing transit infrastructure. 218.04 MU-TC District: Land Use Controls In the following schedules, letter designations are used as follows: "P" designates use classifications permitted in MU-TC district. "PC" designates use classifications permitted on approval of a conditional use permit by the Planning Commission. "ZA" designates use classifications permitted on approval of a conditional use permit by the Zoning Administrator. Use classifications that are not listed are prohibited. Letters in parentheses in the "Additional Provisions" column refer to provisions following the schedule or located elsewhere in the Zoning Ordinance. Where letters in parentheses are opposite a use classification heading, referenced provisions shall apply to all use classifications under the heading. 11/12/2008 Page 1 Ordinance No.3819, Exhibit"A" MU-TC DISTRICT: P=Permitted LAND USE CONTROLS PC=Conditional Use Permit approved by Planning Commission ZA=Conditional Use Permit approved by Zoning Administrator Land Use Additional Controls Provisions Residential Uses (A)(1) Multi-family Residential PC Public and Semipublic Uses (A) Clubs and Lodges ZA Day Care, General ZA Day Care, Large Family P (C) Government Offices P Public Safety Facilities P Religious Assembly ZA Schools, Public or Private PC Commercial Uses (A)(H)(1) Artists' Studios P Banks and Savings & Loans P Catering Services P Drug Stores/Pharmacy P Eating and Drinking Establishments P w/Alcohol ZA (B)(C) w/ Live Entertainment ZA w/ Dancing PC (D) w/ Outdoor Dining ZA (C)(E) Food and Beverage Sales P w/ Alcohol Beverage Sales ZA (B) Office, Business and Professional P Park and Recreational Facilities P Parking PC (F) Personal Enrichment Services P (C) Personal Services P Retail Sales P (G) Visitor Accommodations PC MU-TC District: Additional Provisions (A) — All projects in this District shall have both residential and non-residential components. At least 50 percent of the building fronting public streets at the ground level shall be non- residential uses. At least 50 percent of the project shall be residential uses. 11/12/2008 Page 2 Ordinance No. 3819,Exhibit"A" (B) — The following businesses proposing to sell alcoholic beverages for on-site or off-site consumption are exempt from the conditional use permit process: (i) Retail markets with no more than 10 percent of the floor area devoted to sales, display and storage of alcoholic beverages provided the sale of alcoholic beverages is not in conjunction with the sale of gasoline or other motor vehicle fuel; (ii) Florist shops offering the sale of a bottle of an alcoholic beverage together with a floral arrangement. (C) — Neighborhood notification requirements pursuant to Chapter 241. (D) — See also Chapter 5.28: Dancing Halls and Chapter 5.44: Restaurants — Amusement and Entertainment Premises. (E) — Outdoor dining with alcohol sales shall be permitted with a conditional use permit to the Zoning Administrator. Outdoor dining without alcohol sales that is 400 square feet or less shall be permitted with an administrative permit. If over 400 square feet with no alcohol sales, Neighborhood Notification shall be required pursuant to Chapter 241. (F) — Stand-alone or other permanent parking structures not ancillary to the permitted uses listed above. Must demonstrate necessity of use and comply with the requirements in Section 231.18-G (Parking Structures). (G)— See Section 230.94: Carts and Kiosks (H) — Development of vacant land or additions of 10,000 square feet or more in building floor area; or additions equal to or greater than 50% of the existing building's floor area requires approval of a conditional use permit from the Zoning Administrator. The Planning Director may refer any proposed project to the Zoning Administrator if the proposed project has the potential to impact residents or tenants in the vicinity (e.g. increased noise, traffic). (1)— Projects within 500 feet of a PS District see Chapter 244. 218.06 MU-TC District: Property Development Standards The following schedule prescribes development standards for MU-TC zoning district designated on the zoning map. The first column establishes the basic requirements for permitted and conditional uses. Letters in parentheses in the "Additional Provisions" column refer to "Additional Development Standards" following the schedule. The floor area ratio is calculated on the basis of net site area. All required setbacks shall be measured from ultimate right-of-way and in accordance with the definitions set forth in Chapter 203, Definitions. 11/12/2008 Page 3 Ordinance No.3819,Exhibit"A" Property Development Standards for MU-TC District MU-TCD Additional Requirements Minimum Lot Area (sq. ft.) 43,560 Minimum Lot Width (ft.) 100 Minimum Setbacks Front (ft) 5 (A)(B) Side (ft.) 10 (B) Rear (ft.) 10 (B) Maximum Height of Structures (ft.) 75 (C) Maximum Wall Dimensions (D) Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 2.35 Minimum Site Landscaping (%) 8 (E)(F) Minimum Lot Area per Dwelling - Unit (sq. ft.) Minimum Residential Floor Area (I) Maximum Lot Coverage (%) 75 Minimum Open Space (J) Accessibility within Dwellings (K) Lighting (L) Fences and Walls (G) Off-Street Parking and Loading See Chapter 231 (H) Outdoor Facilities See Section 230.74 Screening of Mechanical See Section 230.76 Equipment Antenna See Section 230.80 (M) Accessory Structures See Chapter 230.08 Refuse Storage Areas See Section 230.78 Underground Utilities See Chapter 17.64 Performance Standards See Section 230.82 Nonconforming Structures See Chapter 236 Signs See Chapter 233 (N) Building Separations (0) Building Design Standards (P) Private Storage Space A Reciprocal Access (R) MU-TC District: Additional Development Standards (A) Multiple street frontage lots shall provide front yards on each frontage. (B) Projections into Setbacks (1) See Section 230.68: Building Projections into Yards. (2) Balconies and bay windows may project into required setbacks and usable open space areas subject to Section 230.68, provided that balconies have open railings, glass, or architectural details with openings to reduce visible bulk. 11/12/2008 Page 4 Ordinance No. 3819,Exhibit"A" Balconies composed solely of solid enclosures are not allowed to project into required setbacks. (3) Awnings, canopies, covered walkways, covered patios, and uncovered arcades with no programmed indoor space may project into required setbacks and usable open space areas provided that a minimum 5 ft. setback is maintained to the property line. (C) Height Requirements. See Section 230.70: Measurement of Height and Section 230.72: Exceptions to Height Limits. A minimum of two stories and a maximum of six stories shall be allowed. (D) Maximum Wall Dimensions. All building wall surfaces shall be no longer than 250 feet without either: (1) a break, a recess or offset measuring at least 10 feet that vary the depth of the building wall by a minimum of 4 feet, or (2) a series of offsets, projections or recesses, including balconies, at intervals of not more than 40 feet that vary the depth of the building wall by a minimum of 4 feet. The Director may grant exceptions or allow these standards to be modified for exceptional or unique structures subject to Design Review, Chapter 244. (E) Planting Areas: With the exception of sidewalks, driveways, pathways and paved outdoor seating areas, required front and street side yards shall be planting areas. (F) Landscape Improvements (1) All landscape improvements shall comply with Chapter 232 unless otherwise provided herein. (2) General Tree Requirements. One 36-inch box tree shall be provided for every 45 lineal feet of street frontage planted within the setback areas adjacent to a street. In addition, there shall be one 36-inch box tree planted within the common open space areas for each ground or first level unit. Specimen palms may be substituted at a ratio of 1/2 foot brown trunk height for one inch of box tree inch required. (G) See Section 230.88: Fencing and Yards. (H) Off-Street Parking and Loading Provisions. (1) All off-street parking and loading provisions shall comply with Chapter 231 unless otherwise provided herein. Off-street parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with the following Schedule A: 11/12/2008 Page 5 Ordinance No. 3819,Exhibit"A" OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES REQUIRED IN MU-TCD ZONE: SCHEDULE A Use Classification Spaces Residential Studio 1 space per unit one bedroom 1 space per unit two bedrooms 2 spaces per unit three or more bedrooms 2.5 spaces per unit Guests 1 space per 5 units Commercial Per Chapter 231 Public and Semi-Public Per Chapter 231 (2) Compact parking spaces may be allowed but not to satisfy the minimum parking requirements. (3) Up to twenty percent (20%) of required parking may be provided by tandem spaces subject to conditional use permit approval. Each tandem space shall be counted as one-half space for purposes of determining the number of parking spaces that are provided. (1) Minimum Floor Area. Each dwelling unit in a mixed-use building shall have the minimum floor area of 500 square feet. (J) Open Space Requirements. (1) The minimum open space area (private and common) for mixed-use projects in the MU-TC District shall be 150 square feet per residential unit. For purposes of this subsection, open space shall mean an area which is designed and intended to be used for active or passive recreation. Open space may consist of private and/or common areas. Parking areas, access aisles, and driveways shall not qualify as usable open space. (2) Private Open Space. (a) Private open space shall be provided in courts or balconies within which a horizontal rectangle has no dimension less than 6 feet. (b) Minimum of seventy-five percent (75%) of the dwelling units shall be provided a minimum of 60 square feet of private open space. (c) Private open space shall be contiguous to the unit and for the exclusive use of the occupants. Private open space shall not be accessible to any dwelling unit except the unit it serves and shall be physically separated from common areas by a wall or hedge at least 42 inches in height. (3) Common Open Space. (a) Common open space, provided by interior side yards, patios, courts, and terraces, shall be designed so that no dimension is less than 10 feet, shall be open to the sky, and shall not include driveways or parking areas. (b) Projects with more than 20 units shall include at least one amenity, such as a clubhouse, swimming pool, tennis court, volleyball court, outdoor cooking facility, or other recreation facility. Such common amenity spaces shall count toward the common open space requirement. 11/12/2008 Page 6 Ordinance No. 3819, Exhibit"A" (K) All habitable rooms in a dwelling unit shall be accessible from within the dwelling. (L) Lighting. Lighting shall be provided in all projects along all vehicular access ways and major walkways. Lighting shall be directed onto the driveways and walkways within the development and away from adjacent properties. A lighting plan shall be submitted for approval by the Director. (M) See Section 230.88: Antennae. (N) See Chapter 233, Signs—Commercial Districts, for applicable provisions related to signs in the commercial component of the MU-TC District. (0) Building Separations. Building separations shall be provided in all mixed-use projects in the MU-TC District subject to the following requirements: (1) The minimum building separation shall be not less than 20 feet opposite a window in a living room and 14 feet opposite a window for any other habitable room. (2) The building separation shall be open to the sky. Eaves may project a maximum 2 feet into this area on each side. (P) Building Design Standards. Buildings in the MU-TC District shall be built in accordance with the following requirements: (1) The maximum building length shall be 300 feet except as provided below. Building length is defined as the total length of a primary building mass lining a street. (a) A 20 foot inset of the building plane with pedestrian access may count as a break in the building length. If the inset varies by floor, then the average inset shall exceed 20 feet. (2) The maximum block size shall be 2,400 feet. Block size is a measure of the total length of the street-fronting property lines along all block faces enclosed within the nearest surrounding publicly accessible streets. (Q) Private Storage Space. An average of 50 cubic feet of private storage space shall be provided for each residential dwelling unit outside such unit. Such private storage space shall be fully enclosed and lockable. (R) Reciprocal Access. Reciprocal ingress/egress access with adjacent properties shall be provided for all projects. 218.08 Modifications for Affordable Housing The Planning Commission may approve a conditional use permit modifying the minimum property development standards in this chapter for affordable housing, as provided in Section 230.14. The proposed modifications shall be requested in writing by the applicant, accompanied by a detailed pro-forma, rental guidelines, deed restrictions, financial subsidies, and other types of documentation which will serve to demonstrate the need for a reduction of 11/12/2008 Page 7 Ordinance No. 3819,Exhibit"A" development standards. Modifications to the standards may include, but are not limited to, the parking requirements and open space. The specific standard(s) from which the applicant is requesting relief shall be identified and alternative development standard(s) proposed. 218.10 Sustainable Development Sustainable or "green" building practices shall be incorporated into the design of the proposed structures and associated site improvements. Sustainable building practices shall include (but are not limited to) those recommended by the U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Program certification or Build It Green's Green Building Guidelines and Rating Systems. 218.12 Review of Plans All applications for new construction, initial establishment of use, exterior alterations and additions shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review. Discretionary review shall be required as follows: (A) Zoning Administrator Review. Projects requiring a conditional use permit from the Zoning Administrator; projects on substandard lots; see Chapter 241. (B) Design Review Board. See Chapter 244. (C) Planning Commission. Projects requiring a conditional use permit from the Planning Commission; see Chapter 241. (D) Projects in the Coastal Zone. A Coastal Development Permit is required unless the project is exempt; see Chapter 245. 11/12/2008 Page 8 Ord. No. 3819 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) 1, JOAN L. FLYNN, the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing ordinance was read to said City Council at a special meeting thereof held on November 10, 2008, and was again read to said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on November 17, 2008, and was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council. AYES: Hansen, Hardy, Bohr, Cook, Coerper, Green, Carchio NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None 1,Joan L.Flynn,CITY CLERK of the City of Huntington Beach and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council,do hereby certify that a synopsis of this ordinance has been published in the Huntington Beach Fountain Valley Independent on November 27,2008. In accordance with the CityCharter of said City b' Joan L. Flynn,Cily Clerk C* Clerk and ex-officio erk Senior Deputy City Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California EXHIBIT A Legislative DRAFT ORDINANCE—ZTA NO. 07-004 #3819 Chapter 218 Mixed Use-Transit Center District Sections: 218.02 Mixed Use-Transit Center District Established 218.04 MU-TC District: Land Use Controls 218.06 MU-TC District: Development Standards 218.08 Modifications for Affordable Housing 218.10 Sustainable Development 218.12 Review of Plans 218.02 Mixed Use-Transit Center District Established The purpose of the Mixed Use-Transit Center District is to implement the General Plan Land Use Plan mixed-use land use designation. This district provides areas for high density residential and commercial uses within one-quarter mile of established transit centers as determined by the Planning Director. Transit centers, serving buses or other modes of transportation, are facilities where passengers transfer from one route to another. This district provides for pedestrian-friendly, transit oriented development in areas adjacent to existing transit infrastructure. 218.04 MU-TC District: Land Use Controls In the following schedules, letter designations are used as follows: "P" designates use classifications permitted in MU-TC district. "PC" designates use classifications permitted on approval of a conditional use permit by the Planning Commission. "ZA" designates use classifications permitted on approval of a conditional use permit by the Zoning Administrator. Use classifications that are not listed are prohibited. Letters in parentheses in the "Additional Provisions" column refer to provisions following the schedule or located elsewhere in the Zoning Ordinance. Where letters in parentheses are opposite a use classification heading, referenced provisions shall apply to all use classifications under the heading. 11/12/2008 Page 1 MU-TC DISTRICT: P=Permitted LAID USE CONTROLS PC=Conditional Use Permit approved by Planning Commission ZA=Conditional Use Permit approved by Zoning Administrator Land Use Additional Controls Provisions Residential Uses (A)(1) Multi-family Residential PC Public and Semipublic Uses (A) Clubs and Lodges ZA Day Care, General ZA Day Care, Large Family P (C) Government Offices P Public Safety Facilities P Religious Assembly ZA Schools, Public or Private PC Commercial Uses (A)(H)(1) Artists' Studios P Banks and Savings & Loans P Catering Services P Drug Stores/Pharmacy P Eating and Drinking Establishments P w/Alcohol ZA (B)(C) w/ Live Entertainment ZA w/ Dancing PC (D) w/ Outdoor Dining ZA (C)(E) Food and Beverage Sales P w/Alcohol Beverage Sales ZA (B) Office, Business and Professional P Park and Recreational Facilities P Parking PC (F) Personal Enrichment Services P (C) Personal Services P Retail Sales P (G) Visitor Accommodations PC MU-TC District: Additional Provisions (A) —All projects in this District shall have both residential and non-residential components. At least 50 percent of the building fronting public streets at the ground level shall be non- residential uses. At least 50 percent of the project shall be residential uses. 11/12/2008 Page 2 (B) — The following businesses proposing to sell alcoholic beverages for on-site or off-site consumption are exempt from the conditional use permit process: (i) Retail markets with no more than 10 percent of the floor area devoted to sales, display and storage of alcoholic beverages provided the sale of alcoholic beverages is not in conjunction with the sale of gasoline or other motor vehicle fuel; (ii) Florist shops offering the sale of a bottle of an alcoholic beverage together with a floral arrangement. (C) — Neighborhood notification requirements pursuant to Chapter 241. (D) — See also Chapter 5.28: Dancing Halls and Chapter 5.44: Restaurants —Amusement and Entertainment Premises. (E) — Outdoor dining with alcohol sales shall be permitted with a conditional use permit to the Zoning Administrator. Outdoor dining without alcohol sales that is 400 square feet or less shall be permitted with an administrative permit. If over 400 square feet with no alcohol sales, Neighborhood Notification shall be required pursuant to Chapter 241. (F) — Stand-alone or other permanent parking structures not ancillary to the permitted uses listed above. Must demonstrate necessity of use and comply with the requirements in Section 231.18-G (Parking Structures). (G) — See Section 230.94: Carts and Kiosks (H) — Development of vacant land or additions of 10,000 square feet or more in building floor area; or additions equal to or greater than 50% of the existing building's floor area requires approval of a conditional use permit from the Zoning Administrator. The Planning Director may refer any proposed project to the Zoning Administrator if the proposed project has the potential to impact residents or tenants in the vicinity (e.g. increased noise, traffic). (1) — Projects within 500 feet of a PS District see Chapter 244. 218.06 MU-TC District: Property Development Standards The following schedule prescribes development standards for MU-TC zoning district designated on the zoning map. The first column establishes the basic requirements for permitted and conditional uses. Letters in parentheses in the "Additional Provisions" column refer to "Additional Development Standards" following the schedule. The floor area ratio is calculated on the basis of net site area. All required setbacks shall be measured from ultimate right-of-way and in accordance with the definitions set forth in Chapter 203, Definitions. 11/12/2008 Page 3 Property Development Standards for MU-TC District MU-TCD Additional Requirements Minimum Lot Area (sq. ft.) 43,560 Minimum Lot Width (ft.) 100 Minimum Setbacks Front (ft) 5 (A)(B) Side (ft.) 10 (B) Rear (ft.) 10 (B) Maximum Height of Structures (ft.) 75 (C) Maximum Wall Dimensions (D) Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 2.35 Minimum Site Landscaping (%) 8 (E)(F) Minimum Lot Area per Dwelling - Unit (sq. ft.) Minimum Residential Floor Area (I) Maximum Lot Coverage (%) 75 Minimum Open Space W) Accessibility within Dwellings (K) Lighting (L) Fences and Walls (G) Off-Street Parking and Loading See Chapter 231 (H) Outdoor Facilities See Section 230.74 Screening of Mechanical See Section 230.76 Equipment Antenna See Section 230.80 (M) Accessory Structures See Chapter 230.08 Refuse Storage Areas See Section 230.78 Underground Utilities See Chapter 17.64 Performance Standards See Section 230.82 Nonconforming Structures See Chapter 236 Signs See Chapter 233 (N) Building Separations (0) Building Design Standards (P) Private Storage Space (Q) Reciprocal Access (R) MU-TC District: Additional Development Standards (A) Multiple street frontage lots shall provide front yards on each frontage. (B) Projections into Setbacks (1) See Section 230.68: Building Projections into Yards. (2) Balconies and bay windows may project into.required setbacks and usable open space areas subject to Section 230.68, provided that balconies have open railings, glass, or architectural details with openings to reduce visible bulk. 11/12/2008 Page 4 Balconies composed solely of solid enclosures are not allowed to project into required setbacks. (3) Awnings, canopies, covered walkways, covered patios, and uncovered arcades with no programmed indoor space may project into required setbacks and usable open space areas provided that a minimum 5 ft. setback is maintained to the property line. (C) Height Requirements. See Section 230.70: Measurement of Height and Section 230.72: Exceptions to Height Limits. A minimum of two stories and a maximum of six stories shall be allowed. (D) Maximum Wall Dimensions. All building wall surfaces shall be no longer than 250 feet without either: (1) a break, a recess or offset measuring at least 10 feet that vary the depth of the building wall by a minimum of 4 feet, or (2) a series of offsets, projections or recesses, including balconies, at intervals of not more than 40 feet that vary the depth of the building wall by a minimum of 4 feet. The Director may grant exceptions or allow these standards to be modified for exceptional or unique structures subject to Design Review, Chapter 244. (E) Planting Areas: With the exception of sidewalks, driveways, pathways and paved outdoor seating areas, required front and street side yards shall be planting areas. (F) Landscape Improvements (1) All landscape improvements shall comply with Chapter 232 unless otherwise provided herein. (2) General Tree Requirements. One 36-inch box tree shall be provided for every 45 lineal feet of street frontage planted within the setback areas adjacent to a street. In addition, there shall be one 36-inch box tree planted within the common open space areas for each ground or first level unit. Specimen palms may be substituted at a ratio of 1/2 foot brown trunk height for one inch of box tree inch required. (G) See Section 230.88: Fencing and Yards. (H) Off-Street Parking and Loading Provisions. (1) All off-street parking and loading provisions shall comply with Chapter 231 unless otherwise provided herein. Off-street parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with the following Schedule A: 11/12/2008 Page 5 OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES REQUIRED IN MU-TCD ZONE: SCHEDULE A Use Classification Spaces Residential Studio 1 space per unit one bedroom 1 space per unit two bedrooms 2 spaces per unit three or more bedrooms 2.5 spaces per unit Guests 1 space per/5 units Commercial Per Chapter 231 Public and Semi-Public Per Chapter 231 (2) Compact ^r tandem parking spaces may be allowed but not to satisfy the minimum parking requirements. Up to twenty percent (20%) of required parking may be provided by tandem spaces subject to conditional use permit approval. Each tandem space shall be counted as one-half space for purposes of determining the number of parking spaces that are provided. (1) Minimum Floor Area. Each dwelling unit in a mixed-use building shall have the minimum floor area of 500 square feet. (J) Open Space Requirements. (1) The minimum open space area (private and common) for mixed-use projects in the MU-TC District shall be 150 square feet per residential unit. For purposes of this subsection, open space shall mean an area which is designed and intended to be used for active or passive recreation. Open space may consist of private and/or common areas. Parking areas, access aisles, and driveways shall not qualify as usable open space. (2) Private Open Space. (a) Private open space shall be provided in courts or balconies within which a horizontal rectangle has no dimension less than 6 feet. (b) €ash Minimum of seventy-five percent (75%) of the dwelling units shall be provided a minimum of 60 square feet of private open space. (c) Private open space shall be contiguous to the unit and for the exclusive use of the occupants. Private open space shall not be accessible to any dwelling unit except the unit it serves and shall be physically separated from common areas by a wall or hedge at least 42 inches in height. (3) Common Open Space. (a) Common open space, provided by interior side yards, patios, courts, and terraces, shall be designed so that no dimension is less than 10 feet, shall be open to the sky, and shall not include driveways or parking areas. (b) Projects with more than 20 units shall include at least one amenity, such as a clubhouse, swimming pool, tennis court, volleyball court, outdoor cooking facility, or other recreation facility. Such common amenity spaces shall count toward the common open space requirement. 11/12/2008 Page 6 (K) All habitable rooms in a dwelling unit shall be accessible from within the dwelling. (L) Lighting. Lighting shall be provided in all projects along all vehicular access ways and major walkways. Lighting shall be directed onto the driveways and walkways within the development and away from adjacent properties. A lighting plan shall be submitted for approval by the Director. (M) See Section 230.88: Antennae. (N) See Chapter 233, Signs—Commercial Districts, for applicable provisions related to signs in the commercial component of the MU-TC District. (0) Building Separations. Building separations shall be provided in all mixed-use projects in the MU-TC District subject to the following requirements: (1) The minimum building separation shall be not less than 20 feet opposite a window in a living room and 14 feet opposite a window for any other habitable room. (2) The building separation shall be open to the sky. Eaves may project a maximum 2 feet into this area on each side. (P) Building Design Standards. Buildings in the MU-TC District shall be built in accordance with the following requirements: (1) The maximum building length shall be 300 feet except as provided below. Building length is defined as the total length of a primary building mass lining a street. (a) A 20 foot inset of the building plane with pedestrian access may count as a break in the building length. If the inset varies by floor, then the average inset shall exceed 20 feet. (2) The maximum block size shall be 2,400 feet. Block size is a measure of the total length of the street-fronting property lines along all block faces enclosed within the nearest surrounding publicly accessible streets. (Q) Private Storage Space. An average of 50 cubic feet of private storage space shall be provided for each residential dwelling unit outside such unit. Such private storage space shall be fully enclosed and lockable. (R) Reciprocal Access. Reciprocal ingress/egress access with adjacent properties shall be provided for all projects. 218.08 Modifications for Affordable Housing The Planning Commission may approve a conditional use permit modifying the minimum property development standards in this chapter for affordable housing, as provided in Section 230.14. The proposed modifications shall be requested in writing by the applicant, accompanied by a detailed pro-forma, rental guidelines, deed restrictions, financial subsidies, and other types of documentation which will serve to demonstrate the need for a reduction of 11/12/2008 Page 7 development standards. Modifications to the standards may include, but are not limited to, the parking requirements and open space. The specific standard(s) from which the applicant is requesting relief shall be identified and alternative development standard(s) proposed. 218.10 Sustainable Development Sustainable or "green" building practices shall be incorporated into the design of the proposed structures and associated site improvements. Sustainable building practices shall include (but are not limited to) those recommended by the U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Program certification or Build It Green's Green Building Guidelines and Rating Systems. 218.12 Review of Plans All applications for new construction, initial establishment of use, exterior alterations and additions shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review. Discretionary review shall be required as follows: (A) Zoning Administrator Review. Projects requiring a conditional use permit from the Zoning Administrator; projects on substandard lots; see Chapter 241. (B) Design Review Board. See Chapter 244. (C) Planning Commission. Projects requiring a conditional use permit from the Planning Commission; see Chapter 241. (D) Projects in the Coastal Zone. A Coastal Development Permit is required unless the project is exempt; see Chapter 245. 11/12/2008 Page 8 ATTACHMENT #4, ,� RESOLUTION NO. 2008-67 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 07-003 WHEREAS, General Plan Amendment No. 07-003 proposes to amend the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan to redesignate an approximate 3.8 acre piece of real property located on the southeast corner of Gothard Street and Center Avenue, as more particularly described as Exhibits "A" and `B" attached hereto, from CG-Fl-d (Commercial General — 0.35 Floor Area Ratio — Design Overlay) to M-F7-d (Mixed Use — 3.0 Floor Area Ratio — Design Overlay). The amendment also includes removing the subject area from Subarea 5E of the Community District and Subarea Schedule of the General Plan. Pursuant to California Government Code, the Planning Commission of the City of Huntington Beach, after notice duly given, held a public hearing to consider General Plan Amendment No. 07-003 and recommended approval of said entitlement to the City Council; and Pursuant to California Government Code, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach,after notice duly given, held a public hearing to consider General Plan Amendment No. 07-003; and The City Council finds that said General Plan Amendment No. 07-003 is necessary for the changing needs and orderly development of the community, is necessary to accomplish refinement of the General Plan, and is consistent with other elements of the General Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach as follows: SECTION 1: That the real property that is the subject of this Resolution (hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Property") is generally located on the southeast corner of Gothard Street and Center Avenue in the City of Huntington Beach, and is more particularly described in the legal description and sketch attached hereto as Exhibits "A" and "B", respectively, and incorporated by this reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION 2: That General Plan Amendment No. 07-003, which amends the General Plan Land Use Designation for the subject area from CG-FI-d (Commercial General—0.35 Floor Area Ratio — Design Overlay) to M-F7-d (Mixed Use — 3.0 Floor Area Ratio — Design Overlay) 08-1818/26371 j Resolution No. 2008-67 and the removal of the subject area from Subarea 5E of the Community District and Subarea Schedule, is hereby approved. The Director of Planning is hereby directed to prepare and file an amended Land Use Map. A copy of said map, as amended, shall be available for inspection in the Planning Department. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 10th day of November , 2008. Mayor REVIEW APPROVED: fNITIATVD AND APPROVED: City A ' i trator Dire oWFPlanning APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jity�Atto y ATTACHMENTS Exhibit A: Legal Description Exhibit B: Sketch 08-1818/26371 2 Resolution No. 2008-67 Page 1 of 2 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL (DESCRIPTION PARCEL 1, IN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 211, PAGES 25 AND 26 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL l; THENCE ALONG THE j SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 1 SOUTH 89032'15" WEST 605.52 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 1; THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 1 NORTH 00039'08" WEST 287.89 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 32.00 FEET, THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF i 9001 I'23" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 50.37 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 1 NORTH 89032'15" EAST 231.71 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A l i TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 396.43 FEET, THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 13021,461, 1 AN ARC DISTANCE OF 92.46 FEET TO THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 1; THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL I FOR THE j FOLLOWING THREE COURSES: SOUTH 00°39'35" EAST 120.73 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89032'15" EAST 250.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00°39'35" EAST 210.00 FEET TO THE i POINT OF BEGINNING. i i EXCEPTING THEREFROM A PORTION THEREOF 50% OF A 100% OF ALL MINERALS, GAS, OIL, PETROLEUM, NAPHTHA AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES IN, UNDER, OR THAT MAY BE PRODUCED OR RECOVERED FROM THAT PORTION OP SAID LAND BELOW A DEPTH OF 500 FEET FROM ITS SURFACE, WITH AND INCLUDING IN SUCH EXCEPTION AND RESERVATION, FOR THE BENEFIT OF THOSE ENTITLED THERETO, THE RIGHT AT ANY AND ALL TIMES TO ENTER UPON AND INTO ANY AND ALL PARTS OF THE PORTION OF SAID LAND BELOW SUCH DEPTH OF 500 FEET FROM ITS SURFACE FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXPLORING AND DRILLING FOR, MINING, DEVELOPING, REMOVING AND EXTRACTING ANY AND ALL SUCH l� I I 1A08\8027\PR0D\Mapping\Lega1s&Plats\8027LEGAL.doc t Resolution No. 2008-67 Page 2 of 2 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION SUBSTANCES BY SLANT OR DIRECTIONAL DRILLING OR OTHER OPERATIONS FROM OTHER LAND, ENTERING INTO AND PENETRATING THE LAND THE SUBJECT HEREOF, ONLY BELOW SUCH DEPTH OF 500 FEET FROM ITS SURFACE BUT WITH (AND THERE SHALL BE)NO RIGHT UNDER SUCH EXCEPTION AND RESERVATION OF ENTRY UPON OR USE OF THE SURFACE OR SUBSURFACE TO A DEPTH OF 500 FEET i BELOW THE SURFACE, AS RESERVED BY DOROTHY THAYER PECK, IN DEED RECORDED OCTOBER 1, 1959, IN BOOK 4907, PAGE 389 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, CHARLES H. THATCHER AND TITLE INSURANCE AND TRUST COMPANY A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ALL AS TRUSTEES OF THE TRUST UNDER WRITTEN DECLARATION THEREOF BY CARRIE A. PECK, DATED DECEMBER 18, 1936,AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 25% OF SAID 100% INTEREST, AND BY DOROTHY T. PECK, A WIDOW, IN HER INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 25%OF SAID 100% INTEREST. y� I ALSO EXCEPTING FROM THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING BELOW A DEPTH OF 500 FEET MEASURED VERTICALLY FROM THE CONTOUR OF THE SURFACE WITHOUT, 1 HOWEVER, THE RIGHT FOR ANY PURPOSE WHATSOEVER TO ENTER UPON, INTO OR THROUGH THE SURFACE OF SAID PROPERTY OR ANY PART THEREOF LYING f BETWEEN SAID SURFACE OF 500 FEET BELOW SAID SURFACE, AS EXCEPTED IN THE I GRANT DEED FROM SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY RECORDED JUNE 30, 1986 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 86-277355 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 1 CONTAINING 3.82 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. j A THIS LEGAL DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION. LESS/ BPS W4,u� !� S lZ og o� sow c� • No. 17706 z ; DOUG S W. MASSON DATE w Exp. j R.C.E. 17706 06-30-2009 EXPIRES: 06-30-2009 T C/0- F OF CAI.�F� I:\08\8027\PROD\Mapping\Legals&Plats\8027LEGAL.doc 1 Resolution No. 2008-67 SHEET 1 OF 1 EXHIBIT 'B' CENTER STREET o R-396.43' p�•y - _ __ ____- - D=13'2146„ ti L o5 •'�� N89'32'15"E 231.71' � =92 46 zz O N W 40' 40' O COw Ui .tJ b) N89'32'15"E 250.00' I 0 w 00 00 PARCEL in PIS 85-298, Q o 8K 211 PG 25-26 v rn 0 i o 4 z 142-074-06 I 142-074-12 0 Q f i N$9'32'15"E 605.52' P.0.6.. LEGEND: � SE CORNER P.OB. POINT OF BEGINNING i ALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN HEREON ARE RECORD PER PM 85-298, BK 211, PG 25-26 APN's: 142-074-06 AND 142-074-12 pEESS/ PS W. THIS PLAT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR w o No. 17706 z UNDER MY DIRECTION.Exp. 0 50 100 200 �06-30-2009�' � � C/V1�- a� • SCALE IN FEET OP CAL�Fp� DOU AS W. MASSON, R.C.E. 17706 GRAPHIC SCALE EXP ES: 06-30-2009 1"=100' N i DATE: Aug 12, OB 5:39pm by.jgervals /► 1 FILE I:\08\8027\PRO0\Mopp1ng\Lego1a & Plats\8027plat.dwg BOUNDARY PLAT FOR MASSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. PARCEL 1 , PM 85-298, PLANNING o ENGINEERING • SURVEYING 200 E. WASHINGTON AVE.•SUITE 200-ESCONDIDO•CA 9 2025-1 81 6 BK 211 , PG 25-26 TEL (760) 741-3570•FAX (760) 741-1786.www.mosson—assoc.com Res. No. 2008-67 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) 1, JOAN L. FLYNN the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on November 10, 2008 by the following vote: AYES: Hansen, Bohr, Cook, Coerper, Green, Carchio NOES: Hardy ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None City erk and ex-officio rk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California x x « .. MM . SUGGESTED FINDINGS ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO. 07-001 SUGGESTED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL — ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO. 07- 001: 1. Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001 amends the existing zoning designation by changing the CG (Commercial General) zoning designation on the subject site to MU-TCD (Mixed Use-Transit Center District). The adoption of this amendment will establish the Mixed Use- Transit Center District zoning and development standards for the property and will be consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the City's General Plan as well as the proposed General Plan Amendment No. 07-003. The proposed Mixed Use-Transit Center District zoning is consistent with the goals and policies of the Land Use Element of the General Plan by allowing for the creation of a development compatible with, and sensitive to the existing land uses in the project area and adjoining properties. 2. In the case of general land use provisions, the Zoning Map Amendment is consistent with the uses authorized in, and the standards prescribed for, the zoning district for which they are proposed. The proposed land uses identified in the Mixed Use-Transit Center District land use designation is consistent with the General Plan as well as the proposed General Plan Amendment No. 07-003. 3. A community need is demonstrated for the change proposed. The proposed mixed use-transit center district zoning provides the standards necessary to develop a high quality of mixed use land uses complementing and enhancing surrounding land uses. The existing Commercial General Land Use and Zoning designations do not facilitate the development of mixed-use projects. The mixed use-transit center district land use designation allows for the development of a mixed-use project that produces an environment which is both attractive and sustainable by increasing housing options for diverse household types, promoting alternative modes of transportation, creating a local sense of place, reducing infrastructure and maintenance costs, and allowing for more efficient use of land resources. 4. The adoption of the Mixed Use-Transit Center District zoning is consistent with good zoning practice and was prepared utilizing a comprehensive approach, which included involving the public in numerous public meetings and reviewing the proposed development in terms of potential benefits of this type of development in the larger context of directing future growth. The adoption of this zoning design would implement the goals of smart growth and sustainable development. Al ORDINANCE NO. 3820 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING DISTRICT MAP 15 (SECTIONAL DISTRICT MAP 14-5-11) TO REZONE THE REAL PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF GOTHARD STREET AND CENTER AVENUE FROM CG (COMMERCIAL GENERAL) TO MU-TCD (MIXED USE-TRANSIT CENTER DISTRICT) (ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO. 07-001) WHEREAS, pursuant to the California State Planning and Zoning Law, the Huntington Beach Planning Commission and Huntington Beach City Council have held separate, duly noticed public hearings to consider Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001;'which rezones the property generally located at the southeast corner of Gothard Street and Center Avenue from CG (Commercial General) to MU-TCD (Mixed Use-Transit Center District); and After due consideration of the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission and all other evidence presented, the City Council. finds that the aforesaid amendment is proper and consistent with the General Plan, NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. That the real property that is the subject of this Ordinance (hereinafter referred as the "Subject Property") is generally located at the southeast corner of Gothard Street and Center Avenue, and is more particularly described in the legal description and sketch attached hereto as Exhibits A and B, respectively, and incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION 2. That the zoning designation of the Subject Property is hereby changed from CG(Commercial General) to MU-TCD (Mixed Use-Transit Center District). 08-1767.002/25775 2 1 Ordinance No. 3820 SECTION 3. That Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Section 201.04B District Map 15 (Sectional District Map 14-5-11) is hereby amended to reflect Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001 as described herein. The Director of Planning is hereby directed to prepare and file an amended map. A copy of said District Map, as amended, shall be available for inspection in the Office of the City Clerk. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall take effect thirty days after passage. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 17th day of November , 2008. Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Clerk ity�Attoey q REVIEW A APPROVED: INITIATED AND APPROVED: City dmi istrator Director OAPIanning ATTACHMENTS Exhibit A: Legal Description Exhibit B: Sketch 08-1767.002/25775 2 2 Ordinance No. 3820 Page I of 2 EXHIBIT"A" LEGAL.DESCRIPTION PARCEL 1, IN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 211, PAGES 25 AND 26 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 1; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 1 SOUTH 89032'15" WEST 605.52 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 1; THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 1 NORTH 00039'08" WEST 287.89 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 32.00 FEET, THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 90011'23" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 50.37 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL I NORTH 89032'15" EAST 231.71 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 396.43 FEET, THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 13021'46" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 92.46 FEET TO THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 1; THENCE ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL I FOR THE FOLLOWING THREE COURSES: SOUTH 00039'35" EAST 120.73 FEET; THENCE NORTH 89032'15" EAST 250.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00'39'35" EAST 210.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPTING THEREFROM A PORTION THEREOF 50% OF A 100% OF ALL MINERALS, GAS, OIL, PETROLEUM, NAPHTHA AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES IN, UNDER, OR THAT MAY BE PRODUCED OR RECOVERED FROM THAT PORTION OP SAID LAND BELOW A DEPTH OF 500 FEET FROM ITS SURFACE, WITH AND i INCLUDING IN SUCH EXCEPTION AND RESERVATION, FOR THE BENEFIT OF THOSE ENTITLED THERETO, THE RIGHT AT ANY AND ALL TIMES TO ENTER UPON AND INTO ANY AND ALL PARTS OF THE PORTION OF SAID LAND BELOW SUCH DEPTH OF 500 FEET FROM ITS SURFACE FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXPLORING AND DRILLING FOR, MINING, DEVELOPING, REMOVING AND EXTRACTING ANY AND ALL SUCH I:\08\8027\PR0D\Mapping\Legals&Plats\8027LEGAL.doc ii I Ordinance No. 3820 Page 2 of 2 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION SUBSTANCES BY SLANT OR DIRECTIONAL DRILLING OR OTHER OPERATIONS FROM OTHER LAND, ENTERING INTO AND PENETRATING THE LAND THE SUBJECT HEREOF, ONLY BELOW SUCH DEPTH OF 500 FEET FROM ITS SURFACE BUT WITH (AND THERE SHALL BE)NO RIGHT UNDER SUCH EXCEPTION AND RESERVATION OF ENTRY UPON OR USE OF THE SURFACE OR SUBSURFACE TO A DEPTH OF 500 FEET BELOW THE SURFACE, AS RESERVED BY DOROTHY THAYER PECK, IN DEED RECORDED OCTOBER 1, 1959, IN BOOK 4907, PAGE 389 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, CHARLES H. THATCHER AND TITLE INSURANCE AND TRUST COMPANY A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ALL AS TRUSTEES OF THE TRUST UNDER WRITTEN DECLARATION THEREOF BY CARRIE A. PECK, DATED DECEMBER 18, 1936, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 25% OF SAID 1000% INTEREST, AND BY DOROTHY T. PECK, A WIDOW, IN HER INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY, AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 25%OF SAID 100%INTEREST. ALSO EXCEPTING FROM THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING BELOW A DEPTH OF 500 FEET MEASURED VERTICALLY FROM THE CONTOUR OF THE SURFACE WITHOUT, HOWEVER, THE RIGHT FOR ANY PURPOSE WHATSOEVER TO ENTER UPON, INTO OR THROUGH THE SURFACE OF SAID PROPERTY OR ANY PART THEREOF LYING BETWEEN SAID SURFACE OF 500 FEET BELOW SAID SURFACE, AS EXCEPTED IN THE GRANT DEED FROM SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY RECORDED JUNE 30, 1986 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 86-277355 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. CONTAINING 3.82 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. THIS LEGAL DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION. ESS/�,� W. s � DOUG S W. MASSON S DATEO w Q No. 17706 x Exp. R.C.E. 17706 06-30-2009 EXPIRES: 06-30-2009 `�q� C!V I\- FOF CA1% 1:\08\8027\PROMMapping\Legals&Plats\8027LEGAL.doc Ordinance No. 3820 SHEET 1 OF 1 EXHIBIT 'B' CENTER STREET o 1:1=396.43' �+=13.21'46» L=92.46' N89'32 15 E 231.71 �+ NW O `40' 40' '1('; .tr N89'32'15"E 250.00' w � 00 w Co A/� ��aa pp JLC I tV P® RCELL, , O p PM 85-296, o BCC 211 PG 25-26 w 0 � o 1 Z N 142-074-06 l 142-074-12 0 0 N89'32'15"E 605.52' P.O.B.. —/ LEGEND: SE CORNER P.OB. POINT OF BEGINNING ALL BEARINGS AND DISTANCES SHOWN HEREON ARE RECORD PER PM 85-298, BK 211, PG 25-26 APN's: 142-074-06 AND 142-074-12 �Jv�Ps W. �9S�Fyc, p p THIS PLAT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR c� o No. 17706 z UNDER MY DIRECTION. CC Exp. 0 50 100 200 06-30-2009 * 8 /Z O$ OF CAL\F SCALE IN FEET 16pQ�� DOU AS W. MASSON, R.C.E. 17706 EXP ES: 06-30-2009 GRAPHIC SCALE N 1»=100' DATE. Aug /2. 08 5.39pm by.Jgervols FILE.I:\08\8027\PROD\Mopping\Leg0ls & Plats\8027plat.dwg BOUNDARY PLAT FOR MASSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. PARCEL 1 , PM 85-298, PLANNING v ENGINEERING o SURVEYING 200 E. WASHINGTON AVE.v SUITE 200 v ESCONDIDO v CA 9 2025-1 81 6 BK 211 , PG 25-26 TEL (760) 741-3570 v FAX (760) 741-1786 v www.moseen—conoc.com Ord. No. 3820 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) I, JOAN L. FLYNN, the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven;that the foregoing ordinance was read to said City Council at a special meeting thereof held on November 10,2008, and was again read to said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on November 17, 2008, and was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council. AYES: Hansen, Hardy, Bohr, Cook, Coerper, Green, Carchio NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None 1,Joan L.Flynn,CITY CLERK of the City of Huntington Beach and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council,do hereby certify that a synopsis of this ordinance has been published in the Huntington Beach Fountain Valley Independent on November 27,2008. In accordance with the City Charter of said City e Joan L. Flynn, City Clerk CQ Clerk and ex-officio Verk Senior Deputy City Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California gk OFA (PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION) SUGGESTED FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 07-043 SUGGESTED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 07-043: 1. Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043 for the construction of 330 residential units and 10,000 sq. ft. of commercial/retail space 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 proposed transit-oriented development would produce an environment which is both attractive and sustainable by increasing housing options, promoting alternative modes of transportation, and creating a local sense of place. The adjacency to a variety of commercial, entertainment, educational, and transportation uses allows the project to have a more compact and higher density development while minimizing adverse environmental effects. The mix of land uses contemplated by the proposed project as well as those already existing in the vicinity would create a dynamic environment where people can live, work, and play within a walking distance. The population increase would enhance the economic viability of the area by supplying a customer base for the area businesses. In addition, the architectural treatment of the buildings includes numerous features that contribute to an attractive design and convey a high quality visual image and character of the development. The provision of centrally located courtyards and open space amenities add to the appeal of the development. Given these project features, the project would fit within the surrounding neighborhood. 2. The conditional use permit will be compatible with surrounding uses and anticipated land uses because the proposed mixed-use project is complementary to existing uses in the vicinity. The area in proximity to the project site is targeted for revitalization efforts, incorporating more intense mixed use development. Because of its unique location, the project will accommodate the proposed growth that is compatible with surrounding uses. The project is designed to convey a high quality visual image and attractive pedestrian atmosphere to harmonize with developments in the vicinity. Furthermore, compliance with the mitigation measures of Environmental Impact Report No. 05-01 and code provisions will ensure that the project will be compatible with other area developments. 3. The proposed mixed use project will comply with the provisions of the base district and other applicable provisions in the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located. The proposed development will comply with all code provisions, including setbacks, building height, open space, parking, and building design standards. Compliance with the development standards will ensure a high quality development that would be compatible with the surrounding land uses. 4. The granting of the conditional use permit will not adversely affect the General Plan. It is consistent with the proposed Land Use Element designation of Mixed Use on the subject property. In addition, it is consistent with the following goals and policies of the General Plan: Page 1 of 7 A. Circulation Element Obiective CE 3.2: Encourage new development that promotes and expands the use of transit services. Policy CE 2.1.: Comply with City's performance standards for acceptable levels of service. Policy CE 6.1.6: Maintain existing pedestrian facilities and require new development to provide pedestrian walkways and bicycle routes between developments, schools, and public facilities. B. Growth Management Element Policy GM 3.1.8: Promote traffic reduction strategies including alternate travel modes, alternate work hours, and a decrease of vehicle trips throughout the city. C. Housing Element Policy H 2.2: Facilitate the development of mixed-use projects in appropriate commercial areas, including stand-alone residential development (horizontal mixed-use) and housing above ground floor commercial uses (vertical mixed-use). Establish mixed use zoning regulations. Policy H 3.1: Encourage the production of housing that meets all economic segments of the community, including lower, moderate, and upper income households, to maintain a balanced community. Goal H 5: Provide equal housing opportunity. D. Land Use Element Goal LU 4: Achieve and maintain high quality architecture, landscape, and public open spaces in the City. Goal LU 4.2.4: Require that all development be designed to provide adequate space for access, parking, supporting functions, open space, and other pertinent elements. Goal LU 7: Achieve a diversity of land uses that sustain the City's economic viability, while maintaining the City's environmental resources and scale and character. Goal LU 8: Achieve a pattern of land uses that preserves, enhances, and establishes a distinct identity for the 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 principles discussed below: b. Vary uses and densities along the City's extended commercial corridors, such as Beach Boulevard. Page 2 of 7 c. Increase diversification of community and local commercial nodes to serve adjacent residential neighborhoods. f. Site development to capitalize upon potential long-term transit improvements. Goal LU 9: Achieve the development of a range of housing units that provides for the diverse economic,physical, and social needs of existing and future residents of Huntington Beach. Policy LU 9.1.4: Require that recreational and open space amenities be incorporated in new multi- family developments and that they be accessible to and of sufficient size to be usable by all residents. Goal LU 10: Achieve the development of a range of commercial uses. Goal LU 11: Achieve the development of projects that enable residents to live in proximity to their jobs, commercial services, and entertainment, and reduce the need for automobile use. Policy LU 11.1.2: Limit commercial uses in mixed-use development projects to those uses that are compatible with the residences. Policy L U 11.1.4: Require the incorporation of adequate onsite open space and recreational facilities to serve the needs of the residents in mixed-use development projects. Policy L U 11.1.5: Require that mixed-use developments be designed to mitigate potential conflicts between the commercial and residential uses, considering such issues as noise, lighting, security, and truck and automobile access. Policy L U ILL 6: Require that the ground floor of structures that horizontally integrate housing with commercial uses locate commercial uses along the street frontage (housing may be located to the rear and/or on upper floors). Policy LU 11.1.7: Require that mixed-use development projects be designed to achieve a consistent and high quality character, including the consideration of the: a. Visual and physical integration among the commercial and residential uses (Plates LU-3 and LU-4); b. Architectural treatment of building elevations to convey the visual character of multiple building volumes and individual storefronts and residential units. E. Noise Element Policy N 1.3.10: Require that mechanical equipment, such as air conditioning units or pool equipment, comply with the City's Noise Ordinance and Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. Policy N 1.5.1: Require that commercial and residential mixed-use structures minimize the transfer or transmission of noise and vibration from the commercial land use to the residential land use. The design measures may include: (1)the use of materials which mitigate sound transmission; or (2) the configuration of interior spaces to minimize sound amplification and transmission. Page 3 of 7 F. Urban Design Element Goal UD 1.1: Enhance the visual image of the City of Huntington Beach G. Utilities Element Obiective U 5.1: Ensure that adequate natural gas, telecommunication, and electrical systems are provided. The proposed amendments to the General Plan and Zoning land use designations are a mechanism to achieve the goals of smart growth and sustainable development. The amendments would allow for a mixed use, transit-oriented, high density development thereby increasing housing options for diverse household types, promoting alternative modes of transportation, creating a local sense of place, reducing infrastructure and maintenance costs, and allowing for more efficient use of land resources. The area has a variety of complementary uses that are critical to any vibrant community such as commercial and entertainment uses, employment centers, a transit hub, and a school. Because of its location and unique features, the site would be appropriate in accommodating an infill development that is more compact in design and higher in density and compatible with the surrounding area. In doing so, multiple sustainable development principles are achieved, resulting in the social and economic well-being of the area. The benefits of mixed use developments include creating better places to live, work, and play, reducing dependence on the automobile, and lessening pollution and environmental degradation. Mixed use development is about widening the choices on where to live and how to travel, rejuvenating urban neighborhoods, bringing more people into everyday social interactions, and ensuring that communities continue to thrive. The proposed project would be a mixed-use, transit-oriented, and high-density development that offers a wide range of housing opportunities and options, accommodating different age groups, income levels, and household types. The project is required to meet the City's affordable housing ordinance obligations providing the equivalent of 10 percent of the units (on-site and/or off-site) as affordable. In addition, the project provides a concentration of living, shopping, entertainment, educational, and employment opportunities within walking distance of the Golden West Transportation Center. This development promotes the use of transit services as an alternative to reliance on the automobile as the primary mode of transportation. Because the project is located in close proximity to different activities and uses, it provides opportunities and convenience for many households to use alternate travel modes such as walking and biking to complete their daily routines and run errands. The structures of the proposed project are designed to convey a high quality visual image and character and ensure compatibility of residential and commercial uses. The project is designed with retail storefronts on the ground level and residential units above, incorporating design elements, building materials, and colors to differentiate and complement the residential and commercial components of the project. The proposed mix of retail and residential uses at the project site, along with high quality design and attractive pedestrian atmosphere, would activate the urban environment and revitalize community life. Page 4 of 7 SUGGESTED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 07-043: 1. The site plan, floor plans, elevations, and other site plan exhibits received and dated August 6, 2008 shall be the conceptually approved design with the following modifications. a. The project shall be revised to reduce the number of residential units from 440 units to 330 units and retain the 10,000 sq. ft. of commercial/retail space. b. The number of onsite parking spaces shall be increased to comply with the minimum parking requirements of the MU-TCD development standards. c. The minimum open space areas shall be provided to comply with the open space requirements of the MU-TCD development standards. d. The minimum private storage space shall be provided to comply with the private storage space requirements of the MU-TCD development standards. e. Architectural projections and recesses shall be provided on all building elevations except for the building elevations that face each other (i.e. the east elevation of the west building and west elevation of the east building). f. The height of parapet walls shall be reduced to two feet and maintain the score-line design. g. A walkability/pedestrian access plan within the project site and to adjacent sites and landscape plans shall be submitted for Design Review Board approval. h. The recreation room shall be designed to have windows looking out onto the courtyard and the elevator waiting area to provide more visibility. (PD) 2. Prior to receiving a precise grading and building permit, the following shall be submitted and approved: a. The applicant shall prepare a site Grading and Drainage Plan containing the recommendations of the final Soils and Geotechnical Reports analysis for temporary and permanent groundwater dewatering as well as for surface drainage. (PW) b. A Shoring Plan prepared by a Civil or Structural Engineer shall be submitted to the Public Works Department (for reference only) with first submittal of the Precise Grading Plan. (PW) 3. During grading and construction, the following shall be completed: a. Raker braces per the preliminary Geotechnical Report (dated December 12, 2006) shall be used for lateral support of the temporary shoring during the construction phase of the project. (PW) Page 5 of 7 b. Tie-back anchors will not be allowed in the public right-of-way (under Gothard Street or Center Avenue) or under any adjacent private property (Levitz and Southern California Edison). (PW ) 4. Prior to issuance of building permits, the following shall be approved: a. The Affordable Housing Agreement shall be approved and recorded by the City prior to issuance of building permits. The Agreement shall provide for a minimum-of 25 percent of the affordable housing requirement as affordable to low income households on-site. The remaining affordable housing requirement may be satisfied off-site at either the low or median income level, pursuant to the HBZSO, and the method and location of off-site compliance shall be set forth in the Agreement. The income levels of any of the units may be increased consistent with any change to the City's Affordable Housing Ordinance prior to execution of the Agreement; however, in no case shall the income requirements be more restrictive than as currently required by this Condition of Approval. b. The subject property shall provide an irrevocable offer to dedicate a reciprocal accessway between the subject site and adjacent southerly property. The design, location and width of the accessway shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department and Public Works Department. The accessway design shall consist of vehicular access, pedestrian access, bicycle access, and landscaping. The pedestrian and bicycle access shall be separated from the vehicular access and shall be attractively landscaped. The subject property owner shall be responsible for making necessary improvements to implement the reciprocal accessway. The legal instrument shall be submitted to the Planning Department a minimum of 30 days prior to building permit issuance. The document shall be approved by the Planning Department and the City Attorney as to form and content and, when approved, shall be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder prior to final building permit approval. A copy of the recorded document shall be filed with the Planning Department for inclusion in the entitlement file prior to final building permit approval. The recorded agreement shall remain in effect in perpetuity, except as modified or rescinded pursuant to the expressed written approval of the City of Huntington Beach. 5. Prior to final inspection, the following shall be completed: a. The project developer shall construct an underground storm drain pipe along the east side of Gothard Street from Center Avenue to Edinger Avenue to connect to the existing, underground Edinger Avenue storm drain pipe. Based on a Final Hydrology and Hydraulics Report, the new Gothard Street, underground storm drain facility sizing and design shall be targeted to convey the highest storm event exceedance flow rates along Gothard Street at full build-out of the General Plan, including contributions from any permanent groundwater dewatering system. The proposed project onsite storm drainage system shall be designed to convey all water quality treated flow directly into the new underground storm drain pipe along Gothard Street. (PW) b. An antenna shall be installed within the underground parking structure to relay Police and Fire Department radio transmissions. (PD) Page 6 of 7 c. Lighting in the parking structure shall be placed over and between parking stalls. (PD) d. Surveillance cameras shall be installed at the elevator areas, stairwells, and main residential lobby and recorded 24 hours a day, every day. (PD) e. Elevators and stairwells shall be adequately lighted. (PD) f. Products shall be attached to areas vulnerable to skateboarding opportunities near the northwest side of the building in order to prevent noise and damage to property. (PD) 6. The City reserves the right to require the property owner to dedicate a portion of the private onsite fire water system to become a future public water system that will be owned and maintained by the City; and shall require the property owner to dedicate a minimum ten (10) feet water utility easement (five feet on either side of the water pipeline and appurtenances) for any portion of the private onsite fire water system that will become public and any new water pipelines/facilities constructed within the subject property that will be part of the public water system. (PW) 7. The City reserves the right to require the property owner to enter into a Special Utility Easement Agreement (SUEA) with the City for any portion of the private on-site fire water system that will be converted to a public water system and any new water pipelines/facilities constructed within the subject property that will be part of the public water system. (PW) 8. To be consistent with the City's condition to convert a portion of the private onsite fire water system to a future public water system, backflow protection devices are required on all individual water service connections (domestic, irrigation and fire) served from the private on-site domestic and fire water pipelines. (PW) 9. The project shall comply with all mitigation measures adopted in conjunction with Environmental Impact Report No. 07-004. 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. Page 7 of 7 .%;,:<J: :.'axe_,-,-,,�� :'� . l�x�. .�:'x:. :.:� .::: .� .iix, �, „ ;. 33 .... '&�' :. .M �.. x �' «« x xx�a (STAFF RECOMMENDATION) SUGGESTED FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 07-043 SUGGESTED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 07-043: 1. Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043 for the construction of 385 residential units and 10,000 sq. ft. of commercial/retail space 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 proposed transit-oriented development would produce an environment which is both attractive and sustainable by increasing housing options, promoting alternative modes of transportation, and creating a local sense of place. The adjacency to a variety of commercial, entertainment, educational, and transportation uses allows the project to have a more compact and higher density development while minimizing adverse environmental effects. The mix of land uses contemplated by the proposed project as well as those already existing in the vicinity would create a dynamic environment where people can live, work, and play within a walking distance. The population increase would enhance the economic viability of the area by supplying a customer base for the area businesses. In addition, the architectural treatment of the buildings includes numerous features that contribute to an attractive design and convey a high quality visual image and character of the development. The provision of centrally located courtyards and open space amenities add to the appeal of the development. Given these project features, the project would fit within the surrounding neighborhood. 2. The conditional use permit will be compatible with surrounding uses and anticipated land uses because the proposed mixed-use project is complementary to existing uses in the vicinity. The area in proximity to the project site is targeted for revitalization efforts, incorporating more intense mixed use development. Because of its unique location, the project will accommodate the proposed growth that is compatible with surrounding uses. The project is designed to convey a high quality visual image and attractive pedestrian atmosphere to harmonize with developments in the vicinity. Furthermore, compliance with the mitigation measures of Environmental Impact Report No. 05-01 and code provisions will ensure that the project will be compatible with other area developments. 3. The proposed mixed use project will comply with the provisions of the base district and other applicable provisions in the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located. The proposed development will comply with all code provisions, including setbacks, building height, open space, parking, and building design standards. Compliance with the development standards will ensure a high quality development that would be compatible with the surrounding land uses. 4. The granting of the conditional use permit will not adversely affect the General Plan. It is consistent with the proposed Land Use Element designation of Mixed Use on the subject property. In addition, it is consistent with the following goals and policies of the General Plan: Page 1 of 8 A. Circulation Element Obiective CE 3.2: Encourage new development that promotes and expands the use of transit services. Policy CE 2.1.: Comply with City's performance standards for acceptable levels of service. Policy CE 6.1.6: Maintain existing pedestrian facilities and require new development to provide pedestrian walkways and bicycle routes between developments, schools, and public facilities. B. Growth Mang ement Element Policy GM 3.1.8: Promote traffic reduction strategies including alternate travel modes, alternate work hours, and a decrease of vehicle trips throughout the city. C. Housing Element Policy H 2.2: Facilitate the development of mixed-use projects in appropriate commercial areas, including stand-alone residential development (horizontal mixed-use) and housing above ground floor commercial uses (vertical mixed-use). Establish mixed use zoning regulations. Policy H 3.1: Encourage the production of housing that meets all economic segments of the community, including lower, moderate, and upper income households, to maintain a balanced community. Goal H S: Provide equal housing opportunity. D. Land Use Element Goal LU 4: Achieve and maintain high quality architecture, landscape, and public open spaces in the City. Goal LU 4.2.4: Require that all development be designed to provide adequate space for access, parking, supporting functions, open space, and other pertinent elements. Goal LU 7: Achieve a diversity of land uses that sustain the City's economic viability, while maintaining the City's environmental resources and scale and character. Goal LU 8: Achieve a pattern of land uses that preserves, enhances, and establishes a distinct identity for the 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 principles discussed below: b. Vary uses and densities along the City's extended commercial corridors, such as Beach Boulevard. Page 2 of 8 c. Increase diversification of community and local commercial nodes to serve adjacent residential neighborhoods. f. Site development to capitalize upon potential long-term transit improvements. Goal LU 9: Achieve the development of a range of housing units that provides for the diverse economic, physical, and social needs of existing and future residents of Huntington Beach. Policy LU 9.1.4: Require that recreational and open space amenities be incorporated in new multi- family developments and that they be accessible to and of sufficient size to be usable by all residents. Goal L U 10: Achieve the development of a range of commercial uses. Goal LU 11: Achieve the development of projects that enable residents to live in proximity to their jobs, commercial services, and entertainment, and reduce the need for automobile use. Policy LU 11.1.2: Limit commercial uses in mixed-use development projects to those uses that are compatible with the residences. Policy LU 11.1.4: Require the incorporation of adequate onsite open space and recreational facilities to serve the needs of the residents in mixed-use development projects. Policy LU 11.1.5: Require that mixed-use developments be designed to mitigate potential conflicts between the commercial and residential uses, considering such issues as noise, lighting, security, and truck and automobile access. Policy LU 11.1.6: Require that the ground floor of structures that horizontally integrate housing with commercial uses locate commercial uses along the street frontage (housing may be located to the rear and/or on upper floors). Policy LU 11.1.7: Require that mixed-use development projects be designed to achieve a consistent and high quality character, including the consideration of the: a. Visual and physical integration among the commercial and residential uses (Plates LU-3 and LU-4); b. Architectural treatment of building elevations to convey the visual character of multiple building volumes and individual storefronts and residential units. E. Noise Element Policy N 1.3.10: Require that mechanical equipment, such as air conditioning units or pool equipment, comply with the City's Noise Ordinance and Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. Policy N 1.5.1: Require that commercial and residential mixed-use structures minimize the transfer or transmission of noise and vibration from the commercial land use to the residential land use. The design measures may include: (1)the use of materials which mitigate sound transmission; or (2)the configuration of interior spaces to minimize sound amplification and transmission. Page 3 of 8 F. Urban Design Element Goal UD 1.1: Enhance the visual image of the City of Huntington Beach G. Utilities Element Obiective U 5.1: Ensure that adequate natural gas, telecommunication, and electrical systems are provided. The proposed amendments to the General Plan and Zoning land use designations are a mechanism to achieve the goals of smart growth and sustainable development. The amendments would allow for a mixed use, transit-oriented, high density development thereby increasing housing options for diverse household types, promoting alternative modes of transportation, creating a local sense of place, reducing infrastructure and maintenance costs, and allowing for more efficient use of land resources. The area has a variety of complementary uses that are critical to any vibrant community such as commercial and entertainment uses, employment centers, a transit hub, and a school. Because of its location and unique features, the site would be appropriate in accommodating an infill development that is more compact in design and higher in density and compatible with the surrounding area. In doing so, multiple sustainable development principles are achieved, resulting in the social and economic well-being of the area. The benefits of mixed use developments include creating better places to live, work, and play, reducing dependence on the automobile, and lessening pollution and environmental degradation. Mixed use development is about widening the choices on where to live and how to travel, rejuvenating urban neighborhoods, bringing more people into everyday social interactions, and ensuring that communities continue to thrive. The proposed project would be a mixed-use, transit-oriented, and high-density development that offers a wide range of housing opportunities and options, accommodating different age groups, income levels, and household types. The project is required to meet the City's affordable housing ordinance obligations providing the equivalent of 10 percent of the units (on-site and/or off-site) as affordable. In addition, the project provides a concentration of living, shopping, entertainment, educational, and employment opportunities within walking distance of the Golden West Transportation Center. This development promotes the use of transit services as an alternative to reliance on the automobile as the primary mode of transportation. Because the project is located in close proximity to different activities and uses, it provides opportunities and convenience for many households to use alternate travel modes such as walking and biking to complete their daily routines and run errands. The structures of the proposed project are designed to convey a high quality visual image and character and ensure compatibility of residential and commercial uses. The project is designed with retail storefronts on the ground level and residential units above, incorporating design elements, building materials, and colors to differentiate and complement the residential and commercial components of the project. The proposed mix of retail and residential uses at the project site, along with high quality design and attractive pedestrian atmosphere, would activate the urban environment and revitalize community life. Page 4 of 8 SUGGESTED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 07-043: 1. The site plan, floor plans, elevations, and other site plan exhibits received and dated August 6, 2008 shall be the conceptually approved design with the following modifications. a. The project shall be revised to reduce the number of residential units from 440 units to 385 units and retain the 10,000 sq. ft. of commercial/retail space. b. The number of onsite parking spaces shall be increased to comply with the minimum parking requirements of the MU-TCD development standards. c. The minimum open space areas shall be provided to comply with the open space requirements of the MU-TCD development standards. d. The minimum private storage space shall be provided to comply with the private storage space requirements of the MU-TCD development standards. e. Architectural projections and recesses shall be provided on all building elevations except for the building elevations that face each other (i.e. the east elevation of the west building and west elevation of the east building). f. The height of parapet walls shall be reduced to two feet and maintain the score-line design. g. A walkability/pedestrian access plan within the project site and to adjacent sites and landscape plans shall be submitted for Design Review Board approval. h. The recreation room shall be designed to have windows looking out onto the courtyard and the elevator waiting area to provide more visibility. (PD) 2. Prior to receiving a precise grading and building permit, the following shall be submitted and approved: a. The applicant shall prepare a site Grading and Drainage Plan containing the recommendations of the final Soils and Geotechnical Reports analysis for temporary and permanent groundwater dewatering as well as for surface drainage. (PW) b. A Shoring Plan prepared by a Civil or Structural Engineer shall be submitted to the Public Works Department (for reference only) with first submittal of the Precise Grading Plan. (PW) 3. During grading and construction, the following shall be completed: a. Raker braces per the preliminary Geotechnical Report (dated December 12, 2006) shall be used for lateral support of the temporary shoring during the construction phase of the project as deemed necessary by the Public Works Director. (PW) Page 5 of 8 b. Tie-back anchors will not be allowed in the public right-of-way (under Gothard Street or Center Avenue) or under any adjacent private property (Levitz and Southern California Edison) as deemed necessary by the Public Works Director. (PW ) 4. Prior to issuance of building permits, the following shall be approved: a. The Affordable Housing Agreement shall be approved and recorded by the City prior to issuance of building permits. The Agreement shall provide for a minimum of 33 percent of the affordable housing requirement as affordable to low income households on-site. The remaining affordable housing requirement may be satisfied off-site at either the low or median income level, pursuant to the HBZSO, and the method and location of off-site compliance shall be set forth in the Agreement. The income levels of any of the units may be increased consistent with any change to the City's Affordable Housing Ordinance prior to execution of the Agreement; however, in no case shall the income requirements be more restrictive than as currently required by this Condition of Approval. b. The subject property shall provide an irrevocable offer to dedicate a reciprocal accessway between the subject site and adjacent southerly property. The design, location and width of the accessway shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department and Public Works Department. The accessway design shall consist of vehicular access, pedestrian access, bicycle access, and landscaping. The pedestrian and bicycle access shall be separated from the vehicular access and shall be attractively landscaped. The subject property owner shall be responsible for making necessary improvements to implement the reciprocal accessway. The legal instrument shall be submitted to the Planning Department a minimum of 30 days prior to building permit issuance. The document shall be approved by the Planning Department and the City Attorney as to form and content and, when approved, shall be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder prior to final building permit approval. A copy of the recorded document shall be filed with the Planning Department for inclusion in the entitlement file prior to final building permit approval. The recorded agreement shall remain in effect in perpetuity, except as modified or rescinded pursuant to the expressed written approval of the City of Huntington Beach. c. A public art element, approved by the Design Review Board, Director of Planning, and Director of Huntington Beach Art Center, shall be designated on the plans. Public Art shall be innovative, original, and of artistic excellence; appropriate to the design of the project; and reflective of the community's cultural identity (ecology, history, or society). 5. Prior to final inspection, the following shall be completed: a. The project developer shall construct an underground storm drain pipe along the east side.of Gothard Street from Center Avenue to Edinger Avenue to connect to the existing, underground Edinger Avenue storm drain pipe as deemed necessary based on a Final Hydrology and Hydraulics Report. As deemed necessary, the new Gothard Street, underground storm drain facility sizing and design shall be targeted to convey the highest storm event exceedance flow rates along Gothard Street at full build-out of the General Plan, including contributions from any permanent groundwater dewatering system. The proposed project onsite storm drainage system shall be designed to convey all water quality treated Page 6 of 8 flow directly into the new underground storm drain pipe along Gothard Street, as deemed necessary. (PW) b. An antenna shall be installed within the underground parking structure to relay Police and Fire Department radio transmissions. (PD) c. Lighting in the parking structure shall be placed over and between parking stalls. (PD) d. Surveillance cameras shall be installed at the elevator areas, stairwells, and main residential lobby and recorded 24 hours a day, every day. (PD) e. Elevators and stairwells shall be adequately lighted. (PD) f. Products shall be attached to areas vulnerable to skateboarding opportunities near the northwest side of the building in order to prevent noise and damage to property. (PD) 6. The City reserves the right to require the property owner to dedicate a portion of the private onsite fire water system to become a future public water system that will be owned and maintained by the City; and shall require the property owner to dedicate a minimum ten (10) feet water utility easement (five feet on either side of the water pipeline and appurtenances) for any portion of the private onsite fire water system that will become public and any new water pipelines/facilities constructed within the subject property that will be part of the public water system. (PW) 7. The City reserves the right to require the property owner to enter into a Special Utility Easement Agreement(SUEA) with the City for any portion of the private on-site fire water system that will be converted to a public water system and any new water pipelines/facilities constructed within the subject property that will be part of the public water system. (PW) 8. To be consistent with the City's condition to convert a portion of the private onsite fire water system to a future public water system, backflow protection devices are required on all individual water service connections (domestic, irrigation and fire) served from the private on-site domestic and fire water pipelines. (PW) 9. The project shall comply with all mitigation measures adopted in conjunction with Environmental Impact Report No. 07-004. 10. The Development Services Departments (Building & Safety, Fire, Planning and Public Works) shall be responsible for ensuring compliance with all applicable code requirements and conditions of approval. The Director of Planning may approve minor amendments to plans and/or conditions of approval as appropriate based on changed circumstances, new information or other relevant factors. Any proposed plan/project revisions shall be called out on the plan sets submitted for building permits. Permits shall not be issued until the Development Services Departments have reviewed and approved the proposed changes for conformance with the intent of the City Council's action. If the proposed changes are of a substantial nature, an amendment to the original entitlement reviewed by the City Council may be required pursuant to the provisions of HBZSO Section 241.18. Page 7 of 8 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. Page 8 of 8 T . . . � - ` . To � «. » . wft :� � :}> . s /, . w y ` 3 - « � «\ - THE RIPCURL PROJECT Findings of Fact/ Statement of Overriding Considerations Prepared for City of Huntington Beach Planning Department 2000 Main Street, Third Floor Huntington Beach, California 92648 Prepared by PBSU 12301 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 430 Los Angeles, California 90025 October 4 2008 CHAPTER1 Introduction............................................................................................................ 1-1 CHAPTER-2 CEQA Findings......................................................................................................2-1 2.1 Introduction.....................................................................................................................2-1 CHAPTER 3 Findings Regarding the Rejected Project and Project Alternatives......................3-1 3.1 Introduction.....................................................................................................................3-1 3.2 Project Objectives...........................................................................................................3-1 3.3 Selection of Alternatives ................................................................................................3-3 3.4 Project and Alternative Findings ..................................................................................3-3 3.4.1 The Rejected Originally Proposed Project...................................................3-3 3.4.2 The Ripcurl Project Alternatives...................................................................3-4 CHAPTER 4 Statement of Overriding Considerations ...............................................................4-1 4.1 Introduction.....................................................................................................................4-1 4.2 Significant Adverse Impacts..........................................................................................4-1 4.3 Findings............................................................................................................................4-2 4.4 Overriding Considerations.............................................................................................4-2 Table Table 2-1 CEQA Findings for The Ripcurl Project...............................................................................................2-3 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations M tr CHAPTER I In piducttor� This document presents the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations that must be adopted by the City of Huntington Beach (City) pursuant to the requirements of Sections 15091 and 15093, respectively, of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines (CEQA Guidelines) prior to the approval of The Ripcurl Project (proposed project). This document is organized as follows: Chapter 1 Introduction to the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations. Chapter 2 Presents the CEQA Findings of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), including the identified significant cumulative impact. Chapter 3 Presents the alternatives to the proposed project and evaluates them in relation to the findings contained in Section 15091(a)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines. The City must consider and make findings regarding alternatives when a project would involve environmental impacts that cannot be reduced to a less-than-significant level, or cannot be substantially reduced,by proposed mitigation measures. Chapter 4 Presents a Statement of Overriding Considerations that is required in accordance with Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines for significant impacts of the proposed project that cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level. The proposed project involves the construction of a mixed-use residential and commercial development that would consist of four levels of residential uses over street-level neighborhood commercial uses in two six-story structures. Parking would be provided on-site; one level of parking would be below-grade, and two levels of parking would be above-grade. A total of 705 parking spaces would be provided for residences and visitors. The commercial component would be located on the ground level adjacent to the above grade parking. A mezzanine level would also be located on the roof. Overall, the project as originally proposed would consist of 440 residential units and up to 10,000 square feet (sf) of street level commercial uses. The total project floor area, excluding parking and basement area would be approximately 382,700 sf. The project would be transit-friendly in that it is situated adjacent to the Golden West Transportation Center, which is the City's largest transit hub and provides transit access throughout northern Orange County. The location of the project next to the transportation center hub would provide residents with a convenient alternative means of transportation. The project could also benefit from future commuter rail service if it is established along the existing Union Pacific Railroad line. The proposed location of high- density infill development would also benefit from the existing nearby retail and neighborhood services. The project as originally proposed would result in significant unavoidable project-level impacts with respect to traffic, as well as cumulative traffic and population and housing impacts. In comparison to the alternatives analyzed against the proposed development, the City finds in the Draft EIR that Alternative 4—Reduced Project Alternative Option 2 would be considered the environmentally superior alternative. The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations �_� Chapter 1 In •s • The following discretionary approvals by the City of Huntington Beach are required to implement the proposed project: ■ Conditional Use Permit Request—To permit construction of the proposed structures ■ Design Review—Approval ■ General Plan Amendment—To allow mixed-use on the site ■ Zoning Map Amendment—To establish a "Transit Center District" zone on the project site ■ Zoning Text Amendment—To establish a "Transit Center District" and associated development standards The project as originally proposed and analyzed in the Draft EIR has been rejected from further consideration. A project with 330 residential units and 10,000 square feet of commercial uses is more desirable than the proposed project and has been recommended by the Planning Commission to become the Recommended Project and replace the original project. The Recommended Project would reduce the intensity of the residential development (while keeping the intensity of the commercial development the same as the proposed project), and reduce the severity of traffic/transportation impacts. 1.2 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations CHAPTER. e • • 2.1 INTRODUCTION This chapter presents the potential impacts that were identified in the EIR and the findings that are required in accordance with Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines. The possible findings for each significant and/or potentially significant adverse impact are as follows: (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project which avoid, substantially lessen, or reduce the magnitude of the significant environmental effect as identified in the EIR ("Finding 1"). (b) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the findings. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can, and should be, adopted by such other agency ("Finding 2"). (c) Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives in the EIR ("Finding 3"). CEQA requires that the lead agency adopt mitigation measures or alternatives,where feasible, to avoid or substantially reduce significant environmental impacts that would otherwise occur as a result of a project. Project modification or alternatives are not required, however, where they are infeasible or where the responsibility for modifying the project lies with some other agency (State CEQA Guidelines §15091, subd. (a), [3]). Public Resources Code Section 21061.1 defines "feasible" to mean "capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social and technological factors." (See also Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors [Goleta II] [1990] 52 Ca1.3d 553, 565 [276 Cal. Rptr. 410].) Only after fully complying with the findings requirement can an agency adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations (Citizens for Quality Growth v. City of Mount Shasta [1988] 198 Cal.App.3d 433, 442, 445 [243 Cal. Rptr. 727]). CEQA requires the Lead Agency to state in writing the specific rationale to support its actions based on the Final EIR and/or information in the record. This written statement is known as the Statement of Overriding Considerations. The Statement of Overriding Considerations provides the information that demonstrates the decision-making body of the Lead Agency has weighed the benefits of the project against its unavoidable adverse effects in determining whether to approve the project. If the benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse effects may be considered "acceptable." The California Supreme Court has stated that, "the wisdom of approving any development project, a delicate task which requires a balancing of interests, is necessarily left to the sound discretion of the local officials and their constituents who are responsible for such decisions. The law as we interpret and apply it simply requires that those decisions be informed, and therefore balanced." (Goleta II, 52 Cal.3d 553, 576 [276 Cal. Rptr. 401].) This document presents the City of Huntington Beach findings as required by CEQA, cites substantial evidence in the record in support of each of the findings, and presents an explanation to supply the The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 2.1 C.hap_ter2 CEdAa e logical step between the finding and the facts in the record (State CEQA Guidelines �15091). Additional facts that support the findings are set forth in the Draft EIR, the Final EIR, staff reports, and the record of proceedings. Table 2-1 (CEQA Findings for The Ripcurl Project) summarizes the potentially significant impacts of the originally proposed project in the EIR that were reduced to less-than-significant levels with mitigation as well as the project-level and cumulative significant impacts. As discussed in Chapter 1, the project as originally proposed and analyzed in the Draft EIR has been rejected from further consideration. A project with 330 residential units and 10,000 square feet of commercial uses is more desirable than the proposed project and has been recommended by the Planning Commission to become the Recommended Project and replace the original project. The Recommended Project would reduce the severity of traffic/transportation impacts. All other elements of the project as originally proposed would remain as presented in the Draft EIR. 2.2 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations -Chapter Q • • Table N • Findings • - Ri• �Project > Impact Statement > Impactsummaty > Findings > Aesthetics > Impact 4.1.2 Implementation of the > Proposed structures would range between approximately 66.5 > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project would create new to 72.5 feet in height. Buildings generally three or more stories changes or alterations in the project, which sources of light or glare into the project in height have the potential to include large building faces that would reduce Impact 4.1-2 to less-than- vicinity. However,these sources would not could introduce reflective surfaces (e.g., brightly colored significant levels, are hereby incorporated into adversely affect day or nighttime views in building fagades, reflective glass) that could increase existing the project. No additional mitigation measures the area. levels of daytime glare. The proposed project could,therefore, are necessary with the implementation of serve as a new source of light and glare in the area, and mitigation measure MM4.1-1. impacts would be potentially significant. However, implementation of mitigation measure MM4.1-1 would reduce impacts associated with glare from mid-to high-rise structures. > The provision of non-reflective fagade treatments for structures proposed under the project would ensure that impacts related to daytime glare would be reduced to a less-than-significant level by reducing the reflective properties of the building materials employed,such as glass,metal,or finished concrete. > Air Quality > Impact 4.2-2 Peak construction activities > Construction-related daily emissions would not exceed > Finding 1. The City finds that changes or associated with the proposed project could SCAQMD significance thresholds. However,these calculations alterations have been required in, or generate emissions that exceed SCAQMD assume that appropriate dust control measures would be incorporated into, the project, which would thresholds. implemented during each phase of development as required by reduce Impact 4.2-2 to less-than-significant SCAQMD Rule 403—Fugitive Dust, and that all other levels. No additional mitigation measures are appropriate mitigation measures (MM4.2-1 and MM4.2-2), necessary with the implementation of CR4.2-1 such as limiting idling of motorized equipment, has been through CR4.2-5 and mitigation measures implemented. Thus, all identified city requirements and MM4.2-1 and MM4.2-2. mitigation measures are required. > Cumulative Climate Change > Construction and operation of the proposed project would > Finding 1. The City finds that the cumulative contribute to greenhouse gas emissions. However, due to the impact of the proposed project with respect to type and size of the proposed project, design features and climate change would be less than significant greenhouse gas emission reduction measures incorporated due to the incorporation of changes or into the proposed project, as well as mitigation measures alterations, either required or incorporated, to MM4.2-1 and MM4.2-2, the project's contribution to the the project. No additional mitigation measures cumulative impact would not be considerable. Further in are necessary with the implementation of accordance with guidance from the State Attorney General,the CR4.2-1 through CR4.2-5 and mitigation California Air Pollution Control Officers Association, the measures MM4.2-1 and MM4.2-2, in light of The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 2.3 s •tor2'CE0A Firidinds > Impactswement > Impact Summary > Andings California Climate Action Team, the California Air Resources the current design of the proposed project. Board, and the South Coast Air Quality Management District, the project has been designed in such a manner as to reduce its contribution to climate change and global warming emissions. > Biological Resources > Impact 4.3-1 The proposed project could > Project implementation and construction-related activities may > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified have a substantial adverse impact either result in the disturbance of nesting species protected by the changes or alterations in the project, which directly (e.g., habitat loss) or indirectly MBTA. Prior to the onset of ground disturbance activities, the would reduce Impact 4.3-1 to less-than- (e.g., noise effects on wildlife) through City shall implement mitigation measure MM4.3-1, which significant levels, are hereby incorporated into habitat modifications, on any species entails focused surveys and avoidance measures for sensitive the project. No additional mitigation measures identified or published as an endangered, nesting and MBTA species, and appropriate agency are necessary with the implementation of threatened, rare, candidate, sensitive, or consultation. mitigation measure MM4.3-1. special-status species by CDFG or USFWS, and meets the definition of Section 15380 (b), (c), or(d)of the CEQA guidelines. > Impact 4.3-3 The proposed project would > Through implementation of mitigation measure MM4.3-1, > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified not conflict with local policies or ordinances implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with changes or alterations in the project, which protecting biological resources. any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources would reduce Impact 4.3-3 to less-than- (e.g., Policies ERC 2.1.9 and ERC 2.1.10 of City's General significant levels, are hereby incorporated into Plan—Environmental Resource/Conservation Element), which the project. No additional mitigation measures are designed to protect sensitive species and their habitats are necessary with the implementation of within the City from development and related construction mitigation measure MM4.3-1. activities. > Cultural Resources > Impact 4.4-1 Construction of the proposed > A records search was conducted by the SCCIC, which > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified project could cause a substantial adverse included a review of all recorded archaeological sites within a changes or alterations in the project, which change in the significance of previously 0.5-mile radius of the project site as well as a review of cultural would reduce Impact 4.4-1 to less-than- unknown archaeological resources that resource reports on file. No archeological sites were identified significant levels, are hereby incorporated into could be present on the project site. on the project site or within a 0.5-mile radius of the project site. the project. No additional mitigation measures Regardless, the lack of findings does not eliminate the are necessary with the implementation of potential for archaeological resources to be identified during mitigation measures MM4.4-1 and MM4.4-2. ground-disturbing activities associated with project implementation. Implementation of mitigation measures 2-4 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations Chapter 2 PA Finclings Table !► • o for - Ripcurl Project, > Impadswement > ImpactSu►nmaiy > Findngs MM4.4-1 and MM4.4-2 would require monitoring of construction activities by a qualified professional archaeologist and would require the scientific recovery and evaluation of any archaeological resources that could be encountered, which would ensure that important scientific information that could be provided by these resources regarding history or prehistory is not lost. > Impact 4.4-2 Construction of the proposed > Even though previous activities may have involved excavation > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified project would not destroy a unique or other earth-disturbing activities, some paleontologically changes or alterations in the project, which paleontological resource or unique sensitive rock units underlying the project site may not have would reduce Impact 4.4-2 to less-than- geologic feature that could be present on been disturbed, despite the possible destruction of surface significant levels, are hereby incorporated into the project site. evidence of their presence. Therefore, the impact resulting the project. No additional mitigation measures from damage to, or destruction of, these resources would be are necessary with implementation of potentially significant, as it makes biological records of ancient mitigation measures MM4.4-1 and MM4.4-2. life permanently unavailable for study by scientists. Mitigation measures MM4.4-1 and MM4.4-2 require monitoring of construction activities by a qualified paleontologist and require implementation of additional provisional measures in the event that paleontological resources are identified. > Impact 4.4-3 Construction activities > Although no surface evidence has been revealed,the potential > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified associated with implementation of the for human remains to be located at the site exists and for changes or alterations in the project, which proposed project could result in the excavation during construction activities to disturb these would reduce Impact 4.4-3 to less-than- disturbance of human remains, including resources. To reduce this impact, and as required by law, significant levels, are hereby incorporated into those interred outside of formal mitigation measure MM4.4-3 reflects provisional measures if the project. No additional mitigation measures cemeteries. human remains are discovered on the project site. are necessary with the implementation of mitigation measure 4.4-3. > Geology and Soils > Impact 4.5-1 Development of the > The proposed project site is situated in a seismically active > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project would not expose people area. During the design life of the development, strong ground changes or alterations in the project, which and/or structures to potentially substantial shaking may occur. Accordingly, the proposed structures and would reduce Impact 4.5-1 to less-than- adverse effects, including the risk of loss, improvements could be adversely impacted by the seismic significant levels, are hereby incorporated into injury, or death, involving strong seismic ground shaking if proper mitigation measures are not the project. No additional mitigation measures groundshaking and/or seismic-related implemented. Implementation of CR4.5-1 would require the are necessary with the implementation of ground failure,including liquefaction. preparation of a soils and geotechnical report specific to the CR4.5-1 and mitigation measure MM4.5-1. project site and mitigation measure MM4.5-1 would ensure that The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 2-5 e o - &� ' o 0 • • - Q4 O • ifO - - O O - > .Impoctstafement > Impact Summary - ""> Findings the design recommendations identified suggested therein are implemented. > Impact 4.5-3 The proposed project would > The potential for soil liquefaction from earthquake-induced > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified be located on subsidence-prone and groundshaking at the site was evaluated in a geotechnical changes or alterations in the project, which potentially liquefiable soils. investigation of the site taking into account the current and would reduce Impact 4.5-3 to less-than- historic groundwater levels and the increase in potential for the significant levels, are hereby incorporated into groundwater to rise closer to the ground surface. Based on the the project. No additional mitigation measures analysis, liquefaction could induce settlement of as much as are necessary with the implementation of 1.0 inch at the site. However,adherence to the City's Municipal CR4.5-1, CoA4.7-2, and mitigation measure Code (CR4.5-1 and CoA4.7-2) would ensure the maximum MM4.5-1. practicable protection available for structures on the project site. In addition, implementation of MM4.5-1 would further ensure adequate consideration of liquefaction potential at the site. > Impact 4.5-4 The proposed project could > The soils encountered at the site had a "very high"expansion > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified be located on expansive soil. index. Further, the alluvium and existing fills at the site were changes or alterations in the project, which considered to pose very high expansion potential risks. would reduce Impact 4.5-4 to a less-than- Because of the potential for volume changes with fluctuations significant level, are hereby incorporated into in moisture, expansive and compressible soils create a risk of the project. No additional mitigation measures distress to pavement, foundation elements, and other are necessary with the implementation of structures. However, because the proposed project structures CR4.5-1 and mitigation measure MM4.5-1. would be designed, constructed, and operated in conformance with Section 1802.2.2 Expansive Soils, of the 2007 CBC and Title 17 Excavation and Grading Code, and because the project would be required to comply with CR4.5-1 and mitigation measure MM4.5-1,potential risks to life and property associated with expansive soils would not be significant. > Hazards > Impact 4.6-2 Implementation of the > Demolition, grading and excavation activities for the proposed > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project could create a significant project could result in the exposure of construction personnel changes or alterations in the project, which hazard to the public or the environment and the public to previously unidentified hazardous substances would reduce Impact 4.6-2 to less-than- through reasonably foreseeable upset and in the soil. If any unidentified sources of contamination are significant levels, are hereby incorporated into accident conditions involving the release of encountered during demolition, grading or excavation, the the project. No additional mitigation measures hazardous materials into the environment. removal activities required could pose health and safety risks are necessary with the implementation of capable of resulting in various short-term or long-term adverse mitigation measures MM4.6-1 and MM4.6-2. 2-6 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations P e s e - • Table Q • •s for The Ripcurl Prdj'ect > ImpactStalement > ImpacfSummary > Finings health effects in exposed persons. However, coupled with compliance with existing local, State and federal regulations relating to potentially hazardous materials, implementation of mitigation measure MM4.6-1 would ensure that any potentially hazardous materials that may be discovered during construction activities would be handled so as to minimize potential exposure to construction workers and nearby residents. > The project site is located within a designated methane gas overlay district. The City has set minimum requirements for new building construction within the methane overlay districts in order to reduce the hazards presented from accumulations of methane gas by requiring the appropriate testing and mitigation measures for all new buildings within the methane districts. Implementation of mitigation measure MM4.6-2 would ensure appropriate testing and methods of gas reduction, as required by the HBFD. The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 2-7 • o - P e • > ImpaciSl6tement > . Imp6dS661riiary > 'Findings > Hydrology and Water Quality > Impact 4.7-1 Construction and operation > The proposed project would include construction activities, > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified of the proposed project could increase which would temporarily disturb soils. Disturbed soils are changes or alterations in the project, which stormwater pollutant loads or susceptible to high rates of erosion from wind and rain, would reduce Impact 4.7-1 to less-than- concentrations, which could result in a resulting in sediment transport from the site. Erosion and significant levels, are hereby incorporated into violation of water quality standards or a sedimentation affects water quality through interference with the project. No additional mitigation measures substantial degradation of water quality. photosynthesis,oxygen exchange, and the respiration, growth, are necessary with the project's adherence to and reproduction of aquatic species. Additionally, other CR4.7-1 and CoA4.7-1. pollutants, such as nutrients, trace metals, and hydrocarbons, can attach to sediment and be transported downstream,which could contribute to degradation of water quality. > During the operational phase of the proposed project, the major source of pollution in stormwater runoff would be contaminants that have accumulated on rooftops and other impervious surfaces, such as parking lots, pedestrian walkways, and the off-site road improvement prior to connecting to the storm drain system. Implementation of existing City requirements and conditions of approval(CR4.7-1 and CoA4.7-1) would reduce potential pollutant loads, assure that appropriate BMPs are used (e.g., constraints on infiltration-type BMPs), that regulatory requirements are met, and any post-construction violation of water quality standards would be less than significant. > Impact 4.7-2 Implementation of the > Operation of the proposed project would not substantially alter > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project could contribute site drainage and land use characteristics such that there changes or alterations in the project, which additional sources of polluted runoff. would be substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. would reduce Impact 4.7-2 to less-than- Nonetheless, existing regulations require implementation of a significant levels, are hereby incorporated into WQMP that would reduce pollutants in stormwater runoff,likely the project. No additional mitigation measures to less than existing conditions. Implementation of City are necessary with the implementation of requirement CR4.7-1 would also ensure that pollutants in CR4.7-1. stormwater runoff are reduced to the maximum extent practicable. 2-8 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations qhd__�pter2CEQA Findings > ImpactStabement > ImpactSummary > Findings > Impact 4.7-3 Implementation of the > The proposed project would not cause or contribute to a > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project would exceed the substantial increase in the exceedance of street flow design changes or alterations in the project, which capacity of the existing storm drain system. capacities of Gothard Street; however, a detailed project site would reduce Impact 4.7-3 to less-than- Hydrology and Hydraulic Report has not yet been prepared significant levels, are hereby incorporated into and alterations in project site drainage characteristics could, the project. No additional mitigation measures therefore increase peak flow rates from the project site and are necessary with the implementation of even incrementally small increases in peak flows would be CoA4.7-1 and mitigation measure MM4.7-1. potentially significant. Implementation of CoA4.7-1, which requires the construction of an off-site underground storm drain system to convey water quality treated flows from the project site to the storm drain system in Edinger Avenue, and mitigation measure MM4.7-1, which calls for the preparation and implementation of a hydrology and hydraulics report, as well as a site drainage plan, would ensure impacts are less than significant. > Impact 4.7-4 Implementation of the > During operation of the proposed project, exposed surfaces, > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project would alter the project including the filled slopes in the eastern portion of the project changes or alterations in the project, which site runoff characteristics that could result site, would be required to be stabilized in accordance with would reduce Impact 4.74 to less-than- in more on-site erosion and off-site Municipal Code,the City of Huntington Beach LIP,and DAMP. significant levels, are hereby incorporated into siltation. The proposed project would also be required to develop and the project. No additional mitigation measures implement an approved project WQMP including post- are necessary with the implementation of construction structural and non-structural BMPs for erosion CR4.7-1. and sediment controls. Implementation of City requirement CR4.7-1 would also include surface stabilization to prevent increased on-site erosion and off-site siltation following implementation of the proposed project. > Impact 4.7-5 Implementation of the > The project site is currently flat and about 90 percent > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project would substantially alter impervious surfaces that drain as sheet flow to local streets changes or alterations in the project, which the project site runoff characteristics that and Gothard Street. The proposed project would substantially would reduce Impact 4.7-5 to less-than- could result in more flooding on-or off-site. alter the project site runoff characteristics. However, with significant levels, are hereby incorporated into implementation of mitigation measures MM4.7-1 and MM4.7-2 the project. No additional mitigation measures and implementation of CR4.7-1 and CR4.7-2, the potential for are necessary with the implementation of increased site runoff for both peak runoff rates and total storm CR4.7-1, CR4.7-2, and mitigation measures flow volumes would not be substantial. MM4.7-1 and MM4.7-2. > Impact 4.7-6 Implementation of the > About 1.3 acres of the eastern portion of the project site is > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project would place housing located within a 100-year flood hazard area from failure of the changes or alterations in the project, which The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 2-9 J)apter 2,CEO A inclings Table N • • eThe oProject > Impact Statement > Impactsummary ;; > Find►ngs within a 100-year flood hazard area. East Garden Grove-Wintersberg Channel as mapped by would reduce Impact 4.7-6 to less-than- FEMA. significant levels, are hereby incorporated into > Compliance with CR4.7-2, which includes the elevation of the project. No additional mitigation measures residential construction at least one foot above the base flood are necessary with the implementation of elevation, would ensure that the housing proposed under the CR4.7-2. project would not be subjected to flooding impacts. > Impact 4.7-9 Construction of the proposed > The historical high groundwater levels at the project site occur > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified project would require groundwater at five feet below ground surface. Consequently, construction changes or alterations in the project, which dewatering. dewatering for utilities, foundation excavation and fill, and would reduce Impact 4.7-9 to less-than- below-grade parking would be required. However,the soils are significant levels, are hereby incorporated into very fine-grained and do not tend to allow free flow of water. the project. No additional mitigation measures Therefore, it is unlikely that substantial dewatering would be are necessary with the implementation of required during construction. Additionally, coverage under the CoA4.7-2. De Minimus Threat General Permit would include discharge quantity limitations. Furthermore, any potential construction dewatering impacts would be temporary. Therefore, with implementation of CoA4.7-2, the potential impacts as a result of dewatering activities would be minimal. > Noise > Impact 4.9-1 Construction activities > During construction activities, noise would be generated > Finding 1, The City finds that the identified associated with the proposed project would through the use of heavy machinery that could affect nearby changes or alterations in the project, which not exceed the standards established in sensitive receptors, including institutional uses. However, would reduce Impact 4.9-1 to less-than- the Huntington Beach Municipal Code. construction-related noise is intermittent in nature and would significant levels, are hereby incorporated into Operation of the proposed project would not generate continuous noise levels above the Municipal the project. No additional mitigation measures not generate noise levels in excess of Code standards. Furthermore, mitigation measures MM4.9-1, are necessary with the implementation of standards established by the City. which requires the use of noise attenuation measures such as mitigation measures MM4.9-1 and MM4.9-2. noise barriers (e.g., sound walls) or noise blankets, and MM4.9-2, which requires that construction staging areas and earthmoving equipment be located as far away from noise and vibration-sensitive land uses as possible, would also reduce construction-related noise levels. > Population and Housing > Impact 4.10-1 Implementation of the > The residential component of the project is anticipated to > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project would directly increase generate approximately 611 residents, which is based on an changes or alterations in the project, which population growth;however,the population average household size of 1.1 persons per studio and loft unit, would reduce Impact 4.10-1 to less-than- 2-10 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations • s - @ • s • • •le 2ml C EQA_Findingsfor Ripcurl • > Impact Statement > Impactsummary > Finings, growth would not cause exceedance of 1.4 persons per one-bedroom unit, and 2.0 persons per significant levels, are hereby incorporated into current growth projections established by two-bedroom unit. Using SCAG population projections for 2015 the project. No additional mitigation measures the City. (as shown in Table 4.10-1), the City's population is anticipated are necessary with the implementation of to increase by approximately 14,572 residents through buildout CR4.10-1. of the project.As such,the proposed project would account for approximately seven percent of the anticipated growth in this timeframe, or approximately 0.49 percent of the City's projected 2015 population, assuming full occupancy, and would not be considered substantial in light of current population projections. Furthermore, compliance with CR4.10- 1 would ensure that adequate affordable housing provisions are made at the project site. > Cumulative Population and Housing > Although full occupancy of all cumulative residential > Finding 3. Because all cumulative residential development would fall below the General Plan buildout development would ultimately contribute to the numbers, the City's General Plan did not account for substantial exceedance of SCAG population residential growth within the project site as well as the Beach- projections for the City for the 2015 timeframe, Edinger Corridor boundary as these projects require GPAs. The Ripcurl Project would have a considerable Additionally,it is beyond the scope of this document to assume contribution to the cumulative impact, and no a buildout year beyond 2015 for all residential projects under feasible mitigation is available. the Beach-Edinger Corridor Study since a time frame has not yet been established for that project. Therefore, because full occupancy of all cumulative development could potentially occur by 2015, the overall residential population that could occur would substantially exceed the SCAG population projections. > Public Services > Impact 4.11-2 Implementation of the > Although not necessary to maintain sufficient levels of police > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project would not result in the service, additional personnel and possibly equipment would changes or alterations in the project, which need for new or physically altered police ensure no change to the ratio of officers to population and would reduce Impact 4.11-2 to less-than- facilities in order to maintain acceptable response times.The proposed project would contribute funding significant levels, are hereby incorporated into service ratios. to the City's general fund in the form of tax revenue,fees, and the project. No additional mitigation measures other ancillary payments. The funds could, in turn, be used by are necessary with the implementation of the City to fund additional police officers in order to maintain mitigation measure MM4.11-1. the existing service ratio of officers to population. Further, on- site security concerns related to the proposed uses would be addressed through the permit process,at which time the HBPD The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 2-11 e e -r;�CIEQA Findings > Impact9demerd > Impactsummary > Findings would have the opportunity to review the proposed uses and provide input on necessary security measures. The City actively employs Crime Prevention Through Design (CPTED) recommendations in projects and has projects reviewed by a specialist in this field. Implementation of mitigation measure MM4.11-1 would ensure the safety of residents in the proposed building. > Impact 4.11.3 Implementation of the > Direct population growth resulting from the proposed project > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project would not require new or would not have an impact on the capacity of schools within the changes or alterations in the project, which physically altered facilities to HBUHSD and OVSD, as all three schools serving the project would reduce Impact 4.11-3 to less-than- accommodate additional students. site are currently operating below maximum capacity. significant levels, are hereby incorporated into Additionally, both Districts anticipate that the enrollment for its the project. No additional mitigation measures schools will be lower in the upcoming years and will continue to are necessary with the implementation of decline in the future. Due to declining enrollment within each CR4.11-1 and CR4.11-2. District, new students generated as a result of this development would not result in overcrowding and would likely help offset the current declining population. With the implementation of City requirements CR4.11-1 and CR4.11-2, fees collected under the authority of SB50 would offset any additional increase in educational demand at the elementary school,middle school and high school serving the project site. > Impact 4.11-4 Implementation of the > Upon project implementation, the City's population would > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project would not result in the increase by approximately 1,060 residents. Implementation of changes or alterations in the project, which need for new or physically altered library City requirement CR4.11-3 would be required to ensure that would reduce Impact 4.11-4 to less-than- facilities in order to maintain acceptable these additional residents would not notably affect the current significant levels, are hereby incorporated into service ratios. ratio of library staff per resident or items per capita. the project. No additional mitigation measures are necessary with the implementation of CR4.11-3. > Recreation > Impact 4.12-1 Implementation of the > The proposed project does not include dedicated open space > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project could increase the use of or parklands. Rather, private and common open space would changes or alterations in the project, which existing parks or recreational facilities; be provided through outdoor amenities such as balconies, a would reduce Impact 4.12-1 to less-than- however, not such that substantial physical pool and spa area, fire pit and movie projection area, and an significant levels,are hereby incorporated into deterioration of the facility would occur or indoor fitness center, which would be available to residents. the project. No additional mitigation measures be accelerated. The availability of such on-site amenities for future residents are necessary with the implementation of 2_12 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations s • - @ a o e • - !� s o ® - o • - > Impadstotement > Impactstimmary > findings n}, could potentially displace the demand on public recreational CR4.12-1. facilities. However, because the project does not include any designated park land, payment of the applicable open space and park fees, as required by City requirement CR4.12-1, would help acquire, develop, improve, and expand the City's open space and parklands inventory. > TransportationlTraffic > Impact 4.13-1 Under Year 2014 > The 1-405 northbound loop ramp from Beach Boulevard is > Finding 2. The City finds changes or Conditions, operation of the proposed deficient in both the AM and PM peak hours under future alterations that could reduce the potential project would cause an increase in traffic, conditions with the proposed project. Further,the project has a impact of the proposed project are within the which is substantial in relation to the significant contribution to this deficiency(more than 0.01)in the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public existing traffic load and capacity of the AM peak hour. Since traffic would be added to an existing agency and not the agency making the street system. deficiency(LOS E), impacts are considered substantial. There findings. are no physical improvements within the City's jurisdiction that > Finding 3. The City finds specific economic, can be made to this facility to improve operations. social,or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives in the EIR. > Impact 4.13-2 Under Year 2030 > Implementation of The Ripcurl Project would result in an > Finding 2. The City finds changes or Conditions, operation of the proposed increase in project-related traffic that could be substantial in alterations that could reduce the potential project would cause an increase in traffic, relation to the forecasted traffic load and capacity of the street impact of the proposed project are within the which is substantial in relation to the system in 2030. Implementation of mitigation measure responsibility and jurisdiction of another public forecasted traffic load and capacity of the MM4.13-1 would ensure that operation of the proposed project agency and not the agency making the street system. in the long range would not result in intersections operating findings. below the City of Huntington Beach performance standards. Although mitigation measure MM4.13-1 would reduce long- term impacts to a less-than-significant level, the impacted intersection is owned by Caltrans, and implementation of the proposed mitigation measure at this location would be dependent on factors outside the control of both the City of Huntington Beach and the project Applicant. > Impact 4.13-5 The project would not > The potential for roadway hazards can also occur as an > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified substantially increase roadway hazards. inherent result of the placement of additional access points changes or alterations in the project, which along public roadways. New intersections require adequate would reduce Impact 4.13-5 to less-than- sight distance and intersection traffic control in order to significant levels, are hereby incorporated into minimize potential hazards. In order to ensure safe the project. No additional mitigation measures The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 2-13 0 0 - & ' o 0 > ImpactSkdemenf > Imp:Ids Findings . > construction of project intersections, implementation of are necessary with the implementation of CR4.13-1 and CR4.13-2 would reduce potential impacts CR4.13-1 and CR4.13-2. associated with roadway hazards to a less-than-significant level. > Cumulative Traffic > Under the current General Plan, in 2030 the proposed project > Finding 2. The City finds changes or would result in a substantial increase in traffic volume at the alterations that could reduce the potential intersection of the 1-405 Freeway southbound ramps and impact of the proposed project are within the Center Avenue. As such, the proposed project would be responsibility and jurisdiction of another public considered cumulatively considerable. Further, although agency and not the agency making the mitigation measure MM4.13-1 would reduce the impact at the findings. 1-405 southbound ramps at Center Avenue to a less-than- significant level for project-level impacts, the improvement of this intersection is outside the control of both the City of Huntington Beach and the project Applicant. > Utilities and Service Systems > Impact 4.14-4 Implementation of the > The proposed project would increase the amount of > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project could require new sewer wastewater generated in the area and would potentially changes or alterations in the project, which connections, and could require or result in increase the demand for wastewater conveyance would reduce Impact 4.14-4 to less-than- the construction of new or expanded infrastructure. The OCSD did not provide an official"will serve significant levels, are hereby incorporated into conveyance systems. letter"for the project;however,based on their peak flow model the project. No additional mitigation measures there is approximately 0.6 mgd capacity in the 15-inch sewer are necessary with the implementation of line at Goldenwest Street and Heil Avenue and 4 mgd capacity CR4.14-1. in the 69-inch trunk line in Center Avenue at the Old Hoover alignment. Implementation of CR4.14-1 would require that a sewer study is conducted to determine if the existing sewer lines would require upgrades to ensure that the construction of new or expanded wastewater conveyance systems would not cause significant environmental effects. > Impact 4.14-5 Implementation of the > The proposed project would involve the construction and > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project would include new operation of stormwater treatment control Best Management changes or alterations in the project, which stormwater treatment control BMPs, the Practices (BMPs) that would be identified in a Stormwater would reduce Impact 4.14-5 to less-than- operation of which would not result in Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which would be a part of significant levels, are hereby incorporated into significant environmental effects. the project's Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP). The the project. No additional mitigation measures City has general/standard conditions of approval to protect are necessary with the implementation of receiving water quality from short- and long-term impacts of CR4.14-2 and CR4.14-3. 2-14 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 00 - Q' 0 0 • o - ' Findi eS.flof"T": e • - " � > Impact Statement > IrripactSurnm*' , ;Finings new development and significant redevelopment,which include CR4.14-2 and CR4.14-3. Since stormwater treatment control BMPs must be in conformance with approved plans and specifications of appropriate agencies,operations would not be anticipated to result in significant environmental effects including,but not limited to,vectors or odors. The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 2_15 ro 3.1 INTRODUCTION The EIR prepared for The Ripcurl Project considered four separate alternatives to the proposed project. Pursuant to Section 15126.6(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, the primary intent of an alternatives evaluation is to "describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives." As discussed in Chapter 2, the project as originally proposed and analyzed in the Draft EIR has been rejected from further consideration. A project with 330 residential units and 10,000 square feet of commercial uses is more desirable than the proposed project and has been recommended by the Planning Commission to become the Recommended Project and replace the original project. All other elements of the project as originally proposed would remain as presented in the EIR. In the Years 2014 and 2030, significant and unavoidable impacts at Caltrans intersections would occur under both the project as originally proposed and the Recommended Project. However, allowing for only 330 residential units would result in a reduction of PM peak hour trip generation by approximately 22 percent. Therefore, the Recommended Project would reduce the cumulative impacts created at the I- 405 Freeway Southbound ramps and Center Avenue to less than significant levels, whether or not the Village at Bella Terra Project is approved. Additionally, the Recommended Project may require additional parking due to the mix of unit types. This chapter describes the project objectives and design criteria used to reject the originally proposed project, develop and evaluate project alternatives presented in the Draft EIR, and recommend the project with 330 residential units and 10,000 square feet of commercial uses. A description of the alternatives compared to the originally proposed project and the findings regarding the feasibility of adopting the described alternatives is presented for use by the City in the decision-making process. .2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES The objectives of the project as originally proposed and identified by the City, as well as those of the Recommended Project are as follows: ® Establish zoning standards and implementation mechanisms applicable to mixed-use developments consistent with the policies and development framework of the City's General Plan and Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance to maximize land use opportunities. ® Create a development that is compatible with and sensitive to the existing land uses in the project area. ® Promote residential and commercial buildings that convey a high quality visual image and character. The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 3-1 'Chapter 3 s eV Regarding the:Rej6c,ted,Prdject • e Project Alternatives ■ Enhance the community image of Huntington Beach through the design and construction of high quality development consistent with the Urban Design Element of the City's General Plan. ■ Ensure adequate utility infrastructure and public services for new development. ■ Achieve the development of projects that enable residents to live in proximity to their jobs, commercial services, and entertainment, and reduce the need for automobile use. s Provide for the development of mixed-use projects that integrate residential and commercial uses and ensure compatibility of these uses. ■ Mitigate environmental impacts to the greatest extent possible. Additionally, the objectives of the proposed project, as identified by the Applicant are as follows: Community Objectives ■ Support regional mobility goals by encouraging development in and around current and future potential transportation and activity centers, thereby reducing vehicle trips and infrastructure costs, and encouraging the expansion and improvement of public transportation service. ® Provide local residents and college students, faculty, and staff with a luxury living alternative,and attract high-income renters from other areas whose spending power and consumption habits will provide support for surrounding retail businesses. ■ Accommodate demand for Class-A market rate rental housing otherwise unmet in the community. Development and Site Design Objectives ■ Create a high-quality, mixed-use development that offers unique urban living experiences while promoting an active pedestrian environment and access to restaurant and retail uses in the area. ■ Maximize utilization of a uniquely located development opportunity by locating density where it is self-mitigating through resident access to campus and transit. ■ Provide for the development of an underutilized site and replace the visual blight of existing strip retail with the visual excitement of new, top-rate development. ■ Improve the open space environment through the addition of open spaces and increased landscaping including new landscaped podiums and pathways, some of which will be accessible not only to the residents, but also to the public. ■ Capitalize on future potential commuter rail service by locating development along the likely route of the Union Pacific rail line. ■ Provide parking with direct access to the development. ■ Create affordable housing through on-site and directly subsidized off-site units. ® Create a mixed-use development that maximizes opportunities for green building and environmentally sound design. Economic Objectives ■ Maximize the value of the currently underutilized site through the development of new housing and retail uses, consistent with anticipated market demands. ■ Accommodate sufficient residential density to make demolition of an operating retail and office asset financially feasible. ■ Achieve high retail rents by providing a base of captive on-site customers and a smaller but upgraded offering of establishments. ■ Achieve premium apartment rents by meeting the high market demand for housing that is close to retail, office, education, and transportation. 3.2 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations - Rejected . - ■ Accommodate future economic expansion by providing high density housing and retail within a community that has the necessary infrastructure to support the development. ® Strengthen the economic vitality of the region by attracting new workers, through construction, rehabilitation, and operation of the project. 3.3 SELECTION OF ALTERNATIVES The range of feasible alternatives was selected and discussed in a manner to foster meaningful public participation and informed decision-making. Among the factors that were taken into account when considering the feasibility of alternatives (as described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[f][1]) were environmental impacts, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries, and attainment of project objectives. As stated in Section 15126.6(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR need not consider an alternative whose effects could not be reasonably identified, whose implementation is remote or speculative, or one that would not achieve the basic project objectives. The analysis includes sufficient information about each alternative to provide meaningful evaluation, analysis and comparison with the proposed project. 3.4 PROJECT AND ALTERNATIVE FINDINGS The following is a description of the alternatives evaluated in comparison to the proposed project, as well as a description of the specific economic, social, or other considerations that make them infeasible for avoiding or lessening the impacts. The City finds that the adoption of any of the alternatives to the project is infeasible. The reasons for each finding are provided following the description of the alternative, and are further described in the Draft EIR. 3.4.1 The Rejected Originally Proposed Project The proposed project involves the construction of a mixed-use residential and commercial development that would consist of four levels of residential uses over street-level neighborhood commercial uses in two six-story structures. Parking would be provided on-site; one level of parking would be below-grade, and two levels of parking would be above-grade. A total of 705 parking spaces would be provided for residences and visitors. The commercial component would be located on the ground level adjacent to the above grade parking. A mezzanine level would also be located on the roof. Overall, the proposed project would consist of 440 residential units and up to 10,000 square feet (sf) of street level commercial uses. The total project floor area, excluding parking and basement area would be approximately 382,700 sf. Although the original project that was analyzed in the July 8, 2008 Draft EIR would meet the objectives of the Applicant, it would create significant and unavoidable project-related traffic impacts to the surrounding area, which led staff to prepare a Project that would avoid the traffic impacts that the original project would create. Under the original project, the site would be developed under a General Plan Amendment, Zoning Map Amendment and Zoning Text Amendment. The primary difference between the proposed project and the Recommended Project is that the proposed project would result in 440 residential units, and the Recommended Project would result in 330 residential units;both would result in 10,000 square feet of commercial uses.. The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 3-3 Chapter,3 Findilngs -•ardin• - Rejected o - • • • - Alternatives Findings The City hereby finds that the Proposed Project is infeasible for the following environmental, economic, social, and other considerations: n Would result in significant and unavoidable cumulative traffic/transportation impacts at the I-405 Freeway Southbound ramps and Center Avenue intersections. The Recommended Project would reduce the cumulative impacts created at the I-405 Freeway Southbound ramps and Center Avenue to less than significant levels,whether or not the Village at Bella Terra Project is approved. Therefore, the originally proposed project is less desirable than the Recommended Project and the City rejects this proposal. The proposed project would result in more severe environmental impacts without a substantial increase in project benefits when compared to the Recommended Project. 3.4.2 The Ripcurl Project Alternatives As shown below and in Chapter 6 (Alternatives) of the Draft EIR, four alternatives were evaluated in comparison to the proposed project. The environmental advantages and disadvantages of each of these alternatives are described. The alternatives that were selected for analysis include: ® Alternative 1: No Project/No Development Alternative—In addition to alternative development scenarios, Section 15126.6(e) of the CEQA Guidelines requires the analyses of a "no project" alternative. The purpose of examining such an alternative is to allow decision-makers to compare the effects of approving the project with the effects on not approving the project. For the purposes of this analysis, the "no project" alternative would serve as a "no development" alternative with the site remaining in its existing condition. This would include the continuation of the existing 30,000 square feet (sf of retail use and 30,000 sf of office use, with 80 percent occupancy. The existing retailers would remain,with no improvements occurring at the site. ■ Alternative 2: No Project/Continuation of Uses Allowed By Existing General Plan— Consistent with Section 15126.6(e)(3)(C) of the CEQA Guidelines, this alternative assumes the site would remain as commercial general (CG-F1-d) as identified in the existing General Plan. However, under this alternative growth could occur through existing permitted development or increased tenant use, as the site is currently 80 percent leased. In general, no new environmental effects would directly result from the selection of this alternative. Maintenance of the project site in its present state would avoid the environmental impacts identified for the proposed project. In general, no significant and adverse environmental impacts directly or cumulatively associated with Alternative 2 are anticipated, although slight increases in traffic resulting from increased tenant occupancy could occur. ® Alternative 3: Reduced Project Alternative-Option 1—This alternative assumes a reduced intensity of the project elements at the same project site. Under this alternative, The Ripcurl Project would preserve the planned 440 residential units and eliminate the 10,000 sf of retail use. ® Alternative 4: Reduced Project Alternative-Option 2—This alternative assumes a reduced intensity of the project elements on the same project site. Under this alternative, The Ripcurl Project would be reduced to 385 residential units and 8,500 sf of commercial/retail space. 3-4 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations • • - • e -•• e o - - - -o • - • o • - El Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Further Evaluation An additional alternative was initially considered but found to be infeasible. Initially, the City considered an alternative location for the project as being a feasible alternative. Given that the City of Huntington Beach is a highly urbanized area, underdeveloped or vacant land parcels of similar size to the project site are limited. Additionally, moving the project to another location would not satisfy many of the project objectives; nor would it reduce significant and unavoidable impacts to traffic conditions. For example, one of the objectives is to support regional mobility goals by placing the site close to transit and activity centers, which thereby limits the potential for alternative locations. No vacant sites would be suitable to provide retail and residential use in close proximity to transit centers like the Golden West Transportation Center while simultaneously serving Golden West College and providing access to regional activity centers like the existing Bella. Terra Mall and The Village at Bella Terra, proposed east and southeast of the project site. In addition, there are a number of other project objectives that could not be served at other locations. For example, the project is designed to create a pedestrian-friendly complement to Golden West College by providing resident- and student-serving retail uses along with providing local density with access to regional freeways, such as I-405. No other feasible locations are available in the City to successfully complete both of these objectives. Therefore, this alternative was rejected as infeasible. 13 No Project/No Development Alternative Section 15126.6(e) of the CEQA Guidelines requires the analyses of a "no project" alternative. The purpose of examining such an alternative is to allow decision-makers to compare the effects of approving the project with the effects on not approving the project. This "no project" analysis must discuss the existing conditions, as well as what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not to be approved. For a development project (such as The Ripcurl Project), this analysis generally focuses upon the property remaining in its existing state. The No Project/No Development Alternative represents the status quo; the project site would continue with the 60,000 sf of retail and office use,while remaining at 80 percent capacity. Further, the existing tenants would remain unchanged. The vacant space would remain vacant, and the employment levels would remain as they are. No residential uses or improvements to the site would occur. In general, no new environmental effects would directly result from the selection of this alternative. Maintenance of the project site in its present state would allow the on-site uses to continue. Recent trends show a decline in patron use of strip malls. As a result, blight could occur at the project site under this alternative. The site would not be developed with new uses, as it is currently developed as a commercial/retail site, and no demolition activities would occur. Traffic impacts, in particular those associated with the I-405 Freeway southbound ramps at Center Avenue, which would be significant and unavoidable for the proposed project would be eliminated. No increase in traffic impacts would occur above what currently exists as the site would not include additional uses. The site would remain visually as-is, eliminating changes to the visual character and land uses on site. However, the introduction of a high-density mixed-use project near an existing transit center would also not occur. Although no significant and adverse environmental impacts directly or cumulatively associated with this alternative would occur, it is possible that if continuing uses elicited a sharp decline in patronage of the strip mall, The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 3-5 Chapter • • -•e • • - - - -e Project i3ndi •Alterinatiyes�- then blight could eventually occur, which could lead to future environmental impacts. However, the analysis of such potential impacts is considered speculative. Under this alternative, the mixed-use project would not be constructed. As a result, only one of the seventeen identified project objectives would be obtained by implementation of this Alternative, as no new retail or residential uses would be developed. While this alternative may result in a reduction of most environmental impacts associated with the proposed project, it would not satisfy the identified project objectives. Findings The City hereby finds that the No Project/No Development Alternative is infeasible for the following environmental, economic, social, and other considerations: ■ Would not create a mixed-use development that is compatible with and sensitive to the existing land uses in the project area. ® Would not enhance the community image of Huntington Beach through the design and construction of high quality development consistent with the Urban Design Element of the City's General Plan. ® Would not further enable residents to live in proximity to their jobs, commercial services, and entertainment, and reduce the need for automobile use. El No Project/Continuation of Uses Allowed By Existing General Plan This alternative assumes the development level articulated in the City's General Plan (1996). Currently, the project site has a General Plan designation of CG-F1-d (Commercial General), which establishes a floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.35 for the site and a design overlay that permits underlying land uses to be designed in accordance with special design standards. The project site currently has a zoning designation of CG (Commercial General), which provides opportunities for a full range of retail and service businesses and is consistent with the General Plan. With a project site of 3.8 acres (approximately 165,500 so, roughly 60,000 sf of commercial use could be developed. Therefore, no additional development would be anticipated to occur on the site as a result of this Alternative. As with Alternative 1, this Alternative is not anticipated to result in any new environmental effects. The project site would remain as is, as the existing use represents full build-out of the General Plan. The only environmental impacts that could be anticipated to occur as a result of Alternative 2 would be an increase in traffic, which could result in subsequent air quality and noise impacts. However, full build-out of the project site under the existing General Plan is not anticipated to result in any greater traffic volumes than those anticipated for the proposed project. As one significant and unavoidable impact relating to traffic volumes was identified for the proposed project (both project-specific and cumulatively), Alternative 2 may also result in a significant environmental impact. However, overall traffic impacts would be less because there would be no construction-related truck trips. Air quality and noise impacts from traffic would be less than that identified for the proposed project because construction activities would not be required to increase tenant occupancy rates. 3-6 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations (;hapter 3 Findings -•• • • - Re'jected Projee e • - ati4sa Under this alternative, the mixed-use project would not be constructed. As a result, only one of the seventeen identified project objectives would be obtained by implementation of this Alternative, as no new retail or residential uses would be developed. Similar to Alternative 1, while this Alternative may result in a reduction of most environmental impacts associated with the proposed project, it would not satisfy the identified project objectives. Findings The City hereby finds that the No Project/Continuation of Uses Allowed By Existing General Plan Alternative is infeasible for the following environmental, economic, social, and other considerations: ® Would not create a mixed-use development that is compatible with and sensitive to the existing land uses in the project area. ■ Would not enhance the community image of Huntington Beach through the design and construction of high quality development consistent with the Urban Design Element of the City's General Plan. ■ Would not further enable residents to live in proximity to their jobs, commercial services, and entertainment, and reduce the need for automobile use. FM Reduced Project—option I This Alternative assumes a reduced intensity of development through an elimination of retail use on the same project site. Under this Alternative, 440 residential units would be developed on the project site. These units would include: 151 studio units, 190 one-bedroom units, 88 two-bedroom units, and 11 live-work lofts. However, unlike the proposed project, Alternative 3 would not include retail use on the site, but the estimated 7,000 sf residential leasing office would .remain. Therefore, the Project's overall size would be reduced by 10,000 sf. Implementation of Alternative 3 would satisfy some, but not all of the identified project objectives. Under this Alternative, 440 residential units would be developed on the project site. This would satisfy all objectives related to the development of dense residential uses within close proximity to transit, schools, and regional activities. However, objectives related to the creation of a mixed-use development with retail uses would not be met. One example of such an objective is to enliven the area and provide pedestrian- friendly retail to both students of Golden West College and the residential uses at The Ripcurl Project. This Alternative would not fulfill all of the project objectives identified for the project. While this Alternative may result in a slight reduction of most environmental impacts, it would not necessarily reduce the significance of the impacts below those of the proposed project. Findings The City hereby finds that the Reduced Project/Option 1 Alternative is infeasible for the following environmental, economic, social, and other considerations: ■ Would not create a mixed-use development that is compatible with and sensitive to the existing land uses in the project area. ■ Would not further enable residents to live in proximity to their jobs, commercial services, and entertainment, and reduce the need for automobile use. The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 3-7 Chapter- • • -o s rdin�gthe Rejected Project • • e • 0 Reduced Project—Option 2 This Alternative assumes a reduced intensity of development for both the residential and retail components. Under this Alternative, 385 residential units would be developed on the project site, a reduction of 55 total units from the proposed project. These units would include: 50 studio units, 135 one-bedroom units, 185 two-bedroom units, and 15 live-work lofts. Additionally, Alternative 4 would reduce the amount of retail space by 1,500 sf, to a total of 8,500 sf of retail. The estimated 7,000 sf residential leasing office would remain. Therefore, the project's overall size would be reduced by approximately 1,500 sf of retail space and 55 residential units, or more than a 12 percent reduction in residential uses and a 15 percent reduction in commercial uses when compared to the proposed project. Implementation of Alternative 4 would satisfy all of the identified project objectives. Under this alternative, 385 residential units and 8,500 sf of retail space would be developed on the project site. This would satisfy all objectives relating to developing dense residential uses within close proximity to transit, schools, and regional activities while offering close proximity to retail opportunities. Implementation of this Alternative would reduce the significant and unavoidable traffic impact caused by the proposed project to a less-than-significant level. Findings The City hereby finds that the Alternative Site is infeasible for the following environmental, economic, social, and other considerations: ® Would not provide the same level of residential and commercial/retail uses at the project site. 3-8 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations CHIA PTER 4 Statement of 6ve,'rndihd� • hsid6r.at ioris ' 4.1 INTRODUCTION Section 15093 of the CEQA guidelines states: (a) CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic,legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic,legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable." (b) When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reason to support its actions based on the final EIR and/or other information in the record. The statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. (c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the notice of determination. The City of Huntington Beach (City) proposes to adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations regarding the significant project-specific traffic impacts and cumulative population/housing impacts of the Recommended Project. Although all project-level impacts are reduced to less-than-significant levels, this section describes the anticipated economic, social, and other benefits or other considerations of the proposed project to support the decision to proceed with the project even though two identified project- specific impacts and two identified cumulative impacts are not mitigated to a less-than-significant level. 4.2 SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS The City is proposing to approve the Recommended Project, with revisions to reduce environmental impacts, and has prepared an EIR required by CEQA. Even with revisions in the project, the following impacts are unavoidable because it has been determined that no feasible mitigation is available or the mitigation that could be implemented is outside the purview of the City and the Applicant. Refer to Chapter 2 (CEQA Findings) for further clarification regarding the impacts listed below. Population and Housing n Cumulative development within the project area, including The Ripcurl Project, could result in an increase of approximately 7,645 to 7,820 new residential units. Because all cumulative residential development would ultimately contribute to the substantial exceedance of SCAG population projections for the City for the 2015 timeframe, The Ripcurl Project, due to its size, would have a considerable contribution to the cumulative impact. Therefore, the cumulative impact is considered significant and unavoidable. The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 4.1 s • - • - - • • - • • • •- • • Transportation/Traffic ® In the Year 2014, the I-405 northbound loop ramp from Beach Boulevard is deficient in both the AM and PM peak hours. The Ripcurl Project has a significant contribution to this deficiency (more than 0.01) in the AM peak hour. Since traffic would be added to an existing deficiency (LOS E), this impact is considered significant and unavoidable. o Implementation of The Ripcurl Project would result in an increase in project-related traffic that could be substantial in relation to the forecasted traffic load and capacity of the street system in 2030. Specifically, the The Ripcurl Project has a long-range significant impact at the intersection of the 1-405 southbound ramps at Center Avenue during the PM peak hour. Although mitigation measure MM4.13-1 would reduce long-term impacts to a less-than-significant level, the impacted intersections are owned by Caltrans, and implementation of the proposed mitigation measures at these locations would be dependent on factors outside the control of both the City of Huntington Beach and the project Applicant. A General Plan Amendment (GPA) is currently being processed for The Village at Bella Terra Project, which would reduce the PM peak hour trip generation such that the impacted intersection would no longer be impacted by The Ripcurl Project. However, approval of that project cannot be guaranteed. In addition, the project contributes traffic to 2030 deficiencies on 1-405. 4.3 FINDINGS The City has evaluated all feasible mitigation measures and project revisions with respect to the project's impacts, both project-specific and cumulative (see Chapter 2, CEQA Findings). The City has also examined a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed project (see Chapter 3, Findings Regarding Project Alternatives). Based on this examination, the City has determined that because of its reduced intensity, the Recommended Project is considered to be the environmentally superior alternative. All of the other alternatives listed above would potentially result in lesser environmental impacts than the Recommended Project, although not necessarily less than significant. However, the City finds these alternatives infeasible and less desirable than the Recommended Project and has rejected these alternatives from further consideration because they would not achieve the environmental, economic, social, and other considerations outlined in Chapter 3 (Findings Regarding Project Alternatives). 4.4 OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Specific economic, social, or other considerations outweigh the cumulative population and housing and project-specific traffic/transportation impacts stated above. The reasons for proceeding with the Recommended Project, even though identified project-specific and cumulative impacts are not fully mitigated to a less-than-significant level, are described below. M Project Benefits The Recommended Project would provide a new, optimally located state-of-the-art mixed use development that would be located in close proximity to transit uses and would serve as a model for modern residential development. 4.2 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations •e - %at6me4it • AM• • o 1 o- • s 1. The project would establish zoning standards and implementation mechanisms applicable to mixed-use developments consistent with the policies and development framework of the City's General Plan and Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance to maximize land use opportunities. 2. The project would promote residential and commercial buildings that convey a high quality visual image and character, as well as provide for the development of mixed-use projects that integrate residential and commercial uses and ensure compatibility of these uses. 3. The project emphasizes compatibility and sensitivity to the existing uses surrounding the site and would include a variety of sustainable features, such as drought-tolerant landscaping,waterless urinals,roofing materials, and installation of low-flush water devices. The City is actively pursuing the feasibility of including additional features that would bring the building closer to LEED certification. 4. The project will maintain and enhance the community image of Huntington Beach through the design and construction of high quality development consistent with the Urban Design Element of the City's General Plan. 5. The project would foster walkability and reduced vehicle trips by locating close to an established transit center, college and shopping and other services. 6. The project would provide luxury apartments, filling an unmet niche in terms of housing production in the City as well as improving the supply of rental housing in the City. 7. The project will provide the equivalent of 10 percent of the units as affordable housing, consistent with City requirements. The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 4-3 #!)"wo Al, -mv,40 .,ffi Ali, THE RIPCURL PROJECT Findings of Fact/ Statement of Overriding Considerations Prepared for City ®f Huntingt®n Beach Planning Department 2000 Main Street, Third Floor Huntington Beach, California 92648 Prepared by PBSU 12301 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 430 Los Angeles, California 90025 September 15, 2008 ® ent CHAPTER1 Introduction............................................................................................................ 1-1 CHAPTER2CEQA Findings......................................................................................................2-1 2.1 Introduction.....................................................................................................................2-1 CHAPTER 3 Findings Regarding the Rejected Project and Project Alternatives......................3-1 3.1 Introduction.....................................................................................................................3-1 3.2 Project Objectives...........................................................................................................3-2 3.3 Selection of Alternatives ................................................................................................3-3 3.4 Project and Alternative Findings ..................................................................................3-3 3.4.1 The Rejected Originally Proposed Project...................................................3-4 3.4.2 The Ripcurl Project Alternatives...................................................................3-4 CHAPTER 4 Statement of Overriding Considerations ...............................................................4-1 4.1 Introduction.....................................................................................................................4-1 4.2 Significant Adverse Impacts..........................................................................................4-1 4.3 Findings............................................................................................................................4-2 4.4 Overriding Considerations.............................................................................................4-2 Table Table 2-1 CEQA Findings for The Ripcurl Project...............................................................................................2-3 Table 3-1 Modified Reduced Project Alternative Option 2 Parking Requirements.....................................3-1 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations Hi CH ® ® Introldructi0h , This document presents the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations that must be adopted by the City of Huntington Beach (City) pursuant to the requirements of Sections 15091 and 15093, respectively, of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines (CEQA Guidelines) prior to the approval of The Ripcurl Project (proposed project). This document is organized as follows: Chapter 1 Introduction to the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations. Chapter 2 Presents the CEQA Findings of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), including the identified significant cumulative impact. Chapter 3 Presents the alternatives to the proposed project and evaluates them in relation to the findings contained in Section 15091(a)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines. The City must consider and make findings regarding alternatives when a project would involve environmental impacts that cannot be reduced to a less-than-significant level, or cannot be substantially reduced, by proposed mitigation measures. Chapter 4 Presents a Statement of Overriding Considerations that is required in accordance with Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines for significant impacts of the proposed project that cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level. The proposed project involves the construction of a mixed-use residential and commercial development that would consist of four levels of residential uses over street-level neighborhood commercial uses in two six-story structures. Parking would be provided on-site; one level of parking would be below-grade, and two levels of parking would be above-grade. A total of 705 parking spaces would be provided for residences and visitors. The commercial component would be located on the ground level adjacent to the above grade parking. A mezzanine level would also be located on the roof. Overall, the project as originally proposed would consist of 440 residential units and up to 10,000 square feet (s fl of street level commercial uses. The total project floor area, excluding parking and basement area would be approximately 382,700 sf. The project would be transit-friendly in that it is situated adjacent to the Golden West Transportation Center, which is the City's largest transit hub and provides transit access throughout northern Orange County. The location of the project next to the transportation center hub would provide residents with a convenient alternative means of transportation. The project could also benefit from future commuter rail service if it is established along the existing Union Pacific Railroad line. The proposed location of high- density infill development would also benefit from the existing nearby retail and neighborhood services. The project as originally proposed would result in significant unavoidable project-level impacts with respect to traffic, as well as cumulative traffic and population and housing impacts. In comparison to the alternatives analyzed against the proposed development, the City fords in the Draft EIR that Alternative 4—Reduced Project Alternative Option 2 would be considered the environmentally superior alternative. The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations �_� • • - •ducti6n The following discretionary approvals by the City of Huntington Beach are required to implement the proposed project: ■ Conditional Use Permit Request—To permit construction of the proposed structures • Design Review—Approval ■ General Plan Amendment—To allow mixed-use on the site ■ Zoning Map Amendment—To establish a "Transit Center District" zone on the project site ■ Zoning Text Amendment—To establish a "Transit Center District" and associated development standards The project as originally proposed and analyzed in the Draft EIR has been rejected from further consideration. A Modified Reduced Project Alternative Option 2 is more desirable than the proposed project and has been recommended by City staff to become the recommended project and replace the original project. The Modified Reduced Project Alternative Option 2 would reduce the intensity of the residential development (while keeping the intensity of the commercial development the same as the proposed project), and reduce the severity of traffic/transportation impacts. 1-2 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations CHAPTER2 ' s • • 2.1 INTRODUCTION This chapter presents the potential impacts that were identified in the EIR and the findings that are required in accordance with Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines. The possible findings for each significant and/or potentially significant adverse impact are as follows: (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project which avoid, substantially lessen, or reduce the magnitude of the significant environmental effect as identified in the EIR ("Finding 1"). (b) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the findings. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can, and should be, adopted by such other agency ("Finding 2"). (c) Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives in the EIR ("Finding 3"). CEQA requires that the lead agency adopt mitigation measures or alternatives,where feasible, to avoid or substantially reduce significant environmental impacts that would otherwise occur as a result of a project. Project modification or alternatives are not required, however, where they are infeasible or where the responsibility for modifying the project lies with some other agency (State CEQA Guidelines §15091, subd. (a), [3]). Public Resources Code Section 21061.1 defines "feasible" to mean "capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social and technological factors." (See also Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors [Goleta 11] [1990] 52 Cal.3d 553, 565 [276 Cal. Rptr. 410].) Only after fully complying with the findings requirement can an agency adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations (Citizens for Quality Growth v. City of Mount Shasta [1988] 198 Cal.App.3d 433, 442, 445 [243 Cal. Rptr. 727]). CEQA requires the Lead Agency to state in writing the specific rationale to support its actions based on the Final EIR and/or information in the record. This written statement is known as the Statement of Overriding Considerations. The Statement of Overriding Considerations provides the information that demonstrates the decision-making body of the Lead Agency has weighed the benefits of the project against its unavoidable adverse effects in determining whether to approve the project. If the benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse effects may be considered"acceptable." The California Supreme Court has stated that, "the wisdom of approving any development project, a delicate task which requires a balancing of interests, is necessarily left to the sound discretion of the local officials and their constituents who are responsible for such decisions. The law as we interpret and apply it simply requires that those decisions be informed, and therefore balanced." (Goleta II, 52 Cal.3d 553, 576 [276 Cal. Rptr. 401].) This document presents the City of Huntington Beach findings as required by CEQA, cites substantial evidence in the record in support of each of the findings, and presents an explanation to supply the The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 2.1 \r logical step between the finding and the facts in the record (State CEQA Guidelines §15091). Additional facts that support the findings are set forth in the Draft EIR, the Final EIR, staff reports, and the record of proceedings. Table 2-1 (CEQA Findings for The Ripcurl Project) summarizes the potentially significant impacts of the originally proposed project in the EIR that were reduced to less-than-significant levels with mitigation as well as the project-level and cumulative significant impacts. As discussed in Chapter 1, the project as originally proposed and analyzed in the Draft EIR has been rejected from further consideration. A Modified Reduced Project Alternative Option 2 is more desirable than the proposed project and has been recommended by City staff to become the recommended project and replace the original project. The Modified Reduced Project Alternative Option 2 would allow for development of 385 residential units and up to 10,000 square feet of commercial uses and reduce the severity of traffic/transportation impacts. All other elements of the project as originally proposed would remain as presented in the Draft EIR. 2.2 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations e e - t • • a _Ph > Table 2-1 CEO-AfindingS for The Ripcvel Project > ImpoctStafement > Impoctsummmy > Findings > Aesthetics > Impact 4.1-2 Implementation of the > Proposed structures would range between approximately 66.5 > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project would create new to 72.5 feet in height. Buildings generally three or more stories changes or alterations in the project, which sources of light or glare into the project in height have the potential to include large building faces that would reduce Impact 4.1-2 to less-than- vicinity. However, these sources would not could introduce reflective surfaces (e.g., brightly colored significant levels, are hereby incorporated into adversely affect day or nighttime views in building facades, reflective glass) that could increase existing the project. No additional mitigation measures the area. levels of daytime glare.The proposed project could, therefore, are necessary with the implementation of serve as a new source of light and glare in the area, and mitigation measure MM4.1-1. impacts would be potentially significant. However, implementation of mitigation measure MM4.1-1 would reduce impacts associated with glare from mid-to high-rise structures. > The provision of non-reflective fagade treatments for structures proposed under the project would ensure that impacts related to daytime glare would be reduced to a less-than-significant level by reducing the reflective properties of the building materials employed,such as glass,metal,or finished concrete. > Air Quality > Impact 4.2-2 Peak construction activities > Construction-related daily emissions would not exceed > Finding 1. The City finds that changes or associated with the proposed project could SCAQMD significance thresholds. However,these calculations alterations have been required in, or generate emissions that exceed SCAQMD assume that appropriate dust control measures would be incorporated into, the project, which would thresholds. implemented during each phase of development as required by reduce Impact 4.2-2 to less-than-significant SCAQMD Rule 403—Fugitive Dust, and that all other levels. No additional mitigation measures are appropriate mitigation measures (MM4.2-1 and MM4.2-2), necessary with the implementation of CR4.2-1 such as limiting idling of motorized equipment, has been through CR4.2-5 and mitigation measures implemented. Thus, all identified city requirements and MM4.2-1 and MM4.2-2. mitigation measures are required. > Cumulative Climate Change > Construction and operation of the proposed project would > Finding 1. The City finds that the cumulative contribute to greenhouse gas emissions. However, due to the impact of the proposed project with respect to type and size of the proposed project, design features and climate change would be less than significant greenhouse gas emission reduction measures incorporated due to the incorporation of changes or into the proposed project, as well as mitigation measures alterations, either required or incorporated, to MM4.2-1 and MM4.2-2, the project's contribution to the the project. No additional mitigation measures cumulative impact would not be considerable. Further in are necessary with the implementation of accordance with guidance from the State Attorney General,the CR4.2-1 through CR4.2-5 and mitigation California Air Pollution Control Officers Association, the measures MM4.2-1 and MM4.2-2, in light of The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 2.3 �Cha"• - Q' e • > Table 2-1,CEQA Findings for The Rilpcurl Project > Impact Statement > Impoctsummary > Find►ngs California Climate Action Team, the California Air Resources the current design of the proposed project. Board, and the South Coast Air Quality Management District, the project has been designed in such a manner as to reduce its contribution to climate change and global warming emissions. > Biological Resources > Impact 4.3-1 The proposed project could > Project implementation and construction-related activities may > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified have a substantial adverse impact either result in the disturbance of nesting species protected by the changes or alterations in the project, which directly (e.g., habitat loss) or indirectly MBTA. Prior to the onset of ground disturbance activities, the would reduce Impact 4.3-1 to less-than- (e.g., noise effects on wildlife) through City shall implement mitigation measure MM4.3-1, which significant levels, are hereby incorporated into habitat modifications, on any species entails focused surveys and avoidance measures for sensitive the project. No additional mitigation measures identified or published as an endangered, nesting and MBTA species, and appropriate agency are necessary with the implementation of threatened, rare, candidate, sensitive, or consultation. mitigation measure MM4.3-1. special-status species by CDFG or USFWS, and meets the definition of Section 15380 (b), (c), or(d)of the CEQA guidelines. > Impact 4.3-3 The proposed project would > Through implementation of mitigation measure MM4.3-1, > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified not conflict with local policies or ordinances implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with changes or alterations in the project, which protecting biological resources. any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources would reduce Impact 4.3-3 to less-than- (e.g., Policies ERC 2.1.9 and ERC 2.1.10 of City's General significant levels, are hereby incorporated into Plan—Environmental Resource/Conservation Element), which the project. No additional mitigation measures are designed to protect sensitive species and their habitats are necessary with the implementation of within the City from development and related construction mitigation measure MM4.3-1. activities. > Cultural Resources > Impact 4.4-1 Construction of the proposed > A records search was conducted by the SCCIC, which > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified project could cause a substantial adverse included a review of all recorded archaeological sites within a changes or alterations in the project, which change in the significance of previously 0.5-mile radius of the project site as well as a review of cultural would reduce Impact 4.4-1 to less-than- unknown archaeological resources that resource reports on file. No archeological sites were identified significant levels, are hereby incorporated into could be present on the project site. on the project site or within a 0.5-mile radius of the project site. the project. No additional mitigation measures Regardless, the lack of findings does not eliminate the are necessary with the implementation of potential for archaeological resources to be identified during mitigation measures MM4.4-1 and MM4.4-2. ground-disturbing activities associated with project implementation. Implementation of mitigation measures 2-4 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations Chapter N • m Table N • Findings forThe, • Project > ImpactStatement > ImpadSummary > Findings MM4.4-1 and MM4.4-2 would require monitoring of construction activities by a qualified professional archaeologist and would require the scientific recovery and evaluation of any archaeological resources that could be encountered, which would ensure that important scientific information that could be provided by these resources regarding history or prehistory is not lost. > Impact 4.4-2 Construction of the proposed > Even though previous activities may have involved excavation > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified project would not destroy a unique or other earth-disturbing activities, some paleontologically changes or alterations in the project, which paleontological resource or unique sensitive rock units underlying the project site may not have would reduce Impact 4.4-2 to less-than- geologic feature that could be present on been disturbed, despite the possible destruction of surface significant levels, are hereby incorporated into the project site. evidence of their presence. Therefore, the impact resulting the project. No additional mitigation measures from damage to, or destruction of, these resources would be are necessary with implementation of potentially significant, as it makes biological records of ancient mitigation measures MM4.4-1 and MM4.4-2. life permanently unavailable for study by scientists. Mitigation measures MM4.4-1 and MM4.4-2 require monitoring of construction activities by a qualified paleontologist and require implementation of additional provisional measures in the event that paleontological resources are identified. > Impact 4.4-3 Construction activities > Although no surface evidence has been revealed,the potential > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified associated with implementation of the for human remains to be located at the site exists and for changes or alterations in the project, which proposed project could result in the excavation during construction activities to disturb these would reduce Impact 4.4-3 to less-than- disturbance of human remains, including resources. To reduce this impact, and as required by law, significant levels, are hereby incorporated into those interred outside of formal mitigation measure MM4.4-3 reflects provisional measures if the project. No additional mitigation measures cemeteries. human remains are discovered on the project site. are necessary with the implementation of mitigation measure 4.4-3. > Geology and Soils > Impact 4.5.1 Development of the > The proposed project site is situated in a seismically active > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project would not expose people area. During the design life of the development, strong ground changes or alterations in the project, which and/or structures to potentially substantial shaking may occur. Accordingly, the proposed structures and would reduce Impact 4.5-1 to less-than- adverse effects, including the risk of loss, improvements could be adversely impacted by the seismic significant levels, are hereby incorporated into injury, or death, involving strong seismic ground shaking if proper mitigation measures are not the project. No additional mitigation measures groundshaking and/or seismic-related implemented. Implementation of CR4.5-1 would require the are necessary with the implementation of ground failure,including liquefaction. preparation of a soils and geotechnical report specific to the CR4.5-1 and mitigation measure MM4.5-1. project site and mitigation measure MM4.5-1 would ensure that The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 2-5 • e - Q� ` e e • O - 2-10EQA,_Findings.for - Ripc url Project > ImpactStatement > ImpactSummary > Findngs the design recommendations identified suggested therein are implemented. > Impact 4.5-3 The proposed project would > The potential for soil liquefaction from earthquake-induced > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified be located on subsidence-prone and groundshaking at the site was evaluated in a geotechnical changes or alterations in the project, which potentially liquefiable soils. investigation of the site taking into account the current and would reduce Impact 4.5-3 to less-than- historic groundwater levels and the increase in potential for the significant levels, are hereby incorporated into groundwater to rise closer to the ground surface. Based on the the project. No additional mitigation measures analysis, liquefaction could induce settlement of as much as are necessary with the implementation of 1.0 inch at the site. However,adherence to the City's Municipal CR4.5-1, CoA4.7-2, and mitigation measure Code (CR4.5-1 and CoA4.7-2) would ensure the maximum MM4.5-1. practicable protection available for structures on the project site. In addition, implementation of MM4.5-1 would further ensure adequate consideration of liquefaction potential at the site. > Impact 4.5-4 The proposed project could > The soils encountered at the site had a "very high"expansion > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified be located on expansive soil. index. Further, the alluvium and existing fills at the site were changes or alterations in the project, which considered to pose very high expansion potential risks. would reduce Impact 4.5-4 to a less-than- Because of the potential for volume changes with fluctuations significant level, are hereby incorporated into in moisture, expansive and compressible soils create a risk of the project. No additional mitigation measures distress to pavement, foundation elements, and other are necessary with the implementation of structures. However, because the proposed project structures CR4.5-1 and mitigation measure MM4.5-1. would be designed,constructed, and operated in conformance with Section 1802.2.2 Expansive Soils, of the 2007 CBC and Title 17 Excavation and Grading Code, and because the project would be required to comply with CR4.5-1 and mitigation measure MM4.5-1,potential risks to life and property associated with expansive soils would not be significant. > Hazards > Impact 4.6-2 Implementation of the > Demolition, grading and excavation activities for the proposed > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project could create a significant project could result in the exposure of construction personnel changes or alterations in the project, which hazard to the public or the environment and the public to previously unidentified hazardous substances would reduce Impact 4.6-2 to less-than- through reasonably foreseeable upset and in the soil. If any unidentified sources of contamination are significant levels, are hereby incorporated into accident conditions involving the release of encountered during demolition, grading or excavation, the the project. No additional mitigation measures hazardous materials into the environment. removal activities required could pose health and safety risks are necessary with the implementation of capable of resulting in various short-term or long-term adverse mitigation measures MM4.6-1 and MM4.6-2. 