Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAmendment to the Phase I Land Use Element - May 1975 I i`t0.3p Ve, 46 ZO 5v-,> as;t3 G L W 0 } C J N Q Q. 1 �� hu"tkgton bead, d " arht » CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY COUNCIL NORMA BRANDEL GIBBS,Mayor HARRIETT M.WIEDER,Mayor Pro Tern TED W. BARTLETT ALVIN M.COEN HENRY H. DUKE JERRY A. MATNEY DONALD D.SHIPLEY DAVID D. ROWLANDS, City Administrator PLANNING COMMISSION EDWARD H. KERINS,Chairman FRANK P. HIGGINS,Vice-Chairman ROBERT D. BAZIL RUTH FINLEY WILLIAM J. GEIGER MARCUS M.PORTER ROGER D. SLATES RICHARD A. HARLOW,Secretary TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. 0 INTRODUCTION 1 1. 1 Intent and Purpose 1 1.2 Methodology 1 2 . 0 PLANNING ISSUES 3 2 . 1 Yorktown School Site 3 2 . 2 Huntington Harbour Area 7 2 . 3 Manthei Property 10 2. 4 Bolsa Chica and Heil Avenue Area 12 2. 5 Signal Property 15 2. 6 Kendall Property 18 2 . 7 Classic Development 21 2. 8 North of Huntington Center 24 2 . 9 Hamilton School Site 27 2. 10 Newland School Site 31 2 . 11 Administrative Changes 33 3. 0 AMENDMENT SUMMARY 47 3. 1 Scope of Amendment 47 3. 2 Residential Standards 47 3. 3 Planned Multiple Use 48 3. 4 Proposed Amendment, Phase I Land Use Element 48 3. 5 Summary of Land Use and Population 52 4. 0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 54 4. 1 Project Description and Location 54 4. 2 Environmental Setting and Impact 57 4. 3 Summary and Mitigation Measures 75 section 1.0 introduction 1 . 0 INTRODUCTION This document constitutes the second amendment to the Phase I Land Use Element (Figure 1-1) . The Element was adopted in December, 1973, and amended for the first time in March, 1975 (Figure 1-2) . 1.1 Intent and Purpose In the past, the Planning Department has approached the General Plan on an element by element basis. To promote coordination among elements and speed completion of a comprehensive General Plan, the Department is currently exerting a concerted staff effort to develop ah integrated document containing all nine elements. The results of this effort will be available for official consideration in August. Before that time, however, several specific planning decisions must be made. Therefore, this second amendment to the Phase I Land Use Element is designed to investigate some areas where changing conditions require reconsideration of past decisions. At the same time, this amendment is meant to accomplish several minor administrative adjustments. 1 . 2 Methodology The changes considered in this amendment derive from three sources : directed studies from the Planning Commission and City Council, requests from property owners, and "housekeeping" chores generated by the Planning Department. In Section 2 .0, Planning Issues, each � 1. case is discussed and analyzed in terms of existing conditions and impact on surrounding areas as well as consistency with the goals and policies of the City. Section 3 . 0 summarizes the recommendations contained in Section 2 . 0 into a comprehensive text and plan to be adopted. Section 4 . 0 presents an Environmental Assessment for the Amendment as required by the California Environmental Quality Act. 2 . P ft Iilliil'„'9'Ipfl p PJ FREEWAY SAN DIEGO ? I P �'�� Illp III � P . r``• � � o � '„ I� ... ° f,cC ....;.;•••'�[aiiiE:• �+II, ! � I t I � 'eoo `+' I:-,,:I II JI r all ,�J Il,v li� yC t„�•"C+ K .:i iiii:•....�;:i'ciieiii�. II j[!II-11, ........ �� �. -h. ✓3 ,4p 4/ �, '3 Ism nV IIIIIpIIM- �y, 4 c E c� 3 r� a I iFl ,gym ti+ ��� 7111j1 ullti rn ��' IV�t I u� ��''lUf I p'+I� I� al«IV�I udl��n!i �g a• ��II r�����l, � �e, - ll DUI � '. II 'Ilr I. �'�:'p•� � _�I. ;;• iiie::ii:. '::. .'� ii�5i!5:. ���� C� � d y I I - III m I y V W I •M1 I fi E a III', I, I�� V�r I � II,I�.,,,, .........ce�� F •::::::�::::::::::. ':.`liiii��' o �F '� IIY., �.•, I!=„3 Il+�girll I Illills '.� ............ ........ �t{ }y,, 'c - ull�1�9- I :u•I- �I•�� �''•�� �•• I -JIIIIIIIV. "IIIIIV,- e I ............... - IIh II ,I�� C` �.IIV lI - C1 I I S - C C c 1 Ilk>, G � el .,c�F+�c Ea JI II JIIII 11 I' „' �G, ,Get, .L., C •-��-. _ �if� ............. ............ .�cU•`t',L.�' I'�.ips III ' �I��I,�I�, t,I III �II�� _ `- '�'�' y G... •,. .. r l � q,i.;I. p .d: �I! ..G, €A �4•G. t. _r ;`J� �i`^ 6. -, 4 - - ur IIII _ - � c I � r�pIIII, I� i Pf` �- .,, .. ." G ':••:: V I;,, x y �e a� ; 'p 11,1�r, i� = r w� _-,r,. �I Ili .'- t?e ,—� �-_ --,' _'- h Giro IncI, � .. .•,':'.. .• c.J c-e- - e �'�' - .�-�' - -. .�' red ..: €`:'s4 v .• ._:.-. , III �7( � �a•r� I � rl�i�:311I - I ',��1r a C -.+i!',:_� IIIII II,, c�^•e. 0� Ji'�h, a[ � II '�ii i • ��� i::. is `F�+�•� .....i=�?�ii;.�i'.ii iiiii=i':ii::':::• :::-:.. ::: VV,r :`�<- r ,,UII, I I VIA.; I ,- c'r�� ` ,(C, :ieiiiiRiE:iaEi...i7iiiiiiieeii'':•• '. < 6 C §:iiie:i�::::::.di::::::::::::�:• .::' Q ........ � .\ „In ����� '{L r i. N e C C� Ali Vv- - ............... � .....�••:i�{::•F..... ... i:: .•��'•\ :EiFfs•:`::tlfEEiEap i' t•Pi� q m � '� G a 5 i y7 N\ i/ ��, � i 3�E .._• � ��" limb al, � � >u v - .:.�:; - - r n ='al. "'a'rs—• - - - 1 F. 1 PACIFIC :(,_ G f i!'• �rr A P i•S•- - •1—_ III Hi6�wpn, ���•� g�_ _ a : I I• ..'•",{ ':'[}'::a'[;-•��� �vex "I" OCEAN PACIFIC l HUNrINGTON BE4CH 04LIFORNIA PLANNING DEPARTMENT LEGEND*. RESIDENTIAL: PUBLIC USES 81 FACILITIES (CON'T) LOW DENSITY EXISTING PROPOSED MEDIUM DENSITY SCHOOL MEDIUM-HIGH DENSITY ELEMENTARY HIGH DENSITY JUNIOR HIGH MOBILE HOME HIGH 0 COLLEGE PARKS COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL RETAIL COMMUNITY MCP, 0 OFFICE HUNTINGTON CENTRAL HOTELS-MOTELS REGIONAL SPECIALTIES RECREATIONAL FACILITIES RECREATION CENTER 0 0 INDUSTRIAL NEIGHBORHOOD BEACH FNI 7� = LIGHT BEACH EM PUBLIC UTILITY MARINA FTI A IM OIL RESOURCE PRODUCTION GOLF COURSE EDISON R/W LEASED AGRICULTURE EDISON R/W UNLEASED SPECIAL USE PUBLIC USES & FACILITIES INSTITUTIONAL TRANSPORTATION ECOLOGICAL RESERVE CHURCH F77:1 RAILROAD CIVIC CENTER HOSPITAL CITY YARD Em LODGE, MEETING HALL m PRIVATE SCHOOL STREETS LIBRARY CEMETERY FREEWAY EM QUASI-PUBLIC(INCLOUDIENSGi Cc CENTRAL LIBRARY D6 INTERCHANGE SCHOOL WAREHOUSE CHURCHESCLUBS&L MAJOR SCHOOL ADMIN.OFFICE OTHERS PRIMARY POST OFFICE PRIMARY WATER RESERVOIR COUPLET FIRE TRAINING CENTERS STATION FIRE STATION PLANNING RESERVE ........... SECONDARY F-87 BUFFER NO RIGHT OF WAY EXISTS HARBORS a BEACHES FACILITY DRAINAGE CHANNEL a WATER WAYS DESTINATION RESORT PLANNED COMMUNITY REV 9-18-72 � 17 73 21_l-73 8_�-74 TOWN LOT LKND USE ELEMENT Legend -- Residential ESTATE 0-2 un/gac ESTATE 0•4 un/gac LOW DENSITY 0.7un/gac ' \ / \ \ I•::::.. MEDIUM DENSITY 8.15 un/gac San Die o Fr\a C HIGH DENSITY above 15 un/gac ^ / Commercial General Office•Professional \ Industrial ® Light / Public Utility \ \ Resource Production 1 / Public � High School M Fire Facility / Recreation Center 3 Proposed Park Other Destination Resort ® Government Center C - Ocean-Front Commercial/Residential o open Space Planning Reserve a r •'::N::::::::::::::::::: •::K. •. n c •E ......: .... \l �o / Pad palm --� _ F_- t___� Pocific Coast Hwy 9 - 2 HUNTINGTPLANNINGODEP DEPARTMENT AMENDMENT TO THE PHASE 1 LAND USE ELEMENT AS ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL MARCH 10,1975 section 2.0 planning ' issues 2.0 PLANNING ISSUES The following sections discuss possible changes to the Phase I Land Use Element. Figure 2-1 identifies areas under consideration. 2.1 Yorktown School Site 2.1.1 Background Information The Yorktown school site is located northwest of the intersection of Yorktown and Magnolia Streets (Figure 2-2) . In early 1975, the Huntington Beach Union High School District announced the deletion of the school site from its Master Plan, and is presently requesting bids for sale of the property. Since the property is no longer planned as a future school site, the Phase I Land Use Element of the General Plan must be amended to reflect an alternative land use. The subject school site property encompasses approxi- mately 50 acres of vacant land presently zoned RA (Residential Agriculture District) . The property is designated on the Land Use Element of the General Plan as a future high school site of which a portion is also planned for a community park. Directly north of the site is the Edison right-of-way. East and south of the site are existing single-family homes. Directly west are vacant parcels presently lip 3. LA CR - - - - VACANT OR (K-w.='r) C2 u: LAU R. ce — C4 r V j APARTMENTS ELG Q R3 z s; � CR c� NAt P Hym PA VACANT R4 TF lw c p POSED PARK CR. olt CF-E `T` AIN (SCHUC?L SITE) CD c CR H W 1pf r v M = CR. N ANNIK Q YORKTOWN Ixui ALBATROSS DR. Z ICA do tu rw ...w, LAKE VERON Fiw 2-2 YORKTOWN SCHOOL SITE lip4. Coro, Col11, '�p SP 1�, �P10, � o- ��\Y A 4 4 ` :ri'•: 2.11.6 VP 2: V P GP 9 Cf' 'S' A o q 6 10 ti 0 O C S P S _ QO \ ti P .11.6 \P { O 3 2.. 2.1 P P P� 1 .b rr Z. 1 Z; :4 .11.3v 2.111 2 4 ''''.}.5.,..... K .... 2.6 4.. j/ :y. 2 " ..:::::... ...:....::....::::::::... ..... h••?:•?:•?::::.�:::::•h•:. Fig. 2-1 HUNTINGTON BEACH C4LIFORNIA PLANNING DEPARTMENT PHASE I LAND USE M SECOND AMENDMENT STUDY AREAS zoned R1, Low Density Residential. Tract Map 8049 has been processed and development of these vacant parcels is scheduled to begin within the near future. R 2.1.2 Analysis Predominate uses surrounding the site are single-family residential units. Consequently, it seems apparent that residential uses on the subject site would be most compatible with adjacent areas. The amount of residen- tial acreage and densities, as well as the additional population generated, are the resulting concerns that must be evaluated. Two residential categories may be realistically con- sidered: Low Density Residential and Medium Density Residential Development. Applying the maximum densities yield on a per acre basis of each residential density category illustrates the amount of units and population that could be generated (Refer to Figure 2-3) . Figure 2-3 Residential Development on the Deleted Yorktown School Site Residential Max.Units Total Total No. Population* Total Category Per Acre Area of Units Per Unit Population Low Density 7 x 48 Ac. = 336 x 3.55 = 1192 Medium Density 15 x 48 Ac. = 720 x 2.3 = 1656 i * Based on 1974 special census of the City of Huntington Beach. The lower density has a greater level of compatibility with existing single-family residential areas surroun- ding the subject site and would therefore, preserve the homogeneity and contiguity of the neighborhood. The potential for commercial development on the site is also an issue. Currently, there is no commercial zoning at the intersection of Yorktown and Magnolia. IFowever, there is commercial zoning at the intersections of Garfield and Magnolia and Adams and Magnolia. The total commercial zoning at these two nearby inter- sections amounts to 58 acres, with 30 acres developed. r This leaves approximately 28 acres of property vacant and available for development. i 5. Based on a standard of 4 to 10 acres of neighborhood shopping per 1 mile service area or 10,000 people, this 58 acres of commercial development will more than adequately serve the potential population. Thus, additional commercial uses are inappropriate. Another issue regarding the deletion of the Yorktown school site is its impact on the originally planned Yorktown Community Park. In conjunction with the A high school site, the City intended to provide a future community-sized park adjacent to the north- westerly portion of the school site area. The potential for joint use of park and playground area on the school site would have existed. The 14 acres along the Edison right-of-way were to be used, through an agreement with Edison, as part of the park. In addition, a 7 .68 acre site (Lot A of Tract Map 8049) was intended to be used for park purposes. An approximate total of 20 to 30 acres would have been provided for recreational use. However, as a result of the school_ site deletion, there is a need to reconsider the original park plan in terms of its size and configuration. The City Council has, in fact, expressed a desire to alter the original plans of a full-size community park. 14 Efforts have already been made to revise Final Map 8049 so as to allocate only a portion of Lot A for park use instead of the total 7.68 acres. The City is pursuing the acquisition of needed acreage to provide recreational uses, but more in line with a neighbor- hood-type park. Assuming the City would still be able to lease the Edison right-of-way area for park use, it would account for approximately 14 acres. In terms of area, this amount of land along the right-of-way would classify it as a community-sized park. However, because of its longitudinal configuration and the activity constraints due to existing power lines, it cannot provide the level of recreational activities usually associated with a larger size park, and may perhaps limit recreational activities to passive recreation or playground activities for smaller children. In order to provide a wider range of park activities, it would be necessary to provide additional acreage. The Planning Department, in a joint effort with the Recreation and Parks Department, is presently negotiating with Donald Bren Company to retain approximately 2 acres of the 7.68 acres on Lot A of a 6. lip Final Map 8049 for park use. If negotiations with the property owners are successful, the two acres could be combined with an additional two acres that may be acquired from future residential development of the deleted school site area. The total four acres would abut the Edison right-of-way area so as to provide a larger, rectangular section of the park for more active recreational purposes. Thus, the total park area, including the Edison right-of-way, would be approximately 18 acres. Park need, of course, must be based on the future population. Under the existing zoning, the quarter section would generate approximately 1465 people at ultimate development. If the low density designation is implemented, it would result in the addition of 1192 people. This would result in an ultimate population of 2657 people. Using the neighborhood park standard of .91 acres per one thousand population as set forth in the Parks, Open Space, Schools, and Recreation Element of the Master Plan of Land Use, the quarter section would generate a need of 2.4 acres. When the future park demand of 2.4 is compared to the supply of 18 acres, there results a surplus of 15.6 acres. However, the Edison right-of-way comprises 14 acres of the proposed park, thereby limiting the possible recreational uses. Since the park acreage will be limited by transmission power lines, the 18 acre proposed park site seems feasible. 2.1.4 Recommendation r The Amendment to the Land Use Element proposes that the deleted Yorktown school site be designated for Low Density Residential of 0-7 units per gross acre. In addition, it is proposed that the park area be desig- nated as a neighborhood park instead of a community park. r 2.2 Huntington Harbour Area The Huntington Harbour Corporation is currently investigating possible uses for a 25-acre site between the Orange County Flood Control Channel and the planned Long Channel in Huntington Harbour. Two differing proposals have been set forth, one requiring a General Plan amendment. It is the purpose of this section to investigate these two alternatives and recommend appropriate action. 