The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCode Amendment 69-2 - Ordinance 1563 - Planned Residential D Page #9 - Council Minutes - 3j2J70 10 PUBLIC HEARING - CODE AMENDMENT 69-2 & CODE AMENDMENT 69-12 ` Mayor Green announced that this was the day and hour set for public hearings on Code Amendment No. 69-12 proposing to establish procedure for Use Permit application to the Planning Commission and the manner in which appeals are made to City Council; and Code Amendment No. 69-2 which proposes to permit Planned Residential Developments subject to . Use Permit approval in the Rl, R2 and R3 Districts. He stated that hearings on the two matters would be conducted simultaneously. The Clerk informed Council that all legal requirements for notification, publication and posting on said public hearing had been met and that he had received communications from the Huntington Harbour Property Owners Association and the Chamber of Commerce regarding Code Amendment No. 69-2. The Planning Director presented a resume' of the Planning Commission's reasons for recommending approval of said Code Amendments. Mayor Green declared the hearing open. Mr. Harry Burkford, Huntington Harbour Property Owners Association, 17181 Westport Drive, City, addressed Council regarding provisions set forth in Code Amendment No. 69-2. Mr. Jim Bentson, Vice-President of the Huntington Harbour Property Owners Association, 16642 Melville Circle, City, addressed Council and stated that he did not believe that said Code Amendments were in the best interest of City development. There being no one further present to speak on the matter, and there being no further protests filed, either oral or written, the hearing was closed by the Mayor. Considerable discussion was held by Council regarding Section 6 - (Coen or Public Land) and Section 9311.2 (Maximum Density) contained in Ordinance No. 1563 pertaining to Planned Residential Districts. On motion by Kaufman, Council sustained the decision of the Planning Commission; approved Code Amendments Nos. 69-2 and 69-12 and directed the Clerk to give Ordinance No. 1563 a first reading by title - "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH .A11ENDING THE HUNTINGTON BEACH ORDINANCE CODE BY REPEALING SECTION 9730.19 AND ARTICLE 984; BY RE- NUMBERING CERTAIN SECTIONS; AND BY ADDING ARTICLE 902 ENTITLED "ENFORCE- MENT", SECTIONS 9101.3.1 AN1D. 9201.3.1, CHAPTER 93', ENTITLED "PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT", ADDING DEFINITIONS TO SECTION 9700, AND ADDING ARTICLE 984, ENTITLED "USE PERMIT". On motion by Kaufman, Council waived further reading of Ordinance No. 1563. When put to a vote, the motion carried by the following unanimous roll call vote: AYES: Councilmen: Shipley, Bartlett, McCracken, Kaufman, Matney, Coen, careen NOES: Councilmen: None ABSENT: Councilmen: None The City Attorney was directed to amend Section 9700 (o) of Ordinance No. 1563 to read as follows: "Shall include parks dedicated or proposed to be dedicated for public use, school sites, areas set aside for school sites, easements or rights of way for electrical transmission lines, or areas set aside for water uses or flood control channels," also to amend the last sentence in Section 9311.2 to read as follows: "For the Purpose of this section gross acreage shall not includ open or public land as defined in this code" . 100 Page #14 - Council Minutes - 6/2/69 Mr. David Ifland, 10012 Birchwood Drive, City, President of the Meridith Garden Homeowners Association, addressed Council and stated his organiza- tion's opposition to this proposed change of zone. Mr. V. Waterman, Glenmar Lane, City, addressed Council, and requested that they deny the application for a change of zone. Mr. Herk McDonald, 6382 Santa Ynez Drive, City, representing the Sol Vista Homeowner's Association, addressed Council and stated that their organization believes that traffic problems and overcrowded conditions of. schools will occur if approval is given to Zone Case No. 69-6. Mr. Phillip Bush, Craimer Lane, Westminster, addressed Council and stated that he felt the best interests of the area would not be served by the granting of Zone Case No. 69-6. Mr. James Gath, 9962 Silverstrand Drive, City, Chairman of the Shorecrest West Homeowners Group, addressed Council and submitted a petition listing 214 signatures from homeowners adjacent to the area who are opposed to this zone case. . Mr. Dwight Young, 10082 Birchwood Dr. , City, addressed Council and stated that he felt that approval of Zone Case No. 69-6 would create a severe traffic flow problem in the area. Mr. Cris C. Cris, 9627 Adams, City, representing residents of Huntington Continental #2 and the Home Council, addressed Council and gave reasons why the granting of Zone Case No. 69-6 would prove detrimental to the area. Mr. Robert