2-6 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations • • - Q s • > Impact Statement > ImpodSummory > Findngs health effects in exposed persons. However, coupled with compliance with existing local, State and federal regulations relating to potentially hazardous materials, implementation of mitigation measure MM4.6-1 would ensure that any potentially hazardous materials that may be discovered during construction activities would be handled so as to minimize potential exposure to construction workers and nearby residents. > The project site is located within a designated methane gas overlay district. The City has set minimum requirements for new building construction within the methane overlay districts in order to reduce the hazards presented from accumulations of methane gas by requiring the appropriate testing and mitigation measures for all new buildings within the methane districts. Implementation of mitigation measure MM4.6-2 would ensure appropriate testing and methods of gas reduction, as required by the HBFD. The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 2.7 -,Chapter ! ' Findinigs, > ImpactStafement > Impact Summary > Findngs > Hydrology and Water Quality > Impact 4.7-1 Construction and operation > The proposed project would include construction activities, > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified of the proposed project could increase which would temporarily disturb soils. Disturbed soils are changes or alterations in the project, which stormwater pollutant loads or susceptible to high rates of erosion from wind and rain, would reduce Impact 4.7-1 to less-than- concentrations, which could result in a resulting in sediment transport from the site. Erosion and significant levels, are hereby incorporated into violation of water quality standards or a sedimentation affects water quality through interference with the project. No additional mitigation measures substantial degradation of water quality. photosynthesis,oxygen exchange, and the respiration,growth, are necessary with the project's adherence to and reproduction of aquatic species. Additionally, other CR4.7-1 and CoA4.7-1. pollutants, such as nutrients, trace metals, and hydrocarbons, can attach to sediment and be transported downstream,which could contribute to degradation of water quality. > During the operational phase of the proposed project, the major source of pollution in stormwater runoff would be contaminants that have accumulated on rooftops and other impervious surfaces, such as parking lots, pedestrian walkways, and the off-site road improvement prior to connecting to the storm drain system. Implementation of existing City requirements and conditions of approval(CR4.7-1 and CoA4.7-1) would reduce potential pollutant loads, assure that appropriate BMPs are used (e.g., constraints on infiltration-type BMPs), that regulatory requirements are met, and any post-construction violation of water quality standards would be less than significant. > Impact 4.7-2 Implementation of the > Operation of the proposed project would not substantially alter > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project could contribute site drainage and land use characteristics such that there changes or alterations in the project, which additional sources of polluted runoff. would be substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. would reduce Impact 4.7-2 to less-than- Nonetheless, existing regulations require implementation of a significant levels, are hereby incorporated into WQMP that would reduce pollutants in stormwater runoff,likely the project. No additional mitigation measures to less than existing conditions. Implementation of City are necessary with the implementation of requirement CR4.7-1 would also ensure that pollutants in CR4.7-1. stormwater runoff are reduced to the maximum extent practicable. 2-8 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations • • -r'2 CMA'Fincllngs > Impact Statement > ImpoctSummary > Findings > Impact 4.7-3 Implementation of the > The proposed project would not cause or contribute to a > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project would exceed the substantial increase in the exceedance of street flow design changes or alterations in the project, which capacity of the existing storm drain system. capacities of Gothard Street; however, a detailed project site would reduce Impact 4.7-3 to less-than- Hydrology and Hydraulic Report has not yet been prepared significant levels, are hereby incorporated into and alterations in project site drainage characteristics could, the project. No additional mitigation measures therefore increase peak flow rates from the project site and are necessary with the implementation of even incrementally small increases in peak flows would be CoA4.7-1 and mitigation measure MM4.7-1. potentially significant. Implementation of CoA4.7-1, which requires the construction of an off-site underground storm drain system to convey water quality treated flows from the project site to the storm drain system in Edinger Avenue, and mitigation measure MM4.7-1, which calls for the preparation and implementation of a hydrology and hydraulics report, as well as a site drainage plan, would ensure impacts are less than significant. > Impact 4.7-4 Implementation of the > During operation of the proposed project, exposed surfaces, > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project would alter the project including the filled slopes in the eastern portion of the project changes or alterations in the project, which site runoff characteristics that could result site, would be required to be stabilized in accordance with would reduce Impact 4.7-4 to less-than- in more on-site erosion and off-site Municipal Code,the City of Huntington Beach LIP,and DAMP. significant levels, are hereby incorporated into siltation. The proposed project would also be required to develop and the project. No additional mitigation measures implement an approved project WQMP including post- are necessary with the implementation of construction structural and non-structural BMPs for erosion CR4.7-1. and sediment controls. Implementation of City requirement CR4.7-1 would also include surface stabilization to prevent increased on-site erosion and off-site siltation following implementation of the proposed project. > Impact 4.7-5 Implementation of the > The project site is currently flat and about 90 percent > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project would substantially alter impervious surfaces that drain as sheet flow to local streets changes or alterations in the project, which the project site runoff characteristics that and Gothard Street. The proposed project would substantially would reduce Impact 4.7-5 to less-than- could result in more flooding on-or off-site. alter the project site runoff characteristics. However, with significant levels, are hereby incorporated into implementation of mitigation measures MM4.7-1 and MM4.7-2 the project. No additional mitigation measures and implementation of CR4.7-1 and CR4.7-2, the potential for are necessary with the implementation of increased site runoff for both peak runoff rates and total storm CR4.7-1, CR4.7-2, and mitigation measures flow volumes would not be substantial. MM4.7-1 and MM4.7-2. > Impact 4.7-6 Implementation of the > About 1.3 acres of the eastern portion of the project site is > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project would place housing located within a 100-year flood hazard area from failure of the changes or alterations in the project, which The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 2-9 Chapter Q• o e > Impact Statement > ImpactSummary > Frndmgs within a 100-year flood hazard area. East Garden Grove-Wintersberg Channel as mapped by would reduce Impact 4.7-6 to less-than- FEMA. significant levels, are hereby incorporated into > Compliance with CR4.7-2, which includes the elevation of the project. No additional mitigation measures residential construction at least one foot above the base flood are necessary with the implementation of elevation, would ensure that the housing proposed under the CR4.7-2. project would not be subjected to flooding impacts. > Impact 4.7-9 Construction of the proposed > The historical high groundwater levels at the project site occur > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified project would require groundwater at five feet below ground surface. Consequently, construction changes or alterations in the project, which dewatering. dewatering for utilities, foundation excavation and fill, and would reduce Impact 4.7-9 to less-than- below-grade parking would be required. However,the soils are significant levels, are hereby incorporated into very fine-grained and do not tend to allow free flow of water. the project. No additional mitigation measures Therefore, it is unlikely that substantial dewatering would be are necessary with the implementation of required during construction. Additionally, coverage under the CoA4.7-2. De Minimus Threat General Permit would include discharge quantity limitations. Furthermore, any potential construction dewatering impacts would be temporary. Therefore, with implementation of CoA4.7-2, the potential impacts as a result of dewatering activities would be minimal. > Noise > Impact 4.9-1 Construction activities > During construction activities, noise would be generated > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified associated with the proposed project would through the use of heavy machinery that could affect nearby changes or alterations in the project, which not exceed the standards established in sensitive receptors, including institutional uses. However, would reduce Impact 4.9-1 to less-than- the Huntington Beach Municipal Code. construction-related noise is intermittent in nature and would significant levels, are hereby incorporated into Operation of the proposed project would not generate continuous noise levels above the Municipal the project. No additional mitigation measures not generate noise levels in excess of Code standards. Furthermore, mitigation measures MM4.9-1, are necessary with the implementation of standards established by the City. which requires the use of noise attenuation measures such as mitigation measures MM4.9-1 and MM4.9-2. noise barriers (e.g., sound walls) or noise blankets, and MM4.9-2, which requires that construction staging areas and earthmoving equipment be located as far away from noise and vibration-sensitive land uses as possible, would also reduce construction-related noise levels. > Population and Housing > Impact 4.10-1 Implementation of the > The residential component of the project is anticipated to > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project would directly increase generate approximately 611 residents, which is based on an changes or alterations in the project, which population growth;however,the population average household size of 1.1 persons per studio and loft unit, would reduce Impact 4.10-1 to less-than- 2_10 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations Qlhapter 2 CEGrAo • > Impact Statement > ImpactSummary > Find►ngs growth would not cause exceedance of 1.4 persons per one-bedroom unit, and 2.0 persons per significant levels, are hereby incorporated into current growth projections established by two-bedroom unit.Using SCAG population projections for 2015 the project. No additional mitigation measures the City. (as shown in Table 4.10-1), the City's population is anticipated are necessary with the implementation of to increase by approximately 14,572 residents through buildout CR4.10-1. of the project.As such,the proposed project would account for approximately seven percent of the anticipated growth in this timeframe, or approximately 0.49 percent of the City's projected 2015 population, assuming full occupancy, and would not be considered substantial in light of current population projections. Furthermore, compliance with CR4.10- 1 would ensure that adequate affordable housing provisions are made at the project site. > Cumulative Population and Housing > Although full occupancy of all cumulative residential > Finding 3. Because all cumulative residential development would fall below the General Plan buildout development would ultimately contribute to the numbers, the City's General Plan did not account for substantial exceedance of SCAG population residential growth within the project site as well as the Beach- projections for the City for the 2015 timeframe, Edinger Corridor boundary as these projects require GPAs. The Ripcurl Project would have a considerable Additionally,it is beyond the scope of this document to assume contribution to the cumulative impact, and no a buildout year beyond 2015 for all residential projects under feasible mitigation is available. the Beach-Edinger Corridor Study since a time frame has not yet been established for that project. Therefore, because full occupancy of all cumulative development could potentially occur by 2015, the overall residential population that could occur would substantially exceed the SCAG population projections. > Public Services > Impact 4.11-2 Implementation of the > Although not necessary to maintain sufficient levels of police > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project would not result in the service, additional personnel and possibly equipment would changes or alterations in the project, which need for new or physically altered police ensure no change to the ratio of officers to population and would reduce Impact 4.11-2 to less-than- facilities in order to maintain acceptable response times.The proposed project would contribute funding significant levels, are hereby incorporated into service ratios. to the City's general fund in the form of tax revenue,fees, and the project. No additional mitigation measures other ancillary payments. The funds could, in turn, be used by are necessary with the implementation of the City to fund additional police officers in order to maintain mitigation measure MM4.11-1. the existing service ratio of officers to population. Further, on- site security concerns related to the proposed uses would be addressed through the permit process,at which time the HBPD The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 2-1 1 •• - Q� ' o • • • - h • •s ifor The iRipcurl Project > ImpactStatement > ImpactSummory > Rndngs would have the opportunity to review the proposed uses and provide input on necessary security measures. The City actively employs Crime Prevention Through Design (CPTED) recommendations in projects and has projects reviewed by a specialist in this field. Implementation of mitigation measure MM4.11-1 would ensure the safety of residents in the proposed building. > Impact 4.11-3 Implementation of the > Direct population growth resulting from the proposed project > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project would not require new or would not have an impact on the capacity of schools within the changes or alterations in the project, which physically altered facilities to HBUHSD and OVSD, as all three schools serving the project would reduce Impact 4.11-3 to less-than- accommodate additional students. site are currently operating below maximum capacity. significant levels, are hereby incorporated into Additionally, both Districts anticipate that the enrollment for its the project. No additional mitigation measures schools will be lower in the upcoming years and will continue to are necessary with the implementation of decline in the future. Due to declining enrollment within each CR4.11-1 and CR4.11-2. District, new students generated as a result of this development would not result in overcrowding and would likely help offset the current declining population. With the implementation of City requirements CR4.11-1 and CR4.11-2, fees collected under the authority of SB50 would offset any additional increase in educational demand at the elementary school,middle school and high school serving the project site. > Impact 4.11-4 Implementation of the > Upon project implementation, the City's population would > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project would not result in the increase by approximately 1,060 residents. Implementation of changes or alterations in the project, which need for new or physically altered library City requirement CR4.11-3 would be required to ensure that would reduce Impact 4.11-4 to less-than- facilities in order to maintain acceptable these additional residents would not notably affect the current significant levels, are hereby incorporated into service ratios. ratio of library staff per resident or items per capita. the project. No additional mitigation measures are necessary with the implementation of CR4.11-3. > Recreation > Impact 4.12-1 Implementation of the > The proposed project does not include dedicated open space > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project could increase the use of or parklands. Rather, private and common open space would changes or alterations in the project, which existing parks or recreational facilities; be provided through outdoor amenities such as balconies, a would reduce Impact 4.12-1 to less-than- however, not such that substantial physical pool and spa area, fire pit and movie projection area, and an significant levels, are hereby incorporated into deterioration of the facility would occur or indoor fitness center, which would be available to residents. the project. No additional mitigation measures be accelerated. The availability of such on-site amenities for future residents are necessary with the implementation of 2-12 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations e o - N • o e Table H • Finding's forThe Ripcurl Project > ►mpactStatement > ImpadSummoW > Finings could potentially displace the demand on public recreational CR4.12-1. facilities. However, because the project does not include any designated park land, payment of the applicable open space and park fees, as required by City requirement CR4.12-1, would help acquire, develop, improve, and expand the City's open space and parklands inventory. > Transportation/Traffic > Impact 4.13-1 Under Year 2014 > The 1-405 northbound loop ramp from Beach Boulevard is > Finding 2. The City finds changes or Conditions, operation of the proposed deficient in both the AM and PM peak hours under future alterations that could reduce the potential project would cause an increase in traffic, conditions with the proposed project. Further,the project has a impact of the proposed project are within the which is substantial in relation to the significant contribution to this deficiency(more than 0.01)in the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public existing traffic load and capacity of the AM peak hour. Since traffic would be added to an existing agency and not the agency making the street system. deficiency(LOS E), impacts are considered substantial. There findings. are no physical improvements within the City's jurisdiction that > Finding 3. The City finds specific economic, can be made to this facility to improve operations. social,or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives in the EIR. > Impact 4.13-2 Under Year 2030 > Implementation of The Ripcurl Project would result in an > Finding 2. The City finds changes or Conditions, operation of the proposed increase in project-related traffic that could be substantial in alterations that could reduce the potential project would cause an increase in traffic, relation to the forecasted traffic load and capacity of the street impact of the proposed project are within the which is substantial in relation to the system in 2030. Implementation of mitigation measure responsibility and jurisdiction of another public forecasted traffic load and capacity of the MM4.13-1 would ensure that operation of the proposed project agency and not the agency making the street system. in the long range would not result in intersections operating findings. below the City of Huntington Beach performance standards. Although mitigation measure MM4.13-1 would reduce long- term impacts to a less-than-significant level, the impacted intersection is owned by Caltrans, and implementation of the proposed mitigation measure at this location would be dependent on factors outside the control of both the City of Huntington Beach and the project Applicant. > Impact 4.13-5 The project would not > The potential for roadway hazards can also occur as an > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified substantially increase roadway hazards. inherent result of the placement of additional access points changes or alterations in the project, which along public roadways. New intersections require adequate would reduce Impact 4.13-5 to less-than- sight distance and intersection traffic control in order to significant levels, are hereby incorporated into minimize potential hazards. In order to ensure safe the project. No additional mitigation measures The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 2-13 'G�hapt. CECikFih-® o 14— li 0 0 - !� ' • • o o • - > `Impactstoement .> Impao's6mmary �"> Findings : construction of project intersections, implementation of are necessary with the implementation of CR4.13-1 and CR4.13-2 would reduce potential impacts CR4.13-1 and CR4.13-2. associated with roadway hazards to a less-than-significant level. > Cumulative Traffic > Under the current General Plan, in 2030 the proposed project > Finding 2. The City finds changes or would result in a substantial increase in traffic volume at the alterations that could reduce the potential intersection of the 1-405 Freeway southbound ramps and impact of the proposed project are within the Center Avenue. As such, the proposed project would be responsibility and jurisdiction of another public considered cumulatively considerable. Further, although agency and not the agency making the mitigation measure MM4.13-1 would reduce the impact at the findings. 1-405 southbound ramps at Center Avenue to a less-than- significant level for project-level impacts, the improvement of this intersection is outside the control of both the City of Huntington Beach and the project Applicant. > Utilities and Service Systems > Impact 4.14-4 Implementation of the > The proposed project would increase the amount of > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project could require new sewer wastewater generated in the area and would potentially changes or alterations in the project, which connections, and could require or result in increase the demand for wastewater conveyance would reduce Impact 4.14-4 to less-than- the construction of new or expanded infrastructure. The OCSD did not provide an official "will serve significant levels, are hereby incorporated into conveyance systems. letter"for the project;however,based on their peak flow model the project. No additional mitigation measures there is approximately 0.6 mgd capacity in the 15-inch sewer are necessary with the implementation of line at Goldenwest Street and Heil Avenue and 4 mgd capacity CR4.14-1. in the 69-inch trunk line in Center Avenue at the Old Hoover alignment. Implementation of CR4.14-1 would require that a sewer study is conducted to determine if the existing sewer lines would require upgrades to ensure that the construction of new or expanded wastewater conveyance systems would not cause significant environmental effects. > Impact 4.14-5 Implementation of the > The proposed project would involve the construction and > Finding 1. The City finds that the identified proposed project would include new operation of stormwater treatment control Best Management changes or alterations in the project, which stormwater treatment control BMPs, the Practices (BMPs) that would be identified in a Stormwater would reduce Impact 4.14-5 to less-than- operation of which would not result in Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which would be a part of significant levels, are hereby incorporated into significant environmental effects. the project's Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP). The the project. No additional mitigation measures City has general/standard conditions of approval to protect are necessary with the implementation of receiving water quality from short- and long-term impacts of CR4.14-2 and CR4.14-3. 2-14 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations Chapter,2 CEQAa • > Impact Statement > Impactsummary > Finings new development and significant redevelopment,which include CR4.14-2 and CR4.14-3. Since stormwater treatment control BMPs must be in conformance with approved plans and specifications of appropriate agencies,operations would not be anticipated to result in significant environmental effects including,but not limited to,vectors or odors. The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 2_15 Fr *ect and Fro 3.1 INTRODUCTION The EIR prepared for The Ripcurl Project considered four separate alternatives to the proposed project. Pursuant to Section 15126.6(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, the primary intent of an alternatives evaluation is to "describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives." As discussed in Chapter 2, the project as originally proposed and analyzed in the Draft EIR has been rejected from further consideration. A Modified Reduced Project Alternative Option 2 is more desirable than the proposed project and has been recommended by City staff to become the recommended project and replace the original project. The Modified Reduced Project Alternative Option 2 would allow for development of 385 residential units and up to 10,000 square feet of commercial uses. All other elements of the project as originally proposed would remain as presented in the EIR. In the Years 2014 and 2030, significant and unavoidable impacts at Caltrans intersections would occur under both the project as originally proposed and Modified Reduced Project Alternative Option 2. However, allowing for only 385 residential units under Modified Reduced Project Alternative Option 2 would result in a reduction of PM peak hour trip generation by approximately 12 percent. Therefore, Modified Reduced Project Alternative Option 2 would reduce the cumulative impacts created at the I- 405 Freeway Southbound ramps and Center Avenue to less than significant levels, whether or not the Village at Bella Terra Project is approved. Additionally, as shown in the table below, Modified Reduced Project Alternative Option 2 would require additional parking due to an increase in 2-bedroom units. Table 3-1 Modified Reduced Pr *ect Alternative 0 in > use > Proposed > HBZSO Requaements > TCD Requirements(as Classfica6on uses (eAsung) proposed) > Studio > 50 > 1 space(50) > 1 space(50) > One Bedroom > 135 > 1 space(135) > 1 space(135) > Two Bedroom > 185 > 2 spaces(370) > 2 spaces(370) > LiveMork Units > 15 > 1 space(15) > 1 space(15) > Guests > N/A > 0.5 space/unit(220) > 1 space/10 units(39) > Commercial > 10,000 sf > 1 space/200 sf(50) > 1 space/200 sf(50) > Extra > N/A > N/A > N/A > Total > N/A > 840 spaces > 659 spaces The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 3-1 Ch .9pter 3 Findings -•• • s 1he Rejecte.0 Project-,a.nd"Project thdtiv- This chapter describes the project objectives and design criteria used to reject the originally proposed project, develop and evaluate project alternatives presented in the Draft EIR, and recommend the Modified Reduced Project Alternative Option 2. A description of the alternatives compared to the originally proposed project and the findings regarding the feasibility of adopting the described alternatives is presented for use by the City in the decision-making process. 3.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES The objectives of the project as originally proposed and identified by the City, as well as those of Modified Reduced Project Alternative Option 2 are as follows: ■ Establish zoning standards and implementation mechanisms applicable to mixed-use developments consistent with the policies and development framework of the City's General Plan and Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance to maximize land use opportunities. ■ Create a development that is compatible with and sensitive to the existing land uses in the project area. ® Promote residential and commercial buildings that convey a high quality visual image and character. ® Enhance the community image of Huntington Beach through the design and construction of high quality development consistent with the Urban Design Element of the City's General Plan. ® Ensure adequate utility infrastructure and public services for new development. ■ Achieve the development of projects that enable residents to live in proximity to their jobs, commercial services, and entertainment, and reduce the need for automobile use. ■ Provide for the development of mixed-use projects that integrate residential and commercial uses and ensure compatibility of these uses. ■ Mitigate environmental impacts to the greatest extent possible. Additionally, the objectives of the proposed project, as identified by the Applicant are as follows: Community Objectives ■ Support regional mobility goals by encouraging development in and around current and future potential transportation and activity centers, thereby reducing vehicle trips and infrastructure costs, and encouraging the expansion and improvement of public transportation service. ® Provide local residents and college students, faculty, and staff with a luxury living alternative,and attract high-income renters from other areas whose spending power and consumption habits will provide support for surrounding retail businesses. ® Accommodate demand for Class-A market rate rental housing otherwise unmet in the community. Development and Site Design Objectives ■ Create a high-quality, mixed-use development that offers unique urban living experiences while promoting an active pedestrian environment and access to restaurant and retail uses in the area. ® Maximize utilization of a uniquely located development opportunity by locating density where it is self-mitigating through resident access to campus and transit. ® Provide for the development of an underutilized site and replace the visual blight of existing strip retail with the visual excitement of new, top-rate development. 3.2 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations Chapter 3 Fe es R!qaQdingJhezFej&cted P le6t • • e - eives ■ Improve the open space environment through the addition of open spaces and increased landscaping including new landscaped podiums and pathways, some of which will be accessible not only to the residents,but also to the public. ■ Capitalize on future potential commuter rail service by locating development along the likely route of the Union Pacific rail line. ■ Provide parking with direct access to the development. ® Create affordable housing through on-site and directly subsidized off-site units. ■ Create a mixed-use development that maximizes opportunities for green building and environmentally sound design. Economic Objectives ■ Maximize the value of the currently underutilized site through the development of new housing and retail uses, consistent with anticipated market demands. • Accommodate sufficient residential density to make demolition of an operating retail and office asset financially feasible. ■ Achieve high retail rents by providing a base of captive on-site customers and a smaller but upgraded offering of establishments. ■ Achieve premium apartment rents by meeting the high market demand for housing that is close to retail, office, education, and transportation. ■ Accommodate future economic expansion by providing high density housing and retail within a community that has the necessary infrastructure to support the development. ■ Strengthen the economic vitality of the region by attracting new workers, through construction, rehabilitation, and operation of the project. 3.3 SELECTION OF ALTERNATIVES The range of feasible alternatives was selected and discussed in a manner to foster meaningful public participation and informed decision-making. Among the factors that were taken into account when considering the feasibility of alternatives (as described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[f][1]) were environmental impacts, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries, and attainment of project objectives. As stated in Section 15126.6(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, an EIR need not consider an alternative whose effects could not be reasonably identified, whose implementation is remote or speculative, or one that would not achieve the basic project objectives. The analysis includes sufficient information about each alternative to provide meaningful evaluation, analysis and comparison with the proposed project. 3.4 PROJECT AND ALTERNATIVE FINDINGS The following is a description of the alternatives evaluated in comparison to the proposed project, as well as a description of the specific economic, social, or other considerations that make them infeasible for avoiding or lessening the impacts. The City fords that the adoption of any of the alternatives to the project is infeasible. The reasons for each fording are provided following the description of the alternative, and are further described in the Draft EIR. The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 3-3 • • - m o -•e • e - 'Rejected; • - • • • AlterhativeS 3.4.1 The Rejected Originally Proposed Project The proposed project involves the construction of a mixed-use residential and commercial development that would consist of four levels of residential uses over street-level neighborhood commercial uses in two six-story structures. Parking would be provided on-site; one level of parking would be below-grade, and two levels of parking would be above-grade. A total of 705 parking spaces would be provided for residences and visitors. The commercial component would be located on the ground level adjacent to the above grade parking. A mezzanine level would also be located on the roof. Overall, the proposed project would consist of 440 residential units and up to 10,000 square feet (s fl of street level commercial uses. The total project floor area, excluding parking and basement area would be approximately 382,700 sf. Although the original project that was analyzed in the July 8, 2008 Draft EIR would meet the objectives of the Applicant, it would create significant and unavoidable project-related traffic impacts to the surrounding area,which led staff to prepare a Modified Reduced Project Alternative Option 2 that would avoid the traffic impacts that the original project would create. Under the original project, the site would be developed under a General Plan Amendment, Zoning Map Amendment and Zoning Text Amendment. The primary difference between the proposed project and the Modified Reduced Project Alternative Option 2 is that the proposed project would result in 440 residential units, and the Modified Reduced Project Alternative Option 2 would result in 385 residential units;both would result in 10,000 square feet of commercial uses. Findings The City hereby finds that the Proposed Project is infeasible for the following environmental, economic, social, and other considerations: ■ Would result in significant and unavoidable cumulative traffic/transportation impacts at the I-405 Freeway Southbound ramps and Center Avenue intersections. Modified Reduced Project Alternative Option 2 would reduce the cumulative impacts created at the I-405 Freeway Southbound ramps and Center Avenue to less than significant levels,whether or not the Village at Bella Terra Project is approved. Therefore, the originally proposed project is less desirable than Modified Reduced Project Alternative Option 2 and the City rejects this proposal. The proposed project would result in more severe environmental impacts without a substantial increase in project benefits when compared to Modified Reduced Project Alternative Option 2. 3.4.2 The Ripcurl Project Alternatives As shown below and in Chapter 6 (Alternatives) of the Draft EIR, four alternatives were evaluated in comparison to the proposed project. The environmental advantages and disadvantages of each of these alternatives are described. The alternatives that were selected for analysis include: ■ Alternative 1: No Project/No Development Alternative—In addition to alternative development scenarios, Section 15126.6(e) of the CEQA Guidelines requires the analyses of a "no project" alternative. The purpose of examining such an alternative is to allow decision-makers to compare the effects of approving the project with the effects on not approving the project. For the purposes of this analysis, the "no project" alternative would serve as a "no development" 3-4 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations Chapter 3 Fo m Reg• • hg'tk' Ojedted Pr6ject • • Pr6ject o - alternative with the site remaining in its existing condition. This would include the continuation of the existing 30,000 square feet (sf) of retail use and 30,000 sf of office use, with 80 percent occupancy. The existing retailers would remain,with no improvements occurring at the site. ® Alternative 2: No Project/Continuation of Uses Allowed By Existing General Plan— Consistent with Section 15126.6(e)(3)(C) of the CEQA Guidelines, this alternative assumes the site would remain as commercial general (CG-Fl-d) as identified in the existing General Plan. However, under this alternative growth could occur through existing permitted development or increased tenant use, as the site is currently 80 percent leased. In general, no new environmental effects would directly result from the selection of this alternative. Maintenance of the project site in its present state would avoid the environmental impacts identified for the proposed project. In general, no significant and adverse environmental impacts directly or cumulatively associated with Alternative 2 are anticipated, although slight increases in traffic resulting from increased tenant occupancy could occur. ■ Alternative 3: Reduced Project Alternative-Option 1—This alternative assumes a reduced intensity of the project elements at the same project site. Under this alternative, The Ripcurl Project would preserve the planned 440 residential units and eliminate the 10,000 sf of retail use. ■ Alternative 4: Reduced Project Alternative-Option 2—This alternative assumes a reduced intensity of the project elements on the same project site. Under this alternative, The Ripcurl Project would be reduced to 385 residential units and 8,500 sf of commercial/retail space. M Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Further Evaluation An additional alternative was initially considered but found to be infeasible. Initially, the City considered an alternative location for the project as being a feasible alternative. Given that the City of Huntington Beach is a highly urbanized area, underdeveloped or vacant land parcels of similar size to the project site are limited. Additionally, moving the project to another location would not satisfy many of the project objectives; nor would it reduce significant and unavoidable impacts to traffic conditions. For example, one of the objectives is to support regional mobility goals by placing the site close to transit and activity centers, which thereby limits the potential for alternative locations. No vacant sites would be suitable to provide retail and residential use in close proximity to transit centers like the Golden West Transportation Center while simultaneously serving Golden West College and providing access to regional activity centers like the existing Bella Terra Mall and The Village at Bella Terra, proposed east and southeast of the project site. In addition, there are a number of other project objectives that could not be served at other locations. For example, the project is designed to create a pedestrian-friendly complement to Golden West College by providing resident- and student-serving retail uses along with providing local density with access to regional freeways, such as I-405. No other feasible locations are available in the City to successfully complete both of these objectives. Therefore, this alternative was rejected as infeasible. F] No Project/No Development Alternative Section 15126.6(e) of the CEQA Guidelines requires the analyses of a "no project" alternative. The purpose of examining such an alternative is to allow decision-makers to compare the effects of approving the project with the effects on not approving the project. This "no project" analysis must discuss the existing conditions, as well as what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 3-5 AlternativesCha0er 3�Findings Regard ing the Rejecte I d Project and.Project project were not to be approved. For a development project (such as The Ripcurl Project), this analysis generally focuses upon the property remaining in its existing state. The No Project/No Development Alternative represents the status quo; the project site would continue with the 60,000 sf of retail and office use,while remaining at 80 percent capacity. Further, the existing tenants would remain unchanged. The vacant space would remain vacant, and the employment levels would remain as they are. No residential uses or improvements to the site would occur. In general, no new environmental effects would directly result from the selection of this alternative. Maintenance of the project site in its present state would allow the on-site uses to continue. Recent trends show a decline in patron use of strip malls. As a result, blight could occur at the project site under this alternative. The site would not be developed with new uses, as it is currently developed as a commercial/retail site, and no demolition activities would occur. Traffic impacts, in particular those associated with the I-405 Freeway southbound ramps at Center Avenue, which would be significant and unavoidable for the proposed project would be eliminated. No increase in traffic impacts would occur above what currently exists as the site would not include additional uses. The site would remain visually as-is, eliminating changes to the visual character and land uses on site. However, the introduction of a high-density mixed-use project near an existing transit center would also not occur. Although no significant and adverse environmental impacts directly or cumulatively associated with this alternative would occur, it is possible that if continuing uses elicited a sharp decline in patronage of the strip mall, then blight could eventually occur, which could lead to future environmental impacts. However, the analysis of such potential impacts is considered speculative. Under this alternative, the mixed-use project would not be constructed. As a result, only one of the seventeen identified project objectives would be obtained by implementation of this Alternative, as no new retail or residential uses would be developed. While this alternative may result in a reduction of most environmental impacts associated with the proposed project, it would not satisfy the identified project objectives. Findings The City hereby finds that the No Project/No Development Alternative is infeasible for the following environmental, economic, social, and other considerations: ■ Would not create a mixed-use development that is compatible with and sensitive to the existing land uses in the project area. ■ Would not enhance the community image of Huntington Beach through the design and construction of high quality development consistent with the Urban Design Element of the City's General Plan. ■ Would not further enable residents to live in proximity to their jobs, commercial services, and entertainment, and reduce the need for automobile use. 0 No Project/Continuation of Uses Allowed By Existing General Plan This alternative assumes the development level articulated in the City's General Plan (1996). Currently, the project site has a General Plan designation of CG-F1-d (Commercial General), which establishes a floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.35 for the site and a design overlay that permits underlying land uses to be 3-6 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations • • -r 3:FindiRgs Regar(eIng he,,Re jected ' • - o s FAdjg6to, ernatives designed in accordance with special design standards. The project site currently has a zoning designation of CG (Commercial General), which provides opportunities for a full range of retail and service businesses and is consistent with the General Plan. With a project site of 3.8 acres (approximately 165,500 so, roughly 60,000 sf of commercial use could be developed. Therefore, no additional development would be anticipated to occur on the site as a result of this Alternative. As with Alternative 1, this Alternative is not anticipated to result in any new environmental effects. The project site would remain as is, as the existing use represents full build-out of the General Plan. The only environmental impacts that could be anticipated to occur as a result of Alternative 2 would be an increase in traffic, which could result in subsequent air quality and noise impacts. However, full build-out of the project site under the existing General Plan is not anticipated to result in any greater traffic volumes than those anticipated for the proposed project. As one significant and unavoidable impact relating to traffic volumes was identified for the proposed project (both project-specific and cumulatively), Alternative 2 may also result in a significant environmental impact. However, overall traffic impacts would be less because there would be no construction-related truck trips. Air quality and noise impacts from traffic would be less than that identified for the proposed project because construction activities would not be required to increase tenant occupancy rates. Under this alternative, the mixed-use project would not be constructed. As a result, only one of the seventeen identified project objectives would be obtained by implementation of this Alternative, as no new retail or residential uses would be developed. Similar to Alternative 1, while this Alternative may result in a reduction of most environmental impacts associated with the proposed project, it would not satisfy the identified project objectives. Findings The City hereby fords that the No Project/Continuation of Uses Allowed By Existing General Plan Alternative is infeasible for the following environmental, economic, social, and other considerations: ■ Would not create a mixed-use development that is compatible with and sensitive to the existing land uses in the project area. ■ Would not enhance the community image of Huntington Beach through the design and construction of high quality development consistent with the Urban Design Element of the City's General Plan. ■ Would not further enable residents to live in proximity to their jobs, commercial services, and entertainment, and reduce the need for automobile use. M Reduced Project—Option 1 This Alternative assumes a reduced intensity of development through an elimination of retail use on the same project site. Under this Alternative, 440 residential units would be developed on the project site. These units would include: 151 studio units, 190 one-bedroom units, 88 two-bedroom units, and 11 Eve-work lofts. However, unlike the proposed project, Alternative 3 would not include retail use on the site, but the estimated 7,000 sf residential leasing office would remain. Therefore, the Project's overall size would be reduced by 10,000 sf. The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 3.7 0 0 - o • -•o • • - !Rqjected Project • s • k1ternatives Implementation of Alternative 3 would satisfy some, but not all of the identified project objectives. Under this Alternative, 440 residential units would be developed on the project site. This would satisfy all objectives related to the development of dense residential uses within close proximity to transit, schools, and regional activities. However, objectives related to the creation of a mixed-use development with retail uses would not be met. One example of such an objective is to enliven the area and provide pedestrian- friendly retail to both students of Golden West College and the residential uses at The Ripcurl Project. This Alternative would not fulfill all of the project objectives identified for the project. While this Alternative may result in a slight reduction of most environmental impacts, it would not necessarily reduce the significance of the impacts below those of the proposed project. Findings The City hereby finds that the Reduced Project/Option 1 Alternative is infeasible for the following environmental, economic, social, and other considerations: ■ Would not create a mixed-use development that is compatible with and sensitive to the existing land uses in the project area. ■ Would not further enable residents to live in proximity to their jobs, commercial services, and entertainment, and reduce the need for automobile use. EJ Reduced Project—Option 2 This Alternative assumes a reduced intensity of development for both the residential and retail components. Under this Alternative, 385 residential units would be developed on the project site, a reduction of 55 total units from the proposed project. These units would include: 50 studio units, 135 one-bedroom units, 185 two-bedroom units, and 15 live-work lofts. Additionally, Alternative 4 would reduce the amount of retail space by 1,500 sf, to a total of 8,500 sf of retail. The estimated 7,000 sf residential leasing office would remain. Therefore, the project's overall size would be reduced by approximately 1,500 sf of retail space and 55 residential units, or more than a 12 percent reduction in residential uses and a 15 percent reduction in commercial uses when compared to the proposed project. Implementation of Alternative 4 would satisfy all of the identified project objectives. Under this alternative, 385 residential units and 8,500 sf of retail space would be developed on the project site. This would satisfy all objectives relating to developing dense residential uses within close proximity to transit, schools, and regional activities while offering close proximity to retail opportunities. Implementation of this Alternative would reduce the significant and unavoidable traffic impact caused by the proposed project to a less-than-significant level. Findings The City hereby finds that the Alternative Site is infeasible for the following environmental, economic, social, and other considerations: m Would not provide the same level of residential and commercial/retail uses at the project site. 3-8 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 4.1 INTRODUCTION Section 15093 of the CEQA guidelines states: (a) CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered"acceptable." (b) When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reason to support its actions based on the final EIR and/or other information in the record. The statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. (c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the notice of determination. The City of Huntington Beach (City) proposes to adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations regarding the significant project-specific traffic impacts and cumulative population/housing impacts of the Modified Reduced Project Alternative Option 2. Although all project-level impacts are reduced to less-than-significant levels, this section describes the anticipated economic, social, and other benefits or other considerations of the proposed project to support the decision to proceed with the project even though two identified project-specific impacts and two identified cumulative impacts are not mitigated to a less-than-significant level. 4.2 SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS The City is proposing to approve the Modified Reduced Project Alternative Option 2, with revisions to reduce environmental impacts, and has prepared an EIR required by CEQA. Even with revisions in the project, the following impacts are unavoidable because it has been determined that no feasible mitigation is available or the mitigation that could be implemented is outside the purview of the City and the Applicant. Refer to Chapter 2 (CEQA Findings) for further clarification regarding the impacts listed below. Population and Housing ® Cumulative development within the project area, including The Ripcurl Project, could result in an increase of approximately 7,645 to 7,820 new residential units. Because all cumulative residential development would ultimately contribute to the substantial exceedance of SCAG population projections for the City for the 2015 timeframe, The Ripcurl Project, due to its size, would have a The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 4-1 • • - 4 Stat-mentof Overridifia Considerations considerable contribution to the cumulative impact. Therefore, the cumulative impact is considered significant and unavoidable. Transportation/Traffic ■ In the Year 2014, the 1-405 northbound loop ramp from Beach Boulevard is deficient in both the AM and PM peak hours. The Ripcurl Project has a significant contribution to this deficiency (more than 0.01) in the AM peak hour. Since traffic would be added to an existing deficiency (LOS E), this impact is considered significant and unavoidable. ® Implementation of The Ripcurl Project would result in an increase in project-related traffic that could be substantial in relation to the forecasted traffic load and capacity of the street system in 2030. Specifically, the The Ripcurl Project has a long-range significant impact at the intersection of the I-405 southbound ramps at Center Avenue during the PM peak hour. Although mitigation measure MM4.13-1 would reduce long-term impacts to a less-than-significant level, the impacted intersections are owned by Caltrans, and implementation of the proposed mitigation measures at these locations would be dependent on factors outside the control of both the City of Huntington Beach and the project Applicant. A General Plan Amendment (GPA) is currently being processed for The Village at Bella Terra Project, which would reduce the PM peak hour trip generation such that the impacted intersection would no longer be impacted by The Ripcurl Project. However, approval of that project cannot be guaranteed. In addition, the project contributes traffic to 2030 deficiencies on I-405. 4.3 FINDINGS The City has evaluated all feasible mitigation measures and project revisions with respect to the project's impacts, both project-specific and cumulative (see Chapter 2, CEQA Findings). The City has also examined a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed project (see Chapter 3, Findings Regarding Project Alternatives). Based on this examination, the City has determined that because of its reduced intensity, Modified Reduced Project Alternative Option 2 is considered to be the environmentally superior alternative. All of the other alternatives listed above would potentially result in lesser environmental impacts than the recommended project, although not necessarily less than significant. However, the City finds these alternatives infeasible and less desirable than the recommended project and has rejected these alternatives from further consideration because they would not achieve the environmental, economic, social, and other considerations outlined in Chapter 3 (Findings Regarding Project Alternatives). 4.4 OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Specific economic, social, or other considerations outweigh the cumulative population and housing and project-specific traffic/transportation impacts stated above. The reasons for proceeding with Modified Reduced Project Alternative Option 2, even though identified project-specific and cumulative impacts are not fully mitigated to a less-than-significant level, are described below. 4.2 The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations ,Che•' terA Statementof • - s • C:opsiftrationS 10 Project Benefits The Modified Reduced Project Alternative Option 2 would provide a new, optimally located state-of-the- art mixed use development that would be located in close proximity to transit uses and would serve as a model for modern residential development. 1. The project would establish zoning standards and implementation mechanisms applicable to mixed-use developments consistent with the policies and development framework of the City's General Plan and Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance to maximize land use opportunities. 2. The project would promote residential and commercial buildings that convey a high quality visual image and character, as well as provide for the development of mixed-use projects that integrate residential and commercial uses and ensure compatibility of these uses. 3. The project emphasizes compatibility and sensitivity to the existing uses surrounding the site and would include a variety of sustainable features, such as drought-tolerant landscaping,waterless urinals,roofing materials, and installation of low-flush water devices. The City is actively pursuing the feasibility of including additional features that would bring the building closer to LEED certification. 4. The project will maintain and enhance the community image of Huntington Beach through the design and construction of high quality development consistent with the Urban Design Element of the City's General Plan. 5. The project would foster walkability and reduced vehicle trips by locating close to an established transit center, college and shopping and other services. 6. The project would provide luxury apartments, filling an unmet niche in terms of housing production in the City as well as improving the supply of rental housing in the City. 7. The project will provide the equivalent of 10 percent of the units as affordable housing, consistent with City requirements. The Ripcurl Project EIR Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations 4-3 C H City of Huntington Beach The R *i curl Project Final Environmental Impact Report: SCH No. 200801 1069 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Prepared for City of Huntington Beach Planning Department 2000 Main Street, Third Floor Huntington Beach, California 92648 Prepared by PBSU 12301 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 430 Los Angeles, California 90025 September 2008 m otldn A. INTRODUCTION The Final Environmental Impact Report for The Ripcurl Project (State Clearinghouse #2008011069) identified mitigation measures to reduce the adverse effects of the project in the areas of. aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, noise,public services, and transportation/traffic. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that agencies adopting environmental impact reports ascertain that feasible mitigation measures are implemented, subsequent to project approval. Specifically, the lead or responsible agency must adopt a reporting or monitoring program for mitigation measures incorporated into a project or imposed as conditions of approval. The program must be designed to ensure compliance during applicable project timing, e.g. design, construction, or operation (Public Resource Code §21081.6). Code Requirements (CRs) that were identified in the Draft EIR are required to be implemented as a result of existing City code and are not considered mitigation measures. Therefore, CRs would be implemented for The Ripcurl Project but these do not require monitoring activity, and are not included in this Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). The MMRP shall be used by the City of Huntington Beach staff responsible for ensuring compliance with mitigation measures associated with The Ripcurl Project. Monitoring shall consist of review of appropriate documentation, such as plans or reports prepared by the party responsible for implementation or by field observation of the mitigation measure during implementation. The following table identifies the mitigation measures by resource area. The table also provides the specific mitigation monitoring requirements, including implementation documentation, monitoring activity, timing and responsible monitoring party. Verification of compliance with each measure is to be indicated by signature of the mitigation monitor, together with date of verification. The Project Applicant and the Applicant's Contractor shall be responsible for implementation of all mitigation measures,unless otherwise noted in the table. City of Huntington Beach The Ripcurl Project 0 0 0 o e o o a -o• o a o • • • O h, O • • • • • O 0 0 • ° im ementalion Res risible _ Comptiance MilinMeasure.� u, <.=` "Documerafafion Monifo►in Activ lirriin IlAonifor VerrncahonSignaturek =Date � � , Aesthetics ,, ,, % F .. _.. . .b. MM4.1-1 To the extent feasible, the Applicant shall use non- Project building plans Review and Plan check prior Planning reflective facade treatments, such as matte paint or glass approve building to issuance of coatings. Prior to issuance of building permits for the proposed plans for inclusion building permit project, the Applicant shall indicate provision of these materials of features on the building plans. ' I QIICI�Ity,v" r>. k Sa€ rx kc � ' . MM4.2-1 During construction, operators of any gas or diesel Contract language and Review and Plan check prior Planning fueled equipment, including vehicles, shall be encouraged to turn notes on grading and approve contract to issuance of a off equipment if not in use or left idle for more than five minutes. building plans specifications, grading permit grading and building plans for Perform periodic inclusion field check during construction to ensure compliance MM4.2-2 The Applicant shall require by contract specifications Contract language and Review and Plan check prior Planning that the architectural coating (paint and primer) products used notes on building plans approve contract to issuance of a would have a low VOC rating. Contract specifications shall be specifications and building permit included in the proposed project construction documents, which building plans for shall be reviewed by the City prior to issuance of a building inclusion permit. i' 1,0 . r i,` - x°.x ,r �' , :: ' :: ,ate i.- ,t'z ..sue . a. a. . t`J ,tBi Logical Resources z _ a w _ ; MM4.3-1 Nesting habitat for protected or sensitive avian Developer shall submit Review schedule Plan check prior Planning species: construction schedule and field survey to issuance of a 1. Vegetation removal and construction shall occur between (including grading report,and as grading permit September 1 and January 31 whenever feasible. activities)as evidence necessary, review 2. Prior to any construction or vegetation removal between of construction overlap and approve plans February 15 and August 31,a nesting survey shall be with breeding season. indicating conducted by a qualified biologist of all habitats within If construction occurs construction limits 500 feet of the construction area.Surveys shall be during relevant During conducted no less than 14 days and no more than 30 days breeding,developer Perform periodic construction Planning prior to commencement of construction activities and surveys shall present a survey field check to 2 City of Huntington Beach o• o 0 0 • o o -o 0 0 •o • O • O © • O • • - • • o • O • ' n irriplementation = Responsible CO M►ii on'Measure,":r Documentafion ' 141onito►in Acliv w .Timing Moniior VerficaHonS' nature Date:as will be conducted in accordance with CDFG protocol as report(prepared by a ensure applicable. If no active nests are identified on or within consultant approved by compliance 500 feet of the construction site, no further mitigation is the City)to the City necessary.A copy of the pre-construction survey shall be prior to issuance of a submitted to the City of Huntington Beach. If an active nest grading permit. If nests of a MBTA protected species is identified onsite(per are found,developer established thresholds)a 250-foot no-work buffer shall be shall submit plans maintained between the nest and construction activity.This identifying nest buffer can be reduced in consultation with CDFG_and/or locations and limits of USFWS. construction activities. 3. Completion of the nesting cycle shall be determined by qualified ornithologist or biologist. <' f .» .any CIt raI R�so"areas. a � MM4.4-1 The Applicant shall arrange for a qualified professional Proof of retention of Verify retention of Plan check prior Planning archaeological and paleontological monitor to be present during archaeological and qualified monitors to issuance of all project-related ground-disturbing activities. In addition,all paleontological monitor grading permit construction personnel shall be informed of the need to stop work on the project site in the event of a potential find, until a Throughout qualified archaeologist or paleontologist has been provided the Periodic field ground-disturbing Planning opportunity to assess the significance of the find and implement check to ensure activities appropriate measures to protect or scientifically remove the find. monitors are Construction personnel will also be informed that unauthorized present collection of cultural resources is prohibited. The Ripcurl Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 3 0 ® • O • O ® 0 • • ® ® ® O e. ►m etnentafion esn'srbte Compliance , r - Mill fionMeasure Docuinenfaffon 'Monitain A .rmin Monitor_ ; Verr�icafion°S' ►iature Date MM4.4-2 If archaeological or paleontological resources are Notes on grading plans Review and Plan check prior Planning discovered during ground-disturbing activities, all construction approve grading to issuance of activities within 50 feet of the find shall cease until the plans for inclusion grading permit arch aeologistlpaleontologist evaluates the significance of the resource. In the absence of a determination, all archaeological Throughout and paleontological resources shall be considered significant. If Research design and Review and ground-disturbing Peer review the resource is determined to be significant, the archaeologist or recovery plan,if approve research activities by three paleontologist, as appropriate, shall prepare a research design required design and County- for recovery of the resources in consultation with the State Office recovery plan certified of Historic Preservation that satisfies the requirements of Section 21083.2 of CEQA. The archaeologist or paleontologist professionals shall complete a report of the excavations and findings, and shall submit the report for peer review by three County-certified archaeologists or paleontologists, as appropriate. Upon approval of the report,the City shall submit the report to the South Central Coastal Information Center at California State University, Fullerton, and keep the report on file at the City of Huntington Beach. MM4.4-3 In the event of the discovery of a burial, human bone, Notes on grading plans Review and Plan check prior Orange or suspected human bone, all excavation or grading in the approve grading to issuance of County vicinity of the find shall halt immediately,the area of the find shall plans for inclusion grading permit Coroner be protected, and the Applicant shall immediately notify the City &Planning and the Orange County Coroner of the find and comply with the Throughout provisions of P.R.C. Section 5097. If the human remains are ground-disturbing determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the NAHC, which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendent(MLD). activities The MILD shall complete the inspection of the site within 24 hours of notification, and may recommend scientific removal and non- destructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials. r; ,e 5, 5 .. " ..rr• t'"" ..*fit``t''`sx "x - `.) s. .,rs w,� .1 r, xa°•'.. ..: '' "r MM4.5.1 The grading plan prepared for the proposed project Notes on grading plan Review and Plan check prior Public Works shall contain the recommendations of the final soils and and building plans approve grading to issuance of a geotechnical report. These recommendations shall be and building plans grading permit implemented in the design of the project, including but not limited for inclusion of 4 City of Huntington Beach is o e o e e e e o -o e o 0 0 0 Me • • • O • • • • — O O • • • • rrrj er enMtion >�; Responsible = Compliance - Mili bon Measure Documentation n Monifain Aci►v' riming Monitor =1%rficaf►on Si nature; ' Datexf_ to measures associated with site preparation, fill placement, final soils and temporary shoring and permanent dewatering, groundwater geotechnical Building and seismic design features, excavation stability, foundations, soil recommendations Safety stabilization, establishment of deep foundations, concrete slabs and pavements, surface drainage, cement type and corrosion measures,erosion control,shoring and internal bracing,and plan review. z r Hadous Materials z �. MM4.6.1 In the event that previously unknown or unidentified Risk Management Plan Review and Plan check prior Fire soil and/or groundwater contamination that could present a threat &Site Health and approve any to issuance of to human health or the environment is encountered during Safety Plan grading plans for any grading construction in the project area, construction activities in the inclusion permit immediate vicinity of the contamination shall cease immediately. If contamination is encountered, a Risk Management Plan shall be prepared and implemented that (1)identifies the contaminants of concern and the potential risk each contaminant would pose to human health and the environment during construction and post-development and (2)describes measures to be taken to protect workers, and the public from exposure to potential site hazards. Such measures could include a range of options, including but not limited to, physical site controls during construction, remediation, long-term monitoring, post- development maintenance or access limitations, or some combination thereof. Depending on the nature of contamination, if any, appropriate agencies shall be notified (e.g., Huntington Beach Fire Department). If needed, a Site Health and Safety Plan that meets Occupational Safety and Health Administration requirements shall be prepared and in place prior to commencement of work in any contaminated area. The Ripcurl Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 5 0 o s o e o o • -o e a o e e miag"(01,1:1 • • O • • - • • • • • •MT Im�emeniafion. Responsible Compl►arice Mili on'Measu[e' h Documentaflon Monilain ;4cfiv rmiri` Monitor. 1/er►caHon Si nature° Date` MM4.6-2 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the project Methane Testing Plan Review and Prior to Fire shall comply with HBFD City Specification#429, Methane District approval of testing commence- Building Permit Requirements. A plan for the testing of soils for plan ment of sampling the presence of methane gas shall be prepared and submitted by the Applicant to the HBFD for review and approval, prior to the Prior to issuance commencement of sampling. If significant levels of methane gas are discovered in the soil on the project site, the Applicant's Notes on building and Review and of any grading Fire grading, building and methane plans shall reference that a sub- methane plans approve building permit and during slab methane barrier and vent system will be installed at the and methane gas construction project site per City Specification #429, prior to plan approval. If plans for required by the HBFD, additional methane mitigation measures appropriate to reduce the level of methane gas to acceptable levels shall be documentation implemented. '-"'Hydrology and Water Qua lity, ZO,le CoA4.7-1 The project developer shall construct an underground Improvement Plans Review and Plan check prior Public Works storm drain pipe along the east side of Gothard Street from approval of to issuance of Center Avenue to Edinger Avenue to connect to the existing, improvement grading permit underground Edinger Avenue storm drain pipe. Based on a Final plans Hydrology and Hydraulics Report, the new Gothard Street underground storm drain facility sizing and design shall be targeted to convey the highest storm event exceedance flow rates along Gothard Street at full build-out of the General Plan, including contributions from any permanent groundwater dewatering system. The proposed project onsite storm drainage system shall be designed to convey all water quality treated flow directly into the new underground storm drain pipe along Gothard Street. MM4.7-1 The Applicant shall prepare a Hydrology and Hydrology and Review and Prior to issuance Public Works Hydraulics Report and Drainage Plan that incorporates Hydraulic Report and approve plan and of a precise stormwater attenuation to reduce project site runoff to meet City Drainage Plan documentation grading permit design standards for stormflow in Gothard Street. Prior to receiving a precise grading permit,the Applicant shall prepare an Hydrology and Hydraulics Report detailing proposed Prior to issuance project peak runoff rates for the 10-,25-, 50-,and 100 year Groundwater Review and of a grading Building& design storm events to Gothard Street,including contributions permit and Safety 6 City of Huntington Beach 0 O 0 0 0 ® ®Men!Nont ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® O ►mpiementalion :�� � Respons�We . . _ ``Compliance Miti hon Mleasure Documentation' Monitain Acfiv rimin Monitor 1/er�icafion Signafure. Date from any permanent groundwater dewatering that may be Dewatering System approve following implemented by the proposed project.This Hydrology and Plan dewatering completion of Hydraulics Report shall also identify the existing available system construction capacity for flow in Gothard Street for the design storms and activities evaluate the existing capacity in and potential impacts to the Edinger Avenue system, Murdy Channel,and East Garden Grove-Wintersburg Channel. Based on the Hydrology and Hydraulics Report,the Applicant shall prepare a Drainage Plan that shall incorporate sufficient stormwater attenuation such that the City design standards for flow in Gothard Street are not exceeded. It is expected that this may require underground detention facilities. However,detention in underground parking structures shall not be allowed and surface ponding shall be limited to a maximum depth of 8 inches. Attenuation shall be designed for back to back 24-hour storm design storm events that development of the proposed project would increase peak runoff rates for. If either above-ground or below-ground detention facilities are proposed,the Applicant shall consult with the Department of Public Works and vector control agency to develop a design that will be sufficient for stormwater detention but will not present a human health or environmental hazard. A qualified engineer of the Public Works Department shall approve this Hydrology and Hydraulics Report and Drainage Plan prior to issuance of a precise grading permit.The site Drainage Plan shall be coordinated with the WQMP to maximize efficiency of stormwater runoff detention/retention and water quality treatment. The Building and Safety Department shall evaluate any proposed permanent groundwater dewatering system to ensure that it would function as required. Following construction, the Building and Safety Department shall verify that any groundwater dewatering system has been implemented as required. MM4.7-2 The Applicant shall design and implement project site Grading and Drainage Review and Prior to issuance Public Works drainage features to minimize stormwater runoff and flood waters Plan approval of of a precise The Ripcurl Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 7 O • O 11 , • • • • • - • • O • • • , ►mp24 lementalion n, !Re7L� T"7 Miti on°Medsuie Documentation Moriilioiin A_ctiv' rmin Date-..'. from entering into underground parking structures or otherwise Grading and grading permit contribute to flood hazards and shall incorporate flood-proofing Drainage Plan and hydrostatic pressure measures for all below-ground structures. Prior to receiving a precise grading permit, the Applicant shall prepare a site Grading and Drainage Plan identifying design elements to minimize underground structure flooding. The Grading and Drainage plan shall implement design features to minimize flooding of under ground structures such as, but not limited to: ® Grade areas to drain away from the structure entryways. ® Implement overflow prevention(e.g.,berms or dikes,grated inlets,or a combination,thereof)to direct project site runoff and flood flows away from underground structure entryways. ® Elevate underground structure entryways to two-feet above the existing grade(approximate depth of potential flooding from the East Garden Grove-Wintersburg Channel). ® Implement sumps and pumps within the underground structures to remove any runoff entering the underground structures(this measure shall also be subject to WQMP and DAMP BMP requirements for discharge treatment and disposal). ® Additionally,the Applicant shall incorporate flood-proofing measures to prevent seepage flooding. Underground structures materials and design shall be in accordance with FEMA floodplain development requirements and the 2007 California Building Code for structures subject to flooding and hydrostatic pressures. ® The geotechnical engineer and/or waterproofing specialist shall prepare design requirements for flood-proofing the underground structures and ensuring that structures are build to withstand hydrostatic pressures. ® Any utilities located in below grade structures shall be protected from ponding water and seepage in accordance with the geotechnical engineer recommendations and 2007 8 City of Huntington Beach e o • o 0 o a o -o 0 0 o e o ® ® ® ® ® 0 • ® 0 ® ® program "'T.:k ►mplementaHon "` _' Res nsible `. Compliance Miti on Measure Documeritofion: :, Mornloiin Ac1rv' , . ,y. Timm Monitor p.wVerrr►caHon "'nature California Building Code. The Applicant shall also design on-site runoff to drain away from building foundations and shall not allow for more than 8 inches of ponding at any location on-site. CoA4.7.2 Prior to receiving a precise grading or building permit, Grading and Drainage Review and Prior to issuance Public Works the Applicant shall prepare a site Grading and Drainage Plan Plan approval of of a precise containing the recommendations of the final Soils and Grading and grading plan Geotechnical Reports analysis for temporary and permanent Drainage Plan groundwater dewatering as well as for surface drainage. .ft,..," a MM4.9.1 The Applicant shall require by contract specifications Contract language and Review and Plan check prior Planning that the following construction best management practices notes on grading and approve contract to issuance of a (BMPs) be implemented by contractors to reduce construction building plans specifications, grading permit noise levels: grading and ® Notification shall be mailed to owners and occupants of all building plans for developed land uses immediately bordering or directly inclusion across the street from the project site area providing a schedule for major construction activities that will occur through the duration of the construction period. In addition, the notification will include the identification and contact number for a community liaison and designated construction manager that would be available on site to monitor construction activities.The construction manager will be located at the on-site construction office during construction hours for the duration of all construction activities.Contract information for the community liaison and construction manager will be located at the construction office, City Hall, and the police department ® Ensure that construction equipment is properly muffled according to industry standards • Place noise-generating construction equipment and locate construction staging areas away from sensitive uses,where feasible Implement noise attenuation measures to the extent feasible, The Ripcurl Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 9 ATTACHMENT #�12, � ATTACHMENT NO. 12 RIPCURL PROJECT EIR NO. 07-004 ON FIDE IN THE CITY CLERK' S OFFICE r .,: ;, .. ,.:. ... _.. ,, �- „ .. .., �.�: �r, .,.- _ _ ,. :, =:r; ,,,, ,� .�_..,.;;: �,, _� 3, ,�. ,:.;;. .. ..- ..; ..;;. � a...,,.. .;.. �. ,,,,a.n. i r ,�. .;;, ,.,. fir.::'. mom. .. ,,,, ... .z;... ,ni".. .. ..: a_ _ ,,,,, � �,� �, f � ..a,.. .:e..., �� W ::. ..;.� W: ... � .. 'r...� ,,, ... ,,. :.:.�.,. � ,,,.. .�. ..,. rz�::h':��.i °j: - ;.:.::. �: �.: °A� CITY F HUNTINGTO CH .�- City Council Interoffice Communication TO: Joan Flynn, City Clerk r. FROM: Jill Har , City Council Member DATE: October 9, 2008 SUBJECT: APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S CERTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 07-004 AND APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 07-003, ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO. 07-001, ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 07-004, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 07-043 (THE RIPCURL) am hereby appealing Planning Commission's actions on The Ripcurl project. On September 23, 2008, the Planning Commission certified Environmental Impact No. 07- 004 and approved Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004. On September 30, 2008, the Planning Commission approved General Plan Amendment No. 07-003, Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001, and Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043. The request is to permit the construction of an approximately 382,700 square foot mixed use development, consisting of 440 residential units and 10,000 square feet of commercial uses on a 3.8 acre site at the southeast corner of Gothard Street and Center Avenue. The primary reason for my appeal is to allow the City Council an opportunity to review The Ripcurl project and all associated entitlements in its entirety. Pursuant to Section 248.18 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance, the City Council shall hear an appeal from the decision of the Planning Commission. DC:SH:HF:tn cc: Tom Livengood, Planning Commission Chair Fred Wilson, City Administrator Scott Hess, Director of Planning Herb Fauland, Planning Manager Tess Nguyen,Associate Planner Amstar/Red Oak Huntington Beach, LLC, Property Owner Andrew Nelson/Alex Wong, Applicant Ak QO RED 9 OAK INVESTMENTS October 10,2008 Scott Hess Planning Director City of Huntington Beach Planning Department Huntington Beach City Hall,3rd Floor 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Re Notice of Appeal of Conditions of Approval La.,3.a.,3.b.,and 5.a. for Conditional Use Permit 07-043 Dear Scott, On behalf of everyone at Amstar/Red Oak Huntington Beach, LLC,I would like to thank you,your staff,and the members of the Huntington Beach Planning Commission for the hard work and thoughtful consideration that has been given to The Ripcurl development project. We have been uniformly impressed with the professionalism, responsiveness,and quality of work that we have experienced in the City of Huntington Beach. Consistent with the respect we have for the City,we have worked to incorporate the majority of the changes to the project proposed by Planning staff,the Design Review Board,and the Planning Commission. We were generally very pleased with the outcome of the Planning Commission hearing on the project. However, the limitation on residential units imposed by the Planning Commission as a Condition of Approval will significantly constrain our ability to secure financing and deliver The Ripcurl as envisioned. For this reason,we submit this Notice of Appeal of Condition of Approval La. for Conditional Use Permit 07-043. In addition,we are requesting minor changes to, and therefore appealing,Conditions of Approval 3.a.,3.b.,and 5.a. I. Appeal of Condition of Approval La.for Conditional Use Permit 07-043 Condition of Approval 1.a. provides "[t]he project shall be revised to reduce the number of residential units from 440 units to 330 units and retain the 10,000 sq. ft. of commercial/retail space." The original residential unit count we proposed was 440 units. Staff's recommendation was to reduce the residential unit count to 385 units. Staff's recommendation was based on the finding in the Environmental Impact Report that a reduction to 385 units would reduce the cumulative significant and unavoidable traffic impact to a less than significant level. 2101 Business Center Drive * Suite 230 * Irvine,CA 92612 Tel: 949.733.2000 * Fax:949.733.2005 Page 2 of 2 10/10/2008 The grounds for our appeal of the 330 residential unit limitation is that we are concerned that there is insufficient evidence or reasoned rationale supporting the imposition of the 330 unit limitation. Unit count is important to us,especially in this challenging economic environment,because of the flexibility it provides. Allowing us the ability to build up to the proposed 440 units will let us choose the right number of units for the building and for this market,rather than being constrained by one that is artificially set. A reduction in units also has an impact on the financial feasibility of the project. Moreover,we believe that greater density is uniquely appropriate in this transit center location. II. A1212eal of Conditions of Approval 3.a.,3.b.,and 5.a. for Conditional Use Permit 07-043 In addition to our appeal of Condition of Approval 1.a.,we are also requesting minor changes to,and therefore appealing,conditions 3.a.,3.b., and 5.a. We would like conditions 3.a.,3.b.,and 5.a. to be modified to permit the Planning Director or the Department of Public Works to modify or amend these conditions administratively. It is possible that some factors surrounding the project may change,and this provision will provide some flexibility in implementing these conditions to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works and the Planning Director. III. Zone Text Amendment Issues. In addition to our appeal of the Condition of Approval,we plan to ask the City Council to modify the Zoning Text for the MU-TCD to allow for a limited number of tandem stalls. We understand that an appeal is not technically required for this matter because the Zone Text Amendment is automatically forwarded to Council. As a courtesy to you and staff,we wanted to inform you of our intent to make this request at Council. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Sincerely, 7 Andrew B. Nelson On behalf of Applicant for The Ripcurl: Amstar/Red Oak Huntington Beach,LLC CC: Herb Fauland Tess Nguyen Mary Beth Broeren :.:. ILK, ��::. �Hm ,NT i t f y' ' 6 H1,61itifigt6m Beach Plaifting, ,epait nt'T�;-` PORT, . ........ HUNTINGTON BEACH 7, k TO: Planning Commission FROM: Scott Hess, AICP, Director of Planning BY: Tess Nguyen, Associate Planner DATE: September 23, 2008 SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 07-004 (THE RIPCURL) APPLICANT/ Andrew Nelson/Alex Wong, Amstar/Red Oak Huntington Beach, LLC, 2 101 Business PROPERTY Center Drive # 230, Irvine CA 92612 OWNER: LOCATION: 7302-7400 Center Avenue (southeast comer of Gothard Street and Center Avenue) ——---------- STATEMENT OF ISSUE: ® Environmental Impact Report No. 07-004 (EIR No. 07-004): - Analyzes proposed Zoning Text Amendment to the HBZSO by adding Chapter 218 that establishes the Mixed-Use Transit Center District zoning and development standards. - Analyzes proposed General Plan Amendment from Commercial General to Mixed-Use for the subject property. - Analyzes proposed Zoning Map Amendment from Commercial General to Mixed-Use Transit Center District for the subject property. - Analyzes proposed construction of a mixed-use development consisting of 440 residential units (including 11 live/work units), 10,000 sq. ft. of commercial uses, outdoor and indoor amenities, and associated infrastructure. - Documents potential impacts to aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, noise, public services, recreation, and utilities and service systems. - Evaluates four alternatives to the proposed project. - Concludes that potential impacts can be mitigated to less than significant levels for the project with the exception of impacts to population and housing and transportation/traffic, which would remain significant and unavoidable. * Staff s Recommendation: - Certify EIR No. 07-004 because it adequately analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with the project, identifies project alternatives and mitigation measures to lessen the project's impacts consistent with General Plan policies and has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: "Certify EIR No. 07-004 as adequate and complete in accordance with CEQA requirements by approving Resolution No. 1624 (Attachment No. 1)." ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): The Planning Commission may take alternative actions such as: A. "Deny certification of EIR No. 07-004 with findings for denial." B. "Continue certification of EIR No. 07-004 and direct staff accordingly." PROJECT PROPOSAL: Environmental Im acp t Report No. 07-004 represents an analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with proposed Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004 (ZTA), General Plan Amendment No. 07- 003 (GPA), Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001 (ZMA), and construction of a mixed-use development consisting of 440 residential units and 10,000 sq. ft. of commercial uses on an approximate 3.8 acre site and associated infrastructure via Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043 (CUP). The project is proposed to be six stories in height consisting of four levels of housing above two levels of above ground parking and one level of subterranean parking. The commercial component is proposed on the ground level adjacent to two levels of above grade parking. Outdoor amenities for the residential uses include a pool and spa area, fire pit and movie projection area. Indoor amenities include a fitness center, business center, conference room, and clubhouse. The GPA and ZMA would amend the General Plan and Zoning designations from commercial to mixed-use for the subject property. The ZTA establishes the Mixed Use-Transit Center District zoning and development standards. The EIR provides a discussion of impacts by issue area and provides mitigation measures, where appropriate. Specific issue areas discussed in the EIR include: aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use, noise, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation/traffic and utilities and service systems. An analysis of alternatives to the proposed project and long-term implications resulting from project implementation are also provided. The EIR consists of three volumes. Volumes 1 and 2 are the Draft EIR and Appendices that were circulated for a minimum 45-day public review period. Volume 3 is titled the Final EIR and includes the comments received during the public review period, responses to those comments and text changes to the Draft EIR (Volumes 1 and 2) to clarify or correct information in response to comments or as identified as necessary by staff. These volumes are referenced as Attachment No. 2 to this staff report. An analysis of the ZTA, GPA, ZMA and CUP is presented in two companion reports that will be considered by the Planning Commission after action on the EIR. The first companion report reviews the application for Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004. The second companion report reviews applications for General Plan Amendment No. 07-003, Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001, and Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043. PC Staff Report—09/23/08 2 (08sr42 EIR 07-04) Background and Site History: Historical records indicate that the project site was first utilized for agricultural purposes sometime prior to 1938 and the site continued to be utilized for agricultural purposes until at least 1953. As early as 1969, the site appeared to lay empty. The project site was cleared and developed as a shopping center in 1979. The project site is currently developed with a shopping center known as the College Country Center. The shopping center contains approximately 60,000 sq. ft. of commercial and office spaces located in four one-story retail buildings and one two-story office building. The shopping center is approximately 80 percent leased with 45 tenants. Existing tenants include Ruby Nail & Spa, Taste of France French Bistro, Dinner's Ready Home Cooking, Kathy May Coffeehouse, College Books, Allied Hearing Services, Heritage House Center, Cloud Mover Day Spa, an antique store, a liquor store & market, a tanning salon, a hair salon, and various office tenants. Del Taco fast food restaurant and the United States Post Office anchor the shopping center. ISSUES: Subiect Property and Surrounding Land Use, Zoning, and General Plan Designations: y A�1C 3 kpi 1�1r �9 Subject Property CG-F1-d(Commercial CG(Commercial Commercial Shopping General-0.35 Max. Floor Area General) Center—College Country Ratio—Design Overlay) Center North of Subject MV-178-d(Mixed Use Vertical CG-H(Commercial Golden West Property(across Center Integration of Housing-1.5 General—Highrise Transportation Center Avenue) Max. Floor Area Ratio— Overlay) Design Overlay) South of the Subject CR-F2-d(Commercial CG(Commercial Vacant Retail Building Property Regional-0.50 Max. Floor General) (former Levitz Furniture Area Ratio—Design Overlay) Store East of Subject CG-F1-d(Commercial CG(Commercial Southern California Property General-0.35 Max. Floor Area General); Edison transmission Ratio—Design Overlay); SP 13 (Crossings towers; Bella Terra Mall CR-F2-sp-mu(F9) (Huntington Center) (across the Union Pacific (Commercial Regional-0.50 Specific Plan) Railroad right-of-way) Floor Area Ratio—Specific Plan Overlay—Mixed Use Overlay—(1.5 Max. Floor Area Ratio(Mixed Use)/0.5 Max. Floor Area Ratio (Commercial)/25 du/ac)) West of Subject P (RL) (Public—Low Density PS (Public—Semipublic) Golden West College Property(across Residential) Gothard Street) PC Staff Report—09/23/08 3 (08sr42 EIR 07-04) General Plan Conformance: The current General Plan Land Use Map designation on the subject property is CG-F1-d (Commercial General — 0.35 Maximum Floor Area Ratio — Design Overlay). In addition, the project is located within Subarea 5E (Student Center) of the General Plan. The proposed project includes General Plan and Zoning Amendments that would change the land use and zoning designations of the project site from "Commercial General" to "Mixed-Use" and "Mixed-Use Transit Center District," respectively. Upon project implementation, the uses on the proposed project site would be consistent with the characteristics for "Mixed-Use Transit Center District" described in the General Plan and Zoning Code. Because the General Plan and Zoning designation would change, the project site would no longer be designated as subarea 5E (Student Center), and the subarea figure (LU-6) in the General Plan Land Use Element would be changed to reflect this. The EIR is consistent with the goals, policies and objectives of the City's General Plan as follows: A. Air QualitEElement Goal AQ 1: Improve regional air quality by a) decreasing reliance on single occupancy vehicular trips, b) increasing efficiency of transit, c) shortening vehicle trips through a more efficient jobs-housing balance and a more efficient land use pattern, and d) increasing energy efficiency. Policy Q 1.8.1: Continue to enforce construction site guidelines that require truck operators to minimize particulate emission. Policy AQ 1.8.2: Require installation of temporary construction facilities (such as wheel washers) and implementation of construction practices that minimize dirt and soil transfer onto public roadways. Objective AQ 1.9: Minimize sensitive uses (residential, hospitals, schools, etc.) exposure to toxic emissions. Policy AQ 1.10.1: Continue to require the utilization and installation of energy conservation features in all new construction. The EIR includes discussion of standard City Code Requirements (CR) 4.2-1 through 4.2-5 that address means by which air emissions impacts will be minimized, primarily by complying with the SCAQMD Rule 403 regarding fugitive dust. Code Requirements CR 4.2-1 through 4.2-5 ensure that criteria pollutants will not exceed SCAQMD established thresholds for sensitive uses. The EIR also includes two mitigation measures designed to minimize air quality impacts related to construction. In addition, as a mixed use development, the project provides a more diverse and sizable population for supporting viable alternatives to driving such as walking, biking, and public transit. The EIR concluded that construction and operation of the proposed project would contribute to greenhouse gas emissions, particularly from mobile sources such as motor vehicles traveling to and from the site and stationary sources such as natural gas combustion for heating and electricity consumption. This impact is considered to be less than significant due to the type and size of the proposed project and the incorporation of design features and greenhouse gas emission reduction PC Staff Report—09/23/08 4 (08sr42 EIR 07-04) measures into the project. The project's compliance with Title 24 and the project's green features may include energy conservation measures. B. Circulation Element Goal CE 2: Provide a circulation system which supports existing, approved and planned land uses throughout the City while maintaining a desired level of service on all streets and at all intersections. Policy CE 2.1.1: Maintain a city-wide level of service (LOS) not to exceed LOS "D" for intersections during the peak hours. The EIR includes a detailed traffic analysis of the proposed project and cumulative development. Mitigation Measure 4.13-1 requires signal operation to be changed to provide right turn overlap for westbound right turns at the intersection of I-405 southbound ramp at Center Avenue to achieve the PM peak hour LOS of C. Obiective CE 2.3: Ensure that the location, intensity and timing of new development is consistent with the provision of adequate transportation infrastructure and standards as defined in the Land Use 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 2.3.2: Limit driveway access points and require adequate driveway widths onto arterial roadways and require driveways be located to ensure the smooth and efficient flow of vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. The EIR studied the potential design hazards of the project and found none. The project would not introduce design features incompatible with current circulation patterns. To ensure safe construction of project intersections, Code Requirements CR 4.13-1 and 4.13-2 require new intersections to be designed to provide adequate sight distance and intersection traffic control in order to minimize potential hazards. C. Environmental Hazards Element Goal EH 1: Ensure that the number of deaths and injuries, levels of property damage, levels of economic and social disruption and interruption of vital services resulting from seismic activity and geologic hazards shall be within acceptable levels of risk. Obiective EH 1.1: Ensure that land use planning in the City accounts for seismic and geologic risk, including groundshaking, liquefaction, subsidence, soil and slope stability and water table levels. Policy EH 1.1.4: Evaluate the levels of risk based on the nature of the hazards and assess acceptable risk based on the human, property and social structure damage compared to the cost of corrective measures to mitigate or prevent damage. PC Staff Report—09/23/08 5 (08sr42 EIR 07-04) Obiective EH 1.2: Ensure that new structures are designed to minimize damage resulting from seismic hazards, ensure that existing unsafe structures are retrofitted to reduce hazards and mitigate other existing unsafe conditions. Policy EH 1.2.1: Require appropriate engineering and building practices for all new structures to withstand groundshaking and liquefaction such as stated in the Uniform Building Code. The EIR analyzed potential impacts related to environmental hazards. Development of the proposed project would not expose people and/or structures to potentially adverse effects from seismic activity, groundshaking, or liquefaction. Adherence to CR 4.5-1 and Mitigation Measure 4.5-1 require that the grading plan contain the recommendations of the final soils and geotechnical analysis and would reduce the project's impact from seismically induced groundshaking and related ground failure to less than significant. Goal EH 3: Ensure the safety of the City's businesses and residents from methane hazards. Obiective EH 3.2: Minimize methane hazards in the identified Methane Overlay District, and other areas outside the Methane Overlay Districts as may later be defined, through the regulation of construction and adherence to the City's Methane Hazard Mitigation Plan. Policy EH 3.2.2: Establish, enforce, and periodically update testing requirements for sites proposed for new construction within the identified Methane Overlay District. Although the project site is not located within a designated methane gas overlay district, the potential presence of methane gas is a concern due to the proposed below-grade construction. Mitigation Measure 4.6-2 reduces any impacts associated with methane gas by ensuring that appropriate testing and methods of gas detection are implemented at the project site. D. Environmental Resources/Conservation Element Goal ERC 2: Protect and preserve significant habitats of plant and wildlife species, including wetlands, for their intrinsic values. Policy ERC 2.1.10: Conduct construction activities to minimize adverse impacts on existing wildlife resources. Mitigation Measure 4.3-1 requires nesting surveys for migratory avian-protected species prior to the onset of ground disturbance activities, including impact-avoidance measures, to ensure that the substantial loss of these species will not occur. E. Growth Management Element Goal GM 1: Provide adequate police services to meet the needs of the City's population. Policy GM 1.1.7: Ensure that new development site design incorporates measures to maximize policing safety and security. PC Staff Report—09/23/08 6 (08sr42 EIR 07-04) Goal GM 2: Provide adequate fire and paramedic services to meet the needs of the City's population. Policy GM 2.1.2: Provide a 5-minute response time for emergency fire services at least 80 percent of the time. Policy GM 2.1.3: Provide a 5-minute response time for paramedic services at least 80 percent of the time. Policy GM 2.1.4: Ensure that new development site design incorporates measures to maximize fire safety and prevention. The EIR includes an analysis of potential impacts related to police and fire services and both departments were consulted in the preparation of the EIR. Implementation of the proposed project would not require any new or physically altered fire or police facilities to maintain adequate response time and staffing. To maximize policing safety and security, Mitigation Measure MM 4.11-1 requires the installation of radio antenna receivers in all underground parking structures to allow emergency responders to use their radio systems. F. Hazardous Materials Element Goal HM 1: Reduce, to the greatest degree possible, the potential for harm to life, property, and the environment from hazardous materials and hazardous waste. Obiective HM 1.1: Promote the proper handling, treatment and disposal of hazardous materials and hazardous waste. Mitigation Measure 4.6-1 ensures remediation of contaminated soils containing hazardous materials, if any, prior to development of the proposed project and by providing supplemental procedures in the event of unanticipated discoveries of contaminants. G. Historic and Cultural Resources Element Obiective HCR 1.1: Ensure that all of the City's historically and archaeologically significant resources are identified and protected. The EIR documents all recorded archaeological sites in the vicinity of the project. There are no known cultural resources on or in the vicinity of the project site. As a conservative measure, the EIR recommends Mitigation Measures 4.4-1 through 4.4-3 to reduce impacts to a less than significant level should resources be uncovered during site work. H. Housing Element Goal H 2: Provide adequate housing sites to accommodate regional housing needs. Goal H 3: Assist in development of affordable housing. PC Staff Report—09/23/08 7 (08sr42 EIR 07-04) The EIR includes an analysis of the City's Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) future housing need as determined by SCAG population projections. The proposed project site, though currently designated for commercial uses, is identified as a residential inventory site by the City's Housing Element. The project would provide needed housing for the City and the region, contributing to the City's progress towards meeting its RHNA numbers. Code Requirement CR 4.10-1, requiring the project to comply with the City's affordable housing requirements, ensures the development of affordable housing. I. Land Use Element Goal LU 2: Ensure that development is adequately served by transportation infrastructure, utility infrastructure, and public services. Policy LU 2.1.2: Require that the type, amount, and location of development be correlated with the provision of adequate supporting infrastructure and services (as defined in the Circulation and Public Utilities and Services Elements of the General Plan). Policy LU 2.1.6: Monitor the capacities of other infrastructure (water, sewer, and other) and services and establish appropriate limits on development should their utilization and demands for service exceed acceptable levels of service. The EIR analyzes the proposed project's impact on supporting infrastructure and services and found that the demand of the project would be less than significant through implementation of code requirements and mitigation measures, with the exception of certain impacts related to transportation. CR 4.14-1 requires the preparation of a sewer study, prior to issuance of grading permit, to determine if existing sewer lines need to be upgraded to accommodate the project sewer's flow. CR 4.7-1 requires the preparation of a Final WQMP prior to issuance of a precise grading plan to ensure adequate treatment of stormwater runoff. Mitigation Measure 4.7-1 ensures that storm drain capacity is not exceeded and no environmental hazards will be associated with implementation of stormwater detention and dewatering. CR 4.14-2 and CR 4.14-3 ensure the protection of receiving water quality from short- and long-term impacts of new developments. The EIR also includes mitigation measures to minimize transportation impacts, though not all impacts can be reduced to a less than significant level. J. Noise Element Goal N 1: Ensure that all necessary and appropriate actions are taken to protect Huntington Beach residents, employees, visitors, and noise sensitive uses from the adverse impacts created by excessive noise levels from stationary and ambient sources. Policy N 1.2.1: Require, in areas where noise levels exceed an exterior Ldn of 60 dB(A) and an interior Ldn of 45 dB(A), that all new development of "noise sensitive" land uses, such as housing, health care facilities, schools, libraries, and religious facilities, include appropriate buffering and/or construction mitigation measures that will reduce noise exposure to levels within acceptable limits. PC Staff Report—09/23/08 8 (08sr42 EIR 07-04) Policy N 1.2.3: Require development, in all areas where the ambient noise level exceeds an Ldn of 60 dB(A), to conduct an acoustical analysis and incorporate special design measures in their construction, thereby, reducing interior noise levels to the 45 dB(A) Ldn level. The EIR includes a noise analysis consistent with CEQA requirements. The use of HVAC systems and other mechanical equipment associated with the operation of the proposed project would be required to comply with State Building Code requirements and City regulations requiring adequate buffering to mitigate potential increase in ambient noise levels. In addition, the project would be required to minimize noise transmission between commercial and residential uses through the use of building materials to mitigate sound transmission or configuration of interior spaces to minimize sound amplification. With these requirements, the impact on ambient noise levels would be less than significant. Policy N 1.2.5: Require development that generates increased traffic and subsequent increases in the ambient noise levels adjacent to noise sensitive land uses to provide for appropriate mitigation measures in accordance with the acceptable limits of the City noise ordinance. Operation of the proposed project would generate local traffic as a result of residents, employees, and patrons entering and exiting the site. The increase in traffic could increase the ambient noise levels at off-site locations. The changes in the roadway-generated noise levels would be imperceptible when existing noise levels were compared to future ones. There would be less than significant impacts on the residential and other"noise sensitive" uses. Objective N 1.6: Minimize the impacts of construction noise on adjacent uses. Policy N 1.6.1: Ensure that construction activities be regulated to establish hours of operation, to prevent and/or mitigate the generation of excessive or adverse noise impacts through the implementation of the existing Noise Ordinance and/or any future revisions to the Noise Ordinance. Under the City's Municipal Code, construction activities can only occur between the hours of 7:00 AM and 8:00 PM from Monday through Saturday. The applicant will be required to adhere to these requirements in order to mitigate excessive or adverse noise sources associated with construction activities. Mitigation Measures 4.9-1 and 4.9-2 ensure that impacts associated with construction activities resulting from implementation of the proposed project will be less than significant. K. Public Facilities and Services Element Objective PF 1.1: Provide adequate police facilities and personnel to correspond with population and service demands, and provide protection for the community from illicit activities and crime. Policy PF 1.3.2: Ensure that new development and land use proposals are analyzed to determine the impact on their operators, occupants, visitors, or customers may have on the safety and welfare of the community. The EIR includes an analysis of impacts to police facilities and services. Implementation of the proposed project would not significantly impact the level of service delivery for the project area and PC Staff Report—09/23/08 9 (08sr42 EIR 07-04) would not require any new or physically altered police facilities to maintain adequate response times and staffing. However, to ensure the safety of residents in the proposed building, Mitigation Measure MM 4.11-1 is recommended requiring radio antenna receivers to be installed in all underground parking structures. Goal PF 2: Ensure adequate protection from fire and medical emergencies for Huntington Beach residents and property owners. Policy PF 2.3.1: Continue to require all structures to follow all State and nationally recognized fire codes. The EIR includes an analysis of impacts related to Fire department response. Implementation of the proposed project would not significantly impact the level of service delivery for the project area and would not require any new or physically altered fire facilities to maintain adequate response times and staffing. Policy PF 4.2.3: Ensure that development shall not occur without providing for adequate school facilities. The EIR includes an analysis of potential impacts to schools. The EIR documents that direct population growth resulting from the proposed project would not have an impact on the capacity of schools within the schools serving the project site. With the implementation of code requirements CR 4.11-1 and CR 4.11-2, fees collected would offset any additional increase in educational demand at the elementary school, middle school, and high school levels serving the project site. Objective PF 5.1: Provide adequate library service that responds to the needs of the community. The EIR includes an analysis of potential impacts to library service. The existing library facilities are reasonably adequate to accommodate the increase in users from the proposed project. However, implementation of code requirement CR 4.11-3, payment of library and community enrichment impact fees would ensure that the increased growth would be adequately planned for in advance of project development. L. Recreation and Community Services Element Policy RCS 2.1.1: Maintain the current park per capita ratio of 5.0 acres per 1,000 persons, which includes the beach in the calculation. The EIR examines how the project can comply with the City's park requirements. CR 4.12-1 ensures that applicable open space and park fees are paid to acquire, develop, improve, and expand the City's open space and parklands inventory. M. Urban Design Element Goal UD 1.1: Enhance the visual image of the City of Huntington Beach PC Staff Report—09/23/08 10 (08sr42 EIR 07-04) Implementation of the project will change the visual character of the area and introduce new sources of light and glare. The EIR analyzes the potential impacts associated with these changes, including an analysis of impacts to scenic resources and vistas, and the effects of shade and shadow on adjacent uses. The EIR concludes that impacts associated with light and glare from building facades could be potentially significant and recommends Mitigation Measure MM 4.1-1, which restricts the use of reflective materials. In terms of potential impacts associated with light and glare from nighttime lighting, the EIR concludes that impacts will be less than significant. The EIR documents that potential impacts related to scenic resources, views, and shadows will be less than significant and do not warrant mitigation. N. Utilities Element Policy U.1.1.1: Monitor the demands on the water system, manage the development to mitigate impacts and/or facilitate improvements to the water supply and distribution system, and maintain and expand water supply and distribution facilities. Policy U.1.3.2: Continue to require the incorporation of water conservation features in the design of all new and existing uses such as the use of native plants, low flow toilets and water efficient appliances. The EIR includes an analysis of the project's impact on water supply. Implementation of the proposed project would result in an increase in water demand. To minimize the amount of water required to serve the proposed development, consistent with the City's conservation programs and statewide efforts, a Condition of Approval has been identified. Implementation of the Condition of Approval would reduce the impact of water supply to less than significant. Policy U.1.2.2: Require new developments to connect to the sewer system. Policy U.2.1.6: Require that sewer capacity is available before building permits are issued for new development. Implementation of the proposed project could require new sewer connections and construction of new or expanded wastewater conveyance systems. The project would be required to pay a fee for connection to the Orange County Sanitation District, based on the increase in anticipated use of the sewage system. The fee ensures that all users pay their share of any necessary expansion of the system, including expansion to wastewater treatment facilities. These fees are considered full mitigation for potential impacts resulting from project development. CR 4.14-1 requires the preparation of a sewer study, prior to issuance of grading permit, to determine if existing sewer lines need to be upgraded to accommodate the project sewer's flow. This would ensure that the construction of new or expanded wastewater conveyance systems would not cause significant environmental effects. PC Staff Report—09/23/08 11 (08sr42 EIR 07-04) Policy U 3.1.6: During development review, determine if any structures meant for human habitation are constructed within the 100-year flood plain. If necessary, evaluate the structures' flood safety, and require remedial actions. CR 4.7-2, Mitigation Measure 4.7-2, and Condition of Approval 4.7-1 reduce the potential for on-site flooding of underground structures and on-site flood impacts. Obiective U 3.3: Ensure that storm drain facilities (channels and outputs) do not generate significant adverse impacts on the environment in which the facilities traverse or empty. Implementation of the proposed project would require the construction of the new off-site storm drain pipe along Gothard Street, as required by project Condition of Approval CoA 4.7-1. Code Requirement CR 4.7-1 would also be required to ensure that the project runoffs are treated prior to discharge into the City storm drain system. Implementation of existing regulations along with CR 4.7- 1 and CoA 4.7-1 would reduce potential pollutant loads and ensure that appropriate construction and operation of stormwater treatment control Best Management Practices (BMPs) are used. Existing regulatory requirements would ensure that construction of this new off-site stormwater drainage facility would not result in substantial environmental effects and potential impacts would be less than significant. Zoning Compliance: Not applicable. Urban Desimn Guidelines Conformance: Not applicable. Environmental Status: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), EIR No. 07-004 was prepared by PBS&J to analyze the potential environmental impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project as well as identify appropriate mitigation measures. The Draft EIR was distributed to the Planning Commission for review at the start of the 45-day public comment period on July 8, 2008. The Final Draft EIR, including the Response to Comments and all text changes, was distributed to the Planning Commission on September 12, 2008 and posted on the City's website on September 15, 2008. The document must be adopted and certified by the Planning Commission prior to any action on General Plan Amendment No. 07-003, Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001, Zoning Text Amendment No. 07- 004 and Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043. The procedure that was followed during the preparation of EIR No. 07-004 is outlined below: June 2007 Staff conducted an initial study and determined that an EIR would be required. January 18, 2008 A Notice of Preparation was filed with the State Clearinghouse to notify public of intent to prepare an EIR. January 22, 2008 to FebruM 20, Initial Study/Notice of Preparation available for 30 day public 2008 review and comment period. PC Staff Report—09/23/08 12 (08sr42 EIR 07-04) February 7, 2008 A Public Scoping Meeting was held to solicit comments and issue areas to be studied in the EIR. July 8, 2008 A Notice of Completion was filed with the State Clearinghouse. July 8, 2008 to August 21, 2008 Draft EIR available for public review and comment for forty-five days. July 23, 2008 A Public Comment Meeting was held to solicit comments on the adequacy of the Draft EIR. August 26, 2008 Planning Commission Study Session on EIR process. September 12, 2008 Final EIR(including Response to Comments on Draft EIR, Text Changes to Draft EIR and Comments) made available for public information and sent to Responsible Agencies. (CEQA requires Response to Comments be sent to Responsible Agencies 10 days prior to certification hearing.) September 23, 2008 Public hearing is scheduled before Planning Commission to Certify EIR No. 07-004. Through the use of appropriate mitigation measures identified in the EIR, the majority of the potentially adverse impacts associated with the project can be mitigated to a level of insignificance. There are, however, four adverse environmental impacts anticipated from the proposed project that cannot be completely eliminated through mitigation measures. The adverse environmental impacts are as follows: Population and Housing ■ The project would have a considerable contribution to the cumulative population growth, exceeding the SCAG population projections for the City for 2015. Because of this substantial increase,the cumulative impact is considered significant and unavoidable. Traffic ■ The project would have a significant contribution to the deficiency of the I-405 northbound loop ramp from Beach Boulevard in both the AM and PM peak hours in 2014. ■ The project would have a long-range significant impact, at the project level, at the intersection of the 1-405 southbound ramps at Center Avenue during the PM peak hour in 2030. In addition, the project contributes traffic to deficiencies on 1-405 in 2030. ■ The project would have a long-range significant and unavoidable impact, at the cumulative level, at the intersection of the 1-405 southbound ramps and Center Avenue during the PM peak hour in 2030. Environmental impacts associated with implementation of a project may not always be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. In such cases, a Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC) must be prepared prior to approval of the project. The SOC would describe the specific reasons for approving the PC Staff Report—09/23/08 13 (08sr42 EIR 07-04) project, based on information contained within the Final EIR, as well as any other information in the public record. The SOC for The Ripcurl project is part of the Conditional Use Permit staff report. Environmental Board: The City's Environmental Board reviewed the EIR and provided a comment letter during the public review period. The letter has been responded to in the Response to Comments. In summary, the Board commented on the following: traffic, green building, parking, crime, open space, zone change, and health concerns related to the SCE Towers. Coastal Status: Not applicable Redevelopment Status: Not applicable Desimn Review Board: Not applicable. Subdivision Committee: Not applicable. Other Departments Concerns and Requirements: The EIR was circulated to other Departments for review and comment. All Department comments and recommendations are incorporated into the EIR and its mitigation measures. As development of the proposed project occurs, compliance with mitigation measures will be enforced through the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Public Notification: Legal notice was published in the Huntington Beach Independent on September 11, 2008, and notices were sent to property owners of record and occupants within a 500 ft. radius of the subject property, individuals/organizations requesting notification (Planning Department's Notification Matrix), applicant, interested parties, and individuals/organizations that commented on the environmental document. As of September 15, 2008, no communication supporting or opposing the request, other than letters included in the Final EIR/Response to Comments have been received. Application Processing Dates: DATE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: MANDATORY PROCESSING DATE(a Draft EIR: July 8, 2008 Within 1 year of complete application or by July 8, 2009 General Plan Amendment: Not Applicable Not Applicable Zoning Map Amendment: Not Applicable Not Applicable Zoning Text Amendment: Not Applicable Not Applicable Conditional Use Permit: August 5, 2008 Within 180 days from EIR Certification PC Staff Report—09/23/08 14 (08sr42 EIR 07-04) ANALYSIS: The analysis section provides an overview of the EIR and its conclusions, a review of the project alternatives and, a summary of the response to comments. EIR Overview The EIR provides a detailed analysis of potential impacts associated with the proposed project. It is intended to serve as an informational document for decisions to be made by the City and responsible agencies regarding the project. The issues discussed in the EIR are those that have been identified in the course of extensive review of all potentially significant environmental impacts associated with the project. The EIR discusses potential adverse impacts in 14 issue areas. The direct, indirect and cumulative impacts of the project are addressed, as are the impacts of project alternatives. A summary of key issues and mitigation measures as a result of the environmental impact report process is provided below. A complete listing of the recommended mitigation measures is provided in the Mitigation Monitoring Program provided as Attachment No. 3. o Aesthetics Implementation of the project will change the visual character of the area and introduce new sources of light and glare. The EIR analyzes the potential impacts associated with these changes, including an analysis of impacts to scenic resources and vistas, and the effects of shadows on adjacent uses. The EIR concludes that impacts associated with light and glare from building facades could be potentially significant and recommends Mitigation Measure MM 4.1-1, which restricts the use of reflective materials. In terms of potential impacts associated with light and glare from nighttime lighting, the EIR concludes that impacts will be less than significant. The EIR documents that potential impacts related to scenic resources, views, and shadows will be less than significant and do not warrant mitigation. o Air Quality Air quality modeling was completed by PBS&J to assess potential impacts related to construction and operation of the project. Consistent with the South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD) recommendations, the EIR analyzed the following emissions: Ozone (03), Carbon Monoxide (CO), Respirable Particulate Matter (PM10) and Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5), Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), Sulfur Dioxide (SO2), Lead (Pb), and Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs). In addition, the EIR examined if localized CO concentrations at nearby intersections would be increased beyond state and national standards as a result of increased vehicle traffic. The EIR concludes that construction of the proposed project will have less than significant air quality impacts with compliance with standard requirements such as SCAQMD's Rule 403 related to fugitive dust during construction. The EIR discusses five standard City requirements to improve air quality emissions. CR 4.21-1 through 4.2-5 would require signage of contact information of the contractor's superintendent, noticing of grading activity to all property owners and tenants, a grading/erosion control plan, minimizing construction disturbance, and installation of wind barriers. The EIR also recommends two mitigation measures to further reduce air quality impacts. MM 4.2-1 would require all construction equipment be turned off when not in use and MM 4.2-2 would require the use of low VOC paints on all PC Staff Report—09/23/08 15 (08sr42 EIR 07-04) exterior surfaces at the proposed project site. The operation of the project will not generate daily emissions that exceed the thresholds of significance, resulting in a less than significant impact. In addition, the proposed project will not cause localized CO concentrations at nearby intersections to exceed national or state ambient air quality standards. The EIR concludes that construction and operation of the proposed project would contribute to greenhouse gas emissions, particularly from mobile sources such as motor vehicles traveling to and from the site and stationary sources such as natural gas combustion for heating and electricity consumption. This impact is considered to be less than significant due to the type and size of the proposed project and the incorporation of design features and greenhouse gas emission reduction measures into the project. The project's adherence to California Air Pollution Control Officers Association's measures for reducing climate change emissions would ensure that construction and operational impacts from the project remain less than significant with respect to climate change. ♦ Biological Resources The EIR includes an analysis of potential impacts to plant and wildlife. Although the EIR concludes no significant impacts to biological resources, a mitigation measure is recommended to address potential impacts to migratory avian species that may use portions of the site or the large trees adjacent to the site for nesting during breeding season. Mitigation Measure MM 4.3-1 entails nesting surveys, avoidance measures, and appropriate agency consultation for sensitive species. ♦ Cultural Resources According to the cultural resources records check completed for the project, five previous cultural resources investigations have been conducted within a half-mile radius of the project site, one of which (OR1) was located within the project site. The investigation on the project site, OR1, was performed in 1973. The existing commercial shopping center was constructed after this study was performed (in 1979). The EIR concludes that because the project site and vicinity are known to be archaeologically sensitive, the potential exists for unanticipated finds of archaeological resources during ground-disturbing activities associated with project implementation, even though portions of the site near the ground surface have previously been disturbed. The EIR recommends three mitigation measures to reduce impacts to these resources, if found, to less than significant, including on-site monitors during grading, trenching and other excavation activities. MM 4.4-1 would require a qualified professional archaeological and paleontological to be present during all project-related ground-disturbing activities. MM 4.4-2 would require all construction activities to cease until the archaeologist/paleontologist evaluates the significant of the resource. MM 4.4-3 would require the halting of excavation or grading activities if a burial, human bone, or suspected human bone is discovered. ♦ Geology and Soils The EIR includes an analysis of existing geology, seismicity and soil conditions that would be conducive to geological constraints such as liquefaction or expansive soils. The analysis is based on the preliminary geotechnical study completed for the project, which determined that the project is feasible from a geotechnical perspective. The EIR concludes that implementation of the project will require the submittal of a detailed soils and geotechnical analysis and compliance with Mitigation Measure 4.5-1 to minimize PC Staff Report—09/23/08 16 (08sr42 EIR 07-04) potential impacts to less than significant levels. The mitigation measure requires compliance with the recommendations of all soils and geotechnical studies. e Hazards and Hazardous Materials The EIR analyzes the potential for adverse impacts associated with hazardous materials on human health and the environment resulting from project implementation. The proposed project site was in agricultural use beginning sometime prior to 1938. In 1979, the project site was cleared and developed as a shopping center, which is its current use. No above-ground storage tanks or underground storage tanks were reported on the project site. Based on the date of building construction (1979), there is a potential for asbestos-containing materials and lead-based paint to be present on site. The EIR identifies two mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts to a level of insignificance. MM 4.6-1 would require a Risk Management Plan to be prepared and implemented if contaminants are encountered during construction and MM 4.6-2 would require appropriate testing and methods of methane gas detection to be implemented at the project site. ♦ Hydrology and Water Quality Construction and operation of the proposed project would increase stormwater pollutant loads which could result in a violation of waste water discharge requirements or water quality standards. All construction activities would be subject to existing regulations, which are considered protective of water quality and would therefore prevent violation of water quality standards during construction activities. In addition, implementation of the proposed project would alter the project site runoff characteristics that could result in more on-site erosion and off-site siltation. Code requirement CR 4.7-1 requires that a Final WQMP be prepared in order to ensure that pollutants in stormwater runoff are reduced to the maximum extent practicable. In addition, Condition of Approval (CoA) 4.7-1 requires the project developer to construct an underground storm drain pipe along the east side of Gothard Street to connect to the existing, underground Edinger Avenue storm drain pipe. Implementation of the existing regulations along with code requirement CR 4.7-1 and project conditions of approval CoA 4.7-1 would reduce potential pollutant loads and ensure that appropriate Best Management Practices are used. The existing project site exceeds the capacity of the existing storm drain system, and the project would contribute to that exceedance. Implementation of mitigation measure MM 4.7-1 would require the Applicant to prepare a Hydrology and Hydraulics Report and Drainage Plan that incorporates stormwater attenuation to reduce project site runoff to meet City design standards for stormflow in Gothard Street. This would ensure that storm drain system capacity is not exceeded and there would be no human health or environmental hazards associated with implementation of stormwater detention and dewatering. Project condition of approval CoA 4.7-2 requires the Applicant to prepare a site Grading and Drainage Plan containing the recommendations of the final Soils and Geotechnical Reports analysis for temporary and permanent groundwater dewatering as well as for surface drainage. This would serve to minimize potential effects of temporary or permanent groundwater dewatering. Because development would occur within a FEMA-defined flood hazard area Zone A and City Floodplain Overlay F2 designated area, Code Requirement CR 4.7-2 requires that the Applicant design and implement the proposed project in accordance with the requirements in the HBZSO as it pertains to floodproofing. In addition, Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-2 requires the applicant to design and implement PC Staff Report—09/23/08 17 (08sr42 EIR 07-04) project site drainage features to minimize stormwater runoff and flood waters from entering into below- ground structures or otherwise contribute to flood hazards. Implementation of existing code requirements CR 4.7-2 and mitigation measures MM 4.7-1 and MM 4.7-2, along with project conditions of approval CoA 4.7-1,would reduce the potential for on-site flooding of underground structures and other areas. ♦ Land Use The proposed project includes a mixed-use residential and commercial development. Implementation of the proposed project would require amendments to the General Plan and Zoning land use designations to change the existing Commercial designations to Mixed Use designations. In addition, the proposed project would require an amendment to the HBZSO to establish the Mixed Use Transit Center District zoning and development standards. The EIR analyzes the General Plan and Zoning redesignation of the project site from Commercial General to Mixed Use and the proposed Zoning Text Amendment. Since the project area and surrounding vicinity is targeted for revitalization activities, including high-density mixed use developments, the change in land use designation is consistent with the vision for the area and the policies encouraging mix of uses that are compatible and harmonious with surrounding development. The EIR concludes that the proposed project would represent a new land use on the site and in the immediate area but would not in itself result in environmental impacts related to land use and planning. The project would be consistent with the applicable goals, objectives, and policies of the General Plan. As such, there will not be any significant land use impacts as a result of the project. ♦ Noise Potential noise impacts relate to short-term construction activities and long-term changes in ambient conditions related to an increase in traffic. Ambient noise levels were measured at five locations around the project site and roadway noise levels were calculated using data from the traffic study. In terms of the short-term noise impacts from construction, the City's noise ordinance exempts noise associated with construction provided the construction takes place between the hours of 7:00 A.M. and 8:00 P.M. Monday through Saturday. Despite this exemption, to further reduce less-than-significant impacts the EIR recommends Mitigation Measure MM 4.9-1 to implement noise attenuation measures that may include the use of noise barriers or noise blankets. The EIR also identifies the potential for construction-related noise impacts to noise-sensitive sites such as Golden West College. Mitigation Measure MM 4.9-2 is recommended to require the construction staging areas and earthmoving equipment be located as far away from noise and vibration-sensitive land uses as possible to reduce these impacts. The EIR also examined the potential for noise impacts associated with traffic related noise on other street segments in the project vicinity and concluded that no significant impacts would occur. ♦ Population and Housing This section of the EIR analyzes the potential for the project to induce population and employment growth beyond current growth projections and the impacts on housing. As the proposed project site is currently designated for commercial uses, increased population on the site has not been anticipated in the General Plan. However, the project would provide needed housing to the City and the region, contributing to the City's progress towards meeting its Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) numbers. Further, with a projected population increase of 1,060 persons, the project would represent only a 0.52 percent increase PC Staff Report—09/23/08 18 (08sr42 EIR 07-04) in population compared to current 2008 conditions. Thus, these project impacts are insignificant. The EIR documents that the project does not yet have a fully defined or approved affordable housing plan. Code Requirement CR 4.10-1, describing the need to comply with the Zoning Code Affordable Housing provisions, is included to ensure that impacts relative to the provision of affordable housing are less than significant. The proposed project would develop uses that, in combination with cumulative development anticipated in the Beach-Edinger Specific Plan area, would increase population and housing opportunities in Huntington Beach and in neighboring cities. This growth would serve the existing population and help to meet anticipated housing demand in the City and County. However, because all cumulative residential development would contribute to the substantial exceedance of SCAG population projections for the City in the 2015 timeframe, the proposed project would have a considerable contribution to the cumulative impact. Therefore,this cumulative impact is considered significant and unavoidable. ♦ Public Services The EIR evaluates the effects of the proposed project on public services (fire, police, schools and libraries) by identifying anticipated demands on existing and planned service availability. Both the Fire and Police Departments concluded that they have adequate staffing to serve the project. Mitigation Measure MM 4.11-1 requiring radio antenna receivers to be installed in all underground parking structures is recommended to facilitate police response and service in the proposed building. The existing library facilities are reasonably adequate to accommodate the increase in users from the proposed project. However, implementation of code requirement CR 4.11-3, payment of library and community enrichment impact fees, would ensure that the increased growth would be adequately planned for in advance of project development. Direct population growth resulting from the proposed project would not have an adverse impact on the capacity of schools within the schools serving the project site as they are below capacity. With the implementation of code requirements CR 4.11-1 and CR 4.11-2, fees collected would offset any additional increase in educational demand at the elementary school, middle school, and high school serving the project site. ♦ Recreation The City requires that new residential projects dedicate parkland, improve parkland, pay park in-lieu fees, or some combination thereof, to ensure that adequate recreation facilities are available. The proposed project does not include dedicated open space or parklands nor is it required to provide dedication per the HBZSO. With the implementation of code requirement CR 4.12-1, payment of applicable open space and park fees would help acquire, develop, improve, and expand the City's open space and parkland inventory. With implementation of this code requirement, no significant impacts to recreation opportunities are expected. ♦ Transportation/Traffic The EIR examines the potential impacts related to traffic generation, parking demand and access. A project specific traffic study was completed that includes an analysis of traffic conditions in Year 2014 and Year 2030 to assess potential impacts at project buildout and the long-term effect of the project in conjunction with other growth within the city. PC Staff Report—09/23/08 19 (08sr42 EIR 07-04) The EIR documents that the project would result in a deficiency of the 1-405 northbound loop ramp from Beach Boulevard in both the AM and PM peak hours in the Year 2014. Since traffic would be added to an existing deficiency (LOS E), impacts are considered significant and unavoidable. The proposed project would also result in a significant impact (from LOS D to LOS E) at the intersection of the 1-405 southbound ramps at Center Avenue during the PM peak hour in the Year 2030. Implementation of mitigation measure MM 4.13-1 would improve conditions significantly, resulting in a PM peak hour LOS of C. The impacted intersection is owned by Caltrans and implementation of the proposed mitigation measure would be dependent on factors outside the control of both the City of Huntington Beach and the project applicant. The EIR documents that if the General Plan Amendment for The Village at Bella Terra is approved, the project's contribution to the cumulative impact on the intersection of the 1-405 Freeway Southbound ramps at Center Avenue during the PM peak hours in Year 2030 would be less than significant. The project would provide a total of 705 parking spaces. Based on the parking requirements of the HBZSO, 798 parking spaces would be required. Based on the proposed Mixed-Use Transit Center District, 622 parking spaces would be required. Depending on whether the City approves the proposed new zoning, the proposed parking spaces may or may not comply with parking standards. The proposed project would ultimately be required to comply with the parking standards whatever the standards may be. The proposed project would have three access locations. To ensure safe construction of project intersections, code requirements CR 4.13-1 and CR 4.13-2 would require adequate sight distance and intersection traffic control in order to minimize potential hazards. s Utilities and Service Systems This section of the EIR analyzes potential impacts to water, wastewater and solid waste services. Implementation of the proposed project would result in an increase in water demand. To ensure that the City has a sufficient supply of water available to serve the proposed development consistent with the City's conservation programs and statewide efforts, a Condition of Approval has been identified. Implementation of the proposed project could require new sewer connections and construction of new or expanded wastewater conveyance systems. Code requirement CR 4.14-1, requiring a sewer study to determine if existing sewer lines need to be upgraded to accommodate the project's sewer flow, would ensure that the construction of new or expanded wastewater conveyance systems would not cause significant environmental effects. The proposed project would involve the construction and operation of stormwater treatment control Best Management Practices (BMPs) that would be identified in a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP). The City has general/standard conditions of approval to protect receiving water quality from short- and long-term impacts of new development which include code requirements CR 4.14-2 and CR 4.14-3 relating to submittal of storm drain plans and specifications. The EIR concludes impacts related to solid waste and energy would be less than significant. Alternatives to the Proposed Project CEQA requires that an EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project or its location that could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the project, but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant impacts of the project. An EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative to a project; rather, it must consider a range of potentially feasible alternatives that will foster informed decision- making and public participation. An EIR should also evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. PC Staff Report—09/23/08 20 (08sr42 EIR 07-04) Four alternatives were selected for detailed analysis in the Draft EIR: ® Alternative l: No Project/No Development Alternative — Maintains the project site in its current state. ■ Alternative 2: No Project/Continuation of Uses Allowed by Existing General Plan Alternative — Assumes the site would remain as commercial general as identified in the existing General Plan. Growth could occur through existing permitted development or increased tenant use. • Alternative 3: Reduced Project Alternative — Option 1 — Analyzes a reduced intensity of the proposed project: development of 440 residential units and elimination of 10,000 sq. ft. of retail use. ® Alternative 4: Reduced Project Alternative — Option 2 — Analyzes a reduced intensity of the proposed project: development of 385 residential units and 8,500 sq. ft. of retail use. Alternative 1 would result in no new environmental effects but would not meet the identified project objectives. Alternative 2 would not result in any new environmental effects but would not meet the identified project objectives. Alternative 3 would result in similar impacts as the proposed project in all areas except for the areas of traffic, air quality and noise where the impacts are slightly less. Traffic would be reduced seven percent but would remain significant. While this Alternative may result in a slight reduction of most environmental impacts, it would not necessarily reduce the significance of the impacts below the proposed project. Alternative 3 would satisfy some, but not all of the identified project objectives related to the development of dense residential uses within close proximity to transit, schools, and regional activities. However, objectives related to the creation of a mixed-use development with retail uses would not be met. Alternative 4 would result in similar impacts as the proposed project in the areas of aesthetics, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use, recreation, and utilities and services systems (except for water demand). Alternative 4 would result in impacts that are slightly less than the proposed project in areas of air quality, noise, population and housing, and public services. In the area of transportation/traffic, Alternative 4 would result in impacts that are less than the proposed project. Implementation of this Alternative would reduce the significant and unavoidable traffic impact caused by the proposed project to a less-than-significant level. Alternative 4 would satisfy all of the identified project objectives related to developing dense residential uses within close proximity to transit, schools, and regional activities as well as retail opportunities. The Draft EIR identifies Alternative 4 as the environmentally superior alternative. Statement of Overriding Considerations Environmental impacts associated with implementation of a project may not always be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. In such cases, a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be prepared prior to approval of the project, and in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091 and 15093. Because implementation of the proposed project would create significant unavoidable impacts as described above in the Transportation/Traffic and Population and Housing sections, a Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC) is required to describe the specific reasons for approving the project, based on information contained within the Final EIR, as well as any other information in the public record. The SOC is part of the companion report for this project. PC Staff Report—09/23/08 21 (08sr42 EIR 07-04) Public Comments on the Draft EIR and Errata Changes During the public review period, the City of Huntington Beach received a total of 14 comment letters from three state agencies, two regional agencies, two organizations, and seven individuals, as well as some verbal comments at the public meeting held during the comment period. The most frequent verbal and written comments relate to traffic congestion, density, parking provision, and population increase. The comments resulted in the need for one minor change to the EIR document itself to add clarifying language regarding the floodplain in response to a comment from the County of Orange; however, the changes do not change the conclusions of the EIR analysis. All of the other comments are adequately addressed in the Response to Comments, including a response regarding the bikeway comment from the County. The Final EIR includes a number of other revised text sections as a result of needed corrections as identified by staff or the applicant and in response to comments from the Planning Commission at the August 261h Study Session. Notably, the discussion of height and parking has been updated and corrected. As explained in the Response to Comments, the height of the building had been shown as measured by the Uniform Building Code. The EIR has been corrected to reflect the height as measured by the HBZSO; as a consequence, the measurement has increased. Staff has also corrected the information on the amount of parking included in the EIR. The Draft EIR had only discussed the number of parking spaces provided for the units and did not include the spaces that were provided for guests, although these were included on the plans included in the Draft EIR. The Final EIR includes an updated analysis of parking for the project. In response to the Planning Commission's comments at the Study Session, the following information has been added to the EIR regarding: • clarification of the 10,000 square feet of commercial space, • the square footage range of the proposed residential units, ■ a description of the Transit Center District, ■ additional context language regarding green house gas emissions analysis, ■ additional analysis related to electromagnetic fields, ■ language indicating the City of Westminster's historic opposition to the Hoover Gothard connection, • a summary table regarding SCAG and City of Huntington Beach General Plan projections, • clarifying language regarding the City's LOS standard and local capture trip methodology, • discussion related to potential traffic hazards due to the curve in Center Avenue, and • additional analysis regarding water supply and water conservation measures. Any written communication received subsequent to the preparation of this staff report will be forwarded to the Planning Commission under separate cover. PC Staff Report—09/23/08 22 (08sr42 EIR 07-04) SUMMARY: Environmental Impact Report No. 07-004 serves as an informational document with the sole purpose of identifying potential environmental impacts associated with The Ripcurl project, alternatives that minimize those impacts, and appropriate mitigation measures. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission certify EIR No. 07-004 because: ■ The EIR has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act; ■ The EIR adequately addresses the environmental impacts associated with the proposed project; and ■ The EIR identifies project alternatives and mitigation measures to lessen the project's impacts consistent with General Plan policies. ATTACHMENTS: 2. Final EIR No. 07 > ft > EIR Appendiees, Response To Comments and Text Changes ✓. Mitigation llgCLl1V11 Moniter-ing and RepaAing Program SH:HF:MBB:TN:lw PC Staff Report—09/23/08 23 (08sr42 EIR 07-04) it 4 ;P h"Phiiih- CRY R_ P 0 R',TT, Hej "i ...E A, TO: Planning Commission FROM: Scott Hess, AICP, Director of Planning BY: Tess Nguyen, Associate Planner DATE: September 23, 2008 SUBJECT: ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 07-004 (HBZSO CHAPTER 218—MIXED USE-TRANSIT CENTER DISTRICT) APPLICANT: Andrew Nelson/Alex Wong, Amstar/Red Oak Huntington Beach, LLC, 2101 Business Center Drive #230, Irvine CA 92612 LOCATION: Proposed to be available for use by Properties Within One-Quarter Mile Radius of an Established Transit Center(see Attachment No. 5) STATEMENT OF ISSUE: + Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004 represents a request for the following: - To amend the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance by adding Chapter 218 to establish the Mixed Use-Transit Center District zoning and development standards. * Staff s Recommendation: Approve Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004 based upon the following: - Consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element designation of Mixed Use that allows for vertically and horizontally integrated housing uses and commercial uses. - Facilitates mixed-use development that produces an environment that is both attractive and sustainable by increasing housing options for diverse household types, promoting alternative modes of transportation, creating a local sense of place, reducing infrastructure and maintenance costs, and allowing for more efficient use of land resources. - Consistent with good zoning practice and implements the goals of smart growth and sustainable development. Environmental Impact Report No. 07-004 is being processed concurrently with this entitlement and is addressed under a separate staff report. It is necessary for the Planning Commission to review and act on Environmental Impact Report No. 07-004 prior to action on this entitlement. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: "Approve Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004 with findings for approval (Attachment No. 1) and forward the draft Ordinance (Attachment No. 3)to the City Council for adoption." PC Staff Report—9/23/08 (06sr43 ZTA 07-04) ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): The Planning Commission may take alternative actions such as: 1. "Continue Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004 and direct staff accordingly." 2. "Deny Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004 with findings for denial." PROJECT PROPOSAL: Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004 represents a request by the applicant to amend the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance (HBZSO) by adding Chapter 218 to establish the Mixed Use- Transit Center District zoning and development standards. The key components of the proposed ordinance, as originally proposed by the applicant, are: ® location near a transit center • minimum lot size of one acre • maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 3.0 ® residential density of 130 units per acre ® maximum building height of 76 feet • parking requirements consistent with the HBZSO except for guest parking and for the allowance of compact and tandem parking spaces • minimum open space of 150 sq. ft. per residential unit The reason for the request is to establish zoning development standards to facilitate development of The Ripcurl project, also analyzed in EIR No. 07-004, as well as a companion report for General Plan Amendment No. 07-003, Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001 and Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043. However, the proposed ordinance has applicability beyond The Ripcurl site. The analysis presented below takes this into consideration and evaluates the proposed ordinance on its merits, independent of The Ripcurl project. ISSUES: General Plan Conformance: The proposed Zoning district is consistent with the following goals, objectives, and policies of the City's General Plan: A. Air Quality Element Policy AO 1.5.1: Encourage residential and commercial growth to occur in and around existing activity centers and transportation corridors in accordance with the Land Use Map (Figure LU-1). PolicyAQ 1.10.1: Continue to require the utilization and installation of energy conservation features in all new construction. PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -2- (06sr43 ZTA 07-04) B. Circulation Element Obiective CE 3.2: Encourage new development that promotes and expands the use of transit services. C. Growth Management Element Policy GM 3.1.8: Promote traffic reduction strategies including alternate travel modes, alternate work hours, and a decrease of vehicle trips throughout the city. D. Housing,'Element Policy H 2.2: Facilitate the development of mixed-use projects in appropriate commercial areas, including stand-alone residential development (horizontal mixed-use) and housing above ground floor commercial uses (vertical mixed-use). Establish mixed use zoning regulations. Policy H 3.1: Encourage the production of housing that meets all economic segments of the community, including lower, moderate, and upper income households, to maintain a balanced community. E. Land Use Element Goal LU 9: Achieve the development of a range of housing units that provides for the diverse economic, physical, and social needs of existing and future residents of Huntington Beach. Goal LU 11: Achieve the development of projects that enable residents to live in proximity to their jobs, commercial services, and entertainment, and reduce the need for automobile use. Policy LU 11.1.2: Limit commercial uses in mixed-use development projects to those uses that are compatible with the residences. Policy LU 11.1.4: Require the incorporation of adequate onsite open space and recreational facilities to serve the needs of the residents in mixed-use development projects. Policy LU 11.1.6: Require that the ground floor of structures that horizontally integrate housing with commercial uses locate commercial uses along the street frontage (housing may be located to the rear and/or on upper floors). PolicyLU 11.1.7: Require that mixed-use development projects be designed to achieve a consistent and high quality character, including the consideration of the: a. Visual and physical integration among the commercial and residential uses (Plates LU-3 and LU-4); b. Architectural treatment of building elevations to convey the visual character of multiple building volumes and individual storefronts and residential units. PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -3- (06sr43 ZTA 07-04) F. Urban Design Element Goal UD 1.1: Enhance the visual image of the City of Huntington Beach The proposed zoning text would allow for transit-oriented developments that provide a concentration of living, shopping, entertainment, educational, and employment opportunities within walking distance of a transit hub. These developments would promote the use of transit services as an alternative to reliance on the automobile as the primary mode of transportation. Because these projects are located in close proximity to different activities and uses, they provide opportunities and convenience for many households to use alternate travel modes such as walking and biking to complete their daily routines and run errands. The proposed zoning text would facilitate development of mixed-use, high-density projects that offer a wide range of housing opportunities and options, accommodating different age groups, income levels, and household types. These developments would promote residential and commercial buildings that are designed to convey a high quality visual image and character and ensure compatibility of these uses. The proposed mix of retail and residential uses of these developments would activate the urban environment and revitalize community life. The zoning regulations under the proposed Mixed Use- Transit Center District would allow for developments that are both attractive and sustainable by increasing housing options for diverse household types,promoting alternative modes of transportation, creating a local sense of place, reducing infrastructure and maintenance costs, and allowing for more efficient use of land resources. The proposed zoning text would require sustainable or "green" building practices to be incorporated into the design of proposed structures and associated site improvements. Sustainable building practices would include those recommended by the U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Program certification or Build It Green's Green Building Guidelines and Rating Systems. Zoning Compliance: This is a new chapter of the HBZSO and adds Chapter 218 to establish Mixed Use-Transit Center District zoning and development standards. As recommended by staff, the new zoning standards would be available to properties within one-quarter mile of an existing transit center. (Note: this would require individual properties to gain approval of a general plan amendment and a zoning map amendment, similar to what the applicant is requesting for The Ripcurl project). The analysis of the standards is provided below. Public Notification: Legal notice was published in the Huntington Beach Independent on September 11, 2008, and notices were sent to property owners of record and occupants within a 500 ft. radius of the project site, individuals/organizations requesting notification (Planning Department's Notification Matrix), applicant, interested parties, and individuals/organizations that commented on the environmental document. PC Staff Report—9/23/08 4- (06sr43 ZTA 07-04) Application Processing Dates: DATE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: MANDATORY PROCESSING DATE(S): Zoning Text Amendment: Not Applicable Not Applicable ANALYSIS: The proposed Zoning Text Amendment involves a request to amend the HBZSO by adding Chapter 218 to establish the Mixed Use-Transit Center District zoning and development standards. The analysis below reviews 1) the overall objectives of allowing mixed use development, 2) the location criteria recommended by staff, and 3)the proposed development standards. Mixed Use Development The growing trend towards mixed land use development in Southern California is part of the larger shift in thinking about managing future growth. As the population continues to increase and protecting the environment takes on new importance, smart growth and sustainable development have become more vital as communities consider their futures. Smart growth focuses on sustainable long-term strategies for managing the growth of communities. It is designed to create livable cities, promote economic development, minimize dependence on auto transportation, reduce air pollution, and make infrastructure investments more efficient. The following are smart growth principles: ■ mix land uses ® take advantage of compact building design • create a range of housing opportunities and choices ■ create walkable neighborhoods ■ foster distinctive, attractive communities with a strong sense of place ■ preserve open space, farmland, natural beauty and critical environmental areas ® strengthen and direct development towards existing communities • provide a variety of transportation choices ■ make development decisions predictable, fair and cost-effective ■ encourage community and stakeholder collaboration in development decisions Mixed use development promotes the concepts of smart growth and sustainable communities. The integration of mixed land uses into communities is a critical component of achieving better places to live. Mixed land uses provide a more diverse and sizable population and commercial base for supporting viable alternatives to driving such as walking, biking, and public transportation where it is available or may be provided in the future. By increasing travel options, these developments have the potential to reduce dependence on the automobile. The key element in creating walkable neighborhoods is to take advantage of compact building design and higher density development. The close proximity of different yet complementary activities and uses provides convenience for many household types and needs, ranging from completing their daily routines to running errands. The streets, public spaces, and pedestrian-oriented retail become places where people meet, attracting pedestrians back onto the streets and revitalizing community life. Higher density PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -5- (06sr43 ZTA 07-04) development contributes to a wider range of housing opportunities and options, accommodating different age groups, income levels, and household types. The increased density of mixed use developments allows for more efficient use of land resources by utilizing less land area and reduces infrastructure and maintenance costs by minimizing the need for more roads, water lines, sewer lines, etc. Sustainable development has become more critical in the face of dwindling land and environmental resources. By moving closer to efficient use of existing resources and conserving energy through reduced reliance on the automobile, mixed use developments would ensure that communities continue to thrive. The City of Huntington Beach has long recognized the importance of Mixed Use as a land use tool to manage growth and stimulate economic activity within specified areas. As early as 1983, the Downtown Specific Plan was envisioned to implement many of the smart growth, mixed use principles discussed above. Moreover, the City of Huntington Beach General Plan currently contains three Mixed Use land use designations, which apply to numerous areas throughout the city, as well as many objectives and policies that are fulfilled by and foster mixed use development. The proposal to develop mixed use development standards is consistent with the General Plan and has been a needed addition to the HBZSO since the General Plan update in 1996 to provide a zoning category consistent with General Plan policies. In addition, the State Department of Housing and Community Development has acknowledged the importance of mixed use in the provision of needed housing in a community, and the City's recently adopted Housing Element contains a program requiring that the City adopt mixed use standards by 2008/2009. Transit Oriented Development and Location Criteria The proposed Mixed Use-Transit Center District development standards require proximity to transit. Generally referred to as transit-oriented developments (TODs), they advance smart growth goals by creating mixed use, higher density communities and providing a concentration of living, shopping, entertainment, educational, and employment opportunities within walking distance of transit stations. TOD neighborhoods typically occur within one quarter mile, or a five to seven minute walk, of a transit station but can extend to within a half-mile radius. By requiring high quality urban design and attractive pedestrian connections between uses, TODs create a vibrant sense of place. The benefits of TODs include: • creating better places to live, work, and play • reducing dependence on the automobile ® encouraging efficient use of existing land, infrastructure, and services ® promoting transportation alternatives ® lessening pollution and environmental degradation ® providing a variety of housing options The proposed Mixed Use-Transit Center District is targeted to a very specific area where development could occur with minimal impacts to the predominant character of the city of Huntington Beach and the surrounding area. Consistent with the more restrictive industry "standard" referenced above, staff is recommending that the proposed zoning category only be available for properties within one-quarter mile of an established transit center, after processing a general plan amendment and a zoning map amendment. Currently the Golden West Transportation Center is the only such center in the city. As such, the radius does not extend south of Edinger nor does it extend all the way to Goldenwest Street or Beach Boulevard. PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -6- (06sr43 ZTA 07-04) As indicated on the attached map, there are less than 15 commercial sites that would be eligible to use this zoning and a number of these are governed by general plan designations or specific plans that already allow some form of mixed use. Specifically, the one-quarter radius includes portions of the Bella Terra specific plan area, portions of the North Huntington Center specific plan area, and portions of the area proposed to be included in the Beach Edinger Specific Plan that would allow mixed use. In addition, the radius includes part of the Goldenwest College campus. In terms of properties that could more realistically benefit from the zoning category, the radius includes The Ripcurl site, the Levitz site, the redevelopment agency-owned property east of the Transit center, and the commercial property at the northwest corner of Gothard and Edinger. All of these properties are located a reasonable distance from detached single family neighborhoods such that redevelopment of these properties pursuant to the proposed zoning standards would not result in compatibility issues, nor undermine the suburban, and urban, fabric of the city. The restriction of the proposed Mixed Use-Transit Center District zoning to within one-quarter radius of the existing transit center is consistent with the current planning efforts envisioned for the general area such as the Beach-Edinger Corridor Specific Plan and The Village at Bella Terra proposal. Planned for more intensive growth, the vision of the revitalization efforts is to transform the area into a hub of high- density mixed-use development that fits within its urban context. Proposed Development Standards The table below summarizes the development standards of the Mixed Use-Transit Center District proposed by the applicant and recommended by staff. Where staffs recommendation differs from the applicant's submittal, staff s recommendation is shown in bold text. The legislative draft (Attachment No. 2) and draft ordinance (Attachment No. 3) contain the entire chapter. The applicant has provided a letter indicating agreement with some of staff s recommended changes (Attachment No. 6). ... WA Minimum Lot Area 43,560 sq. ft. 43,560 sq. ft. Minimum Lot Width 100 ft. 100 ft. Setbacks Front 5 ft. 5 ft. Side 5 ft. 10 ft. Rear 5 ft. 10 ft. Maximum Height of Structures 76 ft. 80 ft. (a minimum of 2 stories and a maximum of 6 stories Maximum Floor Area Ratio(FAR) 3.0 2.5 Minimum Site Landscaping 8% 8% Minimum Lot Area per Dwelling Unit 335 sq. ft. -- Minimum Residential Floor Area Studio 450 sq. ft. each dwelling unit shall have a One Bedroom 550 sq. ft. minimum floor area of 450 sq. Two Bedrooms 800 sq. ft. ft. Three or More Bedrooms 1000 sq. ft. PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -7- (06sr43 ZTA 07-04) .......... - Minimum Open Space Per Residential Unit 150 sq. ft. 150 sq. ft. Private Open Space 60 sq. ft. Minimum Dimension 5 ft. 6 ft. Off-Street Parking and Loading Studio/One Bedroom I space per unit I space per unit Two Bedrooms 2 spaces per unit 2 spaces per unit Three or More Bedrooms 2.5 spaces per unit 2.5 spaces per unit Guest Parking I space per 10 units I space per 4 units Compact and tandem spaces shall No compact or tandem spaces be allowed. Tandem parking spaces shall be allowed. shall be counted as V2of a space. Not more than 25% of the project parking requirement shall be met by any combination of compact or tandem parking spaces. Building Design Standards 1)the maximum building length shall be 300 ft.,with exceptions for a 20 foot inset 2) the maximum block size shall be 2,400 feet. Private Storage Space 50 cu. ft. per unit In reviewing the applicant's proposed Mixed Use-Transit Center District standards, staff compared the proposed zoning and development standards with the current HBZSO and the draft standards being considered for the Beach Edinger Specific Plan (Attachment No. 4). Staff also researched Planning literature and other mixed use ordinances from similar cities in size and development pattern. The major staff recommended modifications are discussed below: Setbacks The side and rear setbacks are recommended to be 10 feet instead 5 feet to allow more areas to be utilized for open space or landscaping. In addition,the building bulk and mass would be minimized. Maximum Height of Structures The maximum building height is recommended to be 80 feet instead of 76 feet with the requirement that a minimum of 2 stories and a maximum of 6 stories be allowed. The limitation on the number of stories, rather than the building measurement, allows flexibility in the provision of higher ceilings in the building. Maximum Floor Area Ratio The maximum floor area ratio is recommended to be 2.5 instead of 3.0, factoring in a mechanism to limit the building bulk and mass. Minimum Lot Area per Dwelling Unit No minimum lot area per dwelling unit or density is recommended for this Zoning district. Because this zoning district is intended to facilitate higher densities and more compact mixed use developments, this PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -8- (06sr43 ZTA 07-04) allows for more flexibility to design a project that is suitable for the site using development standards such as setbacks, building height, maximum floor area ratio, maximum site coverage, minimum open space, minimum parking requirements, and building design standards, consistent with Form Based Codes, which are often used to implement mixed use development. Minimum Residential Floor Area The minimum size of a dwelling unit is recommended to be 450 square feet instead of specifying the minimum size for each of the unit types. This allows the developer flexibility to determine the unit sizes based on the market demand. Minimum Open Space The minimum private open space is recommended to be 60 square feet with the minimum dimension of 6 feet. This is consistent with other cities requirements for mixed use projects and ensures an adequate amount of private balcony or patio area. Off-Street Parking and Loading The guest parking requirement is recommended to be one space for every 4 units instead of one space for every 10 units. Research of planning literature and other mixed use ordinances from similar cities in size and development pattern show that there is a benefit to reducing the parking requirement for mixed-use projects because of the interplay between the commercial and residential uses. Because of this, the guest parking requirement of one space for every 4 units is appropriate. No compact or tandem parking spaces are recommended to be allowed. Research of regulations from other cities indicates that compact or tandem are generally not allowed for mixed use projects. In addition, the current HBZSO does not allow compact and tandem parking spaces. Building Design Standards The following building design standards are recommended: 1) the maximum building length shall be 300 feet with exceptions for 20 feet building insets; and 2)the maximum block size shall be 2,400 feet. These requirements would minimize the size of the project as well as the building mass and bulk and stem from the draft Beach Edinger Specific Plan. Private Storage Space The private storage space requirement is recommended to be 50 cubic feet per unit. Given the size the units, individuals might need extra storage space outside of the units that is enclosed and lockable. Other cities require private storage space for multi-family development. Summary The proposed Zoning Text Amendment would implement the policies of the General Plan and the goals of smart growth and sustainable development. The new zoning and development standards would create mixed-use, high density developments that promote the use of transit service, reduce dependence on the automobile, encourage a wide range of housing options, and take advantage of the adjacency of complementary uses in order to build vibrant livable communities. The recommended Mixed Use Transit Center District development standards would facilitate the types of projects to promote the benefits of PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -9- (06sr43 ZTA 07-04) transit-oriented development. The requirements for setbacks, height, maximum floor area ratio, and building design would ensure that the bulk and mass of buildings are minimized. The requirements for parking, open space, and unit size would make sure that developments fit within an urban context without impacting the surrounding area. Having no specified density requirements would allow flexibility in designing a compact development within the parameters of applicable development standards. The benefits of transit-oriented developments transcend the form of the built environment and focus on the function of the social environment in creating a sense of place and revitalizing community life. For these reasons, staff recommends the Planning Commission approve Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Suggested Findings for-Zoning Text Amendment No. 07 004 2. Legislative Draft of Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004 3. Dr-aft Ordi nee for-Zoning Text o,,,o„ameftt No. 07 004 4. Comparison Between the Mixed Use Transit Center District, the HBZSO and draft standards for the Beach Edinger Specific Plan 5. Exhibit Showing Pr-epei4ies Within One Quafter-Mile Radius of the Transit Center 6. het4er-fiem Red Oak investmeats Regarding Proposed Standards dated September- 16, 2008 SH:HF:MBB:TN:lw PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -10- (06sr43 ZTA 07-04) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT ORDINANCE—ZTA NO. 07-004 (STAFF RECOMMENDATION) Chapter 218 Mixed-Use Transit Center District Sections: 218.02 Mixed-Use Transit Center District Established 218.04 MU-TCD District: Land Use Controls 218.06 MU-TCD District: Development Standards 218.08 Modifications for Affordable Housing 218.10 AftFdable Housing Sustainable Development 218.12 Review of Plans 218.02 Mixed-Use Transit Center District Established The TGD TFans*t Center DiStFiGt iestablished by chic Ghapter. The purpose of the Mixed- Use Transit Center District is to implement the General Plan Land Use Plan Mixed Use land use designation. This district provides areas for high density m -Gf residential and commercial uses Hear within '/a mile of established transit centers as determined by the Planninq Director. Transit centers, serving buses or other modes of transportation, are facilities where passengers transfer from one route to another. The intent of This district provides for is te GOUrage the deyel„lanler .®f pedestrian-friendly, transit oriented development semRittes in areas of the-city adjacent to the neGes existinq transit infrastructure. ettheFexi6tin^ of planned, to support the deRSity With minimal imnant on tF ffin 218.04 MU-TCD District: Land Use Controls In the following schedules, letter designations are used as follows: "P" designates use classifications permitted in MU-TCD district. "Additional Previs*ans" that follow. "PC" designates use classifications permitted on approval of a conditional use permit by the Planning Commission. "ZA" designates use classifications permitted on approval of a conditional use permit by the Zoning Administrator. 9/16/2008 ' Page 1 ATTACHMENT N - Use classifications that are not listed are prohibited. Letters in parentheses in the "Additional Provisions" column refer to provisions following the schedule or located elsewhere in the Zoning Ordinance. Where letters in parentheses are opposite a use classification heading, referenced provisions shall apply to all use classifications under the heading. MU-TCD DISTRICT: P=Permitted LAND USE CONTROLS ' - '�— `tea PC=Conditional Use Permit approved by Planning Commission ZA=Conditional Use Permit approved by Zoning Administrator Land Use Additional Controls Provisions Residential Uses (A)(I) Single family Ro ideR iai RG Multi-family Residential PC Public and Semipublic Uses Clubs and Lodges RZA Day Care, General ZA Day Care, Large Family P Government Offices P Public Safety Facilities P Religious Assemblv ZA Schools, Public or Private PC Commercial Uses A H Artists' Studios P Banks and Savings & Loans P Catering Services P Clubs and Ledges R GommeFGial ReGFeat;OR and EnteFt ainment R 7LY F Cultural institutions Fb Day i GeneFal ZA fl���ivu r`�caTrnge FaFni y ZA Drug Stores/Pharmacy P Eating and Drinking Establishments P w/Alcohol ZA (B)(C) w/ Live Entertainment ZA (G)(D) w/ Dancing PC (€D) w/ Outdoor Dining ZA (C)( E) RmergeRG / Health Care ZA 9/16/2008 :�gg��� � � 2 ATTACH Div! Food and Beverage Sales P w/Alcohol Beverage Sales ZA (B) Government Offinos P_ Health and Sports Clubs P_ Office, Business and Professional P Park and Recreational Facilities P Parking PC (HF) Personal Enrichment Services P Personal Services P PubliG Safety FaGilities. P_ Re"gio is Assemb! ZA Retail Sales P (�G) PIG Visitor Accommodations PC MU-TCD District: Additional Provisions L 1 PerrAm#ed Of the spaGe is 5,000 square feet oF less; allowed with Neighborhood NgtifiGatien puFsuaRt tG Chapter 241 if the laboratory spaGe eXGeeds 5,000 square feet. (A) - See-se +�T2-80.38. Garne-oentersi Chapter 5:28: D_aRGe-Hall6; G apter-9.24: ward . All projects in this District shall have both residential and non-residential components. At least 50 percent of the building fronting public streets at the ground level shall be non-residential uses. At least 50 percent of the project shall be residential uses. (B) - The following businesses proposing to sell alcoholic beverages for on-site or off-site consumption are exempt from the conditional use permit process: (i) Retail markets with no more than, 10 percent of the floor area devoted to sales, display and storage of alcoholic beverages provided the sale of alcoholic beverages is not in conjunction with the sale of gasoline or other motor vehicle fuel; " , $44 _i i Florist shops offering the sale of a bottle of an alcoholic beverage together with a floral arrangement. (C) - Neighborhood notification requirements pursuant to Chapter 241. (D) NOR amplified love eRteFtaiRFneRt greateF than 300 feet from a FesideRtial zone U% shall be permi#ed without a nnnditional use permit (€D) - entry.provided. These may RGt obstruGt either the publiG sidewalk OF the buildiRg See also Chapter 5.28: Dancing Halls and Chapter 5.44: Restaurants - Amusement and Entertainment Premises. and Ghnntor 5 70- Adult Entertainment Businesses. 9/16/2008 ATTACHME.NTP �NO. , 2 . 3 ( E) — Outdoor dining with alcohol sales shall be permitted with a conditional use permit to the Zoning Administrator. Outdoor dining without alcohol sales that is 400 square feet or less shall be permitted with an administrative eut a Genditional use permit. If over 400 square feet with no alcohol sales, Neighborhood Notification shall be required pursuant to Chapter 241. (G) QRIY perrni#ed _F arterial street, and a passive eF aGtive outdoor reGreatmonal amenity shall be previde4-. (HE) — Stand-alone or other permanent parking structures not ancillary to the permitted uses listed above. Must demonstrate necessity of use and comply with the requirements in Section 231.18-G (Parking Structures). (1G) — See Section 230.94: Carts and Kiosks (H) — Development of vacant land or additions of 10,000 square feet or more in building floor area: or additions equal to or greater than 50% of the existing building's floor area requires approval of a conditional use permit from the Zoning Administrator. The Planning Director may refer any proposed protect to the Zoning Administrator if the proposed proiect has the potential to impact residents or tenants in the vicinity (e.g. increased noise, traffic). (I) — Projects within 500 feet of a PS District see Chapter 244. 218.06 MU-TCD District: Property Development Standards The following schedule prescribes development standards for MU-TCD zoning district designated on the zoning map. The first column establishes the basic requirements for permitted and conditional uses. Letters in parentheses in the "Additional Provisions" column refer to "Additional Development Standards" following the schedule. in Ga! ng the number of units n�itted on the site Anncitii is raln,,lated on the basic of nolot aFea. FraGtional numbeFE, shall be FOURded down to the nearest whole # number, one dwelling URit may be allowed OR a legally GFeated lot GGFnPIYiRg With Minimum let aFea. 44 GaIGUI�9 the maxim, rn gross floor area as defiRed in rhaptar The floor area ratio is calculated on the basis of net site area. FraGtiGnal numbers shall be--rouRded down te the nearest wh„lo n„mhor All required setbacks shall be measured from ultimate right-of-way and in accordance with the definitions set forth in Chapter 203, Definitions. Any new paFGel GFeated pursuant to Title 25, Subdivisions, shall GGMPIY with the MiRimum buildiRg site requirements of the distFiGt on WhiGh the paFGel 66 IGGated unless approved as a 9/16/2008 ATTACHMENT N . R¢ Property Development Standards for MQ-TCD District MU-TCD Additional Requirements Minimum Lot Area (sq. ft.) 43,560 Minimum Lot Width (ft.) 100 Minimum Setbacks Front (ft) 5 (A)(B) Side (ft.) 510 (B)(r)(n)(E)(F Rear (ft.) 510 (B)(G)(F) Maximum Height of Structures (ft.) 7680 (G4LQ Maximum Wall Dimensions "LD I Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 2.5 Minimum Site Landscaping (%) 8 Minimum Lot Area per Dwelling 335 - Unit (sq. ft.) Minimum Residential Floor Area {9) Maximum Lot Coverage (%) 75 Minimum Open Space Accessibility within Dwellings {Q) Lighting 0;�) Fences and Walls ) Off-Street Parking and Loading See Chapter 231 (M)(N) Outdoor Facilities See Section 230.74 (-&) Screening of Mechanical See Section 230.76 (S) Equipment Antenna See Section 230.80 Off Street Parking and Leading Coo Chapter 231 Accessory Structures See Chapter 230.08 Refuse Storage Areas See Section 230.78 Underground Utilities See Chapter 17.64 Performance Standards See Section 230.82 Nonconforming Structures See Chapter 236 Signs See Chapter 233 Counts Building Separations Building Design Standards Private Storage Space MU-TCD District: Additional Development Standards (A) Defile Multiple street frontage lots shall provide front yards on each frontage. (B) Projections into Setbacks (1) See Section 230.68: Building Projections into Yards. 