2.2.1 Background Information The subject property is currently vacant. The Phase I r 7. r Land Use Element designates it low density residential and existing zoning is R1. The vicinity adjacent to the site is also zoned and planned for low density w residential uses. The adjacent surrounding area is vacant, though a proposed residential development (Tract 8636) is pending to the east. The site is bounded on the north by Edinger Avenue, on the west by a flood control channel and Sunset Aquatic Park, on the south by the main Huntington Harbour Channel and on the east by the planned Long Channel (Figure 2-4) In keeping with its current zoning and planning desig- nations, one proposal being considered for the site is a 132-unit townhouse development at 5.2 units per acre Tract 8718) . This plan provides for a 0.5 acre public beach, community center, and pool. It also includes 104 docks located partially in Long Channel and partially in the main harbor channel. The po- tential population to be generated by this plan is about 322 persons. The second proposal would require modification of the Land Use Element. This conceptual plan would provide both tourist commercial and residential uses on the site. Calling for 6 acres of commercial use, the plan would provide for specialty shops and restaurants. Residential uses would encompass 6 .6 acres of the site and generate 90 dwelling units at a density of 13.6 dwelling units per acre. Population generated by the residential area would total 207. In addition to residential and tourist commercial, this plan includes a 5. 6 acre public beach and park which would serve both the neighborhood and adjacent areas. Fewer boat slips would be provided by this alternative, 54 compared to 104 in Tract 8718 . Both of these alternatives are feasible from a land use standpoint. Therefore, the decision to be made is which alternative would be better in terms of impact on the environment, benefit to the City, and optimum utilization of the coastal area. 2.2.2 Analysis A low density residential use would be in keeping with the character of surrounding development. It is consistent with the General Plan and existing zoning; and as currently proposed by Huntington Harbour, the townhouse project would provide private recreation facilities and a small public beach. A combination tourist-commercial/residential use of the area, on the 8. � r o. G _4 si9. n J� L CELE51 TT 5483 Single Family R1 0. VACANT TT 8636 s Rl Single Family `{ U r1AM / Rl y I r / y CNANNE O MAR'Og t N � - � sNFLTER 0 CNANME,. Q VACANT - W LIMITS C4 ✓ � [ J REMORA VACANT "T cNAN NONTIN6T�N OF rt > 1 r J sg9yy. PACIFIC NUNTINGTON lEACN ; 0MUMIL�D HwY N NTI! � COAST Sao aaa�aa-avaa�� u I r�r��� P PACIFIC-, E R OCEAN _ AVE r Fis.!-4 HUNTINGTON HARBOUR r 9. other hand, might be less harmonious with existing development. Any impact of conflicting uses is significantly lessened, however, by the physical barriers on three sides of the property. This project would contribute fewer residents to the area though it would contain higher densities. The tourist- commercial use would capitalize on the water-oriented character of the site and would bring added revenues to the City, serve residents of the area, be i consistent with the County recreation area to the west, and increase public access to the water resources of Huntington Harbour. This proposed use would provide additional public recreation in terms of both park and beaches. While the low density residential use would be acceptable on this site, it seems obvious that the tourist-commercial/residential project would supply additional benefits. It would generate revenues for the City, it would reduce potential population, it would increase public access and facilities, and it would complement existing recreation facilities. 2 .2.3 Recommendation This amendment proposes that the Phase I Land Use Element designate the site Medium Density Residential and Retail Commercial. It further recommends that a park and beach site be identified in the area . 2. 3 Manthei Property (Talbert and the Railroad 2. 3.1 Background Information In March, 1975, the Planning Department was to evaluate the redesignation of twenty acres located northeast of Pacific Electric_ Railroad right-of-way and Talbert Avenue. The subject area (Figure 2-5) consumes approximately 20 acres of vacant property zoned Ml, Light Indus-_ ___. trial. It is located within the Central Industrial Corridor, which runs along Gothard from Garfield to Edinger, and the Land Use Element of the General ' Plan designates it for light industrial development. Aaft 10. 11��1111111111�1111�11�111!•I�I�I�INI�N�IIlll�f IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII/IIIIIIiIIIl/1I1N111N11/1 11 ' tt1t11it1!llllliilllilillititllitllilttuitllti�ll 11:IIIIIIIIIIIIiII lllilll l l llillll llllllllllllllii �,11 ill IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINIIIIIIIIIN 11111� 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 : ' ' ' ' ' ' ?1111111�11111111111111111111111111111�11111=Illlll i p111111111111111111�1111111111t1111 Hill111111 aY11111Ilrlllilllllr�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIn11111111 INIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIEa11111111f111111Li:.: di11ti11 INS IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIr�11111111111i11111'!i1111111111 1111111111111111111�!�IIIIIIIIIIIIn111111111111111 - ?Illlllllillillllllir-�111111111111lIIIIllllllllllll �mI1111/1111111111�a1=J11111111111111111111111111 �' �11111111111111111111111i11111111111111111111111111 � � IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNIIIIIIIII • N1111111111111111 U11lllllllllllllinlllillilllll � � p111111I11111111111101111111111111111111111111111 � � NIlIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIf111111111111111111111111111111 Lq 111111�=�.At7"lt��f111111l11111111111111111111111 �� ofIIIi1111fA�111111111111111111111111111111111111 IIIIIiIIlllifiallllllrtltlttlfitltlil1111111111111 �• � Ir11111111111/11111111111111111111111111111111111IN ��•. � ' +RI111111111i1111111IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIItF �a • � - ! ----------- ,ram ----------- ----------- ----------- IE�IIIIIC=''���IIN ----------- ----------- ----------- it � --•-------- _ ----------- - ----------- A r The property directly to the north is zoned for light industrial (Ml) and multi family (R2 and R3) , uses and has been developed accordingly. The area to the east has been zoned and developed in R2 multi-family housing. The south is zoned for restricted manu- facturing (M1-A) but is currently vacant. The westerly property has been zoned and developed into M1 industrial uses. 1 2. 3.2 Analysis The subject property is bordered by residential uses on the east and by industrial uses on the west. Additionally, the Land Use Element designates the vacant property on the north and south for industrial uses. These factors place the emphasis on the property to be retained for industrial development. In designating the property for industrial uses, the , homogeneity of the area is preserved. Whereas, if the subject property is designated for residential development, it would virtually be surrounded on three sides by industrial development. Such a situation would subject the residents to increased arterial traffic as well as noise and aesthetic problems. Finally, , retaining the area for industrial development will preserve the integrity of the Central Industrial Corridor concept. 2. 3. 3 Recommendation Therefore the subject property should not be designated for residential development and the'-. existing industria . designation should be retained in the Phase I Land Use Element 2.4 Bolsa Chica and Heil Avenue Area 2 . 4.1 Background Information In response to a citizen request, the City Council directed the Planning Staff to reevaluate the feasi- bility of commercial development on the southwest corner of Bolsa Chica Street and Heil Avenue (Figure 2-6) . 12. � •,, �� ,�,; ■■■■ aid I■■� ■: _ �� :: 1111111�■ . ■■ - mm mm !l111!!� ■ mm :: 1 WE • 1� � . ON WE ■ ■■ ..� MOBILE-■ HOME 1111111�■ .4,} �■ �I�. ARK L C2 - S 111111111111111l11111l11 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIe ■ �"', .�tllltttititllirltltiill! ^IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIillllllle - 1111111r111111111111111e IIIIIe1111r1111111/t11e1 111�1 elllllllllllllllllllilie IIt1111111111111 IIIIe RIIIIIIIIilllllillo/lilt IIIIIRIIIIt/t11/ Rollie • Rilllll11111111111111111 111111R111111111 (Iloilo e11111111111111l111111Re 1111111111111111111111lt - R11111t1i11111111111111t II/IIRIIIIt11111111!llit �-;*--�, , t1111111111111//IIIIIIIt IIIlleltlrltl1111l11/IIe ,11■,� e1111111111A1lIIIIlllllt _IIIIIIIIItIiR1111111111e Ilttl111AAI11111111111:R'�Illlltl/i1111e111111111te Pool en: c��xrc:e�sait�s�lR«„n:a� er��.z�:ae�cune ellllillllllilllllllllll '11111111111111111111111! w � A The subject property presently supports Ed' s Dairy and residential uses. The dairy, however, is a short-term use and the existing zoning would allow for con- struction of multi-family housing upon its elimination. The remaining three corners of the intersection are currently zoned for commercial development, with the northwestern and southeastern corners already developed. In addition the four corners of Warner Avenue and Bolsa Chica are zoned for commercial with two of the corners already developed. The Amendment to the Land Use Element, adopted in March, 1975, designated the subject property for Medium Density Residential, 7 to 15 units per acre. The study which formed the basis for the Amendment considered the property for commercial use. However, it found that there was already an adequate amount of property designated for commercial development and that additional acreage was not needed. 2 .4 .2 Analysis Presently there are three corners at the intersection of Heil Avenue and Bolsa Chica Street designated for commercial development. About 2. 3 acres are vacant and thus available for development. Amounting to approximately 10 acres of commercial property, this area is enough to serve 10,000 residents within a service area of one mile. This would more than adequately serve the surrounding quarter sections. In addition there is acreage designated for commercial uses which is approximately one-half mile to the north and south of the subject area. E Therefore, by comb ping all the existing commercial areas, there is more than an adequate amount of proposed commercial to serve the 12,400 residents of the quarter sections surrounding the subject property. 2 .4 .3 Recommendation Therefore, it is recommended that no commercial use be designated at the northwest corner of Heil A and Bolsa Chica and that the existi_ng__medium density residential be retained. 14. 2. 5 Signal Property (Bolsa Chica/Talbert/Springdale) 2.5.1 Background Information The subject property is generally located south of the future intersection of Talbert Avenue and Springdale Street (Figure 2-7) . It encompasses approximately 72 acres consisting of two contiguous parcels of undeveloped land in oil production. Directly south of the site is a large unincorporated area referred to as Bolsa Chica. As set forth in the Phase I Land Use Element of the General Plan, the Bolsa Chica area is presently designated as a "Planning Reserve" . Further discussion of the Bolsa Chica Planning Reserve and its relationship to the study area is presented in Section 2.5.2. The westerly section of the subject property is designated on the Phase I Land Use Element for Retail Commercial development and the easterly portion is designated for Medium Density Residential use. The westerly portion of the subject property is zoned C4 (Highway Commercial District) and the easterly section is presently zoned R2-PD-14 (Medium Density Planned Residential development at a maximum of 14 units per gross acre) . Predominant uses surrounding the site are single-family homes. In May of 1974, Zone Change No. 74-5 was initiated by ` Signal Bolsa Corporation to change the existing C4 and R2-PD-14 zoning districts to R1, Low Density Residential District. Environmental Impact Report No. 74-4 has been processed through the Environmental Review Board and ap; roved by the Board on March 18, 1975. 2.5. 2 Analysis The question involved in this planning study is really twofold. First, is the existing commercial desig- nation realistic in terms of changing circumstances; and secondly, is Low Density Residential use desirable for the site. In answering these questions, a third element must be considered; that is, the relationship between the subject area and the remaining Bolsa Chica area. The Bolsa Chica is significant to the subject property in that future planned uses would definitely have a relationship to uses planned on the subject site. As previously stated, this unincorporated area 15. _._4_1----_.L_I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 17 r, I I II r C1 r1 I I ,u ' I I I Tl\. �rTTTTH aR c I 1�py _ LEI ,j pp Ftl1LEY DR f - — J°� CF-ERAPKAEL CF Y NELL[r u I � 'o ._ D, CF-E g b+ f Td11N DR \��_ 1 �MRDwNE.O DR i � vIL CF-R '+\ ("ARK YTF) FRITCNj .� -� F � FL CDR DR. F D. EALUMCtlTEA DR __ � j E t1' tip' Vr. KIM. DR ATCNER aJ DR rDll. °' T 7637 T 7636 Single Family Single Family Rl Rl sA`� Y ¢E70R oR�( y C/r 5 FiM V� �N i • C y —ssus Fig.2-7 SIGNAL PROPERTY Aft am H an 16 . is designated in the Phase I Land Use Element as a Planning Reserve. As defined in the Element, a Planning Reserve is a "broadly defined interim designation for areas where long-term comprehensive planning and development is anticipated" . Because the Bolsa Chica area has yet to be "master planned" by the City in terms of specific land use designations, it is difficult to evaluate any change to the existing Commercial and Medium Density Residential designations on the subject property. It is of particular concern to the Planning Staff that deleting the proposed commercial use on the property may be premature and prove to be an undesirable modification of the City' s long-range General Plan, especially when the potential revenues to the City that may be generated from retail uses are considered. It is the contention of the property owner that the area will not support commercial uses at this time. To investigate this contention, Signal Landmark Properties engaged Alfred Gobar Associates to conduct a market study. . While the Gobar study does not address long-term demand resulting from development in the unincorporated Bolsa Chica, it does conclude that potential demand within the incorporated vicinity would not support a viable commercial center as envisioned by the Land Use Element. From this information it is apparent that sufficient i commercial demand will result only upon development in the Bolsa Chica. All indications are that due to oil encumbrances widespread development of that area will not occur for 15 ; .) 