L. Brown, 6332 Athena Drive, City, representing the Beach North Property Owner's Association addressed Council and gave reasons why their organization believes that this zone change is incompatible with the surrounding area. Mr. Bernard McCune, 7865 El Dorado Plaza, Long Beach, representing the S & S Development Company, addressed Council to state the reasons he felt Council should grant the requested zone change, and also exhibited slides of various projects undertaken by the S & S Development..Company. Following considerable discussion by Council, Mr. McCune withdrew the application for a change of zone filed by Mr. Nathan Shapell, 8857 W. Olympic Boulevard, Beverly Hills, California. On motion by Shipley, Council overruled the decision of the Planning Commission and denied Zone Case No. 69-6. Motion ca_rrr[i,,ed. CODE AMENDMENT NO 69-2 - PUBLIC HEARING - APPROVED f`� Mayor Green announced that this was the day and hour set for a con- tinuance of a public hearing on Code Amendment No. 69-2, which was opened at the meeting of March 17, 1969, and continued to the following meeting dates - April 7, 1969, May 5, 1969, May 19, 1969, and again to this date. The City Clerk informed Council that a report of the proposed changes had been submitted to Council. Mr. Jerry Shea, 2110 Main Street, City, Vice President of the Huntington Beach Company, addressed Council, endorsing the Code Amendment and submitting a memorandum of suggestions from the Huntington Beach Company regarding this matter for Council's consideration. 864 Page #15 - Council Minutes - 6/2/69 There being no one further- present to speak on the matter, and there being no protests filed, either oral or written, the hearing was closed by the Mayor. On motion by Bartlett, Council approved Code Amendment No. 69-2, and directed the City Attorney to prepare an Ordinance amending the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Motion carried. Councilman Coen stated, as a matter of record, that he favored Code Amendment No. 69-2, but that he did not concur with the change which stipulates that the minimum lot size for single dwellings be not less than 5000 square feet when abutting common open space used for recreation and leisure purposes. G9-�7 RESOLUTION OF HOME COUNCIL REGARDING CIVIC CENTER Mr. Cris C. Cris, President of the Home Council, addressed the Council, and read a Resolution adopted by their body, commending the Council for their endeavors to select the most suitable site for the new Civic Center. ADJOURNMENT On motion by Matney, the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach adjourned at 10:20 P.M. , to Monday, June 9, 1969, at 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chamber. Motion carried. 71 Paul Jones City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California V. V. Green Mayor ATTEST: Paul C Jones City Clerk 865 Page #10 - Council Minutes - 5/19/69 CODE AMENDMENT NO 69-2 -- PUBLIC HEARING - REFERRED BACK TO PC Mayor Coen announced that this was the day and hour set for the con- tinuance of a public hearing on Code Amendment No. 69-2, which was opened at the meeting of March 17, 1969, continued to April 7, 1969, continued to May 5, 1969, and again continued to this date. The Assistant City Clerk stated that a Planning Commission report and draft with additions underlined, and communications from the Huntington Beach Chamber of Commerce and the Huntington Harbour Property Owner's Association, Inc., have been submitted for their information, The Assistant .Planning Director presented a report for Council's information. Considerable discussion was held by Council regarding the minimum square footage requirement when structure abuts the green. On motion by McCracken, Council referred Code Amendment No, 69-2 back to the Planning Commission for a change to require that the minimum lot size for single dwellings be not less than 5000 square feet when said lots abut common open space used for recreation and leisure purposes. Motion carried. COMPLAINT-MOTORCYCLE NOISE Mr. Robert Healy, 6871 Vista Del Sol, City, President of the Franciscan Fountain Homeowner's Association, addressed Council regarding the excessive noise created on weekends from motorcyles using an area of State-owned and privately owned land south of Slater Avenue. Police Captain Robitaille reported that the Police Department had recently received written authority from the property owners to enforce the no trespassing notices which are posted in the area. The Council informed Mr. Healy that every effort would be made by the Police Department to alleviate this problem. Mr- Robert Dingwall, 19791 Estuary Lane, City, addressed Council regard- ing Mr. Healy's complaint and stated that he agreed the situation con- stituted a nuisance, however, he felt the Police Department had exerted as much control as possible in this matter. ADJOURNMENT On motion by Coen, the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach adjourned to Monday, May 26, at 6:30 P.M. in the Administrative Annex, Civic Center, Motion carried, Paul C. Jones City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California BY4LA4sZs�ista,t 4ity U ATTEST: No JOHN V. V. G Paul C. J.