Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Draft Open Space/Conservation Element Amendment 80-1 - Hunti
AN ! .. , \ r Ft., CITY OF H4�iI�t�1 INGTCV. J' JPEAC" P.O.BOX 100 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SE'RV( SS-' � � �j °RNla�zsas BUILDING DIVISION 1714)63"241 PLANN1NaLti�Ikfbk�?141 d38d211 t ee August 27, 1980 , ' ,•` f^to t 4 To Whom It Ma*r Concern: The enclosed draft Environmental Impact Report has been prepared by the City of Huntington Dench Department of Development Servicas and . Is being distributed for a 30-day public review period ending Snptembor 299 1980. The EIR is incorporated into the analysis of General Plnn Amendment 80- 1 , which includes the following changes to the Open Space Conservation Element; 1) Redesignate 65 .3 acres located north of Ellis Avenue and east of Edwards Street from Planned Open Space development to Recreation Area; 2) Redesignate 10 acres at the northwest corner or, Ellis, Avenue and Goldenwest Street from General Industrial to Recreation Area. The intent of the proposed amendment is to expand the boundaries of Huntington Central Park to allow for public acquisition of the subject property. witl�rt!iis�proeerctmine' all wc, are Possiblemental aysociacoii', ' p j . g y in writing no later thin September -29, l9aa. If your comments have not been received by dute, 'we will assume that you concur with the adequacy of the draft HIR. incerely, amen R. UTnes ssociate planner .IRB/dc CITY �OF WUNTiGTON l3F_ACi�i . Office of the City Clerk F. o, 8D, F untingtOs� Jjencli, Calll. . 1. LWw7'iKs.wwr.•w... - i.. - ' t }-•ft 1.1,. ! Ir•ti ill 1 try! r " ;• ; t j.;t r4f t �` rtC � .Ri r r . '•..�. �� 'r ` -. t T r �t t i •7c t ., i h '.t REQUE'L. FOR CITY COUNCis. ACTION Date Julm 10, 1Q81 Submitted to: The Honorable Mayor and City Council _ Submittodby., Charles W. Thompson, City Administrato fIt' y y>�� Vincent a. Moorhouse Director Communit Prepared by. Y Services Subject: Acquisition of Encyclopedia Lots "P -0a- 16 k COUNCIL e �419 Statenent of Issue,Recommendation,Analysts, Funding Sou oe,Altomative Actio men CA 11—TIft— STATEMENT OP ISSUE In order for twenty-five acres of land within the designated bound- aries of Huntington Central Park to be properly utilized in the future, the city needs to acquire through eminent domain one hundred aeventy--nine ennyclopedia lots to bo consolidated with the ninety- five lots presently owned and t%e twenty-two lots proposed to be acquired by trade. RECOMMENDATION Authorize acquisition through eminent domain of one hundred seventy- nine encyclopecila lots (25' x 1121) located north of Ellis Avenue between Goldenweat and Edwards Streets for the purpose of expanding the size of Huntington Central Park. a ANAL 'Council minute ac't1on on January 20, 1975, established Huntington <- Central Park boundary as 660' north of Ellis Avenue with the acreage between the boundary and Ellis Avenue designated as open space. In considering tax title acquisition of several encyclopedia lots north of Ellis. Avenue, City Council on November lu, 19.77, ' designated ;R all small lots north of Ellis as a future part of Huntington Central Park. r Council Resolution No. 4853 extended the southerly boundary of t' Central, Park to Ellis Avenue for the sole purpose of conducting planning and feasibSlity studies. jV1th'in'.the sub j.e " p � a II.56 acre silie, there: is a,:total of three .hundred n ye opedia lots.; The city presently awns ninety fiveq: The. State Of California _owns four lots -which: ma or, not be as uired' at th::a y Y time, due, to the', i'ive�yeer redemption period an tax delinquent property sales. When`'avaiTableifor acquisition, the estimated cost per ?of would be $1,500 or a total of $6,000 . >; r There'-are one: hundred seventy,-nine :lots .which -a,re .privately owned. Wlmated acquisition cast far each lot is $6,000 or a total of +�G."'..ia.T'^'. -ir�':e i+.ii...�i.i;Yvt iu�l,:♦�1L. ...:.::i'. 'i':.'.:i:.:25LWt�a:s+ww.-.- ,-...... _ .�-. vz-..,. � - .... � - �_ ..,v..� .-1 I', r `•i - .. t 1,•11 r.+- sue`', t There are twenty-two lots north of Ellis which are owned by Mr. M. H. Morrow who has expressed an interest in trading said lots for twenty-two lots south of Ellis which the city owns. FUNDING SOURCE The total estimated acquisition cost of the 183 encyclopedia lots is $1,080,000. Available funds are as follows: 1980 Park Bond Act . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 636,436 Roberti-Z'berg Program 12,3034 1974 Park Bond Act r 80,044 Park Acquisition and Development Fund 235,486 $l,oaa,Goo ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS 1. Continue to acquire encyclopedia lots as they become available through tax title sales. 2. Discontinue acquiring the lots and let those that have been . acquired revert to the State. ATTACHMENTS �1, Memo from Gail Hutton, Sub, : , Acquisition and Eminent Domain Procedures for Huntington Central Park 2. Excerpt of Council Minutes of 11/14/77 , 3. Memo from Bill Holman, Surf : General Plan Conformance City Owned Encyclopedia Lots 4. Notice of Determination 5. , Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes of 5/26/80 6. . Map of area r } • j5 r 3. o, L M tr�•s t 5 •• 1 '! �v .ill.ti r. ri .. E-4. 1� CITY OF H1�NTINGdTtaN BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HIWf441014/l4GH . � r wr rr .1'�ti ;�wt#;ry� •�, � Mr .. fw. ( h f .. S• J •.. t . Y incent`~fG Moorhouse i� .; From Gail Hutton Community Services Director 'City Attorney' .# �,, ,' •• ' `:' +.• ce s AJP,JG, C,Aavis-Public Works, ftrris-Co;nm5ery Acquisition and Eminent Domain Date Jul 9 19B1 Subject a Y ._x• Procedures for Huntington Central 'Park �r Pursuant..to l-ths requcsit by Vick tforris, Senior'Department Analyst, acquisition by P' xU66ae and eminent domain procedures to acquire encyclopedia lots for H.C:P. are as follawa: 1.� + Obtain.,izidependent ,fen' apprsiis3a19 and secure title reports--'rlitl ation Ruarantee'�,:" Z.• Abtaln a-•determination frosa the Planning Commission thin tne'pr'opoged Acquisition •'; "Is in conformance with,;.the general plan. ; : •r�, li; Poriaa 'off r to'u .•,, , r t. ,1 •3 -,f, 1 c equine'rsust'be made co'owners'at•FM as' appraised.' ':Negotiation r through a city land acquisition agent. 4. When and if efforts to acquire by purchase fail., the City Attorneyea office oends out required notices by first class mail to each owner of record whose property is to be acquired and ahall state all of the following Information: a. Intent �of the governing body to adopt a �t000lution of Necessity. b. Legal. deucriptione and diagrams of the property to be acquired. c. The right of such person to appear and be heard on the matter at the noticed hearing. d. Make clear that the gearing must precede adoption of resolution. 5. PreparE-a request. to this office requesting the preparatlon ,uf a Resolution of Need 'and Necessity for.Council approval and a copy of City Council procedures for hearing cn the resolution. A public entity may not commence an eminent domain proceeding until its governing body has adopted a Resolution of Necessity, g � of the •ublic, entit may.'ado t a Re 'i'li8 - overttin 'body, public,- Y �.Y. P solution of Neaessity,ronl •. 'after,the governing body; has .given each'•'person whose property .:a, to be, acquired by,,eminent domain.and ,whose nave- aind addresis appears: on the,last Equalized County 'Assesamerit' Role. Notice and ,arreasonable,;opportunity' to, appear and be,heaxd'on the matter. ' Objections•will'oniy;be heard-on the "rl'hi' to, take. " objections to the'FMV offer to acquire will be the subject; of later. litigation. 6. ` The public`hearing is held. Resolution shall,`be adopted by a vote of two-thirda (fi�►c) 'of all the members of the governing body unless a greater vote is required by statute,' c::arter or ordinance. 7. Eminent domain procee dings cocmnence. ,. Re aeide�ttiance muse be rovide' If necessctr _ $• p y pursuant to Gant 57260 et. sse re ts, businesses, ece. . , t••rtr.7.gYt'.:i4•.�ar:srxtvar.....w - _ --- i r F0i 1 CITY OF HUNTIN1GTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION 4 C %%GiUUKit ! _ To Vick Morris From Hill Holman Subject GENERAL PLAN CONFOPWANCE Date July 9, 1981 � CITY`-OWNED ENCYCLOPEDIA LOTS ! ti • On July 7, 1981 the Plunning Commission found your E request to declare, as surplus 23 City-owned encyclopedia lots located south of: Ellis Avenue between Edwards and Goldenwest Streets to be in confor- mance with the General Plan. This item may now be submitted, with appropriate environmental documentation, to the City Council for final approval. l UHipj • f,t t ; +a'>�as.its4��ir•T+'KTiT%.'..�Z�ww�l'K"S�xr+GCJ F"�i.5'4°aL�'i2ICff�ti4Rs,�:t�'t0»•k+ws.•.�------- - —»�.+..a...+++...«t.�... .. —....»..... .....,...�..,,.,.• �J ,.; it ` •. }rl `;� ', t t + T y' 'r 1 f f � t +>5•' T J X t 1X• �A /'f t��� I 1 '• r t _+t r f .✓ ijt r t(i +X7 �rrr � ( !� •I. { t,+.' , �• . .�+ I ,• ,t eft L, ( 7�•X+{p 4• l �.. 1 l l, a ` 3 _ Jay '. s.Qom:. , ��•:, t �,r � •'�' e - I � r .1 t J�SIX t � + ,'•, � ' ' _ F ` •�,+ rl �(X t� � .. •.r ti' T• � ,t - t f a.OTICE OF DETli RAf INATION [EE A. 011MIC11, Ccuuly Clerk NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a determinatipn b h,4s� , ��, '• . Depu been made with respect to the below des project. project. APPLICA14T City of Huntington Beach/Community Services papAr&Ment ADDUSS P.O. Box 190, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Reach, CA, 96248 PROJECT TITLE lib 9 L 17 _.._._,_.,._.._. PROJECT DESCRIPTION To acquire 7 9 encyclapedia lots LOCATION Goldenwesit and Ellis Streets The above described project was: APPROVED ONE DIF&PPROVED ON '1 BY: �... Lo --al * Discretionary Body$ The. pro; c't wi�.l, C will, not, have a significant effec n*ha environment. r r , 1 If approved, having,a significant effect, a statement of Overxiddi.nq , Considerations is attached. .M .En it nmental Impact Report was prepared for this �roject -i p 'to the previsions .of CEQA (EZR # ) . t �) A Negative>pecl'aratioR was preparQd ,for'.this-pro ec pursaar�t ' to :the 'prdVi6iona of•'CEQA. A capy'• of the, Negative Declaration r (Envkidnmeatal Clearance Report) is attached. %? The EIR'Js "available fore-review at the City cf 1i��ntington Beach- ; Department `of' D•evelopment Services Environmental Resources' Section.' �� . •DATE -MAILED. SIGN£D: 4 TITLE. .t 1 -A,5.C;04, .Anl}.1�'��:. y ;r 4 ` ' !yµL s , , t ' r } F t j• t t .. � C try > l!