20 years. It is the Staff' s opinion that the proposed Commercial designation would, in essence, prohibit development of the area for many years. Such a consequence would certainly be un- desirable for the property owner and would not necessarily be in the best interests of the City, either. This is especially true since the entire un- incorporated Bolsa Chica area remains unplanned, thus presenting multiple opportunities to provide for Com- mercial uses where they can most adequately and ef- fectively serve future populations. By deleting exist- ing Commercial designations, therefore, no long-term shortage will necessarily result because of the po- tential for Commercial uses in the Bolsa Chica. The existing Commercial and Medium Density Residential designations on the subject property evolved from I In# 17. previously adopted Master Plans. Reflective of conditions in the 1960' s, this area was planned around S the proposed Route 1 Freeway. The intersection of Talbert and Springdale was to be a major Freeway inter- change. Recognizing that the interchange, with two primary arterials, would generate heavy traffic flows and that much of the surrounding area was planned for multi-family residential units, the subject property , would have been a prime location for a community shopping center. However, the Route 1 Freeway has since been deleted from the State' s transportation plans. In addition, Talbert Avenue is no longer planned as a major , east-west arterial through the City as a result of its proposed deletion through Huntington Central Park. Therefore, the original intent of a major commercial center adjacent to multi-family housing is no longer the only obvious answer to planning this area. Because the surrounding area has developed into low density uses, the Medium Density designation is no longer justifiable. Because the freeway plan has been deleted the feasibility of a major commercial center is questionable. 2. 5. 3 Recommendation . This Amendment to the Phase I Land Use Element proposes redesignation of the subject property to Low Density Residential use (0-7 units per gross acre) with the understanding that an area or areas shall be planned in the unincorporated Bolsa Chica for commercial use that fulfills the policies and development standards as set forth in the General Plan. 2. 6 Kendall Property Slater and Graham) 2. 6. 1 Background Information The subject property is located southwest of the inter- section of Slater and Graham Streets (Figure 2-8) . The 38-acre property is designated for Medium Density Residential use on the Land Use Element of the General Plan and is zoned R2-PD-14 (Medium Density Planned Residential Development of a maximum of 14 units per acre) . In February 1975, a request for a zone change from R2-PD-14 to R2-5.5 on the subject property was initiated by Kendall Development Company. The applicant' s desire to change the zoning evolved from Adft 18. lip VACANT Rl J r = SLATER A TT 8630 SERENE SINGLE FAMILY R2-5.5 RIDQESURY i J J '?P Ga Pi 2-8 KENDALL ' PROPIRTY 19. complications encountered on the original Tentative Tract Map No. 8630 under the R2-PD-14 zone. After a series of preliminary reviews of the original planned development concept and further reviews of revisions to the Tentative Tract Map, it was decided by the developer to pursue a different type of residential development. The applicant wished to alter his plans of a planned residential development and construct single-family homes on the subject property but was informed that such development would be inconsistent with the Medium Density Residential designation as set forth in the adopted Land Use Element of the General Plan. Therefore, the applicant requested that the City evaluate the new proposal and determine if changes to the existing zoning and land use designation should be made. Upon submittal of a staff report regarding the zone change application, it was the consensus of the Planning Commission and the City Council that a land use amendment from Medium Density to Low Density Residential be considered. 2. 6.2 Analysis The present Medium Density Residential designation on the subject property was an outgrowth of earlier adopted Master Plans. As originally intended, the proposed Route 1 Freeway was aligned directly through the subject property. Earlier land use planning concepts set a trend of designating multi-family residential properties adjacent to freeways. Route 1 Freeway plans have since been abandoned, and the areas along and within proximity to i the deleted freewEl alignment have been subject to transitional land use changes. The majority of the surrounding areas of the subject property are developed or proposed for Low Density Residential use. + It is the Staff' s contention that the subject property should also be changed to a lower intensity of residential use that would assure a better level of compatibility to surrounding uses. 2.6. 3 Recommendation The Amendment to the Land Use Element proposes to redesignate the subject property to Low Density Residential use of 0-7 units per gross acre. Atak Alm 20. 1151 1 2.7 Classic Development (Ellis and Huntington) 2 .7 .1 Background Information The subject property is located south of Ellis Avenue between the Pacific Electric Railroad and Huntington Avenue (Figure 2- 9 ) . In April, 1975, Classic Development Corporation requested that the Planning Department consider redesignating the property from industrial to high density residential. The subject property is a seven-acre site which is presently vacant. The M1-A, Light Industry, zoning is reflective of the existing Land Use Element designation of Light Industry. The property directly north is zoned R1 and developed in single family housing. Condominiums have been constructed on the R2 on the east. The property bounding the study area on the south has been developed for industrial uses. The western property is presently vacant. In June, 1973, Classic Development Corporation filed Tentative Tract 8367 on the subject property, a seven lot industrial subdivision. The tract was approved by the Planning Commission in August, 1973 . Construction b did not begin on the property and Classic Development requested a one year extension of time in 'July, 1974. The Planning Commission approved the extension of time in August, 1974. 2.7.2 Analysis Residential uses border the subject property on the north and east, wb'.le the southern boundary abuts industrial uses. these two uses create an issue of what is the most realistic use of the property. Industrial use of the property would continue the industrial character to the south and west and be consistent with the Central Industrial corridor. However, access would have to be provided either through the existing residential section of Ellis ! or by a new crossing of railroad tracks. On the other hand, the tracks could provide a logical barrier between the future industrial uses to the west and the subject property. 1 i 21. u KON OR VACANT PA M1 A 'AVE. VACANT VACANT --- - ---- , Ml—O—CD Ml CONDO�TIUMS (; F (: 1 i VACANT - ---- --- M1—O. r USTRI N COMMODORE CR. �— R I I I Fj '' VACANT R3 VACANT M2-0 VAC ANT 5 C2 RVI ' NDUS VACANT VCA VA aw fiy.2-9 CLASSIC DEVELOPMENT � 22. Residential use of the property is possible as it would provide for the transition of industrial uses on the south to the residential neighborhood on the north. An issue arises as to which would be a more appropriate density. The Classic Development Corporation requested the designation of the property for high density residential, 25 units per acre. This would result in the addition of 175 dwelling units with a population of 315 people. Whereas a low density designation, 0-7 units per acre, would produce an increase of 49 units with a population of 174; and medium density residential at 7 to 15 units per acre would create 105 units and a population of 241 people. The low density residential would create the fewest dwelling units and would be compatible with the single family houses to the north. However, it would not be compatible with industrial uses to the south. The medium density residential use would be compatible with all the surrounding uses. The high density residential uses would be in conflict with the single family residential neighborhood on the north. There- fore the property should be designated for Medium Density Residential. It is apparent from this discussion that residential use would be practical and perhaps desirable in this area even though industrial uses would also be feasible. One problem in this situation arises because of a steady erosion of industrial designations along the corridor. Because residential uses have been permitted on adjacent parcels, the validity of industrial use on the subject parcel is questioned. To allow residential use on this parcel, however, will further erode the industrial corridor concept and make additional industrial parcels untenable. Therefore, though residential use could be supported, it would be wise to defer decision here until a comprehensive policy is established on the future of the industrial corridor. 2. 7. 3 Recommendation This Amendment to the Land Use Element proposes that subject area remain Industrial as previously designated. ilip 23. 2.8 North of Huntington Center 2. 8.1 Background Information The subject property is a 32-acre site that has been recently proposed by Jerwel Enterprises for a commercial/residential complex (Zone Case 74-20) . The area is located behind Huntington Center, north of Center Drive to the San Diego Freeway and east of the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way (Figure 2-10) . It is presently designated Commercial on the Phase I Land Use Element. The subject property contains three sections included in the proposed project area plans. The westerly _ section of the proposed project area abuts the , Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way. It consists of 7-1/2 acres of vacant land presently zoned C4 (Highway Commercial) . As part of the proposed commercial/residential project plans, the existing commercial zoning on the subject parcel was requested to be changed to R4 (High Density Residential) . Also . included in the zone change proposal was a request to change an R1 zoning designation to C4 on a triangular section located in the southeasterly portion of the project area. Recently annexed to Huntington Beach, this triangular section has no General Plan designation. , The intent of the requested changes to the existing zoning was to provide the opportunity to construct residential uses on the 7-1/2 acre section and to construct a hotel complex on the 3 acre triangular section. Between the two parcels is a 21. 5 acre area proposed to be used for a commercial complex consisting of variety restaurants, specialty shops, theatre, and a professional office building. After several continuances on the proposed zone change, the City Council considered the item on April 21, 1975. Recognizing that there are several issues relative to the proposed project, the Council did not take action to approve the zone change. It was, however, the unanimous decision of the Council to direct the Planning Staff to include consideration of the proposal in this Amendment to the General Plan and, further, to direct that a specific plan be developed by City Staff and Jerwel Enterprises. 2.8 . 2 Analysis As stated earlier there are several issues pertaining to the subject property and the proposed project. 24. lip i The major issues have already been identified and dis- cussed in staff reports and at public hearings conducted by both the Planning Commission and City Council. It is not the intent of this sub-section to further dis- cuss or analyze these issues in greater detail. However, as a preface for amending the existing commercial land use designation on the subject property it is important to summarize these issues. a. Consistency between the Zoning and General Plan A strong concern on the part of the Planning Staff and the City Council is maintaining consistency between the proposed zoning and the General Plan. The proposed Zone Change of C4 to R4 on the 7.5 acre site would be inconsistent with the existing commercial designation on the Land Use Element. R4 zoning would be necessary, however, for construction of high density residential uses. E Action on the proposal could not be taken unless the commercial land use designation is amended. Unlike the consistency issue of the 7. 5 acre site, the request to change the zoning on the annexed triangular section from R1 (Low Density Residential) to C4 (Highway Commercial) would not be in conflict with the existing General Plan, of course, since this area has not been planned. Howevez, the City Council was understandably reluctant to take action on rezoning the annexed area or any portion of the subject property in light of uncertainties and the presumption that it would be premature to rezone the area before it was incorporated into the Land Use Element. Even the commercial uses proposed by Jerwel, however, would be inconsistent with the existing land use designation because the developer is contemplating combined residential-commercial activities in terms of artisan shops with living quarters overhead. No existing land use category could provide for such a scheme. If a project such as this is deemed desirable, obviously modification of the General Plan is necessary to permit a greater degree of development flexibility in this area. 1 25. b. Multi-Modal Transportation Center i As mentioned in a Planning Staff Report on Zone Change 74-20, a portion of the subject property was preliminarily planned to accommodate a future multi-modale transportation center. In conjunction, the Orange County Transportation District has proposed a park-and-ride facility in the vicinity of the San Diego Freeway and Beach Boulevard. Furthermore, the concept of utilizing the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way for a mass rapid transit spur into the City of Huntington Beach may someday become a reality. Thus, the apparent attractiveness of the subject property makes it most desirable to accommodate future plans for the above mentioned uses. However, such a facility is still in the conceptual stage and current funding priorities reveal that any implementation is many years off. The future of this proposal, therefore, is so unsure that it would a ------ unrealistic to impose it as a constraint on planning the area. c. Economic viability i The issue of whether or not the subject property, coupled with the existing Huntington Center, could be totally developed as a regional commercial node is also at question. The existing Land Use Element obviously assumes this is the case. It is the contention of Jerwel Enterprises that the 7.5 i commercially zoned (proposed site of high density residential use) portion of the subject area is not presently rsrketable for commercial use. When considering the recent developments of Westminster Mall and the expansion of South Coast Plaza Shopping Center as well as the depressed state of economic affairs, all short term indications are that .the Huntington Center area may be limited as a regional commercial node. However, the long- range marketability of the property (not immediate developability) should be the major ingredient in formulating future land use plans for the area. It should be noted, though, that the proposed project would retain commercial uses for a majority of the area even while providing for residential and office-professional activities. 26. -- - y � t tltr m- :Y tit N _ U T ON E N W NARNAY AVE � w T CR Cl.