-(?Res Mayor City Clerk` Assistant City lerk 847 Page #13 - Council Minutes - 5/5/69 REPORT - SITE #12 - COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY The Planning Director informed Council that the Site #12 small lot con- solidation plans on property located east of Beach Boulevard and north of Ellis Avenue, had been approved by the property owners and that this matter is now ready for action by the Redevelopment Agency. On motion by Shipley, Council directed the Planning Director to prepare plans on this matter for the meeting of the Redevelopment Agency on May 19, 1969. Motion carried. 1/ CONDITIONAL . EXCEPTION NO 68-46 - APPEAL - DENIED The Clerk.presented an appeal to the denial by the Planning Commission to Conditional Exception No. 68-46, on which a hearing was held on October 21, 1968 with action deferred to January 20, 1969 at which time action was deferred to April 21, 1969, when it was again deferred to this date, on property located north of Hamilton Avenu@ approximately 480 feet west of Brookhurst Street. The appeal was filed by Jennings, Halderman and Hood, registered Civil Engineers, on behalf of the owners and developers of Tract Nos. 5559 and 5561. On motion by Coen, Council sustained the decision of the Planning Commission and denied Conditional Exception No. 68-46. Motion carried. CODE AMENDMENT NO 69-2 - PUBLIC HEARING - CONTINUED Mayor Green announced that this was the day and hour set for the con- tinuance of a public hearing on Code Amendment No. 69-2, which was opened at the meeting of March 17, 1969, continued to April 7, 1969, at which time it was again continued to this date. The Clerk informed Council that he had received a communication from the Legislative Committee of the Chamber of Commerce regarding this matter. The Planning Director addressed Council and stated that the Planning Commission had not-completed their report on this matter -and requested that Council continue this matter to the meeting of May 19, 1969. On motion by Green Council directed that the Public Hearing on Code Amendment No. 69-2 be continued to the May 19, 1969 meeting. Motion carried. �o CODE, AMENDMENT NO 69-3 - PUBLIC HEARING - CONTINUED- Mayor Green announced that this was the day and hour set for a public hearing on Code Amendment No. 69-3, which proposes to Amend Article 968 (-0 Combining Oil District) by renumbering, rewording-and adding various sections within such Article and proposes to reword Section 9700 (n) Definitions. The Clerk informed the Council that all legal requirements for notifi- cation, publication and posting on Code Amendment No. 69-3 had been met. The Clerk informed the Council that they had been provided with copies of the Planning Secretary's transmittal, and stated that he had received no communications or written protests to Code Amendment No; 69-3, or to the recommendation of approval of the Planning Commission. Page #17 - Council Minutes - •4/7/69 4- APPEAL - OIL WELL PERMIT FEE HEARING SET The Clerk informed Council of a communication from Mr. Henry Crozier appealing the Oil Superintendent's decision requiring a Surety Bond and a $2.5 Oil Well Permit Fee on Well "William #1", located on property approximately 850 feet south of Ellis Avenue and 1400 feet east of Beach Boulevard. On motion by Kaufman, Council directed that the appeal to the Oil Superintendent's decision filed by Mr. Henry Crozier be set for hear- ing on April 21, 1969. Motion carried. CODE AMENDMENT NO 69-2 - CONTINUED TO MAY 5. 1969 - Mayor Coen announced that this was the day and hour set for the con- tinuance of a public hearing on Code Amendment No. 69-2, which was opened at the meeting of March 17, 1969. Considerable discussion was held by the Council as to the amount of square footage that should be required in the R1 lots of a Planned Residential Development. On motion by McCracken, Council continued the public hearing to May 5, 1969, and referred Code Amendment No. 69-2 back to the Planning Commission for a recommendation and report. Motion carried. -rJk APPEAL - TENATIVE TRACT NO 6874 & CE 69-5 - REFERRED TO PC Mayor Coen announced that this was the day and hour set for a public hearing on an appeal by Nachazel-Leonard, Inc. to the denial of the Planning Commission of Tentative Tract No. 6874 and Conditional Exception No. 69-5, on property located southwest of Channel Lane, between Admiralty Drive and Broadway, to allow the subdivision of a parcel of land into lots