�,. > r , MI�JU'1'!s5 HUNTENGTON IWACII PLANNING COI-MISSION Council Chambers - Civic Carter. 2000 Main Street i Huntington !leach, California TUF:SDAY, KhY 20, 1900 - 7:00 PM COmaSSIOtuMs minsrwe: Winchell, Xenefick, IIazil, Greer CoMI-IrSSYUNERS ABSENT: Porter, Dauer CONSULT CALENDAR: � The :ninuton of the meeting of May G, 1980 , were mulled 'Prom the consent: agenda for separate action. 1 ON MOTION nY (,JT NCIIELr. AND SECOND BY RENFrICK TIli: MINUTES OP 14AY � 6, 19UG, !'IL'113 A!'PROVKD AS TIUINSCRIAED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE- : AYt:.ti: tVii:che11, KeneJ:ich, Daz.:l ► � A13GNNT t Porter, Dauer ABSTAIN: Greer � I ' xoi ' o ' r ccneCick as to,, then responnd'to questioning f a c d-irf,ercnce 'bet:wenri . the conformance praseiit:ly' bof6re the 'Cammission t:hw are{ii'is,it.i.o�: ur "siila11. IoL•s north nf Glli::; t+venue and the � ! reory`et '-Alchi::c iI. Lnb.thelad''.1F a 'pzs,oi- Meeting, Lbghl Counsel `Jim C z , tFEerences in j3resQntr zoning, General- 'Plan des.igna t:ici;�n, tied ;� uxpose of the proposed 4icq't1J.Si bons 071 ch make it: 'iiosslble for •khe Commission to act ot: the present .request but not on the pr- One. OW MOT *4 AY 71,17NCIII:JX.AND !.SECOND, BY GRI:TritM, TII AIEMAINING XONST NT. ', . C/tLpf1r)AR,_ CONSIS'rhNG OF A ;I'XfiDltIG .;OF- COiVCOIMIANCIs FOR ACQUISITION t or. 'SMALL ,0TS NORTH 0!? .E'LLT.S '11VEMIL (CEP t30-7) , nKSOLUTION 1260, f` ANDRf:SOE UTIUN ;1257, 14'AS 'AMCIVEO 1 Y :.X FOLL014ING VOTES j `Sii III ': t,, l3nzil, Greer t4nrS,i Ii��iiefic�s hTiSI;M'1'• 1101:,ter, Dauer AUS'TAlt�: 'None ORAL •COMMUNICA'rIOfJS:. too no i JI SECTION&L DISTRICT MAP 34- 5-II •isr 1 N�y `/■ I /y�•1�-�, !T ICGEND v ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA USE OF P17OPERTY MAP Isle• " L !�j� 1. '-'� ��l:.�; • .1t! � � ;•.r, ; i j ; �� � � , } iFF 1 �iG: a )• .t_i is }' __ �.� ' fie/�� �.(, {� . .�(`� c .. + •. � � ow Lo ~` •,yam • it ! _._. � j � �. � (' •• • AV E �'�•�..�. `"'�'.."ww�w...wnyl•F1Y.Tw.twM+rrw_w--..�.. �, . ,S�t� fj]�� • Ir 1 1 p•• t /'� ' Ott 1 , � r � r• 01 1• • OPEN "oPACE/ ivaw CONSt:RVATION ELEMENT AMENDMENT 80--m 1 It's UGUST 1980 r0 vironmantal impact Report 80- 4 t hinting#on + ach plan in clivsav _ . �h.�w�u+�aa+asM.+....+•�...v�wstrs•a.a/v�L'lrCKf1YG.•►tC.t�S3J RlY::3Ri1 Ya.•.�+r•.•. ,.—,•, •. .,•,�.,,,,,,��.,�„�. •f . . uw+e�.'ctttit.�.:...:.:['i3C.�wfS2l4�x1�tYt3L1!}w"'R . 1. •' r. (I� • � . .. ' .. ;. f , t'F'. OPEN SPACE AND CONSERVATION ELEMENT AMEi4DMENT 80-1 TAB!E OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Envlranmental Status 3 2.0 AREAS OF CONCERN 5 2.1 Central Park Expansion 7 2.11 Background 7 2.1.2 Central Park Plaming History 8 291.3 Huntington Central Park Conceptual Master Plan i 1 2.1.4 Open Space and Conservation Policies 15 2.1.5 Bobo Chico Regional Linear Park l8 2:14 Ellis Avenue Realignment 18 2.1'7 Econ6mic Consideratlons 20 2.1.8 'Recommendation 24 2.2 Miscellaneous Changes 24 2.2:1 Trinidad Island Parks 2k 2.2.2 Gibbs Park Site 24 2.2.3 Carr Park. 26 2.2.4 McCblien`ParkSite 26 2.2.5, Manning Park:Site ,:, 26 2.2.6 Westmont'Park Site 26 2.2.7 Old Civ!G Center.Site .26 2.2.8 Edlann Hight-oWay, east of Brookhurst Street 26 2.2.9. Pc•?ersnn School Park Site 27 2.2.10 Goldenweit/Palm Park Sites 2: 30; �ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 29 3.1`'.'. ;PhA!cal.Featu'res,, 30 3 12 Geology/S 3.1 1 T0PogroPI-Y/S6il5 -- 30 . . rismicity 30. •�� Hydrolagy/Drbinoc3a 30 3 1.4 'Veg tatiort/Wildilfe/Mchltnt 31 3 7 LdMd Use'and Zoning 31. 3.3` Trafflc'and Circulation 31' 3.4 "'Alf duality. 31 3.5 Noise 31 3.6 "Archbeology 31 3.7 • Pubiic Services 32. .3:8 . Economics ', ,32 309 'Alf ernof Ws . 32 i .3.10 Ralatlonship 6'etween Local'Sh'''t Term Uses of 33 r • an's EnvlronnTe:it,and the Maintenance'and ' Enhancement of Laig'Term Produativltye r :1 1 ! Irreversible or hiii4oidabfe EnW rimental Changes 33 3.12 Growth Inducing Impacts 1 - �•"�.rvN11=X�f}ti1Gr�^r"vY�.7«1:'k.{ik.v:ZJ:.T.S.'".:.�>;.G'l..^R'.+ssera�..,..-............._ __ •_ - - � i ., �. i 'i _ • t : - 1 1 _ T. i r '- .ti11 - ti it�. •fl r i _ 1. `t -•: tt. 0 I s'swls .I 1 1 {A iNTRUDUCTION I This report.represihts Amendment 80-1 to the,Open Spoce�and Conservation � . Ekrnenl;• or',the ,Huntington „Beach General Plan. Dw OFen Spo� and ; ConservationElement-was adopted 'as a mandated element of the General Plan In 'December;' 1973i`'this Is the third .amendment to :the elemenr since its original adoption. , The' amendment proposes a number 'of changes to the CJpen Space and Conservation Plan, which is shown In Figure 1-1. = r y 7he-primary area'addressed. Jn-this.arms idment 13 the arealsouth of Huntington ' ' ark'between:-Edwards.and ,Gothard Streets., •Within`this arLQ' ,' 65.3 Ge�itroi�,P, .,, acres are; proposed to:be redesignated from Alarmed,op ' 'spoce:devGiopment to recreati6ii, either.of which"is consistent vilth the Land'Use Element open'spoco designatlai' for:* the arena, 1n addition, the recreation designatlon is also pr oaed:#or, a�10-ocre Industrial area at the northwest corner of. Ellis Avenue op , and Gothcrd ,Street. An_:amendment to the Land, Use'.Element :proposing redeslgrmticn"of.'. the:industrial are'' to . open space is concurrently being processed f cr the Ellis-Gothard,site. , 1, ( The intent of't6i proposed:Open Spore o'id1 Canserwtion:*Elernent amendment ? is' to eici a W Huntington Central Park by 75.3'ocres to r$flect4he circa lncludcd in ,the 'schematic master plan for Central Park• now.'being'Aprapared by the { Commtnity Services Department. Adoption of this''amendment would enlarge , r".".t+wrs++#�rttatX't:�t�.1�h1Z?ler. ' .1^..'r:ta+v..l...-.-•-...._ .....� \�: r r 1l r 2, s 4. • . 0 5'• r rho tiusn�,aa asrtw.a►soo►au �- OPEN SPACE AND • � ���t�I/�i'0►J�DEs+Hi1M1EN •� P.MMR'+R.....r R..wR{}adwtw• r�..;eor CONSERVATION PLAN j L - _ � s ari:hbrtrxdl'ai. �:f«.lnd+ntn:riKit►7 the Central fork area designated for public acquisition tr: the General Plan, and in so doing would Increase the range of funding sources available to the , City for additional park land acquisition. Redeeignation of the area of concerti to recreation would also prohibit residential construction, which is allowed under the planned open space development designation. The proposed amendment will be analyzed In terms of its Impacts on: land uses and zoning in the area, the conceptual master plan for Huntington Central Park, the alignment of Ellis Avenue, the Balsa Chico regional linear park, the City's open space and consPrvatlon policies, and fiscal and envirairriental concerns. A number of miscellaneous changes to the plan are also proposed. These changes, which lnc;ude the addition, relocatiam, and deletion of several neighbiwhood porkay are summarized in Section 2.2. 1.1 Environmental Status Section 15148 of the California Environmental impact Report Guidelines states that "the requirements for an EIR on a local general plan element or s amendment thereof will be satisfied by the general plan or clement document and no separate EIR will be required If: i) The general pig• addresses all the points required to be in on EiR by Article 9 of the State EiR Guidelines, and 2) , The documen" contains a special sectloi or cover .;hest identifying where the ; genera I plan document addresses each of the points required:' f4 In' conformance with these guidelines, this document will 'constitute, the envirotirr ental impact, report for Open Space and Conservatinn Elemehli . Admendraent 60-1. The environmental setting and significant `impacts f; associated with the varlous issue areas are addressed in the analysis .oP amendment (terns..,In Section 2, as are clterm ves and feasible mitigation measures .to minimize significant effects. Section 3 addresses -the overall !� environmental changes related to 1) the relatianNp between loon) short term uses of Mbn's•envirc;nient and the maintenance and enhancement of lone term productivity, 2) irreversible or unavoidable environmental changes, and 3) , growth inducing impacts. . ...t•'..,tl.«,.r+l.'1!:y'T�.YL'I:�.iY::R1L`t:L'Z�cIKiKs�•t�....w..•-.w,�--...... ....-.... ..,.. ,._ ..,..__....�...—�•....e.r�r.rwl►+.tYuwvex�waF.virew _ i• i W r i, r VV 2.0 AREAS OF CONCERN { The primary area of concern encompases 75.3 gross acres of Iend.lucated north of Ellis Avenue between Edwards and Gothard Streets (Figure 2-1). The proposed amendment was Initiated by the City Council as a result of a joint meeting with five Community Services Commission to review the conceptual master plan for the development of Huntington Central Park, At that meeting, the i7irector of Community Services Indicated that a distinct i planning area needed to he established in order to prepare a comprehensive park plan. On March 3, 1980, the City Council adopted Resolution 4853, I ustablishing Ellis Avenue between Edwards end Gothard Streets as the southern park boundary for the sole pure-ise of conducting planning and feasibility studies. The resolution also directed staff to initiate amendments to the Lcnd Use and Open Space and Conservation Elements of the General Plan to consider a permanent expansion of Huntington Central Park. The following � suctions analyze the various planr'+ing Issues surrounding the proposed boundary I Change. ► t. �I�I 1�� t t al . wia r.