� SING FAMILY Y - EMILL N y 2 AVE O O u o cm = r 2 ► = W < u V®6 W CITT OF WCSTMI T -- v CITY IsTER o� �f MOBILE HOME VA C4 W ` Cf-E Gwc vCF-E pw""m ULDEN WEST::OLLEGLI D!tUN R.W IY =-C4- W 0 COMMERCIAL C2 0 yA� I LEVi ~ MMIT OWAY WAND AMTi4GTON CENTER BRo—.Iw.aY W iL ESC NANDYMAN 0 C4 I�RV+J 1!tMTIM±T'N: CENTER = FlIsm r VACANT COMMERCIAL COMME RCIAL C4 ; C4 VACANT C2 AL C2 INDUSTRI T ji J�ff"NVIFM - --- - u su DR '�• Mj va oR -- ART�ME3NTS Fig.2-10 NORTH OF HUNTINGTON CENTER 27. It is apparent that the intent of the Jerwel proposal is to develop a commercially-oriented project in an area planned for commercial use. This proposal seeks variety of urban environments yet coordination of living, working, and shopping activities. Such a concept is desirable and points out a deficiency in the General Plan. Some areas ' of the community, such as this one, lend themselves to a harmony of uses. To encourage multi-use concepts in such areas, however, requires not only an amended Land Use Element but the formulation of a new land use category which can set a theme for the area without inhibiting creative land use , mixes. 2.8.3 Recommendations The previous discussion has investigated the possibilities for a commercial-oriented multi-use project north of Huntington Center and concluded that not only would such a pro ject_ be__acceptable in that area but that it is desirable to formulate a land use category which will permit such multi-use concepts in other suitable areas of the City. Therefore, this amendment proposes establishing a Planned Multiple Use, Commercial classification which would permit multi-use developments oriented toward commercial pursuits in which residential, business, office, and recreation activities are integrated. Acceptable uses under this land use category would include: . retail and avecialty commercial • office-prof :ssional . hotels and motels . residential • public facilities . light industry (such as research facilities) It is further recommended that the Planned Multiple Use, Commercial designation be applied to the 32-acre site north of Huntington Center. 28. 2.9 Hamilton School Site 2.9.1 Background Information The Hamilton School site is located northwest of the intersection of Brookhurst Street and Banning Avenue (Figure 2-11) . In early 1975, the Huntington Beach Elementary School District deleted the Hamilton School site from its Master Plan and has since sold the property. Because the property is no longer considered a future school site, the Land Use Element must be amended to provide an alternative use.- The subject property is an eight-acre vacant school site which is zoned CF-E, Community Facility- Educational. The site was designated by the Land Use Element as a future elementary school site. The property to the north of the site has developed as apartments under the R3, Multi-Family Residential zoning. The property east and south of the study area is being developed as R1 single family housing. A 3.5 acre park site exists to the immediate west. 2.9.2 Analysis The subject area is currently surrounded by residential uses; therefore, it seems logical to propose residential uses for the property. Since the property is bounded by Rl, single family houses on three sides, the subject property should be designated for low density develop- ment. The low density residential designation would result in a maximum of 56 units with a total popu- lation of 199 people. The low density designation would not conflict with the existing medium density residential district to the b north. It would also provide for a logical Extension of the single family homes being constructed on the south and east. 2.9. 3 Recommendation This Amendment to the Land Use Element proposes that Low Density Residential, 0-7 units per gross acre, be applied to the subject property. 29. HAMILTON AVENUE C , CHURCH VACANT VACANT SERVECE R3 R3 C4j E/R DR. APARTMENTS R3 ' i Co. CLEMWN OR rTm-nlr I ju LANDFALL DR. APARTMENTS ' R3 0 8 M VAC �ocuPOW i C F—E R3 CF—R c:...:::::%-_ ��Yy 3 DR 4 i J Jp V N VACANT Q ► ew" mi oft. RA-0 ~ J �w� Fig. 2-11 HAMILTON SCHOOL SITE 30. 2 .10 Newland School Site 2.10.1 Background Information r The Newland School Site is located on Newland Street between Adams and Indianapolis Avenue (Figure 2-12) . In early 1975, the Huntington Beach City School District deleted the site from its Master Plan. The school district is in the process of selling the property. 1 As a result the Land Use Element must be amended to provide an alternative use for the site. The subject property is a vacant school site which consumes approximately 14 acres of R1, Single Family, zoning. The Land Use Element designates this property and the surrounding area for Low Density development. An elementary and junior high school have been designated in the vicinity. However, no specific locations are assigned on the map. The property north, east, and south is developed as single family homes. The area west of the study parcel is primarily -v&cant;_iowever oil production is scattered throughout. A 2.6 acre neighborhood park site is located at the northwest corner of the subject property, but develop- ment of the park has not yet occurred. 2.10. 2 Analysis ! The subject property is a piece of vacant land sur- rounded by low density residential development. It is both zoned and designated for such development. Therefore to retain the homogenous nature of the area, the subject property should be retained as Low Density, 0-7 units per acre on the Land Use Element. 2 .10. 3 Recommendations 1 The Amendment to the Land Use Element proposes that the Elementary and Junior High School designations be eliminated from this area. In addition, it recommends that the Low Density Residential district be retained. r lip r 31. Z ADAMS AVE J = = J a NORTHPORT OR CR. ' Rai2 z , H CR HA N CR. TT 887 Single Family cR --- VACANT - ~ z Rl t > 3 R. a W NORFOLK DR. KELSO O m(K cWa 3 H z � C E W � MASTERS �} x 0 ILQ N Q Q SOUTHPORT DR (�F-'` , (r'rl�%K) L4)? VACANT MAR z J z -j Q %AL D _ z z Z W i z J J MUNSTER DR z 3 - o z J MALLOY z DR J ; = J Y > Y • INUMAPOLIS AVE Fig. s-12 NEWLAND SCHOOL SITE � Adft IN � p WIN 32. 2.11 Administrative Changes The previous discussion presented a detailed investi- gation of possible amendments to the Phase I Land Use Element generated by proposals from the private sector or public agencies. The following proposals, on the other hand, reflect administrative or "housekeeping" actions generated by the Planning Staff. 1. Planning Reserve, Beach/Adams In the Phase I Land Use Element, this 13 acre area east of Beach and south of Adams is designated Planning Reserve, a broadly defined interim designation intended for areas where long term comprehensive planning and development is anticipated (Figure 2-13) . The present zoning is RA-0 and RA-01. The current use is oil ex- traction, and all indications are that this use will continue over the next 20 to 30 years. Thus, the need to set forth specific land uses in the area is of low priority at this time. A Resource Production designation, on the other hand, will assure long-term protection and preservation of this natural resource area. When oil extraction ceases to yield acceptable profit and development pressures crease, more etailed an u designations will be necessary. Recommendation: This amendment proposes redesignation of the area to Resource Production. 2. Planning Reserve, Pacific Coast Highway Oil Strip Similar to the Beach/Adams area, this oil production strip north of Pacific Coast Highway between Goldenwest Street and the Bolsa Chica was desig- nated Planning Reserve by the Phase I Land Use Element (Figure 2-14) . This 93 acres is zoned M2-02 and heavily involved in oil extraction. It 1 is anticipated that this use will continue well into the future. 1 33. ALTAMAR DR VACANT TT 7742 C2 Single Family Rl a VA RIANA CIH _0 1 � C AL-itc ew C] A ANi� APARTMENTS VACANT:C2 ERV "a. �' RA-0 -ir C2 C4 a R5 CA-0 m 1 -- OIL ; RA-01 VACANT VACANT R1-O = VACANT R5-0 I R5 OIL '1 RA-01 ` _ u R2-PD-10 " m 3 i � OIL = ._ AVEJ RA-0 --- _-N VACANT u ci SOUTHPOF C4 W VACANT m C AVE. r-- _ NURSERY -- C? _= I 1COMMERCIAL -- C4 z — -- AVE. J � F111 — j MONSTER]F]�-F Fib. 2-13 PLANNING RESERVE BEACH AN© ADAMS 34. TA My VACANT VACANT R3 R3-0 v VACANTOIL Cl-O ,, - ---- R4 OIL �� R3-01 .1 "i:; OIL OIL �\R2-Pp10 o \ VACANT R2-PD;U . .OIL 00 1:4-01 r \� VACANT GOLF \ •'r R4-0 COURSE `✓� ROS-0 �\ �0 ..................... .. IL' vy .af� � 3 \ VACANT 9 Ar - R4-0 VACANT E C1=0 VACANT M2-01 PLANNING RESERVE PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY OIL STRIP Pig.2-14 35. Recommendation: To protect this valuable natural resource area, the Planning Reserve designation should be amended to Resource Production. When oil reserves are de- pleted, more specific land use categories can be applied. 3. Planning Reserve, Banning/Brookhurst This 12 acre site (Figure 2-15) presently desig- nated Planning Reserve, is zoned RA-0 and is vacant. In early 1975, the entire parcel was purchased by the Orange County Sanitation District for expansion of existing facilities. Therefore, since alternative development possibilities no longer exist, the Planning Reserve designation should be modified to Public Utility, reflecting planned useage. Recommendation: This amendment proposes redesignation of the area to Public Utility. 4. Planning Reserve, Brookhurst/OCFCD Channel This vacant site (Figure 2-16) , previously designated Planning Reserve is zoned RA-0. Like the Banning Broo urst area it has been purchased by the Orange County Sanitation District for expansion of its treatment facility. f Recommendatior. This amendment proposes redesignation of the area to Public Utility. 5. Mobile Home Designations The Phase I Land Use Element designates all existing mobile home parks in the City with a residential density category and a mobile home overlay. It is the purpose of the Element, however, to establish residential densities, not types of uses, and so it is unnecessary to identify mobile homes in addition to density range. Therefore, 36. HAMILTON AVENUE CHURCH VACANT VACANT ISERVICS 5HOPPIN R3 R3 C4 LIM lop CENTER 4 i W TtT-d< APARTMENTS oft R3 3 0 I u oa. APARTMENTS 2 R3 a o g CF-Eti C F JR VACANT 4� N Fc E DR \ W Y 4•p?• G I T Y A N N I N G -- -- �— ,t Fig.4-15 PLANNING RESERVE BANNING AND BROOKHURST 37. J LEILANI DR. WATCH CABT 0 ac = i U! TT 5664 m CONDOMINIUM SHOPPI Rrl R2 CENTE C4 O� s tulo I W, �J OR byRE S VACANT Ml-A • R5 y� QAAV MANS. O 11 O Q � ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION TREATMENT VACANT C PLANT C0,9s P.5 � O T 0 I � Fig.Z-16 PLANNING RESERVE BROOKHURST AND 0 C F C D 38. lip in an effort to make the City's General Plan as general and flexible as it should be as a long- range guide for development, all mobile home designations should be removed. Recommendation: This amendment proposes removal of all mobile home designations from the Phase I Land use Element. 6. Route 39 Freeway and Transportation Corridor In the past the City's Land Use Elements have . reflected State plans for freeways in Huntington Beach. The status of these plans has changed, however, eliminating the need to accommodate them within the twenty-year scope of the General Plan. The previous amendment to the Phase I Land Use Element adopted March, 1975, deleted the Route 39 designations in the Government Center/Old Town Planning Unit and the Beach/Ellis Planning Unit. To remove remaining Route 39 designations, this amendment addresses four additional areas of the City. . The first site (Figure 2-17) is adjacent to the San Diego Freeway west of Newland. This 7-acre area is currently vacant and zoned R-3. Surround- ing uses are residential and commercial. The adjacent area is developed in multiple-family uses. Recommendation: f To maintain compatibility, this area should be designated Me lum Density Residential. The second site (Figure 2-18) is 63 acres north of Warner, east of Newland and south of Heil. This area is zoned R1 and currently developed. Recommendation: r To reflect existing conditions, therefore, the freeway designation should be deleted and the area identified as Low Density Residential (0-7 units/gac) . 39. EDINGER AV o , A APARTMENTS R3 R4 Z pRJ I VACANT SINGLE FAMILY Z C2 R1 G5.5 a �u o L SINGLE FAMILY F R1 0 2' < Z W � Z O SCiOOL W N 1 z trr�ar�z OF Fi�.4.17 FREEWAY AND TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR 40. : : 1111111 � ►I� :� ����� The third area is north of Ellis and west of Newland (Figure 2-19) . The 10-acre freeway designation is bordered by Low Density Residential use on the Land Use Element. The entire vicinity is presently zoned R1 and Rl-PD and developed or approved for those uses. Recommendation: In accordance with State plans, the freeway designation should be deleted and the Land Use Element amended to Low Density Residential (0-7 units/gross acre) . The Route 39 Freeway is also designated on 3 acres east of Beach and south of Garfield (Figure 2-20) . The existing zoning and_ use of this area is commercial. The surrounding _a_rea is planned for Medium Residential or additional Commercial. Recommendation: The freeway designation should be deleted and the Land Use Element should be amended to Commercial. The Phase I Land Use Element contains a Transportation Corridor designation which generally follows previously planned alignments of a proposed Route 1 freeway (Figure 2-21) . Portions of the Corridor through the Government Center/Old Town Planning Unit were deleted by the previous Land Use Amendment. This Amend- ment proposes d letion of the remainder of the Corridor (75 acres) from Atlanta to Newland. Though a transportation study is currently underway, the Transportation Corridor designation is meaningless on the Land Use Element and should be considered in the Circulation Element. To reflect the uncertain future of lands within the Corridor pending completion of the transportation study, the Land Use Element should include the corridor area in the Planning Reserve designation now adjacent to it. 42. �La ► ► ► J t 1 1 J �P — .. �rr_..__ - AVENUE ...,. ..�� 1 �; O TH IE CA. AVENU NER AVE. 1�•• •bLcwaocii?� t W J { Rl—PD R. LE CONTE DR. , 'I 11 SINGLE FATLY .. .loll . �P f. TM E D. Z VACANT '.T 777 O -j _ R1 CONDO I Z R1—PD VACANT W R1 R2 ELLis Z J , CHURCH TT 8687 MH SINGLE R3 R2—PD-8 FAMILY Rl I J u Fiw 2-19 FREEWAY AND TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR 43. �� . i■i i t � f, ■ s NI ' ■ ■ ••ii••i= �, ,�•� �IN Il,lo • •:•• • Q� � •r• • �S�i•i•r •�� • rr �O Q r _ _ CF-R 41.E -,."NOT Fib.2-21 FREEWAY AND TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR EL M 45. Recommendation: This amendment proposes deletion of the Trans- portation Corridor and retention of the Planning Reserve designation in the area from Atlanta to Newland. A 46. 1 FIP section 3.0 amendment ' summary 3. 0 AMENDMENT SUMMARY As explained in Section 1. 0 , the purpose of this second amendment to the Phase I Land Use Element is to investigate areas of the City where changing conditions require reconsideration of past decisions and to initiate several minor administrative adjustments. This section of the report compiles the recommendations developed in Section 2. 0 into a combined form for adoption. 3. 1 Scope of Amendment Adoption of this amendment to the Phase I Land Use Element consti- tutes approval of the Land Use plans , added residential standards, and new Planned Multiple Use, Commercial designation in the identi- fied areas only. Adoption of the amendment will not affect any other area of the City. 3. 2 Residential Standards Residential standards utilized in this amendment are those incorpor- ated in the first amendment to the Phase I Land Use Element. These standards, which generally reduce residential densities, are outlined in the first amendment report. Because they were adopted in that document, they need not be re-adopted at this time. With adoption of this second amendment, however, the new densities will be applied to the identified areas thus adding to the five planning units in which they are already used. lip 47. 