having an average frontage of 35 feet and an area of 5600 square feet, including a 43 foot wide private road, in lieu of the required 60 foot of lot width and 6000 square foot lot area. The Clerk informed the Council that all legal requirements for notifi- cation, publication and posting on said public hearing had been met and that he had received no communications or written protests to Tentative Tract No. 6874 and Conditional Exception No. 69-5 or to the recommendation of denial of the Planning Commission, other than the letter of appeal and a communication from George Shibata, Attorney representing the appellant, requesting a continuance of this matter to May 19, 1969. The Clerk read the communication from Mr. Shibata requesting said continuance. Mr. Shibata then addressed Council and requested that this matter be referred back to the Planning Commission so that they might study a revised map which has been presented for their consideration. On motion by McCracken, Council directed that the appeal to the denial by the Planning Commission of Tentative Tract No. 6874 and Conditional Exception No. 69-5, be referred back to the Planning Commission. Motion carried. `7�fi Now r 40 P.O. BOX M CALIFORNIA 92648 . ` February 16, 1970 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ,FROM: Planning Commission SUBJECT: Code Amendment No. 69-2 - PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ATTN: ' Doyle Miller, City Administrator Paul Jones, .: City Clerk Gentlemen: According to your request, the Planning Commission reviewed Code Amendment No. 69-2, which will permit planned residential developments in the Rl, R2 and R3 zones. This amendment was approved by the Planning Commission on May 27, 1969, and heard by your Honorable Body on June 2, 1969, at which time the amend- ment was approved and referred to the City Attorney' s office for preparation of an ordinance. The City Attorney' s version was presented to your Honorable Body and due to changes proposed by the Attorney, the matter was referred back to the Planning Commission for review and possible reconsideration. By unanimous vote, the Planning Commission approved the attached version of the Code Amendment and recommend adoption by your Honorable Body. The amendment under consideration has been approved by the City Attorney' s office; therefore, the ordinance can be set on the agenda for first reading concurrently with the public hearing. Respectfully submitted, K. A. Reynol s Planning Director KAR:dr t Publish 2112/70 Postcards PUBLIC HFARiNG SET FOR:_----- -17�► NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ---••- ....C-� ... : c NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, in the Council Chamber of the Civic Center, Huntington Beach, at the hour of 7:30 P.M. , or as soon thereafter as possible, on Maadav ®a the 2nd day of March 19_7D_, for the purpose of considering a proposed Code Amendment to Division 9 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code to add the following provisions to said Code: 1) Permit Planned Residential Developments, subject to a Use Permit approval in the Rl, R2 and R3 Residential Districts; 2) Define a Planned Residential Development; 3) Establish development standards for such Punned Residential Development, All interested persons are invited to attend said hearing and express their opinions for or against said Code Amendment Further information may be obtained from the Office of the City Clerk. DATED: CITY OF- HUNTINGTON BEACH 275770 By: Paul C . Jones City Clerk e 2110 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92646 J. J. SHEA VICE PRESIDENT .hat t June 2, 1969 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH CODE AMENDMENT NO. 69-2 PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS Honorable_Mayor and City Council City of Huntington Beach Huntington Beach, California Gentlemen: Tonight you have before you Code Amendment No. 69-2, the ,Planned Residential Development (PRD) Ordinance. We would like to make a comment in support of such ordinance and also on the manner in which it must be administered in order to achieve its objectives. The key to a successful PRD, one that encourages innovative and desirable land uses and better residential community concepts, is flexibility. Code Amendment No. 69-2 accomplishes this by virtue of its allowance of exceptions to the more rigid requirements of the ordinance upon a showing of good cause and good planning which meets with City approval. No ordinance can be drafted that will cover every specific aspect of a PRD type community. If rigid requirements were to be set, it would either discourage PRD developments or result in repetitious, stereotype developments which would not be to the credit of the City of Huntington Beach. Therefore, it is important that a PRD ordinance such