^-r••. •-• �• �� 1 r r-r -. t , ,.—l*=1 �t� � f + v.} .# - �. .ma's L...IZ..L - +• _ ...+,. w _ � �..._•-�._.._.....,,.,,.�,.�,,,f ✓"' TA t lJ R It Huntington Ct entral Park r .+cx�- .aarsq�".t�• i��#►'i of °omA� a woo • --- Proposed Expansion { 75 gr ac) _ left 6 Figure 2-1 2.1 Central Park Expansion 2.1.1 Background The Open Space and Conservation Element contains a statement of the City's goals and policies concerning the conservation .ind management of natural resources exnd the preservatio,i of open space for recreational and other compatible uses. These policies are reflected graphically in the Open Space and Conservation Plan diagram, which designates seven categories of open space and conservation arenst resource preserves, scenic corridors, recreation areas, neighborhuod parks, water areas, resource production arras, and planned open space development areas. This amendment request involves redesignoting some 65.3 acres from a planned open space development area to a recreation area as well as adding 10 acres of recreation area to the Plan. 1 the recreation area designation applies to all public cmd private park and recreation arenas that are community-wide or regicrxil in nature. Neighborhood parks are not Included under this designation, which ;s intended to reflect large open areas and active recreaticnn facilities such as t1v beach, regional and' community parks, recreation centers, aid gaff courses. Huntington Central Park Is depicted --n the Open Space aril Conservation Plan Qs a 297.3-acre recreation area. The City currently awns all property within the existing park boundary with the exception of a number of encyclopedia lots. Approximately 180 acres of Huntington Central Pork leave -vtn developed, leaving 55 acres west of Goldenwest and 62 ocres east of Goldenwest undeveloped. Within the amendment area of concern, the: City currently aA-ns a fiver-acre parcel and j about IM scattered encyclooedla lots totaling just over six tyres. The 1 remaining 85 perc2nt of Fireperty in the area of concern is privately owned. The planned open spare development designation applies to special resource areas and permits open space and other kinds of uses, including residentiol, which maximize open space benefits by incorporating natural resources into - development plans. The 65.E acres being considered for amendment from planned open space development are separutmi into two areas. A 40-acre area immediately north of Ellis Atve:nue between Edwards and Goldenwest Streets Is predominantly vacant with the exception of a private stables at the corner of Ellis and Goldenwest, Iwo mobile homes and several abandoned buildings. Nine i active oil wells are scattered throughout. this 40-acre area. A 25.3-ocre area i northeast of Ellis and Goldenwest now includes a mushroom farm, are automotive repair shop, three dwelling units, and a farm lamer camp. Both of these areas are propowd to be redesignated for recreational use. The 10-acre site located at the northwest corner of Ellis Avenua and Gothaid I Street Is not presently shown on the Open Spcne and Conservation * Plan diagram. This ar om Is designated for Industrial use in the Land Use clement and is currently used for compost spreading and rock crushing operatiotrs. This amendment .onsiders designation of this site as a recreation area 7 r e,ri1.73.'�1..�:f'3::f..1R1...r:w.N.�.�'�.Z,1� .-.... .:..•...T�r __r-..w..u. 7 1 ¢?1 t .....�..;. , ..,,_ . .. .. ... ..'ti: �..,.. l7.lT. for inclusion into Huntington Central Park, An amendment to the Land Usc Element has also hem initiated to consider redesignating this site from industrial to open space, consistent with the remaining Central Park area. The prq-used amendment raises several important issues concerning present and future uses and ownership of pteperty within the area of concern. Redesigrwtion of t1u- area from planned open space development to recreation would limit the range of allowable uses cn public and private property within the area of eoncem by elisnlnattng the possibility of residential and other non-recreational uses. The recreation oma designation would allow the City to use local, state, and fedora) park acquisition arvi development funds to acquire additianal property for Inclusion into Fluntington Central Park. Without the recreation area designation, the City can still buy property, however, general fund monies must be used, ' i Another issue to be resolved in considering the proposed amendment involves the importance of Huntington Central Park within the context of the City's overall open space, parks, and recreation plan. The expenditure of park funds to enlarge Huntington Central Paric may affect the acquisition arrJ development of planned neighborhood parks. At the present time, the Open Space and Cmservatlon Element calls for the City to acquire 10 additional three-acre neighborhood parks as well as developing 11 neighborhmi sites and one community park site it-Kit have already been acquired or are under. joint powers agreement. Maintenance costs are also a critical concern, and are discussed further in Section 2.1.7. In order to better understand the nature and role of Huntington Central Park In the context of the City's open spcx:e and reereaticxr plan, a brief history of park planning efforts folic.ws. 2.1.2 Huntington Central Park Planning History Planning for the acquisition and development of land for a central city park 1 surroundinn Huntington Lake began in the mid,-1960's. Over the years, the ultimain size of the pnrk aril the nature of uses and activities within tho,pork have been the subject of much public interest cad debate. The 1966 Darks, Open Spaces, Schools, nrxi Recreadon Element to the Master Plan of Land Use called for a central city lake aid natural area of 65 acres, to include a natural hlstory.museum, a wildlife center, and possibly an adjacent public golf course, This plan further recommended that shnuid the opportunity arise to acquire ':,' property In the area at a reasonable rate, the City Should consider additional acquisition. Active recreational uses were to be located at at least three communHy parks and recreation centers, one of which was proposed for thi3 southeast corner of Talbert Avenue and Goldcnwest Street, P .,•t ew ENS F , r - Bu • In 1969, a specir.l bond election was held, in whit+, the voters of Huntington Beach ovewrwhelmingly opproved the use of general obligation bonds to � finance the acquisition and development of the C.'ity's park program. The � ultimate park system proposed at that time consisted of 32 neighborhood s parks, six larger community parks, and a central city park covering 147 acres - a regional facility to offer multi-use recreational opportunities. The 1969 conceptual plan for Huntington Central Park is shown in Figure 2-2. In 1970, the City Council authorized the issuance of $6 million in bonds and hired the firm of Eckbo, Deon, Austin, and Williams: Landscape Architects to design Central Perl<. The EDAW design plus incorporated both natural and manmade foatures to create a diversity of recreational opportunities including hilcing, fishing, camping, canoeing, picniking, tennis, basketball, and golf. Additionally, a central city library, multi-use recreation building, parking structure, Indoor-outdoor restaurant, tea house, and ampitheater were also proposed In the EDAW plan to integrate cultural opportunities within Central Park to complement the recreational activities. In the early 1970's, a citywide Policy Plan was developed -to establish goals and principles to guide the city's growth and development. This plan called for a central city pork of 200-400 acres that had qualities of a regional pork by nature , of its large, open natural areas, trees, and lakes, but also of a community park to serve the local community's recreational needs. With the 1971 EDAW Design Plan as a guide, a three-phase acquisition program was proposed, expanding Huntington Central Park to 450 acres at ultimate development and Including areas both south of Ellis Avenue and west of Edwards Street. l` Concerns about the costs of acquiring, developing# and maintaining such a large park area prompted a financing study in 1973, which indicated alternative configurations of an expanded park, proposed realignments of Talbert and Ellis Avenues-, and recommended several strategies for financing acquisitions. While the majority of the existing park area was designated for ! passive use, plans for the area immediately north of Ellis Avenue included.an 18-hole golf course, equestriaan trails, and an equestrian center. Park planning efforts were also influenced by the adoption of the Plisse i Land Use Element of the General Plan in December, 1973 and subsequent amenuments. On this plan, the area north of Ellis was,shown as the proposed expansion of Huntington Central Park. The area south of Ellis was designated f . a planning reserve, indicating that additional planning was necessary, to determine the most desirable land uses for the area, which had been In►.tustrial prior•to the deletion of the proposed Route I Freeway. The entire;area.south of Huntington Central Park was analyzed In.the M jrch, 1975.amendment;to the ! Land Use Element, The recommended land use plan showed Ellis Avenue realigned 660 feet south of its existing alignment,,and the area north of the C I. reallgned highway designated for the possible future exprnsion of Huntington Central Park. or other open space uses to buffer the paric f:om estate density ; + residential uses to the south. However, at a study session on 9 ...,.w.et., .Ly17,^. •k. ^ti; .,_.._ ..