3. 3 Planned Multiple Use Adoption of this amendment includes adoption of an additional land use classification: Planned Multiple Use, Commercial. As discussed in Section 2. 8.2 and 2 . 8. 3, this new classification will permit multiple use developments oriented toward commercial pursuits in which residential, business, office, and recreation activities are integrated. Acceptable uses under this land use category would include: d • retail and specialty commercial • office-professional • hotels and motels • residential • public facilities • light industry (such as research facilities) . 3. 4 Proposed Amendment, Phase I Land Use Element The following paragraphs summarize the recommended changes to the amendment which are illustrated in Figure 3-1: 1. Yorktown School Site This deleted 50-acre school site at Yorktown and Magnolia Streets Id should be designated for Low Density Residential (0-7 units per gross acre) uses in keeping with surrounding development. The proposed park in the vicinity should be redesignated from Community to Neighborhood status in recognition of the decreased acreage and facil ities to be provided. PROPOSED LAND USE ACREAGE SUMMARY Category Gross Acres Residential Low Density 0-7 un/gac 48 Other Park 2 Total: 50 PROJECTED POPULATION Residential Gross Maximum Total Population Estimated Type Acres Units/gac Units Per Unit Population Single-family 48 x 7 = 336 x 3. 55 = 1193 48. P co/pti fp C�'g• Ol`94 O�SP •9(,1, tP lq,�' FO .. !Ify 7. V P I C•Pgyq S ,�O 6 ♦d�2 APO O 4 C C 50 1O Gb ti 2 4 ¢. P l 2 e 4 P2 0 :........... .:...:........:.:....::.:::.. .. BOAS .........." s. : • •t .: ....... ... F .......... Fig. 3-1 HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA PLANNING DEPARTMENT LEGEND Residential Public Y �9 P Proposed Low Density 0-7 un ac P opos Pa rk Medium Density 8-15 un/gac B Proposed Beach PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE PHASE Commercial Other .t- - Retail Resource Production ND USE ELEMENT MAY 1975 Industrial ME PlannedMultiple Use,Commercial EM Public Utility Destination Resort 2. Huntington Harbour Area This 25-acre site should be designated Medium Density Residential and Retail Commercial. A park and beach site should also be identi- fied. Such land use guides will capitalize on the water-oriented character of the site and bring added revenues to the City, serve residents of the area, be consistent with the County recreation area to the west, and increase public access to the water resources of Huntington Harbour. PROPOSED LAND USE ACREAGE SUMMARY Category Gross Acres Residential Medium Density 8-15 un/gac 10. 0 Commercial Retail 9. 0 Park and Beach 6. 0 Total: 25. 0 PROJECTED POPULATION Residential Gross Maximum Total Population Estimated Type Acres Units/gac Units Per Unit Population Medium Density 10 x 15 = 150 x 2. 3 = 345 r 3. Signal Property (Bolsa Chica/Talbert/Springdale) The 48-acre area east of Springdale should be redesignated from Medium Density Residential and Commercial to Low Density Residential. This change reflects the deletion of the Route 1 Freeway and is consistent with surrounding residential uses. (The remaining 24 acres should be retained as designated for commercial use. ) PROPOSED LAND USE ACREAGE SUMMARY Category Gross Acres Residential Low Density 0-7 un/gac 72 r r 49. PROJECTED POPULATION i Residential Gross Maximum Total Population Estimated Type Acres Units/gac Units Per Unit Population Low Density 72 x 7 = 504 x 3. 55 = 1789 7 4 . Kendall Property (Slater and Graham) In keeping with surrounding residential development, this 38-acre site should be redesignated from Medium Density to Low Density Residential. PROPOSED LAND USE ACREAGE SUMMARY Category Gross Acres Residential Low Density 0-7 un/gac 38 PROJECTED POPULATION Residential Gross Maximum Total Population Estimated Type Acres Units/gac Units Per Unit Population Low Density 38 x 7 = 266 x 3. 55 = 944 s 5. North of Huntington Center This 32-acre area should be redesignated from Commercial to Planned Multiple Use, Commercial in, order to foster multi-use developemtns in which commercial, residential,* business, office, and recreation activities are integrated. Category Gross Acres Other Planned Multiple-Use, Commercial 32 6 . Hamilton School Site Because this proposed school site has been deleted from school district plans and the property sold and to provide an alternative 50 . lip use compatible with surrounding development, this 8-acre site should be redesignated Low Density Residential. PROPOSED LAND USE ACREAGE SUMMARY Category Gross Acres Residential Low Density 0-7 un/gac 8 PROJECTED POPULATION Residential Gross Maximum Total Population Estimated Type Acres Units/gac Units Per Unit Population Low Density 8 x 7 = 56 x 3. 55 = 199 7. Newland School Site To bring the City' s Land Use Element into consistency with School district plan, this abandoned school site should be deleted from the General Plan. The existing land use designation of Low Density Residential should be retained. 8 . Administrative Changes a. Planning Reserve, Beach/Adams. To protect ex- isting oil extraction uses, this 13-acre area should be redesignated from Planning Reserve to Resource Production. b. Planning Reserve, Pacific Coast Highway Oil Strip. To protect existing oil extraction uses, this 93-acre area should be redesignated from Planning Reserve to Resource Production. C. Planning Reserve, Banning/Brookhurst. Reflect- ing planned expansion by the Or .nge County Sanitation District, this 12-acre site should be redesignated from Planning Reserve to Public Utility. d. Planning Reserve, Brookhurst/OCFCD Channel. Reflecting planned expansion by the Orange County Sanitation District, this 3-acre site should be redesignated from Planning Reserve to Public Utility. e. Mobile Home Designations. To maintain consis- tency in designating residential densities only and not unit types, all mobile home overlay designations should be removed from the Phase I Land Use Element. f. Route 39 Freeway and Transportation Corridor. 1 Because the Route 39 Freeway is no longer planned and because circu- lation issues should not be addressed in the Land Use Element, the XWk 51. r Freeway and Transportation Corridor designations should be deleted from the plan. In their place, existing land uses should be accom- modated: Newland and Edinger - Medium Density Residential Newland and Heil - Low Density Residential Newland and Ellis - Low Density Residential Garfield and Beach - Commercial Atlanta to Newland - Planning Reserve PROPOSED LAND USE ACREAGE SUMMARY Category Gross Acres Residential Low Density 73 i+ Medium Density 7 Commercial Retail 3 Other Planning .Reserve 75 Total : 158 PROJECTED POPULATION Residential Gross Maximum Total Population Estimated Type Acres Units/gay . Units Per Unit Population Low Density 73 x 7 = 511 x 3 .55 = 1813 , Medium Density 7 x 15 = 101 x 2 .3 = 241 Y 2054 3 .5 Summary of Land Use and Population The following tables present a statistical summary of the proposals set forth in this amendment: 52 . lip '� PROPOSED LAND USE ACREAGE SUMMARY Category Gross Acres Residential 1 Low Density 0-7 un/gac 239 Medium Density 8-15 un/gac 17 Commercial 1 Retail 12 Planned Multiple Use 32 Industrial. 1 Public Utility 15 Resource Production 106 Open Space Park and Beach 8 Other . Planning Reserve 75 Total 504 PROJECTED POPULATION 1 Residential Gross Maximum Total Population Estimated Type Acres Units/gac Units Per Unit Population Low Density 239 x 7 = 1673 x 3. 55 = 5939 Medium Density 17 x 15 = 255 x 2. 3 = 586 6525 B 53. Ana, 4.0 environmental assessment r 1 r r 4. 0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 4. 1 Project Description and Location E The proposed project is the second amendment to the Phase I Land Use Element of the General Plan prepared by the Advanced Planning Section of the City of Huntington Beach Planning Department. This amendment is designed to investigate specific areas where changing conditions require reconsideration of past decisions , and to establish land use policy accordingly. Another objective is to accomplish several t minor administrative adjustments. The study areas, which in total cover 811 acres, are scattered throughout the City of Huntington Beach. All areas are shown in Figure 2-1. 4. 1. 1 Yorktown School Site The Yorktown school site encompasses 50 acres , and is bounded by the Southern California Edison right-of-way on the north, Magnolia Street on the east, Yorktown Avenue on the south, and vacant R-1 lots on the west. The amendment proposes to change the deleted school site to Low Density Residential on 48 acres. Two acres will be redesignated from a community park to a neighborhood park. 4. 1. 2 Huntington Harbor Area The Huntington Harbor area known as Tract 8718 covers r 25 acres, and is bounded by the Orange County Flood Control District (OCFCD) CO4 Channel on the north, 54 . i Tract 5483 and the proposed Long Channel in Huntington Harbor on the east, the State-owned Main Channel on the south, and the CO4 Channel on the west. The amend- ment proposes that the present Low Density Residential designation be changed to Medium Density Residential (10 acres) , Retail Commercial (9 acres) , and Park and Beach (6 acres) . 4. 1. 3 Manthei Property The Manthei property covers 20 acres , and is bounded by M-1 and R-3 zoned land on the north, R-2 zoned land on the east, Talbert Avenue on the south, and M-1 zoned land east of the Pacific Electric Railroad right-of-way. The amendment proposes no change of the existing Light Industrial designation. 4. 1. 4 Bolsa Chica and Heil Avenue The subject property consists of 12 acres on the south- west corner of Bolsa Chica Street and Heil Avenue. The amendment proposes to maintain the existing Medium Density Residential designation. 4. 1. 5 Signal Property The Signal property occupies 72 acres, and is bounded by Talbert Avenue on the north, vacant R-1 zoned land on the east, and the City limits on the south and west. The amendment proposes to change the property' s desig- nation from Retail Commercial and Medium Density Residential to Retail Commercial and Low Density Resi- dential. 4. 1. 6 Kendall Property - - -- The subject property covers 38 acres, and is bounded by Slater Avenue on the north, Graham Street on the east, and the City limits on the south and west. The amendment proposes to change the property from Medium Density Residential to Low Density Residential. 4. 1. 7 Classic Development The Classic development area consists of seven acres, and is bounded by Ellis Avenue on the north, Hunting- ton Street on the east, vacant M2-0 land on the south, and the Pacific Electric Railroad right-of-way on the west. The amendment proposes to retain the Light In- dustrial designation. • 55. i 4. 1. 8 North of Huntington Center The subject property encompasses 32 acres, and is bounded by the San Diego Freeway on the north and east, Center Drive on the south, and the Pacific Electric Railroad right-of-way on the west. The amendment pro- poses a change in designation from Re_t_ai_l Commercial to Planned Multiple Use, Commercial. i 4. 1. 9 Hamilton School Site The Hamilton school site covers 8 acres, and is bounded by residential areas on the north, east, and south near the northwest intersection of Brookhurst Street and Banning Avenue. A park site bounds the property on the west. The amendment proposes changing the deleted school site to Low Density Residential. 4. 1. 10 Newland School Site The Newland school site occupies 14 acres on the west side of Newland Street between Adams Avenue and Indian- apolis Avenue. The amendment proposes that the Elementary and Junior High School designations be elim- inated, and that the existing Low Density Residential district be retained. ! 4 . 1. 11 Administrative Changes 1. Planning Reserve, Beach/Adams. The subject property covers 13 acres, and is bounded by Adams Avenue on the north, the OCFCD DO1 Channel on the east, C-2 and R-1 ! zoned land on the south, and Beach Boulevard on the west. The amendment proposes to delete the Planning Reserve designation and redesignate Resource Production. 2. Planning Reserve, Pacific Coast Highway. The sub- ject property encompasses 93 acres, and is bounded by vacant residential zoned land to the north, Goldenwest Street on the east, Pacific Coast Highway on the south, and the City limits on the- west. The amendment pro,-- - - - - --- -- -- - poses to delete the Plannin_g Reserve designation and redesignate Resource Production. 3. Planning Reserve, Brookhurst/Banning. The subject property occupies 12 acres, and is bounded by vacant R-3 zoned land on the north, the Santa Ana River on the east, Banning Avenue on the south, and Brookhurst 1 Street on the west. The amendment proposes that the Planning Reserve designation be changed to Public Util- ity. 56. 4. Planning Reserve, Brookhurst/OCFCD Channel. The subject property covers 3 acres, and is bounded by the Orange County Sanitation District on the north and east, the OCFCD DO2 Channel on the south, and Brookhurst Street on the west. The amendment proposes that the Planning Reserve designation be changed to Public Ut- ility. 5. Mobile Home Designations. Ten residential sites designated Mobile Home exist in the Land Use Element. These areas encompass a total area of 254 acres. The amendment proposes the removal of all Mobile Home des- ignations. Low Density Residential and Medium Density Residential designations will be retained. Residential densities will not be changed. 6. Route 39 Freeway, Ellis/Newland. The subject prop- erty occupies 10 acres near the northwest corner of Ellis Avenue and Newland Street. The amendment proposes redesignation of the freeway route to Low Density Residential. 7. Route 39 Freeway, Beach/Garfield. The subject property covers 3 acres at the southeast corner of Beach Boulevard and Garfield Avenue. The amendment pro- poses redesignation of the freeway route to Retail Commercial. 8. Route 39 Freeway, Beach/Heil. The subject property covers 63 acres southeast of the Beach Boulevard/Heil Avenue intersection. The amendment proposes redesigna- tion of the freeway route to Low Density Residential. 9. Route 39 Freeway, Newland/San Diego Freeway. The subject property covers 7 acres at the west intersec- tion of Newland Street and the San Diego Freeway. The amendment proposes redesignation of the freeway route to Medium Density Residential. 10. Transportation Corridor, South of Atlanta. The sub- ject property covers 75 acres in a curvilinear pattern from the southwest intersection of Atlanta Avenue and Beach Boulevard to the northwest intersection of Pac- ific Coast Highway and Newland Street. The amendment proposes removal of the Transportation Corridor desig- nation and retention of the Destination Resort desig- nation. 4. 2 Environmental Setting and Impact. The proposed project is located in the City of Huntington Beach, / which is a metropolitan area in a metropolitan county. As a result, 57. the local and regional environments are primarily urban in charac- ter. 4. 2 . 