9/16/2008 Page 52 5 ATTACHMENT NO. (2) Balconies and bay windows may project into required setbacks and usable open space areas subject to Section 230.68, provided that balconies have open railings, glass, or architectural details with openings to reduce visible bulk. Balconies composed solely of solid enclosures are not allowed to project into required setbacks. (3) Awnings, canopies, covered walkways, covered patios, and covered arcades with no programmed indoor space may project into required setbacks and usable open space areas provided that a minimum 5 ft. setback is maintained to the property line. (G� Along a side 9F FeaF propeFty line abuttiRg resideRtial uses, a 10 feet setbaGk is {4} in the TGD DiStFiGt, inteFier side setbaGks shall be a minimurn of 5 feet, eXGep stated belew-. (E4 Street Side SetbaGks. IR the TGD DiStFiGt, the stFeet side yard shall be the sarne as the front sethaGk Ze er Rear SetbaGk. Azero -ier e s aoL ma r he nerTmmed provided that the Gppesite side setbaGk on the sarne let is nE)t less than 5 feet, and shall be subjeGt to t (� iirements lector-I in c,�hcen+inn .3) below. 2-) the adi�aGenttlloott her_7crn or minim„m of 10 feet, to the , rerv,,irements listed in s„hseGtien k3) below. A zero side or rear sethaoh may be Fm,# bier a follewino T�CL.T\T�Tl7'G-0'1—TG�7—'.7 ri—�el"T1�1"1"CC )7jV-V�C�C�"T requiFements' /ol The lot adjan t to the zero side or rear setbaoh shall either be held ,ruder ��^�I veer Zrr�c ccrr�c�nuvrc-.rrccrr�c�rrT��-o c�Tcra-m-rvcr the same o��rn ,n at the a of annlination or a deed rectrintien er rrr eFSttTp-�� crvTTj vr-cr-acc'c�r���.c��crrv...... agreement proved as thetyr--A#E)Fney-shall e Fe6erded A nten�. e � �m� her th��' 4#erney, shall {-�} ea-Se�l�ed-&s-t�f 9F' -�rz '�'T�T* he reoerded between the property owner and the oWner of the arliar`ent Int to whinh anr•e is rnrr,sired in order to maintain and repair a Bern lot line the—tand. Ye building per�mits shall hamssued until_suGh FeGGrded //��,�� maintenanne easement has been s„hmi#erl lam! adjanent let shall either be zero era minim,,m of C. fee+ (4) No portion of the dwelliRg or any aFGhiteGtUral featums shall projeGt eve the pmperty line (al a zero ethaoL shall not he adjaoent to a publin er private right_of_way. 9/16/2008 Page 6 / ^ ATTACHMENT NO. __v WIC) Height Requirements. See Section 230.70: Measurement of Height and Section 230.72: Exceptions to Height Limits. A minimum of two stories and a maximum of six stories shall be allowed. . (ILD) Maximum Wall Dimensions. All building a front or street side wall surfaces shall be no longer than 250 feet without either: (1) a break, a recess or offset measuring at least 10 feet that vary the depth of the building wall by a minimum of 4 feet, or (2) a series of offsets, projections or recesses, including balconies, at intervals of not more than 40 feet that vary the depth of the building wall by a minimum of 4 feet. The Director may grant exceptions or allow these standards to be modified for exceptional or unique structures subject to Design Review, Chapter 244. qg) Planting Areas: With the exception of sidewalks, driveways, pathways and paved outdoor seating areas, required front and street side yards shall be planting areas. (J.F) Landscape Improvements (1) All landscape improvements shall comply with Chapter 232 unless otherwise provided herein. FoF sites in the TGD DistFiGt, plaRtiRg OR F0Gft0P6, pediurn aFeas, OF PGFGhes, as well as any hardSGape elements, shall be GORSidered landsGa. (2) General Tree Requirements. One 36-inch box tree shall be provided for every 45 lineal feet of street frontage planted within the setback areas adjacent to a street. In addition, there shall be one 36-inch box tree planted within the common open space areas for each ground or first level unit. Specimen palms may be substituted at a ratio of 1/2 foot brown trunk height for one inch of box tree inch required. (KG) See Section 230.88: Fencing and Yards. (L4 appliGant Gan demonstrate that the Y- '- - - - 5 have divergent needs in teFm e# daytime versus nighttime hours or weekday versus weekend he ors WMH) Off-Street Parking and,,Loading Provisions. ,,� ,,,}�,. (1) The-req�emeRts of f Chapter 231 difi�nvrhi-crTat site G--rbti DistFic+ s�;; only be required *�--ce ppFeyide All off street parking and loading provisions shall comply with Chapter 231 unless otherwise provided herein. Off- street parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with the following Schedule A: 9/16/2008 Pag9V � ATTACHMENT N0 LL'Z- OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES REQUIRED IN MU-TCD ZONE: SCHEDULE A Use Classification Spaces Residential Studio 1 space per unit one bedroom 1 space per unit two bedrooms 2 spaces per unit three or more bedrooms 2.5 spaces per unit Guests 1 6paGe-pe r 10 units, 1 space per 4 units Commercial Per Chapter 231 eFany s bsequen+ apnlinahle speGifir plan requirements Public and Semi-Public Per Chapter 231 , o (I4I) Minimum Floor Area. Each dwelling unit in a multi famiiy mixed-use building and attaGhed Giggle family dwel;,g shall have the feAew+Rg minimum floor area of 450 square feet. Unit ,�Type ,�y a Minimum Arnim+ (Square Cent) Studio 1�Y"^ �50 One mom d50 twe bedrooms 98 throe Gr mGre heiJrr a me -i�W r PJ) Open Space Requirements. (1) The minimum open space area (private.and common) for multi farnil mixed- use Fesidential projects in the MU-TCD District shall be 150 square feet per residential unit. For purposes of this subsection, open space shall mean an area which is designed and intended to be used for active or passive recreation. Open space may consist of private and/or common areas. Parking areas, access aisles, and driveways shall not qualify as usable open space. Required front and side yards shall qualify as usable open spaGe. (2) Private Open Space. (a) Private open space shall be provided in courts or balconies within which a horizontal rectangle has no dimension less than 5 6 feet. (b) Each dwelling unit shall be provided a minimum of 60 square feet of private open space. (c) Private open space shall be contiguous to the unit and for the exclusive use of the occupants. Private open space shall not be accessible to any 9/16/2008 Page 8 ` ATTACHMENT NO. �--- dwelling unit except the unit it serves and shall be physically separated from common areas by a wall or hedge at least 42 inches in height. (3) Common Open Space. (a) Common open space, provided by interior side yards, patios, courts, and terraces, shall be designed so that a horizontal—TeEtangle has no dimension is less than 10 feet, shall be open to the sky, and shall not include driveways or parking areas. (b) Projects with more than 20 units shall include at least one amenity, such as a clubhouse, swimming pool, tennis court, volleyball court, outdoor cooking facility, or other recreation facility. Such common amenity spaces shall count toward the common open space requirement. (RK) All habitable rooms in a dwelling unit shall must be accessible from within the dwelling. (QL) Lighting. Lighting system shall be provided in all projects along all vehicular access ways and major walkways. Lighting shall be directed onto the driveways and walkways within the development and away from adjacent properties. A lighting plan shall be submitted for approval by the Director. (RM) See SeGtien 230.44. ReGyGliRg OperatiGRs and Section 230.88: Antennae. HIV) The prGvisieRs of Chapter 233, Signs, appliGable to GemmeFGial DiStFiGts shall apply in the TGD DiitFict. See Chapter 233, Signs—Commercial Districts, for applicable provisions related to signs in the commercial component of the MU-TCD District. (TO) Courts Opposite Windows in the T-GID D;StFiGt. Courts shall be pFevided epposite a rott,,i ro m e nee Gourts Opposite Walls OR the Same Site. Th depth of a GOUrt shall not less +�r2 f`eopposite a requ.r r-I 4-1 in a living rnnm and 44 feet opposite a Fequired window for any etheF habitable room-. shall he open to the sky. Eavesmay PR JeGt a mwim,,m 2 food inn a nn,,rF en eaGh s;de Building Separations in the MU-TCD District. Building separations shall be provided in all mixed-use proiects in the MU-TCD District subject to the following requirements: (1) The minimum building separation shall be not less than 20 feet opposite a window in a living room and 14 feet opposite a window for any other habitable room. (2) The buildinq separation shall be open to the sky. Eaves may project a maximum 2 feet into this area on each side. 9/16/2008 Pag��`� A'��e 9 Z 8 ATTACHMENT N Building Design Standards. Buildings in the MU-TCD District shall be built in accordance with the following requirements: The maximum building length shall be 300 feet except as provided below. Building length is defined as the total length of a primary building mass lining a street. (a) Allow a 20 foot inset of the building plan with pedestrian access to count as a break in the building length. If the inset varies by floor, then the average inset shall exceed 20 feet. (2) The maximum block size shall be 2,400 feet. Block size is a measure of the total length of the street-fronting property lines along all block faces enclosed within the nearest surrounding publicly accessible streets. Private Storage Space. A minimum of 50 cubic feet of private storage space shall be provided for each residential dwelling unit outside such unit. Such private storage space shall be fully enclosed and lockable. 218.08 Modifications for Affordable Housing The Planning Commission may approve a conditional use permit modifying the minimum property development standards in this chapter for affordable housing, as provided in Section 230.14. The proposed modifications shall be requested in writing by the applicant, accompanied by a detailed pro-forma, rental guidelines, deed restrictions, financial subsidies, and other types of documentation which will serve to demonstrate the need for a reduction of development standards. Modifications to the standards may include, but are not limited to, the parking requirements and open space. The specific standard(s) from which the applicant is requesting relief shall be identified and alternative development standard(s) proposed. 218.10 AffOFdable Housing Sustainable Developmen(A) ProjeGts in a TGD DiStFiGt Gentaining residential units shall provide affordable URits AgFee +eyed by the DwFeGtoF Sustainable or "green" building practices shall be incorporated into the design of the proposed structures and associated site improvements. Sustainable building practices shall include (but are not limited to) those recommended by the U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Program certification or Build It Green's Green Building Guidelines and Rating Systems. 9/16/200810 ATTACHMENT N 9e �- . 40 i 218.12 Review of Plans All applications for new construction, initial establishment of use, exterior alterations and additions shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review. Discretionary review shall be required as follows: (A) Zoning Administrator Review. Projects requiring a conditional use permit from the Zoning Administrator; projects on substandard lots; see Chapter 241. (B) Design Review Board. See Chapter 244. (C) Planning Commission. Projects requiring a conditional use permit from the Planning Commission; see Chapter 241. (D) Protects in the Coastal Zone. A Coastal Development Permit is required unless the project is exempt; see Chapter 245. 9/16/2008 Page��ENT 9�O0 1 ATTACH N Z_11 COMPARISON--MIXED USE-TRANSIT CENTER DISTRICT, HBZSO, AND DRAFT BEACH-EDINGER SPECIFIC PLAN ISSUE EXISTING HBZSO APPLICANT PROPOSED STAFF RECOMMENDED DRAFT BEACH- THE RIPCURL MU-TCD MU-TCD EDINGER SPECIFIC PROJECT(PROPOSED) PLAN permitted uses residential, public and residential, limited public residential, limited public entertainment, retail, residential, retail semipublic uses, a range and semipublic uses, and semipublic uses, restaurant, multi-family of commercial uses neighborhood commercial neighborhood commercial uses uses minimum lot area 10,000 sf(commercial); 43,560 sf(1 acre) 43,560 sf(1 acre) -- 166,362 sf(3.8 acres) 6,000 sf(residential) width 100 ft(commercial); 60 ft 100 sf 100 ft -- 320 ft (residential) maximum 1.5 FAR 3.0 FAR 2.5 FAR -- 2.23 FAR commercial density maximum 35 du/ac 130 du/ac -- -- 115 du/ac residential density maximum height 50 ft(commercial); 35 ft 76 ft 80 ft, min 2 stories & max min. 2 stories, max. 6 72.5 ft, 6 stories residential 6 stories stories max bldg length -- -- 300 ft or if greater with 300 ft 327 ft with an average minimum 20 ft inset inset exceeding 20 ft setbacks - ---------------- ----- ------ front 10 ft(commercial and 5 ft 5 ft 0 min/ 15 ft max 18 ft _ residential) interior side 0 ft(commercial); 5 ft 5 ft, 10 ft if abut residential loft 10 ft w/ living space 24 ft (residential) zones windows, 0 ft w/o living D space windows .,.� street side 10 ft(commercial and 5 ft -- 0 min/ 15 ft max 15 ft residential) rear Oft(commercial); 10 ft 5 ft, 10 ft if abut residential loft 10 ft 28 ft 3: (residential) zones 9: min space between 10 ft (residential) -- 20 ft with living room 20 ft 40 ft Q bldgs windows, 14 ft with other habitable rooms max block size -- -- -- 2,400 ft 1,929 ft 9/16�. Pagel COMPARISON--MIXED USE-TRANSIT CENTER DISTRk;T, HBZSO, AND DRAFT BEACH-EDINGER SPECIFIC PLAN ISSUE EXISTING HBZSO APPLICANT PROPOSED STAFF RECOMMENDED DRAFT BEACH- THE RIPCURL MU-TCD MU-TCD EDINGER SPECIFIC PROJECT (PROPOSED) PLAN min floor area 450 sf studio 500 sf(residential) 450 sf -- 465 sf(average 541 sf) 1 br 650 sf(residential) 550 sf -- 536 sf(average 640 sf) 2 br 900 sf(residential) 800 sf -- 872 sf(average 1016 sf) 3+ br 1,100 sf(residential) 1,000 sf -- N/A minimum total open 25% of residential floor 150 sf per unit, required 150 sf per unit 137 sf per unit, (60,443 sf space (residential) area per unit front and side yards total) qualify as usable open space common min dim 10 ft min dim 10 ft min. dim 10 ft 100 sf/unit 87 sf per unit, 10' min. dim., (38,443 sf total) private 60 sf(studio/1 br), 120 sf min dim 5 ft 60 sf, min dim 6 ft 60 sf/unit 50 ft per unit, 4' 6" min. 2+ br dim., 22,000 sf total landscaping 8% (commercial) 8% min. 8% 16% parking and loading compact&tandem no compact or tandem 705 spaces total; 518 al lowed--com pacts= full allowed standard spaces; 108 spaces, tandem spaces = tandem spaces; 82 1/2 space; < 25% of compact spaces requirement to be met by compact&tandem spaces residential 639 spaces studio 1 per unit 1 per unit 1 per unit 1 per unit (per applicant proposal) one bedroom 1 per unit 1 per unit 1 per unit 1 min, 1.5 max two bedrooms 2 per unit 2 per unit 2 per unit 1.5 min, 2 max three+ bedrooms 2.5 per unit 2.5 per unit 2.5 per unit 1.5 min, 2 max guest parking 0.5 per unit 0.1 per unit 0.25 per unit 0.1 min, 0.3 max Mnonresidential 1/200 sf(retail) 1/200 sf 1/200 sf varies based on specific 66 spaces uses z 9/16/2008 Page 2 r. is b'd Uk- PROPERTIES WITHIN ONE-QUARTER MILE RADIUS OF THE TRANSPORTATION CENTER AND ELIGIBLE TO USE PROPOSED ZONING STANDARDS WITHIN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 14, ,fr aes�.�+�st' Vm CITY OF WESTMINSTER' a 5 ROOMqtf Fay` ' '• wx ^' '^ �", � .. � ��• "yam ,, t .. c e ! I u �'�� � r} � �� �n � — �LU�"� ��l.� � .t � ti ��` ii 'k � �s� i`-: .?..��-'fie.' +.:,��y' •� ':.' e a ,+ F r i'• t L. M . i��f -��� �� 7 ,,•`^ S$,�r"c'",xo� :) f E.�,g �'� } °`tea w �f•. �e a"« - � y u� t�-t�y`�`a�ty � P5� • � ,,'�(� r�r r s �� ! ;� �4 sc ' F' 1 4, ,. "t �Eligible-To Use;Proposed Zoning Staridards . $ubject To A General'RlaniAmendmerit .: And Zoning MapsAmendment .s�- .4 .${ ., r x �.. .... `� ..� � m E€� .,.; �, ;u ;�,,,..._,. � W r :f �€ a �, � .. N ut c r � �e� .b v r �•iE .T�: ��� S ORDINANCE NO. 3819 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT ORDINANCE—ZTA NO. 07-004 Chapter 218 Mixed-Use Transit Center District Sections: 218.02 Mixed-Use Transit Center District Established 218.04 MU-TCD District: Land Use Controls 218.06 MU-TCD District: Development Standards 218.08 Modifications for Affordable Housing 218.10 Aftrdable Housing Sustainable Development 218.12 Review of Plans 218.02 Mixed-Use Transit Center District Established The TGD TFaRSi+ (men+er Dic+ri^+ is established by this ^hapter. The purpose of the Mixed- Use Transit Center District is to implement the General Plan Land Use Plan Mixed Use land use designation. This district provides areas for high density Mixes a residential and commercial uses near within %a mile of established transit centers as determined by the Planning Director. Transit centers, serving buses or other modes of transportation are facilities where passengers transfer from one route to another. The intent of This district provides for is to ecnG()Urage the deyelnnmen+ of pedestrian-friendly, transit oriented development sites in areas of the Gity adjacent to the ne^eccory existinc I transit infrastructure. eitheFexisting E)F planned, to support the density with minimal imr»^+ nn +raffi^ 1 218.04 MU-TCD District: Land Use Controls In the following schedules, letter designations are used as follows: "P" designates use classifications permitted in MU-TCD district. "Addit.GRal PF9Ywswon6" that follow. "PC" designates use classifications permitted on approval of a conditional use permit by the Planning Commission. "ZA" designates use classifications permitted on approval of a conditional use permit by the Zoning Administrator. Use classifications that are not listed are prohibited. Letters in parentheses in the "Additional Provisions" column refer to provisions following the schedule or located elsewhere in the 10/21/2008 Pagel Zoning Ordinance. Where letters in parentheses are opposite a use classification heading, referenced provisions shall apply to all use classifications under the heading. MU-TCD DISTRICT: P=Permitted LAND USE CONTROLS ' -�—Limited PC=Conditional Use Permit approved by Planning Commission ZA=Conditional Use Permit approved by Zoning Administrator Land Use Additional Controls Provisions Residential Uses (A)(I) Single family Residential PI Multi-`family Residential PC Public and Semipublic Uses Clubs and Lodges RZA Day Care, General ZA Day Care, Large Family P Government Offices P Public Safety Facilities P Religious Assembly ZA Schools, Public or Private PC Commercial Uses (A)(H)(I) Animal Sales & SeNiGe R Artists' Studios P Banks and Savings & Loans P Catering Services P Clubs and Ledges R Gernmercial Recreatign and Entertainmcn I Community and Human SeNiGes ZGLAUFal institutions nnYF nn �b Care,Day Genepal ZA Day Gare Large ZA Drug Stores/Pharmacy P Eating and Drinking Establishments P w/Alcohol ZA (B)(C) w/ Live Entertainment ZA (G)(D) w/ Dancing PC (€D) w/ Outdoor Dining ZA (C)( E) Emergency Health Gore ZA Food and Beverage Sales P w/Alcohol Beverage Sales ZA (B) 10/21/2008 Page 2 Government Offines R Office, Business and Professional P Park and Recreational Facilities P Parking PC (#F) Personal Enrichment Services P LQ Personal Services P Religious Assembly ZA Retail Sales P (}G) gS Visitor Accommodations PC MU-TCD District: Additional Provisions L 1 PeFmotted if the space is 5 000 square fee r'r—vi less; allowed with NeighbeFheed (A) — See section 23 eaters; Chapter-5.28: Dance-Halls; Chapter 9.241 Card Rooms; Chapter 9.32: PGE)IFoGm6 and Billiards; and GhapteF 9.2& Pinball . All projects in this District shall have both residential and non-residential components. At least 50 percent of the building fronting public streets at the ground level shall be non-residential uses. At least 50 percent of the protect shall be residential uses. (B) — The following businesses proposing to sell alcoholic beverages for on-site or off-site consumption are exempt from the conditional use permit process: (i) Retail markets with no more than 10 percent of the floor area devoted to sales, display and storage of alcoholic beverages provided the sale of alcoholic beverages is not in conjunction with the sale of gasoline or other motor vehicle fuel; mmeFe frFem_any c e PS di6tFGt, publ+G GF Private cnhnGl nh��r�nh 9F publiGse; and (i4) LD Florist shops offering the sale of a bottle of an alcoholic beverage together with a floral arrangement. (C) — Neighborhood notification requirements pursuant to Chapter 241. (D) Non amplified live entertaiRment gFeater than 300 feet frern a FesideRtial ZeRe OF use shall he permitted without a nnnditional use permit ( D) - For teeR daRGiRg faGilities, � i provided These q�bStFUG eFthe-pub sidewalk or b uildiRg eptFy. See also Chapter 5.28: D``a'nc��i``n7)g .Halls and Chapter 5.4'4::`"Restaurants — Amusement and Entertainment Premises. and chapter F 70: Adult Cptertainment RUGinesses 10/21/2008 Page 3 ( E) - Outdoor dining with alcohol sales shall be permitted with a conditional use permit to the Zoning Administrator. Outdoor dining without alcohol sales that is 400 square feet or less shall be permitted with an administrative out a GE)Rditional use permit. If over 400 square feet with no alcohol sales, Neighborhood Notification shall be required pursuant to Chapter 241. (G) Only permitted A- aFteFoal street, and a passive or aGtive outdoor reGreatiGRal ameRity shall be provideGL (HF) - Stand-alone or other permanent parking structures not ancillary to the permitted uses listed above. Must demonstrate necessity of use and comply with the requirements in Section 231 .18-G (Parking Structures). (IG) - See Section 230.94: Carts and Kiosks (H) — Development of vacant land or additions of 10,000 square feet or more in building floor area: or additions equal to or greater than 50% of the existing building's floor area requires approval of a conditional use permit from the Zoning Administrator. The Planning Director may refer any proposed protect to the Zoning Administrator if the proposed project has the potential to impact residents or tenants in the vicinity (e.g. increased noise, traffic). (1) — Protects within 500 feet of a PS District see Chapter 244. 218.06 MU-TCD District: Property Development Standards The following schedule prescribes development standards for MU-TCD zoning district designated on the zoning map. The first column establishes the basic requirements for permitted and conditional uses. Letters in parentheses in the "Additional Provisions" column refer to "Additional Development Standards" following the schedule. in a the n� umber of Unito permitted n the site density is GaIG Tate J on the hack of not !Gt aFea. F=FaGtlenal nurnbeFS shall be rounded dewR to the neaFest whole number, eXGept tha GRe dwelling unit may be allowed on a legally GFeated let Gemplying with Fninimum lot aF in IGUIating the maximum gFess floor area as definer! in GhapteF 7n 2 The floor area ratio is FiarQcrrCtrrrrc� crr„ ...,,.,.....,,.... y....,., ...,... area ..... defined ... -..-r--• --- _ calculated on the basis of net site area. Crar•tmenal n„mh��hpll he ro,,nded rGWR to the nearest whole n„mher All required setbacks shall be measured from ultimate right-of-way and in accordance with the definitions set forth in Chapter 203, Definitions. pert of a Dlnnned I Init development 10/21/2008 Page 4 Property Development Standards for MU-TCD District MU-TCD Additional Requirements Minimum Lot Area (sq. ft.) 43,560 Minimum Lot Width (ft.) 100 Minimum Setbacks Front (ft) 5 (A)(B) Side (ft.) 510 (B)(G)(D)(F=)(F Rear (ft.) 510 (B)(G)(€) Maximum Height of Structures (ft.) 7975 {G}LQ Maximum Wall Dimensions (4}L Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 3:-9 2.35 Minimum Site Landscaping (%) 8 Minimum Lot Area per Dwelling 335 - Unit (sq. ft.) Minimum Residential Floor Area (9} Maximum Lot Coverage (%) 75 Minimum Open Space (124 Accessibility within Dwellings (Q)W Lighting kR} Fences and Walls (q}(-0 Off-Street Parking and Loading See Chapter 231 (M)(N) Outdoor Facilities See Section 230.74 (&- Screening of Mechanical See Section 230.76 (�S} Equipment Antenna See Section 230.80 Off Street Papkinn and Leading Coo (chanter 231 Accessory Structures See Chapter 230.08 Refuse Storage Areas See Section 230.78 Underground Utilities See Chapter 17.64 Performance Standards See Section 230.82 Nonconforming Structures See Chapter 236 Signs See Chapter 233 J4 Seu+ts Building Separations M Building Design Standards Private Storage Space Reciprocal Access LRI MU-TCD District: Additional Development Standards (A) Double Multiple street frontage lots shall provide front yards on each frontage. (B) Projections into Setbacks 10/21/2008 Page 5 (1) See Section 230.68: Building Projections into Yards. (2) Balconies and bay windows may project into required setbacks and usable open space areas subject to Section 230.68, provided that balconies have open railings, glass, or architectural details with openings to reduce visible bulk. Balconies composed solely of solid enclosures are not allowed to project into required setbacks. (3) Awnings, canopies, covered walkways, covered patios, and covered arcades with no programmed indoor space may project into required setbacks and usable open space areas provided that a minimum 5 ft. setback is maintained to the property line. (G� Along a side 9F rear property line abUttiRg resideRtial uses, a 10 feet setbaGk ( , eXGep stated be!Gw-. (E-) Street Side SetbaGk6. in the TGD Di6tFiGt, the 6tFeet side yard shall be the sarne a6 the front setbaGk (G\ Smde nr ReaF S T en l\�/! zeFe inte'rinrsid e cs •,nL m•.y be permitted r+r�Qed that the Gpposite Seth G on the same lots ng+ IeSG tFiaR 5 feet, shall ho subject to tho J rrr�-rv' �rvr-rcr�r' o--rc an-��aujcvr-c�cr-c rent lirementa lister♦ in s Ibsentien (3) below. 94 Q zero rear setbaGk may he nermi#erd pFevided that the opposite rear setbaG for the ent I� either zero nr a minimum of 10 feet, anti subject to the regllirements listed in aubsentien P) below. {3} � ee-re -s de E)F rear� aGk M.ay ne-rmi#ed -subjent to the fe,l.lew,,ny requirements-1 /o\ The Lott adjaGen�rt zero side or rear cetbaGk shall either he held I lnrler t�I '^`"J IlA MI MV the same owneFship at the tirne of 1 aggFeementt appFGy d .. to form bythe Gity tttemey shall be FeGOFded /h\ Q enanGeeaeernent, R approved #o form b y the Git y Attorney, c hall lam! 11 he rennrded between the property owner and the GWRer of the adjacent lot t�}eland. No bl ilding n mite shall he ie ued until s Gh rennrrled -tea, eF,Trrc��,-sin--�-r�S ''^^`` rnaintenanne easement has been s rl lamitte �7 adjaGent lot hall either he tern or a minim)Im of 5 _ �-v-vr-p-mTrrrrrrarr-rv-r�v feet. the nreperty line !e\ The zero setbaGk hall not he adjaGent to a p Iblin OF private right of way. 10/21/2008 Page 6 (f) Exposure-prroteGtien between StrUGtWes shall be provided as speGified by the Ciro Department and Building Division kqC) Height Requirements. See Section 230.70-. Measurement of Height and Section 230.72: Exceptions to Height Limits. A minimum of two stories and a maximum of six stories shall be allowed. (#D) Maximum Wall Dimensions. All building a front nr street side Wall surfaces shall be no longer than 250 feet without either: (1) a break, a recess or offset measuring at least 10 feet that vary the depth of the building wall by a minimum of 4 feet, or (2) a series of offsets, projections or recesses, including balconies, at intervals of not more than 40 feet that vary the depth of the building wall by a minimum of 4 feet. The Director may grant exceptions or allow these standards to be modified for exceptional or unique structures subject to Design Review, Chapter 244. OE) Planting Areas: With the exception of sidewalks, driveways, pathways and paved outdoor seating areas, required front and street side yards shall be planting areas. (dF) Landscape Improvements (1) All landscape improvements shall comply with Chapter 232 unless otherwise provided herein. C..r sites in the TGD Di +rir•+ plan+inn on rooftops pedium a ea OF POFGhes,as well as any haFdSGape elements, shall he nnnsidered IandSGa,-inn in addition to the items listed under Sen+inn 203.06. (2) General Tree Requirements. One 36-inch box tree shall be provided for every 45 lineal feet of street frontage planted within the setback areas adjacent to a street. In addition, there shall be one 36-inch box tree planted within the common open space areas for each ground or first level unit. Specimen palms may be substituted at a ratio of 1/2 foot brown trunk height for one inch of box tree inch required. (K ) See Section 230.88: Fencing and Yards. / \ �' Chapter 2 1: Off sic+ Parking and Loading. The Planning (`nmmis�inn nr 7nninn tom! tom` r w., , Administrator may gFaRt a fedur--ti.A-R on the total number of requiFed spaGes when the daytime versus nighttime hours nr weekday versus weekend hn,ors W1 ) Off-Street Parking and Loading Provisions. (1) The Feq �irernents of Ghan+eF 231 1sshall he modified si�nh that sites in the TT4Q DiiStFi t sh'�1`"hall only he required to pFevide All off street parking and loading provisions shall comply with Chapter 231 unless otherwise provided herein. Off- street parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with the following Schedule A: 10/21/2008 Page 7 OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES REQUIRED IN MU-TCD ZONE: SCHEDULE A Use Classification Spaces Residential Studio 1 space per unit one bedroom 1 space per unit two bedrooms 2 spaces per unit three or more bedrooms 2.5 spaces per unit Guests 1 c� PeF 10 units 1 space per 4 units Commercial Per Chapter 231 er any s b eq ent appliGable speGifin plan Feq iiromon s Public and Semi-Public Per Chapter 231 (2) GernpaGt and tandem spaGes shall be allowed. For paFking GernpliaRGe , GOunted as 1 spaGe. n;oFe0 be met by aRY nemhinatien of nerrmnant or tandem paFkinn spa {14 ) Minimum Floor Area. Each dwelling unit in a multi family mixed-use building a-Rd attaGhed SiRgle family dwellings shall have the following minimum floor area Of 500 square feet. UType Minimum Area (SquareClef) Studio One bedroom &50 throe er mere hedreems �ti , {9J) Open Space Requirements. (1) The minimum open space area (private and common) for multi family mixed- use Feside tial projects in the MU-TCD District shall be 150 square feet per residential unit. For purposes of this subsection, open space shall mean an area which is designed and intended to be used for active or passive recreation. Open space may consist of private and/or common areas. Parking areas, access aisles, and driveways shall not qualify as usable open space. leuifed ftent and side yaFds shall qualify as usable open spaGe. (2) Private Open Space. (a) Private open space shall be provided in courts or balconies within which a horizontal rectangle has no dimension less than 5 6 feet. (b) Each dwelling unit shall be provided a minimum of 60 square feet of private open space. (c) Private open space shall be contiguous to the unit and for the exclusive use of the occupants. Private open space shall not be accessible to any 10/21/2008 Page 8 dwelling unit except the unit it serves and shall be physically separated from common areas by a wall or hedge at least 42 inches in height. (3) Common Open Space. (a) Common open space, provided by interior side yards, patios, courts, and terraces, shall be designed so that a—hG ;metal rectangle has no dimension is less than 10 feet, shall be open to the sky, and shall not include driveways or parking areas. (b) Projects with more than 20 units shall include at least one amenity, such as a clubhouse, swimming pool, tennis court, volleyball court, outdoor cooking facility, or other recreation facility. Such common amenity spaces shall count toward the common open space requirement. {-12-K) All habitable rooms in a dwelling unit shall met be accessible from within the dwelling. FQL) Lighting. -A-Lighting system shall be provided in all projects along all vehicular access ways and major walkways. Lighting shall be directed onto the driveways and walkways within the development and away from adjacent properties. A lighting plan shall be submitted for approval by the Director. {RM) See SeGtin„ 230 44: Ren\/nli„n Operatic„s and Section 230.88: Antennae. fSN) me TGD District. See Chapter 233, Signs—Commercial Districts, for applicable provisions related to signs in the commercial component of the MU-TCD District. (TO) Courts Opposite Windows OR the TGD DiStFiGt. Courts shall be provided opposite a torn irementc Courts Opposite Walls on the Same Site: The minimum depth of a GGUFt shall be not less than 20 foot opposite a require id ,eii„d- OR a living rni+m and 14 feet (2) Court Ope-9. tg Go Arta shall be E)„pe„ to the sky. Gavel a�gicnt a m ��wim . 2 feet into a nn,IFt en eenh side "` �" Building Separations in the MU-TCD District. Building separations shall be provided in all mixed-use .projects in the MU-TCD District subject to the following requirements: (1) The minimum building separation shall be not less than 20 feet opposite a window in a living room and 14 feet opposite a window for any other habitable room. (2) The building separation shall be open to the sky. Eaves may proiect a maximum 2 feet into this area on each side. 10/21/2008 Page 9 Building Design Standards. Buildings in the MU-TCD District shall be built in accordance with the following requirements: (1 ) The maximum building length shall be 300 feet except as provided below. Building length is defined as the total length of a primary building mass lining a street. (a) Allow a 20 foot inset of the building plan with pedestrian access to count as a break in the building length. If the inset varies by floor, then the average inset shall exceed 20 feet. (2) The maximum block size shall be 2,400 feet. Block size is a measure of the total length of the street-fronting property lines along all block faces enclosed within the nearest surrounding publicly accessible streets. Private Storage Space. An average of 50 cubic feet of private storage space shall be provided for each residential dwelling unit outside such unit. Such private storage space shall be fully enclosed and lockable. Reciprocal Access. Reciprocal ingress/egress access with adiacent properties shall be provided for all projects. 218.08 Modifications for Affordable Housing The Planning Commission may approve a conditional use permit modifying the minimum property development standards in this chapter for affordable housing, as provided in Section 230.14. The proposed modifications shall be requested in writing by the applicant, accompanied by a detailed pro-forma, rental guidelines, deed restrictions, financial subsidies, and other types of documentation which will serve to demonstrate the need for a reduction of development standards. Modifications to the standards may include, but are not limited to, the parking requirements and open space. The specific standard(s) from which the applicant is requesting relief shall be identified and alternative development standard(s) proposed. 218.10 Affordable Housing Sustainable Developmen(A) PFgjeGtS in a TGD DiStFiGt Gentaining residential units shall provide affordable Units Agree . .9reyed by the DireGter. Sustainable or "green" building practices shall be incorporated into the design of the proposed structures and associated site improvements. Sustainable building practices shall include (but are not limited to) those recommended by the U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Program certification or Build It Green's Green Building Guidelines and Rating Systems. 10/21/2008 Page 10 218.12 Review of Plans All applications for new construction, initial establishment of use, exterior alterations and additions shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review. Discretionary review shall be required as follows: (A) Zoning Administrator Review. Projects requiring a conditional use permit from the Zoning Administrator; projects on substandard lots; see Chapter 241. (B) Design Review Board. See Chapter 244. (C) Planning Commission. Projects requiring a conditional use permit from the Planning Commission; see Chapter 241. (D) Projects in the Coastal Zone. A Coastal Development Permit is required unless the project is exempt; see Chapter 245. 10/21/2008 Page 11 IR AftI. SM, RED OAK INVESTMENTS City of Huntington Beach September 16,2008 SEP 16 2008 City of Huntington Beach,Planning Commissioner 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach,CA 92648 RE: Applicant response to Staffs recommended changes for MU-TCD zoning text Dear Chairman Livengood and members of the Planning Commission: We appreciate the careful review that Planning Staff has given to the proposed Zoning Text Amendment that would establish a Mixed-Use Transit Center District("MU- TCD").The MU-TCD zone text would accommodate our proposed project,The Ripcurl Mixed Use Project. In its report,staff has recommended changes to our proposed zoning text,some of which have a substantial impact on the project's economics and/or design. Nevertheless,we agree with and will accommodate most of these,including: • Meeting the full Affordable Housing requirements,pursuant to Section 230.26 of the zoning code. • Changing guest parking requirements from 1 space per 10 units to 1 space per 4 units Increasing side and rear setbacks from 5 to 10 feet Increasing required private open space from 0 sf to 60 sf per unit • Building 50 cubic feet of private storage space per unit(subject the clarification below) o Implementing several design guidelines given by the city's Design Review Board in its meeting August 14,2008. A few recommendations made by staff will more problematic,however. We ask the Planning Commission specifically reconsider the following items,all of which will make a project that is better and/or more financeable: Compact and Tandem Parking Staff has recommended that compact and tandem parking not be allowed. We ask that Planning Commission and City Council allow compact and tandem parking for this site. We think that a minimal amount of compact and tandem parking results in an overall better garage design and is appropriate in a transit-oriented building. In addition, these parking strategies reduce the square footage needed for parking,and accordingly reduce impacts associated with the construction and operation of the parking facility. We ask that tandem and compact stalls be allowed for MU-TCD zones, subject to the following limitations: 2101 Business Center Drive * Suite 230 * Irvine.CA 92612 Tel:949.733.2000 * Fax:949.733.200- Page 2 of 2 9/16/2008 • only on a limited basis,with not more than 15% compact and 10% tandem spaces; • only in areas not accessible to the general public(i.e.,behind controlled access gates); • only if they are assigned to specific users/households; • only if the tandem stalls are assigned to the same household;and • only if tandem spaces are counted as half a space for compliance purposes. Compact,tandem,and reduced ratio parking may not be appropriate for every project, but they are uniquely suitable in this location and for this type of transit-oriented use. Private Storage Space Staff has recommended that the zoning text provide a minimum of 50 cubic feet of private storage per unit.We agree that private storage is important and think that this amount of storage is reasonable.We ask,however,for the flexibility to provide that storage space in units of varying sizes-some larger and some smaller.Some households travel light, and some travel with more stuff. We will be better able to meet varying demand by offering storage units that differ in size. Densi Staff may recommend a reduction in density from 440 units to 385 units. We ask the Planning Commission and City Council to approve 440 units. As set forth above, density is uniquely appropriate in this transit center location. The Ripcurl provides the City with an opportunity to encourage smart planning and site-appropriate density by approving a project that reflects those principles. In fact,if density is proposed for anywhere in the City,this may be the best location imaginable for it. The proposed 2.3 FAR is less than Downtown's 3.0 and an appropriate residential complement to Bella Terra's 1.75. A reduction in units means a reduction in profitability,and therefore a change in the financial feasibility of the entire venture. Especially in this challenging economic environment,we ask for the flexibility to build the project as designed,in order to optimize the opportunity to secure financing and deliver The Ripcurl as envisioned. We sincerely appreciate all of the hard work and careful consideration staff has put in to this project,and thank you for your consideration of these requests. Sincerely, Andrew B. Nelson On belialf of Applicant: Amstar/Red Oak Huntington Beach, LLC JJ City of Huntington Beach Planning Department STAFF REPORT HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Planning Commission FROM: Scott Hess, AICP, Director of Planning BY: Tess Nguyen, Associate Planner DATE: September 23, 2008 SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 07- 003/ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO. 07-001/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 07-043 (THE RIPCURL) APPLICANT/ Andrew Nelson/Alex Wong, Amstar/Red Oak Huntington Beach, LLC, 2101 Business PROPERTY Center Drive # 230, Irvine CA 92612 OWNER: LOCATION: 7302-7400 Center Avenue (southeast corner of Gothard Street and Center Avenue) STATEMENT OF ISSUE: ♦ General Plan Amendment (GPA)No. 07-003 represents a request for the following: - To amend the General Plan Land Use designation on 3.8 acres from the current CG-F1-d (Commercial General-0.35 Floor Area Ratio—Design Overlay) to the proposed M-F7-d (Mixed Use3.0 Floor Area Ratio—Design Overlay) designation. - To amend the General Plan Land Use Element by removing the subject area from Subarea 5E of the Community District and Subarea Schedule. ♦ Zoning Map Amendment (ZMA)No. 07-001 represents a request for the following: - To amend the Zoning designation from the current CG (Commercial General) to the proposed MU-TCD (Mixed Use-Transit Center District) designation. ♦ Conditional Use Permit (CUP) No. 07-043 represents a request to develop and construct a mixed use residential and commercial development and associated infrastructure that consists of- - 440 residential apartment units (consisting of 11 live/work units) - 10,000 sq. ft. of commercial uses - 705 parking spaces for residents and visitors - Outdoor amenities such as a pool and spa area, fire pit, and movie projection area - Indoor amenities such as a fitness center, business center, conference room, clubhouse ♦ Staff s Recommendation: Approve General Plan Amendment No. 07-003, Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001, and Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043 with modifications based upon the following: - Consistent with the proposed General Plan Land Use Element designation of Mixed Use on the subject property by providing for mixed uses on the site. PC Staff Report—9/23/08 (08sr44 GPA 07-03 ZMA 07-01 CUP 07-43 (The Ripcurl) - Consistent with the proposed zoning designation of Mixed Use-Transit Center District by providing a mixed use development that is consistent and transitional between surrounding densities and land uses. - Facilitates mixed-use development that produces an environment which is both attractive and sustainable by increasing housing options for diverse household types, promoting alternative modes of transportation, creating a local sense of place, reducing infrastructure and maintenance costs, and allowing for more efficient use of land resources. - Consistent with good zoning practice and implements the goals of smart growth and sustainable development. - Compatible with adjacent commercial, educational, and transportation uses, and the site is physically suitable for a higher-density, transit-oriented development with a mix of residential and commercial land uses. - Serves affordable housing needs of the community by providing affordable housing units. - Recommended project is consistent with the environmentally superior alternative analyzed in EIR No. 07-004. • Staff s Suggested Modifications: - Reduce the number of residential units from 440 units to 385 units and retain the 10,000 sq. ft. of commercial/retail space (modified Alternative 4: Reduced Project-Option 2). - Increase the number of onsite parking spaces to comply with the minimum parking requirements of the MU-TCD development standards. - Provide the minimum open space areas to comply with the open space requirements of the MU- TCD development standards. - Provide the minimum private storage space to comply with the private storage space requirements of the MU-TCD development standards. The Design Review Board recommends the following: - Provide architectural projections and recesses on all building elevations except for the building elevations that face each other (i.e. the east elevation of the west building and west elevation of the east building). - Reduce the height of parapet walls to two feet and maintain the score-line design. - Provide a walkability/pedestrian access plan and landscape plans for Design Review Board approval. Environmental Impact Report No. 07-004 and Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004 are being processed concurrently with these entitlements and are addressed under two separate staff reports. It is necessary for the Planning Commission to review and act on Environmental Impact Report No. 07-004 and Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004 prior to action on these entitlements. Based on the EIR analysis, following approval of these entitlements, a CEQA Statement of Findings and Fact with a Statement of Overriding Considerations will be required. PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -2- (08sr44 GPA 07-03 ZMA 07-01 CUP 07-43 (The Ripcurl) RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: A. "Approve General Plan Amendment No. 07-003 by approving the draft City Council Resolution (Attachment No. 1) and forward to the City Council for adoption." B. "Approve Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001 with findings for approval (Attachment No. 2) and forward the draft Ordinance (Attachment No. 3) to the City Council for adoption." C. "Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043 with findings and suggested conditions of approval (Attachment No. 6)." D. "Approve CEQA Statement of Findings and Fact with a Statement of Overriding Considerations EIR No. 07-004 (Attachment No. I I)." ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): The Planning Commission may take alternative actions such as: 1. "Continue General Plan Amendment No. 07-003, Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001, and Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043 and direct staff accordingly." 2. "Deny General Plan Amendment No. 07-003, Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001, and Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043 with findings for denial." PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -3- (08sr44 GPA 07-03 ZMA 07-01 CUP 07-43 (The Ripcurl) 1 MCP BDDIGM ♦ 1 �0. wABNra ♦ ♦ s�.iaax 7MBEB7 ♦ 1 u''a� B � a .cnarucD !rD®ccowN ADAMS y^sr UOMNATO 1LIS r P & ! BANMG Subject Site h •, jj, �v r VICINITY MAP GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO.07-003/ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO. 07-001/ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 07-043 (THE RIPCURL-7302-7400 CENTER AVENUE) PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -4- (08sr44 GPA 07-03 ZMA 07-01 CUP 07-43(The Ripcurl) PROJECT PROPOSAL: General Plan Amendment No. 07-003 represents a request by the applicant to: 1. Amend the City's General Plan Land Use Element by changing the existing land use category on the 3.8 acre subject property from the current CG-F1-d (Commercial General-0.35 Floor Area Ratio—Design Overlay) to the proposed M-177-d (Mixed Use3.0 Floor Area Ratio—Design Overlay) designation; and 2. Amend the General Plan Land Use Element by removing the subject area from Subarea 5E of the Community District and Subarea Schedule pursuant to California Planning, Zoning, and Development Laws. Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001 represents a request by the applicant to amend the City's Zoning Map by changing the zoning designation on the subject property from CG (Commercial General) to MU- TCD (Mixed Use-Transit Center District) pursuant to Chapter 247 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance (HBZSO). Conditional Use Permit No. 2007-043 represents a request by the applicant to construct a mixed use residential and commercial development that consists of: ® 440 residential units (consisting of 11 live/work units) ■ 10,000 sq. ft. of commercial uses ■ 705 parking spaces for residents and visitors ■ Outdoor amenities such as a pool and spa area, fire pit, and movie projection area ■ Indoor amenities such as a fitness center, business center, conference room, clubhouse The Ripcurl Project proposes development on an approximately 3.8-acre site at the southeast corner of Gothard Street and Center Avenue, which is currently developed with a shopping center known as the College Country Center. The proposed project will include an approximately 382,700 square-foot mixed- use residential and commercial development that consists of 440 residential apartment units and 10,000 square feet of commercial uses. The project would be six stories in height with four levels of housing over three levels of parking (two levels of above ground parking and one level of subterranean parking). The retail component would be on the ground level adjacent to two levels of above grade parking. Outdoor amenities include a pool and spa area, fire pit and movie projection area. Indoor amenities include a fitness center, business center, conference room, and clubhouse. The composition of residential units is as follows: 151 studio units, 190 one-bedroom units, 88 two-bedroom units, and 11 live/work units. The range of unit sizes is summarized below: Residential Unit Types. "Number df Units Size Range " Average Unit Size Studio 151 465 sq. ft. to 669 sq. ft. 541 sq. ft One-Bedroom 190 536 sq. ft. to 817 sq. ft. 640 sq. ft. Two-Bedroom 88 872 sq. ft. to 1,285 sq. ft. 1,016 sq. ft. Live/Work 11 762 sq. ft. 762 sq. ft. PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -5- (08sr44 GPA 07-03 ZMA 07-01 CUP 07-43(The Ripcurl) ISSUES: Subiect Property and Surrounding Land Use, Zoning, and General Plan Designations: LOCATION. -GENERAL PLAN ZONING ` LAND USE Subject Property CG-F1-d(Commercial CG(Commercial Commercial Shopping General-0.35 Max. Floor Area General) Center—College Country Ratio—Design Overlay) Center North of Subject MV-F8-d(Mixed Use Vertical CG-H(Commercial Golden West Property(across Center Integration of Housing-1.5 General—Highrise Transportation Center Avenue) Max. Floor Area Ratio— Overlay) Design Overlay) South of the Subject CR-F2-d(Commercial CG (Commercial Vacant Retail Building Property Regional-0.50 Max. Floor General) (former Levitz Furniture Area Ratio—Design Overlay) Store) East of Subject CG-FI-d(Commercial CG (Commercial Southern California Property General-0.35 Max. Floor Area General); Edison transmission Ratio—Design Overlay); SP 13 (Crossings towers; Bella Terra Mall CR-F2-sp-mu(179) (Huntington Center) (across the Union Pacific (Commercial Regional-0.50 Specific Plan) Railroad right-of-way) Floor Area Ratio—Specific Plan Overlay—Mixed Use Overlay—(1.5 Max. Floor Area Ratio (Mixed Use)/0.5 Max. Floor Area Ratio (Commercial)/25 du/ac)) West of Subject P (RL)(Public—Low Density PS (Public—Semipublic) Golden West College Property(across Residential) Gothard Street) General Plan Conformance: The proposed General Plan Land Use Map designation on the subject property is M-F7-d (Mixed Use- 3.0 Floor Area Ratio—Design Overlay). The proposed General Plan Amendment, Zoning Map Amendment, and project are consistent with this designation and the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan as follows: A. Circulation Element Obiective CE 3.2: Encourage new development that promotes and expands the use of transit services. Policy CE 6.1.6: Maintain existing pedestrian facilities and require new development to provide pedestrian walkways and bicycle routes between developments, schools, and public facilities. PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -6- (08sr44 GPA 07-03 ZMA 07-01 CUP 07-43(The Ripcurl) B. Growth Management Element Policy GM 3.1.8: Promote traffic reduction strategies including alternate travel modes, alternate work hours, and a decrease of vehicle trips throughout the city. C. Housing Element Policy H 2.2: Facilitate the development of mixed-use projects in appropriate commercial areas, including stand-alone residential development (horizontal mixed-use) and housing above ground floor commercial uses (vertical mixed-use). Establish mixed use zoning regulations. Policy H 3.1: Encourage the production of housing that meets all economic segments of the community, including lower, moderate, and upper income households, to maintain a balanced community. Goal H 5: Provide equal housing opportunity. D. Land Use Element Goal LU 4: Achieve and maintain high quality architecture, landscape, and public open spaces in the City. Goal LU 4.2.4: Require that all development be designed to provide adequate space for access, parking, supporting functions, open space, and other pertinent elements. Goal LU 7: Achieve a diversity of land uses that sustain the City's economic viability, while maintaining the City's environmental resources and scale and character. Goal LU 8: Achieve a pattern of land uses that preserves, enhances, and establishes a distinct identity for the 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 principles discussed below: b. Vary uses and densities along the City's extended commercial corridors, such as Beach Boulevard. c. Increase diversification of community and local commercial nodes to serve adjacent residential neighborhoods. f. Site development to capitalize upon potential long-term transit improvements. Goal LU 9: Achieve the development of a range of housing units that provides for the diverse economic, physical, and social needs of existing and future residents of Huntington Beach. Policy LU 9.1.4: Require that recreational and open space amenities be incorporated in new multi- family developments and that they be accessible to and of sufficient size to be usable by all residents. PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -7- (08sr44 GPA 07-03 ZMA 07-01 CUP 07-43(The Ripcurl) Goal L U 10: Achieve the development of a range of commercial uses. Goal LU 11: Achieve the development of projects that enable residents to live in proximity to their jobs, commercial services, and entertainment, and reduce the need for automobile use. Policy LU 11.1.2: Limit commercial uses in mixed-use development projects to those uses that are compatible with the residences. Policy LU 11.1.4: Require the incorporation of adequate onsite open space and recreational facilities to serve the needs of the residents in mixed-use development projects. Policy LU IL 1.5: Require that mixed-use developments be designed to mitigate potential conflicts between the commercial and residential uses, considering such issues as noise, lighting, security, and truck and automobile access. Policy LU 11.1.6: Require that the ground floor of structures that horizontally integrate housing with commercial uses locate commercial uses along the street frontage (housing may be located to the rear and/or on upper floors). Policy LU 11.1.7: Require that mixed-use development projects be designed to achieve a consistent and high quality character, including the consideration of the: a. Visual and physical integration among the commercial and residential uses (Plates LU-3 and LU-4); b. Architectural treatment of building elevations to convey the visual character of multiple building volumes and individual storefronts and residential units. E. Noise Element Policy N 1.3.10: Require that mechanical equipment, such as air conditioning units or pool equipment, comply with the City's Noise Ordinance and Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. Policy N 1.5.1: Require that commercial and residential mixed-use structures minimize the transfer or transmission of noise and vibration from the commercial land use to the residential land use. The design measures may include: (1)the use of materials which mitigate sound transmission; or (2) the configuration of interior spaces to minimize sound amplification and transmission. F. Urban Design Element Goal UD 1.1: Enhance the visual image of the City of Huntington Beach G. Utilities Element Obiective U 5.1: Ensure that adequate natural gas, telecommunication, and electrical systems are provided. PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -8- (08sr44 GPA 07-03 ZMA 07-01 CUP 07-43(The Ripcurl) The proposed amendments to the General Plan and Zoning land use designations are a mechanism to achieve the goals of smart growth and sustainable development. The amendments would allow for a mixed use, transit-oriented, high density development thereby increasing housing options for diverse household types, promoting alternative modes of transportation, creating a local sense of place, reducing infrastructure and maintenance costs, and allowing for more efficient use of land resources. The area has a variety of complementary uses that are critical to any vibrant community such as commercial and entertainment uses, employment centers, a transit hub, and a school. Because of its location and unique features, the site would be appropriate in accommodating an infill development that is more compact in design and higher in density and compatible with the surrounding area. In doing so, multiple sustainable development principles are achieved, resulting in the social and economic well-being of the area. The benefits of mixed use developments include creating better places to live, work, and play, reducing dependence on the automobile, and lessening pollution and environmental degradation. Mixed use development is about widening the choices on where to live and how to travel, rejuvenating urban neighborhoods, bringing more people into everyday social interactions, and ensuring that communities continue to thrive. The proposed project would be a mixed-use, transit-oriented, and high-density development that offers a wide range of housing opportunities and options, accommodating different age groups, income levels, and household types. The project is required to meet the City's affordable housing ordinance obligations providing the equivalent of 10 percent of the units (on-site and/or off-site) as affordable. In addition, the project provides a concentration of living, shopping, entertainment, educational, and employment opportunities within walking distance of the Golden West Transportation Center. This development promotes the use of transit services as an alternative to reliance on the automobile as the primary mode of transportation. Because the project is located in close proximity to different activities and uses, it provides opportunities and convenience for many households to use alternate travel modes such as walking and biking to complete their daily routines and run errands. The structures of the proposed project are designed to convey a high quality visual image and character and ensure compatibility of residential and commercial uses. The project is designed with retail storefronts on the ground level and residential units above, incorporating design elements, building materials, and colors to differentiate and complement the residential and commercial components of the project. The proposed mix of retail and residential uses at the project site, along with high quality design and attractive pedestrian atmosphere, would activate the urban environment and revitalize community life. Zoning Compliance: Two of the entitlements associated with this project are to amend the Zoning designation for the site from General Commercial to Mixed Use-Transit Center District and to amend the HBZSO by adding Chapter 218 to establish the Mixed Use-Transit Center District zoning and development standards. The project will be required to comply with the adopted Mixed Use-Transit Center District zoning and development standards. PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -9- (08sr44 GPA 07-03 ZMA 07-01 CUP 07-43(The Ripcurl) Urban Design Guidelines Conformance: The proposed project has been analyzed for conformance with the Urban Design Guidelines, Chapter 3 (Multi-Family Residential), Chapter 4 (General Commercial), and Chapter 6 (Special Consideration Commercial Guidelines Mixed Use Projects). The applicant has completed the Urban Design Checklists for the proposed project and indicates compliance with the majority of the Guidelines (Attachment No. 16). The Urban Design Guidelines recommend specific design criteria for mixed use projects. In particular, several recommendations are discussed for site planning and building design. The Urban Design Guidelines for mixed use project site planning recommend incorporation of the following: ■ separate site access drive and parking facilities for residential and commercial uses ■ security gates for access to residential uses and residential parking areas ■ private open space areas for use by residents only The Urban Design Guidelines for mixed use project building design recommend incorporation of the following: ■ consistent architectural style and use of materials throughout the entire mixed-use project • storefront design consistent with commercial development guidelines and residential design consistent with multi-family development guidelines ■ separate entrances for residential and commercial uses when both uses are in the same structure The proposed site layout conforms with these design recommendations through the provision of separate access drives and parking facilities for residential and commercial uses. In addition, the project provides private open space either accessible only from the individual units or common open space on the podium level, separated from the commercial uses by one floor. The applicant is utilizing a variety of building materials, design elements, and colors to differentiate and complement the residential and commercial components of the project. Environmental Status: The project's potential environmental impacts are analyzed and discussed in a separate staff report. Prior to any action on General Plan Amendment No. 07-003, Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001 and Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043, it is necessary for the Planning Commission to review and act on Environmental Impact Report No. 07-004. Staff, in its initial study of the project, is recommending that Environmental Impact Report No. 07-004 be certified as adequate and complete with mitigation measures, findings of fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Although the project results in adverse impacts to the environment that cannot be mitigated or avoided, the Planning Commission may still approve the project if a Statement of Overriding Considerations is adopted. CEQA requires decision makers to balance the benefits of the proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project. If the benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the City may consider the adverse environmental effects acceptable. In this particular case, staff believes the economic and social PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -10- (08sr44 GPA 07-03 ZMA 07-01 CUP 07-43 (The Ripeurl) benefits of the proposed project outweigh the adverse impact to Population and Housing and Transportation/Traffic. The adverse Population and Housing and Transportation/Traffic impacts are unavoidable because it has been determined that no feasible mitigation is available or the mitigation that could be implemented is outside the purview of the City and the Applicant. Approval of the project changes the land use designation from Commercial General to Mixed Use and results in a new, optimally located mixed-use development that would be located in close proximity to transit uses and would serve as a model for modern residential development. In addition, the project would have the following benefits: 1. The project would establish zoning standards and implementation mechanisms applicable to mixed-use developments consistent with the policies and development framework of the City's General Plan and Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance to maximize land use opportunities. 2. The project would promote residential and commercial buildings that convey a high quality visual image and character, as well as provide for the development of mixed-use projects that integrate residential and commercial uses and ensure compatibility of these uses. 3. The project emphasizes compatibility and sensitivity to the existing uses surrounding the site and would include a variety of sustainable features, such as drought-tolerant landscaping, waterless urinals, roofing materials, and installation of low-flush water devices. The City is actively pursuing the feasibility of including additional features that would bring the building closer to LEED certification. 4. The project will maintain and enhance the community image of Huntington Beach through the design and construction of high quality development consistent with the Urban Design Element of the City's General Plan. 5. The project would foster walkability and reduced vehicle trips by locating close to an established transit center, college and shopping and other services. 6. The project would provide luxury apartments, filling an unmet niche in terms of housing production in the City as well as improving the supply of rental housing in the City. 7. The project will provide the equivalent of 10 percent of the units as affordable housing, consistent with City requirements. Following approval of the general plan amendment, zoning map amendment, zoning text amendment, and conditional use permit, the Planning Commission must approve CEQA Statement of Findings and Fact with a Statement of Overriding Considerations (Attachment No. 11). Coastal Status: Not applicable. Redevelopment Status: Not applicable. Design Review Board: The proposed project was submitted to the Design Review Board (DRB) on two occasions (July 17, 2008 and August 14, 2008). On July 17, 2008, the DRB reviewed the colors, materials, design, and preliminary plans for The Ripcurl Project. The Board was informed of staff s recommendations regarding compliance with the Urban Design Guidelines. The Board expressed several overall concerns during their initial PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -11- (08sr44 GPA 07-03 ZMA 07-01 CUP 07-43(The Ripcurl) review of the project. In summary, the Board expressed concerns regarding the use of different materials to differentiate the commercial and residential components of the project, accentuate the corner of the building, and the provision of vertical and horizontal articulations to the building. In response, the applicant altered the proposed architectural design, incorporated new building materials and colors, and garnered support from the Board. On August 14, 2008, the DRB recommended conceptual approval of the project with the following conditions of approval: 1. Provide architectural projections and recesses on all building elevations except for the building elevations that face each other (i.e. the east elevation of the west building and the west elevation of the east building). 2. Reduce the height of parapet walls to two feet and maintain the score-line design. 3. Provide a walkability/pedestrian access plan and landscape plans for Design Review Board approval. Subdivision Committee: Not applicable. Other Departments Concerns and Requirements: The Departments of Public Works, Fire, Building and Safety, Community Services, and Police have reviewed the project and recommended standard code requirements and conditions of approval. A summary of the applicable standard code requirements is included in a letter to the applicant and is provided for informational purposes only(Attachment No. 9). The Economic Development Department is recommending that 100 percent of the affordable housing requirement be located on-site. Public Notification: Legal notice was published in the Huntington Beach Independent on September 11, 2008, and notices were sent to property owners of record and occupants within a 500 ft. radius of the subject property, individuals/organizations requesting notification (Planning Department's Notification Matrix), applicant, interested parties, and individuals/organizations that commented on the environmental document. As of September 15, 2008, 57 letters were received supporting the project. Application Processing Dates: DATE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: MANDATORY PROCESSING DATE(S): Draft EIR: July 8, 2008 Within 1 year of complete application or July 8, 2009 General Plan Amendment: Not Applicable Not Applicable Zoning Map Amendment: Not Applicable Not Applicable Conditional Use Permit: August 5, 2008 Within 180 days from EIR Certification PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -12- (08sr44 GPA 07-03 ZMA 07-01 CUP 07-43(The Ripcurl) ANALYSIS: General Plan Amendment: The request is to amend the General Plan Land Use designation on the approximately 3.8-acre site from the current CG-F1-d (Commercial General0.35 Floor Area Ratio—Design Overlay) designation to the proposed M-F7-d (Mixed Use-3.0 Floor Area Ratio—Design Overlay) designation and to amend the General Plan Land Use Element by removing the subject area from Subarea 5E of the Community District and Subarea Schedule. The existing General Plan Land Use designation for the site is Commercial General (CG), which permits a range of commercial activities. Subarea 5E, "Student Center", allows community-serving commercial uses in two-story high buildings that achieve a unified "village" environment with common courtyards and pedestrian areas. The maximum allowable floor area ratio is 0.35 (57,934 sq. ft.) and the development is subject to special design standards. The proposed General Plan Land Use designation is Mixed Use (M), which allows for townhomes, garden apartments, and mid-/high-rise apartments and a range of commercial uses. To permit greater design flexibility and to address the uniqueness of a particular area, the exact density, location, and mix of uses are not specified. Staff proposes a maximum allowable floor area ratio of 3.0 and that the design overlay remain on the property, indicating the development is subject to special design standards. The proposed amendment for the General Plan Land Use designation to mixed use for the subject site is a mechanism to achieve the goals of smart growth and sustainable development, discussed in the companion staff report for ZTA No. 07-004. The subject site is surrounded by a variety of uses that are critical to any vibrant community such as commercial and entertainment uses (Bella Terra Mall and those along Edinger Avenue), employment centers (Towers at Bella Terra), a transit hub (Golden West Transportation Center), and a school (Golden West College). The site allows an opportunity for an infill development that is more compact in design and higher in density. In addition, the area in the vicinity of the project site is targeted for revitalization efforts. The draft Beach-Edinger Specific Plan includes a vision of smart growth and sustainable development, incorporating more intensive mixed use development for the Edinger Avenue segment specifically. The Village at Bella Terra, the site east to the project site, is also proposing a mixed use project. Furthermore, the site is located at the intersection of two arterials and in close proximity to the I-405 freeway. Because its unique location and in light of the current planning efforts, the project site is an appropriate location to accommodate the proposed growth while minimizing off-site impacts to other areas of the City. The proposed higher density and taller structures at the project site would be compatible with the surrounding area. Close proximity to a variety of uses offers convenient opportunities for people to live, work, and play without depending on the automobile and consider alternative modes of transportation such as walking or biking. Zoniniz Map Amendment: The request is to amend the Zoning designation on the 3.8-acre site from the current CG (Commercial General) designation to the proposed MU-TCD (Mixed Use-Transit Center District) designation. The Zoning Map Amendment would provide consistency with the proposed General Plan Land Use designation of Mixed Use. PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -13- (08sr44 GPA 07-03 ZMA 07-01 CUP 07-43 (The Ripcurl) The existing Zoning designation for the subject site is Commercial General(CG). This designation permits a full range of retail and service businesses such as but not limited to: Group Residential, Community and Human Services, Convalescent Facilities, Day Care, Heliports, Hospitals, Religious Assembly, Schools (private or public), Utilities (minor or major), Animal Sales and Services, Building Materials and Services, Commercial Recreation and Entertainment, Eating and Drinking Establishments, Maintenance and Repair Services, Offices, Retail Sales, Vehicle Equipment Repair, Visitor Accommodations, etc. Development standards permit: minimum lot size of 10,000 sq. ft., minimum lot width 100 feet, maximum building height of 50 feet, maximum floor area ratio of 1.5, and minimum of 8% landscaping. Additional requirements are identified in Chapter 211, Commercial Districts (Attachment No. 14). The proposed Mixed Use-Transit Center District Zoning designation is a new zoning designation that currently does not exist on the Zoning Map. As proposed, this designation permits multiple-family residential uses and a range of retail and service businesses such as but not limited to: Clubs and Lodges, Day Care, Religious Assembly, Schools (private and public), Eating and Drinking Establishments, Offices, Personal Services, Retail Sales, Visitor Accommodations, etc. Development standards permit: minimum lot size of 43,560 sq. ft. (one acre), minimum lot width 100 feet, maximum building height of 80 feet, maximum floor area ratio of 2.5, and minimum of 8% landscaping. Additional requirements are identified in the draft Ordinance for Chapter 218, Mixed Use-Transit Center District (Attachment No. 15). The amendment of the Zoning designation for the subject site from Commercial to Mixed Use-Transit Center District implements the proposed General Plan Land Use designation of Mixed Use. This change is related to the focus on smart growth and sustainable development mentioned in the General Plan Amendment section above. Mixed use development is a strategy to meet the goals of smart growth. The benefits of mixed use development include producing an environment which is both attractive and sustainable by increasing housing options for diverse household types, promoting alternative modes of transportation, creating a local sense of place, reducing infrastructure and maintenance costs, and allowing for more efficient use of land resources. Transit-oriented development is about widening the choices on where to live and how to travel, rejuvenating urban neighborhoods, and bringing more people into everyday social interactions. Conditional Use Permit: The primary factors to consider when analyzing this project are compatibility with surrounding land uses, density, site layout/design, compliance with the proposed Mixed Use-Transit Center District standards, and affordable housing. The following is a detailed discussion of these issues. Compatibility with Surrounding Land Uses In the vicinity of the project site, there is a mix of land uses such as commercial and entertainment uses (Bella Terra Mall and those along Edinger Avenue), employment centers (Towers at Bella Terra and Golden West College), an educational use (Golden West College), a transit hub (Golden West Transportation Center), and mixed-uses (Old World Village). Because of the project site's location, it allows an opportunity for an infill development that is more compact in design and higher in density while protecting the residential areas of the City. The project site is an appropriate location to combine housing PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -14- (08sr44 GPA 07-03 ZMA 07-01 CUP 07-43 (The Ripcurl) and economic activity to provide both living and employment options for a wide range of people. The mix of land uses contemplated by the proposed project as well as those already existing in the vicinity would create a dynamic environment where people can live, work, and play within walking distance. The population increase would enhance the economic viability of the area by supplying a customer base for the area businesses. Not only would the proposed project be compatible with the surrounding land uses, it would contribute to the synergy in creating better places to live within an urban context. Density The current General Plan and Zoning designations of Commercial General do not allow multi-family residential uses. Part of the request is to establish a new zoning designation and category of Mixed Use- Transit Center District in order to implement the proposed project. This zoning category would allow for high density residential and commercial uses within one-quarter mile of established transit centers. The intent is to provide pedestrian-friendly, transit-oriented developments in areas adjacent to existing transit infrastructure. The proposed Zoning Text Amendment for the Mixed Use-Transit Center District does not specify a density limit. Although there is no specified density limits in the proposed Mixed Use-Transit Center District, there are development standards that would restrict the mass and bulk of the project such as setbacks, building height, maximum floor area ratio, maximum site coverage, minimum open space, parking requirements, and building design standards. The Environmental Impact Report for The Ripcurl project analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project as well as identifies reasonable alternatives and appropriate mitigation measures. Four alternatives were evaluated for their ability to attain project objectives and avoid significant environmental impacts. Alternative 4: Reduced Project Alternative — Option 2, consisting of 385 residential units and 8,500 sq. ft. of commercial/retail space, was identified as the environmentally superior project. Implementation of this Alternative would reduce the cumulative significant and unavoidable traffic impact caused by the proposed project to a less-than-significant level. Alternative 4 would satisfy all of the identified project objectives related to developing dense residential uses within close proximity to transit, schools, and regional activities as well as retail opportunities. Staff is recommending approval of a modified Alternative 4 project with 385 residential units but 10,000 sq. ft. of commercial/retail space. The density of the recommended project would be approximately 101 units per net acre as opposed to the applicant's proposed project of approximately 115 units per net acre. Since the area surrounding the project site is targeted for revitalization efforts that include more intensive mixed use development, the more compact design and high density of the proposed project is appropriate for the site. In addition, the development of the proposed project at 101 units per net acre would have less than significant impacts on the environment, with the exception of one traffic impact that remains significant and unavoidable because the intersection is controlled by Caltrans and implementation of the mitigation measure cannot be guaranteed. Finally, the proposed Mixed Use-Transit Center District zoning regulations do not include a density limitation but incorporate other development standards to shape the bulk and mass of the project consistent with the intent and vision of the planning effort along the Beach/Edinger corridor. PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -15- (08sr44 GPA 07-03 ZMA 07-01 CUP 07-43(The Ripcurl) Site Layout and Architectural Treatment The proposed project is designed as a vertical mixed-use development with the retail and live/work component on the ground level and the residential component above. Having separation between residential and commercial uses would ensure compatibility of these uses on-site. Access to the development will be taken from both Gothard Street and Center Avenue. Pedestrian access to the retail stores and live/work units is provided along the project frontage on Gothard Street and Center Avenue. Pedestrian access to the residential units on the podium level is provided by two secured lobbies at the street level. Primary access to commercial parking is from Gothard Street and to residential parking from Center Avenue. Once inside the parking area, there is internal circulation but there is a secured gate that separates the commercial parking from residential parking. In addition, a driveable surface access lane is provided along the southern edge of the property for emergency vehicle access. This layout is designed to mitigate potential conflicts between these uses such as noise, security, and access. The first residential or podium level is designed to have residential units that surround two central courtyards that are open to the sky. This level includes open space amenities that are available for the tenants' use, including a pool and spa area, fire pit, and movie projection area. Additionally, there are also a fitness center, business center, conference room and clubhouse on the podium level. There is also a creatively designed lounge/roof top deck element on the fifth level that allows interaction with the streetscape below. The open space amenities are centrally located and provide a variety of recreational options for tenants. The layout of the open space areas provides a focal point for the development and facilitates social interaction among neighbors. The architectural treatment of the buildings includes numerous features that contribute to an attractive design, such as building offsets, distinct entries, courtyards, balconies, varied rooflines, and window treatments (Attachment No. 7). The architectural theme of the project is a coastal Mediterranean design. The project is utilizing a variety of building materials, design elements, and colors to differentiate and complement the residential and commercial components of the project as well as to accentuate the corner of the building. The use of building materials (stone, ceramic tiles, sandblasted concrete, plaster, metal trellis, fabric awnings), colors (terra cotta, limestone, cool whites, blue, gray-green), and paving materials (colored and enhanced concrete pavers) are designed to convey a high quality visual image and character for the development. Incorporation of the Design Review Board's recommended changes to the building elevations and parapet walls will enhance the building's architecture and make it more compatible with the character of the surrounding area. Compliance with Proposed Mixed Use-Transit Center District Development standards The project would comply with the proposed Mixed Use-Transit Center District (MU-TCD) development standards in the following areas: • minimum lot area and lot width ■ minimum setbacks • maximum building height ■ maximum floor area ratio ■ minimum landscaping . minimum unit size • building design standards PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -16- (08sr44 GPA 07-03 ZMA 07-01 CUP 07-43(The Ripcurl) The project as designed with 440 units would not comply with the minimum open space, off-street parking, and private storage space requirements. Below is a comparison of the staff recommended MU- TCD requirements and the proposed project provisions. Dever ariils t �4 ,._ osed 1VI�T TCD The Ripculk=hm ` . 4 Minimum ®pen Space Per Residential Unit 66,000 sq. ft. (150 sq. ft./unit) 60,443 sq. ft. (137 sq. ft./unit) Private Open Space 26,400 sq. ft. (60 sq. ft./unit) 22,000 sq. ft. (50 sq. ft./unit) Minimum Dimension 6 ft. 4 ft. 6 in. Off-Street Parking and Loading Residential 151 studio units 151 spaces(1/unit) 151 spaces (1/unit) 190 one-bedroom units 190 spaces(1/unit) 190 spaces (1/unit) 88 two-bedroom units 176 spaces(2/unit) 176 spaces (2/unit) 11 live/work units 11 spaces(1/unit) 11 spaces (1/unit) guest parking 110 spaces(0.25/unit) 44 spaces (0.10/unit) Commercial(10,000 sf) 50 spaces(1/200 sq. ft.) 50 spaces (1/200 sq. ft.) Extra 83 spaces Total Required 688 spaces 705 spaces tandem and compact parking spaces 518 standard spaces are not allowed 105 tandem spaces 82 compacts aces Private Storage Space per Unit 50 cu. ft. 0 cu. ft. If the proposed Mixed Use-Transit Center District development standards are adopted, the applicant would be required to modify the design to comply with all development standards, including minimum open space, off-street parking, and private storage space. The staff recommended approval of a 385-unit project would effect the requirements for open space and off-street parking. Since the parking requirements would be established by the Mixed Use-Transit Center District, compliance with the parking requirements cannot be determined at this time. However, based on staff recommendations of the parking requirements in the proposed Mixed Use-Transit Center District, 688 standard parking spaces would be required with no allowance for compact or tandem parking. The applicant has indicated that allowing minimal amount of compact and tandem parking results in a better garage design, minimizes the square footage needed for parking, and reduces impacts associated with the construction and operation of the parking facility (Attachment No. 6 of the ZTA Staff Report). If the project is reduced from 440 units to 385 units, the applicant has indicated that the number of 2-bedroom units would increase. As a consequence the required amount of parking will increase to 717 parking spaces as indicated in the table below. Ultimately, the proposed project is required to comply with the adopted parking standards in the Mixed Use-Transit Center District. PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -17- (08sr44 GPA 07-03 ZMA 07-01 CUP 07-43(The Ripcurl) Off-Street.Parking The Ripcurl,'as Proposed =, The Ripctitfas Rec6inmerided 4401Inits' R 385.Units Residential studio units 151 spaces(151 units) 50 spaces (50 units) one-bedroom units 190 spaces (190 units) 135 spaces(135 units) two-bedroom units 176 spaces (88 units) 370 spaces(185 units) live/work units 11 spaces(11 units) 15 spaces(15 units) guest parking 110 spaces 97 spaces Commercial (10,000 sf) 50 spaces(1/200 sq. ft.) 50 spaces(1/200 sq. ft.) Total Required 688 spaces 717 spaces Affordable Housing The proposed mixed-use development would be required to provide affordable housing. According to the HBZSO, all new residential developments are required to provide the equivalent of 10 percent of the total units (44 units for the 440-unit proposed project, or 39 units for the reduced project of 385) as affordable. Affordability and income levels are based on Orange County median income levels and whether the affordable units are for-sale or for rent. The applicant provided a draft affordable housing plan (Attachment No. 10)that proposed to provide the affordable units in the following manner: ■ affordable units will be made available to very low, low, or moderate-income households ■ at least one-fifth of the total required affordable units will be provided on-site ■ up to four-fifths of the total required affordable units will be provided off-site at one or multiple sites within the City using some combination of the following: building new units, renovating existing units, acquiring existing units, subsidizing the construction of another affordable housing project, partnering with another group to create affordable housing. As part of the Mixed Use-Transit Center District zoning text amendment, staff is recommending that the proposed project comply with all the requirements set forth in Section 230.26 of the HBZSO, Affordable Housing. The applicant has submitted a letter in conjunction with the Zoning Text Amendment report indicating their agreement with that recommendation. Staff would note that the only portion of the applicant's plan that does not currently comply with the HBZSO is the request to be able to provide some of the units at the moderate income level. The City's existing affordable housing ordinance requires that affordable rental units be provided to very low or low income households. In practice, the City has only required the affordable rental units at the low income level due to the fact that very low income units can realistically only be provided with significant subsidy from a governmental or non-profit agency. The ordinance also states that for-sale units can be at the median income level. Based on recent direction from the City Council Ad Hoc Committee on Affordable Housing, staff is working on revisions to the affordable housing ordinance to remove the language regarding very low income units and to increase the median income level to moderate income, which is what the City's affordable housing policy had been for more than a decade. The revisions to the ordinance are tentatively schedule for Planning Commission and City Council action in the next two months. PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -18- (08sr44 GPA 07-03 ZMA 07-01 CUP 07-43(The Ripcurl) Based on the nature of the project and the fact that the affordable housing ordinance may be modified prior to The Ripcurl applicant receiving a building permit, or even final approvals, staff recommends a condition of approval as follows: Prior to submittal for building permits, the applicant shall submit an Affordable Housing Agreement for review by the City of Huntington Beach City Council. The Agreement will provide for a minimum of 33 percent of the affordable housing requirement as affordable to low income households on-site. The remaining affordable housing requirement may be satisfied off-site at either the low or median income level, pursuant to the HBZSO, and the method and location of off-site compliance shall be set forth in the Agreement. The income levels of any of the units may be increased consistent with any change to the City's Affordable Housing Ordinance prior to execution of the Agreement; however, in no case shall the income requirements be more restrictive than as currently required by this Condition of Approval. The Affordable Housing Agreement shall be approved and recorded by the City prior to issuance of building permits. If the project is approved with 385 units, this condition would result in a minimum of 13 low income rental units and 372 market rate rental units on the project site. The remaining 26 affordable units could be provided off-site as (currently) median-income level for-sale units or as low-income rental units. While staffs recommendation of 33 percent of the units on-site results in a greater financial burden on the applicant than their proposal of 20 percent, staff believes that this is reasonable given the greater density that is being recommended for the site. Should the project be further reduced in size, staff would recommend a smaller percentage of affordable units on-site. Finally, staff does not think that a more restrictive affordable housing obligation should be imposed on the project in recognition of the important contribution that this project will make to the City's rental stock. As documented in the recent Housing Element update, the City's vacancy rate for rental housing is approximately two percent; however, industry standards call for a five percent rate. This is indicative of how needed rental housing is in Huntington Beach. The City has not had a new rental project of the caliber and size of The Ripcurl project in over a decade. Even market rate rental housing provides an affordable housing alternative for a variety of household types, from single person households to empty nesters, and is an essential component in accommodating the housing needs of the diverse population in the city. Summary Staff finds that the proposed project is compatible with surrounding uses in terms of density, architecture, site layout, design, access, and other development standards. The current Commercial General land use designations do not allow for residential uses but the proposed establishment of a new zoning designation of Mixed Use Transit Center District would allow for the implementation of the proposed project. The site layout, including vertical mixed-use design, project access, location of common open space, maximizes the use of the site and ensures compatibility between commercial and residential uses. The inclusion of many design features, building materials, and colors into the architectural design of the building enhances the project and creates a high quality development. The development standards in the proposed Mixed Use-Transit Center District would ensure that the proposed project would be compatible PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -19- (08sr44 GPA 07-03 ZMA 07-01 CUP 07-43(The Ripcurl) with the surrounding land uses. Moreover, the project would provide much needed rental housing in the city. Therefore, staff supports the proposed amendments to the General Plan and Zoning designations as well as the proposed development of a mixed use project with 385 residential units and 10,000 sq. ft. of commercial/retail space. ATTACHMENTS: 1rnztt Cit C-6unCti Resolution No. for- Genezil Plan Ameiraimen4 No. 07 0 2. Suggested Findings for-Zoning Map Amendmei4 No. 07 001 3. Draft Ordinanee No. for-Zoning Map Amendment Ne. 07 001 4. General Plan Land Use Element- Existing Land Use Designation Exhibit and Excerpt of Existing Table LU-4 Community District and Subarea Schedule 5. Zoning Map-Existing Zoning Designation Exhibit 6. Suggested Findings and Conditions of Appr-oval for- Conditional Use Permit Ne. 07 043 7. Site Plan, Floor-Plans, > > 8.—nqjeEt Naffative dated Febfumy-21, 2008 9. Standard Code Requirements Letter dated July 3, 2008 10. Draft Affor-dable Hottsing-Plan dated August 1, 2008 11. GFQA Statement of Findings and Faet with Statement of Oveffiding Considerations EIR Ne. 07 004 12. Mitigation Ater-ing and Repel ing-Program EIR No. 07 004 13-Envir-onmental impac-t Repett '.07-004- Not Aftnehed (Available at City H t 3d-F4eer- Planning Department) 14. HBZSO Chapter 211—Commercial Districts 1 c�Pter 218 Mixed Use Transit Center-Distr-iet(Staff Ree,,,,,,..-endat; 16. Design Review Board Checklists Completed by the Applicant (Multi Family Residential, General Commercial, Mixed Use Projects) 17. Letters Received Regarding the Proposed Project 18. Letter from Red Oak InvestmentsSummary of The Ripcurl Mixed Use Project SH:HF:MBB:TN:lw PC Staff Report—9/23/08 -20- (08sr44 GPA 07-03 ZMA 07-01 CUP 07-43(The Ripcurl) E35. Nrni1YN1i .TkA�� Lb � � ��_ - r 5 n � '11 Q _ 3 err �.�CL "I A crJ Y��YiS�Mtl y, ka. I w. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER LAND USE ELEMEVr TABLE LU4(Cont.) Community District and Subarea Schedule `:Si>___-<:_- _:;:_:`;-'>: :;_:__.:;c<scS•+--:.;:.