-�.. _-,. .-_. .., .r._.«......o..w^......—...r..rs.x..Lrnr_s .14tvur.. •. ref..,r-r.ew.•.r.•.«+^........... • Ilk LEGEND t MIGRATORY BIRDS 10 .PICNIC .AREA `~ 1 CAMPING 11 FISHING , �' 3 COMMUNITY CENTER 12 BOATS J ,• d 4 RUSTIC VILLAGE 13 RECREATION BUILDING 5 LIBRARY 14 NATURE AREA E MULTI-PURPOSE FIELD 15 ARCHERY RANGE ) � 1 7 BASKETBALL 16 MARKSMANSHIP RANGE s I` B VOLLEY TALL 17 THEME PLAY AREA -1-" ( , 9 TENNIS 11 GARDENS az 0 W- V '(Ll, ., TALOERT N. 99 of 10 FcS17+ l 11 10 —KIi, / 1 j y+1 ) nsru iUrt %•�1j � N l' 11 � r � � .bnd�•w+ 1 1� I t 1 11 � ► ! . J �j Q \� Dv%1gn'cancepI'' f the Jp1roposed 147•acre Huntington Control Park, fa 6o hnnnced by the"!ponds described in Ail: allicial if clement.The f1rer arras outlined in block are presently award by the city, j • r. ! -WO 1969 Conceptual Flan 1� Figure 2--2 AwaN.•w�—.w�r,'�••as..�1'.�'1 ASV T1..lwM.N• �..._._.....-_......._.__... •.. ..,. . ....... ..............�_��_�-_._..._... .... _..... t i fit; January 20,`i975, the City Council directed that the park boundary be fixed 660 feet north of the existing Ellis Avenue alignment. The area between the park boundary and Ellis was subsequently designated for open space uses, allowing public and private agriculture, recreation facilities, parks, single family homes on one-acre parcels, and resource production. 'rhe Open Space and Cor aervation Element adopted In December, 1976, reflects the park boundary as established by the City Council in 1975. After the passage of Proposition 13 in 1978, the City Council directed staff to pursue alternative funding sources to finance development and maintenance of City parks. In response, staff proposed that Central Park be divided Into passive, non-revenue producing active, and revenue producing active sections (Figure 2-3). The prospect of developing revenue producing uses within the park In addition to passive areas makes a larger park area more viable, and the City Council agreed to Include an,additional 75 ac:res within 'the Huntington Central Park planning m-ea for the purpose of developing a master plan and studying the fusibility and compatibility of more active recreational uses. The master plan as it presently exists Is shoe,tn in Figure 2.4. The propcaed conceptual master plan foe Central Pari< and amendment to the Open Space and Conservation Element raise several important issues. The Inclusion of restaurants, shops, and other commercial uses within Huntington Central Park may be considered somewhat of a departure frorn the character of the, park"originally proposed and may not be feasible given potential' restrictions on.'state .end federal monies originally used to acquire the park. The compatibility between oct Ive and passive areas of the park and the park's orientar lon (community vs. regional) are Important concerns to consider in developing the conceptual master plan for Huntington Central Park, but are ) not significant issues with the proposed amendment for two reasons: the c recreation area designo',im is flexible so as to allow either active or passive recreation, and the conceptual plan is preliminary; both and location and mix of uses proposed may change as a result of economic fensibl lity analysis. L If, in developing the conceptual plan, it is determined that active recreational uses are.not compatible with tha natural setting and unique topography of the amendment area,'o reasonable alternative would be to designate an additional community prrk site elsewhere in the city to support the desired intensity"of ;r• recreational uses. 2.1.3 Huntington Central Park Conceptual Master Plan _The ,conceptual mutter play know being prepared by the Community services � Depo-tment proiposes a varlety of uses for the area of concern Thls -section j disr issen relates tlx conceptual plan in relation to existing conditions and uses I ' within the urea of cencern. The 1 S+ acre area located northeast,'of.Ellis Avenue and Edwards Street is charaaterized by, rol ling topography:-'and a natural draw which runs generally toward Huntington Lake. The five-acre; area t adjacent to Edwards Sheet Is owned by the Huntington Pacific Corporation t and has five oil wells and two tank enciosur�s on the site. The rematning 10 1 s 11 ...1 t t~f 1 ...:., .•..:�:.7.;ll.-w......-....._. ... .. ..._....�.w.-�.�..�+_w..s•T`.lL..:'.. ..:.'ri•:"t•Mf.i:rxK"K�3Jl/i.;A.jJ-.`w1.I'-t.�/w+..�M� ;p ••: -► 1 Mum 1M1PM1Dell1 I fillw•v"%) •I L- ' I i } • w f � I PASSIVE RECREATION ff� � ,� \' �. saaere�sooeifev4oaaa � r , ° ' ' • ° ' ° - - NON-REVENUE-PRODUCING ACTIVE RECREATION I '� os000nga• II' I�'E .• „ � O mDl1�000U � ,.� �, C O 0 • r f � ` REVENUE-PRODUCING � ACTIVE RECREATION CF-C ' 1 I I I 12 Figure 2-3 jf i ..__._...... _....�.. .__ ...._.. _.........•.........,.-ate,-�:-..___,_...._._..-.._ ... . _..___.___._...__.._._-..�.: __.. „ • ■ acres are comprised of encyclopedia lots, and while there are no active vielis In this area, several old buildings remain on the site. The schematic master plai for Huntington Central Park proposes that this 15-acre area be utilized for equestrian stables and an arena for exhibitions. On either slde of the draw, the land rises to an elevation of nearly 70 feet above sea levels both of these high points afford commanding views of Huntington Lake, the Library and Huntington Central Park, as well as the city and San Gabriel Mouotains in the distance. The schematic master plan shown in Figure 2-4 Illustrates the proposed realignment of Ellis Avenue to connect with T(ilbert Avenue at Edwards Street. One of the advantages of the proposed alignment is the use of the natural draw to provide a grade separation to allow a trail to pass under 'the roadway, thereby eliminating the need for an at-grade trail crossing. The Ellis realignment is discussed further in Swtion 2.1.6. The City owns the sevai-acre parcel immediately east of the encyclopedia lots mentioned above. This parcel slopes up gently from the north and south to a summit of 65 feet, and like the previous area, offers scenic views to the north and east. One active oil well and a tank enclosure ore located an this parcel. The schematic master plan proposes that this area remain open for either a frisbee golf area or a small pitch and putt golf course. Immediately east of the City-owned parcel is another 10-acre area comprised of encyclopedia lots. Much of this area is a ravine which runs between elevated areas to the northwest and southeast. Two active oil wells and two } tank enclosures are located in this area. The southeast corner of 'this area is f flat and elevated, and currently support port of u stables operation. The schematic master plan proposes to develop this corner as a kiddie piaylend i with soft sculpture and play apparatus for children aged 1-8 years. A giant watersiide is also proposed to be built into the hillside of the ravine. The 10-acre parcel at the northwest corner of Ellis and Goldenwest is owned by A. C. Mart-in, who operates a stables an the southern portion of the site. Two mobile homes, one active oil well, and a tank enclosure are also located an the site. This area is relatively flat, sloping gently to the north. The conceptual moster plan proposes to place a small restaurant and :ports-oriented shops on this site and parking for 250 cars. The 25.3-acre area just east of Goldenwest Street proposed for' inclusion into Huntington Central Park Is dominated by the Ocean View Mushroom Growers Forms-, one of the lost remaining agricultural operations'In the city. A small automotive repair shop, a single family home,•• and a "farm lob or camp are located on Ellis Avenue, along with three active all wells and two tank enclosures. This large area slopes gradually from an elevation of 60 feet at �. Ellis Avenue to 40 feet at the north end. Along the eastern edge of this property, the Irma drops off steeply into Sully-Miller Lal(e, which has a water elevation of minus two feat. The schematic' master plan proposes AM)k 13 ti. t i ' s ,I 1 Imo" 4 $ . / I VIP.ON 111% I .F .. .'. Mvl t CF-F U UIL--% vi•L•11111 i PASSIVE AREA /7777 v H r , (7T, • M � 'I NATURE AREA lull _ •r� SPORTS L f E' •-- . \. am riLLO TALStIIT j ... vr COMPLEX i . •�� UINI DIKE - Y�� •1••� TRAILS f y . - . 001.F 1 PARKIIIO DRIVING MODEL AREA RAIIGERS \ YMCAPOL •�'.� STot FIA ECA70 fl �� PICNIC ADV[NTIME < / PLATEAU $ FRISDEE TENNIS PLA\'OROI)r CF-C AREA WU£TOA ROLLER RV I•/� r /,.�.wlr•r ARE '�� SKATING SPACES a {{ 9 Id 230 f EOUESIRIAH AREA y�. _� A V �. IDDIE W PS SPACES lY r` r #• PROPOSED RESTAURANTS L h7i Proposed HCP Master Plan 14 Figure 2-4 ....+. .. .-._.. � -- .1•IYAv./Mf'..3.f:Ji. .�....1.y4'..F...�/I.v w•�._..._._.. .-_.. _.. _...w...r_ •...�wr+w... �. _.-... �- ."-._ .... .. y�w.�gkllr;. ' l ciJiv V to out and terrace this area to provide compirxj spaces for 570 recreational vehicles oriented to the lake. This area, which is also proposed to accommodate weekend swap meets from September to May, is to be the major revenue-producing element of the park. A batting cage is proposed to be located Just north of the RV campground. The 10-acre area located at the northwest corner of Ellis Avenue and Gothard Street is privately owned and is currently used for a rocf< crushing operation a .d a composting area for the mushroom farm. This area is relatively flat, dropping off sharply into Sully-Miller Lake. This area Is proposed to be developed as a second recreational vehicle campground with 230 spaces, also terraced back from and oriented to the lake. The conceptual master plan of Huntington Central Park assumes that all properties within the park boundary will be acquired by the City of Huntington Beach within a 10-year period. Once acquired, the property is to be developed by the City and the majority of activities operated by private concesslomires. Revenues from active' recreational uses will help defray the City's maintenance and operating costs. The economics of the proposed amendment are discussed it more detail in Section 2.1.7. 