1 Yorktown School Site 1. Land Use/Demography. The deleted school site is currently vacant and is zoned RA. Property to the north across the Edison right-of-way consists of single-family homes and a community commercial center. Zoning is R-1 and C-4 , and the Land Use Element shows Low Density Residential and Retail Commercial designa- tion. Property to the east and south of the site are existing single-family homes, zoned R-1, and designated Low Density Residential in the Land Use Element. To the west are vacant parcels zoned R-1 and designated Low Density Residential. The effect of the amendment will be to change land use from a school site/community park to a Low Density Residential area at 0-7 units per gross acre. The proposed use is compatible with surrounding land uses and no significant effect is expected. A maximum of 336 dwelling units with an estimated population of 1,193 persons will be accommodated on the 48 acres of residential land. Two acres of the site are designated as part of a neighborhood park to include the Edison right-of-way. The total park area will be 18 acres. The deletion of the school site will mean a decrease in expected recreational activity because a portion of the school site and adjacent properties were to have constituted a full-range 20-30 acre community park. 2. Topography and Geology. The subject property is located on the flood plain of the Santa Ana River in the broad gap formed between Huntington Beach Mesa and Costa Mesa. The site topography is relatively level at an elevation of about 10 feet above sea level. The Hanford Fine Sandy Loam soil type dominates the surface, with quaternary sedimentary deposits of recent age alluvium and the pleistocene age lakewood formation constituting the sub-surface geology. The site is also located within the Newport-Inglewood fault zone. The Yorktown Avenue fault trace crosses the southwest section of the property and the Bolsa-Fairview fault 1 passes within 1,000 feet to the north. A Low Density Residential land use will have minimal effect on the natural landform. Location on a sandy alluvial soil with possible unconsolidated peat dep- osits in the area could subject a development to 1 liquefaction during a local earthquake. The historic Adft M 58. 1111 seismic record suggests the probability of earthquake activity in the general area with peak ground accelera- tions ranging from about . 18g to . 30g. 3. Water Resources. The project site is located in the Talbert Gap, which is part of the Santa Ana River watershed and flood plain. This area is designated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as a special flood hazard area. In the event of a Standard Project Flood (200-year storm) , the property would be inundated by two feet of water. With the exception of regional flood conditions, storm water collected by the site is directed to a 51-inch pipeline on Yorktown and a 48-inch pipeline on Magnolia. 4 The Yorktown line directs all water to the Yorktown pump station and the OCFCD DO2 Channel for final dis- posal at the ocean. A low density residential use of the property would intensify storm runoff and decrease percolation. However, the pervious differential between low density residential and a school site is only about 5 percent. The low density residential use will gen- erate approximately 61 cubic feet per second under 25-year storm conditions. At this rate , the existing drainage facilities in the area will be sufficient to accommodate flows. Storm runoff from a low density residential development would indirectly introduce additional contaminants to the ocean. However, the control of urban runoff and its impact on regional water quality is so poorly developed that at present the only effective mitigation measure is to process such runoff in a sewage treat- ment facility. 4. Air Resources. The City of Huntington Beach is located within the South Coast Air Basin. Like other coastal cities, Huntington Beach experiences consid- erably less air pollution than inland cities. The daily sea breezes along the coast clear the skies by sweeping pollutants inland. The City' s relatively flat topography offers little resistance to this cleansing action. As a result of low density residential development at the subject property, vehicle traffic would be the primary source of air emissions. The major emissions will include carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, and particulates. The project site would add about 20,750 daily vehicle miles traveled to the City' s streets and . 825 tons of vehicu- 59. lar emissions to the atmosphere. The traffic emissions from the site would increase total contaminant levels by . 02 percent in the South Coast Air Basin. 5. Biological Resources. Development of the project site in conformance with the proposed Low Density Residential designation will result in the removal of all existing natural vegetation and the displacement or elimination of wildlife species. No trees are known to exist at the site. The rest of the low growth vege- tation is typical of that in a Mediterranean climate. These species and associated wildlife species are presented in Section 2. 4 of the Conservation Potentials Report. E 6. Human Interest Resources. No known archaeological sites, paleontological sites, or historic landmarks exist at the site. No effect on these resources is ex- pected. 7 . Municipal Services and Utilities. The Southern California Edison Company provides electricity to the area of the site. A low density residential use will consume approximately 5,700 KWH per dwelling unit per year, or 1,915 , 000 KWH per year. This amounts to less than . 01 percent of Edison' s supply capability. The Southern California Gas Company provides gas ser- vice to the area of the project site. The average single-family home uses 122 ,000 cubic feet of gas per year. At this rate, a low residential density use would increase demand by about 41, 000 ,000 cubic feet of gas per year, or by . 05 percent of the Gas Company' s supply capability. Water service to the area of the project site is pro- vided by the Huntington Beach Water Department. Using a rate of 147 gallons of water demand per person per day, the site' s future population will require a total of 175 , 400 gallons per day from the water source, or about .79 percent of present usage in the City. The site will be served by an existing 12-inch water line along Magnolia and by 12-inch and 30-inch lines in Yorktown. 1 The Orange County Sanitation District, in cooperation with the City of Huntington Beach, provides sewer service to the area of the proposed site. The general area is serviced by a 72-inch County sewer line on Magnolia and a 12-inch line on Yorktown. These facili- ties have been designed to accommodate projected sewage 60 . 1 flows in the area. A low density residential use will contribute about 118 gallons per day per person to t these lines, or a total of 140,,800 gallons per day. Solid waste pickup service for the project area is pro- vided by Rainbow Disposal. The Rainbow Disposal Company has indicated that no problem would occur in servicing the site. Solid waste demand for service will increase by about 3 tons per day. Police and fire protection are provided to the area of the project by the City of Huntington Beach. Based on the present manpower requirements of approximately one officer per 1 ,000 residents, the addition of 1,193 persons to the City may require one additional police officer. The project site is within the standard two- mile or five-minute radius of fire service, and no adverse effects are expected. The project site lies within the Fountain Valley School District for grades K-8 and the Huntington Beach Union High School District for grades 9-12. The change in land use from school site to Low Density Residential will result in an additional 315 elementary school students and 95 high school students to these districts. The high schools in the local area are presently over- crowded and the Yorktown site has been deleted from the High School District' s Master Plan. However, the High School District believes that overcrowding condi- tions can be relieved and foreseeable growth accom- modated by the development of one new site (Warner and Goldenwest) rather than two (the other being the de- leted Yorktown site) . 8. Economics. Depending on the market value of the future single-family homes at the site, the change to Low Density Residential could have a positive or a negative impact on the City and school revenues/ expenditures. For a positive effect on City revenues, homes will have to sell for about $43 ,750 or more. For a positive impact on schools, homes will have to sell for $47 ,250, plus. Since the average value of a single- family home in Huntington Beach is above these figures, the overall effect will probably be beneficial. 9. Traffic Circulation. The project site is accessible from Magnolia Street and Yorktown Avenue. .The present traffic volume on Magnolia is 29,000 vehicles per day. Traffic volume on Yorktown is 4 ,300 vehicles per day. Single-family residences will add about 3 ,460 trips per day to these arterials. A high school at this 61. site will generate 4 ,500 to 5,000 daily trips. Capacities on Magnolia and Yorktown are estimated at 20 ,000 daily vehicles each. Traffic on Magnolia presently exceeds this desirable capacity. The addi- tion of vehicles from a low density residential use will compound congestion pressures on Magnolia, but less so than a high school use of the property. , 10. Acoustical Quality. Traffic on Magnolia Street and Yorktown Avenue will be the major source of noise in the project area. Along Magnolia, the median sound level at 100 feet from the arterial is approxi- mately 67 dB (A) . The existing noise level along Yorktown is 57 dB (A) . Added vehicle traffic from the proposed residential use would increase noise levels to about 67. 5 dB (A) on Magnolia and 58. 5 dB (A) along Yorktown. 4. 2. 2 Huntington Harbour Area An environmental assessment of the Huntington Harbour project is contained in EIR 74-6. The Medium Density Residentail/Retail Commercial project is considered as an alternative to Huntington Harbour' s proposed townhouse project on Tract 8718 . The environmental assessment is presented on pages 109-120 of the Alternatives section of the report. EIR 74-6 was posted for public and private input on May 6 , 1975. 4. 2. 3 Manthei Property Since the proposed amendment recommends no change in the existing Light Industrial designation, no disposition is needed. Rationale for retention of the existing Light Industrial designation is presented in Section 2 . 3. ! • • 62 . S 4. 2. 4 Bolsa Chica and Heil Avenue ! Since the ,proposed amendment recommends no change in the existing Medium Density Residential designation, no disposition is needed. Reasons for maintaining the existing Medium Density Residential use are pre- sented in Section 2. 4 . 1 4. 2. 5 Signal Property An environmental assessment of the Signal property at Talbert and Springdale is contained in EIR 74-4. 1 The original project and EIR were approved on March 18 , 1975, and there were no substantial changes pro- posed in the project to involve new environmental impacts not considered in the original EIR: 4. 2 . 6 Kendall Property ! An environmental assessment of the Kendall property at Slater and Graham is contained in EIR 73-26. The original project and EIR were approved on July 2 , 1974 , and there were no substantial changes proposed in the project to involve new environmental impacts not con- e 1 R 63. a sidered in the original EIR. Moreover, the Huntington Beach Environmental Review Board on March 11, 1975, found that in accordance with Section 15067 of the California Environmental Quality Act guidelines no added environmental documents were required for this change in land use nomenclature. 4. 2 . 7 Classic Development Since the proposed amendment recommends no change in the existing Light Industrial designation, no disposi- tion is needed. Retention of the Light Industrial use will reduce the magnitude of local environmental effects in the area. First, the Bolsa-Fairview fault traverses across the north section of the property, thus posing a safety hazard to fewer persons. Industrial use will be more compatible with surrounding industrial uses and the Central Industrial Corridor. Lastly, the extension of Ellis to connect Beach and Gothard and the reroute of Huntington Street through the center of the subject property to connect with Ellis will provide access to industrial traffic and render residential use undesir- able (congestion, noise, and lower local air quality) . 4. 2 . 8 North of Huntington Center 1. Land Use/Demography. The subject property is pre- sently vacant and is zoned C-4. Land to the north across McFadden Avenue and the San Diego Freeway is developed to single-family homes. Zoning is R-1 and M-1, and the Land Use Element designates the area Low Density Residential and Light Industrial. Property to the east across the San Diego Freeway is developed to residential use and is within the City of Westminster. South of Center Drive is the Southern California Edi- son right-of-way and the Huntington Center. Zoning is R-1 in the Edison right-of-way and C-2 (Retail Commer- cial) at the Huntington Center. The Pacific Electric right-of-way and the Southern California Edison right- of-way are located directly west. Zoning is R-1 for the Edison right-of-way and M-1 for the railroad right-of-way. Golden West College is situated to the west of these areas. The effect of the amendment will be to change land use from Retail Commercial to Planned Multiple Use, Commer- cial. The latter classification would permit multiple use developments oriented toward commercial activities in which retail and specialty commercial, office professional, hotel and motel, residential, public A!Rk 64 . ! facility, and light industry activities are integrated. If well designed, a commercially oriented multiple use ! development would provide a variety of urban environ- ments yet coordinate living, working, and shopping activities. At least a general quantitative indication of the land use mix is required to adequately assess the growth and layout of dwelling units, offices, re- tail shops, etc. , and the increased accommodation of residential, employee, and customer populations. A specific plan is being developed by the City staff and Jerwel Enterprises, but no agreement has been reached as to whether a multiple commercial oriented use or total retail commercial use will prevail. As a result, it is too premature to assume a land use mix .and assess impacts on local/regional land use and demography. 2. Topography and Geology. The subject property is located on the Santa Ana River flood plain approxi- mately 1. 5 miles north of the Huntington Beach Mesa and 2 miles northeast' of the Bolsa Chica Mesa. The ! site topography is relatively level with a one percent grade toward Center Drive. The average elevation is about 25 feet above sea level. Three soil types exist at the site: Chino Silty Clay in the western one-third of the property, Chino Clay Loam in the center of the property, and peat deposits in the southeast section. Quaternary sedimentary deposits of recent age alluvium and the pleistocene age lakewood formation constitute the underlying geology. The site is located north of the Newport-Inglewood fault zone. The nearest fault is the Bolsa-Fairview fault which is 2.5 miles from ! the property. A multiple commercial oriented use will have a minimal effect on the natural landform. Preliminary plans for such a development indicate that the entire 32 acres would require grading with an additional 40, 000 to ! 