as Code Amendment No. 69-2 be adopted for our -City but it is more important to recognize that no worth- while development can be built exactly as outlined in such ordinance and that there will be numerous exceptions and variations in any PRD plan that the City will have to consider and, if acceptable, approve for development. We mention these points because, although there are several large landowners and developers in the City who will likely apply for PRD developments, such a development on Huntington Beach Company property will likely be the first to be built under this new PRD ordinance. Planning and program for just such a residential community on a portion of our property is currently underway by a highly reputable developer who we feel will present a most acceptable plan to the City for approval. However, we already know that exceptions on numerous matters will have to be requested and, we hope, found acceptable. s. The point in this discussion is the same point that we made in addressing the Planning Commission when they reviewed, approved and recommended Code Amendment No. 69-2 to the City Council for adoption. That is that the City must recognize that this new ordinance merely establishes authority for PRD type developments and to accomplish the actual reality of commendable planned residential developments the City must further recognize that it must be receptive to the 6- Honorable Mayor and City Council -2- June 2, 1969 requested exceptions and variations that will be necessary in,.each unique planned concept. Those variations of merit ',that meet the test of good planning and the intent and purpose of this new ordinance .must then be approved, in order to achieve commendable planned residential developments of mutual benefit to all parties concerned. We hope the foregoing will be the spirit in which Code Amendment No. 69-2 is adopted and carried out. We encourage its. adoption as a necessary step in providing the City of Huntington Beach with the means to encourage better living environments in our City, .which can. be accomplished in this manner and which we hope will be- attained to the credit and satisfaction of all parties. Thank you for this opportunity to have made these comments. Yours very truly., 4L �VJ. SHEA ce President JJS/mb O P.O. BOX 190 CALIFORNIA 92 N May 19 1969r'� : C'.. MEMO: ' TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL ,•-'' FROM: K. A. Reynolds, Planning Director RE: Code Amendment No. 69-2 (Planned Residential ev opment) C_ _ ATTN: Doyle Miller, City Administrator Gentlemen: The Planning Commission at their May 6, 1969, meeting considered your request to review Code Amendment No. 69-2 (Planned Residential Development Ordinance) with the possibility of imposing a minimum limitation on the square footage of R-1 lots in planned residential developments. Several amendments were made to the ordinance all of which have been included in the enclosed draft with the additions underlined. The most significant addition is found on page 3, entitled "Single Family Detached Homes" . It was the consensus of the Commission that this limitation will accomplish your desired results and eliminate the possibility of substandard single family development. There was also discussion as to whether a public hearing should be held by the Planning Commission when a site plan is reviewed. It should be noted that Section 9891.3 of the Huntington Beach Ordi- nance Code provides the :Planning Commission the opportunity of holding a public hearing when they so desire. In line with this, the Planning Commission adopted 'by minute action a policy to require a public hearing whenever a planned residential development abuts public waterways or waterways proposed for public use. The other changes suggested by the Commission have been included to insure that the common areas be designed as an integral part of the planned residential development. Respectfully submitted, K. A. Reynolds Secretary, Planning Commission KAR:bd O P.O. SOX 990 CALIFORNIA 92548 March 17, 1969 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: Planning Commission SUBJECT: Code Amendment No. 69-2 ATTENTION: Doyle Miller, City Administrator Paul Jones, City Clerk Gentlement- m. Transmitted herewith is a proposed amendment to the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Said code amendment proposes to add the following provisions to Division 9 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code : 1) Permit Planned Residential Developments subject to Site Plan approval in the Rl, R2, and R3 Residential Districts, 2) Define a Planned Residential Development, 3) Establish development standards for such Planned Residential Developments under Article 989, SITE PLAN, and, 4) Establish a $100.00 filing fee for Site Plans pertaining to Planned Residential Developments. The Planning Commission unanimously approved this matter on March ::,4: - 1969, and recommends adoption by your Honorable Body. Respectfully submitted, K. A. Reynolds Secretary, Planning Comrmssion KAR:b d Enc. Pub f i s h PUBLIC HEARING:' SET Postcards FOR. C 4......