2.1.4 Open Space and Conservation Policies The previous sections have attempted to provide some background concerning the history of open space planning in the city and a familiarity with the proposed amendment. This section analyzes the request in relation to ?he ' stated goals, policies, and objectives of the City's adopted General Plan. Briefly Mated, approval of the requested amendment to the Open Spoce and Conservation Element would enlarge the ultimate area of Huntington Central Park from 297 to 373 gross acres. All but i0 acres of the area (n,questlon are currently designated for planned open space development, which allows private nonrecreational uses, including residential. Approval of the requested amendment would, restrict allowable uses In'the area r. of concern, and would also allow the City to Use park .acquisition and development funds, as well as state and federal funding scurcros, to,,:acquire property in the area. The amendment is being considered, cancurrently,with the approval of a schematic master plan of uses•for Huntington Central park. As such, the uses.and activities proposed .in the master plan,:may be used as.a basis far analyzing the amendment request but should ..,be considered Illustrative only. The recreation designation Is sufficiently'flexible to allow a �. range of uses, and'.the schematic master pion Is subject to change. Because• uses proposed In the schematic master plan may.change, the.key.issues to' be resolved with this amendment are the balance of public.and private ownership I within the area of concern and the restriction of residential and industrial uses. ""-'.srT, "::... 'fn..-....-.�....-.�ur+wu U,.+s �l'.: � .r-:'.'.T'rw-•.•,..�..-..-�.�_....ti-,-._..._..�-�,..-....r...ww^ -n_.• i :r •y The Open Space and Conservation Element states the following goals and policies for the city's land resources: Goal: To conserve land resources which enhance the physical, social, and economic life style of the area by: i 1. preserving and protecting outstanding geographical and topographical features; 2. encouraging beautification of oil-producing areas and restoration of nonproductive ell Iand; 3. maximizing the outdoor and environmental potential of the City by providing comprehensive, coordinated recreation, parks, and open space programs that fulfill the needs of all segments of the community; and 4. seeking Joint participation, in all resource categor'es, among all levels of government, private citizens, and involved agencies and organizations. t Goal: To create a product?ve harmony between man and his environment by: ' 1. preserving and protecting areas of significant historic, scenic, and archaeological value; and 2. developing and 'maintaining high standards of visual beauty within all areas of the city. L' The area of concern, with its rolling topography, bluffs, and scenic vista potential, is a unique resource in the city and is worthy of preservation. As all uses phase out of this area and other vacant land in the city is developed, r pressures to develop ihis area will mount. The Open Space and Conservation Element outlines a program of preservation that relies on a combination of public ownership and regulation of private development to achieve the above f . goals and policies. While the City owns a total of approximately l I acres within the area of concern the rime hmeans of regulating development to t reserve U en ace resources is rougrestrictive RA (Re dential Agrlcultu0•and L (Limited ; Use) zoning, which covers most of the area. (see Figure 2-5) ,The intent of file RA district Is to prohibit land subdivision and/or development until the i►: property is rezoned to conform with the Land 'Use Element;of tire';General !I'. Plan. Residential uses are allowed at a density of one unit per acre,- providing { no more than five units are located on any one-parcel of land. Residential uses on lots'loss than one acre in size are prohibited unless the lots abut a,dedlcated street or vehicular easement. The LU district is more restrictive, prohibiting any residential use'and subdivision-and requiring a 14-acre' minimum' site.dr,ea. j Both.the,RA and LU zones are further intended to be temporary or transitional In natute for the purpose of further planning and for zoning or environmentai Issues, While the majority of the area of concern is protected by restrictive zoning, the approximately 12 acres zoned Mi-CD are not as protected.Tft j 16 _._"L— Jx RI I --'l"L--' L1'�.�L•L t _-- I'LR{ r� its Cqt, i MI'-CD i Q lil CE.E AI rrr RA-CD. 8 I,ltt► u a u �. � a l q Rt RI � 111 RI k R1 Is CF_R .•rn.4't T"'• ' RI RI F11 RI Awls I i ,� .•• to I � } CF-R MI-CD 1 RI f g!Rl 3 =;MI''CDCO R1 fit fit RI I RI ni Ri f �...,.. CF-R .�r...r CF—R MI—CD 1 .�:114'TYr �:7M••:: r.l • RA-0-CD M I Yip RA-0-CD r _ r RA-0-CD' ' Ci=rC '. 111 t aaa� snl I= %CB11111811 Am emt II lam III vow LU•o U•n•w L{ro-col [IL"- yLUaCC O� INA•6CG -0• LtfO* RA-0'C�D w MI-CD Ml f 1 i{tai •c0 LU•o• E WE, a•co rl•�o 1; �.. RA-CD MI'O CD '�e�i R.Q-O-CD tltr� RA-O-CDI EXISTING ZONING Al2h MAI Figure 2-�5.- 17 •�*wYw.�"N`�rflrr•nnrrw•+•....+•.-�.•..rr..-.wa�..+1�N�wi..tr/�I:�i'.'i�.�lfM.r.r���. . .. _•...... .. � ...•...�....� �+�_+�.1c�.�M`..I+a.ar.M.`fM..'tYYrr..•l•�I.�.�If MCHV�A^'`}L�(R"��r: 1.he proposed redesignation of the area of concern to a recreation area and subsequent acquisition by the City of Huntington Beach would not guarantee' aey greater degree of open space preservation. In fact, City acquisition and implementation of the conceptual park master plan as presently proposed coAd result In a Lesser degree of preservation of resources, given the punned restaurants, terraced recreational vehicle campgrounds, and other active revenue-producing uses, Because the recreation area designation allows both large natural open areas and active recreation facilities, the current regulation of privately-owned property through zoning may he more In keeping with the goals and policies of the Open Space and Conservation Element. On the other hand, the policy of maximizing the outdoor r.nd environmental potential of the City by providing comprehensive, coordinated recreation, parks and open space programs may be furthered by expanding Central Park to include active recreational facilities. Again, the balance of public and private M recreation and open space opportunities is the key issue to be resolved. 2.1.5 Bolso Chico Regional Linear Park The County of Orange is currently preparing plans for the acquisition and development of a regional park located around the periphery of the Balsa Chico lowlands. The linear park is Intended to act as a buffer between developed areas of H.:ntington Beach and environmentally sen31'1ve wetlands in the Balsa Chico. The eastern reach of the park will incorporc,te and preserve the bluffs of the Huntington Bench Mesa, offering scenic views of the lowlaixis from atop the mesa. Passive in nature, the linear park will provide trails to link Balsa Chico State leach with Huntington Central Park. Both the City and County will acquire land for the linear park, and negotiations are underway for the par--cis shown In Figure 2-6. The transition between Huntington Central Park and the linear park and the provision of a continuous trail system iinking the two would be facilitated by expanding the park to the south to the vicinity of Edwards Street due to the area's topography. Much of the land now owned or planned to ba acquired by the City near Edwards is on a slope; only a small b; -f top area is included In Central Park exi the cast side of th^ stre ot. 2.1.6 Ellis Avenue Realignment The City Council has directed staff to Investigate the feasibility of realigning a portion of Ellis Avenue between Edwards and Gold�unwest Streets. The alignment being considered would curve northward about halfway between Goldenwest and Edwards, bridge the draw and then carve around`ond 'descend the bluff. to tie into Talbert Avenue at Edwards Street. This alignment is being analyzed along with a total circulation system for the linear park area as part of Amendment 80-1 to the Circulation Element of the General Plan. ARM 18 �:, � Cf''fLtli , � ELLIS • ..... ._._ � _.� _._ � —..._ - is lu i d a � r a 1 w GAR FIELD f `� ,i:��►..,.