50 ,000 cubic yards of earthen material imported. The maximum height and grade of fill after the completion of grading would be about 3 feet. Peat deposits could present foundation problems if structures are located on the southeast portion of the property. Although not located within the Newport-Inglewood fault zone, a maximum probable earthquake will probably be felt at the site. The combination of peat deposits and ground shaking at the site during seismic activity could also subject development to a low liquefaction hazard. 3. Water Resources. The project site is located in r the Santa Ana River watershed and flood plain. U.S. Army Corps of Engineer maps indicate that the property Aft 65 . lies within a flood hazard area. In the event of a Standard Project Flood, the property will be inundated by 1. 5 feet of water. Excluding regional flood conditions, storm water col- lected by the site is directed by gravity flow to an open ditch paralleling the San Diego Freeway and/or the C5SC2 Channel along Center Drive. The C5SC2 Channel conducts all runoff from the site to the OCFCD C05 Channel for final disposal at Bolsa Chica Bay. A multiple commercial oriented development will in- crease storm runoff and decrease percolation. This use will generate approximately 39 cubic feet per second under 25-year storm conditions, and is not significantly different from a total retail commercial use. Pro- jected storm runoff can be accommodated by existing drainage facilities. Storm runoff from such a high intensity development will indirectly introduce additional effluents into Bolsa Chica Bay via the CO2 Channel. Primary pollut- ants will include greases, oils, asbestos, heavy metals, fertilizers, and pesticides. The only effect- ive measure to control the quality of urban runoff is processing in a sewage treatment facility. 4. Air Resources. The project site is situated within the South Coast Air Basin. Similar to other coastal locations , the air of the Huntington Beach area is less polluted than inland cities. However, the pro- ject site is subjected to relatively high levels of air emissions due to the high intensity of human activity in the surrounding area. The major source of air emissions is traffic generated by Huntington Center, Golden West College, and the San Diego Freeway. A multiple commercial oriented development at the site will intensify the concentration of traffic and local air emissions. Residential areas within the multi-use development will be subjected to this increased level of contaminants as well as air emissions generated by Huntington Center, Golden West College, and the San Diego Freeway. Land use mix is indeterminant at the project site, and hence no reliable estimation of incremental local traffic and emission levels can be made at this time. 5. Biological Resources. Development of the subject property_ in conformance with the proposed Planned Multi- ple Use, Commercial designation will result in the removal of all existing natural vegetation and the displacement or elimination of wildlife species. No 66- trees are known to exist at the site. The rest of the low growth vegetation is typical of that in a Mediter- ranean climate. These species and associated wildlife species are presented in Section 2 .4 of the Conservation Potentials Report. 6. Human Interest Resources. No known archaeological sites, paleontological sites, or historic landmarks exist at the site. No effect on these resources is expected. 7. Municipal Services and Utilities. The Southern California Edison Company provides electricity to the area of the site. A multiple commercial oriented use will increase electricity demand but will be accommo- dated by the extension of electrical service to the site. Land use mix is indeterminant at the subject property. As a result, no reliable estimation of incre- mental effects on electrical supply can be made at this time. The Southern California Gas Company provides gas service to the area of the project site. The proposed use of the property will increase natural gas demand. The Gas Company has indicated that such demand can probably be accommodated by the extension of service without f significant effect on gas supplies. Since land use mix is unknown, no reliable estimation of incremental ef- fects on gas supply can now be determined. .Water service to the area of the site is provided by the Huntington Beach Water Department. At present, the area is serviced by a 12-inch water line in Center Drive. The Water Department indicated that this would be insufficient to serve a multi-use commercial/resi- dential center. As a result, looped water service will be required to adequately supply the area. Again, because of the unknown land use mix incremental effects on water supply and demand cannot be adequately assessed at this time. The Orange County Sanitation District, in cooperation with the City of Huntington Beach, provides sewer service to the area of the proposed site. The area is serviced by a 10-inch to 12-inch sewer line along Cen- ter Drive, a 69-inch County line in the railroad right- of-way, and an 18-inch sewer along McFadden Avenue. These facilities have been designed to accommodate pro- jected .sewage flows in the area. No adverse effect on sewer service is expected. N 67. Solid waste pickup service for the project area is provided by Rainbow Disposal. The Rainbow Disposal Company has indicated that no problem would occur in , servicing the site. Police and fire protection are provided to the area of the project by the City of Huntington Beach. No unusual policing problems in surveillance are expected from an integrated commercial/residential complex. The popula- tion size and intensity of commercial activity could be sufficient to require one additional police officer to the City Police Department. The project site is within the standard two-mile or five-minute radius of fire service, and no adverse effects are expected. The project site lies within the Ocean View School District for grades K-8 and the Huntington Beach Union High School District for. grades 9-12 . The new Planned_ Multiple Use_,.. Commercial. desiqnation will allow residen- tial development. Preliminary indication from Jerwel Enterprises is that any residential complex at the site , would be adult-oriented with no generation of K-12 grade age students. 8. Economics. Since the land use mix is presently un- known, no reliable estimate of City and school revenues/ expenditures are ascertainable. In all probability, a . mixed commercial/residential development would have a positive effect on City and school revenues. However, this positive economic return could be reduced in significance during the short-term. The recent devel- opment of Westminster Mall and the expansion of South Coast Plaza as well as the present recession indicate that the Huntington Center area may be limited as a regional commercial node. In the long-term, the mixture of commercial and residential land uses should increase in economic viability. 9 . Traffic Circulation. Relevant traffic arteries at or near the site include the San Diego Freeway, Beach Boulevard, Edinger Avenue, Gothard Street, McFadden Avenue , and Center Drive. Traffic on the San Diego Freeway is estimated to range from 110 ,000-130,000 ve- hicles per day. Beach Boulevard between the freeway and Edinger carries about 57 ,000 daily vehicles. Edinger Avenue between Gothard and Beach Boulevard aver- ages 28, 100 vehicles per day. Gothard Street between Edinger and McFadden has a traffic volume of 4 , 800 daily vehicles. Traffic on McFadden Avenue immediately north of the site is 8 , 800 vehicles per day, while approximately 7 ,200 vehicles use Center Drive. Current 68. ! access to the subject property is from Center Drive via Gothard Street and through Huntington Center via ! Edinger Avenue and Beach Boulevard. Without an adequate determination of land use mixes in the commercial/residential complex, traffic generation cannot be reliably analyzed. However, past plans by Jerwel Enterprises indicate that a multi-use develop- ment in the area would have a parking capacity of 1,000-1,500 spaces. This means a substantial expected traffic increase. Whether the parking supply represents excess or deficient capacity depends on the competitive- ness of commercial and office uses with other business nodes in the region and the duration of the recession. Another consideration is that a portion of the site' s commercially-related traffic generation will also be the same shopping trips generated by Huntington Center. In addition, if the owners and some employees of the com- mercial and office establishments reside at the site, vehicle trips and total miles traveled will be reduced. A final consideration that will have a significant effect on traffic circulation near the subject property is the possibility of a new offramp from the San Diego Freeway to Center Drive. The feasibility of such a proposal is currently being studied. If implemented, one effect would be to provide direct access from the freeway to the project site and Huntington Center. This would also decrease congestion at the Beach Boule- vard offramp and at the Beach and Edinger intersection. Through traffic at Huntington Center attempting to reach the subject property will also decrease. On the other hand, the new offramp will increase accessibility to the site and Huntington Center, possibly resulting in increased freeway traffic utilizing the business district. 10. Acoustical Quality. Traffic on the San Diego Freeway, Center Drive, Gothard Street, and McFadden Avenue will be the major noise source in the project area. Occasional railroad traffic utilizing the Pacific Electric right-of-way is a secondary source of noise in vicinity of the site. An acoustical analysis of the subject property was undertaken in April 1975 by Bio-Acoustical Engineering Corporation. Two sites along the San Diego Freeway at 30 feet from the free- way fence were in the 70 dB (A) , Ldn, noise contour. A third site along McFadden had an Ldn of 62. Sites 4 and 5 were located off McFadden at the extreme northwest section of the site. Noise levels were below 60 dB (A) , Ldn, and no special noise attenuation was AMft 69. recommended. Noise checks at the middle of the property were made, and the level was below 55 dB (A) (ambient from surrounding streets) . 4. 2. 9 Hamilton School Site 1. Land Use/Demography. The deleted school site is presently vacant and is zoned CF-E. Property to the north is developed to apartments. Zoning is R-3 and ! the Land Use Element designates the area High Density Residential. Property to the east and south consists of single-family homes under R-1 zoning. The Land Use Element indicates Low Density Residential uses. A 3. 5 acre park exists directly to the west. Zoning is CF-R and shown as a park site in the General Plan. ! The effect of the amendment will be to change land use from an elementary school site to a Low Density Resi- dential area at 0-7 units per gross acre. The pro- posed use is compatible with surrounding land uses and no significant effect is expected. A maximum of 56 ! dwelling units with an estimated population of 199 persons will be accommodated on the 8 acres of residen- tial land. The loss of a school site will slightly decrease potential area in the local neighborhood available for recreational activities. However, the 3. 5 acre park adjacent to the site should mitigate this ! effect. 2. Topography and Geology. The subject property is situated on the Santa Ana River flood plain in the southerly portion of the broad gap formed between Huntington Beach Mesa and Costa Mesa. The site topo- graphy is relatively level at an elevation of about 5 feet above sea level. The Chino Clay Loam soil type dominates the area with quaternary sedimentary deposits of recent age alluvium and the pleistocene age lakewood formation constituting the underlying geology. No known peat deposits exist at the site. The subject property is located within the Newport-Inglewood fault zone. The active North Branch fault passes to the south within 250 feet of the site. A low density residential land use will have minimal effect on the natural landform. Location in the floodplain could subject a development to a low to moderate liquefaction hazard during a local earthquake. The historic seismic record suggests the probability of earthquake activity in the general area with peak ground accelerations ranging from about . 2g to . 5g. 70. 1 3. Water Resources. The project site is located in the Talbert Gap, which is part of the Santa Ana River watershed and flood plain. This area is designated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as a special flood hazard area. In the event of a Standard Project Flood, the property would be inundated by six feet of water. Excluding regional flood conditions, storm water col- lected by ,the site is directed by gravity street flow to a 48-inch drainage line on Banning. The Banning line conducts the water to the OCFCD DO2 Channel for final disposal at the ocean. A low density residential use of the property will increase storm runoff and decrease percolation. Like the Yorktown School site, a low density residential use will be about 5 percent less permeable than a school site. A low density residential development will generate approximately 10 cubic feet per second under 25-year storm conditions. This rate can be accommodated by existing drainage facilities. i Storm runoff from a low density residential development will indirectly introduce additional effluents to the ocean via storm channels. Primary pollutants will in- clude greases , oils, asbestos, fertilizers, and pesti- cides. The only effective measure to control the quality of urban runoff is processing in a sewage treat- ment facility. 4. Air Resources. The project site is situated within the South Coast Air Basin. Similar to other coastal locations, the air of the Huntington Beach area is less polluted than inland cities. The daily sea breezes along the coast clear the skies by sweeping contaminants inland. The extremely flat topography of the site' s flood plain location offers little resis- tance to this cleansing action. The major source of air emissions from a residential development will be vehicle traffic on local streets and nearby arterials (Brookhurst and Banning) . The project site will add about 3,450 daily vehicle miles traveled to the local area and . 138 tons of vehicle emissions to the atmosphere. The traffic emissions from the site would increase total emission levels by . 003 percent in Orange County. 5. Biological Resources. Development of the project site in conformance with the proposed Low Density Residential designation will result in the removal of 71. all existing natural vegetation and the displacement or elimination of wildlife species. No trees are known to exist at the site. The rest of the low growth vege- tation is typical of that in a Mediterranean climate. These species and associated wildlife species are pre- sented in Section 2. 4 of the Conservation Potentials Report. 6. Human Interest Resources. No known archaeological sites, paleontological sites, or historic landmarks exist at the site. No effect on these resources is expected. 7. Municipal Services and Utilities. The Southern California Edison Company provides electricity to the area of the site. A low density residential use will consume approximately 5 ,700 KWH per dwelling unit per year, or 319,000 KWH per year. This amounts to less than . 