�.:�-:::�:>::«;>s:.; ::.::._>::_s::: <—:::::;-:;;r- -- -- <>_£:;:c->:aRz:> >::»: uharea•;:: .:: . -. -_-_-- - 1es_-=:__ - 5C Permitted Uses Category Commercial Regional C<CR") Edinger Region-serving commercial uses, including"big-box" retail uses permitted Corridor by the"CR"land use category- Density/Intensity Category: • Height: three(3)stories Design and Category: Special Design Development • Design and site development as a cohesive and integrated center as _ stipulated by Policy LU 10.1.15. • . Mitigate noise and vehicular impacts that may occur on adjacent residential neighborhoods. • Implement extensive streetscape improvements (landscape, signage, lighting,etc.)along Edinger. 5D Permitted Uses Category: Mixed Use("M") "Old World" Community-serving commercial uses, motellbed and breakfast, restaurants, cultural facilities, and similar uses (as permitted by the "CG" land use category)and free-standing multi-family housing- Density/Intensity Category: "-1`2/45" • Motel: 12 units • Height: three(3)stories Design and Category. Special Design Development New development shall be designed to be consistent with the style of existing buildings. • vide pedestrian to uses within the subarea and adjacent cente . 5E Permitted Uses Category: Commercial General("CG") "Student Community-serving commercial uses permitted by the "CG" land use Center" category- Density/Intensity Category: "-Fl" • Height two(2)stories Design and Category. Special Design(" ) Development • Design and site development to achieve a unified"village"environment (as defined by Policy LU 10.1.12). • Locate buildings around common courtyards and pedestrian areas. • Discourage the development of office uses on the fast floor_ • Establish pedestrian linkages to Golden West College and adjacent regional commercial centers. THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH GENERAL PLAN II-LU-57 ATTACHMENT N®. ______�' r lfd •.�3 sG / d 56 �1! 5F 5D .6B•. � /• 88 86�- SE 5C �i�•. - 4G 8B — 88 - -- 4G- --—9A--- - —_1= _9D= �9C fi . 86 ---- 98 88 gE ---- — ,;� —8B — 8B 9F - a 4G /f� 4G _ 8A y� °O� 4G -- ' �•• 4G 4A 8B j 88`�1 Pacific Coast trighway LEGEND \4J City Boundary _ Old Town -_ - Beach Boulevard Downtown - PCH Coastal Corridor Civic Center Node Pier Regional ' Commercial Nodes =_ Industrial Nodes ---- Commercial Core I= HUNTINGTON BEACH SUB-AREA MAP II-LU-66 City of Huntington Beach General Plan ATTAr.RMEN T NO. __._---- { s a _ s d Ok iG Subject Site Proposed Zoning � I r Y i t s � g CG CG CG CG M CG ^ aCG E.G' C,G ` IG RMK. R 1 R RIVIR Wo - _ � �� .. �. gr i J® ' Affl City ®f Huntington Beach 2000 MAIN STREET CAUFORNIA 92648 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING July 3, 2008 Andrew Nelson 2101 Business Center Drive#230 Irvine CA 92612 SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 07-003; ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO. 07-001; ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 07-004; CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 07-043; DESIGN REVIEW NO. 07-031 (THE RIPCURL PROJECT)-7302-7400 CENTER AVENUE PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION CODE REQUIREMENTS Dear Mr. Nelson: In order to assist you with your development proposal, staff has reviewed the project and identified applicable city policies, standard plans, and development and use requirements, excerpted from the City of Huntington Beach Zoning & Subdivision Ordinance and Municipal Codes. This list is intended to help you through the permitting process and various stages of project implementation. It should be noted.that this requirement list is in addition to any"conditions of approval adopted by the Planning Commission- Please note that if the design of your project or if site conditions change, the list may also change based upon modifications to your project and the applicable city policies, standard plans, and development and use requirements. The attached project implementation code requirements may be appealed to the Planning Commission as a matter separate from the associated entitlement(s)within ten calendar days of the approval of the project pursuant to the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Section 248.24. The appeal fee is$494.00. If you would like a clarification of any of these requirements, an explanation of the Huntington Beach Zoning & Subdivision Ordinance and Municipal Codes, or believe some of the items listed do not apply to your project, and/or you would like to discuss them in further detail, please contact me at 714-374-1744 (tnquyen _surfcity-hb.org) and/or the respective source department(contact person below). Sincerely, �T �� - TESS NGUYEN Associate Planner Enclosures cc: Gerald Caraig,Building&Safety Department—714-374-1575 Herb Fauland,Planning Manager Lee Caldwell,Fire Department—714-536-5531 Ken Small,Police—714-536-5902 Steve Bogart,Public Works—714-536-5431 Jason Kelly,Planning Department Amstar/Red Oak Huntington Beach,LLC,Property Owner Project File Phone 714-536-5271 Fax 714-374-1540 www.surfcity-hb.org ATTACHMENT Nu. He ° CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION CODE REQUIREMENTS HUNTINGTON BEACH DATE: JULY 3, 2008 PROJECT NAME: THE RIPCURL ENTITLEMENTS: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO_ 07-003/ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO. 07-001/ZONiNG TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 07- 00E/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 07-043/DESIGN REVIEW NO.07-031 PROJECT LOCATION: 7302-7400 CENTER AVENUE, HUNTINGTON BEACH PLAN REVIEWER: TESS NGUYEN, ASSOCIATE PLANNER TELEPHONE/E-MAIL: (714) 374-1744/tnguyen@surfcity-hb.org PROJECT DESCRIPTION: TO PERMIT A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF 440 RESIDENTIAL UNiTS AND 10,000 SQ. FT. OF COMMERCIAL USES; TO AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION; TO AMEND THE ZONING DESIGNATION; TO ESTABLISH THE MIXED-USE TRANSIT CENTER DISTRICT. The following is a list of code requirements deemed applicable to the proposed project based on plans received and dated February 21, 2008. The list is intended to assist the applicant by identifying requirements which must be satisfied during the various stages of project permitting and implementation. A list of conditions of approval adopted by the Planning Commission in conjunction with the requested entitlement(s), d any, will also be provided upon final project approval. If you have any questions regarding these requirements, please contact the Plan Reviewer. 1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations approved by the Planning Commission shall be the conceptually approved design with the following modifications: a. Elevations shall depict approved colors and building materials. b. Parking lot striping shall comply with Chapter 231 of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and Title 24, California Administrative Code. c. Depict all utility apparatus, such as but not limited to, back flow devices and Edison transformers on the site plan. Utility meters shall be screened from view from public right-of-ways. Electric transformers in a required front or street side yard shall be enclosed in subsurface vaults. Backflow prevention devices shall be prohibited in the front yard setback and shall be screened from view. d. All exterior mechanical equipment shall be screened from view on all sides. Rooftop mechanical equipment shall be setback a minimum of 15 feet from the exterior edges of the building. Equipment to be screened includes, but is not limited to, heating, air conditioning, refrigeration equipment, plumbing lines, ductwork and transformers. Said screening shall be architecturally compatible with the building in terms of materials and ATTACHMENT NO. �: - Page 2 of 5 colors_ If screening is not designed specifically into the building, a rooftop mechanical equipment plan showing proposed screening must be submitted for review and approval with the application for building permit(s). e_ Depict the location of all gas meters, water meters, electrical panels, air conditioning units, mailboxes (as approved by the United States Postal Service), and similar items on the site plan and elevations_ If located on a building, they shall be architecturally integrated with the design of the building, non-obtrusive, not interfere with sidewalk areas and comply with required setbacks. f. All parking area fighting shall be energy efficient and designed so as not to produce glare on adjacent residential properties_ Security lighting shall be provided in areas accessible to the public during nighttime hours, and such lighting shall be on a time- clock or photo-sensor system. (HBZSO 231.18(C)) g. Project data information shall include the flood zone, base flood elevation and lowest building floor elevation(s) per NAVD88 datum. h. Bicycle parking facilities shall be provided in accordance with the provisions of HBZSO Section 231.20—Bicycle Parking. 2_ Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the following shall be completed: a. The applicant shall follow all procedural requirements and regulations of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and any other local, state, or federal law regarding the removal and disposal of any hazardous material including asbestos, lead, and PCB's. These requirements include but are not limited to: survey, identification of removal methods, containment measures, use and treatment of water, proper truck . hauling, disposal procedures, and proper notification to any and all involved agencies. b. Pursuant to the requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District, an asbestos survey shall be completed. c_ The applicant shall complete all Notification requirements of the South Coast Air Quality Management District. d. The City of Huntington Beach shall receive written verification from the South Coast Air Quality Management District that the Notification procedures have been completed_ e. All asbestos shall be removed from all buildings prior to demolition of any portion of any building. f. All facets of the project related to historic preservation shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Huntington Beach. The applicant shall provide written notice of any proposed demolition to the Planning Department, for review by the City of Huntington Beach Historic Resources Board, a minimum of 45 days in advance of permit issuance. The HRB may relocate, fully document and/or preserve significant architectural elements. The applicant/property owner shall not incur any costs associated with moving or documenting the structure by the Board. 3. Prior to issuance of grading permits,the following shall be completed: b. At least 14 days prior to any grading activity, the applicant/developer shall provide notice in writing to property owners of record and tenants of properties within a 500-foot radius of the project site as noticed for the public hearing. The notice shall include a general description of planned grading activities and an estimated timeline for commencement and completion of work and a contact person name with phone number. Prior to Page 3 of 5 issuance of the grading permit, a copy of the notice and list of recipients shall be submitted to the Planning Department_ c_ Blockwall/fencing plans (including a site plan, section drawings and elevations, depicting the height and material of all retaining walls, freestanding walls and fences) consistent with the grading plan, shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Department. Double walls shall be prohibited. Prior to construction of any new property line walls or fences, a plan, approved by the owners of adjacent properties, and identifying the removal of any existing walls, shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. The plans shall identify proposed wall and fence materials, seep holes and drainage. 4. Prior to submittal for building permits, the following shall be completed: a. One set of project plans, revised pursuant to Condition of Approval No. 1, shall be submitted for review, approval and inclusion in the entitlement file, to the Planning Department. b. Zoning entitlement conditions of approval, code requirements identified herein and code requirements identified in separately transmitted memorandum from the Departments of Fire and Public Works shall be printed verbatim on one of the first three pages of all the working drawing sets used for issuance of building permits (architectural, structural, electrical, mechanical and plumbing) and shall be referenced in the sheet index. The minimum font size utilized for printed text shall be 12 point_ 5. Prior to issuance of building permits,the following shall be completed: a. An interim parking and building materials storage plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department to assure adequate parking and restroom facilities are available for employees, customers and contractors during the project's construction phase and that adjacent properties will not be impacted by their location. The plan shall also be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department and Public Works Department The applicant shall obtain any necessary encroachment permits from the Department of Public Works. b. A gated entryway .(access control devices) plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department. The gated entryway shall comply with Fire Department Standard No. 403. In addition, the gated entryway plan shall be reviewed by the United States Postal Service. Prior to the installation of any gates, such plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning, Fire and Public Works Departments. c. A planned sign program for all signage shall be submitted to the Planning Department_ Said program shall be approved prior to the first sign request. d. A Mitigation Monitoring Fee for EIR No. 07-04 shall be paid to the Planning Department pursuant to the fee schedule adopted by resolution of the City Council (City of Huntington Beach Planning Department Fee Schedule). e. All new commercial and industrial development and all new residential development not covered by Chapter 254 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance, except for mobile home parks, shall pay a park fee, pursuant to the provisions of HBZSO Section 230.20—Payment of Park Fee. The fees shall be paid and calculated according to a schedule adopted by City Council resolution (City of Huntington Beach Planning Department Fee Schedule). ATTACHMENT NO. ��- Page 4 of 5 f_ Developers of projects with 50 or more units or project sites consisting of five acres or larger shall conduct an analysis to determine their base flood elevation (BFE) if the project is located in a flood zone without a BFE noted on the FEMA flood map. 6_ During demolition, grading, site development, and/or construction, the following shall be adhered to: a_ Construction equipment shall be maintained in peak operating condition to reduce emissions. b. Use low sulfur (0.5%) fuel by weight for construction equipment. c_ Truck idling shall be prohibited for periods longer than 10 minutes_ d_ Attempt to phase and schedule activities to avoid high ozone days first stage smog alerts_ e. Discontinue operation during second stage smog alerts. f_ Ensure clearly visible signs are posted on the perimeter of the site identifying the name and phone number of a field supervisor to contact for information regarding the development and any construction/grading activity. g_ All Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and Municipal Code requirements including the Noise Ordinance. All activities including truck deliveries associated with construction, grading, remodeling, or repair shall be limited to Monday - Saturday 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM_ Such activities are prohibited Sundays and Federal holidays. 7. The structure(s) cannot be occupied, the final building permit(s) cannot be approved until the following has been completed: a_ All improvements must be completed in accordance with approved plans, except as provided for by conditions of approval. b. The applicant shall obtain the necessary permits from the South Coast Air Quality Management District and submit a copy to Planning Department. c. Compliance with all conditions of approval specified herein shall be verified by the Planning Department. d. All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material, shall be disposed of at an off-site facility equipped to handle them- e- A Certificate of Occupancy must be approved by the Planning Department and issued by the Building and Safety Department. 8. The Development Services Departments (Building & Safety, Fire, Planning and Public Works) shall be responsible for ensuring compliance with all applicable code requirements and conditions of approval. The Director of Planning may approve minor amendments to plans and/or conditions of approval as appropriate based on changed circumstances, new information or other relevant factors. Any proposed plan/project revisions shall be called out on the plan sets submitted for building permits. Permits shall not be issued until the Development Services Departments have reviewed and approved the proposed changes for conformance with the intent of the Planning Commission's action. if the proposed changes are of a substantial nature, an amendment to the original entitlement reviewed by the ATTAGENT NO °� Page 5 of 5 Planning Commission may be required pursuant to the provisions of HBZSO Section 241.18_ 9_ 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_ 10.Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043 shall not become effective until General Plan Amendment No. 07-003, Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001, and Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004 have been approved by the City Council and is in effect. 11-Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043 shall not become effective until the ten calendar day appeal period following the approval of the entitlements has elapsed_ 12_Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043 shall become null and void unless exercised within one year of the date of final approval or such extension of time as may be granted by the Director pursuant to a written request submitted to the Planning Department a minimum 30 days prior to the expiration date. 13.The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043 pursuant to a public hearing for revocation, if any violation of the conditions of approval, Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance or Municipal Code occurs. 14.The project shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Municipal Code, Building & Safety Department and Fire Department, as well as applicable local, State and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards, except as noted herein_ 15. Construction shall be limited to Monday— Saturday 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM_ Construction shall be prohibited Sundays and Federal holidays. 16.All landscaping shall be maintained in a neat and clean manner, and in conformance with the HBZSO. Prior to removing or replacing any landscaped areas, check with the Departments of Planning and Public Works for Code requirements. Substantial changes may require approval by the Planning Commission_ 17.All permanent, temporary, or promotional signs shall conform to Chapter 233 of the HBZSO. Prior to installing any new signs, changing sign faces, or installing promotional signs, applicable permit(s) shall be obtained from the Planning Department_ Violations of this ordinance requirement may result in permit revocation, recovery of code enforcement costs, and removal of installed signs. 18. lave entertainment and/or outdoor dining in excess of 400 sq. ft shall not be permitted unless a conditional use permit for this specific use is reviewed and approved. Outdoor dining occupying less than 400 sq. ft_ is subject to Neighborhood Notification and approval by the Director of Planning. 19.Alcoholic beverage sales shall be prohibited unless a conditional use permit for this particular use is reviewed and approved. ATTACHMENT NO. JJ HUNTINGTON BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT HUNTINGTON BEACH CONDITIONS + �g ® p® ® ®� SUGGESTED CONDIT IONS ®F APPROVAL DATE: JUNE 9, 2008 City 0f Hunvingy-,o= S-e'cjc:i PROJECT NAME: THE RIPCURL JUN 10 2008 ENTITLEMENTS: CUP 07-043 PLNG APPLICATION NO. 2007-0219 DATE OF PLANS: FEB 21, 2008 PROJECT LOCATION: 7302-7400 CENTER AVENUE PROJECT PLANNER TESS NGUYEN, ASSOCIATE PLANNER TELEPHONE/E-MAIL: 714-374-1744/TNGUYEN@SURFCITY-HB.ORG PLAN REVIEWER: STEVE BOGART, SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER TELEPHONE/E-MAIL: 714-374-1692/SBOGART(a)-SURFCITY-HB.ORG PROJECT DESCRIPTION: TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SIX-STORY MIXED- USE PROJECT CONSISTING OF 440 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, 10,000 SF OF RETAIL USES, AND AMENITIES SUCH AS POOL/SPA AREA, FIRE PIT, MOVIE PROJECTION AREA, FITNESS CENTER,CONFERENCE ROOM,AND CLUBHOUSE. THE PROJECT INCLUDES FOUR LEVELS OF HOUSING OVER THREE LEVELS OF PARKING (ONE LEVEL OF PARKING BELOW GRADE AND TWO LEVELS OF PARKING ABOVE GRADE). THE RETAIL COMPONENT 1S LOCATED ON THE GROUND LEVEL ADJACENT TO THE TWO LEVELS OF ABOVE GRADE PARKING. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL APPLY TO THE SUBJECT PROJECT: 1. The City reserves the right to require the property owner to dedicate a portion of the private onsite fire water system to become a future public water system that will be owned and maintained by the City; and shall require the property owner to dedicate a minimum ten (10) feet water utility easement (five feet on either side of the water pipeline and appurtenances) for any portion of the private onsite fire water system that will become public and any new water pipelines/facilities constructed within the subject property that will be part of the public water system. 2. The City reserves the right to require the property owner to enter into a Special Utility Easement Agreement (SUEA) with the City for any portion of the private on-site fire water system that will be converted to a public water system and any new water pipelines/facilities constructed within the subject property that will be part of the public water system. 3. To be consistent with the City's condition to convert a portion of the private onsite fire water system to a future public water system, backflow protection devices are required on all 6_\Engineering Division\ELLIOYIAConditions 2008\Center 7400-RIPCURL\Center 7302-7400 CLIP 07-043(PA 2007-219)Conditions 6-9- 08.doc ATTACHMENT O. Page 2 of 2 3 individual water service connections (domestic, irrigation and fire) served from the private on-site domestic and fire water pipelines. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT: 1. Raker braces per the preliminary Geotechnical Report (dated December 12, 2006) shall be used for lateral support of the temporary shoring during the construction phase of the project. 2. Tie-back anchors will not be allowed in the public right-of-way (under Gothard Street or Center Avenue) or under any adjacent private property (Levitz and Southern California Edison). 3. A Shoring Plan prepared by a Licensed Civil or Structural Engineer shall be submitted to the Public Works Department (for reference only) with first submittal of the Precise Grading Plan. i 2 GAEngineering Division\ELL10Tt1Conditions 2008\Center 7400-RIPCURLCenter 7302 7400 CUP 07-043(PA 2007-219)Conditions 6-9- 08 dac ATTACHMENT N®. �� JJ ' HUNTI GTON BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT NUNTINGrON BEACH PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION CODE REQUIREMENTS DATE: JUNE 9, 2008 PROJECT NAME: THE RIPCURL ENTITLEMENTS: CUP 07-043 PLNG APPLICATION NO. 2007-0219 July 10 Z008 DATE OF PLANS: FEB 21, 2008 PROJECT LOCATION: 7302-7400 CENTER AVENUE PROJECT PLANNER TESS NGUYEN, ASSOCIATE PLANNER TELEPHONEIE-MAIL: 714-374-17441 TNGUYEN@SURFCITY-HB.ORG PLAN REVIEWER: STEVE BOGART, SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER 11A TELEPHONEIE-MAIL: 714-374-1692 I SBOGART(c_SURFCITY-HB.ORG PROJECT DESCRIPTION: TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SIX-STORY MIXED-USE PROJECT CONSISTING OF 440 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, 10,000 SF OF RETAIL USES, AND AMENITIES SUCH AS POOUSPA AREA, FIRE PIT, MOVIE PROJECTION AREA, FITNESS CENTER, CONFERENCE ROOM, AND CLUBHOUSE. THE PROJECT INCLUDES FOUR LEVELS OF HOUSING OVER THREE LEVELS OF PARKING (ONE LEVEL OF PARKING BELOW GRADE AND TWO LEVELS OF PARKING ABOVE GRADE). THE RETAIL COMPONENT IS LOCATED ON THE GROUND LEVEL ADJACENT TO THE TWO LEVELS OF ABOVE GRADE PARKING. The following is a list of code requirements deemed applicable to the proposed project based on plans as stated above. The items below are to meet the City of Huntington Beach's Municipal Code (HBMC), Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance (ZSO), Department of Public Works Standard Plans (Civil, Water and Landscaping) and the American Public Works Association (APWA) Standards Specifications for Public Works Construction (Green Book), the Orange County Drainage Area management Plan (DAMP), and the City Arboricultural and Landscape Standards and Specifications. The list is intended to assist the applicant by identifying requirements which shall be satisfied during the various stages of project permitting, implementation and construction. If you have any questions regarding these requirements, please contact the Plan Reviewer or Project Planner. THE FOLLOWING DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A DEMOLITION PERMIT: 1. Applicant shall provide a consulting arborist report on all the existing trees. Said report shall quantify, identify, size and analyze the health of the existing trees. The report shall also ATTACHMENT NO. °�{� Page 2 of 8 recommend how the existing trees that are to remain (if any) shall be protected and how far construction/grading shall be kept from the trunk. (Resolution 4545) a. Existing mature trees that are to be removed must be replaced at a 2 for 1 ratio with a 36" box tree or palm equivalent (13'-14' of trunk height for Queen Palms and 8'-9' of brown trunk). 2. Separate plans for removals, stockpiling, surcharge and other independent or phased remedial or earth moving operations shall be prepared by a License Civil Engineer and be submitted to Public Works for review and approval. (MC 17.05.140) 3. If soil remediation is required, a remediation action plan shall be submitted to the Fire, Planning, and Public Works Departments for review and approval in accordance with the Fire Departments Specification No. 431-92 and the conditions of approval. The plan shall include methods to minimize remediation-related impacts on the surrounding properties; details on how all drainage associated with the remediation efforts shall be retained on site and no wastes or pollutants shall escape the site; and shall also identify wind barriers around the remediation equipment. (MC 17.05.150/FD Spec. 431.92) THE FOLLOWING DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A PRECISE GRADING PERMIT: 1. The following dedications to the City of Huntington Beach shall be shown on the Precise Grading Plan: (ZSO 230.084A, Precise Plan of Street Alignment) a. A five foot right-of-way dedication along the Gothard Street frontage is required, per the modified Precise Plan of Street Alignment for Gothard Street. b- A thirty-five foot radius right-of-way dedication at the intersection of Gothard Street and Center Avenue per Public Works Standard Plan No- 207. 2. A Legal Description and Plot Plan of the dedications to City to be prepared by a licensed surveyor or engineer and submitted to Public Works for review and approval. The dedication shall; be recorded prior to issuance of a precise grading permit- 3. A final detailed soils and geological/seismic analysis shall be prepared by a registered engineer and submitted to Public Works (for reference) with first submittal of the Precise Grading Plan_ This analysis shall include on-site soil sampling and laboratory testing of materials to provide detailed recommendations for grading, over excavation, engineered fill, dewatering, settlement, protection of adjacent structures, chemical and fill properties, liquefaction, retaining walls, streets, and utilities. (MC 17.05.150) 4. A Precise Grading Plan prepared by a Licensed Civil Engineer, shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval. (MC 17.05/ZSO 230.84) The plans shall comply with Public Works plan preparation guidelines and include the following improvements on the plan: a. A new sewer lateral shall be installed connecting to the main in Gothard Street. if the new sewer lateral is not constructed at the same location as the existing laterals,then the existing lateral shall be severed and capped at the main or chimney. (ZSO 230.84) b- A private looped on-site fire water system required by the Fire Department shall be constructed per Water Standards to provide service to the new fire sprinkler systems and on-site fire hydrants. Separate backflow protection devices shall be required at each point of connection to the City's water system- (Resolution 5921 and Title 17) GAEnginee mg Division\ELLIOTr Conditions 2008\Center 7400-RIPCURL\Center 7302 7400 CUP 07-043(PA 2007-219)Dev Req 69-08-docP 07-043 (PA 2007 219)04-28-08.doc t/ft ATTACHMENT NO..___._--� Page 3 of 8 C. Each retail unit may have a separate water service and meter constructed per Water _ Standards, and sized to meet the minimum requirements set by the California Plumbing Code (CPC). Placement of retail water services and meters shall meet Public Works approval. The domestic water service shall be a minimum of 2-inches in size. Alternatively, a master water service and meter to the retail building/units is also acceptable. (ZSO 230.84) d. The quantity and placement of domestic water services and meters to the residential units shall meet Public Works' approval and shall be constructed per Water Standards. The meters shall be sized to meet the minimum requirements set by the California Plumbing Code (CPC). (ZSO 230.84) e. Common landscaping areas, courtyards, common recreational areas, etc. shall have separate irrigation service(s) and meter(s). Each irrigation water service shall connect to the City's water system and be a minimum of 1-inch in size constructed per Water Standards. The meter size shall require the City's Landscape Architect approval. (ZSO 232) f. Separate dedicated fire water services shall be constructed per Water Standards for the fire sprinkler systems required by the Fire Department. (ZSO 230.84) g- Separate backflow protection devices shall be constructed per Water Standards for the domestic, irrigation and fire water services connected to the City's water system. (Resolution 5921 and Title 17) h. The existing on-site public water system improvements (including water services, meters, backflow protection devices, etc.) shall be abandoned and removed per Water Standards. (ZSO 230.84) i. The applicant shall quitclaim the existing water line easements dedicated to the City by submitting a legal description and plat of the public on-site water facilities for Public Works review and approval. (ZSO 230.84) 5. A Street Improvement Plan prepared by a Licensed Civil Engineer, shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval. (MC 17.05/ZSO 230.84) The plans shall comply with Edinger Corridor Draft Policies (dated February 25, 2008), with Public Works plan preparation guidelines and include the following improvements on the plan: a. Curb, gutter and sidewalk along the Gothard Street and Center Avenue frontages shall be removed and replaced per Public Works Standard Plan Nos. 202 and 207. (ZSO 230.84) b. The existing driveway approaches on Gothard Street and Center Avenue shall be removed and replaced with curb, gutter, and sidewalk per Public Works Standard Plan Nos. 202 and 207. (ZSO 230.84) C. The proposed driveway approaches on Gothard Street and Center Avenue shall be ADA compliant and constructed per Public Works Standard Plan No. 211 with minimum driveway widths of 27 feet. (ZSO 230.84) Additionally, all driveways shall be provided with a 10-foot clear sight distance triangle per the City of Huntington Beach Zoning Code, Chapter 230.88. d. An ADA compliant access ramp at the southeast corner of Gothard Street and Center Avenue per Caltrans Standard Plan A88A. (ZSO 230.84,ADA) G_1Engineering DivisionTLLIOT Monditions 2008\Center 7400-RIPCURUCenter 7302-7400 CUP 07-043(PA 2007-219)Dev Req 6-9-08.docP 07-043 (PA 2007-219)04-28-08.aoc � r ATTACHMENT Nye Page 4 of 8 e. Pavement for half-street width along the project's frontages on Gothard Street and Center Avenue plus pavement for the five feet of additional Gothard Street dedication. (ZSO 230.84) f. All onsite and offsite drainage facilities shall be designed per the final approved hydrology and hydraulics analysis and per the City's and County of Orange's design criteria. g_ The onsite and offsite sewer facilities shall be designed per the .final approved sewer study and per the City's design criteria. 6. Any monument signage, hardscape and landscaping at street intersections shall conform to the 25-foot sight distance triangle. Within the 25-foot visibility triangle, the maximum height permitted for objects is 42 inches. (ZSO 230.88) 7. A separate signing and striping plan for Gothard Street and Center Avenue shall be prepared by a Licensed Civil or Traffic Engineer and be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval. The plans shall address access from the project driveways. The plans shall be prepared according to the .City of Huntington Beach Signing and Striping Plan Preparation Guidelines. (ZSO 230.84) 8. Street lighting plans for all streets adjacent to the project, shall be prepared by a Licensed Civil or Electrical Engineer, and be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval. Lighting shall be per the City of Huntington Beach guidelines. (ZSO 230.84) 9. A signal modification plan for the intersection at the Gothard Street and Center Avenue shall be prepared by a Licensed Civil Engineer and be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval. The plans shall be prepared according to the City of Huntington Beach Traffic Signal Plan Preparation Guidelines. (ZSO 230.84) 10. A Landscape and Irrigation Plan, prepared by a Licensed Landscape Architect shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval by the Public Works and Planning Departments. (ZSO 232.04) a. Existing mature trees that are to be removed must be replaced at a 2 for 1 ratio with a 36"- box tree or palm equivalent (13'-14' of trunk height for Queen Palms and 8'-9' of brown trunk). b. "Smart irrigation controllers" and/or other innovative means to reduce the quantity of runoff shall be installed. (ZSO 232.04D) C. Standard landscape code requirements apply. (ZSO 232) 11. All landscape planting, irrigation and maintenance shall comply with the City Arboricultural and Landscape Standards and Specifications. (ZSO 232.04B) 12. Landscaping plans should utilize native, drought-tolerant landscape materials where appropriate and feasible_ (DAMP) 13. The Consulting Arborist(approved by the City Landscape Architect)shall review the final landscape tree planting plan and approve in writing the selection and locations proposed for new trees and the protection measures and locations of existing trees to remain. Said Arborist report shall be incorporated onto the Landscape Architect's plans as construction notes and/or construction requirements. The report shall include the Arborist's name, certificate number and the Arborist's wet signature on the final plan. (Resolution-4545) G.TAgineering Division\FUJOYrConditios 2008\Center 7400-RIPCURL\Center 7302-7400 CUP 07-043(PA 2007-219)Dev Req 6-9-08.docP 07-043 (PA 2007-219)04-28-08.doc ATTACHMENT NO. Page 5 of 8 14. A final Hydrology and hydraulic analysis for the runoff from this project(10, 25, and 100-year storms shall be analyzed) and its impact to the existing downstream storm drainage system shall be submitted to Public Works for review and approval with first submittal of the Precise Grading Plan. Possible mitigation measures to manage increased storm water runoff may include on-site attenuation and/or construction of downstream drainage improvements. The study and the proposed drainage improvements shall include on-site, privately maintained BMPs to control the quality of run-off water from the development. The study shall also justify final pad elevations on the site in conformance with the latest FEMA requirements and City Standard Plan No. 300. (ZSO 230.84) 15. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit that will result in soil disturbance of one or more acres of land, the applicant shall demonstrate that coverage has been obtained under California's General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity by providing a copy of the Notice of Intent(NOI)submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board and a copy of the subsequent notification of the issuance of a Waste Discharge identification (WDID) Number. Projects subject to this requirement shall prepare and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)conforming to the current National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and acceptance. A copy of the current SWPPP shall be kept at the project site and another copy to be submitted to the City. (DAMP) 16. A Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) conforming to the City of Huntington Beach's Project WQMP Preparation Guidance Manual dated June 2006 and prepared by a Licensed Civil Engineer, shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and acceptance and shall include the following: a. Discusses regional or watershed programs (if applicable) b. Addresses Site Design BMPs (as applicable) such as minimizing impervious areas, maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, creating reduced or"zero discharge"areas, and conserving natural areas C. Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMPs as defined in the Drainage Area Management Plan ( DAMP) d. Incorporates Treatment Control BMPs as defined in the DAMP e. Generally describes the long-term operation and maintenance requirements for the Treatment Control BMPs f. Identifies the entity that will be responsible for long-term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs g. Describes the mechanism for funding the long-term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs h. Includes an Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan for all structural BMPs i. After incorporating plan check comments of Public Works, three final WQMPs (signed by the owner and the Registered Civil Engineer of record) shall be submitted to Public Works for acceptance. After acceptance, two copies of the final report shall be retuned to applicant for the production of a single complete electronic copy of the accepted version of the WQMP on CD media that includes: i) The 1 V by 17"Site Plan in .TIFF format(400 by 400 dpi minimum). GAEngineering DivisionNELLIOT nConditions 2008\Center 7400-RIPCURI.\Center 7302-7400 CUP 07-043(PA 2007-219)Dev Req 6-9-08.docP 07-043 (PA 2007-219)04-28-08.doc ATTACHMENT NO. 0 U. Page 6 of 8 ii) The remainder of the complete WQMP in .PDF format including the signed and stamped title sheet, owner's certification sheet, Inspection/Maintenance Responsibility sheet, appendices, attachments and all educational material. j_ The applicant shall return one CD media to Public Works for the project record file. 17. Indicate the type and location of Water Quality Treatment Control Best Management Practices (BMPs) on the Grading Plan consistent with the Project WQMP_ The WQMP shall follow the City of Huntington Beach; Project Water Quality Management Plan Preparation Guidance Manual dated June 2006. The WQMP shall be submitted with the first submittal of the Precise Grading Plan_ 18. In complexes larger than 100 dwelling units where car washing is allowed, a designated car wash area that does .not drain to a storm drain system shall be provided for common usage. Wash water from this area may be directed to the sanitary sewer(upon approval by the Orange County Sanitation District), to an engineered infiltration system, or to an equally effective alternative. Pre- treatment may also be required. (DAMP) 19. A suitable location, as approved by the City, shall be depicted on the grading plan for the necessary trash enclosure(s). The area shall be paved with an impervious surface, designed not to allow run-on from adjoining areas, designed to divert drainage from adjoining roofs and pavements diverted around the area, and screened or walled to prevent off-site transport of trash. The trash enclosure area shall be covered or roofed with a solid, impervious material. Connection of trash area drains into the storm drain system is prohibited_ If feasible, the trash enclosure area shall be connected into the sanitary sewer. (DAMP) 20. The applicant's grading/erosion control plan shall abide by the provisions of AQMD's Rule 403 as related to fugitive dust control. (AQMD Rule 403) 21- The name and phone number of an on-site field supervisor hired by the developer shalt be submitted to the Planning and Public Works Departments. 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 shad 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, 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. 22. The applicant shall notify all property owners and tenants within 300 feet of the perimeter of the property of a tentative grading schedule at least 30 days prior to such grading. THE FOLLOWING DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE COMPLIED WITH DURING . GRADING OPERATIONS: 1. An Encroachment Permit is required for all work within the City's right-of-way. (MC 12.38.010/MC 14.36.030) 2. The developer shall coordinate the development of a truck haul route with the Department of Public Works if the import or export of material in excess of 5000 cubic yards is required_ This plan shall include the approximate number of truck trips and the proposed truck haul routes. It shall specify the hours in which transport activities can occur and methods to mitigate construction-related impacts to adjacent residents_ These plans must be submitted for approval to the Department of Public Works. (MC 17.05.210) GAEngineering Division\ELLIO'r"Mmditions 2008\Center 7400-RIPCURUCenter 73027400 CLIP 07-043(PA 2007 219)Dev Req 6-9-08.docP 07-043 (PA 2007-219)04-28-08.doc ti Page 7 of 8 3. Water trucks will be utilized on the site and shall be available to be used throughout the day during site grading to keep the soil damp enough to prevent dust being raised by the operations. (California Stormwater BMP Handbook, Construction Wind Erosion WE-1) 4_ All haul trucks shall arrive at the site no earlier than 8:00 a.m. or leave the site no later than 5:00 p.m., and shall be limited to Monday through Friday only. (MC 17.05) 5. Wet down the areas that are to be graded or that is being graded, in the late morning and after work is completed for the day. (WE-1/MC 17.05) 6. The construction disturbance area shall be kept as small as possible. (California Stormwater BMP Handbook, Construction Erosion Control EC-1) (DAMP) 7. All haul trucks shall be covered or have water applied to the exposed surface prior to leaving the site to prevent dust from impacting the surrounding areas. (DAMP) 8. Prior to leaving the site, all haul trucks shall be washed off on-site on a gravel surface to prevent dirt and dust from leaving the site and impacting public streets. (DAMP) 9: Comply with appropriate sections of AQMD Rule 403, particularly to minimize fugitive dust and noise to surrounding areas. (AQMD Rule 403) 10. Wind barriers shall be installed along the perimeter of the site. (DAMP) 11. All construction materials, wastes, grading or demolition debris and stockpiles of soils, aggregates, soil amendments, etc. shall be properly covered, stored and secured to prevent transport into surface or ground waters by wind, rain, tracking, tidal erosion or dispersion. (DAMP) THE FOLLOWING DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT: 1. A Precise Grading Permit shall be issued. (MC 17.05) 2. Traffic impact fees shall be paid at the rate applicable at the time of Building Permit issuance. The current rate of$154 per net new added daily trip is adjusted annually. This project is forecast to generate 1,666 new daily trips for a total traffic impact fee of$256,564. (MC 17.65) THE FOLLOWING DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF AN ENCROACHMENT PERMIT: 1. Traffic Control Plans, prepared by a Licensed Civil or Traffic Engineer, shall be prepared in accordance with the latest edition of the City of Huntington Beach Construction Traffic Control Plan Preparation Guidelines and submitted for review and approval by the Public Works Department. (MC 12.13, Construction Traffic Control Plan Preparation Guidelines) THE FOLLOWING DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO FINAL INSPECTION OR OCCUPANCY: 1. Complete all improvements as shown on the approved grading, landscape, street and offsite improvement plans. (MC 17.05) 2. The current tree code requirements shall apply to this site. (ZSO 232) a. Existing trees to remain on site shall not be disfigured or mutilated (ZSO 232.04E) and, GAEngineezing Division\ELUOTMonditions 2008\Center 7400-RIPCURUCenter 7302-7400 CUP 07-043(PA 2007 219)Dev Req 6-9-08.docP 07-043 (PA 2007-2I9)04-28-08.doc ATTACHMENT NO. .t Page 8 of 8 b. General tree requirements, regarding quantities and sizes. (ZSO 232.08B and C) 3. All landscape irrigation and planting installation shall be certified to be in conformance to the City approved landscape plans by the Landscape Architect of record in written form to the City Landscape Architect. (ZSO 232.04D) 4. Applicant shall provide City with CD media TIFF images (in City format) and CD (AutoCAD only) copy of complete City Approved landscape construction drawings as stamped "Permanent File Copy" prior to starting landscape work. Copies shall be given to the City Landscape Architect for permanent City record. 5. Prior to grading or building permit close-out and/or the issuance of a certificate of use or a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall: a. Demonstrate that all structural Best Management Practices (BMPs) described in the Project WQMP have been constructed and installed in conformance with approved plans and specifications. b. Demonstrate all drainage courses, pipes, gutters, basins, etc. are clean and properly constructed. C. Demonstrate that applicant is prepared to implement all non-structural BMPs described in the Project WQMP. d. Demonstrate that an adequate number of copies of the approved Project WQMP are available for the future occupiers. 6. All new utilities shall be undergrounded. (MC 17.64) 7. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid at the current rate unless otherwise stated, per the Public Works Fee Schedule adopted by the City Council and available on the city web site at http://www.surfcity-hb.org/files/users/public works/fee_schedule.pdf. (ZSO 240-06/ZSO 250.16) 8. The Water Ordinance#14.52, the"Water Efficient Landscape Requirements"apply for projects with 2500 square feet of landscaping and larger. (MC 14.52) GAEngineedug Division\ELUOTTConditions 2008\Center 7400-RIPCURL\Center 7302-7400 CUP 07-043(PA 2007-219)Dev Req 6-9-08AocP-07-043 (PA 2007-219)04-28-08_doc tilTTdXr141U1C'NT Nn q• 1(0 Hn HUNTINGTON EACH FIRE DEPTART ENT PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION CODE REQUIREMENTS HUNTINGTON BEACH DATE: MARCH 31, 2008 PROJECT NAME: THE RIPCURL PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 07-219 ENTITLEMENTS: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 07-043 AND DESIGN REVIEW NO. 07- 031 DATE OF PLANS: FEBRUARY 21, 2008 PROJECT LOCATION: 7302-7400 CENTER AVENUE, HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA PLANNER: TESS NGUYEN, ASSOCIATE PLANNER TELEPHONE/E-MAIL: (714) 374-1744/tnguyen@surfcity-hb_org PLAN REVIEWER-FIRE: LEE CALDWELL, FIRE DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST TELEPHONE/E-MAIL: (714) 536-5531/lcaldwell@surfcity-hb.org PROJECT DESCRIPTION: TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SIX-STORY MIXED-USE PROJECT CONSISTING OF 440 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, 10,000 SF OF RETAIL USES, AND AMENITIES SUCH AS POOUSPA AREA, FIRE PIT, MOVIE PROJECTION AREA, FITNESS CENTER, CONFERENCE ROOM, AND CLUBHOUSE. THE PROJECT INCLUDES FOUR LEVELS OF HOUSING OVER THREE LEVELS OF PARKING (ONE LEVEL OF PARKING BELOW GRADE AND TWO LEVELS OF PARKING ABOVE GRADE). THE RETAIL COMPONENT IS LOCATED ON THE GROUND LEVEL ADJACENT TO THE TWO LEVELS OF ABOVE GRADE PARKING. The following is a list of code requirements deemed applicable to the proposed project based on plans received and dated March 12, 2008. The list is intended to assist the applicant by identifying requirements which must be satisfied during the various stages of project permitting and implementation. If you have any questions regarding these requirements, please contact the Plan Reviewer- Fire: LEE CALDWELL, FIRE DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST. PRIOR TO DEMOLITION, GRADING, SITE DEVELOPMENT, ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS, BUILDING PERMITS,AND/OR CONSTRUCTION, THE FOLLOWING SHALL BE REQUIRED: a. "Phase 9 Environmental Study' is required. Submit report to the Fire Department for review per City Specification#431-92 Soil Clean-Up Standards. Based on site characteristics, identified former uses, suspected soil contamination, proximity to a producing/abandoned oil well, or Phase 1,11, or III Site Audit, soil testing may be required. ATTACHMENT NO. ,t Page 2 of 10 If contamination is identified, provide a Fire Department approved Remediation Action Plan (RAP) based on requirements found in Huntington Beach City Specification #431- 92, Soil Cleanup Standard. All soil must conform to City Specification # 431-92 Soil Clean-Up Standards. (FD) b. Methane Mitigation Requirements. Due to the proposed below-grade construction, soil gas testing for methane gas is required. A methane sample plan shall be submitted to the fire department for review and approval, prior to the commencement of sampling. If methane gas is discovered in the soil, the following City Specification would be applicable and the grading, building, and methane plans must reference that a sub-slab methane barrier and vent system will be installed per City Specification #429, Methane District Building Permit Requirements prior to plan approval. Additional methane mitigation measures may be required by the fire department. Methane safety measures per City Specification #429, Methane District Building Permit Requirements shall be detailed on a separate sheet titled "METHANE PLAN" and three copies submitted to the Fire Department for approval. (FD) C. Imported Soff Plan.All imported soil shall meet City Specification #431-92, Soil Cleanup Standards. When required by the Fire Department, off-site soil importation exceeding 50 cubic yards requires an "Imported Soil Plan" to be submitted to the Fire Department for review and joint approval with the Public Works Department prior to soil importation onto the site. Initial sample schedule: ® 1 sample per 50 cubic yards of imported fill (prior to import). Modified sampling schedule upon source approval by fire and public works: ® 1 sample per 100 cubic yards of imported fill (prior to import). 1 sample per 1000 cubic yards of imported fill (prior to import). Public Works may also have plan requirements for grading, stockpiling, haul routes, storm water pollution prevention, erosion and/or dust control. Note: Grading Plans must be approved by the Fire Department prior to issuance of a Public Works grading permit. Standard Fire Department notes are required to be on the plans on oil industry impacted sites. Additional requirements will be necessary for the development of former oilfield property. Soil testing results must be submitted, and approved by the Fire Department prior to issuance of a building permit. (FD) ATTACHMENT . - Page 3 of 10 d. Fire Access Roads shall be provided and maintained in compliance with City Specification #401, Minimum Standards for Fire Apparatus Access. Driving area shall be capable of supporting a fire apparatus (75,000 lbs and 12,000 lb point load). Minimum fire access road width is twenty-four feet (24') wide, with thirteen feet six inches (13' 6") vertical clearance. Fire access roads fronting commercial buildings shall be a minimum width of twenty-six feet (26') wide, with thirteen feet six inches (13' 6") vertical clearance. For Fire Department approval, reference and demonstrate compliance with City Specification #401 Minimum Standards for Fire Apparatus Access on the plans. NOTE: Due to the length of the proposed fire road and the substantial residential density the project proposes, the fire road design needs to be amended so that a second means of access is provided through to Center Avenue. (FD) e. Fire Access Road Turns and Corners shall be designed with a minimum inner radius of seventeen feet (17') and a minimum outer radius of forty five feet (45') per City Specification #401 Minimum Standards for Fire Apparatus Access. For Fire Department approval, reference and demonstrate compliance with City Specification #401 Minimum Standards for Fire Apparatus Access on the plans. (FD) f. Maximum Grade for Fire Apparatus Access Roads shall not exceed 10%. (FD) g. Fire Lanes, as determined by the Fire Department, shall be posted, marked, and maintained per City Specification#415, Fire Lanes Signage and Markings on Private, Residential, Commercial and Industrial Properties. The site plan shall clearly identify all red fire lane curbs, both in location and length of run. The location of fire lane signs shall be depicted. No parking shall be allowed in the designated 24 foot wide fire apparatus access road or supplemental fire access per City Specification #415. For Fire Department approval, reference and demonstrate compliance with City Specification# 401 Minimum Standards for Fire Apparatus Access on the plans. (FD) h. Secured Vehicle Entries shall utilize KNOX®activated access switches (Knox switches for automated gates, Knox padlocks for manual gates), and comply with City Specification #403, Fire Access for Pedestrian or Vehicular Security Gates & Buildings. Reference compliance in the plan notes. (FD) i. Secured Automated Vehicle Entry Gates (Residential) shall utilize a combination "Strobe-Activated Switch" and "Knox Manual Key Switch", and comply with City Specification #403, Fire Access for Pedestrian or Vehicular Security Gates & Buildings. Reference compliance with City Specification # 403 Fire Access for Pedestrian or Vehicular Security Gates & Buildings in the plan notes. (FD) j. Fire hydrants (Public) are required. Hydrants must be portrayed on the site plan. Hydrants shall be installed and in service before combustible construction begins. Installation of hydrants and service mains shall meet NFPA 13 and 24, 2002 Edition, Huntington Beach Fire Code Appendix B and C, and City Specification #407 Fire Hydrant Installation Standards requirements. Maximum allowed velocity of fire flow in a ATTACHMENT NO. � Page 4 of 10 supply piping is 12 fps. Plans shall be submitted to Public Works and approved by the Public Works and Fire Departments. For Fire Department approval, portray the fire hydrants and reference compliance with NFPA 13 and 24, 2002 Edition, Huntington Beach Fire Code Appendix B and C, and City Specification#407 Fire Hydrant Installation Standards in the plan notes. (FD) k. Private Fire Hydrants are required. Hydrants must be portrayed on the site plan. Hydrants shall be installed and in service before combustible construction begins. Installation of hydrants and service mains shall meet NFPA 13 and 24, 2002 Edition, Huntington Beach Fire Code Appendix B and C, and City Specification #407 Fire Hydrant Installation Standards requirements. Private fire hydrants shall not be pressurized by Fire Department Connections to the sprinkler system. The system design shall ensure that recirculation of pressurized water from the hydrant, thru the FDC and back through the sprinkler_system supply to the hydrant does not occur. Installation of the private fire service main, including fire department connections, shall meet NFPA 13 and 24, 2002 Edition requirements. Maximum allowed velocity of fire flow in supply piping is 12 fps. The maintenance of private fire hydrants is the responsibility of the owner or facility association. Shop drawings shall be submitted to and approved by the Fire Department. For Fire Department approval, portray the fire hydrants and reference compliance with City Specification #407 Fire Hydrant Installation Standards in the plan notes. (FD) 1. Private Fire Service Piping(FSP)Application for permit shall be made for private on- site Fire Service Piping (FSP), including but not limited to, private fire service mains and underground sprinkler laterals. Maximum allowed velocity of fire flow in supply piping is 12 fps. Additionally, application for permit shall be made for fire protections systems (sprinklers, alarms, chemical, fire pumps, etc.) as applicable. Permits may be obtained at the City of Huntington Beach Department Fire Department by completing a Fire Permit Form (available at Fire Administration) and submitting such plans and specifications as required by the bureau of fire prevention. A permit constitutes permission to begin work in accordance with approved plans and specifications. The permit fee includes plan checking and inspections by an authorized fire prevention inspector. Development reviews/approvals by the bureau of fire prevention during planning do not constitute approval to perform FSP or fire protection system work, unless otherwise noted. (FD) m. Private Fire Service Connection to the Public Water Supply- Separate plans shall be submitted to the Public Works Department detailing the connection, piping, valves and back-flow prevention assembly (DDCA)for approval and permits. Approval by Public Works and the Fire Department must be completed prior to issuance of a grading permit. The dedicated private fire water service off-site improvements shall be shown on a precise grading plan, prepared by a Licensed Civil Engineer. (FD) ATTACHMENT NO. Page S of 10 n_ Fire Alarm System is required. For Fire Department approval, shop drawings shall be submitted to the Fire Department as separate plans for permits and approval. For Fire Department approval, reference and demonstrate compliance with UBC 305.9 on the plans. A C-10 electrical contractor, certified in fire alarm systems, must certify the system is operational annually. (FD) o. Automatic Fire Sprinklers are required. NFPA13 Automatic fire sprinkler systems are required per Huntington Beach Fire Code for new buildings with "fire areas" 5000 square feet or more or for buildings 10,000 square feet or more. An addition of square footage to an existing building also triggers this requirement. Separate plans (three sets) shall be submitted to the Fire Department for permits and approval. The system shall provide water flow, tamper and trouble alarms, manual pull stations, interior and exterior horns and strobes, and 24-hour central station monitoring. Automatic fire sprinkler systems must be maintained operational at all times, with maintenance inspections performed quarterly and the system serviced every five years by a state licensed C-16 Fire Protection Contractor. For Fire Department approval, reference that a fire sprinkler system will be installed in compliance with the Huntington Beach Fire Code, NFPA 13, and City Specification #420 -Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems in the plan notes. NOTE: When buildings under construction are more than one (1) story in height and required to have automatic fire sprinklers, the fire sprinkler system shall be installed and operational to protect all floors lower than the floor currently under construction. Fire sprinkler systems for the current floor under construction shall be installed, in-service, inspected and approved prior to beginning construction on the next floor above. (FD) p. Fire Department Connections (FDC) to the automatic fire sprinkler systems shall be located to the front of the building, at least 25 feet from and no farther than 150 feet of'a properly rated fire hydrant. (FD) q. Class 9 Standpipes (2 V NFH connections) are required at each stairway. The standpipe system in stairwells cannot protrude into, impede, or compromise the H.B.B.C. "Exit Width" requirements. For Fire Department approval, reference and portray Class 1 standpipes at each stairway in the plan notes. (FD) r. NPFA 13 Commercial Fire Sprinkler Systems Supply shall be from a dedicated fire water service installed per Fire Department, Public Works, and Water Division Standards. The dedicated fire water service connection shall be a minimum of four inches (4") in size. Depending on fire sprinkler system demands, larger water service may be required. Separate plans shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for approval and permits, and must be completed prior to issuance of a grading permit. The dedicated fire water service off-site improvements shalt be shown on a precise grading plan, prepared by a Licensed Civil Engineer. Contact Huntington Beach Public Works Department(714-536-5431)for offsite water improvement requirements. (FD) ATTACHMENT NO. 6f. 2I_ Page 5.of 10 s_ On-Site Fire Service Piping (FSP)Application for permit shall be made for on-site Fire Service Piping (FSP), including but not limited to, private fire service mains and underground sprinkler laterals. Maximum allowed velocity of fire flow in supply piping is 12 fps. Additionally, application for permit shall be made for fire protections systems (sprinklers, alarms, chemical, fire pumps, etc.) as applicable. Permits may be obtained at the City of Huntington-Beach Department Fire Department by completing a Fire Permit Form (available at Fire Administration) and submitting such plans and specifications as required by the bureau of fire prevention. A permit constitutes permission to begin work in accordance with approved plans and specifications. The permit fee includes plan checking and inspections by an authorized fire prevention inspector. Development reviews/approvals by the bureau of fire prevention during planning do not constitute approval to perform FSP or fire protection system work, unless otherwise noted. (FD) to Connection to the Public Water Supply- Separate plans shall be submitted to the Public Works Department detailing the connection, piping, valves and back-flow prevention assembly (DDCA) for approval and permits. Approval by Public Works and the Fire Department must be completed prior to issuance of a grading permit. The dedicated private fire water service off--site improvements shall be shown on a precise grading plan, prepared by a Licensed Civil Engineer. (FD) u_ Trash turnpsters or containers with an individual capacity of 1.5 cubic yards (40.5 cubic feet) or more shall not be stored in buildings or placed within 5 feet of combustible walls, openings or combustible roof eave lines unless protected by an approved fire sprinkler system. HBFC 1103.2.2 For Fire Department approval, reference and demonstrate compliance with HBFC 1103.2.2 (FD) V. Fire Extinguishers shall be installed and located in all areas to comply with Huntington Beach Fire Code standards found in City Specification#424. The minimum required dry chemical fire extinguisher size is 2A 10BC and shall be installed within 75 feet travel distance to all portions of the building. Extinguishers are required to be serviced or replaced annually. (FD) W. Commercial Food Preparation Fire Protection System required for commercial cooking. Plans (three sets) shall be submitted to the Fire Department as separate plans for permits and approval. Reference compliance with City Specification#412 Protection of Commercial Cooking Operations in the plan notes. (FD) x_ Main Secured Building Entries shall utilize a KNOX® Fire Department Access Key Box, installed and in compliance with City Specification #403, Fire Access for Pedestrian or, Vehicular Security Gates & Buildings_ Please contact the Huntington Beach Fire Department Administrative Office at (714) 536-5411 for information. Reference compliance with City Specification #403 - KNOO Fire Department Access in the building plan notes. (FD) ATTACHMENT NO. °�: - Page 7 of 10 ZI y. Fire Sprinkler System Controls access shall be provided, utilizing a_KNOX® Fire Department Access Key Box, installed and in compliance with City Specification #403, Fire Access for Pedestrian or Vehicular Security Gates & Buildings. The approximate location of the system controls shall be noted on the plans. Reference compliance in the plan notes. (FD) Z. Secondary Emergency Access Gates serving courtyards, paseos, and all project pool or spa areas must be secured with KNOX®Fire Department Access Key Box in addition to association or facility locks (if any). For Fire Department approval, reference compliance with City Specification#403 Fire Access for Pedestrian or Vehicular Security Gates & Buildings in the plan notes. (FD) aa. Elevators shall be sized to accommodate an ambulance gurney. Minimum interior dimensions are 7 feet (84") wide by 4 feet 3 inches (51") deep. Minimum door opening dimensions are 3 feet 6 inches (42") wide right or left side opening. Center opening doors require a 4 feet 6 inches (54")width. For Fire Department approval, reference and demonstrate compliance on the building plans_ HBBC 3002.4 (FD) bb. High Rise Buildings. Buildings classified as being 55 feet or more in height must comply with the requirements of the State Fire Marshall for a high-rise building. (FD) cc_ Subterranean Parking Garage- Ventilation Systems must have emergency smoke t evacuation capability. A zoned, mechanical smoke and combustible products removal system, with manual controls for firefighters located in the fire control room shall be provided. This shall include an emergency power source. System shall also comply with Building and Mechanical Codes and shall be adequate to exhaust carbon monoxide (CO). (FD) dd. Enhanced Communication Systems are required for Fire Department and Police Department communications in Subterranean Parking Garages. Repeater type radio systems as specified by the Fire and Police Departments shall provide adequate communication inside the parking garages, from inside the garages to the exterior, and to/from the fire control rooms. Above-grade areas or floors found to have with poor radio reception may also require repeating systems. (FD) ee. On-Slope Located Fire Equipment Fire Hydrants, backflow devices (DDCA), Fire Department Connections (FDC) and other related fire devices located in bermed or sloped areas must be enclosed in retaining walls, providing flat access to the equipment. (FD) ff. Stairwell Required Minimum Widths. Standpipe systems in stairwell areas shall not impede code required minimum widths. (FD) ATTACHMENT NO. _ 9 ,23 Page 8 of 10 gg. Fire Control Room required. Provide a dedicated room for the Fire Department to observe and monitor all systems operations from an integrated annunciator panel. They shall be located in an exterior location that is at grade level and has clear-to-the sky access. (FD) hh. Structure or Building Address Assignments. The Planning Department shall review and make address assignments. The individual dwelling units shall be identified with numbers per City Specification #409 Street Naming and Address Assignment Process. For Fire Department approval, reference compliance with City Specification #409 Street Naming and Address Assignment Process in the plan notes_ (FD) ii. Commercial Building Address Numbers shall be installed to comply with City Specification #428, Premise Identification. Building address number sets are required on front and rear of the structure and shall be a minimum of six inches (6") high with one and one half inch (1 '/2") brush stroke. Note: Units shall be identified with numbers per City Specification #409 Street Naming and Address Assignment Process. Unit address numbers shall be a minimum of four inches (4") affixed to the units front and rear door. All address numbers are to be in a contrasting color. For Fire Department approval, reference compliance with City Specification#428 Premise Identification in the plan notes and portray the address location on the building. (FD) jj. Residential(SF®) Address Numbers shall be installed to comply with City Specification #428, Premise Identification. Number sets are required on front of the structure in a contrasting color with the background and shall be a minimum of four inches (4n) high with one and one half inch (%") brush stroke. For Fire Department approval, reference compliance with City Specification #428, Premise Identification in the plan notes and portray the address location on the building. (FD) kk. GIS Mapping Information shall be provided to the Fire Department in compliance with GIS Department CAD Submittal Guideline requirements. Minimum submittals shall include the following: ➢ Site plot plan showing the building footprint. ➢ Specify the type of use for the building ➢ Location of electrical, gas, water, sprinkler system shut-offs. ➢ Fire Sprinkler Connections (FDC) if any. ➢ Knox Access locations for doors, gates, and vehicle access. ➢ Street name and address. Final site plot plan shall be submitted in the following digital format and shall include the following: ➢ Submittal media shall be via CD rom to the Fire Department. ➢ Shall be in accordance with County of Orange Ordinance 3809. ATTACHMENT NO, _L, 24 Page 9 of 10 ➢ File format shall be in .shp, AutoCAD, AUTOCAD MAP (latest possible release) drawing file - .DWG (preferred) or Drawing Interchange File - .DXF. ➢ Data should be in NAD83 State Plane, Zone 6, Feet Lambert Conformal Conic Projection. ➢ Separate drawing file for each individual sheet. In compliance with Huntington Beach Standard Sheets, drawing names, pen colors, and layering convention and conform to City of Huntington Beach Specification #409 —Street Naming and Addressing. For specific GIS technical requirements, contact the Huntington Beach GIS Department at (714) 536-5531. For Fire Department approval, reference compliance with GIS Mapping Information in the building plan notes. (FD) 11. Fire Pits. Recreational or decorative fire pits shall only be gas-fired and shall conform to Huntington Beach Fire Department guidelines. (FD) mm_ Mushroom Space Heaters(if utilized) shall meet the following requirements: • Heaters shall display a U.L. listing number or other nationally recognized standard. • Heaters shall be used in open-air areas only. Indoor use is not permitted. • Heaters shall be equipped with a safety tilt shut-off switch. • Heaters shall be set upon a firm and level foundation. • Heaters shall not be located inside of or within three feet of the awning or canopy footprint. (CFC 1107.1) • Placements of heater(s) shall not be closer than 5' from buildings. (CFC 8204.3 and Table 8204-A) • Heaters shall not obstruct the clear path of exits. (CFC 1203) • Heaters shall maintain a minimum of 3-foot clearance from any combustible material. (CFC 1107.1) • Heaters shall not be stored or used within any structure. (CFC 1103.3.2.6) ® The storage of spare cylinders is not allowed. (CFC 101.4 and 1103.3.2.6) (FD) THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MAINTAINED DURING CONSTRUCTION: a. Fire/Emergency Access and Site Safety shall be maintained during project construction phases in compliance with HBFC Chapter 14, Fire Safety During Construction And Demolition. (FD) OTHER: ATTACHMENT NO. �• Page 10 of 10 a- Discovery of soil contamination or underground pipelines, etc., must be reported to the Fire Department immediately and the approved work plan modified accordingly in compliance with City Specification #431-92 Soil Clean-Up Standards. (FD) b. Outside City Consultants The Fire Department review of this project and subsequent plans may require the use of City consultants. The Huntington Beach City Council approved fee schedule allows the Fire Department to recover consultant fees from the applicant, developer or other responsible party. (FD) Fire Department City Specifications may be obtained at: Huntington Beach Fire Department Administrative Office City Hall 2000 Main Street, 5th floor Huntington Beach, CA 92648 or through the City's website at www_surfcity-hb.org If you have any questions, please contact the Fire Prevention Division at (714) 536-5411. S:Prevention\1-Developmentu-Planning Department-Planning Applications,CUP's\Center 7302-7400;THE RIPCURL;CUP#07-043;DR#07- 031 3-31-08 LC.doc F i ATTA HMENT Nth, HUNTINGTON BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT HUNTINGTON BEACH �y PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION CODE REQUIREMENTS DATE: March 30, 2008 PROJECT NAME: THE RIPCURL PROJECT LOCATION: 7300 Center Ave, HB PLANNING APP#: PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 07-219 ENTITLEMENTS: CUP NO. 07-043 AND DR NO. 07-031 DATE OF PLANS: FEBRUARY 21, 2008 LOCATION: 7302-7400 CENTER AVENUE, HUNTINGTON BEACH PROJECT PLANNER: TESS NGUYEN, ASSOCIATE PLANNER PLAN REVIEWER: JAN THOMAS TELEPHONE/E-MAIL: (949) 348-8186-JCKTHOMAS@COX.NET PROJECT DESCRIPTION: To permit the construction of a six-story mixed-use project consisting of 440 residential units, 10,000 SF of retail uses, and amenities such as pool/spa area, fire pit, movie projection area, fitness center, conference room and clubhouse. The project includes four levels of housing over three levels of parking. The retail component is located on the ground level adjacent to the two levels of above grade parking. The following is a list of code requirements deemed applicable to the proposed project based on plans stated above. The list is intended to assist the applicant by identifying requirements which must be satisfied during the various stages of project permitting and implementation. A list of conditions of approval adopted by the Planning Commission in conjunction with the requested entitlement(s), if any, will also be provided upon final project approval. If you have any questions regarding these requirements, please contact the Plan Reviewer. SUGGESTED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Garage radio transmittal: The Police and Fire Department emergency radios may not be able to receive or transmit in the subterranean parking levels. If this is the case, it is imperative that an effective antenna be installed so that emergency personnel can receive/transmit in the parking structure. Please contact Jim Moore, City of Huntington Beach, Information Systems, at(714) 536-5943 for more information. ATTACHMENT NOe7 Page 2 of 3 Parking structure lighting: Lighting in parking structures should optimally be placed over and between the parked vehicles. Crimes mainly occur between vehicles; therefore, lighting is important and should focus in these areas. Lighting should also focus on pedestrian areas. Recommendation: Paint the interior white in color. A study showed that painting the interior of the parking structure white adds approximately 20% more light to the structure by reflection alone. Parking.- Residential parking and retail parking should be clearly separated. Distinguish the difference with color, pavement treatments and signs. Parking garage elevators: Elevator areas and stairwells should be well lighted and recorded via surveillance cameras 24 hours a day, every day. Leasing office/Main residential lobby. The person working in the leasing office should be situated to see people entering and exiting the building through the main residential lobby. This person should also be able to view the elevator and stairwell area with ease. A camera 24 hour and recorded should be utilized in the main residential lobby. Recreation room: This room should have windows looking out onto the courtyard_A window on the south side of the recreation room as well will provide more visibility onto the elevator waiting area. Skateboarding. The northwest side of building shows a walkway on a downward slope. Areas such as this provide skateboarding opportunities and should be equipped with something to deter skateboarding in this area. Noise and damage to the property may be avoided as well.Police recommend using a product to attach to the areas vulnerable to skateboarding to stop skateboarders. A company such as www.skatestoppers.com or other similar companies sell a product that will deter skateboarding and possible prevent damage to the property. a ATTACHMENT NO. 8 Page 3 of 3 RECOMMENDATIONS TO ENHANCE THE QUALITY OF THE PROJECT: Landscaping: Landscaping should remain at a height less than 3' in order to allow people the opportunity to clearly see their surroundings and report potential danger. Stairwells: Ideally,stairwells should be open to the exterior. People feel safer and are, in fact, more likely to be seen in case of an emergency. They are also more likely to see an offender coming. Obviously subterranean stairwells cannot be open to the outside,however,where possible in the residential building,allow as much visibility into the stairwells as possible either though open air stairwells or large windows. Community interaction: Courtyards do provide activity areas for interaction.The barbeque areas,benches,and games bring residents together. This,in turn,builds neighborhood cohesiveness. However,are there open space areas for kids to play? Is there grass? Question: Is there a laundry room?If so,please contact police for recommended security measures. ATTACHMENT NT NO. �� 11'H CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING & SAFETY H T1NGTON BEACH PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION CODE REQUIREMENTS DATE: March 11, 2008 PROJECT NAME: THE RIPCURL PLANNING APPLICATION NO: PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 2007-219 ENTITLEMENTS: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2007-043 AND DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2008-031 DATE OF PLANS: FEBRUARY 21, 2008 PROJECT LOCATION: 7302-7400 CENTER AVE, HUNTINGTON BEACH PLAN REVIEWER: JASON KWAK, PLAN CHECK ENGINEER TELEPHONE/E-MAIL: (714) 536-5278/jkwak@surfcity-hb.org PROJECT DESCRIPTION: TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SIX-STORY MIXED-USE PROJECT CONSISTING OF 440 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, 10,000 SF OF RETAIL USES, AND AMENITIES SUCH AS POOUSPA AREA, FIRE PIT, MOVIE PROJECTION AREA, FITNESS CENTER, CONFERENCE ROOM, AND CLUBHOUSE. THE PROJECT INCLUDES FOUR LEVELS 'OF HOUSING OVER THREE LEVELS OF PARKING (ONE LEVEL OF PARKING BELOW GRADE AND TWO LEVELS OF PARKING ABOVE GRADE). THE RETAIL COMPONENT IS LOCATED ON THE GROUND LEVEL ADJACENT TO THE TWO LEVELS OF ABOVE GRADE PARKING The following is a list of code requirements deemed applicable to the proposed project based on plans received as stated above. The list is intended to assist the applicant by identifying requirements which must be satisfied during the various stages of project permitting and implementation. This list is not intended to be a full and complete list and serves only to highlight possible building code issues on the proposed preliminary plans. Electrical, plumbing, and mechanical items are not included in this review. if you have any questions regarding these comments, please contact the plan reviewer. I.SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1. None ATTACHMENT Page 2 of 2 11.CODE ISSUES BASED ON PLANS&DRAWINGS SUBMITTED: 1. Project shall comply with the 2007 California Building Code, 2007 California Mechanical Code, 2007 California Plumbing Code, 2007 California Electrical Code, 2005 California Energy Code and the Huntington Beach Municipal Code(HBMC). Compliance to all applicable state and local codes is required prior to issuance of building permit. 2. Geotechnical investigation shall be updated to comply with 2007 California Building Code. 3. Allowable area of unprotected openings permitted in an exterior wall is limited when the fire separation distance is less than or equal to 30 feet, per section 704.8 of 2007 California Building Code. 3" Y ATTAG �i1 'ENT N®. - J� CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION CODE REQUIREMENTS HUNTINGTON BEACH DATE: March 11, 2008 PROJECT NAME: THE RIPCURL PLANNING APPLICATION NO. PLANNING APPLICATION NO. 07-219 ENTITLEMENTS: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 07-043 AND DESIGN REVIEW NO. 07- 031 DATE OF PLANS: FEBRUARY 21, 2008 PROJECT LOCATION: 7302-7400 CENTER AVENUE, HUNTINGTON BEACH PROJECT PLANNER: TESS NGUYEN, ASSOCIATE PLANNER PLAN REVIEWER: TELEPHONE/E-MAIL: (714) 536-XXX/XXXXX@surfcity-hb.org PROJECT DESCRIPTION: TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SIX-STORY MIXED-USE PROJECT CONSISTING OF 440 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, 10,000 SF OF RETAIL USES, AND AMENITIES SUCH AS POOUSPA AREA, FIRE PIT, MOVIE PROJECTION AREA, FITNESS CENTER, CONFERENCE ROOM, AND CLUBHOUSE. THE PROJECT INCLUDES FOUR LEVELS OF HOUSING OVER THREE LEVELS OF PARKING (ONE LEVEL OF PARKING BELOW GRADE AND TWO LEVELS OF PARKING ABOVE GRADE). THE RETAIL COMPONENT IS LOCATED ON THE GROUND LEVEL ADJACENT TO THE TWO LEVELS OF ABOVE GRADE PARKING. The following is a list of code requirements deemed applicable to the proposed project based on plans stated above. The list is intended to assist the applicant by identifying requirements which must be satisfied during the various stages of project pennitting and implementation. A list of conditions of approval adopted by the Planning Commission in conjunction with the requested entitlement(s), if any, will also be provided upon final project approval. if you have any questions regarding these requirements, please contact the Plan Reviewer. f7� 2_1G0 ATTACHMENT NO. Chapter 211 C Commercial Districts (3285-6/95,3 34 1-1 0196,3334-6/97,3482-12100,3522-2/02,3553-5/02,3568-9/02,3707-6/05,3774-9107) (Note: Ordinance No.3774-9/07 is subject to approval by the California Coastal Commission) Sections: 211.02 Commercial Districts Established 211.04 CO,CG, and CV Districts: Land Use Controls 211.06 CO,CG and CV Districts: Development Standards 211.08 Review of Plans 211.02 Commercial Districts Established The purpose of the Commercial districts is to implement the General Plan and Local Coastal Program commercial land use designations. Three(3)commercial zoning districts are established by this chapter as follows: (3334-6/97) A- The CO Office Commercial District provides sites for offices for administrative, financial,professional, medical and business needs. B. The CG General Commercial District provides opportunities for the full range of retail and service businesses deemed suitable for location in Huntington Beach. C. The CV Visitor Commercial District implements the Visitor Serving Commercial land use designation within the coastal zone and provides uses of specific benefit to coastal visitors. More specifically,the CV district provides opportunities for visitor-oriented commercial activities, including specialty and beach related retail shops,restaurants,hotels, motels, theaters, museums, and related services. (3334-6/97) 211.04 CO, CG,and CV Districts: Land Use Controls In the following schedules, letter designations are used as follows: "P" designates use classifications permitted in commercial districts. "L" designates use classifications subject to certain limitations prescribed by the "Additional Provisions"that follow. "PC"designates use classifications permitted on approval of a conditional use permit by the Planning Commission. "ZA" designates use classifications permitted on approval of a conditional use permit by the Zoning Administrator. "TU" designates use classifications allowed upon approval of a temporary use permit. Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Chapter 211 Page 1 of 13 ATTA HMENT NO. • "P/U" for an accessory use means that the use is permitted on the site of a permitted use, but requires a conditional use permit on the site of a conditional use. Use classifications that are not listed are prohibited. Letters in parentheses in the "Additional Provisions" column refer to provisions following the schedule or located elsewhere_in the Zoning Ordinance. Where letters in parentheses are opposite a use classification heading, referenced provisions shall apply to all use classifications under the heading. P = Permitted CO,CG, L = Limited(see Additional Provisions) and CV PC = Conditional use permit approved by Planning Commission Districts ZA = Conditional use permit approved by Zoning Administrator Land Use TU = Temporary Use Permit Controls P/U = Requires conditional use permit on site of conditional use - = Not Permitted CO CG CV Additional Provisions Residential (J)(Q)(R)(V) (33-) Group Residential PC PC PC (3334-6M7) Multifamily Residential - - PC (3334-6,97) Public and Semipublic Q)(Q)(R)(V) (3334--7.3553-5102} Clubs and Lodges P P - (3334-6197.3707Er05) Community and Human Services Drug Abuse Centers - PC - Primary Health Care L 11 L 1 I - (3522-M2) Emergency Kitchens - L-2 - Emergency Shelters - L-2 - Residential Alcohol Recovery, General - PC - Residential Care, General ZA ZA - (3707-06105) Convalescent Facilities ZA ZA - (3 70 7-0610 5) Cultural Institutions PC PC PC Day Care, General L-3 L-3 - (3707-06/05) Day Care,Large-Family P P - (Y) (3522-2102) Emergency Health Care L-2 L-2 - (3334-M7) Government Offices P P PC (3334-6/97) Heliports PC PC PC (B) Hospitals PC PC - (3334-6/97) Park&Recreation Facilities L-9 L-9 L-9 Public Safety Facilities PC PC PC Religious Assembly ZA ZA - (3522-2v02) (3522-M2) Schools,Public or Private PC PC - Utilities,Major PC PC PC Utilities,Minor P P P (L) Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Chapter 211 Page 2 of 13 ATTAI^uMF-NT NO, T UL P = Permitted CO,CG, L = Limited(see Additional Provisions) and CV PC = Conditional use permit approved by Planning Commission Districts ZA = Conditional use permit approved by Zoning Administrator Land Use TU = Temporary Use Permit Controls P/U = Requires conditional use permit on site of conditional use = Not Permitted CO CG CV Additional Provisions Commercial Uses (J)(Q)(R) (3341-M) Ambulance Services - ZA - Animal Sales&Services Animal Boarding - ZA - (3522-2/02) Animal Grooming - P - Animal Hospitals - ZA - (3522-2/02) Animals: Retail Sales - P - Equestrian Centers(CG Zone) - PC - (S) (3-107-6/05) Pet Cemetery - PC - Artists' Studios P P P Banks and Savings&Loans P P P With Drive-Up Service P P P (3522-2M2) Building Materials and Services - P - Catering Services P P P Commercial Filming P P P (F) Commercial Recreation and Entertainment - PC PC (D) Communication Facilities L-13 L-13 L-13 (3%8-9ro2) Eating and Drinking Estab. L4 L-4 L4 (3522-2ro2.3707-6i05) W/Alcohol ZA ZA ZA (N)(Y) (3522-2102) W/Drive Through - P P (3522-2/02.3707-6/05) W/Live Entertainment ZA ZA ZA (W)(Y) pm-Dm W/Dancing PC PC PC (M W/Outdoor Dining ZA ZA ZA (X)(Y) (3522-M2) Food&Beverage Sales - P L-2 W/Alcoholic Beverage Sales - ZA ZA (N) Funeral&Internment Services - ZA - Laboratories L-1 L-1 - Maintenance&Repair Services - P - Marine Sales and Services - P P Nurseries - ZA - Offices,Business&Professional P P P (3334-M7) Pawn Shops - ZA Personal Enrichment Enrichment Services L-10 L-10 - (Y) (3522-M2) Personal Services P P P Research&Development Services L-1 ZA - Retail Sales - P P (Il)(V) (32858l95.3334-M7.3482-12/00) Secondhand Appliances/Clothing - P - Swap Meets,Indoor/Flea Markets - PC - (T) Swap Meets,Recurring - ZA - Tattoo Establishments - PC - Travel Services P P P Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Chapter 211 Page 3 of 13 ATTACHMENT NO. . 3 P = Permitted CO, CG, L = Limited(see Additional Provisions) and CV PC = Conditional use permit approved by Planning Commission Districts ZA = Conditional use permit approved by Zoning Administrator Land Use TU = Temporary Use Permit Controls P/U = Requires conditional use permit on site of conditional use = Not Permitted CO CG CV Additional Provisions Vehicle Equipment/Sales& Services Automobile Rentals - L-8 L-8 L-12 Automobile Washing - ZA - (3707-6/05) Commercial Parking - ZA ZA (P) (37076105) Service Stations - PC PC (E) Vehicle Equip. Repair - L-5 - Vehicle Equip. Sales& Rentals ZA ZA - L-12 (3522-2/02) Vehicle Storage - ZA - (3707-6/05) Visitor Accommodations Bed&Breakfast Inns PC PC PC (K) (3707-5/05,3774-9/07 subject to approval by the CA Coastal Commission) Hotels, Motels - PC PC (1) (3334-6197.3707-Wro5, 3774-9/07-subject to approval by the CA Coastal Commission) Condominium—Hotel - - PC (Z) (3774-9/07,3707-9/07 subject to approval by the CA Coastal Commission) Fractional Ownership Hotel (3774-9/07-subject to approval by the CA Coastal Commission) Quasi Residential (3334-W7 Timeshares - PC - (1)(J) (3334mW7,3774-9/07 subject to approval by the CA Coastal Commission)) Residential Hotel - PC - (J) (3334-6/97.3774-9/07 subject to approval by the CA Coastal Commission)) Single Room Occupancy - PC - (3774-9/07,3774-9/07 subject to approval by Ow CA Coastal Commission)) Industrial (J)(Q)(R)(V) (3334-6/9-1) Industry, Custom - L-6 L-6 Accessory Uses 0XV) (3334-6/97) Accessory Uses& Structures P/U P/U P/U Temporary Uses (F)(J)(V) (3334---7) Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Chapter 211 Page 4 of 13 AT I f-wc ENT NO. ` Animal Shows - TU - Circus and Carnivals and Festivals - TU - (3522-2/02) Commercial Filming, Limited - P P (M) Real Estate Sales P P P (3522-2/02,3707$/05) Retail Sates, Outdoor - TU TU (M) (3522-2/02) Seasonal Sales TU TU TU (M) (3522-2/02) Tent Event - P - (3522-2/02,3707-6/05) Trade Fairs - P - (3707-6/05) Nonconforming Uses (G)(,l)(V) (3334-6197) (Rest of page not used) Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Chapter 211 Page`5�'of 13 ATTACHME� 1 NO, � � � CO, CG, and CV Districts: Additional Provisions L-1 Permitted if the space is 5,000 square feet or less;allowed with Neighborhood Notification pursuant to Chapter 241 if the laboratory space exceeds 5,000 square feet. (3707-6/05) L-2 Allowed with a conditional use permit from the Zoning Administrator if the space is 5,000 square feet or less; allowed with a conditional use permit from the Planning Commission if the space exceeds 5,000 square feet. (3707-6/05) L-3 Allowed with a conditional use permit from the Zoning Administrator if the space is 2,500 square feet or less; allowed with a conditional use permit from the Planning Commission if the space exceeds 2,500 square feet. (3334-6/97,3707- 6/05)) L-4 Permitted if greater than 300 feet from residential zone or use; if 300 feet or less from residential zone or use neighorhood notification is required pursuant to Chapter 241. (3522-2102,3707-6/05) L-5 Only "limited" facilities are allowed subject to approval of a conditional use permit from the Zoning Administrator, and body and fender shops are permitted only as part of a comprehensive automobile-service complex operated by a new vehicle dealer. L-6 Only "small-scale" facilities, as described in Use Classifications, are permitted with a maximum 7 persons employed full time in processing or treating retail products, limited to those sold on the premises. (3522-2/02) L-7 Repealed. (3707-6/05) L-8 On-site storage limited to two rental cars or two cars for lease. (37o7-6/05) L-9 Public facilities permitted, but a conditional use permit from the Zoning Administrator is required for commercial facilities. L-10 Permitted if the space is 5,000 square feet or less; allowed with conditional use permit approval from the Zoning Administrator if space exceeds 5,000 square feet. (3522-2/02,3707-6/05) In addition,Personal Enrichment uses within a retail building parked at a ratio of one(1)space per 200 square feet, shall require no additional parking provided the use complies with the following: (3522-2102) e Maximum number of persons per classroom does not exceed the number of parking spaces allocated to the suite based upon the square footage of the building; and(3522-2102) ® The instruction area does not exceed 75 percent of total floor area of the personal enrichment building area. (3522-2/02) L-I I Permitted if the space is 5,000 square feet or less; allowed with a conditional use permit from the Zoning Administrator if the space exceeds 5,000 square feet. (3522-2102,3707-6/05) Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Chapter 211 Page 6 of 13 ATTACHMENT NO., I L-12 Permitted for existing facilities proposing to expand up to 20%of existing floor area or display area. (3522-2/02,3707-6/05) L-13 For wireless communication facilities see Section 230.96 Wireless Communication Facilities. All other communication facilities permitted. (3568-9/02) (A) Reserved. (3553-5/02) (B) See Section 230.40: Helicopter Takeoff and Landing Areas. (C) Repealed (3378-2/98) (D) See Section 230.38:Game Centers; Chapter 5.28: Dance Halls; Chapter 9.24: Card Rooms; Chapter 9.32: Poolrooms and Billiards; and Chapter 9.28: Pinball Machines- (E) See Section 230.32: Service Stations. (F) See Section 241.20: Temporary Use Permits (G) See Chapter 236:Nonconforming Uses and Structures. (H) For teen dancing facilities,bicycle racks or a special bicycle parking area shall be provided. These may not obstruct either the public sidewalk or the building entry. See also Chapter 5.28: Dancing Halls; Chapter 5.44: Restaurants- Amusement and Entertainment Premises, and Chapter 5.70: Adult Entertainment Businesses. (3341-1o/96) (I) Only permitted on a major arterial street,and a passive or active outdoor recreational amenity shall be provided. (3707-6/05) (J) In the CV District the entire ground floor area and at least one-third of the total floor area shall be devoted to visitor-oriented uses as described in the certified Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan. Any use other than visitor serving commercial shall be located above the ground level, and a conditional use permit from the Planning Commission or the Zoning Administrator is required. Any use other than visitor serving commercial uses shall only be permitted if visitor serving uses are either provided prior to the other use or assured by deed restriction as part of the development. No office or residential uses shall be permitted in any visitor serving designation seaward of Pacific Coast Highway. (3334-6/97,3707-6105) (K) See Section 230.42: Bed and Breakfast Inns. (L) See Section 230.44: Recycling Operations. (M) Subject to approval by the Police Department, Public Works Department, Fire Department and the Director. See also Section 230.86 Seasonal Sales. (I) The following businesses proposing to sell alcoholic beverages for on-site or off-site consumption are exempt from the conditional use permit process: Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Chapter 211 Page 7 of 13 ATTAr;HMPNT NO. 14- 1 (1) Retail markets with no more than 10 percent of the floor area devoted to sales,display, and storage of alcoholic beverages provided the sale of alcoholic beverages is not in conjunction with the sale of gasoline or other motor vehicle fuel. (3522-2/02) (2) Restaurants, Bars-and Liquor stores located 300 feet or more from any R or PS district,public or private school, church, or public use. (3522-2/02) (3) Florist shops offering the sale of a bottle of an alcoholic beverage together with a floral arrangement. (0) See Section 230.46: Single Room Occupancy. (P) See Chapter 231 for temporary and seasonal parking. (Q) Development of vacant land or additions of 10,000 square feet or more in floor area; or additions equal to or greater than 50%of the existing building's floor area; or additions to buildings on sites located within 300 feet of a residential zone or use for a permitted use requires approval of a conditional use permit from the Zoning Administrator. The Planning Director may refer any proposed addition to the Zoning Administrator if the proposed addition has the potential to impact residents or tenants in the vicinity (e.g., increased noise,traffic). (3522-2/02) (R) Projects within 500 feet of a PS District see Chapter 244. (S) See Section 230.48: Equestrian Centers (T) See Section 230.50: Indoor Swap Meets/Flea Markets (U) See Section 230.94: Carts and Kiosks (3248-6/95,3334-6197,3482-12/00) (V) In the coastal zone,the preferred retail sales uses are those identified in the Visitor Serving Commercial land use designation which provide opportunities for visitor-oriented commercial activities including specialty and beach related retail shops,restaurants, hotels,motels,theaters, museums,and.related services. (W) Non-amplified live entertainment greater than 300 feet from a residential zone or use shall be permitted without a conditional use permit. (3522-2/02) (X) Outdoor dining with alcohol sales shall be permitted with a conditional use permit to the Zoning Administrator. Outdoor dining without alcohol sales that is 400 square feet or less shall be permitted without a conditional use permit. If over 400 square feet with no alcohol sales,Neighborhood Notification shall be required pursuant to Chapter 241.