� ; City-owned Property Signal Df:: :cation ;1 Proposed County Acquisition 3 ° Figure 2-6 19 The proposed Ellis Avenue realignment would bisect Huntington Control Park both in its current configuration and if the park boundary were extended south to the existing Ellis alignment, creating a situation similar to that which the City Councll attempted to avoid by deleting Talbert Avenue, through Central Park in 1976. However, with the adient of the linear park concept and expanded open space areas, It would be difficult to maintain a contiguous park area and at the same time provide adequate access and elrculatiot to and around the park. If the proposed realignment of Ellis Avenue Is approved, the southerly expansion of Central Park would facilitate the provision of an unintermpted system '.,if trails from Central Park to the linear park and beach area. This could be achieved by using the natural topography of the encyclopedia lot area to provide a grade sepcyution. (See Figure 2-7) The construction of G bridge across the existing draw would allow trails to pass and-irneath the roadway, eliminating the need for an at-grate iron crossing at Ellis Avenue. Both the existing and proposed alignments of Ellis Avenue are shown on the schematic master plan for Central Park. The realigned Ellis Avenue would separate the equestricn and picnic areas along Edwards Street from the j fr;sbee/pitch and putt golf course area to the east. The effects of realigning Ellis Avenue ai activities planned for Central Park and other Issuers are onnlrzed in the Circulation Element Amendment 80-1 document. i 2.1.7 Economic Considerations �f One of the most important Issues to consider in analyztr+g the proposed dmendment to the :open Space and Conservation Element involves the cost to the City, and its taxpayers, of a-quiring, developing, operating and maintaining an expanded Central Park area. This is a difficult task; while most of the cost factors of supporting a 297-core Central Park are relatively easy to idenilfy in Economic terms, the benefits to thei City and the general public are riot. This section attempts to quantify and compare the costs arA benefits of the proposed expansion of Huntington Central Park. The City of Huntington Beach currently crwns a five-acre parcel nr►d just over six acres of scattered encyclopedia lots within tho- amendment area of concern. In addition, nearly six acres of streets have been or will he dedicated to the City. A totai of 58.6 net acres are to be acquired by the City if the amendment is approved, which include::i 194 encyclopedia lots. The Community Services Deportment estimates that It would cast approximately $7.5 millian to acquire the remaining land, using average estimates of $220,000 er acre of lend zoned MI-CD, $120,000 per acre of RA-O-CD land, and 94,000..per ' encyclopedia lot. Possible sources of funding for acquisition include local park occluisitien and development funds, state and federal grants, local park revenue bands (must be approved by voters), revenues from the ante of s�icplus City-owned property (the 10-acre Terry Park site has been proposed), ! dedication by property owners, and profits from revenue-producing rictivities proposed foe tlx: park RV. campground). Amendment of the; Open e i luras...e.:.r• i 24 ff i i HUNTINGTON LAKE TALBERT , 10 20 ...ao so36 '"' � ,,,•• uj ELLIS .f 4 � i Ei TOPOGRAPHY Im Figure 2-7 .# 21 j i. } { 1 r+Mll,IER • h LAKE a4 450 s a i 0 60 ELL IS i i TOPOGRAPHY �fr •i AI. Ift e 1 ( Figure 2--7 f t' �.t 22 i tr; lb 7 r T i I t } and Conservation Clement to reflect the expanded Park oreu is a necessary prerequisite to the City using park acquisition and development funds and state and federal grants. Without the amendment, only general funds may be used. Once acquired, it is estimated il-ol it would cost the City 1130,000 to $35,000 per acre to develop the park Into a useable recreation area, white retaining its natural terrain and features. Development of buildings, te;rrsiis and basketball courts, and other more active uses would cost even more; however, revenues derived from user fees would offset sortie of the initial development costs for these kinds of uses. Using the above figures, development of the 65 acres (assumes 10 acres lost to streets) wa,uld cost between $1.95 million and $2.275 million. Possible sources, of funding for development Include local park acquisition and development funds oryJ state and federal grants. Once the park area Is acquired and developed, additional monies will be needed for operation and maintenance of the park. According to figures prepared in February 1979, maintenance of Central Pork costs appruximUtcsly, $2,01J0 per acre per year, compared to an avercge of $2,S00 per acre for neighborhood parks, $2,700 per acre for community parks, and $4,IS6 per..ocre for the City beach (based on 1980-81 budget;. Annual operating and maintenance costs for the? . area. proposed to be added to Central Park would be approximately $130,000, although this figure could probably be reduced tatting thy; entire V contiguous-park area into account. " The above cost figures on development, operation and maintenance of, Central I Park are based on the assumption that the area proposed .to be added to Central Park would be developed In much the some fashion as the existing park area-predominantly forgo mtural open areas with some trees and low brush. Development of tfxr park according to the conceptual,master plan`would.no doubt cost a great deal more, given the proposed restaurants, active } recreational uses, and parking areas. Walla the Initial development costs would.be higher, succer.;rul patronage of the proposed uses would help offset operational and n'oin'tenance costs and, possibly help finance phased new development. The projected costs and benefits of a more active park area will � be easier to estimate once a master plan is adopted and will probably play an Important role in shaping the master plan. The City Council has aithorized ' the hiring of a consultant to prepare an economic analysis of the schematic ma ter plan. in addition to the costs oaitiined above, other cost Wi tors involved with designating the area of concern for park purposes Include the potential loss,of ' property taxes an land purchased by the City, the cost of lost ,development opportunities io private owners of affected parcels, and a potential increase In police service. While ,it is relatively easy to project the anticipated economic. cost factors associated with the proposed amendment, the benefits of a larger„Centrai Park 1' area are not as easily quantified, especially In terms of dollars. While the 1,. i 23 r ' A A park may have some beneficial effect on property values In the Immediate area, most of the benefits derived From rect'ea1(onai open space affect the environmental social, and psychological well-being of tho community by protecting valuable resources and providing patisive aroas and relief from intensive urban development. The conceptual master plan being prepared by the Community Services Departrncnt divW-i Central Pork into non-revenue-producing aid revenue-producing se ctionsl as a result, ".()nomlc benefits may be more accurately estimated using the master plat as a basis. Because a master plan has not yet been adopted, only a very general analysis of the balance of costs to benefits can be aerformcd for the proposed amendment. 2.1.0 Recommendation 2.2 Miscellaneous Changes Since the 0pen Space and Conservation Element was adopted `in 1976, a number of a mges have Token place regardin(i tW system of neighborhood parks.. Five now parks }xtve been added and two relocated. In addition, six undeveloped park sites have been recommended l`or relocatlon'or -deletion. The recommended changes to the Open Space and Conservation Plan are summarized below and are shown in Figure 2-9 at the end of this section. 2.2.1 Trinidad Island Parks t In April '197F, the Pirnnlng Commission approved Tentative Tract 8636, a subdiv;slon of 338 single family residential lots. In approving the tract, the City required the dedication of four park arecs and a public walkway aroune, half of ,the manmade•island, shown,in Figure 2-8. These neighborhood parks (t were`named and dedicated in 'March 1979, and should be designated an the Open Space and Conservation Plan. Name Size . Conrad Park 2.7 a--res 2. Trinidad Beach Park 0.7 acres 3. French Pork 0.3 acres + 4. Prince Park 0.2 acres 22.2 Gibbs Park Site i Gibbs Park site, formerly 'called Sims Grove, is a 4.3-acre site located south of } Neil Avenue and west of Graham Street arq,lired by the City In 1975 along with Meadowlark Golf Course. T his site, a portion of which Is covered with a s(gn(flcont grovb of ' eucalyptus trees, is planned for development as a neighborhood park within five yee►s, and should be,designated as such on the i Open Space and Caiservation Plan. � 1 2 4 .._.., .. _ .,—..... .arm,-a-r wa.lfaava .. w�--•... -__. .. _... �_...v+�..�.. ..�..r.. ..._._.. .�: r IN AIL G }''�1. • i' .. +J :A. \ n.�: �[ ;;� •?� it, �u ;; 'j l' 1;�• �11 ��► ` ,,, , / '`�, ••. , r i "lam, CF•R CF•R 1 C16� 3 4 } ti CF C14q ++ ++r� ` awaw a 4.w �4 cFR P ■ ti �+ CF R MILL t Trinidad Island Parks I N Figure '2-0 25 . •tiw�w... �._...-rr-•�..r+w+Nlal A-�:?C:wil:.'�.. �:. .. • ..�.•.a.....n.._ .. ..,.�w.•..r.., ILY0.JJ" .. ' I • r t wrs+� 2.2.3 Carr Perk Carr Park (11790), located at the southeast corner of Heil Avenue and Springdale Street, 1s currently not designated as a neighborhood park on the Plan, although it has been developed for many years. The neighborhood park designation should be added to the water area designation on the Open apace and Conservation Plan. 2.2.4 McCallen Park Site McCallen Park Site 0973) is incorrectly shown on the Plan as being located generally southeast of Yorktown Avenue and Delaware Street. The City has acquired 5.8 acres between Huntington and Delaware Streets at Wichita Avenue for the development of a neighborhood park. The Open Space and Conservation Plan should reflect the actual location of the proposed park. 2,2.5 Manning Park Site Manning Park Site (11974) is shown on the Plan as being generally located southeast of Indianapolis Avenue and Delaware Street. However, a 3.1-acre ; park site was dedicated as a condition of approval of Tentative Tract 10248 in 1978. The actual site is located on the west side of Delaware Street, south of # Detrelt Avenue and should be relocated on the Open Space and Conservation Plan, 2.2.6 Westmont Nark Site Westmont Park 0965) is located north of Heil Avenue and east of Beach Boulevard, outside the City limits, OrigImi lly, the City had planned io utllixe a 'portion of Westmont School or acquire an :additional 2.5-acre site fora , nelghborhood park to serve adjacent residential. areas in Huntington Bead. , Subsequently, the Westminster School District developed a fxt dll.nature center of the school site, eliminating the possibility of a Joint powers ,agreement 'for a t neighborhood park. The Community Services Department no Monger recommends acquiring park sites outstcie the city and has recommended that the Westmont park site be deleted from the Open Space and Conservation Plan. 2.2.7 Old Civic Center Site When the Civic Center was relocated in 1974, the 3.6-acre former site was considered for a neighborhood park (0977). in September, 1978, tho' City Council endorsed the use of this site for the construction of a senior citizen housing project. As plans for the housing project are now being finalized, the park designation should be deleted from the Open Spoct and Conservation Plan. !' 