01 percent of Edison' s supply capability. The Southern California Gas Company provides gas ser- vice to the area of the project site. The average single-family home uses 122 ,000 cubic feet of gas per year. At this rate, a low density residential use would increase demand by 6 ,832,000 cubic feet of gas per year, or by less than . 01 percent of the Gas Company' s supply. Water service to the area of the project site is pro- vided by the Huntington Beach Water Department. Using a rate of 147 gallons of water demand per person per day, the site' s future population will require a total of 29 ,250 gallons per day from the water source or about . 13 percent of present usage in the City. A series of 6-inch to 8-inch waterlines will serve the site extending from residential areas east and south and connecting to a 16-inch main along Brookhurst. The Orange County Sanitation District , in cooperation with the City of Huntington Beach, provides sewer service to the area of the proposed site. The area is serviced by a series of 8-inch sewer lines extending from residential areas to the south and east and con- necting to a 90-inch County sewer at Brookhurst. These facilities have been designed to accommodate projected sewage flows in the area. A low density residential use will contribute about 118 gallons per day per person to these lines , or a total of 23 ,500 gallons per day. • 72 . • ! Solid waste pickup service for the project area is provided by Rainbow Disposal. The Rainbow Disposal Company has indicated that no problem would occur in servicing the site. Solid waste demand for service will increase by about . 5 ton per day. Police and fire protection are provided to the area of the project by the City of Huntington Beach. Based on ! the present manpower requirements of approximately one officer per 1,000 residents , the addition of 199 per- sons to the City will not justify additional expendi- tures on manpower and equipment. The project site is within the standard two-mile or five-minute radius of fire service, and no adverse effects are expected. The project site lies within the Huntington Beach School District for grades K-8 and the Huntington Beach Union High School District for grades 9-12. The change in land use from school site to Low Density Re- sidential will result in an additional 53 elementary ! school students and 16 high school students to these districts. Additional high school students will contri- bute to the overcrowding of secondary schools. The elementary school students will be accommocated by existing schools in the area. The deletion of the ele- mentary school site from the Huntington Beach Elementary ! School District' s Master Plan will be in conformance with existing needs and growth projections. The near- est elementary school is located within one mile of the site, but busing may be necessary for transport. 8. Economics. Depending on the market value of the ! future single-family homes at the site, the change to Low Density Residential could have a positive or a negative impact on the City and school revenues/ expenditures. For a positive effect on City revenues, homes will have to sell for about $43,750 or more. For a positive impact on .schools, homes will have to sell ! in excess of $47 ,250. Since the average value of a single-family home in Huntington Beach is above these figures, the overall effect will probably be beneficial. 9. Traffic Circulation. No streets presently bound the property site. However, four residential streets ! terminate at the property line: Oceancrest Drive, .Oceanbreeze Lane, Harborbreeze Lane, and Surfcrest Drive. The nearest arterials include Brookhurst Street (16,600 vehicles per day) and Banning Avenue (2 ,500 vehicles per day) . Single-family residences will add about 575 trips per day to local streets and arterials. ! This will increase congestion in the area. Carrying capacity on Brookhurst is 30,000 daily vehicles. ! 73. 1 Traffic generated by the site will not significantly affect present traffic load or ultimate capacity. 10. Acoustical Quality. Traffic on local residential streets, Brookhurst Street, and Banning Avenue will be the major noise source in the project area. Traffic on residential streets will not be sufficient to ad- versely affect residential noise levels at the site. Traffic on Brookhurst is 300 feet from the project site and noise is attenuated by existing single-family homes between the site and Brookhurst. As a result, noise levels at the project location will be acceptable (probably less than 55 dB (A) ) and no extraordinary mit- igation measures will be required. 4. 2. 10 Newland School Site The Huntington Beach School District has deleted the Newland School site from its Master Plan. The site is depicted on the City ' s General Plan Land Use map at an unspecified location between Adams and Indianapolis. It is shown as an overlay on an existing Low Density Residential designation and R-1 zone. Since the amendment proposes to maintain the Low Density Resi- dential use, the removal of the school site will not present any significant environmental changes or effects 4. 2. 11 Administrative Changes 1. Planning Reserve, Beach/Adams & Pacific Coast High- way. No significant adverse environmental effects are expected from this redesignation, and no disposition is needed. The primary beneficial effect of signifying Resource Production is that it will assure long-term protection and preservation of the natural resource area until oil extraction ceases and development pressures justify detailing land use designations. 2 . Planning Reserve, Banning/Brookhurst and Brook- hurst/OCFCD Channel. The Orange County Sanitation District obtained these areas for the future expansion of its sewage treatment facilities. The Land Use Ele- ment is being changed to reflect ownership by a public utility. A preliminary environmental impact report on the proposed expansion has been reviewed by the Envir- d onmental Review Board. The U.S. Environmental Protec- tion Agency is preparing an additional environmental impact report and will submit it for review in the fall of 1975. 3. Mobile Home Designations. Mobile home use is pro- vided for within the underlying Low Density Residential 74 . lip 41 and Medium Density Residential categories. Since the removal of the Mobile Home designation will not change residential densities, no significant environmental impacts are expected and no disposition is needed. 4. Route 39 Freeway and Transportation Corridor. Because the removal of this nomenclature from Land . Use Element maps will not affect the existing or anticipated use and will not affect the underlying zoning, no significant environmental impacts are expected and no disposition is needed. 4. 3 Summary and Mitigation Measures 4. 3. 1 Land Use/Demography The total effect of the Land Use Amendment will be to reduce the intensity of human activity and residential densities below those of present Land Use Element designations or alternative analyzed uses. Only the Huntington Harbour area is planned for increased resi- dential densities. However, this change will be coordinated with integrating a smaller population with commercial , park, and beach uses of the property. It is problematical whether or not the new Planned Mul- tiple Use, Commercial designation north of Huntington Center will increase or decrease the intensity of development and generate population growth. The other study areas down zone densities and signify land uses in general compatibility with surrounding uses. These in effect are mitigation measures. 4. 3. 2 Topography and Geology Grading associated with development in conformance with the proposed changes of the Land Use Amendment will not significantly alter landforms in the City. In all grading, water should be used to ensure required com- paction, and surfaces should be sloped slightly to direct storm runoff toward planned drainage systems. Most of the study areas lie within the Newport-Inglewood fault zone. However, even those located farthest away, such as the property north of Huntington Center, will be subject to seismic hazards. Implementation of applicable building standards and appropriate struct- ural design which considers area seismicity should minimize potential hazards associated with seismic activity. Aft 11 75. 4. 3 . 3 Water Resources With the exception of the Manthei and Classic proper- ties, all study areas not included under the Adminis- trative Changes section will be subject to regional flood hazard. Protection from Standard Project Flood conditions would be most effectively provided by improvements in regional flood control facilities up- stream from the immediate vicinity of the study areas. Local measures which could be implemented to reduce flooding effects are use of water-resistant materials to reduce wall seepage, installation of water-tight seals around door and window openings, and above-ground placement of essential utilities such as water heaters and air heating units. Erosion and siltation will not be a significant prob- lem at any study area (with the possible exception of the Classic property) because of the existing level topography. Erosion and siltation can be mitigated by the protection of exposed surfaces. This can be ac- complished by landscaping, slight grade modifications, and the limitation of grading in sensitive areas to months when rainfall is light. In the case of the Classic property, imported landfill will be required to bring elevation differentials up to minimum grade. Runoff of contaminants during storms and the degrada- tion of regional water quality will be a problem associated with the development of all subject proper- ties. The control of urban runoff and its impact on regional water quality is so poorly developed that at present the only effective mitigation measure is to process such runoff in a sewage treatment facility. 4 . 3. 4 Air Resources The short-term effect on air quality due to developments in the study areas should be diminished by compliance with ordinances requiring watering for dust control and proper emission control devices on machinery. Residential areas of the multi-use development north of Huntington Center will probably be subjected to above average concentrations of air emissions due to heavy traffic on the San Diego Freeway and traffic at Hunt- • ington Center. This should be minimized by requiring the residential complex to be located at sufficient distance from such pollution sources. Adft • 76 . 4. 3. 5 Biological Resources The development of all study areas will adversely affect natural vegetation and wildlife. These effects can be mitigated by requiring landscaping that is conducive to encouraging the return of some displaced wildlife species to the original site as well as en- couraging the entrance of new species to the area. 4. 3. 6 Human Interest Resources Development at all study sites will not affect arch- aeological, paleontological, and historic resources. 4. 3. 7 Municipal Services and Utilities Development of all properties will have an unavoidable adverse effect on the demand for energy resources, public utilities, and community services. The quality of developments and the maximum conserva- tion of energy will be ensured. by the use of building materials and techniques for this purpose. Energy conservation techniques normally utilized in building design include: double wall insulation, ceiling in- sulation, large roof overhangs, and use of fluorescent lighting rather than incandescent where practical. In addition, consideration should be given to the following energy conservation measures: elimination of natural gas fireplaces, elimination of air condition- ing, installation of solar panels or skylights where practical, orientation of buildings on north-south axis when practical in order to maximize east-west ex- posure to solar heat, and planting of deciduous trees to provide summer shade and permit maximum winter ex- posure to sun. The adverse effect resulting from the generation of additional students in the residential planned area will be partially mitigated by the increased tax revenues generated by the subject projects. The deletion of the Yorktown High School site from the district' s Master Plan will be mitigated by the proposed development of a high school at the Goldenwest/Warner site, which / will reduce overcrowding and accommodate foreseeable student growth. The same situation prevails with the deletion of the Hamilton School and Newland School sites 77. 4 . 3. 8 Economics Insufficient information is available from the study areas to undertake a valid analysis of the effects on City and school revenues. In general, however, the overall effect on revenues will probably be beneficial. 4. 3. 9 Traffic Circulation Total vehicle traffic and vehicle miles traveled will increase as a result of development of the subject properties. However, the traffic generated will prob- ably be less than that generated from the higher land use intensity alternatives considered in the Land Use Element Amendment. Ths most substantial traffic in- crease will occur at the property north of Huntington Center. Local congestion at this location will prob- ably be reduced if the new San Diego Freeway offramp is found feasible and approved. The expected increase in vehicle traffic on arterials associated with all study areas can be mitigated to a small measure by in- creased public use of and access to available bus ser- vice on existing Orange County Transit District routes serving the area. 4. 3.10 Acoustical Quality In most of the study areas, normal construction prac- tices and the inclusion of wall insulation per City standards will reduce noise levels to less than the required minimum. At the Yorktown school site, future residences will be adjacent to high noise levels from large traffic volumes on Magnolia Street. As a result, a block wall may be necessary to reduce moise to acceptable levels. In addition, it is recommended that no two-story homes be allowed along Magnolia. Residential areas at the multi-use project north of Huntington Center could be exposed to excessively high noise levels if located too close to the San Diego Freeway. Standard construction practices and the loca- tion of residences at sufficient distance (at least 100 feet) from the freeway should reduce noise to an acceptable level. • • 78 . • RICHARD HARLOW—DIRECTOR EDWARD SELICH —Planning Program Administrator CURRENT PLANNING ADVANCE PLANNING MONICA FLORIAN —Senior Planner DAVE EADIE —Senior Planner Housing and Policy Team JOHN COPE —Associate Planner SAVOY BELLAVIA—Assistant Planner BRYAN AUSTIN —Associate Planner � TOM MOSELEY—Assistant Planner SERGIO MARTINEZ—Planning Aide BOB KIRBY—Planning Aide Physical Planning Team ALAN LEE —Planning Draftsman AL MONTES—Assistant Planner RICHARD BARNARD—Planning Aide SECRETARIAL STAFF BOB SIGMON —Planning Draftsman Environmental Planning Team JUKE ALLEN —Administrative Secretary JANA HARTGE —Principal Clerk EMI LIE JOHNSON —Assistant Planner SUSAN PIERCE —Secretary Typist CHARLES LAUMANN —Planning Aide GISELA CAMPAGNE —Secretary GEORGE ERMIN —Planning Draftsman PARTICIPATING STAFF PLANNING DEPARTMENT— Richard Harlow,Ed Selich,Monica Florian,Charlie Laumann,Al Montes, George Ermin,June Allen,Gisela Campagne ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT—Jim Palin,Mel Tooker,Chuck Clark,Doris Ferguson CENTRAL SERVICES— Ron Campbell,Duplicating Technician;Lorna Etter,Duplicating Aide;Jeff Frankel, Duplicating Aide.