(3522-2/02,3707-6/05) (Y) Neighborhood Notification requirements pursuant to Chapter 241.(3522-2/02,3707- 6/05) (Z) In the CV District, Condominium-Hotels and/or Fractional Interest Hotels are allowed only at the Pacific City(Downtown Specific Plan District 7) and Waterfront(Downtown Specific Plan District 9) sites. Refer to Downtown Specific Plan. (3774-9/07 subject to approval by the CA Coastal Commission) Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Chapter 211 Page 8 of 13 A.TTA T NO. �� 211.06 CO,CG and CV Districts: Development Standards The following schedule prescribes development standards for the CO,CG and CV districts. The first three columns prescribe basic requirements for permitted and conditional uses in each district. Letters in parentheses in the "Additional Requirements" column refer to standards following the schedule or located elsewhere in the zoning ordinance. In calculating the maximum gross floor area as defined in Chapter 203,the floor area ratio is calculated on the basis of net site area. Fractional numbers shall be rounded down to the nearest whole number. All required setbacks shall be measured from ultimate right-of-way and in accordance with definitions set forth in Chapter 203,Definitions. (Rest of page not used) Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Chapter 211 Page 9 of 13 aTT.ArH ENT NCB. < <IL CO,CG and CV)[DISTRICTS DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CO CG CV Additional Requirements Residential Development (A)(B) Nonresidential Development (B) Minimum Lot Area(sq. ft.) 10,000 10,000 10,000 (C) Minimum Lot Width(ft.) 100 100 100 Minimum Setbacks Front(ft.) 10 10 0 (D)(E)(0) (3707-6105) Side(ft.) 5 0 0 (F) (3707-&05) Street Side (ft.) 10 10 0 (E) (3707-6105) Rear(ft.) 5 0 0 (F) (3707-6105) Maximum Height of Structures(ft.) 40 50 50 (F)(G) Maximum Wall Dimensions (N) Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 1.0 1.5 1.5 Minimum Site Landscaping(%) 8 8 8 (H)(I) Building Design Standards (0) Fences and Walls (1)(K) Off-Street Parking/Loading (L) Outdoor Facilities See Section 230.74 (M) (3707-6/05) Screening of Mechanical Equipment See Section 230.76 (M) Refuse Storage Areas See Section 230.78 Underground Utilities See Chapter 17.64 Performance Standards See Section 230.82 Nonconforming Structures See Chapter 236 Signs See Chapter 233 CO, CG, and CV Districts: Additional Development Standards (A) Dwelling units shall be subject to the standards for minimum setbacks, height limits,maximum density, open space, balconies and bay windows,and parking for the RMH District. The setback standards shall apply only to the stories of a building that are intended for residential use. (B) See Section 230.62: Building Site Required and Section 230.64: Development on Substandard Lots. (C) The minimum site area for a hotel or motel is 20,000 square feet. (D) See Section 230.68: Building Projections into Yards and Required Open Space. Double-frontage lots shall provide front yards on each frontage. (E) A minimum 50-foot setback is required along Beach Boulevard,Pacific Coast Highway and Edinger Avenue or 25-foot setback with the setback area entirely landscaped. Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Chapter 211 Page 10 of 13 ATTACHMENT NO. (F) Along a side or rear property line abutting an R district,a 10-foot setback is required, and structures within 45 feet of the district boundary shall not exceed 18 feet in height. (G) See Section 230.70: Measurement of Height and Section 230.72: Exceptions to Height Limits. (H) Planting Areas: (1) Required front and street side yards shall be planting areas except properties with 50 foot setback shall provide a minimum 10 foot wide planting area along street frontages. (2) Required side and rear yards shall be planting areas or shall be enclosed by a solid concrete or masonry wall at least 6 feet in height. (3) Hotels and Motels. A 15-foot wide landscaped strip shall be provided along all street frontages,except for necessary driveways and walks. (I) See Chapter 232: Landscape Improvements. (J) See Section 230.88: Fencing and Yards. (K) A solid masonry or concrete wall at least 6 feet in height shall adjoin the site of an existing ground-floor residential use. However, where the portion of the site within 10 feet of the front property line is occupied by planting area or by a building having no openings except openings opposite a street property line,the Director may grant an exception to this requirement. A wall within 15 feet of a street property Iine shall not exceed 3.5 feet in height. (L) See Chapter 231: Off-Street Parking and Loading. (M) See Section 230.44: Recycling Operations and Section 230.80: Antennae. (N) A front or street side wall surface shall be no longer than 100 feet without a break, a recess or offset measuring at least 20 feet in depth and one-quarter of the building length, or a series of offsets,projections or recesses at intervals of not more than 40 feet that vary the depth of the building wall by a minimum of 4 feet. The Director may grant exceptions or allow these standards to be modified for exceptional or unique structures subject to Design Review, Chapter 244. (Rest of page not used) Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Chapter 211 Page 11 of 13 ,ATTACHMENT N®o 1 `_LI 2Q ft_ 20ft. Max' 100 ft. unbroken wall t 25 ft. or more Single Horizonal Offsets: 20ft. may . 100 ft. unbroken wall 2 ft. 20ft. 40FT. Min. 4 ft. recess 4 25 ft_ 25%of wall or more must be varied Variable Offsets: 20 ft_ and 4 ft_ 211-OFFS MAXIMUM WALL LENGTH AND REQUIRED BREAK (0) Two building design standards are established to make commercial areas more attractive and provide a unified streetscape: (1) In the CV District a 10-foot minimum upper-story setback is required above the second story along street frontages. (3707-6i05) (Rest of page not used) Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Chapter 211 Page 12 of 13 Required Setback =rtical two stories without break 211-cvsB. CV DISTRICT: UPPER-STORY SETBACK (2) In the CO and CV Districts, and on frontages adjacent to major or primary arterials in the CG District at least 40 percent of a building surface may be located at the minimum setback line if additional landscaping is provided on the site. Min. 40 percent of front building elevation at m setback line (� Setback line 21 I-FACE.BMP BUILDING FACE AT SETBACK LINE 211.08 Review of Plans All applications for new construction, initial establishment of use,exterior alterations and additions shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review. Discretionary review shall be required as follows: (3522-2102) A. Zoning Administrator Review. Projects requiring a conditional use permit from the Zoning Administrator;projects on substandard lots; see Chapter 241. B. Design Review Board. Projects within redevelopment project areas and areas subject to specific plans;projects within 500 feet of a PS District; see Chapter 244. C. Planning Commission. Projects requiring a conditional use permit from the Planning Commission; see Chapter 241. D. Projects in the Coastal Zone. A Coastal Development Permit is required unless the project is exempt; see Chapter 245. Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Chapter 211 Page 13 of 13 ATTACH VI NO. I H DESIGN REVIEW CHECKLIST Chapter 3 Multi Family ]residential General Design Obiectives Multi-family residential development in Huntington Beach should: ■ Contribute to the sense of community by respecting the scale, proportion and character of the surrounding area ■ Mitigate existing adverse automobile oriented planning patterns by providing pedestrian friendly design solutions ■ Establish attractive, imaginative and functional site arrangements of buildings, open space, recreation areas and parking areas, and a high quality architectural and landscape design ■ Create visual interest and individual unit identity, while maintaining a sense of harmony and human scale building proportions along street frontages and other portions of the project exposed to public view ■ Provide adequate open space, parking and privacy ■ Preserve and incorporate natural amenities unique to the site such as ocean views, and mature trees into the project development proposal ■ Preserve and incorporate structures which are distinctive because of their age, cultural significance, or unique architectural style into the project development proposal � Site Planning 1. Grading Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks M a. Multi-family development should be sensitive to its natural X surroundings. Grading should be minimized by following the natural contours to the greatest extent possible. Graded Z slopes should be rounded and contoured to blend with the _0 existing terrain. 1. Grading(CONT) Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review Sublmission\The Ripcurl Chapter 3 Checklist with remarks.doc b. Grading should emphasize and accentuate scenic vistas and X natural landforms. c. Large manufactured slopes should be avoided in favor of X several smaller slopes integrated throughout the project, Smaller slopes are less obtrusive, more easily vegetated and can be used to add visual interest, preserve views and provide visual buffers where necessary. d. Significant natural vegetation should be retained and X incorporated into the project. 2. Compatibility Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. The arrangement of structures, circulation and open spaces Provided should recognize the particular characteristics of the site and should relate to the surrounding built environment in pattern, function scale, character and materials. In developed areas, new projects should meet or exceed the standards of quality which have been set by surrounding development. b. Structures which are distinctive due to their age, cultural X significance, or unique architectural style should be preserved and incorporated in the project development proposal. c. Residential uses should be buffered from incompatible Increased setbacks at Levitz development. Intensified landscaping, increased setbacks facility and railroad and appropriate building orientation should be utilized as a means of providing adequate separation between such land uses. 3, Site Entry and Edge Design Not Applicant Staff «•� Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a, Multi-family developments in Huntington Beach should be Provided �j distinguished by entry and edge design features such as ornamental landscaping, open space areas, natural features, H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review Sul2nission\The Ripcurl Chapter 3 Checklist with remarks,doc 1 _ architectural monumentation and enhanced paving. b. Courtyard doors or gates should be designed as an Provided important, well integrated architectural feature of the building or complex. 4. Building Siting/Lot Design Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Buildings should be generally oriented parallel to streets with Provided varying setbacks to provide visual interest and varying shadow patterns. b. Clustering of multi-family units should be a consistent site- Provided planning element. Large projects should be broken up into groups of structures. Including building elements of various heights within the overall building design is encouraged. c. Buildings should be oriented to promote privacy to the Provided greatest extent possible. d. Site buildings to create courtyards and open space areas. Provided ` H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning- Staff\2008,06.30 Design Review SuRnission\The Ripcurl Chapter 3 Checklist with remarks.doc �T' 5.Vehicular Access/Circulation/Parking Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Site access and internal circulation should promote safety, Provided efficiency, and convenience. Conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians should be avoided. Continuous circulation should be provided throughout the site to the greatest extend possible. Dead-end driveways should be minimized. Adequate areas for maneuvering, stacking, and emergency vehicle access should be provided. b. The number of site access points should be minimized and Provided located as far as possible from street intersections. c. Principal vehicular access into multifamily projects should Provided be through an entry drive rather than a parking aisle. d. Parking courts should be separated from buildings by a X No parking courts raised walkway (minimum 4 feet wide) and landscape strip minimum 7 feet wide). e. Parking courts should be treated as an important space X it whose character is clearly defined by landscaping, lighting, building massing, and pedestrian/ vehicular circulation areas. f. Large multi-family parking areas should be divided into a X it series of connected smaller parking courts. g. Adverse visual impacts from parking areas, carports, and Provided garage doors on the residential character of the street or project site should be minimized through proper siting and design. h. Driveway entry locations should be coordinated with Provided existing or planned median openings and driveways on the opposite side of the roadway. 6.Pedestrian Circulation Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staffl2008.06.30 Design Review SulAnission\The Ripcurl Chapter 3 Checklist with remarks.doc a. Facilitate pedestrian access and circulation. Entry design Provided should incorporate sidewalks on both sides of the driveway. b. Where possible, multi-family projects should incorporate Provided. Existing crosswalk pedestrian connections to adjoining residential, commercial to college. Potential for projects, and other compatible land use facilities. crosswalk to transit center. c. Pedestrian walkways should be provided to link dwelling Provided units with common open space areas, recreation areas, parking courts and the street. Curvilinear paths provide a more inviting and interesting experience and are generally preferred over long, straight alignments. Paths which traverse open s ace areas are encouraged. d. Pedestrian walkways should be at a minimum (4) ft. in clear Provided width. e. Pedestrian walkways should be safe, visually attractive, and Provided well defined by landscaping and lights. Use of decorative pavement is encouraged. At a minimum, decorative paving should be used to delineate crossings at circulation drives and parking aisles. 7. Open Space Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. The design and orientation of open space areas should Provided provide shelter from the noise and traffic of adjacent streets or other incompatible uses. b. Open space areas should be designed to take advantage of Provided prevailing breezes and sunlight. c. Open space areas should be provided in large meaningful Provided areas, not unusable fragments. d. Common open space area(s) should be sited to maximize Provided their accessibility and use by residents. 1� e. Private open spaces should be contiguous to the units they Provided serve and screened from public view. f. Children's play areas should be sited to be visible from X residential units. �..� 8. Utility and Mechanical Equipment Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Utility and mechanical equipment (e.g. electric and gas TBD by utility provider. meters, electrical panels, transformers and 'unction boxes) 1 1 -7 H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staffl2008.06.30 Design Review Sulfmission\The Ripcurl Chapter 3 Checklist with remarks.doc l should be screened from view, All screening devices should be compatible with the architecture, materials and colors of adjacent structures. b, Transformers shall not dominate the streetscape. When TBD by utility provider, transformers are required to be installed adjacent to the street,they should be under rounded. 9. Refuse and Storage Area Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Trash and storage enclosures should be architecturally Internal to building compatible with the project design. Landscaping shall be incorporated into their design to screen them and deter graffiti. b. Trash enclosures should be unobtrusive and conveniently Provided accessible for trash collection but should not impede circulation during loading operations. 10.Walls and Fences Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Walls and fences should be enhanced and constructed with Provided materials such as masonry, metal, wood or a combination thereof. Tiered planting should be provided adjacent to project or community perimeter walls along street frontages to soften their appearance. b. Project or community perimeter walls should be of masonry TBD construction or ornamental metal (view fencing) and sited to accommodate a minimum fifteen(15)ft. landscaped setback. 10.Walls and Fences (CONT) Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks -�6 H;\Deals\College Country\2,Entitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review SubbissionMe Ripcurl Chapter 3 Checklist with remarks.doc c. Wall sections greater than 50 ft. in length should incorporate Provided for walls and fences at least two of the following design features, in proportion to other than those on side and the length of the wall: rear property lines. • A minimum 2-ft. change in plane for at least 10 ft. ■ A minimum 18-inch high raised planter for at least 10 ft. ■ A minimum 18-inch change in height for at least 10 ft. • Use of pilasters at 50 ft. maximum intervals and at changes in wall planes • A minimum 4-ft. high view fencing section for at least 10 ft. d. Gates or comparable design solutions should be provided in Provided community perimeter walls or fences to allow emergency access and facilitate convenient pedestrian access to activity areas and adjacent uses. e. Walls should be eliminated or sited to provide additional Provided setbacks areas at project entries to accommodate distinctive landscaping, ornamental gateways, signage and street furniture. f. Walls should be curved or angled at corner locations along X No walls at corner, building street frontages. only 11. Paving Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Decorative paving should be incorporated into project site Provided planning design; driveway entries, pedestrian walkways and crosswalks. b. Paving materials should complement the architectural Provided 531 design. The use of stamped concrete, stone, brick, pavers, exposed aggregate or color concrete is encouraged. M Z 12. Lighting Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks z a. The type and location of site and building lighting should Provided preclude direct glare onto adjoining property, streets, or H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review Subinission\The Ripcurl Chapter 3 Checklist with remarks.doc i skyward. b. Pedestrian scale/decorative light fixtures are encouraged. Provided "High mast"poles are discouraged. c. Open spaces should be adequately lighted with durable low Provided maintenance fixtures. Architectural Guidelines 1. Architectural Imagery Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. There is no particular architectural "style" requirement for Provided multi-family residential structures in Huntington Beach. The primary focus should be on developing a high quality residential environment. b. A visual balance or rhythm should be created by the Provided dimensional ratio of multi-family buildings, their parts and spaces around them. c. Architectural elements such as bays, bay windows, recessed Provided or projecting balconies, verandahs, balconies, porches and other elements that add visual interest, scale and character to the neighborhood are encouraged. d. All support buildings (i.e., laundry facilities, recreation In building buildings and sales/lease offices) should be architecturally compatible with the main building design. C-) 2. Building Fagade and Roof Articulation Not Applicant Staff 3: Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks im a. Building heights should be varied and building facades Provided M should provide wall offsets to give the appearance of a z collection of smaller structures and reduce the perceived height and massing of multi-story structures. 0 b. Boxy and monotonous building facades that lack human Provided scale proportions and large expanses of flat wall planes are MM H:\Deals\College Country\2.Bntitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review Suftission\The Ripcurl Chapter 3 Checklist with remarks.doc strongly discouraged. c. The maximum number of attached units per building should Not provided be 8. Variations to the number and mix of units per structure are encouraged. d. Buildings containing 3 or more attached dwellings in a row This provision is should incorporate at least one of the following: accommodated by balconies for each unit and other wall For each dwelling unit, at least one architectural plane offsets. projection not less than 2-feet from the wall plane and not less than 8-feet wide should be provided. Projections should extend the full height of single story buildings, at least one-half the height of the two-story building, and two-thirds the height of a three-story building;or 0 A change in wall plane of at least 3-feet for at least 12- feet for each two units. e. In some cases, it may be desirable to "step back" the upper Provided stories of new multi-family buildings to "scale down" facades that face the street, common space, and adjacent residential structures. 2. Building]Facade and Roof Articulation (CONT) Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks f. Distinctive architectural elements, materials and colors Provided should be used to denote primary building entries or individual unit entries. g. Long monotonous access balconies and corridors should be Provided avoided. h. Roof-lines should be segmented and varied within an overall Provided horizontal context. Varying heights are encouraged, i. Combinations of one, one and a half, and two story units Loft penthouse top floor units --� create variation and visual interest, and are encouraged. . Use of vertical elements such as towers may be used to Provided (S" H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review Sut&nission\The Ripcurl Chapter 3 Checklist with remarks.doc L accent horizontal massing and provide visual interest. k. Hipped or gabled roofs covering the entire building are Not practical for 4-story preferable to mansard roofs and segments of pitched roofs applied at the building's edge. 1. Roofs should reflect a residential appearance through pitch Varying height parapet and use of materials. expression employed as more appropriate solution for five- story urban mixed use project. m. The roof pitch for a porch may be slightly lower than that of X the main building. n. Carport roofs visible from buildings or streets should X incorporate roof slope and materials to match adjacent buildings.Flat carport roofs are discouraged. o. Awnings, moldings, pilasters and comparable architectural Provided embellishments are encouraged. Verandahs and other types of covered outdoor areas should be used to provide a human scale proportions to the building fa ade. p. Ancillary structures such as carports, detached garages, X recreational buildings and storage structures should be designed as an integral part of the project architecture. Accessory and service structures should be similar in material, color, and detail to the primary buildings, 2. Building Facade and Roof Articulation (CONT) Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks q. Open stairways should incorporate solid wall portions, Provided columns and/or a decorative balustrade. Prefabricated metal stairs are strongly discouraged. r. All mechanical equipment whether mounted on the roof or Provided ground shall be screened from view. Utility meters, backflow devices and equipment should be placed in locations that are not exposed to view from the street or they lrT1 should be suitably screened. All screening devices should be compatible with the architecture and color of the main .� buildin s . 13. Fenestration Not Applicant .Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review Sulbffiission\The Ripcurl Chapter 3 Checklist with remarks.doc a. Where possible, fenestration, should be coordinated vertically Provided and horizontally and windows, doors and other building openings should be designed to be consistent in terms of style. 4. Garage.Design Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Site and design garages to minimize adverse visual impacts to X the street scene and project site. Multiple panel door designs, windows or other architectural detailing should be used on garage doors to reduce their impact and scale. 5. Building Materials and Colors Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Building materials should be durable, require low Provided maintenance, and relate a sense of quality and permanence. b. The building and its elements should be unified by textures, Provided colors and materials. Materials should be consistently applied and should be chosen to work harmoniously with adjacent materials. Piecemeal embellishment and frequent changes in materials should be avoided. 5. Building Materials and Colors(CONT) Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks c. Exterior columns for trellises, porches or colonnades should Provided utilize materials and colors, which are compatible with the adjacent building. d. Materials tend to appear substantial and integral to the Provided structure when material changes occur at changes in plane. Material changes not accompanied by changes in plane appear"tacked-on"and are strongly discouraged. e. Exterior materials and architectural details should Provided compliment each other and should be stylistically_consistent. f. Exposed gutters and downspouts should be colored to match Provided. Color will either fascia or wall materials, unless designed as an outstanding be matched or architectural feature of the overall theme. complementary to building design. g. Materials such as brick, stone, copper, etc. should be left in Provided H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review Sulbihission\The Ripcurl Chapter 3 Checklist with remarks.doc their natural colors. Landscaniniz Guidelines 1. Standard Guideline(s) Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Landscaping for multi-family projects should be used to Provided define and accent specific areas (e.g. building entrances, parking lots), define the edges of various land uses, buffer neighboring properties, and screen parking and storage areas. b. Landscaping should be used as a unifying element within a Provided project to obtain a cohesive appearance and to help achieve compatibility of a new project with its surroundings. c. Landscaped areas should generally incorporate plantings Provided utilizing athree-tier system; 1) grasses and ground covers, 2) shrubs and vines, and 3)trees. 1. Standard Guideline(s) (CONT) Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks d. The following planting design concepts are encouraged Provided within each project: m Specimen trees (36-inch box or more) in informal groupings or rows at major focal points ■ Use of flowering vines both on walls and arbors or trellises m Use of planting to create shadow and patterns against walls m Use of planting to soften building lines and emphasize the Mpositive features of the site ■ Trees to create canopy and shade, especially in parking areas Z and passive open space areas O H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Stafn2008.06,30 Design Review Sul ihission\The Ripcurl Chapter 3 Checklist with remarks.doc • Berms, plantings, and walls to screen parking lots, trash enclosures, storage areas,utility boxes, etc. e. Landscaping around the building perimeter is encouraged. Provided f. Landscaping should be protected from vehicular and X No planters next to parking pedestrian encroachment by raised planting surfaces and the spaces. use of curbs. Concrete step —off areas shall be provided in landscape planters adjacent to parking spaces. g. Vines and climbing plants integrated upon buildings, Provided trellises and perimeter walls are encouraged, h. Gravel or astroturf, is not allowed as a substitute for plant May use on podium courtyard materials. for green purposes. Fi Landscaping shall emphasize water-efficient plants. Provided 1. Standard Guideline(s)(CONT) Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks j. Plant materials should be placed so that they do not interfere Provided with lighting of the premises or restrict access to emergency apparatus such as fire hydrants or fire alarm boxes. Trees or large shrubs should not be planted under overhead lines or over underground utilities if their growth might interfere with such public utilities. k. Existing mature, healthy trees should be preserved and On the site, existing trees incorporated within the overall landscaping plan. conflict with building layout. They are replaced with new species that meet the design character and keep the retail �y com onent visible. 1. For every 750 square feet of required landscaped area, at Provided least one 1 tree and ten 10 shrubs should be provided. in. Trees and large shrubs should be placed as follows: Provided A minimum of 8 feet between center of trees and edge of driveway, 6 feet from water meter or gas meter and sewer ® laterals H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staffl2008.06.30 Design Review Suffiihission\The Ripcurl Chapter 3 Checklist with remarks.doc Vv d A minimum of 25 feet between center of trees and beginning of curb returns at intersections m A minimum of 15 feet between center of trees and large shrubs to utility poles and street lights i A minimum of 8 feet between center of trees or large shrubs and fire hydrants, fire department sprinkler, standpipe connections 2. Slope Revegetation and Erosion Control Not Applicant Staff Avvlicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. All slopes to be constructed at a gradient steeper than 6:1 X horizontal to vertical and with a vertical height of three feet or greater should be revegetated within 30 days of completion of grading. 2. Slope Revegetation and Erosion Control(C®NT) Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks b. All slopes should be covered with herbaceous or prostrate X shrubby ground covers. c. All plant materials should be appropriate to the site X conditions, water conserving and appropriately spaced to control soil erosion. d. Trees, shrubs, and ground covers should be planted in X undulating massings and groupings to reduce the constricted character of manufactured slopes. e. Revegetation on permanent slopes should include permanent X irrigation systems. 3. Plant Maintenance and Irrigation Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. All young trees should be securely staked with double Provided staking and/or guy-wires. Root barriers shall be required for any tree placed in paved or other locations where roots could damage adjacent paving/curb surfaces. b. Automatic sprinkler controllers should be installed to ensure Provided H:\Deals\College Country\2.Bntitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review Sul4iission\The Ripcurl Chapter 3 Checklist with remarks.doc that landscaped areas will be watered properly. Backflow preventors and anti-siphon valves should be provided in accordance with current codes. c. Sprinkler heads and risers should be protected from car Provided bumpers, "Pop-up" heads should be used near curbs and sidewalks, d. The landscape irrigation system should be designed to prevent Provided run-off and overs ra . e. All irrigation systems should be designed to reduce vandalism Provided by placingcontrols in appropriate enclosures. Public Safety Through Design Public Safety Through Design Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Traffic calming features should be integrated into the design Not appropriate for Gothard of streets. On-street parking, speed tables, gateway or Center. treatments, chokers, medians, and chicanes contribute to safety by slowing traffic and make it less attractive to through-traffic. b. Lighting should be sufficient for sidewalk and street Provided illumination. Pedestrian scale lighting fixtures that provide good levels of lighting are encouraged. c. Residences should be clustered into smaller "neighborhood" X grouping or organized in smaller residential block patterns, rather than large development tracts. d. Front porches, back porches and/or decks, which permit Provided—upper level �--q casual observation of alleys and streets, are encouraged, balconies, ground floor entrances e. Gates should be provided in walls or fences to allow Provided emergency access and promote pedestrian access to activity M areas and compatible adjacent uses, Z f. Adequate separation should be provided between adjacent X I land uses and park sites. Siting residential uses adjacent to Z park sites is discouraged. Where this occurs, view fencing, not solid walls, -should be utilized between the park site and (7 H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review SuMnission\The Ripcurl Chapter 3 Checklist with remarks.doc P l a ' residential properties. g. Locate neighborhood parks so that residential development X provides"eyes and ears' on the park. h. Landscaping should be planted and maintained to allow X visibility and eliminate areas of potential criminal activity. i. Delineate the separation between public and private spaces Provided, e.g. enclosed patios with paving, building materials, grade separations or with of ground floor units physical barriers such as landscaping. J. Open spaces, courtyards, circulation corridors, and Provided individual living unit entrances should be designed to be as visible from as many dwelling units as possible. AMSTAR/RED OAK HUNTINGTON BEACH,LLC By: RO]I-lB,LLC,Its Member By: Alex Wong,Manager Applicant Signature: Date: 7-1-08 l� H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review Sul6lission\The Ripcurl Chapter 3 Checklist with remarks.doc DESIGN REVIEW' CHECKLIST Chapter 4 General Commercial General Desisn Obiectives The design of each commercial project in Huntington Beach should: m Contribute towards reinforcing or establishing a distinct architectural and environmental image for the district within which the project site is located ® Consider the scale, proportion and character of development in the surrounding area ® Establish attractive, inviting, imaginative and functional site arrangement of buildings and parking areas, and a high quality architectural and landscape design which provides for proper access, visibility and identity ® Facilitate and encourage pedestrian activity and mitigate existing adverse automobile oriented planning patterns Minimize excessive or incompatible impacts of noise, light, traffic and visual character ® Preserve and incorporate natural amenities unique to the site such as ocean views, mature trees, etc, into the project development proposal ® Preserve and incorporate structures which are distinctive because of their age, cultural significance, or unique architectural style into the project development proposal Site Planning 1. Grading Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Commercial developments should be sensitive to their natural X surroundings. Grading should be minimized by following the natural contours as much as possible. Graded slopes should M be rounded and contoured to blend with the existing terrain. 1 1. Grading(CONT) I Not Applicant Staff Z Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks 0 H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review Sul nission\The Ripcurl Chapter 4 Checklist with remarks.doc b. Grading should emphasize and accentuate scenic vistas and X natural landforms. c, Large manufactured slopes should be avoided in favor of X several smaller slopes integrated throughout the project. Smaller slopes are less obtrusive, more easily vegetated and can be used to add visual interest, preserve views and provide visual buffers where necessary. d. Significant natural vegetation should be retained and X incorporated into the project. 2. Compatibility Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. The arrangement of structures, parking and circulation areas Provided and open spaces should recognize the particular characteristics of the site and should relate to the surrounding built environment in pattern, function, scale, character and materials. In developed areas, new projects should meet or exceed the standards of quality which have been set by surrounding development. b. Structures which are distinctive due to their age, cultural X significance, or unique architectural style should be preserved and incorporated in the project development proposal. c. Residential uses should be buffered from incompatible Provided commercial development. Intensified landscaping, increased setbacks and appropriate building orientation should be utilized as a means of providing adequate separation between such land uses. d. Linkages(e.g walkways, common landscape areas, building Provided orientation)between compatible commercial and residential M uses are encouraged where appropriate. 3. Site Entry Design Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks Z a. Entry areas to commercial development should be enhanced Provided by ornamental landscaping, decorative paving, raised mediansgateway structures, and monument si na e. H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review Sul9mission\The Ripcurl Chapter 4 Checklist with remarks,doc b. Main entry drives should extend from the street to the front X cross aisle and should include: a median with a minimum 10-ft, wide clear landscaped area between the street and the first bisecting parking aisle ® a minimum 5-ft, wide sidewalk on each side of the driveway ® a minimum 10-ft, wide landscaped parkway on each side of the driveway ® a minimum 20-ft. wide decorative paving band 4. Building Siting Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a, Structure siting should take into consideration the context of Provided the commercial area, the location of incompatible uses, the location of major traffic generators as well as the site's characteristics. b. The placement and design of structures should facilitate and Provided encourage pedestrian activity and convey a visual link to the street and sidewalks. c, Whenever possible new structures should be clustered to X create plazas and pedestrian malls and avoid the creation of "barracks-like"rows of structures. When clustering is impractical, a visual link between separate structures should )> be established. This link can be accomplished through the use of an arcades stem,trellis, or other open structure. 4, Building Siting(CONT) Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks d. Parking shall not be permitted between the building and front Provided M and exterior side property lines for a minimum 40% of the total project street frontage. Such siting in conjunction with substantial landscape treatment, enhances the streetscape, and Z contributes in the screening of parking areas. This design n solution should be utilized in high pedestrian activity areas H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review Sulinission\The Ripcurl Chapter 4 Checklist with remarks.doc and along auto-oriented corridors with less pedestrian traffic. e. Site and design buildings on corner and mid-block parcels to Provided establish a strong tie to the street frontage. Buildings with angled corners or plazas are encouraged at corner locations. 5.Vehicular Access/Circulation/Parking Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a, Site access and internal circulation should promote safety, Provided efficiency, and convenience. Conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians should be avoided. Continuous circulation should be provided throughout the site to the greatest extend possible. Dead-end driveways should be minimized. Adequate areas for maneuvering, stacking, truck staging, loading and emergency vehicle access should be accommodated on site. b. The number of site access points should be minimized and Provided located as far as possible from street intersections. The use of common or shared driveways is encouraged and in some case may be required. Designs which encourage the use of streets for"internal circulation"should be avoided. c. Driveway entry locations should be coordinated with Provided existing or planned median openings and driveways on the opposite side of the roadway. 5.Vehicular Access/Circulation/Parking(C®NT) Not Applicant Staff 0 Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks d. Parking lots should be designed with a clear hierarchy of Provided circulation; major access drives with no direct access to M parking spaces; major circulation drives with little or no parking; and parking aisles for direct access to parking spaces. Loading and service areas should be provided with separate access and circulation whenever possible. e. Parking should not dominate street frontages. T ided H;\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staffl2008.06.30 Design Review Submission\The Ripcurl Chapter 4 Checklist with remarks.doc f. Parking areas should be screened by buildings and Provided landscaping. g. Parking lots which accommodate a significant number of X vehicles should be divided into a series of connected smaller lots. h. Parking lots should be separated from buildings by a raised X walkway (minimum 4 feet wide) and landscape strip minimum 7 feet wide). 6. Pedestrian Circulation Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Placement of primary vehicle access points to the project site Appropriate separations in close proximity to major building entries should be maintained avoided in order to minimize pedestrian and vehicular conflicts. b. Clearly defined pedestrian paths should be provided from Provided parking areas to primary building entrances and sidewalks along the site's perimeter. c. Design parking areas so that pedestrians walk parallel to Provided moving cars. Minimize the need for pedestrians to cross parking aisles and landscape islands to reach building entries. d. Raised pathways, decorative paving, landscaping and Provided bollards should be used to separate pedestrian paths from vehicular circulation areas to the maximum extend possible. 7. Plazas and Courtyards Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Commercial developments should incorporate plazas and X Project feels more like an courtyards into their design. Primary access to public plazas urban retail block with public and courtyards should be provided from the street. sidewalk frontage, rather than Secondary access may be provided from retail shops, a self-contained shopping restaurants, offices and other uses within the development. center with interior,plazas and courtyards. b. Entries to the plazas and courtyards should be inviting and X well lit. H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review Sulfmission\The Ripcurl Chapter 4 Checklist with remarks.doc c. Shade trees or architectural elements which provide shelter X and relief from direct sunlight should be provided within plazas and courtyards. d. Landscaping, water features, and public art should be X mcorporated into plaza and courtyard design. e. Courtyards should be buffered from the street, parking areas X or drive aisles. 8.Auxiliary Structures/Areas Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Auxiliary structures and areas such as play areas and outdoor Outdoor seating for dining areas should be integrated within the overall site restaurants design. Play structures associated with commercial uses should be enclosed and integrated within the building design. 9. Loading&Delivery Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Loading and delivery service areas should be located and Provided designed to minimize their visibility, circulation conflicts and adverse noise impacts to the maximum feasible extent. b. Loading and delivery service areas should be screened with Provided inside garage. portions of the building, architectural wing walls, freestanding walls and landscape planting. c. Loading and delivery areas should not be located in required Provided setback areas. 10. Utility and Mechanical Equipment Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Utility and mechanical equipment (e.g. electric and gas TBD meters, electrical panels, transformers and junction boxes) should be screened from view. All screening devices should be compatible with the architecture, materials and colors of adjacent structures. b. Transformers should not dominate the streetscape. When TBD transformers are required to be installed adjacent to the street,they should be undergrounded. 11.Refuse and Storage Areas Not Tkpplicant Staff 6'^ H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review Sutbnission\The Ripcurl Chapter 4 Checklist with remarks.doc Applicable Ap livable Remarks Remarks a. Trash storage must be enclosed within or adjacent to the In ground floor room main structure or located within separate freestanding enclosures. b. Trash enclosures should be unobtrusive and conveniently " accessible for trash collection but should not impede circulation during loading operations. c. Trash enclosures should be located away from residential " uses to minimize nuisance to adjacent properties. d. Trash and storage enclosures should be architecturally Internal to building compatible with the project design. Landscaping shall be incorporated into the design of trash enclosures to screen them and deter grafflti. e. Cart storage should be integrated within the initial building X and site design. Large freestanding enclosures or unscreened "cart corrals" are generally considered unacceptable. 12.Walls and Fences Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Wall/ fence design should complement the project's Provided architecture. Landscaping should be used to soften the appearance of wall surfaces. b. Walls should be offset every 50 ft. Landscape pockets along Provided for walls and fences the wall should be provided at regular intervals. other than those on side and > rear proe lines. c. Solid walls with pilasters, decorative caps and offsets are Landscape provided. Offsets recommended for screening purposes. Low solid wall not provided at rear and side M segments with integrated landscaped planters are encouraged property lines. for open space areas. z d. Walls and fences within front and exterior side yards of Provided 0 commercial sites should be avoided. H;\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review SuKinission\The Ripcurl Chapter 4 Checklist with remarks.doc N IW 13.Paving Not Applicant Staff A licable A licable Remarks Remarks a. Decorative paving should be incorporated into parking lot Provided design, driveway entries, pedestrian walkways and crosswalks. b. Paving materials should complement the architectural design. Provided The use of stamped concrete, stone, brick, pavers, exposed aggregate,or colored concrete is encouraged. 14. Lighting Not Applicant Staff A licable A licable Remarks Remarks a. The type and location of parking area and building lighting Provided should preclude direct glare onto adjoining property, streets, or skyward. Lighting systems should be designed for two operating levels; a higher intensity lighting level for business operating hours and a reduced intensity level for non operating hours. b. The design of the light fixtures and their structural support Provided should be architecturally compatible with the theme of the development. c. Pedestrian scale/decorative light fixtures are encouraged. Provided "High mast" poles are discouraged. 15. Other Site Amenities Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Site amenities within a commercial setting should be Provided coordinated in terms of color, materials and design in order to convey a cohesive project appearance and distinctive character. Site Furniture Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Seating should be included in plaza and courtyard design. Restaurant seating to be Where possible, seating should be provided in active and provided by restaurant passive areas. operators Tree Grates/Guards T Not Applicant Staff H:\Deals\College Country\2..Entitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review Sutflnission\The Ripcurl Chapter 4 Checklist with remarks.doc a. Tree grates should be provided along street edges and plazas Applicable_Applicable Provided Remarks Remarks where a continuous walking surface is needed. Grates should be a minimum of four feet in diameter. Knockouts must be provided to enlarge the inside diameter to support a larger tree trunk as the tree grows. b. Tree guards should be provided to protect trees in high Provided activity areas, Tree guard design should be compatible with other site furnishings. Tree guards should be attached to the tree grate,welds should not be visible. Pots and planters Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a, Planters and pots should not obstruct pedestrian traffic flow, Provided Consider placing pots in building recesses, at locations where access is discouraged and adjacent to blank walls to provide visual interest and color accents. b. Group similar sized planters in clusters to enrich streetscapes Provided and plazas. c. Planter materials should compliment the project architecture. Provided Use of cast stone and masonry is encouraged. Bollards Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Bollard design should be consistent with the overall project Provided theme and should coordinate with other site furnishings. b. In locations where emergency access may be necessary, Provided removable bollards should be considered. Trash receptacles Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Trash receptacle design should coordinate with other Provided streetsca e furnishings._ Bicycle Racks Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Bicycle rack design should be consistent with other Provided streetscape furnishings. Use of "loop racks" and "ribbon ® bars" are encouraged. H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review SulAnission\The Ripcurl Chapter 4 Checklist with remarks.doc a� Newspaper Racks Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Newspaper racks should be consolidated. Newspaper rack Provided locations should not inhibit pedestrian flow. b. Newspaper rack design should incorporate masonry and/or Provided metal elements that compliment other streetsca e furnishings. Kiosks,Bulletin Boards and Directories Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Kiosks, bulletin boards and directories should be provided 10,000 SF retail will likely near vehicular and pedestrian entrances to multi-tenant not use kiosks and directories, commercial developments. b. Directory and bulletin board siting should maximize their " visibility while minimizing the potential for creating a traffic hazard. c. Kiosk design should be consistent with the architectural " theme of the development and other site furnishings. Bus Shelters Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Bus shelters should be compatible with streetscape furniture X and the architectural style of adjacent buiWings. _T b. Bus shelters should be designed to provide unobstructed X visibility into the shelter. Architectural Guidelines 1. Architectural Imagery Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. No particular architectural "style" is required for commercial Provided structures. High quality, innovative and imaginative architecture is encouraged. 6`I'1 b. The use of standardized "corporate" architectural styles Provided associated with franchises is discouraged. Site specific design solutions are encouraged. H;\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review Su$fhission\The Ripcurl Chapter 4 Checklist with remarks.doc c. The selected architectural style/ design should consider Provided compatibility with surrounding character, including harmonious building style, form, size, color, materials and roofline. In developed areas infill projects should meet or exceed the standards of quality which have been set by surrounding development. d. The designer is expected to employ variations in form, Provided building details and siting in order to create visual interest. In all cases the selected architectural style should be employed on all building elevations. 2. Building Facade and Roof Articulation Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Buildings should be divided in distinct massing elements. Provided Building facades should be articulated with architectural elements and details. Vertical and horizontal offsets should be provided to minimize building bulk. b. Variable building facades along linear street frontages are Provided encouraged. c. Arcades trellises and other open structures should be utilized Provided to visually and physically link buildings and provide connections to adjacent sidewalks. d. The siting and design of"anchor buildings" for major tenants X should balance rather to overwhelm minor tenant structures. e. Building entries should be readily identifiable. Use recess Provided projections, columns and other distinctive materials and colors to articulate entries. f. All wall surfaces visible to the public should be Provided M architecturally enhanced. ig. Nearly vertical, mansard or pitched roofs should be avoided. OK Z h. Vertical architectural elements such as towers should be used Provided as focal points. �j' HMeals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review Sulilission\The Ripcurl Chapter 4 Checklist with remarks.doc i. Stairways should be designed as an integral part of the Provided building architecture. Boldly-projecting stairways that complement the architectural massing and form of commercial buildings are encouraged j. Gutters and downspouts should be concealed, unless TBD. They will be handled designed as a decorative architectural feature. either one way or the other. k. All mechanical equipment should be screened from view of Provided public streets, neighboring properties, and nearby higher buildings. 3. Fenestration Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. The size and location of doors and windows should relate to Provided the scale and proportions of the building elevation on which they are located. 4. Building Materials and Colors Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Corporate franchise tenant buildings should utilize colors TBD. and materials which are complementary to the overall design theme and consistent with the colors/ materials palette for the commercial development. b. Exposed gutters should be colored to match fascia or wall Provided. Color will either materials. Exposed downspouts should be colored to match be matched or the surface to which they are attached. complementary to building design. Landscaping Guidelines 1. Standard Guidelines Not Applicant Staff IApplicable Applicable Remarks Remarks Z a. Landscaping should enhance the quality of commercial Provided developments by framing and softening the appearance of structures, defining site functions, screening undesirable views and buffering incompatible uses. H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review Sulihission\The Ripcurl Chapter 4 Checklist with remarks.doc • l b. Landscaped areas should generally incorporate planting Provided utilizing a three tiered system: 1) grasses and ground covers, 2) shrubs and vines, and 3)trees. All areas not covered by structures, service yards, walkways, driveways, and parking spaces should be landscaped, in accordance with City Ordinance requirements. 1. Standard Guidelines(CONT) Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks c. The following design concepts should be utilized in all Provided project design: ■ Specimen trees (36-inch box or more) in informal groupings or rows at major focal points ■ Use of flowering vines both on walls and arbors or trellises ® Use of planting to create shadow and patterns against walls A Use of planting to soften building lines and emphasize the positive features of the site ■ Trees to create canopy and shade, especially in parking areas and passive open space areas Berms, plantings, and walls to screen parking lots, trash enclosures, storage areas, utility boxes, etc. I't'a H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Plannijig-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review Sulb3►ission\The Ripcurl Chapter 4 Checklist with remarks.doc N d. Trees generally should be placed as follows: Provided m A minimum of 8 ft. between center of trees and edge of driveway, 6 ft. from water meter or gas meter and sewer laterals ■ A minimum of 25-ft. between center of trees and point of intersection of the edge of driveways and streets or walkways ® A minimum of 15-ft, between center of trees or large shrubs to utility poles/street lights ■ A minimum of 8-ft,between center of trees or large shrubs and fire hydrants,fire department sprinklers,standpipe connections 1. Standard Guidelines(CONT) Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks e. Trees or large shrubs should not be planted under overhead OK lines or over underground utilities if their growth will interfere with the installation or maintenance of these utilities. f. Landscaping materials should be spaced so that they do not Provided interfere with the lighting of the premises or restrict access to emergency apparatus such as fire hydrants or fire alarms boxes. g. Existing healthy mature trees should be preserved and On the site, existing trees incorporated into the overall landscaping plan. conflict with building layout. They are replaced with new species that meet the design character and keep the retail component visible. h. Gravel, or astroturf, is not allowed as a substitute for plant OK materials. PM i. Use of vines and climbing plants on buildings, trellises, and Provided privately owned perimeter walls is encouraged j. Landscaping should be in scale with adjacent buildings and Provided Z be of appropriate size at maturity to accomplish its intended ® goals. H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Pianning-Staffl2008.06.30 Design Review SubMission\The Ripcurl Chapter 4 Checklist with remarks.doc k. Landscaping should be protected from vehicular and Provided pedestrian encroachment by raised planting surfaces, Concrete step-off areas should be provided in landscape planters adjacent to parking spaces. 1. Landscaping around the entire base of buildings is encouraged to Provided, except where doors soften the edge between parking lot and the structure. or windows come to the round. 2. Parking lot landscaping Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Parking lot landscaping should accent driveways, frame the Provided major circulation aisles, and highlight pedestrian pathways. 2. Parking lot landscaping(C®NT) Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks b. Parking for more than 250 parking spaces shall provide X continuous landscape planting strips between every row of parking and should be planted with shade trees low shrubs and groundcover at a minimum distance of 35-ft on center, These landscaping areas should provide a minimum of 7-ft. clear plantable width and shall be protected by a 6-inch high curb and a 12-inch wide concrete or comparable hardscape material mow strip on both sides. c. Parking for more than 250 parking spaces shall provide X landscaping islands with minimum 500 sq. ft. of plantable .� area and 7-ft. wide clear plantable width at the end of parking rows. These landscaping areas should be planted with shade trees, low shrubs and groundcover and should be protected by a 6-inch high curb on all sides and a 12-inch wide concrete step-off area adjacent to 2arking s aces. M d. Parking for more than 250 parking spaces shall provide X interior planting islands with minimum 135 sq. ft. of plantable area every 10 parking spaces. These landscaping Z areas should be planted with shade trees, low shrubs and roundcover and should be protected by a 6-inch high curb H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staff\2008,06.30 Design Review Sulfnission\The Ripcurl Chapter 4 Checklist with remarks.doc on all sides and a 12-inch wide concrete step-off area adjacent to parking spaces. e. All parking lot street frontages for lots with more than 250 X parking spaces should be screened by landscaping. Screening materials should provide a clear line of sight between 32 inches and 5 ft. above grade. Parking lot landscape screening should be implemented by utilizing one or a combination of the following: a maximum 32-inch high evergreen hedge, to create a solid hedge a maximum 32-inch high earth berm with a slope no greater than 3.5:1 non-deciduous (evergreen) trees planted at a distance of 35 ft. on center. Trees should be a minimum 36-inch box container size, or as recommended by conditions of approval 3. Slope Revegetation and Erosion Control Not Applicant Staff Avvlicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. All slopes to be constructed at a gradient steeper than 6:1 X horizontal to vertical and with a vertical height of three feet or greater, shall be revegetated within 30 days of completion of grading. b. All slopes should be covered with herbaceous or prostrate X shrubby round covers. c. All plant materials should be appropriate to the site X conditions, water conserving and appropriately spaced to control soil erosion. d. Trees, shrubs, and ground covers should be planted in X undulating massings and groupings to reduce the constricted �.� character of manufactured slopes. e. Revegetation on permanent slopes should include permanent X irrigation systems. 4.Plant Maintenance and Irrigation Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. All young trees should be securely staked with double Provided staking and/or guy-wires. Root barriers shall be required for any tree placed in paved or other locations where roots could damage adjacent paving/curb surfaces. H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning- Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review Sub6iission\The Ripcurl Chapter 4 Checklist with remarks.doc �N b. Automatic sprinkler controllers should be installed to ensure Provided that landscaped areas will be watered properly. Backflow preventors and anti-siphon valves should be provided in accordance with current codes. c. Sprinkler heads and risers should be protected from car Provided bumpers. "Pop-up" heads should be used near curbs and sidewalks. d. The landscape irrigation system should be designed to prevent Provided run-off and overs ra . e. All irrigation systems should be designed to reduce vandalism Provided by placingcontrols in appropriate enclosures. Public Safety Through Design Public Safety Through Design Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Electronic surveillance and security hardware should be as Provided invisible and unobtrusive as possible. If security grilles are necessary, they should be architecturally integrated within the overall building design theme. The use of scissor grilles is strongly discouraged. b. Lighting should be designed to satisfy functional and Provided decorative needs. Security lighting should be designed as part of an overall lighting plan rather than as single stand alone elements. c. Safety behind buildings should be ensured through: 1) Provided adequate security lighting for parking areas and pedestrian ways; 2) limited access (walls, fences, gates, shrubs); 3) signage; 4) introduction of activities (e.g., rear entrances for commercial activities) that increase surveillance; 5) M surveillance through windows or with cameras; and 6) z ongoing maintenance of storage areas and alleys. z d. Storefront lighting should complement the architectural style Provided of the building while providing illumination of building facades and entrances. H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review SuMission\The Ripcurl Chapter 4 Checklist with remarks.doc 1w M e. Lighting should be sufficient for sidewalk and street Provided illumination. Pedestrian scale lighting fixtures that provide good levels of lighting are encouraged. f. Window signage should be installed in a manner that Provided provides clear and unobstructed view of the interior of the business establishment from the sidewalk. Public Safety Through Design (CONT) Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks g. Building address numbers should be visible from the public Provided right-of-way, h. Landscaping should be planted and maintained to allow Provided visibility and eliminate areas of potential criminal activity. i. Delineate the separation between public and private spaces Provided with paving, building materials, grade separations or with physical barriers such as landscaping. AMSTAR/RED OAK HUNTINGTON BEACH,LLC By: ROIBB,LLC,Its Member By: Alex Wong,Manager Applicant Signature: Date: 7.1.08 r H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review Sub fission\The Ripcurl Chapter 4 Checklist with remarks.doc H. Mixed Use Projects � ( �( � �,.� ��� FCL—Dj�,_ —FZ-7 Site Planning Not Applicant Staff Applicable Applicable Remarks Remarks a. Separate site access drive and parking facilities should be Provided, with some provided for residential uses and commercial uses. connectivity in access b. Security gates should be considered for access to residential Security gates are planned uses and residential parking areas. for both the pedestrian and the auto entries. In the garage, the retail parking is public, but the residential parking is private. Gates separate the two. c. Private open space areas which are intended for use by The residential private open residents only should not be accessible from the space consists mainly of commercial/office portion of the site, balconies accessible only from units. The residential common open space consists mainly of courtyards at the podium level, which is separated by one story from the commercial space at ground level and is secured by residential entry lobbies. d. Parking lot lighting and building security lighting for Garage lighting is entirely commercial uses should be appropriately shielded so as not interior, and not visible to spill over into the residential area. from the units. Lighting for the front of the stores will be directed away from residences. -7 Building Design Not Applicant Staff Applicable A licable Remarks Remarks M z 0 H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staff\2008,06.30 Design Review SuMiission\The Ripcurl Chapter 6 Checklist with remarks.doc a. The architectural style and use of materials should be The project has the consistent throughout the entire mixed-use project. consistent overall character Differences in use of architectural details may occur where of a classic urban the intent is to differentiate between the residential and Mediterranean building commercial/office scale and character of the structure(s). with apartment stories over ground floor shops. Wall plaster and window materials are common to both residential and commercial components but the functions express themselves separately as well. Lighter colors, balconies and trellises accent the apartment stories, while darker wall color, large storefront openings, awnings, integrated signage, enhanced paving and landscape accent the commercial ground floor. b. The design of storefronts should be consistent with the The project design meets guidelines for commercial development. The residential the intent of each set of portion of a mixed-use structure should be consistent with standards. The shops are the design guidelines for multifamily residential placed in a traditional retail development. base,with a rhythm of storefronts lining the streets and punctuated with a setback corner plaza area which provides room for outdoor tables and gathering, and accented with awnings,enhanced frontyard/sidewalk paving and landscape.Retail parking entrances are clear M but parking is screened from view within the Z building.A walkway arcade 0 connects retail parking to H;\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning- Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review SuKission\The Ripcur(Chapter 6 Checklist with remarks.doc the shops. Residential stories are placed above the retail base and are accessed by two street level pedestrian entries which connect residents to sidewalk activity and the shops. Ground level guest parking and basement resident parking is accessed by a driveway entrance marked by a tower element. Apartments,each with a private balcony,are expressed in vertical stacks, providing individual identity and accentuating their relationship with the street. On the apartment levels, circulation areas overlook the streets below at several points, and connect abundant indoor and outdoor common space including landscaped courtyards and terraces of varying scales, swimming pool,community and recreation rooms and lounges. H;\Deals\College Country\2.$ntitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review SuHnission\The Ripcurl Chapter 6 Checklist with remarks.doc c. Projects three stories or less in height should incorporate full X roofs on at least 50% of the roof area. d. Commercial signage should be restrained. The project will include standards or guidelines for commercial signage to be consistent with design goals for the project as a whole. e. Structures with heights greater than three stories should set The building height is back the upper portions of the structure a minimum of 10 ordered in a classic feet for each additional two stories, tripartite fashion, with distinct base, middle, and top. The retail "base" provides a traditional storefront expression. It is a high story with a continuous horizontal element. The apartment stories in the "middle" are not continuous, but are articulated with balconies set back several feet from the base. The mezzanine constitutes the "top" and is separately articulated and set back several feet from the prevailing face of the building. f. When residential and commercial uses are combined in the Separate entrances are :.� same structure, separate entrances should be provided for provided. Retail spaces are each use. entered from the sidewalk and from the retail parking area. Apartments are accessed from two lobbies entered from the sidewalk. Units are entered from interior hallways for residents only. Ht\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staffl2008.06.30 Design Review SuMission\The Ripcurl Chapter 6 Checklist with remarks.doc 6q Architectural Character: The building is designed to be friendly to the streets it fronts and to its residents and users, responsive to the neighborhood context and responsible to the environment, and its expression is derived from these goals. Two residential lobbies are accessed from the sidewalk via landscaped forecourts through tiled arches. Entries are further marked with setbacks in the building's massing, and with tower elements in contrasting color, punctuating the residential elevations. A rhythmic sequence of retail storefronts and live-work units in an arcaded base lines both streets, enlivening the streets with pedestrian activity and visual interest. Apartments above are expressed in vertical stacks, mitigating building length, and providing individual identity and accentuating their relationship with the street. On the apartment levels, circulation elements and common areas such as lounges and terraces overlook the streets below at several points, offering all residents opportunities to engage the public realm, Building massing with offset planes, deeply recessed balconies and breaks emphasizing entries accentuates these opportunities. A penthouse story set back from the street wall engages the sky. Rich terra cotta and ochre colors, accented with cool whites, blue and gray-green are used to further emphasize this ordering, and combine with a strong integration of landscape to reinforce the coastal Mediterranean context. Michael de Villiers,AIA Senior Associate Van Tilburg, Banvard & Soderbergh, AIA AMSTAR/RED OAK HUNTINGTON BEACH,LLC By: ROIHB,LLC,Its Member By: Alex Wong,Manager Applicant Signature: Date: 7-I-08 H:\Deals\College Country\2.Entitlement\Planning-Staff\2008.06.30 Design Review Sulfhission\The Ripcurl Chapter 6 Checklist with remarks.doc City of Huntington Beach June 3, 2008 SEP 12 200$ The Huntington Beach City Council Huntington Beach, CA Via e-mail Dear Council Members: Collectively,we are most of the major property owners in the Edinger area of the Beach and Edinger Specific Plan("the Plan"). We commend the City of Huntington Beach for its full and thoughtful study of how-to re-energize Beach Boulevard and Edinger Avenue. We have been watching the progress of the Plan carefully, and we look forward to seeing whether the Plan will make redevelopment feasible on each of our parcels. The comments that follow are based on our review of the working draft. Although the Plan has not been widely distributed, we take this chance to provide early feedback on points that matter to us. We request that these items be included in the Plan. Lower open space requirements. The 150 s.f. per unit and 100 s.f. per 1,000 office s_f_ are prohibitive for redevelopment. The Plan must establish a reasonable open space requirement and clearly define how it is calculated and implemented. For example, will public and private open space both count toward any open space requirement? Flexibility with regard to ground floor uses. Where the market does not support new retail,the Plan should permit office, live-work space,lofts, and other alternatives. Flexibility with regard to height. We generally support the height limits proposed along Edinger as average heights,but request that the plan allow for flexibility,which will encourage more interesting and site-appropriate designs. In addition,we request greater height limits at two strategic intersections. At.Fdinger/Gothard,we request that the six-to eight-story limit already suggested by Freedman,Tung& Bottomley("FTB") be applied to all four corners. At the freeway-facing southeast comer of Beach/Edinger, we request a limit equal to the existing twelve-story freeway-facing office building at The Towers at Bella Terra. Accommodation of existing uses. We request that the Plan be written in a way that does not prevent owners from continuing to operate their existing commercial buildings,and that allows them to renovate those buildings without triggering new development standards. Again,we commend the City and FTB for the excellent work that is being done to create a plan that makes functional and economic sense. We look forward to supporting your efforts in any way we can. ATTACHMENT NO. ci�.� :�REELN+'rUiT t=W NO. -�14 52 9040 ;ut,_ 02 2 fly:132AM P? 3une 3,2008 Page 2 of 2 Sincerely. <.� Janette Ditkowsky Steve Dodge Holly Fredensburg Freeway Industrial Park Huntington Exe ive Park JL Predensburg LLC Scott Hufl'ntan Alex Wong Watt Companies Red Oak Investments Copy: Mary Beth Broeren Scott Hess Stanley Smalewitz Paul Emery ATTACHMENT NO. 6r"t13;`-_EtFj 16:adC92 H NTINGTGN PAGE F3�i j line 3,2008 Page 2 42 Sincerely, Janette Ditkowsky Z�*� Xecutive Holly Fredensburg Freeway Industria:Park Hun Park JL Fredensburg LLC Scott Hunan Alex Wong Watt Companies Red Oak Investments Copy: hazy Beth.Broeren Scott Hess. Stanley SinWewirr_ lPaul Emety ATTACHMENT NO. lZ• 3 136/0-3/2003 15:00 —1143'151010-1143751013 CENIP1 INN 4 PAGE 02 Julie 33'2N' s Page 2 of Sincerely, Janette Ditkowsky Steve Dodge Holly Fredensburg Freeway Industrial Park Huntington Executive Park JL Fredensburg LL Scott Huffman Alex Wong Watt Companies Red Oak Investments Copy: Mary Beth Broeren SCottffeSS Stanley Smalewitz Paul Emery 23 ATTACHMENT NO. DA' - June 12008 Page 2 of 2 Sincerer, Janette Ditkowsky Steve Dodge Holly Fredenshurg Freeway Industrial Park Huntington Executive Park JL Fredensburg LLC Scott Huffman Alex Wong Watt Companies Red Oak Investments Copy_ Mary Beth Broeren Scott Hess Stanley Smalewitz Paul Emery ATTACHMENT N , �6� C4 of Huntington each Page 1 of 2 SEP 12 2008 Nguyen, Tess From: Tom Andrusky [tomandrusky@verizon.neq Sent: Friday, September 12, 2008 11.33 AM To: Nguyen, Tess Subject: Ripcurl Project Comments- Need for Comprehensive Strategic Transportation Action Plan September 12, 2008 To: Planning Commission via Tess Nguyen - Planner From : Tom Andrusky - Huntington Beach Resident Subject: Ripcurl Project - Need for a Comprehensive Strategic Transportation Action Plan for the Edinger Corridor I believe that the Ripcurl Project would be beneficial to the City of Huntington Beach, but before it is approved it is suggested that the benefits of a Comprehensive Strategic Transportation Action Plan for the Edinger Corridor be evaluated by the Planning Commission prior to making a final decision. The City of Huntington Beach does not have a Comprehensive Strategic Transportation Action Plan for the Edinger Corridor. By having an in depthTransportation Plan this project and future projects would have a more efficient permitting process , better use of land , all future residents would have access to smoother traffic flow and improved public transit options such as bus rapid transit and metrolink. The Plan would include traffic issues (local streets,arteria[ streets,freeways and highways), public transit (bus shuttles,local bus, bus rapid transit, regional connections to metrolink) and parking ( including concepts related to public private partnerships). It is suggested that the Planning Commission obtain additional information regarding the benefits of a Comprehensive StrategicTransportation Plan. The topics could include current OCTA programs that could fund a transportation plan, benefits of a transportation plan, the current status of the Four City Transportation Project ($400,000.00 funded by OCTA), and CalTrans plans for the 1-405 and Beach Blvd-Highway 39. Please note that OCTA is making plans now to expend $15 billion over the next thirty years and significant funds are available to meet city transportation needs. If the City of Huntington Beach does not choose to be involved in transportation planning other cities such as Anaheim will gladly use the available funds. Anaheim is in the midst of comprehensive transportation planning that would be worth learning about. Thank you for considering the concepts in this letter. If you have questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, 9/12/2008 ATTACHMENT NO. �_ Page 2 of 2 Tom Andrusky 714-840-6325 tomandruskyRverizon net 9/12/2008 ATTACHMENT NO. GOLDEN WEST COLLEGE HUNTINGTON BEACH, � OCEANS OF OPPORTUNITY Wes Bryan, President July 23,2008 City of Huntington Beach Huntington Beach City Council JUL 2 3 2008 Huntington Beach Planning Commission City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Dear members of the Planning Commission and City Council: Golden West College has had an ongoing interest in development plans related to improving and expanding business and professional services along the Golden West/Edinger/Beach Corridor.We perceive this as a major gateway and an important service area for the region.We applaud the council and commission for the energy they have expended in reviewing plans and proposals for this area.Bella Terra has brought new life to north Huntington Beach,and our faculty,staff,and students have benefited in many ways. The proposed Ripcurl project to be located next to the Golden West College campus on the corner of Center Avenue and Gothard Street would complement other developments in many positive ways.While we have not reviewed the plans and do not comment on their specifics,we support the project in concept for the following reasons: ® The Ripcurl will improve the aesthetic character of the neighborhood surrounding our campus by replacing a tired strip retail center with a visually exciting building.A significant new investment like this next to the College will have a positive effect on the entire neighborhood. ® The infusion of residents next to the campus will improve safety and activity around our campus. We hope that the street-front retail proposed for the ground floor will provide some good amenities for our college community.It would also provide additional employment opportunities for students in the same manner as other retails developments have. 6 The completed building would create a dynamic new housing option that could potentially serve some College faculty and students. -We have had some positive conversation with the developers regarding some of our future needs which might be accommodated by this development. The Ripcurl has our support,and we think it will make a great neighbor for the College. We encourage the appropriate city agencies to give the project full consideration as they review various aspects of this proposal. Sincerely, IW4 — Wes Bryan,President Kenneth D.Yglesias,Ed.D.,Chancellor 15744 Golden West Street-P_0.Box 2748-Huntington Beach CA 92647-2748 Board of Trustees"L.Homtwdcle (714)895-8101 - fax(714)895-8929-www_goldenwestcollege_edu Wafter G.Howald rim Moreno Jerry Patterson Mnando R Ruiz ATTACHMENT . � student Trustee p I� QY of Huntington Beach a JUL 172008 HUNTINGTON 8WH CHAMBERfS July 17, 2008 Chairman Tom Livengood Members of the Planning Commission City of Huntington Beach Huntington Beach, Calif. 92648 Dear Chairman Livengood: On behalf of the Huntington Beach Chamber of Commerce, I wish to state our support for The Ripcurl project located at the corner of Gothard and Center Streets. We endorse it in concept—based upon what the developer has presented to us, which we believe is the same 440-unit schematic design that the Planning Commission will be reviewing in the next few months. 1. The proposed project supports the creation of a"'Town Center" consistent with the desirable goals discussed in the first four Beach/Edinger Specific Plan Workshops. The Ripcurl will serve as a demonstration project for the Specific Plan, opening the way and setting a standard for future excellent urban projects. 2. The project promotes jobs/housing balance by placing dense housing in the midst of retail, office, education, and transportation. When completed, The Ripcurl will accommodate demand for Class-A market rate rental housing that has been unmet in north Huntington Beach for decades. And, by replacing an older strip center, it will increase the tax revenue stream contributed by this property to the City. 3. It creates density where it is most beneficial and least impactful. In building housing near the Huntington Beach's largest public transportation hub, the city will make an important statement about smart, transit-oriented growth. The site's unique location allows residents access to and from the I- 405 freeway through routes that avoid the heavily-impacted intersection of Beach Boulevard and Edinger Avenue. ,,,cHMEN'T NO. 19891 Beach Blvd Suite 140 • Creating a strong(Deaf economy Huntington Beach,CA 92648 • Promoting the community (714)53&8M • Providing networking opportunities (714)960-7654 Fax • Representing the interests of businesses with government WWW1 bcha nW.0om • Political action 4. It is expected to be the first multi-family building in Huntington Beach to incorporate environmentally sustainable "Green" design principles. 'hank you for allowing us the opportunity to comment. Sincerely, 1 e Riddell, CCE resident cc: Emery Hall Hess TTACHME T NO. City of Hunfington Beam z THE JUL 2 3 2008 ROBERT MAYEK CORPORATION July 23, 2008 Huntington Beach Planning Commission City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach,CA 92648 RE: Ripcurl Project Dear members of the Planning Commission: This letter is written in support for The Ripcurl project located next to the campus of Golden West College on the corner of Center Avenue and Gothard Street. I. It supports the creation of a"Place"and a"Town Center"consistent with the desirable goals discussed in the first four Beach/Edinger Specific Plan workshops. The Ripcurl will serve as a demonstration project for the Specific Plan,opening the way and setting a standard for future excellent urban projects. 2. It promotes jobs/housing balance by placing dense housing in the midst of retail, office, education,and transportation When completed,The Ripcurl will accommodate demand for Class-A market rate rental housing that been unmet in north Huntington Beach for decades. In addition to providing local residents and workers with a luxury living alternative,the project will also attract high-income renters from other areas whose spending power and consumption habits will support surrounding retail businesses and commercial establishments. 3. It replaces the visual blight of tired strip retail with the visual excitement of new, top-rate development.The area near the intersection of Gothard Avenue and Center Street is in particular need of activity during non-business hours.The resident-and student-serving retail along Gothard and Center will both enliven the streetscape and provide a healthy,pedestrian-friendly compliment to Golden West College. 4. It creates density where it is most beneficial and least impactful. In building housing near the Huntington Beach's largest public transportation hub,the city will make an important statement about smart, transit-oriented growth.The project would also benefit from future commuter rail service,should it be established using the likely route of the existing Union Pacific rail line.The site's unique location allows residents access to and from the I-405 freeway through 660 Ncwlx)rt Center Drive.Suire 1050.Newport Bach,CA 92660 P.O.Nix 86W.New(x1rt Beach,CA 92658-8680 tct 949.759.809( - fax949.720.1017 ATTACHMENT NO, �- Huntington Beach Planning Commission July 23,2008 Page 2 of 2 routes that avoid the heavily-impacted intersection of Beach Boulevard and Edinger Avenue. S. It multiplies the tax revenue stream contributed by this property to the City. 6. It is expected to be first multi-family building in Huntington Beach to incorporate environmentally sustainable"Green"design principles. 7. It will create affordable housing.The Ripcurl will produce affordable housing for Huntington Beach. Some units will be integrated with the market rate units on site. Others will be directly subsidized off site.In both cases,the applicant will be working with staff to deliver specific rent-restricted units to the market_ Overall,this project gives the City and the applicant a chance to demonstrate how the use-segregated development pattern in Orange County and much of suburban America can be successfully replaced with concentrated mixed-use development around transportation nodes and retail centers. We express our support for The Ripcurl and think it will make a great contribution to the City.We encourage the Planning Commission City to give the project full consideration. Sincerely, The Robert Mayer Corporation Lawrence .Brose Senior Vice President ATTACHMENT NO. l?17i PC JUL 2 8 DOB Huntington Beach City Council Huntington Beach Planning Commission City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach,CA 92648 July 23,2008 Dear members of the Planning Commission and City Council: I am the owner of Real Property Management located in the College Country Center that is located at 7400 Center Avenue. I am writing to show my support for the proposed project,The Ripcurl. Even though my business will need to relocate if this development is approved,I am in support of improving the city of Huntington Beach. The current building,College Country Center, is an eyesore. Many of the units are vacant_The building has a dead and out-of-date feel. Due to the positions of the buildings on this property,after hours it attracts transients and questionable characters. The new development would not only provide a clean and pleasing addition to Huntington Beach but it would also improve the security and safety of the neighborhood.Please allow this project to move forward,it is good for the community and it is good for the local business owners. I maintain a good relationship with the owner of College Country Center.Red Oak Investments has been upfront regarding their plans to redevelop this center.I appreciate their candid and open approach on such a detailed project. I support the proposed development and urge the city to approve the project. Res e y, r-- Bryan 7400 Center Ave Suite 210•Huntington Beach,CA 92647- Telephone 714-899-2200•Facsimile 714-899-1914 ATTACHMENT NO. ��� 'FA.'F,, WATT City of Huntington Beach COMPANIES SEP 12 2008 Huntington Beach City Council Huntington Beach Planning Commission City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 July 28, 2008 Dear members of the Planning Commission and City Council: This letter is written in support for The Ripcurl project on the corner of Center Avenue and Gothard Street in Huntington Beach. Watt Companies owns and manages the nearby commercial center at 7560-7566 Edinger Avenue (Michaels, Petsmart). Watt supports The Ripcurl for the following reasons: 1. It will be a good example of the kind of project called for in the Town Center areas described in the Beach/Edinger Specific Plan.The Ripcurl will raise the bar for future projects that might be contemplated in the specific plan area. 2. As owners of an adjacent commercial property, Watt stands to benefit from the residents whose spending power and consumption habits will support surrounding retail businesses and commercial establishments 3. The project promotes jobs/housing balance by placing dense housing in the midst of retail, office, education, and transportation. 4. The current retail and office center on the property is old and is in need of redevelopment. This development will dramatically improve the appearance and functionality of the site. 5. It creates density near the Huntington Beach's largest public transportation hub, away from neighborhood streets, where it would be feast impactful. 6. The environmentally sustainable principles that are expected to be included will be another good benefit of the project. As an adjacent owner, Watt Companies supports The Ripcurl and thinks it will make a great contribution to the neighborhood, and to the city of Huntington Beach. Sincerely, Scott Huffman VP, Development Services Watt Companies, Inc. Watt Properties.Inc. 271t ocean Park 6ivd. Suite 3040 Santa Monica,CA 90405 310.314.2430 310.399_Lal ATTACHMENT NO. � CEMPI INDUS TRIES, INC. Creative Engineered Mcfal Products, INC. Huntington Beach City Council Huntington Beach Planning Commission City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 August ' 2008 Dear members of the Planning Commission and City Council: I Support the proposed Ripcurl project- It will be a good demonstration for the Beach and Edinger Specific plan-It is important that the first project be built in the context of the new plan and be a good example for the rest of us to come-I believe that as designed,The Ripcurl sets a high bar for the rest of the development in the Beach and Edinger plan area.As a redevelopment-incepted neighbor,I appreciate the example that will be set by the Ripcurt project and urge the Planning Commission and City Council to approve it. Thank You holly Fredensbur City of Hunfington Beach cc - AUG-0 8 2008 PT 7-1V 16072 GOTHARDSTREET,HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92647(714)3751000 FAX(714)375-1010 ATTACHMENT NO. et�tlrl�t City at Huni3F,' ::` o"m" Ikury ark�et, &. Tsakler rSEP..12 20a8 Deli 7561 Center Ave. #49 Huntington Beach, CA 92647 Tel: 895-8020 Fax: 895-6011 Web: www.oldworld.ws Huntington Beach City Council Huntington Beach Planning Commission City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 July 30,2008 Dear members of the Planning Commission and City Council: We want to express our support for the proposed Ripcurl project on the corner of Center Avenue and Gothard Street in Huntington Beach.Our support is conditioned on the provision that the owners of the Ripcurl project move forward with the full understanding that their project is located in an area which may be subject to disruption by events such as Oktoberfest which are routinely held at Old World Village and in our festival hall. We would propose that any conditional use permit issued to the Ripcurl project contain a provision that it accept the potential consequences of its decision to locate its operation near a venue which may, on occasion, create some interference with the property owners use and enjoyment of its land due to the noise and crowds generated by the activities that we have been carrying on for over 30 years.We are owners of the nearby commercial center at 7561 Center Ave. Huntington Beach CA 92647. We think The Ripcurl will be a strong addition to this part of the city. Not only will it replace an older shopping center with a new,appealing building.We also think that it will help bring additional energy and vitaCty to this part of the city. As retailers and owners of commercial businesses,we can only expect to benefit from having luxury residences added within walking distances of our stores and commercial establishments. We appreciate the good working relationship we enjoy with the owners of current commercial center,and we support their effort to redevelop it into The Ripcurl.We encourage the city of Huntington Beach to facilitate its approval. Thank you. Sincerely, Josef Bischof (WCSL President) Dolores Bischof (WCSL secretary) � = 1�74 ATTACHMENT NO. l�l�. 4- : r t -ra:=E�= OF- .�,rr. i f WASHBURN EMYERS t :.., .F pity of Huntington Beach SEP 3 ?