2.2.8 Edison Rtgt-t-of-Way, east of i3rcektYxrsi Street } The Open Space and Conservation Plan designates a neighborhood park site ' within the quarter sectirm located south of Garfield Avenue and east of Brookhurst Street. Because the City has not acquired any land within ,oUm 25 J. ..- i Lb this quarter section, the pork Is proposed to be developed on the Edison transmission right-of-way under a joint power s agreement. However, Edison has for several years leased the right-of-way to Odn Nursery, and the site may not be avaliuble to the City for years to come. A possible alternate location for a neighborhood park is the Lamb School site, which is now leased to the Huntington Beach Union High School District for its administrative offices. The field is used for a soccer proctice field and a portion of the site may be feasible for a hood park. Stuff recommends that the Lamb School site be considered for relaxation of the proposed perk site an the Open Space and Conservation Plan for this quarter section. 2.2.9 Petersen School Pori; Site Peterson School, located south of Indianapolis Avenue and east of Newland Street, Is designated as a neighborhood park site (#920). A three-acre portion of the school's open area was proposed for development of a neighborhood perk under a joint powers agreement. However, the construction of Clapp School for the handicapped an the northern part of the school site precludes the r possibility of developing a neighborhood park at this location. Staff recommends that the designation on this site be deleted from the Open Space l; and Ccnservation Plan. 2.2.10 Gotdehwcst/Palm Park Site, f.• Than Open Space and Ccnservation Plan designates two three-acre neighborhd,d ` ark sites an either side of Goldenwest Street at Palm Avenue (11870 and 967). These`two park sites are recommended for deletion from the Plan due to ;donned Improvements to several other parks and park sites in the immediate , vicinity, including: • addition of lighting for the athletic field old basketball courts at Dwyer ; School • installation of new facilities at the City Gym, Including an offs(te parking"lut development of Huntington Community Park f. possible future development of additional recreational fccilities at the t 17th and Orange site. The emphasis on these other facilities is intended to eliminate the need for the two unocquired park sites (it Goldenwest and Palm. 27 r� , .' , 7 .�.:�.._...,.. _.....,. _ ......._.�.�...ny.;ni':L'�1i1'::1.'tr::Lf�.iL:li Nei..!•t•.!a�eMwanrw.+rs�lrw� .. i:. iii•:.Y:fit.::.-r A _ '+ - , ':, - .. ,' •,. ,:` _ Via. : r r; • • M , _ �''` • `4� ./r t west=nt situ wa'fiyrr ` jt � r �••• `� �d • relocate ` 'jr's e • f tdisas ROW site > • '� w LarO Sctsoo*1 ♦1"s .� r 39 t Add • s . Carr Park i .t� sad • • d Gibbs Fork • + ice s\ 1 .. � . • relocate + ftcc'a1lca Ts-lc • • -i • - r • add Trinidad Island parks a �* delete Petersaa site • * :f 1 %k'.' ((�.� t �t r �' relocate Tl� ark 41 x y, J delete deletn Old figure 2-9 AM LEGM part sitez Civic Center site PRQPOSM OPEN SPACE AND S...C .rd.�. _ ..d � �"'`�0..6 CONSERVATION PLAN .e },Lot+x.d cad (10.Ldxat..PFw»;,.► Siff/{of talkwmr V. ..ate i I I 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS As mentioned in Section 1.1, this document Wnstltutes .she environmental impactreport'for proposed Open Space': mnsd Conservailon.Elemeni Amendment' E 80-1. The environmental setting of , 'the area affected . by the proposed amendment is described'throughwt Secilcn 2.1. Areas of.potential sicnific:ant impacts and possible mitigation measures are: discussed in this section. The � 'y 10-acre site at the -corner •of Ellis Avenue and Gothard Street is also the s*ict Land Use Element Amendment 80-2 and .EIR BD4, which analyze the relative impacts of development of.the site under industrial and open spoce land use deslgnations. A separate EIR will be piepared to evaluate potential imp=ts associated 'with tip schematic master plat for. Central Park. Environmental impacts associated with the, misceilanoious changes are considered insignificant because they amendments, are -proposed to reflect existing conditions or affect unacquired end undeveloped sites. Z r M Y M 1 �swn 3.1 Physical Features 1 3.1.1 Topography/Soils As described in Section 2.1.3, the area of concern Is characterized by small hills and drawn west of Goldenwest Street, and predominantly level areas with j steep cliffs surrounding Sully-Miller Lake to the cost of Goldenwest, The proposed amendment would restrict residential development and would allow public ocqulsition, which generally could be expected to protect the area from development and substantial alteration of the existing (andform. If annexed to Central Park, the area could be developed either as a passive, natural area or with active commercial recreatia ul uses, Including recreational vehicle ; camping, as indicated in the schematic master pinn of Central Park. Any ' alteration of existing topography and solls asociated with development of park activities will be analyzed in a separate EIR. 3.1.2 Geology/Seismicity (' The amendment area is generally located within the Newport-inylewood Structural Fault Zone. Three active faults run through this zone - the north ' and south branches of the Newport-Inglewood Fault and the ©olso-Fairview { Foul1. Tha amendment area lies just south of the Bolsa-Fairview to the west of .Goldenwest Street; however, the fault traverses the Marion property, the Mushroom form site, and the southwest corner of Sully-Miller Lake. The 10-acre industrial site nt the corner of Ellis and Gothard lies just north of the f cult. The Newport-Inglewood Zone is a relatively young fault system comprised of numerous short, discontinuous, and intertwined faults located deep In the bedrock beneath the Drange.County coastal plain. The Bolso-Fairview Fault is one of three known faults In Huntington Beads considered to be geologically ti active and subject to possible future surface rupture. This potential is considered to be greater in the northern portion of the City, and the area,of t concern Is not located within the Alquist-Priolo Geologic Hazard Special Study Y Zone. Liquefaction'potential within the area of concern is considered to be low due to the site's elevation on the Huntington Beach, mesa, lack of near-surface groundwater, and soil with high clay content. Appropriate structural requirements should be imposed by the City io minimize potential earthquake damage, which could include limiting placement of structures within 50 feet of the Balsa Fairview Fault. 3.1.3 Hydrology/Drainoge: The majority of the amendment area drains Into the three natural lakes in " Central Park. The eastern half of the 10-acre site a-. Ellis and Godard drains to Gothard and than south. Redesignation of the aree to recreation is not expected to have a significant impact on existing drainage patterns. r . 30 { t f Y` f p I i 3.1.4 Vegetation/Wiidllfe/Habitat With the exception of the mushroom form, stables, and industrial area, the majority of the amendment area 13 vacant and characterized by low weedy growth. Redesignation of the area for Incorporation into Central Park would most likely bring about replacement of existing vegetation with gross, trees, and ground cover similar to the exist ing developed park area. ' 3.2 Land Use and Zoning 9 impacts &-,cussed in Section 2.1.4. 3.3 Traffic and Circulation Traffic impacts associated with the proposed amendment are difficult to assess with any specificity due to the range of uses allowed under the recreation designation. Development of the area according to existing zoning would generate approx(Mately 1,000 trips per day. Open tpoce uses In the area would generate between 135 and 331 daily trips, based on observed traffic. h%xn 'nelghborhood and community parks. Development of active commercial` recreational uses could be expected to generate as much If not more traffic thou 'residential and Industrial ues; however, a separate EIR is necessary to,. I;. evaluate Impacts of development of specific park uses. 3.4 Air Quality l Air,quality impacts are generally o function of vehicle emissions assaciated' , with``traffic generated by vnrlous land uses. The hove section Indicates that traffic generated bVadevelopment ssive open space uses is nearly tuio-thirds less than traffic generated under existing zoning; therefore, the. proposed amendment could be expected to slightly improve;air quality. Like traffic impacts, air quality impacis associated with more active commercial uses '(Including recreational vehicle camping) need to be addressed In greater detail in a separate EiR. 3.5 Noise 1 Noise. sources in and around to amendment area include traffic noise frorn arterials, all,operations, the mushroom farm and fire training focllity, Orange. County transfer station, .Police heliport and pistol range, and the Southern' Pocific'Ralirood. The proposed amendment may have the long term effect of reducing noise by designating additional areas for public oaqulsition caid park development, thereby phasing out the mushroom farm and inckistrial operations at Ellis and Gothard. 3.6 , Ai ctweology 1 Portions of the amendment area are located near the bluffs of the Huntington / Beach Mesas ond,therefore may contain achaeological artifacts associated with Indians that once inhabited this area. Designation of the area for; RM .. i .r ate..+,........-.�-., .,»r..-...«.................. .. �r.n�wvr��.w...- ...... r....... �r.ti�.Y`R ll.:vi:'.Y„ ,. ;1�`.l^.!IY,''1.1'Z:C:4.:'11.MMiwM'n"M+ MVAMts7V+�.ILb , a puk,ll�: acquisition would allow closer monitoring of conditions in the amrndment area and facilitate preservation and exploration of madden areas. 3.7 Public Services Impacts discussed in Section 2.1.7. 3.8 Economics Impacts discussed in Section 2.1.7. 3.9 Alternatives Central Park Expansion Partial Expansion - Existing land uses and economic considerations may lessen t ooa t!)i y cMlor desirability of the proposed 75-acre expansion of Central Park at this time. Partial expmslon to include certain portions of the amendment area would allay the City to pursue ocquisition while the, conceptual master plan Is being prepared and refined. The encyclope d',a lats , aro4s have previously been designatt.,d for City acquisition and could be. incorporated Into Central Park on the Open Spore and Conservation Plan. Open Space Zonin - 65 acres of ilia area of concern are already designated as openn Wace3 in the Land Use Element. This area could be rezoned, to Reacreatlonal Open Space (ROS) in order to restrict residential use cnd provide:' for compatible activities and uses. ANthough ROS zaming Is considered consistent with an Industrial land use &Ogmtien, any change of zoning on the' property at the northwest corner os Ellis Avenue and Goihard Street should. await final consideilation of Laid Use Element Amendment 80-2. Rezoning properties to ROS without amending the Open Space aid Conservation Element would not allow the City to take advnntage of state and federal funding, sources for additional acquisitions. Alternative Location - the conceptual park master pla.n proposes various* active recreat ono uses - trans courts, sports fields, batting cage,.`roller, skating - that might feasibly be located elsewhere in the City, at existing:,or`' additional communitj parks _and/or schools. Recreational vehicle ramming facilities might tnke: advantage of locations closer to beaches. Under this alternative, additional recreational facilities would be provi6ed and valuable; open space preaserve d at the same time. t No Pro ect - The current boundaries of Central Parlt.could be retalned until a master pan for the park area Is adapted. 'if additional area is considered necessary, the Open Space and Conservation Element could then be amended to reflect the park master plan. Development of the remaining areas slow, within tl>L park boundaries could continse as well. r 32 •i t Miscellaneous Changes The five park sites recommended for deletion could be designated for alternative locations ar retained In the Open Space and Conservation Element. 3.10 Relationship between Local Short-term uses of Man'a Environment and the Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-term Productivity. Amendment of the ,0peni Space and. Conservation Element as proposed would have more. longterm: than short-term impacts by prohibiting.:residential end other. non-recreational uses and by improving the City's abillty to acquire property for the preservation and enjoyment of the open space. By preserving the area as recreational open space, long term productivity is enhanced through harmounious development and proper maintenance practices. 3.11 irreversible or Unavoidable Environmental Changes anges 'associated .,With ' • 'fhr '�irreversi�►te or- unavoi��' dable� environmental ch ."the proosed p •emend metit:are.speculative atAis ,time. While 'the amendment'4tself _ would 'cause na'cha des, the implementation:of a development plan could'bring about'_changes. • These changes are to be.addressed' In a separate EIR ,to be prepared In conjunction with a Central Park Master Plan. 3.12 Growth Inducing impacts The>propoaed aniendment, to_the ,.(Tp�cn`'Space,.and;;Conservatlon;Element ,will z: . have �;no �significcnt ;growth induct ,�1m acts` ''arir!';`rino a_tuoll havc.,''the ►xf , p i y. y oppoelto'impact by'restrlcting':residenH61 usei Mthin the Central Park area of concern. "Under existing'zoning,,o mnxirr�urn 6f,'43'units�could be develop d;in areas::zoned ; RAi these Of:the.: tential units; 'would 'ba::prohibited eider ttia ' recreation'lest nation.;, po g mtsceltaneous'changes proposed,;the.dsfkian of three`park sites ma have ion rnn e, rowth inducing,tmpocts.;;7he 07d':Civlc, _ Y.. g , 9 �g Center site.is proposed.for.constructionrof a 157-i rlt•'.senior citiiens':h6bs)ng," complex. , The ;=two''unacquired'`neighborhood 'eerie sites in the vicinity o"r GoldentiVest Street. ,and .Palm ;Avenue •;could;.potentially,'bc devalope�lcis resiiiei'ti 'l.areds`_if the'park'designations are`deleted from the Open.Spaci:'ond Conservation Element. The sites,`, which "icital six acres, . could support a maxln'um of 4? units if developed at low density. • siws >, . 1 33 ""''!K"""' `: ^"""'•'•+++wws+'►ro[vss�-«+r.ew r•+s•7x.r«..q..... ..r....�,,..�1rrfuas5.s�,v.. :. 1 t ..:r -�•cs:r_yYt►?:arxsrr>w►�.'wc�rgCp ru1�►dTtttn�laFrrtlll��•o r MINUTES ; i Ciiuncil Chamber, C1via Center Huntington Beach, , Cr'iiforisin Monday, January 20, 1975.. Mayor Coen cnlied the adjourned regular' meeting of the City Council of tha City of Huntington Beach to order at 5130 P.H. . ROLL CALL ` Present: Shipley; Bartlett, Gibbo, Wiedor, duke, Coen Hatney - (arrived at 51#0 P.M.) Absent: None r' RECESS T'ha:Mafrur called a rococo of the `Council iit 5:35 P.M. to Room B=8. RECff Jlui'raoeting wns reconvened in Raiin B-8 by th''a Hsyov, with Councilman Hat:ney in att:t 4ncn. �: . :. ,, ' `„ ' • : a. ,.�� 1. :. • AMENDnEsT 'ro JHE LAND USE UrikN': of•THE GRNF L PI.NN ; Oie4usaia was' hnld'',bet n wean the Council,"Planning rector.,ani!"sea f>' rcgurdiiiq A l,ortioii of an Amendcacnt to ttic+Fl:and,Uaf, f:lement of -tha` iaraI ;Ptan':on " ch J1; , n: puLlic •hearing:hed be%in.hold January'•G, •1':175', 'with' decision° deferred ' ko the i;;, ''' Yel►ruslry 3, 1975 .ineeting;pending lefjal rinat�l is by the Gity'Attorney. The por ttiin of ibbi ai ndiaent diacuabed ;W'a'as fulZowss to .•:, , .� ,` { , 'I.." Plilhi.in Reserve South'of 1Wntih all I' Park - generAl ly:.lacated west pf c;nt.hsird:Street to-the city bouci(1arf ling, north of'Garfield Avcne' ti +l' + :the ilWitifigton' Central Park: rl •p lannit% .Director reported 'rn the pTop osed asacndc:cnt and prcaonted graphs 0f= the area under can aidaraiion g 'discussion; a'vwtion 1.,,s .mads� by Councilman Harney,=: thnt ;Ctauncil r ;a diricL the Ylarning-;Commigsioe ta;'consIde,i. their .tee dmnehdaEinri itiat t,h'c' Cene lal $ t .f, City:�1'Ark;tjoundary- boifiiKed.'61i0' ,1eet,'narth.of the ceict:et line=of. Ellia 'A*/en'uit ' between Edwards and'Coldetiweet5treeGu. � •, ,� F The itecreaCion,and Parka"'Dir�'ctor roported on'•the reasons for ;the;rec.omme a On of tlie',ftecreation and':Yntker;Coamsigaisin' that the'scan ►inder coiitsiderutiiii be designated for' park expansion. ;i' ' ,, The motion'made'ley, Counciltman'Platne was Passed by the foI1641n roll call vote ,Hartlekt, Matnay ' Wieder, i«oen NOES;;; Shipley, Glbbe, Duke ` i t ':q AUSEN'r: None ...-....:rn ,•_-�- - ..lurtlr+C.a.:stfplrvH+RF•Y"` 7 -,-r --.-.y -.-.�+.,..�. •:.u'...b.+v...w..r.l1»+...n.+w.e.�N..+q.....�..�r.�-�� l �� LI r ,t, � '' a>'} crai, , i ., '/ � �, .., S 't 11,+' y ' f rT ' 1 ,• � j,��^t r ��', +�lf j1#�},, Ir VI I(\#;.ir•. t l J 4.'j , t , ,1 1 #�'{ ' 743 i. f4��.^,I�{/Lrj��-s,�; A t ; • r t;, ,,1 ,, , , 1 1 1, r {, r / ,t y�'�Ir ,�ffl�,C'+r jj�, 1; � t .+, t' t ..r ). ' '• _,1 I ,'. ,y^I rl)�'.•�'l+Rr "yl'�1,:, A AJOURNM UT On roaCiaii;by Bartle tt, `the nJyuurned regular meet in& of the, City Council of the City of Huntington Beach ad jourried at 6:40 P.M. The motion We pafssad by the folloiitng r611 call voter r AYSS Shiplay, Barrtlett$ Gibba► Matney, YLeder, Duke, Coen NASSt; Norte t ABSENT: None f City. Clerk and EL610 Clark a of •the City Council. ofr'the City ' of• Hunt;ington Bench, California ATTEST! { .!% 00 1/ I ', ! iIi/r)�r.►� ' 2a' � f � —I fnr� J Allca.li.;;.ilentwarth Alvin N. Coon ;zr� City Cltark Hayor ;tl t '! r 7 i, Yi2t •.'J f I ', �� It r ' ,l ( i tfT� )J� '! •.i ' : r r t r :) rt r ' �� «..w..w+..rr.w.rrw.ecwr.......•..�.»« - :--T r ....� _7 J�w.�,-t+] } r li lr eft r�:'y+r,tit � ' l:fPS �• C t )•f,f ! �- ( 1`. tr r , '! I i ,..�� y a It � J t;. !) r t)t1n., x r�. } �,.y X � '. y r'� t :) :� ♦ . iJ t J �• rt rr t t • f t ,+ � �nl�y j j r.� c� ta7. J)r t�I.tl,•�t t# � t ,.i Y', � I ) 'ti 1 !.� 3 r, _� `� 7,t„Ily; r�,�sF.I, ,tt JJ)I tell'�r rr\�)).� � Jt. 1 '1 .3•11 .� ^ � 111 ) �•� )) +1-i. ,,',�jtl v� ,ii ir. ) �yf� � ,t r , �, ) " ,, r •!♦r r= � , , 3 J:)rf , .r 1 '; tf�.,, , ! 1,� tfr f. I fgyr! ',,i1� � !r •)t f ! t , } 3 I �' t r r / J - / `� !1 t �..r P. t--{ii iJ 3 !j♦ t 1GSJ/-C.r { 1 t�r � :atl l� ! r 1 �I 2J{{; t { r J•' S ,,. I- J,.' r ) t �� !� , 1,.^I '.i.,i {'It .;j'(.���1�( ,t 1• :1 y:.�l i1./ '/ .:t I r iJ rl •1 lJ 1 , t.•1 J . I r 5♦ r.. ;/ ,i , �I" !.. lit J 4) ,.: j x:t } ! fI i t, .< r }: Y l+pr flY 1 r' .+Y , Jl •_I ' t i , `1 .+ , , �J�. 1y^ ;� S ! , �1. � ) ! f) � r t ` I it _,• } + r; r' , i{j.t r�, � .1�,/4.1 r r; 1�.� 1t �` 1 .'{! rr , t,� r y `) Irt 'l• o t Al 10 1l1 ljfr t J +1 I, ' • r ' it it ��