_ 2 ugust 25,2008 Huntington Beach City.Council I funtina ton Beach Planning Conunission Cite of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach.,CA 92648 3y E Re: proposed Ripcurl Project f Dear members of the Planning Commission and City Council: 1 and writing in support of the proposed project for the property located at the corner of Gothard and Center(72100 Center Avenue). The Ripcurl project is a badly needed upgrade of a tired center. I have rented in this center since approximately 2002 with only a short break in my tenancy-. This center has long since outlived its usefulness and is a stark contrast to the development currently happening all around the area. l } The current owners of this property, Amstar/Red Oak Huntington Beach,LLC,have done j everything possible to insure that we are comfortable and that the facilities,despite the age of the building,are maintained as well as possible. When we were approached with the news that the owners were planning to redevelop the building and that yv e would have to relocate,I was disappointed at first. However,Amstar has gone out of their way to provide a very generous and fair relocation arrangement. They seem to be genuinely concerned with the tenants. } Not only do I conduct business within the city of Huntington Beach,I am also a long time resideazt of the city. I live within a mile or so of the proposed Ripcurl Development. I have watched over the years as this area has been revitalized by Bella Terra and am excited to see the benefits that will come to our city as this center is brought up to the standards of the surrounding area. This type of gentrification is important to the continued growth and prosperity of our community,and I completely support it' i If I can be of any further help in this matter,I am more than happy to answer any questions that ' you roar have. Feel free to contact me at your convenience. Sincerely,:� Timothy D. Myeis Attorney at Law' 7 400 CE1VTUR AVENUE SUITE 21S - }iL3NTINC-TON BF-ACH _ CALIFORNIA _ S2G47 PHONE- 714 _ 7a2 . S060 FAX_ 714 _ 722 , 802S A TTAC ENT NO. A 06 MICHA L C. ADA S ASSOCIATES September 10, 2008 City of Huntington Beach, Planning Commission 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Re: The Ripcurl Project Dear Chairman Livengood and members of the Planning Commission: The City of Huntington Beach is in the middle of some very exciting planning and development projects. The most important planning effort i believe is the revitalization concept for north Huntington Beach. The opportunity is ripe for the creation of a new vibrant neighborhood. A number of property owners and developers are eager to discover what the City is ready to support with respect to the various individual projects wfiich over time will compose the neighborhood master plan. The Ripcurl mixed-use development concept is a true reflection of the visions which has been discussed over the past few years and is also consistent with previous planning concepts for the area, developed over a generation ago. The Ripcurl project will offer new housing products to the City while maintaining the commercial opportunities established in the neighborhood. Although somewhat new to Huntington Beach The Ripcurl concept has been proven successful in many communities throughout the world. Housing and commercial trends are constantly evolving and changing with the needs of the community and consumers. The proposed concept is a well thought out solution to address the current needs of Huntington Beach. The Ripcurl project is only one piece of the Iarger master planned area, however the proposal may indeed set the standard for future growth and development of the neighborhood. While I realize that the proposed project will present many community and environmental challenges, it is critical to review and discuss all individual projects as components in the creation of a new Huntington Beach neighborhood. Any potential negative impacts associated with one component must be viewed enlight of the greater community benefit from the creation of a new revitalized neighborhood. Sincerely, Mike Adams s5 F4uLAN P_O.BOX 382 HUMINGTON BEACH,CA 92W PHONE 714374.5678 FAX 714374.2211 AdamsAs9oc@soca1.rr com _ `�. ATTAr.H ENT 79A�Bi r < SAMUEL CUBETE ATTORNEY AT LAW,APC 7400 CENTER AVENUE,SUITE 107 HUNTINGTON BEACH,CALIFORNIA 92647 (7 t4)799-6977-FAX:(714)893-9983 City of Huntington Beach August 20,2009 AUG 2 2 Z008 Huntington Beach City Council Huntington Beach Planning Commission City.of Huntington Beach- 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Re: Project at Southeast Comer of Gothard and Center Dear Members of the Planning Commission and City Council: This letter is written in support for the proposed project, The Ripcurl project located at 7300 Center Avenue. The proposed redevelopment would replace a tired strip shopping center and office building with a new development which would provide much needed residences in this part of the city. These new residences would put people within easy walking distance of shopping,entertainment and employment. The current building(the one I rent space in)is old and ready to be replaced_ I have been a tenant in this property since August,2001. We have enjoyed a good relationship with the owner,Amstar/Red Oak Huntington Beach, LLC since they took ownership of the center in 2006. When they approached its in 2007 saying they were considering proposing a redevelopment,we were able to work out a relocation arrangement with them that we consider to be fair. Therefore,we wish to express our support for the proposed development and encourage the city to approve the project. Very truly yours, L �C SAMUEL CUBETE j Attorney at Law �l t cl ATTACHMENT N . _ City of Huntington Beach Steven P. Belisle SEP 1 2.2008 15241 Newcastle Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92647 August 21, 2008 City of Huntington Beach Planning Commission 2000 Main Street, 3`d Floor Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Dear Commissioners: Subject_ Support"The Ripcurl"Development at the Intersection of Center and Gothard 1,Steven P. Belisle, have been living at 15241 Newcastle Lane, since November 2003, and in the Westminster/Huntington Beach area for the past 33 years. During that time, 1 have seen many changes to our city and its infrastructure. Most notably, I witnessed the transformation of the defunct Huntington Center Mall into the now illustrious Bella Terra Center. This conversion was one of the best things the city has done in this area: increasing tax revenue, creating jobs, and providing entertainment—to name a few. I am eagerly awaiting the"fix"for the Montgomery Ward property,and I trust your good judgment will result in a transition just as valuable to the city as Bella Terra_ Recently, I have learned of the redevelopment being proposed at the intersection of Center and Gothard—across the street from the®CTA Transfer Station—known as"The Ripcud" development. The current site,with its empty commercial locations and decrepit appearance, leave much to be desired for a city on the edge of the 21"century. With"the Ripcud" plan,the developers will embrace the mixed-use building concept that has been successful in many cities.This concept concentrates on reducing the environmental impact of suburban sprawl by placing residents within walking range of public transportation, commercial and entertainment venues, and educational institutions.Additionally, the developers are seeking to embrace the ecological challenges of construction by adopting the"green" concept of sustainable development a pattern of resource use that aims to meet human needs while preserving the environment. I believe Huntington Beach is a city open to embrace changes that will greatly increase the status and image of our community.The redevelopment of this site will not only be environmentally positive, but it will also lead to higher property values and increased tax revenues. Therefore, I strongly support this plan and urge you to consider the numerous advantages redeveloping this site will have on the city and its residents. Please approve"The Ripcur r project_ Sincerely, even P. Belisle ATTACHMENT NO. SEP 1 08 Ic re 1- 17 ATTACHMENT NO* r ✓� ', ;" -f� 7 i sue: - .L ,4f , L �LL,� iLf l{ ter .CGi ' f I' �fszf_ f,y'.�ci•.- `.! ��Lf �i.- 'L- 't[.'j� .F 3 4-e•e r ,1._ �� i _� ,� � f, �_,� /(i44L IL-L lz�v t5 r� }, y ATTACHMENT NO. hi of SEP 1 22008 f It Y /* 0'7 ATTAMMEENT NO. SEP 1 22008 /4 f i . ��1 � t ax- f q tt ti Ii ii ii It It 14 ATTACHMENT NO. 2008 J,6u ' _ eta./ { All" . c4 6 / is ii i 7 -F t� 7 I t i i+ ii :i ATTACHMENT NO. ! 1 YL�1 r� �G YY1 /Ll �S S c r/ i 3a�: ? �< ; l4 /J 20 08 cr r t j �U wl-e— f C Ct All G 13� s� 14C. A A- k 3 14 13 C eizCq7 ;t L ' 7 4j 1♦ S- 3: js ii =f S� S° �E 1} i� ii t+ t S is ji 3� t; i ;i i t i ! ij �I S j4 44 S j �i }i -�i MAI � �, AC pi � r UL6 } �i Lt F: i �t 'f 3i i 2T ij ;7 A -TAC MENT NO. �27 I4 I (,1l t,;v cA-k: SZt; 2 ► C- c-- 1 c-i lX I i i s 5vYY1 V—C—ct—S S qS S v � � Th wi 00 cAY0 )-(2n de 14 i vD Cn 3� i I 1 l� is ii i fi A A%'—,HME,,NT NO. � .s t 7 i� ��n•..,:,,��,.-���..��.��.,���,��u:r.„.,..,,..,.,,,,,�..c,��k.,.,y4r.W��s...,���,.N,�.��.<.:.w.-e+�.�.,.�i:wniw.,..�,.r.n��.:r..w�..�,,.}+A..�,..,,...,,,��..,�:,��...o„r...•.�,�,,�....�.��..•.,,.,�.�..�..� o, _ �J � �"��. f"\ 1. "' l —,\\. —� J �,.� 1.� `, y�� �� � �� �� �. r _� �'�� �. +,,. � � t':•, �._ ... ,'.y^ r �:) n v 1 `. �\ N 01ti of Hun ington Beach SEP 12 2008 Christopher JM Webb 15401 Hanover Lane Huntington Beach,CA 92647-2654 City of Huntington Beach Planning Commission 2000 Main Street,3`d. Floor Huntington Beach,CA 92648 August 7,2008 Dear Commissioners: I am married with two young children. I live very near the proposed sight for the Rip curl development. This is a development that we would frequent often_ I support it for the following reasons. The current sight is out of date and needs redeveloping_ It needs new blood. Some of the current tenants are undesirable. The new development will be made using new, environmentally sustainable "green" principles. This is the right choice for our community and for our children's future. I support the rip curl project and ask that the City of Huntington Beach approve the project. Thank you. Warmest Re ards, Christopher JM Webb City of Huntington Fwac Geoff Kendle SE12 15431 Hanover Ln Huntington Beach, CA 92647 City of Huntington Beach Planning Commission 200 Main St., Id floor Huntington Beach, CA 92648 August 7, 2008 ®ear Commissioners: As a twelve year resident of Huntington Beach, and an eight year resident at the above address, adjacent to the proposed development project, I support the Rip Curl project for the following reasons: ® Continued beautification of the area with close proximity to the newly developed Bella Terra shopping facility; ® additional retail opportunities for families in the area; increased property values for the area; and, i an infusion of new tax dollars for the city. I support this project and as member of the Huntington Beach community, would like the city of Huntington Beach to do so as well. qThan Y u, G ff Kendle ATTACHMENT NO. I T bI ici-oiG _ cch CA c1 Z(,,-,'A-1 xY1 Y)l LO^�1 m�S5� D, 1 t1C� �-n o�1Gt 1�► W'��\ � � `Mtn fiU - -5 W M' - M\,5 ` tv U(VC -t (mo ctus �J4�1 �It,1 Yi � ELM v- } ' r,1 ( �lV1l, r(' - W- V�Ad nc, G,� �s V W fiq Gtrt G1 w- \'s - I"a Dow "e S w v mlt\�&WCA, f v�At S mkA c,�� t econaY WM &��n eY) -/M5�CAVY104 Ll%kt jXVI C iW 3f 'VYA41V- � ATTACHMENT NO_ ! 2 1 tt ff ATTACHMENT NO. 1��{3z J� Yiy Lr Ghl 0� VNTAIMM woo 1�1�rrin� C�mrr�ssi� 2pt�0 �+ir �fi � 3r� {109Y Hurl�r�ton ��, � �izttzl-� "\kSt CA j 200b VcAf �omm+s��o is A \(/ ?-VV6AAr1 ` o)rN(AbVY Vt" Cnr AX)A 01(f1 AICA kirr {n llb�+ti Cat sty It S • �Ct� var�cfi� sty ;s -hr� �+rA ��cds � ��U+��C�- s�m� c�YYcTt" ��ts arty vrAt�ir�b1� �Y �r cfimr��nr�� _ \t wM1N yet, W\\v %w\t ml.\WMAAAM SASA+i",VIC "\CMCCAI ' V0VCAV)cc . -U\i& � .. �h� 'c i�l� �� -fin �Y caa cnmur�►� . )FcV - VpAVIOAt A YAd+i\IA City of Huntington Bear f; SEP 12 2008 David Skale 6762 Alexandria Dr., Huntington Beach,CA 92647 City of Huntington Beach Planning Commission 2000 Main Street, 3rd Floor Huntington Beach,CA 92648 8-7-2008 Dear Commissioners: I own my home at the above address and I support"The Ripcurl"development at Center and Gothard for the following reasons: I. I'm a believer that,barring significant negative impact on the community,a property owner should have the right to develop THEIR property as they see fit. 2. It will attract high-income residents and will increase the tax base for the city- 3. It will hopefully motivate the Levit•s property owners to develop their property. My only concern as a resident is the potential traffic impact this development may have on the freeway entrances on Beach. As long as this issue is minimal or can be addressed,I would support this project and ask that the City of Huntington Beach approve the project David Skale 4 ATTACHMENT NO. V- ?75 C-1 op 7� 7), CAVA %A C,c— ATTACHMENT of 41 2/w TO L) It I CA qzcr'O 4 CVr� rn^l ST bw-r f A- 44 SOV 'y-ut aJ- 4 V o-4 bA� ji 6J Di ss -14 I it ii as WTACHMENT NO. e . 1c� 7, C/i 26Z/7 ���.����j•-�--- Core��5S i�U� C007 41Y6 q�-- Ctd Xe volepnew- o<;1- C y ATTACHMENT NO. zs i I `\x ` \ .,.,,,�....,,,-.,...................,.....,r,,......,.....,.n.,,;•».....,..,�,.....,,...�...�,.........»..�.»..,....•....Q,...,,,��,. ro•yrr«.,......�..........._.,e,.......,,....�y,.,,...m,.,..�.,.�,...»..,o-,„.,»w,,.u+...,....,µ-r.•-rr+•.,y....,n,m.«�...�,....r�.nki+,«w�.,nan��mnn,..,.wn^.rsxrwn•\eni•..•m*r.�r+i+p+.rr,sY++.wi•urnnr^.�r�*m�mmw.rayrmtr^�rrn^rr.lnm<,wrv-r.r9ms:�^w�vrw1*rrammns rtrwnrreniwcwm 3 f � 2 Z008 10 z ATTACHMENT NO. �4 (71 F t.i s2' S r� C � � INO. 1-f I 7 S170 6 qo� 64 iMIA,),�ToA �IOA bti VL_6� ii ii ii LA It ATTACHMENT NO. 0i Z- 4 SEP 12 2008 A7- Zv 00 L7bq,6-/, ZA 'C7 7 6-Z; 7 it 7 6 L-t-7 LAP� is j4 it -Z, DI)— 2 of vo Fi ATTACHMENT No. -------- Aly Am his SEP C(Z, ILL Z7 Af ATTACHMENT NO 4c, JET'' 12 Z-b -7 CA Pre- rf C-L", 7v4- LA�— 2- Z.J If ATTACHMENT NO. lLq:5 a city of 91 un inglOn Beath I SEt 12 z008 z� 3f a� P s t� bfa ATTACHMENT NO. �%`�� SEA{ Tc� I -�- � �' , 3. c NO. ATTACH MEN 2,6? SEP 12 Z008 Vi 7 VAI 96�C c k) 4e o\A w f-, 44 ck Wo4a p f cl jo ATTACHMENT O. �dvy\cA f Gity of Huntington Basel f j f,`q}�• _ SEP 1 L Yno�V is ,, NV('- c\vc- c% KOfC z SI �� t �g ATTACH ENT city(31 SEP A�C Gta� � � p l� n`r 'Z tj 6G` 6)j cl�c�.c sz 11-ve ike Jden of �kx,- cu( I - ecl! klj� av-,O� 4-o feo(tvolyed )-r) ovo(eK kr- Jed s �iaw Old w aed s cA ci-S 16v-,\ "a DkQ- 0 UAA� �s�' pjn. ,ACHMENT NO. ijf) c t Cc)UV1 CA(� .A�ot on ot ! -� h A v o� r-c 4, a( d�e4lf �TtG, . �CZt� -tt�Y �-� �5 1 SZ vZ �f rya erg t-a! ATTACHMENT NO. ('2Cn city of Huntington Beach SLEP 12 2008 1 Ce A—e Ae a, 4S-072 1 � �.avQ✓ �- ATTACHMENT NO. �'� City of Huntington Bead SHORT TERM SEP 2008 OEM PLANT RENTAL, INC. August 14, 2008 Dear Huntington Beach City Council and Planning Commission: I am a direct neighbor of the College Country site and owner of Short-Terri Plant Rentals. Being a neighbor, I can attest to the fact that the center is run-down,and in need of a facelift. I am writing to express my support for the Ripcurl development project. I think it would help raising surrounding property values, revitalize the neighborhood, and bring a great retail/residential asset to the community. Best, Ax Tim Woodson 448 Terraine Avenue,Long Beach.CA 90814 (562]494-7777 FAX(5621498-3800 r City of Huntington B000i SEP 12 Z008 c� U � Via Verde Apartments&Townhomes j 1SS55 Huntington Viltage lane,Huntington Beach 92647 j 714.898.9961 t (714.8989471 f (via.verde@verizon.net ATTACHMENT NO. l7- � urns, ±4on SEP 12 20o8 P r ATTACHMENT NCB. . DOT I' City of Huntington Bey � SEP 12 ZQRO DESIGNS OF THE INTERIOR KA �JL Q t4J 6U� U-1- 40 Because every life is uniquely designed. 7811 EDINGER AVE_ • SUITE 124 - HUNTINGTON BEACH,CA 92647 714.373.DOT1 (3684) PHONE - 714.373.3680 - FAX ATTACHMENT NO, Ciiv of Hunt" 9fi:q-, SEP 12 2008 aa; ii j. li ti i lli• aj> I ` j* ATTACHMENT NO. i' City of Huntington Beach SEP 12 2008 ')COV N"IM910y� BfDOM Plonnin9 CGmmis sjen of CIA, r We loylp -W-e Ofa of 'vhp �-Ipcurt �01,Ri �t W CkA1 C -t-0 o� Y t�t Q . ;10 ATTACHMENT NO. I .5� Bella Terra Shopping Shopping Center City of Huntington Beach 7811 Edinger Ave Suite#120 Huntington Beach,CA 92647 7148931864 SEP 12.2008 714 893 4562 fax yunkim@tacone.com tacone.com P AI'm in,r ny re ,. y curl PJ Vesl L n. - Hand- made. Individually owned and operated under license. ///'''' ODA registered trademark of CM Franchise Systems Inc All rights reserver- ATTACH M ENT N0. = 5'- Cif of Huntington Beach REST OE KTI At. CEP 122008 August 4,2008 Planning Commissioners City of Huntington Beach Huntington Beach,California Dear Commissioners: Equity Corporate Housing handles the outsourced housing needs for Boeing's employees in the City of Huntington Beach. High quality rental housing helps our client to attract and to maintain its top notch workforce. There has been no Class A rental housing built in the City for at least two decades. For this reason,we support the Ripcurl 440-unit project proposed by Red Oak Investments. We know the principals and their past work. The project is exactly what is needed in Huntington Beach. We urge you to approve it. Sincerely, Daniel P.Golovato Equity Residential First Vice President '3 Ave.<Na de la Playa -aaite 206 San 0"o,CA 92037 858.551.8313 J/) 858-551.8047 fax ATTACHMENT J� vvww.equityapaRrnents.com TTAC M O. Rath ller Pub 10v �Y h 3 � r IYx _An �. M `e � U. zfY I SEP 12 2808 Hn t'Won BeadL.CA-92647 (714)894-6612 3 i ATTACHMENT NO. Of SEP l l Z908 l � -fA 04 //1 at + loel q ram - A,-<66-T wo 0-/-)m alc Alib �T Ivott t 1b 6-,Rw,--1 - � i 1 ATTACHMENT NO. Q$ecahe City of Huntington Beach July 18, 2008 SEP 12 2008 To Whom It May Concern: Re:Red Oak Investments proposed development in Huntington Beach The following letter is in regards to the Red Oak Development. The Cheesecake Factory of Huntington Beach eagerly anticipates the completion of this new and exciting development. The additional housing in the immediate surrounding area is obviously something we would welcome with open arms. I hope that this project is approved and moves forward as soon as possible_ Sincerely, Jim Krohn General Manager The Cheesecake Factory of Huntington Beach The Cheesecake factory Restaurants, Inc. 7871 Edinger Avenue • Huntington Beach,CA 92647 • (714)889-1500 • fax(714)889-1511 ATTACHMENT NO. �3 RED ® AK INVESTMENTS September 17,2008 City of Huntington Beach City of Huntington Beach Planning Commission SEP 17 2008 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach,CA 92648 RE: Summary of The Ripcurl Mixed Use Project Dear Chairman Uvengood and members of the Planning Commission: We have enjoyed bringing The Ripcurl Mixed Use Project before the Planning Commission and thank you for considering our application.As you evaluate The Ripcurl,we ask you to keep in mind the project's strengths,which provide a strong rationale for its approval. 1. The Ripcurl Project Offers Many Benefits to the Huntington Beach Community. Implements Good Planning Principles: The Ripcurl will help make the area around Bella Terra a village,not just a shopping center. It implements principles that Huntington Beach planners have envisioned for years,and that many of the citizens in the Beach Edinger Specific Plan workshops have discussed in detail during the past 16 months. A New Product for a New Market: The Ripcurl will offer new,Class A resort-like living to Huntington Beach renters,which is not otherwise available in the City. Today,high- income professionals go to Anaheim,Fullerton,or Irvine for luxury rental properties. The Ripcurl will also help major employers in the City,like Golden West College and Boeing,attract new people by providing desirable,local residences. Positive Fiscal Impact The Ripcurl will attract high-income luxury renters whose spending power and consumption habits will support surrounding retail businesses and commercial establishments. In addition to supporting surrounding commercial businesses,the project increases the City's stream of property tax and sales tax revenues_ The project requires no redevelopment assistance or tax breaks,and improves the City's financial situation. { 2101 Business Center Drive * Suite 230 * Irvine,CA 92612 Tel:949.733.2000 * Fax-949.733.2005 No ATTACHMENT ► . � - Page 2 of 4 9/17/2008 Green Building Features: The Ripcurl will be Huntington Beach's first green multi- family building,incorporating a long list of environmentally-sustainable features including bike storage,low water consumption landscaping,diversion of construction waste,engineered lumber,CO-sensing garage ventilation,Energy Star appliances,low- flow faucets and showers,low-VOC paints,educational materials that promote the use of transit,preferences for alternative fuel and hybrid vehicles,preferences for reduced car ownership,and superior energy preference. The Ripcurl will make an important statement about the City's support for sustainable development practices,and will establish a model for green building in Orange County. Attractive Design: The Ripcurl replaces the visual blight of a tired,underutilized asset with new,top-rate development. The building's high quality design and character features a uniquely Huntington Beach theme. The building is designed to activate the street and enhance the surrounding neighborhood. The project accommodates specific design direction given by staff and the City's Design Review Board,which is favorably recommending the proposed design Badly Needed Mixed-Use Development The Ripcurl will locate much-needed housing in the middle of commercial,office,education and transportation uses. The building will encourage walkability by connecting to surrounding uses in ways envisioned by the Draft Beach Edinger Specific Plan. Smart Growth Transit-Oriented Development The Ripcurl will create housing within walking distance of the City's largest bus depot and perhaps,someday,its first light rail station. In placing housing near Huntington Beach's largest public transportation hub, the City will make an important statement about smart,transit-oriented growth. Not Next To Homes: The Ripcurl site is uniquely located to accommodate a building of this scale. None of the normal development impacts of a large building on adjacent single family homes are present,because there are no such homes. The Ripcurl site is one of the first parcels in the specific plan area whose users can get to the freeway without going past or through any single-family neighborhoods. Meets Other Huntington Beach Goals: The project meets other city goals,for example by delivering affordable housing and helping to pay for parks and libraries. Successful Community Outreach: Over the last year,we have held numerous meetings with neighbors,stakeholders and voters in Huntington Beach. We have concentrated particularly on neighborhoods near The Ripcurl. Our goal has been to share information about the project and to seek feedback.Our invitation remains open to meet with anyone interested in learning more or voicing an opinion about The Ripcurl. Strong Community Support Despite some dissenting voices,we have been pleased to receive strong community support for this project;as evidenced by the over 50 support letters.Over thirty of these come from our closest homeowner neighborhood in Huntington Beach. ATTACHME.IT NO. Page 3 of 4 9/17/2008 2. The Ripcurl's Impacts Are Quantifiable and Lower Than Normal for a Project of This Size. Surprisingly_Few Impacts: A project of this size could create dozens of impacts,but The Ripcurl does not. The Ripcurl does not block views or cast shadows on houses. It does not threaten wetlands or endangered species. It does not impact historic or cultural resources. It does not overload existing utilities_ Over 55 potential impacts were studied,and significant,unmitigated impacts were identified in only four areas(two project-specific and two cumulative impacts). The Ripcurl has been designed to minimize impacts while providing the maximum amount of community benefits,as set forth above. Manageable Traffic lm_pacts: Improperly designed,a project of this size and density could create numerous severe traffic impacts. The Ripcurl project does not. In fact, the thorough traffic analysis in the Draft EIR studied 16 intersections as well as freeway impacts,and identified significant,unavoidable traffic impacts in only two places,and both are at the 405 freeway,outside of local neighborhoods. One impact is barely over the threshold of significance,and could be eliminated by the reprogramming of a traffic signal. The other impact arises because the project contributes to traffic on a freeway ramp that is expected to fail in 2014 and 2030, with or without The Ripcurl project. The Ripcurl's traffic impacts are modest Reduced Impact Parking: The Ripcurl is designed to accommodate parking demand efficiently,by using progressive ideas to construct parking appropriate for this project in its unique location at a transit center. Specifically,the proposed zoning for The Ripcurl includes tandem stalls assigned to roommates,compact stalls,and lower parking ratios for studios and small apartments. These proposed standards reflect market-tested ideas designed to ensure adequate parking without oversupply. We ask you to seriously consider tandem parking,compact parking,and lower parking ratios for this project. In all events we intend to work with the City to establish a satisfactory parking plan. 3. The Ripcurl is an Attractive Example of Density. Consistent With Draft Specific Plan Density Placement Some community members have expressed concerns that the Ripcurl project will establish an unsustainable precedent for density. However,the Zone Text Amendment for MU-TCD zones expressly limits this zoning density award to areas within 1/4 mile of a transit center. Further,the Draft Beach Edinger Specific Plan contemplates similar densities in only two locations-one directly adjacent to Bella Terra and the other near Five Points. Thus, concentrated,high-density use is only being studied for specific,targeted areas,and The Ripcurl is in keeping with this intent. Different from Adjacent Projects: There is no flood of dense projects seeking to follow The Ripcurl. For both economic and planning reasons,most other parcels in the Draft Beach Edinger Specific Plan area are destined to remain in their current use or be developed with lower density_ The Ripcurl stands at the high end of the density range ATTACHMENT A10. Page 4 of 4 9/17/2008 because of its site-specific physical traits and economic conditions. Other parcels should be,and are,different Project Suitability. A mixed use development such as The Ripcurl suits the site and the area better than a big box retailer,which in fact is already permitted by current zoning. The Ripcurl is an example of smart density and planning,which will enhance its surroundings for years to come. 4.Conclusion In conclusion,while The Ripcurl concept is new to the city and can be a concern to people unfamiliar with the concept,the concerns about the project are narrowly focused around a small line of negatives which,we hope,will not obscure the broad field of benefits this project will bring.In approving The Ripcurl,the City of Huntington Beach will make important statements about its commitment to sound land-use planning principles,progress,and environmental sustainability.The Ripcurl sets a high standard against which future projects may be measured for their overall contribution to city goals. 5.Acknowledgement As we near the end of an almost two-year process with the City,we express our deeply felt appreciation to planning staff,the many city departments,and the city consultants whose hard work has made The Ripcurl what it is today. We have been consistently impressed with the professionalism,responsiveness,and quality of work that we have experienced in the City of Huntington Beach. Your staff s hard work makes a real difference in facilitating investment in your city. The residents of Huntington Beach will be the ultimate beneficiaries. Sincerely, Andrew Nelson On behalf of Applicant: Amstar/Red Oak Huntington Beach,LLC ATTACHMENT NO. F WN i i • • ss e • • s • a (. 4- = -=lti-_-,Tl�`=-Z=-_c-`�_..'".-�—�`=`^�.�.,��.:.��i -,.1_-_`,;,t^^tii::� '.�_<-`.`•-=r'i-. ^,y. �C3� ��•O+ • • ***see 45y �—T 4 NO I _ Icon HtCW2St I'AM5TARGROUP YAN TILBURC,BANVARD 8:SODERBERGH,AIA R E_ DO A IZ V2 k i i �so ae mr n� r rE• • a 62 �• • { �? .� er�•�' � w..� � ee .,oim l�nsx � os •i J • --�i0••• - - m �e s roM• ��i . f+'ee•y r w.�,z '�' �) � �� �.. 5 r��!' �./fir +rd+��m.w.z m..z..aw.,a,x ws`l �• -_ _ __ �' -T' 1 ���3 ��' t' F � + rt ,a°m°wna� • •. •Ts3s, �,a• -. ®. � _ lamx A_. x� � � � ��„ r ': y, a ' .. - _.. —�--—•••�•_ _ __ :,ems••�P.. .. m I — i .1 . 711.1 M3 SF I �-'.�.� r r s�- m..r, apY• .ems,. - - - °sr,�i� '"'`TK wo°�aTsi"o°�''u f � §'-• i,",� ......:.a.�r.n� � :. i �. a' `. gnu.•mors'x w .S r �I JJ i5 T ,�, '�' ' a -+��^ >,}1; 4 '� ' .��� w: �� ,,ate ',� ¢, d .u<N .�s•"' z:�'�`3.� :i i _. 1 i ' ° T. . � N.T.S. i I � fandamwes 'AMSTARGROUP YAN TILBURG,DANVARD h SODERBERGR,AtA -R B D�O A K e, JULV 8e008 I 28134 EXISTING TRANSIT NORTH PARKING LOT sees II I so**Is Is 66 CENTER AVENUE Io 8 N 1G MIN. DRIVEWAY To 66 1 s RESIDENTIAL see* L Ljr: 10 11!1 6 • IL-j RETAIL AT GROUND LOFT RESIDENTIAL AT SNORT TERM 6 see FLOOR GROUND FLOOR PARKING AT HIGH see* •4 o 6 GROUND FLOOR VOLTAGE L------ i ��0— \�> R. ---- GROUND RETAIL AT FLOOR Is-. PROPERTY LINE c DR low To r -ww--mv rmoc--wr-em.=w-mw AR ONDF RIDGE AT FOUR REVERENTIAL —IN LO Y —11- STORIES OVER GROUND w AND LEASING PODIUM LEVEL FLOOR-BASEMENT Lu OFFICE AT PAWING TYIP. 'POOL >1�, GROUND U) r FLOOR A A 0 0 LOFT EXISTING COLLEGE RESIDENTIAL I PROPERTY LINE- OOR PARKING LOT PROPERTY LINE- AT GROUND PROPERTY LINE FL. FOUR RESIDENTIAL STORIESCIVER GROUND FLOOR- 28' BASEMENT PARKING I Typ 55 1z --dw vV0 EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS LANE N Nw PROPERTY LINE r C 15 1 327'-6" 40 187'-6' i i - -- _jI LEVITZ FURNITURE WAREHOUSE landarmest AMSTAR GROUP VAN TILBURG.1A11 I R p A K AIA 1\2YE- SME:V,�, 's Al SITE PLAN JULY 8,20D8 261E I NORTH I __------ -- Ott• - oxen sa�aK�,I 11-SF• .i,.sa.ea /" • • asPA=IIIIn0111—e9 /" •• • vieo • • • •�•• CENTER AVENUE • • =oMMo�pPEaP^Ce •.- P• �Q�a • • ,.. �zaT�ro91 a.� 121g SF • • � �•aoa��m�,00•kanlov _. IFRONTVARDS 4,399SF] - ,c•,rnr mm•r,ni mom•N ; • , s,eraat mma, aa, 10 Al Al Ai Al 80 BO 60 Pa'0Vi0m_,- R�F DECK Bl A2 A2 A2 A2 A2 C3 ••• •• n -P••• 8%SF • ♦ oiexgx An.us.rnervi• P[R FLOOR ,, •• - rr•ore �.pa a'..m.�w qVx. SE46ACK DUE 82 Cl 83 B3 Al A2 AZ A2 A2 ' A2 O VARD /1 DDI CATION 441 SF �� g2 .: i�, A29►et�i, POTENTIAL TONAL C2 f + `- PODIUM A2 g T'k M - OURTVARD Bi RFC _ 346 SF r- ROOM �2,463 ENTRY Bl C1 B4 C3 TyPODIUM Bi SETBACOK$ C3 B3 SO Bo SO SO Al C3 COURTYARD y COURTYARD 46415E 45 SF i - _�,'. 20,48]SF ~ Cl Cl 'ny;;,,� 'jB? B2 12 B2 A2 C3 MMU �I ll! �T. ` ROOM I AfOROUND FLOOR F - 2,000 SF -t"i B1 ^B7 Bi 63 B3 O f' A2 PODIUM BI Q � 81 � B1 81 t EYeL x B3 COURTYARD B3 IA y 3,31 9F 4,4.SF y U, 82 Cl :',' F4 Al Al A2 Al Bt Bi 82 B3 B2 a BO BO 61 SETBACK DUE q2 A2 A2 Bi C2 CO g2 C3 C3 B2 C9 V OE ICATION C3 Al Al Al Al BO B0 BO 6T BFARD /� C4 ^r �HALF OF L_ PERIMETER EVA it r, AMSfARGROUP a v lander wesf t. Aj VAN MffB G,BANVARD&SODERBERGN,AIA RED O,A K 60 SPACE PLAN Al 1 1�(p t� VA ''SCALE 1-30-0 y , {��, fi ., T' .2;€- ^ }r iP";® i' 3 ma's F 1 ti i <aULY8 E06 261M - + ..,_'.c.,....x.`....,_...::_,..�.i.....�._.._..,_...'..,..._,.+.a ._..U:..,_..,._.......e.....,__.._......:.....uS.a.�'._.,.._,_.._��...�J ...,....,:''._._,.i'............._...._........,,�w��:.,...f..✓:.=.:,..___u»._.,,..�..,_:.s.s,,..,� ..'..,.a..._..�..:'i.v...4a.._....�.,....,.__,_ .�.. .,.. __...�.._.a._.._._a',�...�v`FZ i�.__. ...r.c.m._...y.._....:`>� _....... 3��w,n'A34�......_.,.:.. ._..uu�..'sN.:; I NORTH i �_� •O•• � o•eeo• • s • o• •• — — — — CENTER AVENUE •eee•• e • • • •os• 18- 327'-6" 1 'MI • e • • •!•• g — — Oe•O P2 LEVEL PARKING SUMMARY • • e••• RETAIL+ RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL P2 LEVEL e e • LEASING WEST BLDC. F/Si BUM TOTAL • _ SiANDPRO SPACES 16B SPACES • • COMPACT = t14 SPACES = 2{SPACES •••••• ••e• x I TANDEM 56 SPACES - ES Al SPAC 00 • • - 248 SPACES 24S SPACES !••• •••O b4 b4 b4 I o• s •• s S a RESIDENTIAL6 b o PARKING — — — — — — W w ® �4 N I I A a o I s q � I <a sTAEE I I vso g 15' 327'-6" I ' �i AMSTARGROUP', land .c�vesf. VAN TI6RURG,EANYARD&SODERRERGH,AIA R E DO A K r `�' .t t Ol �a, s N:�.R.o eq ..y v '� ""v �Uz '" �q� f �N ��:vk IIkLs_ � � . FQ� P2BA5EMENT LEVEL A2� {s �r gd M, Y'¢ {SCALE 1 30 0" n� ` p ' ` ra .� R i duLv a zooa ze_4 y. 1 NORTH }\/ �� \/} I / / •••••e 00 / / •••ee• es••e• /' • e e• • -—-—-— ----- •e•a•• ° 18, 327'-6" 1 'MI • • • 0000 B — — ese• PI LEVEL PARKING SUMMARY ••e• RETgIL+ RESIDENTWL RESIDENTIAL 11 LEVEL • • • • LFASING WEST BLDG. EAS1 BLOC. TOTAL •• 0 STANDIRO 126 SPACES 61 SPACES 191 SPACES e LOFT COMPACT - 26 SPACES 7 SPACES 29 SPACES e • RETAIL RESIDENTIAL TANDEM 13 SPACES II SPACES 24 P ES ABOVE ABOVE GARAGEENTRYI I 165 SPACES 79 SPACES 244 C •• s•°s SHORTTERM e e e•• ° ° PARKING A I •e e e FUEL ABOVE BOVE se o • • o 7 s s s s s s C •s • RESIDENTIAL b 2.� PARKING AuovE s® ®s I T I I T I I I T I T I ® ®s N 1 A I I mob 6 ® ®4 A I b 4 DDNN ON LOFT RES ABOVE W D" OP S 5 5 5 5 5 I vnD C`a sTAu C} = RESIDENTIAL s 41 r PARKING Gos i i15' 327'-6" 40' 187-6" I 1- I ®AMSTARGROUP .VAN TILBURG,BANVARD&SODERBERGH,AIA R E DO A'K .eElriTecr�4r <..,1,tx.::, r6slxi?I�� 1Vb'i".111tiv"d`t �f ..>71z .7:5 •k '. a ' �uLve zone zslaa w..._;:...____._.., __�:m._.�,r.__.�.;,.,,..,_..........��,.�....:.__<.._m._..�a._._._<_.�.x:u.au_____,_.._,�__�..,<�..:.,�.__..����.�._:.�.�_.,v_,.:.:�;..�.... .�..._.,.. .�.�_��._._....,...�_,.__.._.vv,.*.�.�.,_.�c;_,..s_..�._...�,_"___-_•_.___._...:��._...sere....._._�.._m...._._......_M_.�..._._.. ..�.t.�«..: �.A.,. _�._ ; u {t I NORTH i ��� sae•s• •eO°•• s • CENTER AVENUE _i"/ •• •• s• • — — — — —-—-—-—- — •s•••• •_-- 18' 327'-6' 1 'MI • ° • •••• PROPERTVLINE DRIVEWAY T • • • • RESIDENTIAL •••• B PARKING O••• GROUND LEVEL PARKING SUMMARY ° • 1 7' 11' ••e• ' - ' - _ -- RETAIL+ RESIDENTWL RESIDENRAl GROUND FLOOR ° • • C <:I LEASING WEST BL➢G. EAST BLOC. TOTAL •• • STANDARD 68 SPACES 51 SPACES td SPACES 161 SP _ COMPACT 13 SPACES Id SPACES 25'PAC e RETAIL TANDEM 16 SPACES 9 SPACE 5 P S 4345 SF 01 D1 Di D1 e••• i - s ¢ 5 3 66 SPACES 60 SPM 67 SPACE 213 SP ESIO NTIAI � 6'SITE WALL ON • • (� CMU PLASTERED •°°• •••e RETAIL ELEC 11 S PO RKING MD. ®ACCESSIBLE ROUTE 4,680 SF ® ® s • s S ® ® S PROPERTY LINE fi'SITE WALL ON •• • - - -- - - CMU.PLASTERED RETAIL a C - PARKING => SIALL �f EASING DRI WA OFFICE TO ETAIL RETAll8 RE5 PA KING 36]66F ELEC ELEC LOADING MAIN rI T T T T T T T T T I T DE 3-NTIAL BRIDGE 0 �i T Lu LOBBY OVER w LOBBY 19.0'S S s S S COMMUNITY ®s OA D1 ' RESIDENTIAL G� _ ROOM I A` w PARKING a N. S F G c 75 0 U 0 20' 20' ®s a EVA HAMMERHEAD a„ ; ~ I s 17 {3 TURNAROUND,P`P 0 Di 4 V 0 - - - 2 6 - O OFT R ES ® d1 _ PROPERTY LINE ROPERT`�LINE Di Ywc s s s sa Ir sRESIDENTIAL nIlN':1 L. 3 a I T6 -- _ ,- .� o PARKING �EN FJLLUEIGI R� D7 i�F 7�. _ IL-Fs Ms10 t fi'SITE WALL ON DI C C T, RETAINING WALL s y • c s s s s CMU.PLASTERED a EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS LANE 1 SITEWALLON B PROPERTVLINE fi'SITEWALLON RETAINING WALL RETAINING WALL Ci 15' CMU,PLASTERED 327•-6- 40 CNO,PLASTERED 187'-6' 11-1, II Ali i �I 1 _ .. .. l.i r j landarcweSt AMSTARGROU01 P. VAR TB.BURC,''BANVARD&SDDERBF.RGN,AIA 12 E D". O A'K' ., ,;Y .]:.�, ..„� '�,?:"1�+ 'F,`tE +#"x -j• %, ,`"i HIE{i i'':'<:,3 °r t k•� `" I fi + fie S c E .•° i I Ta I c.•v I.I.,IA. InTtasd>. �;,�• rG ROUNLEVEL . 4;.ax_ ., r ° . i :•d :,"a.,,t>k i �I uLv B.z_o ( zAB143a� , q # 1' NORTH 0060 I0000 CENTER AVENUE i i' •a°••�: s• • •••••s ° B •••• ° • •••• es N - �/—- TERRACE � �- ° • • • • i Al Al Al Al BO BO 80 81 A2 A2 A2 A2 A2 C3 j LOUNGE ` I •°•°••� •O•• _ -.__ I °•••••l , ° L CORRIDOR TVP COURT 82 C1 B3 83 Al A2 ••a• A2 • • • 82 •• • RECREATION C ROOM A2 2A63 SF '� _ i �i B1 C2 0.' 81 _ C3 t N C1 By j B1 C3 B3 80 BO BO BE Al C3 iBRIDGE Vv CORRIDOR TYP W I. W Q' 7 _ Imo' B2 f B2 B2 — B2 A2 A A2 A d' i I I vS. FA CAaAN{ 81 B1 01 63 B3Bi f = C2 B•j'®•/ �(� PIANTINO AREA TYP A2 n Bl B1 Bl Q 03 �� B3 70 20' tl Az _ . .{ __ .��._ B2 Al 81 B1 B2 Q g3 B2 BO 6`URTY D 60 Bl I C1 Al Al A2 t �JI BREEZE- CORRIOOR TYP WAY C2 r OM1 B2 C37 C3 B2 CA j J C3 Al Ai Ai Al BO BO )S APARTMENTS AT 2tiD FLOOR - - - UIL T 6UING�EST BUILDING _ \ I, 15' 327' 6" 40' I i� �alL�r�LVV85 AMSTARGROUP VAN TILBllRG BANVARD&SO➢ERBERGN,AIA IL E D O A'K .h .tl `2NDFLOOR-,POD.IUM,LEVEL A5 t. �uLYS ewe 2613 �— —t NORTH aii 0 0 0 000000 0 0 00 0 *0 eo 327'-6 0 0000 __TERRACE 0 0 00 0 s. A, I, Al ..T.L.R 0 LOUNGE Bi A, A2 A2 A2 A2 C3 0*00 82 E�E CORRIDOR TYP A2 00000 *9000 25' - Cl 00 a A2 0 0 0 B2 e i 0 c 80'-0" A2 A2 20'73,' 7:- A2 --- C2 C3 7 64 B1 C3 B3 BD Bo Bo BO Al C3 COURTYARD BRIDGE BELOW CORRIDOR YP - �BELOW 7 C2 C2 82 A2 I c 1 81 2' 5 A2 31 81 :33 BI C UR�ARIJ A2 CC SE'.. C3 .2 C2 82 R R3 C2 1 7 Bl �7 A2 61 33 B3 Ell 1-2-0"20"j A2 Bi 1— -- BD S2 61 61 32 B3 B2 cl 25'-0" Alp Ai 7112 '"[A t I BI 04 B, B2 I A2 A2 A2 32'-6" C3 B2 C4 Bi C2 -j C3 A�-.' A7 Al 7q EAST BUILDING WEST BUILDING 30 APARTMENTS AT EACH OF 3RD AND 4TH FLOORS78 APARTMENTS AT EACH OF 3RD AND III FLOORS I. 40 327 187'-6" 35,-10" e % At A ,,,T�� N TUBOG kS URBERIGH.Alk R"E IJ"W 0 A k ft 0v. T T A-L k-,''n''-sm, 'r 1 3 it �pl ",5 2BIM j VA 1Z pj --�, P*l-,V� R, nw�g, t V*JQ 777�� it �1 NORTH I '} i 66666 - s s e• • -- --- CENTER AVENUE o 0 be • t 000000 O 0 0 0000 327 DMIN i 0 O • O =6 - B _ ' ® O •O 0 O 00 • - _ • Al Ai At Ai BO BO BO -_ •O O O O O TERRACE Bt A2 A2 A2 A2 A2 C3 • 0 •••••0 I 0000 CORRIDOR TYP 0000 i I B2 Cl B3 83 Al 112 00 • A2 A2 A2 A2 Ci JB 000000 B2 1 C2 A2 C. , t j A2 L Bl C3 C2 I Cl 84 C3 83 BO BO BO BO Al C3 COURTYARD I ! BELOW - _ of „„ CORRIDOR TYP ` - Ct cz B2 B2 A2 Cl c3 j Bl�� AI I A2 L I A o d' Bl Bl 'tI Bl B3 B3 A2 A2 Ii IJ al O B el Bl A2 sa COURTYARD B3 I (� 20' 2G BELOW A2 NB2C4 B2 Al Bl 81 �.2 B3 I- BO BD Cl Al Al A2 CORRIDOR TYP BREEZE- 81 WAY C3A2 A2 A2 B1 -- C2 -, C4 82 C3 C3 Al AiU.lAl BO 80 80 ? C4 EAST BUILDING - - - - 1 WEST BUILOING- t ._.__ 30 APARTMENTS AT 6TH FLOOR y It >B APARTMENTS AT SfH FL00R I 15' 327'-6 -_'- 40 /8/- 135-10 I. QA' C{ AMSTARGROUP Y { Ck AN TILBllRC,:BAtdYARD'&'SODERBBRGH,AIAR E D. 'O AK .> ` , ��. -tea V a6TH�.�'LOOR PLAN ..,, �+ ; s,e {� '`r ,6 e ::A. rm7�.,;.ti."d rB's.. _°"': -�,e. " k �': :. .; _.� .� .;~`:, .g f*�.,, � �...� �.�, �;`,�.:� �.�.�,g,� ,s;� y,� �;�:�`wti� ��'�: � `hi. ��ulra"tale 2eisa .a . y«- „N ,,.:..... ..... ...,.. x ., $ :,.. „y �i 7, $ qx `3 �aa"' a r'-`—""-eo. .T% ,aCt .='4 ' �......: <.�' ..... �..4, .x,�K .,,,. ,,:�,. ..x.,,^�.' ..,,,` �".f a .,,ro. WA,a�^'.,w ,.".3". i.'�.-�,..g., _. .%+\:£•, ,ry in4h.•r+F.S 1 ri. .,�: F..:....: ...:.. ..._,. . .. .<.e s.:r Sr` #: a .x }`, y :^a ,:# $ e '.& a ;fie ... ..:,......K.,.. ..,. � ,c ..L .,.,*. .. ¢_ .,.:,, .s.:, ,..:., n., .::" 'l...k ¢d.#iT 3 .>....:' s....a..;;tk.:.�.h:A.�.... ....:....:. �` � ...«..<n._.�,a«�"�.r:. .�.. ra":,.,�"��..,i.�.:�'t�..,�,.:� ..��:....� .,._ �`.. ::R,.,s..a�.. ''x. ?.».�,. �x�z. �.r� ..�.�. .n.,w+u" .,?x u.."r.�:.a y�. :ter,a ..�e":.„ .. .. .. _.... ...,.„rwa NORTH 6096 • 0 0000 ." •oos•• e s m m CENTER AVENUE 00000 0 • • 0 0000 0 • • 0 18, 327'—C 10'MIN - 0000 ee90 • 0660 B. • • o s e 00 • 000060 0099 TERRACE o • iBELOW BELOW I 0009 0000 yam-- u s• o '" AIR CONDITIONERS��3 u SCREENED FROM - �- VIEW TYP TYP TERRACE _ _ C I BELOW — — -- - �' ROOF _TYP �� li �+E. ... ��,_ 1 BEIOW L— F —._— 1 f+ _ d rrP COURTYARD ' W _ ❑ 1 BELOW i ��AIR CONDITIONERS SCREENED FROM VI EW TYP, ri ll❑µ � I I L COURTYARD U __F N t zD I _ Ll ME IF _., B C 15'i 327' 6" 1 40' 187 6" i 35'-10' �. Q AMSfARGROUP w a VAN:TILHURG BANVAND&"SODEBBERGH NA 'R E 1 O A.K 'w d',„. ''n r ,„n 3': S t10:7i: OCR MEINI E LEUEL .. 5H F" N 'i, gP .'.Yh., ���� �' t �S � JULY87f100 � 36134' a, ... firr wr ':>. _,aY y.� ,. ;."iz. 4 tt. - # '`c¢``r, ^. :x,; 'G,. .. .,._ ".i.�. ..::. x...:.._.': ~r m_...> ...�... ..��:..:�' .,,...s_s,.. .�,.,..,;."..:�.,>»..��...,-. >x,�,�._..__ ,'�?�.'�,�.u".�.�:._.�..,�_'Ex..,.�...£," ......,�... :..r,�.s _x:�.... .,.�..5 �w ,,.,. ., � . p O•• NORTH ♦ e •0♦• - - 00 O ��11// •ao®•s • a s s • eo s -- "--- - - .. •• pp ♦ CENTER AVENUE s o♦®•• • • • 0000 - - - -- - - - - - • e s • 18' 327'-6" 10'MIN 0000 B - O o o•as I -I — I� • oe • 9000 o • F, o o e IIII js "€. �,RQCF TYP TERRACE [ C1��.. BELOW s T 7-1 1_�e.L ❑ 1 OOURTYA El RO _ W w. LJ —.,. ..,� BELOW " ui elf J Aj I_I ❑ � � 2 COURTYARD j —f ='�",! - (, 20' 20 _[-„ n BELOW c El I; Q ❑ C '15' 327'-6" I 40' I87'-6" ` 35-10" ! AWTAR GROUP, .0 I,. r� .tk. ,�"' .1 Y'." J"}P w o-'�"`n'�` 'S. .Kh'•`., i�Y�. y rtr= w w<a, �.FS H�ATA R�E.D� :OAK '� � �a€. ;� °t� �� b :.���. ��.. YAN P[LHURG HAHVAftD&SODERBERG .U,, ,a.,f"" .',,"? " �r : :? +Yss `3 1. °y �, c A9fi '"' 3 3.. 5... fi' � i.R ,C`^1M ,a .- '.. �.<;� �:�.�::�:': �:a ^. :x- �-� z.. :aT 4c< .c' x � � �.. z : 2 ...a" ` $ « v <g,a .£i a u ,a& 5','" -,k� a ,:_�S fit" s } -',"",,,,t «,. JULve.2o➢e ,� 1§1x 4 k�.rT, sees seas ROOF a 0- J go 11 m 500 Ft t 0 It sees 4 3 _ III COURTYARD [,-,,,COVRTY 00010 2 LANE NII G/1 ] 00 VA LITR'T... "OPOF G/l s LANE STREET ICURB Pi P2 • P2 a 0 0 5� so SkOT*16N A ROOF m Ft It 4 RTYARD COURTYARD 7 2 EVA GO iLANE G/l LANE CENTER - AVENUE CU RD Fl P, 2: P2 P2 SECTION B SECTION C 1'2 Va twulMDERBERM Al J BUI c TIONA. LYS 6 AW P4 fw,��y, rz iaii OO N 0 Q�� O ii a cosesia ROOF PEAK ---- on 'L11 I TOP OF PARAPETs4-1 ° - 'd kd� � _ � i • 5TH FLO"fit I L� a 4TH FLOOR no i F; , .:. r--• - r .-,.•v_ ,-.-c a-.w:.-_. .�._�_....__....,-,._..—.� � _ _ .- 40_•a s_3RD Nw- lb®DIUM/2ND FL®®Fb GROUND/1ST FLOOR -- - - -T-- -�. I 7 777 : HIGHEST CURB a y { a a ,...;.�a�:. ..w „a. -,.,..,. ' .,-.,ti.—r-,. w_""^-->..-...-., .:-„.....-_.--�-�.. — --ROOF PEAK----- � TOP OF PARAPET _ EXTERIOR MATERIALS 1 1 t O �_ 1 ® _ 1 LIGHT SANCORCUER i _ _ COLOR DECOROUSAMBER '. --f- •*.� i .1 MEZZANINE � j O LIGHT SAND PLASTER -COLOR:HARvesTER ,, 5TH FLOOR O1 + 03 LIGHTS NO PLASTERCOLOR BUTTERNUT LIGHT S NO O COLOR NAPERY PLASTER .{I - ..RJJ.,._{--•.......�_,__ '.Y, _F 14.I+.1�'f `t^t 3RD FLOOR LIGHTS P O5 LASTER COLOR COLONIAL REVIVAL GREEN STONE © ANODIZED ALUMINUM WINDOWS,STOREFRONT" CANOPY AND GUARDRAILS PODIUM/2ND FLOOR COLOR.LIGHT CHAMPAGNE ' Q SMOOTH PLASTER TRIM y �I COLOR GRAY MATTERS OTRELLIS COLOR AWNIINGCITYSCAPE .,.3u. " '- ,. GROUND/1ST FLOORGHESTCURB ® CERAMIC TILE ENTRY SURROUND �1 LIGHT LIMESTONE BASE �', � © RED SANDSTONE BASE .....».,«.,.......�a"'a. �..v,.S,.�..-... �"' _k_=.�.:.._..t»3.,�a.�.u+".e�, ..,_v,...'�3:.:,v....>�.,.rc...,.....,d.. ..,_s....,x„_.�,..._....,w .._..a�'.,_.�_".�.::..+....._wu.2.�..,�a ............,...w....�..us�...�.,.c...�..3,�a,..�...a,..:,.».....,,_.;a:..'��'�;�d AMSTARGROUP ... . VAN TILBURG BANVARD&SODERBERGH,AFA R,F DO A It. ,..,�, e d ." ° ..:,, s_., _ , ) rseALE'vis•`a-`B BUILDING ELEVATIONS A11 AUGUST 5 2088 � 26134 m t. 0 ,.. w... n .. .. .. + .,.:,. n Yx' j w , w •••• ^� v '�' 9••11• •O • •• TOP P I 0 PARAPET R i EXTERIOR MATERIALS -.-- _ 0 o • 0000 10 LIGHT SAND PLASTER -. ` ..1. ,,.. , ® • "'i • COLOR-DECOROUS AMBER MEZZANIN Q2 LIGHT SAND PLASTER _ u' < _ �:y.�h.:�. - •-•-•• • 1 COLOR HARVESTER 6^ T� 3 LIGHTS NO PLASTER t t.. - -0 .. .. —___ —�• •15TH FLOOR�O• O COLOR BUTTERNUT .�-.—EIS. (,., 9 1 �'i� • ® LIGHT SAND PLASTER �';= I _ 1j!j • 4TH FLOOR O• COLOR NAPERY S LIGHT SAND PLASTER .I ` COLOR.COLONIAL REVIVAL GREEN STONE t"'� _ __ _ i,:.� _,.� .,.� y sy 3RD FL_000�••�•� © ANODIZED ALUMINUM WINDOWS,STOREFRONT k � IrmMP- I • • Q .1 CANOPY AND GUARDRAILS A OR COLOR LIGHTCHAMPAGNE :r •Fb�IPJMl2ND FLOOR a 7Q SMOOTH PLASTER TRIM - S 1 ?O COLOR GRAY MATTERS 08 TRELLIS - - �' •*S a - • �• COLOR CH OUND/'$YSCAPEr:. yT:' „.. y O CERAMIC TILE ENTRY SURROUND -.1T GRHGDO • AWNING R CURB' ikl01 LIGHT LIMESTONE BASE " n g� © RED SANDSTONE BASE �' leis.a. u..� ......_.:..mart,.ex...._.,_,......__........,.,_.,.»....«.. ....-»+..:...........�»....�+.�...a ..«..,-,... .......».,,.,a......,«,..:..s,,.»........«a. ,_....__ a�.... 4 ROOF PEAK - - p,1 µ ni ® ® ® TOP OF PARAPET MEZZANINE j a - f c 5TH FLOOR o _ I 4TH FLOOR 313D FLOOR +r "� r - a..�. r' © 'f P_OIDIUM/2ND FLOOR_ y.. GROUND/1STFLOOR 5t 4a 4 t .,+ a .. '.„y _ - ------ HIGHEST CURB Vvvinn & a Y a. k�� a �`.:. '. �' Q �. ,j. e3 F«40 A a ck `..�, s�."�.. ,.«?.,.U,...3k..:....r 3',.-..m......,�.u.�,,.u,w.,..«`', ,r.«,o-...,.z��.:..,�z,�r�°.....�.u..�.....r..,.,,..,_..�,.,��. '`..adk, ,_x.�....,.....,. ,..i. a.;,,._.s.......:.<,.,,..,_,.,�,.,.,._. .., ....,..v�?�,.i,...,,.a;...2t.::w•',,.;rc. ..-..w.... ,......�a?.x,.�.o.....: .s.;:....�s.,:_,A,..x,..�..F_ .,.,_,_...x.. ��AMSTARGROUP :'ITs1�ooi wQs- .. .. - ., VAN TILBURG BANVARD&SODERBERGF4 NA RED -"(?:AK ` , �. n> V'l �'sevE 1�16aYi, BUILDING ELEVA710NS Al2 - lH kpR Y 4 X„ AU6USTV5,2008 I 28134 w N� 4 *' ssso (D- 71 ROOF 4K EXTERIOR MATERIALS (D LIGHTS ND PLASTER _TOP OFPARAPET•stp COLOR.DECOROUS AMBER LIGHTS ND PLASTER 0 COLOR HARVESTER i* 1 0 0 0 LIGHTS NOPLASTER MEZZANINE__ COLOR:BUTTERNUT -rn I • i 0 LIGHTS ND PLASTER 5TH FLOOR COLOR NAPERY COLORQS COLONIAL REVIVAL GREEN STONE 4TH FLOOW e-&0 _'I ANODIZED ALUMINUM WINDOWS,STOREFRONT, -0 D CANOPY AND GUARDRAILS 00 0 LIGHTS ND PLASTER COLOR LIGHT CHAMPAGNE 3RD FLOOR rp� -m-i__7 0 goo SM OTHPI-ASTER TRIM rn mmm ww"sk,"m 00 COLOR: MY MATTERS TRELLIS COLOR CITYSCAPE AWNING CERAMIC TILE ENTRY SURROUND _-HIGHEST CURB LIGHT LIMESTONE BASE RED SANDSTONE BASE ROOF PEAK @ TOP OF PARAPET I'm m n m r MEZZANINE 5TH FLOOR 4TH FLOOR olm 3RO FLOOR m rm.F9 in 17 rm rT tn A." PODIUM/2ND FLOOR Q) J HIGHESTbURB Am=GROUP landamwest 11DERBERGH,AIA R E D_-e0_A K iWvf""rmf-�\-I-s v SCALE:1/16. BUILDING ELEVATIONS A13 -1, OB5,'2 AUGUST, 4r .. - - °: •O w .. uTUNE�— � M TAL -CORNER ELEMENT .§-rONE 2nd THROUGH,4tft CIONTRASTINO, MEZZANINE LEVEL TRELLIS m. W4VERT(CAL BASE: FLOOR: AWNINGS AT, AR7(CULXTED WITS( o'„pO," 4 a i a CONTRASTING EXPRESSION THICKENED WALL& RESIDENTIAL' SETBACK PLANES,& a myoa :- `COLOR AOIGpLATED YDEEP SETWINDOW3 LEV$1, . .. - LOWERANOHIE{HER�,.„ W INGS SPANDREk � � �, PARAPETSWISCORE LINES&CONTRA$FING COLORS U al R „ — - - - --- -- --- o0 F �H r I , j r xz lk Al 77M, t WT EZ :x:§> ?, ;.�:�s ,s,.x�.c� t. �:> �,.,,. .,L. ..;.�.� �,;�. ..� ...'�" '.�s.>. �,m�... �' ^�- `x ��<: �; z .�: ':c; 3^. ,..... .3• `s:w ..e„ ,`,,� ,.. .,:. ,•;,. rs,; �.r .. a Y,;.q�ei. _.,: ,�. ,�'` ... s.. ,.:,,. x�` r.�� a... ,r, ;,rs. �. z i��is aso• sees • 8 ae • •• •4 • seaeo• a • o eo•o • • e • sees s•oo o s •ssa s a • a s u •e •' aso•oa •••o •se• ee•e oo • a a Lu os • Z W Q — ps,t 1 �._. __.... 8'WIDEVINE- �/ '� COVERED PERGOLA W —STAIR HIGH J % PARAPET W I�JI MEZZANINE-'J MEZZANINELOW LOW J U PARAPET MEZZANINE LOW---- PARAPET TERRACE --- -- --MEZZANINE----- PARAPET HIGH PARAPET MEZZANINE / MEZZANINE- HIGH HIGH � PARAPET / PARAPET/ ;,..__...._...—I--+____ ..__._O ___.. .-❑. __--, 4': BALCONY 5N FLOOR BALCONY 511 FLOOR BALCONY 51M1 FLOOR OPEN TO ` ''> ROOF OPEN TO ROOF OPEN TO ROOF SKY v I SKY SKY J � � 4'WIDE CANTILEVERED PROJECTING METAL LATTICE CANOPY GOTHARD STREET k 'AMSTARGROUP .. - v 'k uy; N. .rw.`+ .aa # xY .xr..-b k''. •:.Y:. GHAiAX 'D' O.' ...K" *s:x ¢ k VAN Tt1.BURG„BANYARD&SODERBER .R=E A € ,>d := .c, *' .-, ,`r"' �..`z{- .:. ...� .�. E � � -T.BI�ILDING�e�F�IVtF2 5 ,..:tc } _�,.1i` `... -, •;I .)} §.aid'-e_+:#3.4R„z :F a. 'b Ay .➢-�'.:r :'�' :•:x,,:e v°`.� .. "�: A� Y� ?�" x ;:� .... :As+�t.'";,., ... ...�_ , '�`�wit � ":i6Mc�•x3 �...,�.+y ,.+ - _ : � _ _. o • n��s' zoo^ _ e• • so 0 / n.s• zoo _ "_ "i k y •••1 t_ � I • • „x=o > Osseo* r�o-E — _ j • o" r b j •o•• 00 ae.�° •e •'_. - � •Goo a ED � Mk—` •••••el •s•o �� :�='_-�: �� �. ._.-� ssG•o• •Goes• •• a .n1 o a e1R�M n^ s s • 1�` UNIT Al UNIT A2 UNIT BO UNIT Bl STUDIO, 1 BATH INTERIOR 465 S F STUDIO, 1 BATH INTERIOR 529 S F 1 BEDROOM, i BATH INTERIOR 516 S.F 1 BEDROOM, 1 BATH INTERIOR 609 S F TERRACE: 52 5 F TERRACE 51 SF TERRACE. S6 IF TERRACE 50 ST zz c" Eq 22'-6" 32 61 i ( Of ED ! ' -- � L T ` � "�aaM l i J _ f Ii rc d ' I t UNIT B2 UNIT B3 UNIT B4 1 BEDROOM, DEN, 1 BATH INTERIOR 577 S F 1 BEDROOM, 1 BATH INTERIOR 598 S F 1 BEDROOM, DEN, 1 BATH INTERIOR 692 S.F. TERRACE 60 S F. TERWA E' 64 S.F. TERRACE 6D S F Iy- ..,...ti .. • .. .. . TI&DR6ty# VRD:&SDDEtR DE� _. C�;..D t'#xC A' K. , A l 4 A, '-f .S� Ah3 ss.s Y,{' - -:t , s .n # 4` e :_' l JUIY.A,"a'od$ zslsa x,m '. ' r :& " �. � tits✓ _� � .� °#r; '-� .x�*",„ .:"," h..... ..... ,.�,rg 3Z 6" •••• e o ar s� ER ip ••oo ❑ oe e lug' ••e•es • s o e 00000m s o e o••m ❑ • s ® o e••• -- -= esoo ❑ �r, •• • • • o r I I � o•o• ss•o III I I ff Rd ° • s e UNIT Cl UNIT C2 2 BEDROOM, 2 BATH INTERIOR: 872 S.F TERRACE 57 S.F. 2 BEDROOM, STUDY, 2 BATH INTERIOR: 1,037 S.F. TERRACE: 52 S.F 27'.6• 21-1 16'6' 9'6' P y ;I i I N I b r b W KIT I—I nc ao-ad w Kicl�_u ,.,,, 'I ra 1 A. LOWER LEVEL MEZZANINE LEVEL UNIT C3 UNIT C4 UNIT D1 2 BEDROOM, 2 BATH IN—ERIOR: 1,002 S.F. 2 BEDROOM, 2 BATH INTERIOR: 986 S.F. LIVE/WORK, 1 BEDROOM, I BATH LOWER LEVEL: 568 S.F. TERRACE: 58 S.F. TERRACE: 53 S.F. MEZZANINE 204 S.F 762 S.F. � TERRACE. 56 S.F. f N AMI5IARGR0UP' x v 4 ,, ., ..,.. . .:, :�'„:'��:' ;.' .. .:..'.. .:.....;' �:�,-' ': ':::, .:.� i,��.., ".., y `:y '��:n: a:,T;� ,„• ..k.,., ,.2 a, �.e �a,.s.,t..' 3�'�...,;,� ,'t.� V-, ��� YAN.TCLBURG,�$ANPARD.&SDDERBERG$,AIA .12�'�, ..©>AK, a, i � a,. ;`^a+.xq .v��;"':t'" a >zu..+.' '�.. � f�•.-. '�,.2., ..T:.,: a�,'rT: .� ,H, d .a, TN��. .:a, a``x„T' .,y$^kv a a -3. .. a t •.r.trtr .1 .�' #<.x z•'. a s7g'-� :�.,,,fs '?" n�'r«n:nY.a'�: ,.�...,.�. .. ,....: .r':,.. x .�?: ., z.�t4�:`t, •t z `tip m�, a;G s� {;.�. ���i �.ai.� �.� ','�, #'•��,a°:.�'g{� „�,.. s ':,.�*. .�.a� t.." ;, +s�,;; ,S to G. .:>': .. x,?,• : +- "ix.:. 4. LV B 2C08„ ,26134.: .nS x.,. ..� ��. �°:.::Ka ram. a..::r :F >t: `i7.. �: .:��e *� a •t#1 -m1 .:,r.:.. �� � d. ': � .,.. b� :.-:. •i'.v.4:: .>'...S::'i.ho X �'€ �`' S'. .c?t�i':. t s':'°4j: �.�`....:....,�,.o,a.1£..s•._.......,�......� ,,.:.,.:..,,�..,u,�.,....v'_�.,�..w,.,<n.D..�,�.•,�..�..,,.,.-...m....,:. ,, ~, =° ~.= ==-1ij . ° 150 Ell ~ ° " ° °",° ° IBM A = 171 LOWER LEVEL MEZZANINE LEVEL LOWER LEVEL MEZZANINE LEVEL STUDIO, 1 BATH, MEZZANINE BED LOWER LEVEL: 529 SY 1 BEDROOM, 1 BATH, MEZZANINE STUDY LOWER LEVEL 609 S.F TERRACE: 51 S F. TERRACE: 50 S.F. �, ��1r °3 ile PLANING LEGEND s`e o O� e• o TTO TRANSIT STATION • couRiY�Ro CENTER AVENUE sEATwnu/PLANTER WALL TOI-405FREEWAY �e• • o,oeo j LEVEL t.r O e �e O O e y; BARBEOUE AREA O 6 '�� CHAISE LOUNGE POOL FURNITURE e 9 O 0 FIREPIT . POOL ...tr. Ai A'I At Al 60 BO 80 POOL DECK O e"a O e O e e • 9' SPA e O e ww •.•• - DECORATIVE PAVING WITH RECYCLED GLASS ,{ CABANA u,. •• • ` AGGREGATE »�, Ct B3 B3 Al- it PLANTING AREA BZ` 2"'LEVEL � WATER FEATURE COURTYARD 'MOVIE u^ DECORATIVE AVING _g._ BS PROJECTION ON G3 e0 GO BO BO »"Ai EYEBROW TREWS THEATER STYLE f DECORATIVE k " 82 82 82 PAVING a T I BUILT-IN BENCH 4 61 B1 .'r B1 83 ' 83 WITH SOFT A2 SEATING i f C2 A2 OUTDOOR «cn Y F b s met g' Ar ,Dl et ez„ Bz ' 'Az 1' OL , Ct ,." AT A r. y Bt a, ?.' A2 A2 A2 Bt' C2 t C4 82 C3 C3 2 C4 C3, Ai AtAt .. r FIRE LA E ,n 1� TO GOLDENWEST COLLEGE » SO BELLA TERRA ' f,"AMSTARGROUP PAN T€LBURG,BpNRARD&.SDBfiRBERGH,AIA .Tt I I3�01, '' ,'x * t "s _ a. �t sSCACE,�� 34'0 L3 26134 2NRFLOOR PC?QlUfi/l LEVEL nk FEBRU v PlANIING LEGEND �.00 • � O O 0 0�� mwA •, am 1TO TRANSIT STATION •s• o o • KK $TH FLOOR wwws COURTYARD 0•® y _ 0 'err uw OVERHEADTRELLIS CEMER,AVENUE TO I405 FREEWAY� ° • 'u'""� ''-�° "' ` WITH ACCENT ,� • .. �mopn-,-..m am � va oa> ` PLANTING 'r "Y.: �- `" kv* y" O O•• I� 4 FIREPIT S '. 3 4 •i e DECORATIVE PAVING +�� " ''"' GG.fW`$.'� T �" • O WITH RECYCLEDGLASS AGGREGATE Al At Al �At .El .� BID - p • SOFT SEATING , ? ` B1 A2 A2 A2' A2 Al C3 g uu AT FIREPIT y, a - ' :•O O O 4s•s• � hl 0 e 02 Ct t t �7.83 83 At ys'2- '`+K.. - •• • `t�066 A2 A2 A2 A2 L .k"�2 Ct l •• s i C2 Y'a 4 ¢ 'et �" ,'�i'YtxP t h r #a 1r4�'' .y'"" t^•--'T—"` j i, } cT. �� _ r t , AT c3 . :etG C3 B3 BO BO B0 BO" y h,� C 'OVERHEAD TRELLIS Y .� 3 Tt:A �. C2 WITH ACCENT ' i 7 FLAMING d ..It.=r .� .Ct•. { C1 y 2 �`' Bt .s° %, `k 02, TC3 qqt '. r B3 A2.' k 81 eT ;.f, �. `r Br e3 ea . Az +n f—t cT A B2, b ,.. �'} OC711 A2 A2 A2 B1 C4 82 C3 { >a C3 .62 Cd (] C3 AT At .Al Al ' K a t 77,71 O � HRELANE i TO GOLDENWEST COLLEGE TO BELLA TERRA, a mdrinrrau.ew..r,e fl AMSTARGROUPIQ ' VAN TUJ3VRG WVARD.&SDDERBEIR AfA R IJ. 1�:�K .,� s _ r. ?.°.�" ..�.+ :> � A, 5TH FLOOR PLAN L4 '° k26134, e 3 � EEeauaRVT zao0 --------------- ----------- ------- OdOd PHOENIX DACTYLIFERA WASHINGTONIA,ROBUSTA LOPHOSTEMON CONFERTUS LAGERSTROEMIA INOICA FEIJOA SELLOWIANA P itNUS CANARIENSIS DATE PALM MEXICAN FAN PALM BRISBANE BOX GRAPE MYRTLE PINEAPPLE GUAVA CANARY ISLANANt 01W BOUGAINVILLEA SP., SALVIALEUCANTHA AGAVE SP. DOMESTICA HEMEROCALLIS'LADY EVN BAMBOO SP. BOUGAINVILLEA MEXICAN BUSH SAGE AGAVE HEAVENLY BAMBOO -'LADY EVA DAYLILY BAMBOO ALOE SP. WESTRINGIA FRUTICOSA LIGUSTRUM JAPONICUM PHORMIUM TENAX ROSKARINUS OFFICINALM STAYCHYS BYZANTINA ALOE ROSEMARY COAST ROSEMARY JAPAN ESE ESE PRIVET NEW ZEALAND FLAX- LAMB'S EAR 111111111112111 PYRACANTHA HYBRID CLYTOSTOMA CALLISTEGICIOES DISYICTUS BUCCINATORIA, TEUCRIUM CHAMAEnRYS ARBUTUS UNEDO'COMPACTE PITTOSPORUM'CREAM DE MINT' FIRETHORN VIOLET TRUMPET VINE BLOOD RED TRUMPET VINE GERMANDER DWARF STRAWBERRY TREE VARIEGATED DWARF PITTOSPORUM f.'MifARGROIJP land"a r�7 vVe st, �VA TILBURG BANVARD&SODERBERGR.AIA E D�10,A K q t, d l PLANT IMAGERY t5 FEBR�ARY'1:208 6134 T 4 IT • o•••ma " i se • zoos t0000 g rr� _ T g •••• - Goes } '_L f i { ! n 1[ 000000 11 ., ,........�«... ,LIU t�t lit - g 4 €€ e :.. �-'7 r JL Jill ij 4)"1 q ------------- AMSTARGROUP g. fi ne m.e eM, tk ,`:,'" p @` �.. t 3" 3 '£ ,4,., j l! z'. :a �s� ,a, s: .+z '�. �t ra 'r ' ✓, .as to n m¢;,t c wns .>y',y x 'a q # et*d'. a.N, y Ni "fit .. ------. ._ ,. .... .. .. .. ., � �t se•e • e arse •e e seoaeo e o 0 o • oo e oe e• eseees e • • O •000 case Q p assess o ee•sc • , Q O ® ® • rM • o :see*: e • 0000 sass i r- V s o LJw 4 u 3 Total Non-Driveable Hardscape: 14,675 S.F. Landscape Area on Podium: 11,500 S.F. Landscape Area Street Adjacent: 1,900 S.F. Landscape Area Off-Street: 12,500 S.F. Total Landscape Area: 25,900 S.F. : .�y . : ���. « !M E"N T '# WRITTEN NARRATIVE a) Description of Proposed Project The proposed project includes both legislative actions and project approvals, as applicable to a 3.8 acre commercial property that the applicant owns. The applicant will submit materials separately for the legislative actions and the project approvals. The requested legislative actions—General Plan Amendment,Zoning Text Amendment, and Zoning Map Amendment—would add housing and mixed use to the list of permitted uses on the property. Today, only commercial uses are allowed. The requested project approvals—Conditional Use Permit, including Design Review—would allow the applicant to develop a specific building on the property. Description of the requested legislative actions: General Plan Amendment: The current General Plan land use designation is CG- FI-d (General Commercial). The applicant proposes creating a new land use designation,"Mixed Use—Transit Center." Zoning MgpAmendment: The current zoning is CG(General Commercial). The applicant proposes creating a new zoning designation, "Transit Center High Density Mixed Use." Zoning Text Amendment: The current text does not have"Transit Center" zoning designations. The applicant proposes to define "Transit Center High Density Mixed Use"as a zone with development standards tailored to urban and transit- oriented districts, as opposed to purely commercial or purely residential districts. Such standards would include a broader mix of allowable uses,higher densities, and greater building heights. Normal requirements for parking and open space would also be adapted to a more urban context and take into account the self-mitigating aspects (especially with respect to traffic, noise and air quality)of both synergies between the multiple uses as well as the proximity to transit. Description of the requested project approvals: Conditional Use Permit: The applicant requests approval to develop the property with a specific building, in a manner consistent with the City's visib Mkefledted.•s in its proposed general plan and zoning standards. g Design Review: The applicant requests that the City conduct its standwo revipw of building architecture, landscape architecture, site planning, and overall design a Description of the proposed building: The proposed building is a mixed-use development consisting of up to 440 units of rental housing over up to 10,000 square feet of retail space. The site is located at the southeast corner of Center Avenue and Gothard Street in Huntington Beach. The nearby land uses are retail, office, education, and transportation. The proposed building has four levels of housing over three levels of parking. Half of the parking is below grade; half is above. At ground level, the street frontages have retail storefronts and live-work units that are convertible to retail in the future, if the demand for retail rises. The proposed building offers an amenity package appropriate for a "luxury apartment community," which is expected to raise the ceiling on the apartment market in Huntington Beach. Such amenity package would typically include a pool, spa, fitness center, business center, conference room, and clubhouse. The proposed building offers neighborhood-serving retail on the ground floor. The retail establishments will target the college community and the nearby residents. Potential retailers would be a convenience store, cafe, sandwich shop, cleaners,juice, and mailbox store. Two driveways serve the garage. The Center Avenue driveway is the main entry for residents;the Gothard Street driveway is the main entrance for retail customers. Gates separate the residential parking from the retail parking. A professional staff, with onsite offices and furnished models, would maintain and manage the building. The applicant expects the staff to keep the leasing office open during normal daytime business hours, 7 days a week, with after-hours emergency maintenance service available. b) Reasons for Initiating this Application The applicant is initiating the legislative actions because the current general plan and zoning designations of the property do not permit the mix of uses that the applicant proposes to develop. The applicant is initiating the project qp rn ovals becaus"e lieto ; applicant plans not only to "rezone the site,"but also to proceed with actup). , redevelopment and construction after the legislative actions are approved.o f a� w This application serves the applicant's private interest by allowing the owner to upgrade a declining strip commercial center to a highly marketable housing-focused mixed-use building. The property would rise from an obsolescent use to its highest-and- best use, and the property value would increase. The adjacent redevelopment project area would benefit economically from any increase in nearby property values. This application also serves the public interest, in the following ways: I. It supports the creation of a"Place"and a"Town Center"consistent with the desirable goals discussed in the first four Beach/Edinger Specific Plan workshops. 2. It promotes jobs/housing balance by placing dense housing in the midst of retail, office, education, and transportation. 3. It replaces the visual blight of tired strip retail with the visual excitement of new, top-rate development. 4. It creates density where density is most beneficial and least impactful. 5. It multiplies the tax revenue stream contributed by this property to the City. This project,overall,gives the City and the applicant a chance to demonstrate how the use-segregated development pattern in Orange County and much of suburban America can be successfully replaced with concentrated mixed-use development around transportation nodes and retail centers. c) Description of Surrounding Uses North: To the North are a Southern California Edison distribution line tower and the OCTA Goldenwest Transportation Center(7301 Center Ave.), consisting of 10 bus docks and 115 parking stalls. To the Northeast is Old World Village(7561 Center Ave.), a Bavarian-themed shopping, dining, and entertainment center, anchored by the Old World German Restaurant. East: To the East are a rail line and a defunct spur serving the adjacent Levitz facility. Also9fd I$ the East is the vacant Montgomery Wards parcel, on which DJM Partners has propospbl a. mixed-use development. h' 3 r S$ $ $g & South: To the South are a neighborhood retail center(15851 Gothard St) and Levitz Furniture (7441 Edinger Ave). Levitz has approximately 230,000 sf of retail show room and distribution space and 331 parking stalls on 11.7 acres. West: To the West is Golden West College (15744 Goldenwest Street), an educational community of 14,000 people. d) Description of Population Served by the project The residential portion of the project will serve three target populations: ® Young Professionals. Childless couples and singles that work in Huntington Beach, North Orange County, and South LA County. This target will thrive on the numerous amenities at Bella Terra, in the neighborhood, and at the project itself. • Golden West People. Students, teachers, and administrators. This target will take advantage of the new, high-quality living option that was previously not available so close to the campus. ® Progressives. People who will seriously consider using transit for work and who will appreciate the green features of the project. This target will live here in order to make a lifestyle statement. The retail portion of the project will serve two target populations: o Golden West People. Again,these include students, teachers, and administrators. College-serving businesses, such as bookstores, copying centers, and internet cafes, will see the convenient project location as the best way to serve Golden West population without actually being on campus. ® Nearby Residents. These include people that already live near the site,as well as the future residents of the applicant's project and other new projects. This target can either walk, drive, or bike to the project retailers. The Ripcurl itself will provide customers for Bella Terra and other retailers in the area. 3�§� g$ $ k $ II $ P �§ $ a L 2 3 8@ d 8 3 3 t 8 a & ZONING CONFORMANCE MATRIX Required 1) Proposed Minimum Parcel Size None 166,362 SF Height „ ""; „ 75 feet 60 feet-70 feet Density " „ 1 unit per 335 SF site area =497 units 440 units FAR 3.0 2.3 estimated Front Setback 5 feet 15 feet Side & Rear Yard Setbacks 5 feet 10 feet- 35 feet Maximum Site Coverage None 72% estimated Open Space 15% of 301,098 (unit area) =45,165 SF Common: 41,523 Private: 22,000 Total: 63,523 Residential Parking 0 - 1 bedroom: 1 space Studio: 1 space 2 or more bedrooms: 2 spaces 1 BR: 1.5 spaces 2 BR or greater: 2 spaces Commercial Parking 5 spaces per 1,000 SF Exceeds 5 spaces per 1,000 SF Guest parking none none, or, retail and residential share Note (1): Per the December 2007 Proposed Zone Text Amendment for Transit Center High Density Mixed Use District TTAlk AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN For THE RIPCURL August 1,2008 The Ripcurl (the"Project") will provide affordable housing in order to implement the goals,objectives and policies of the City's Housing Element. Zoning Ordinance Section 230.26 implements the affordable housing goals of the Housing Element of the City's General Plan. Pursuant to Section 218.10"Affordable Housing"of the Transit Center District Zoning Text Amendment submitted by Applicant,Applicant will work with the City to create an Affordable Housing Agreement(the"Agreement")that will outline an affordable housing plan for the Project that is acceptable to the City and is economically viable for the Project. The Agreement, as approved by the Director,will be executed between Applicant and the City prior to issuance of the first building permit. Among the components of the Agreement will be the following: Affordable Unit Count: Applicant shall provide affordable units such that 10%of the Project households are affordable. For purposes of determining the required number of affordable housing units, only the new units provided by the Project shall be counted. Term: The Agreement shall specify an affordability term of not less than sixty(60)years. Income Levels: Affordable rental units shall be made available to very low, low,or moderate-income households based on the Orange County Median Income, adjusted for appropriate family size,as published by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development or established by the State of California,pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 50093, or a successor statute. On-Site Component: At least one fifth of the total required affordable units shall be provided on site. Applicant may finance this component as a scattered-site project in joint venture with a nonprofit development company. The on-site units shall be mixed throughout the Project, and shall be indistinguishable from market-rate units in terms of exterior appearance, materials, finished quality, and access to amenities, except as may be allowed for in the next paragraph. Flexibility for Special Needs Groups: Applicant may use special configurations or designs of affordable units in order to better meet the needs of targeted income-restricted populations (e.g. student units or large corporation employee units congregated into a single part of the building.) Off-Site Component: Applicant may provide up to four-fifths of the required affordable housing off-site at one or multiple sites within the City of Huntington Beach.If possible, the off-site housing will be located within the Beach-Edinger Specific Plan area. Applicant will provide the off-site component by using some combination of the following methods: • Build new units. • Renovate existing units and deed-restrict them to affordable rent levels. • Acquire existing units and deed-restrict them to affordable rent levels. • Purchase affordable housing units that are "at risk"of converting to market rate rents due to expiration of affordability covenants, and renewing the affordability covenants. • Pay to have an income-based deed-restriction put into place on rental units owned by another owner using terms consistent with inclusionary housing requirements. • Directly subsidize the construction or implementation of another affordable housing project in the City. • Partner with another developer,non-profit group, or public or private group to create an affordable housing development. In-Lieu Fee Option: In the event and to the extent that none of the off-site component methods are feasible,Applicant shall pay a fee equal to the highest per square foot in-lieu fee rate for rental housing, as established annually by resolution of the City Council. Not more than 80%of the Project's affordable housing obligation shall be met using the In- lieu Fee Option. implementation Timi X: All affordable off-site housing shall be constructed, rehabilitated,or acquired and deed-restricted prior to or concurrently with the primary Project. Final approval(occupancy)of the first market rate residential unit shall be contingent upon the completion and public availability, or evidence of the applicant's reasonable progress towards attainment of completion, of the affordable units. To the extent Applicant needs to pay in-lieu fees, one hundred(100)percent of those fees shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit. Riwht of First Refusal for Existing Tenants: In the event that Applicant opts to provide affordable units at an off-site location by renovating or deed-restricting existing residential rental units, if existing tenant(s) in the off-site units meets the eligibility requirements,he/she shall be given the right of first refusal to occupy the affordable unit(s). If there are no qualified tenants, or if the qualified tenant(s)chooses not to exercise the right of first refusal,then qualified households or buyers will be selected. 1 , "MITMI'l JIM r. Hm #2 "Al Page 1 of 1 Stephenson, Johanna From: Dapkus, Pat Sent: Monday, October 06, 2008 5:51 PM To: Stephenson, Johanna;Van Dom, Kay Subject: FW: Ripcurl From: Bobbe Mootchnik[maiito:b.mootchnik@verizon.net] Seen: Monday,October 06, 2008 5:27 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Ripcurl To: City Council Members: The Ripcurl project does not stand alone. Plans are for 440 units on 4 acres, 100 units per acre at a site designated at 25 per acre and even a reduction down to 87 is too much. Bella Terra is planned for 700 units; Levitz property at about 1200 units. This all adds up to well over 2400 units and that number was not considered in the EIR cumulative analysis. (The EIR was significantly deficient in the traffic analysis conducted). I realize something must be done with all these vacant properties. The problem is the sizes of these proposals. They are much too large for the area. The buildings are tall and traffic is already a problem and these plans will only create much more traffic than is really bearable or can be accommodated at Beach-Edinger area. And the first to be built-Ripcurl-will set the precedent with future developers of excessively high density....why not me,if they can have theirs? Please don't let your thoughts for city revenues ruin our city--this is not downtown LA and is the reason why we chose to live here in the first place. Thank you. Bobbe Mootchnik 10/7/2008 Pagel of 1 Stephenson, Johanna From: Dapkus, Pat Sent: Tuesday, October 07,2008 1:55 PM To: Stephenson, Johanna;Van Dorn, Kay Subject: FVV: please say no From: Kay Mylod [mailto:kmylod@socal.rr.com] Sent:Tuesday, October 07, 2008 12:04 PM To: Dapkus, Pat Subject: please say no 1017108 To the CITY COUNCIL I can see the storm clouds gathering for future problems regarding growth in this city. I cannot believe the Planning Commission passed on the proposed RIPCURL and three more expansive programs to make this city more like LA than the peaceful city we are in the process of losing. I hope you do not pass on the projects as they come to you; I have been reading about the major problems for water to start with ( consideration No. 1)--and there are so many more problems looming. Does the city just wait for these ridiculous proposals to come through the door, as in Poseidon Resources, or does someone go out and recruit for these projects. We are out of space and the citizens are out of patience with this sort of thing. Please do not bring these projects down on our city. Enough is enough. Kay Nlylod Huntington Beach, CA 92646 10/7/2008 Ah 1W 1212 Lake Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 October 2, 2008 Huntington Beach City Council Members Dear Councilpersons: I read today that the Huntington Beach Planning Commission approved a mixed-use project on Edinger Avenue known as Ripcurl. They have disregarded the Huntington Beach building code! Why have codes if the commission can do whatever they want? You appointed these commissioners, so you need to fire them. Sincerely, Dennis Bauer ON teach CouNGT� omC ' Page L.of 2 Stephenson, Johanna .338Lf- From: Dapkus, Pat Sent: Monday, October 06, 2008 8:52 AM To: Stephenson, Johanna; Van Dorn, Kay Subject: FW: Ripcurl is a RIPOFF for HB From: Linda Anderson [mailto:linda.43@verizon.net] Sent: Friday, October 03, 2008 4:57 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Ripcurl is a RIPOFF for HB Hello HB City Council Members, Thank you for serving our city! My husband, Andy and I live a few miles to the west of the intersection of Beach Blvd. and Edinger Ave. I have lived in HB since 1966 and have seen the traffic conditions on Edinger worsen considerably in the last few years. If fact, if I have to travel east, I try to avoid Edinger all together. I'm sure the business owners would not want to hear that residents are beginning to avoid the area. I do enjoy visiting some of the businesses and restaurants along Edinger, but I would hate to see the traffic get worse. I've read some of the information regarding revitalization of the Edinger and Beach Blvd. areas and appreciate the need for planned, thoughtful, and fiscally responsible improvement. My concern is that the improvements being considered may, in reality, have the opposite effect on the goals of the city. If our goals include attracting people to the area who spend money and maintaining a tranquil and pleasant environment, I do not feel that an increase in residential density is the answer! Please consider these questions as you continue your work on this project: 1. What did the traffic study reveal about the increase in traffic should 87 apartments per acre be built? With all this additional traffic, will residents be drawn to the area or will they avoid it? 2. Do bike racks and electric car plug-ins mean less traffic congestion? 3. Are the businesses accessible to the commuters? 4. Even though low-flow faucets are planned, won't this many new residences put a dramatic drain (pun intended) on our already serious water shortage? Will the air conditioners and other electrical demands in these many apartments further strain our already taxed power resources? Andy and I agree with those who feel that it would be a terrible shame if HB continued to sacrifice its standards for the sake of greater urbanization and taxation revenue. Greater urbanization does not equate to improved life style or greater revenue. This Ripcurl (or the "The Village") development will not improve the environment or quality of life in HB. It will add more congestion, more pollution, 10/6/2008 d Page 2 of 2 and denser population which the area cannot support in terms of services and space. Remember what an eye sore and traffic nightmare the tall business building on the corner of Beach Blvd. and Warner turned out to be. I realize that the over all and long term planning for Edinger and Beach Blvd. do not entirely hinge on the Ripcurl development and I appreciate that the planning department and the city council are researching successful developments in other areas of the state. Good luck in your efforts and thank you for listening to our concerns. See you at the public meetings. Sincerely, Andy & Linda Anderson linda.43@verizon.net 6432 Govin Circle Huntington Beach, CA 92647 Home: (714) 846-8609 Cell: (714) 625-2842 10/6/2008 -----Original Message----- From: Vallotl @aol.com To: city.council@ surfcity-hb.org Sent: Sun, 12 Oct 2008 10:57 pm Subject: Ripcurl Dear Honorable Mayor and Council Members, I have learned that the Planning Commission has approved the Ripcurl Project on condition of several recommended changes. Where will be the oversight that the recommended changes have been implemented and what if the recommended changes do not accomplish the desired result? Where is the accountability? Too many times there is not follow up on conditions and the development community knows this. It is my understanding that the Ripcurl Project will need to come before the Mayor and Council for final approval. I encourge you to hold off your approval until the plans have been revised to reflect the recommended changes and until the public has had a chance to make input. I am also wondering if the City will have a development agreement with the Ripcurl developers. Is the City making any request for street improvements around the project from the developer? I also have a concern about the planning staff report, attachment no.8.1, regarding Zoning Text Amendment. I do not understand how it can be left to the developer to define "Transit Center" High Density Mixed Use designation. This designati on is to guide development so it works for the City, not so it works for the developer. This transit zoning designation is a type of zoning that is being used across the country but it comes about through studying the existing and potential future uses of the area and through public input. It comes about from studying interconnected relationships. Jane Jacobs discussed in her book, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, about the complexity of cities and about the interconnected relationships. She wrote, "Although the inter-relations of their many factors are complex, there is nothing accidental or irrational about the ways in which these factors affect each other." To define the "Transit Center" High Density Mixed Use designation for the area in question, the inter-relations of the many factors need to be studied and considered. The inter-relations of the many factors include the experiences and knowledge of citizens in the surrounding community. This process should be the responsibility of our Planning Department and of City Council, not the developers. The health, safety and welfare of our people is your responsibility but I feel that you have lost site of that. The American Planning Association has set forth a Code of Ethics that I believe you need to see as it is your=2 Oresponsibility to make sure planning for our City follows these principles. One part of the Code is below and you may see the rest at http://www.planning.or,q/ethics/ethicscode.htm Piln pp (99 to WNch We Aapke 1. Our Overall Responsibility to the Public Our primary obligation is to serve the public interest and we, therefore, owe our allegiance to a conscientiously attained concept of the public interest that is formulated through continuous and open debate. We shall achieve high standards of professional integrity, proficiency, and knowledge. To comply with our obligation to the public, we aspire to the following principles: a)We shall always be co nscious of the rights of others. b)We shall have special concern for the long-range consequences of present actions. c)We shall pay special attention to the interrelatedness of decisions. d)We shall provide timely, adequate, clear, and accurate information on planning issues to all affected persons and to governmental decision makers. e)We shall give people the opportunity to have a meaningful impact on the development of plans and programs that may affect them. Participation should be broad enough to include those who lack formal organization or influence. f)We shall seek social justice by working to expand choice and opportunity for all persons, recognizing a special20responsibility to plan for the needs of the disadvantaged and to promote racial and economic integration. We shall urge the alteration of policies, institutions, and decisions that oppose such needs. g)We shall promote excellence of design and endeavor to conserve and preserve the integrity and heritage of the natural and built environment. h)We shall deal fairly with all participants in the planning process. Those of us who are public officials or employees shall also deal evenhandedly with all planning process participants. Please take the needed steps to ensure that the approval process for Ripcurl Project meets the above principles for overall responsibilities to the public. look forward to your reply. Respectfully, Pam Vallot 6401 Harvard Circle Huntington A 92647 714-892-3406 Stephenson, Johanna From: Dapkus, Pat Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 11:15 AM To: Stephenson, Johanna; Van Dorn, Kay Subject: FW: No to Ripcurl development! -----Original message----- From: Elena Fettig [mailto:emfettig@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 11:12 AM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: No to Ripcurl development ! Dear City Council Members, Myself, my family & friends in Huntinton Beach & Westminster are adamently against the Ripcurl Project because of the scale & density of the project. We believe the area cannot handle what will be a substantial increase in residents & traffic. We are not against development, but want responsible, well thought out plannned development that suits the community. ON NOV 3, PLEASE VOTE AGAINST THESE GENERAL PLAN & ZONING DEVELOPMENTS! We will be watching. Sincerely, Elena Fettig Huntinton Beach, CA 1 rage i of i Stephenson, Johanna From: Dapkus, Pat Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 8:41 AM To: Stephenson, Johanna; Van Dorn, Kay Subject: FW:Vote Against From: Kottler, Ellen [mailto:ekottler@Exchange.FULLERTON.EDU] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 8:26 AM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Vote Against Please vote against amendments for high density projects that will intensify the traffic problem, and effect other city services in a negative way, such as fire and police, as well as other local institutions, such as education-schoo/s(teachers and classrooms)and health care. Please vote to save Alice's restaurant. Thank yowl 10/16/2008 Page 1 of l Stephenson, Johanna From: Dapkus, Pat Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 4:50 PM To: Stephenson, Johanna;Van Dorn, Kay Subject: FW: NO -on Ripcurl; NO -on The Village at Bella Terra development proposal From: Betty Kanne [mailto:bettykanne@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 3:05 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Cc: Betty Kanne; Dan Kanne Subject: NO -on Ripcurl; NO - on The Village at Bella Terra development proposal re: Ripcurl and The Village at Bella Terra development proposal HB City Council, My husband and I are long time residents and home owners in Huntington Beach. We wish to voice our serious concern about the The Village at Bella Terra development proposal. The project environmental impact report(EIR) states that there will be significant and unavoidable traffic problems on streets north of Warner,east of Goldenwest and on I-405 for decades to come with this proposed development. Please do not approve this proposal. We ask that you do not approve development that negatively impacts the citizens of Huntington Beach and the quality of life we currently have. As such do not accept this proposal in any way that approaches its current form. Sincerely, Betty and Dan Kanne 16331 Woodstock Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92647 714.840.4257 beitykanne&,hotmail.com Want to do more with Windows Live? Learn"f0 hidden secrets"from Jamie. Learn Now 10/15/2008 1 ,^ 7 AM"6#r (0211 it h0j �/r4l, . i City of Huntington Beach OCT 2 7 2008 0rj 4 E Ou L,j tL G. city of Huntington Bead OCT 2 7 2000 n VIf V A C f All City of Huntington Beach OCT 2 7 2008 v e in e-- ce tJ� z�-cA �,� � v�^v e�z�.® City OCT 2 9 2008 800Z 6 V .100 - f r 1 4 "� „ .: _:. �,,. ��: �.. n,.�; �,. _ter. ,,, _. „. �-:.. .;� ,::- ,. ,. <:, ��.. .; �.. ;� A:q:, �: r.::::. .,:: %may .,, � �:;i�3'��`: `. ffs a �_, x. ., ,'.. �; F ; �q ww,� y �.;:;:. �i3 i :�::��a ��`, �;. ':irk.;; ;;,s, �j�< A A k BCITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Inter Office Communication Planning Department TO: Honorable Mayor and City Co4ncil Members 9.0 VIA: Fred Wilson, City Administra FROM: Scott Hess, AICP, Director of Planning DATE: November 4, 2008 SUBJECT: TYPING ERRORS IN THE PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE FOR THE RIPCURL PROJECT There were some typing errors for the entitlement numbers in the public hearing notice for The Ripcurl Project that was sent out on October 30, 2008. The errors were as follows: Incorrect Entitlement Numbers Correct Entitlement Numbers Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-003 Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004 General Plan Amendment No. 07-001 General Plan Amendment No. 07-003 Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-004 Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001 Conditional Use Permit No. 08-043 Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043 It has been determined that these typographical errors have no impact on the legal standing of the public hearing notice. If you have any questions, please contact me at extension 5554. copy: Joan Flynn, City Clerk Herb Fauland, Planning Manager Tess Nguyen, Associate Planner ATTACHMENT #26 THE RIPCURL PROJECT APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 07-004, ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 07-004, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 07-003, ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO. 07-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 07-043 Appellants: Councilmember Jill Hardy, Andrew Nelson Applicant: Andrew Nelson/Alex Wong Location: 7302-7400 Center Avenue Date: November 10, 2008 IZEQIJEST—Elk, ZTA ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT REQUEST o To analyze the potential environmental impacts associates} with implementation of the proposed project and proposed entitlements ZONING TEXTAMENDMENT REQUEST P To amend the HBZSO by adding Chapter 218 to establish the Mixed Use-Transit Center District zoning and development standards 1 }eF REQUEST-®GPA, ZMA, CUP S GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST To amend the General Plan Land Use designation from the current Commercial General to the proposed Mixed Use designation ZONING MAP AMENDMENT o To amend the Zoning designation from the current Commercial General to the proposed Mixed Use- Transit Center District designation CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST To permit the development of a mixed use residential and commercial development LOCATION—AERIAL PHOTO LOCATION SEC of Gothard Street r '; ,, ! .•.. an4 Center Avenue SURROUNDINGS North: Gol4en West Transportation Center SUBJECT ar Mr-#1:4 South: Vacant Retail SITE -� •' '., .� Buil4ing (former Levitz) East SCE Towers; -« Bella Terra Mall West.• Gol4enwe5t � }# f _ College 2 ;tea �3 COMMISSION ACTION PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED THE REQUEST ON SEPTEMBER 23 AND 30 WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: Consistent with the proposed General Plan and Zoning designations of Mixed Use on the subject property by providing for a mixed use development that is consistent and transitional between surrounding densities and land uses. Consistent with good zoning practice and implements the ggoats of smart growth and sustainable deveropment. COMMISSION ACTION PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION: Facilitates mixed-use development that produces an environment which is both attractive and sustainable by increasing housing options for diverse household types, promoting alternative modes of transportation, creating a local sense of place, reducing infrastructure and maintenance costs, and allowing for more efficient use of land resources. 3 OMMISSION ACTION PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION: • Compatible with adjacent commercial, educational, and transportation uses, and the site is physically suitable for a higher-density, transit-oriented development with a mix of residential and commercial land uses. • 5erve5 affordable housing needs ofthe community by providing affordable housing units. M. APPEALS OF PLANNING COMMISSION'S ACTION APPEALS WERE FILED ON OCTOBER 10: Q Council member)ill Hardy To allow the City Council an opportunity to review The Ripcurl project and all associated entitlements in its entirety. Red Oak Investments, Applicant Conditions ofApprovaI No. I.a., 3.a., 3.b., and 5.a. Of Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043. 4 t Xj :y P R OJ ECT ANALYSIS-E I k ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT No further analysis was required in the EIR: - Agricultural Resources - Mineral Resources No impacts or less than signif cant impacts: - Land Use and Planning SA RO E T J C A(\IA LYS IS-®EI IZ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Significant or potentially siggnificant impacts that could be mitigated to less-khan-si nificant level: - Aesthetics - Hydrology & Water - Air Quality Quality - Biological Resources - Noise - Cultural Resources - Public Services - Geolo y and Soils - Recreation - Hazards & Hazardous - Transportation/Tragic Materials - Utilities & Service Systems s ' u—Axe f ®EI R PRO) ECT ANALYSIS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Sig nificant and unavoidable impacts: -population and Housing - Transportation/Traffic Population and Housing Cumulative Contribution to population growth, exceeding the SCAG population projections for the City for 2015. PE } PRO) ECT ANALYSIS-El R ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Transportation/Traffic Project Specific Contribution to the deficieng of the 1-405 northbound loop from Beach Blvd in AM and PM peak hours in 2014. Project Specific Impact at the intersection ofthe 1-405 southbound ramps at Center Avenue during the PM peak hour and deficiencies on 1-4 5 in 2030. 6 ISO) ECT ANALYSIS El I. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Transportation/Tra f c Cumulative Impact at the intersection of the 1-405 southbound ramps and Center Avenue during the PM peak hour in 2030. k .ta k: X PRO) ECT A NA Q_YS I S®ZTA ZONING TEXTAMENDMENT Objectives Of Mixed Vse Development • Promotes the concepts of smart growth and sustainable development • Creates livable cities and walkable neighborhoods • Reduces dependence on the automobile • Provides a variety oftransportation choices • Encourages a wile range of housing options • Allows more efficient use of land resources and infrastructure investments °M ���aPwt'� ROJ ECT A NA LYS I S ZTA ZONING TEXTAMENDMENT Transit Oriented Deve opment/Location Criteria Creates better places to live, work, and play Provides a concentration of living, shopping, entertainment, e4ucational, and employment opportunities within walking distance o transit stations Limited to properties within one-quarter mile of the Golden West Transportation Center Consistent with the current planning efforts envisioned for the area � �ROJ ECT A NA LYS Q S ZTA ZONING TEXTAMENDMENT Proposed Development Standards • Planning literature and information from other cities • Goal: ensure compatibility with surrounding uses and allow more flexibility in project design based on market demand • Recommended modifications: - setbacks - building height — door area ratio urliit size - open space - off-street parking - building design - private storage s PrO n ) ECTANALYSIS®GPA GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT • A mechanism to achieve the goals of smart growth and sustainable development • The surrounding area is targeted for revitalization efforts, incorporating more intensive mixed use development o The subject site is located in a variety of land uses that are critical to any vibrant community o The site is an appro riate location to accommodate the Proposed growth while minimizing off-site impacts to other areas ofthe City PRO) ECT ANALYSIS-ZMA ZONING MAP AMENDMENT o A new zoning designation that currently does not exist on the Zoning Map o Implements the proposed General Plan Land Use designation of Mixed Use Transit-oriented development: -a strategy to meet the goals of smart growth and sustainable development -widens the choices on where to live and how to travel -brings more people i nto everyday socia f interactions 9 AQ r PRO) ECTANALYSIS®CUB CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Compatibility with Surrounding Land Uses • Vicinity of project site—a mix of land uses (commercial, entertainment, employment, educational, transit) • Project site—appropriate location to combine housing and economic activity to provide both living and employment options • Mix of land uses—contribute to the synergy in creating better places to live within an urban context PRO) ECT ANALYSIS CUP CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Density New zoning c tegory—allows for high den5ity mixed uses Wit one-quarter mile of an established transit center No density limitation—other developrr)ent standards to shape the mass and bulk of the project High density—ap ropriate forthe site and consistent with intent and vision ofthe planning effort along the Beach-Edinger corridor 10 M p PRO) ECT ANALYSIS-CUP CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Site Layout and Arch itectura Treatment Vertical mixed use—ensures compatibility of commercial and residential components on-site Separate vehicular and pedestrian access—mitigates potential conflicts between uses Open space amenities—provides a variety of recreational options and a focal point for the development Architectural treatment—includes design elements, building materials and colors that contribute to a high quality visuar image PRJ ECT ANALYSIS CUP CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Compliance with Proposed Development Standards Complies with the following standards - of area and lot width - setbacks - building height - floor area ratio - landscaping - unit size - building design standards Would not comply with the following standards - minimum open space - off-street parking - private storage space Project—re uired to comply with all adopted development standards 11 ` # PRO) ECT ANALYSIS-CUP CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Affor4able Housing o Requirement-10 percent of the total units - 44 units (440-unit project) - V units (385-unit project) 0 Staft Recommend tion: - A minimum of 33 percent (13 units) ofthe requirement be low income households on-site. - The remaini g req�u�irement (26 affordable units) may be satisfied 0 f-site at either low or median income level. PRO) ECT A NA LYS I S i APPLICANT'S APPEAL—Condition of Approval 1.a • Planning C,ommission's Approval—To reduce the number of residential units from 440 units to 330 u n its and retain the 10,000 sq. ft. of reta i I space. • Applicant's Concern—insufficient evidence or reasoned rationale to support the imposition of the unit limitation. • Request—have the ability to buildup to 440 units, allowing the option to respond to market dem nds. • Reduction—impact the financial feasibility of the project. 12 RO) ECT- A NA LYS I S APPLICANT'S APPEAL—Condition of Approval I.a. • Staff Recommendation—To allow 385 units based on the environmentally superior project. • Implement#ion of the project • Reduce the cumulative stgnificant and unavoidable t fc impacts to less- than—significant level • Satisfy all ofthe identified project objectives related to developing dense residential uses within close proximity to transit, schools, regional activities and retail opportunities P RO) ECT A NA LYS I S APPLICANT'S APPEAL—Condition ofApproval Nos. 3.a., 3. , and 5.a. • Conditions are related to raker braces, tie-back anchors, and underground storm drain pipes. • Request—allow the Public Works Director the ability to amend the conditions administratively in case of changed circumstances or new information. • Staff Recommendation add "as deemed necessary by the Public Works Director" langua e to the conditions add Condition oNprovaI No. 10 to allow the Planning Director the ability to approve minor amendments as appropriate 13 RECOMMENDATION STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THE FOLLOWING: Certify Environmental Impact Report No. 07-004 as adequate and complete in accordance with CEQA requirements. Approve Zoning Text Amendment No. 07-004 with findings for approval. Approve General Plan Amendment No. 07-003. 11 RECOMMEN DATION STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THE FOLLOWING: Approve Zoning Map Amendment No. 07-001 with findings for approval. Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 07-043 with f ndings and suggested conditions of approval to allow 385 residential units and 10,000 sq. ft. of commercial uses. 14 RCA ROUTING SHEET INITIATING DEPARTMENT: Planning SUBJECT: Appeal of Planning Commission's approval of EIR 07- 004/ZTA 07-004/GPA 07-003/ZMA 07-001/CUP 07-043 (The Ripcurl) COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 10, 2008 RCA ATTACHMENTS STATUS Ordinance (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Attached Not Applicable ❑ Resolution (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Attached Not Applicable ❑ Tract Map, Location Map and/or other Exhibits Attached ❑ Not Applicable ❑ Contract/Agreement (w/exhibits if applicable) Attached ❑ (Signed in full by the City Attorney) Not Applicable ❑ Subleases, Third Party Agreements, etc. Attached ❑ (Approved as to form by City Attorney) Not Applicable ❑ Certificates of Insurance (Approved by the City Attorney) Attached ❑ Not Applicable ❑ Fiscal Impact Statement (Unbudgeted, over $5,000) Attached ❑ Not Applicable ❑ Bonds (If applicable) Attached ❑t Applicable ❑ Staff Report (If applicable) Attached Not Applicable ®❑ Commission, Board or Committee Report (If applicable) Attached Not Applicable ❑ Findings/Conditions for Approval and/or Denial Attached Not Applicable ❑ iEXPLANATIOM FOR MIS&MG ATTACHMii IEHTS REVIEWED RET ED FO RDED Administrative Staff ( ) ) Deputy City Administrator (Initial) ( ) City Administrator (Initial) ( ) ) City Clerk ( ) EXPLANATION FOR RETURN OF ITEM: A g1W c - etc t 1j _ ! llc�_ - 44 _(Be�4w,Spaoe For ISS/ 0/7 ' i N/7Mn/6 RCA Author: SH:HF:MBB:TN �5 >j(�uY.6j - x 1,7,-Iy