_ ..7- ............. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING --- QODE AMENDMENT 69-2 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held by the City. Council of the City of Huntington Beach, in the Council Chamber of the Civic Center, Huntington Beach, at the hour of 7:30 P.M. , or as soon thereafter as possible, on . Monday the 17th day of �_ 19 69 , for the purpose of considering a Code Amendment Co Division. 9 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code to add the following provision to said Code: 1) Permit Planned Residential Developments , subject to a Site Flan approval in the Rl, R2 and R3 Residential Distracts ; 2) Define a Planned Residential Development; 3) Establish development standards for such. Planned Residential Developments under Article 989, SITE PLAN; AMU 4) Establish a $100.00 filing fee for Site Plans pertaining; to Planned Residential Developments . All interested persons Are invited to attend said hearing and - express their opinions for or against said Amendent Further information may be obtained from the Office of the City Clerk. DATED: I-larch S, 1969 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH By: Paul C . Jones City Clerk - .City Clerk City of Huntington Beach The Huntington Beach Planning Commission, at their regular/ rued meeting held ' � � � � , recommended of If approval has -been recommended, the City Council will . be required to hold a public hearing in this matter , and it will be transmitted to you prior to the next regular meeting of the Council. A copy of the Planning Department legal notice, prap- eht--y=w3 �-n== B f=et=c =tire=-�uh ee a ea=is t eked=mere The applicant in this matter is , (Address) (Telephone) Kenneth R. Reynolds, Planning Director By, �� I Number of Excerpts Publish Once LEGAL NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CODE AMENDMENT 69-2 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held by the City Planning Commission of the_ City .of Huntington Beach in the Council Chamber of the Civic Center, Huntington Beach, California, at the hour of 7;pp P.M. , on February 1.8 1969 for the purpose of considering X1IXfMX a Proposed Code Amendment to regulations of the Districting Ordinance. (See attached) All interested persons are invited to attend said hearing and express their opinions for or against the proposed Code Amendment X0WX==WA Further information may be obtained from the office of the Secretary to the Planning Commission. DATED this 6th day of February 1969 CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Rl&hard A. Harlow Acting Secretary I . code Amendment No. 69-2 Said code amendment propo.,es to aad the following provisio,ls to Division 9 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code : 1) Permit Planned Residential Developments subject to a Site Plan/in the RI , R2, and x3 Residential Districts , Approval 2) Define a Planned Residential Development, 3) Establish aevelopment standards for such Planneu. xesidencial Developments under Article y89, SITE PLAN, a-rid 4) Establ-Loh a $100.00 filing fee for Site clans Planned xesidenuial Developments. pertaining to 1 . QU MU -af 4at4t8 » tII." is: ? . .,0 � .}+�•qn ��.qq -p j - ��yyk1t4}M.Ti6a-„Ra- ' .tf•J $«� jn,+,,, - t-m M' ...yq ,i -a y.'s.�y e}. (-y ,.ph.;.,K'Q - r°.i L "i R'sY- •`:�t. D-41+n•F� fs.��. 8- 6"�.. -i 4k Y9 ?:^t:�,•: fr '6.YK,L k1w.,R T. :.�.B.y..nci•F. k 4n , � (pP,i �p;ty gy�iy. s �@. °� r�' r? ntly `'��aiw� : x. '� i�C1 oA�i.,fC� c tt ,. -LYd 'u!]v'�SC'&�L!{,... )C �',.fiJ a:J� �` � tool, x,:' '+„^- d o r^` i .j�,_, . ., . . �: 'tin i,. df.��?;A� �u.,�c;.�s� :,�,�. ��.:�.�,�. ?�s^��L.s,+.s �:�.,,�Y 9�'at,�13 ��n f?:�5c3e ,..C3'?�.��etf. °.) .. d y p tQi - Vi 4qq Vic VV x , ' : �Ir,PVa ,^ 8y ettsir of Augua: ,1,5. �1 fi li" t.si-:t . UiI Ai�ti� I d��erqy `¢�l.y�a �;g1 g: - -t t - .�-�+h r;;��,�� :.�+�.7.��k��".,.��%'� khaC3� '�� k's�'.�E+i{�'i��' �}`k� .M L.��I'.. �I�y��'p fr•��f Ct_��r 'Ip3t,�G� as to all goat w:� �i�F Y.f€�r.w��cE��i� e:.t{�l onfif,61 } ;i � a? .A 1�";r::In u v: � �:�;` ix� �' f :' �T 4 t r� dd d: p 3t - S 4+,r q'' .,ti:�aC.' 'E:.. �� "r 3 l4f h,;:.`av4.i: i4i.A-&".. t', - .is:0�*3t�X'�or �r-'in;urre..d �5+' a �.t� b �cl 3LY34?it F1 � xb ��" '1tt'xt:,;a i . ta.si -t#t" ' t'nat. :'n aue 6 vlF�bd 'd^-+�:�:rS" J.,.f�'_baya'Ll: • _. - • L _ .. ,. .. - ." p� l � 1. t�ta :t ,ic� "pla� izizait:�1y *isiAc v�AyrJ.IH;.�&�s..Lrn�;q#�rgr+ly�e ��•�,�m,ry.��*.q+� �q*r+�°cdl�'EO�A�+je` �i�}�y v;-y,�6,tY� .:E�;9s,..,:�.�k #p�Miy��t-,�,i.4�44',.S1aY 1.��.�` to ye+$77 [['��-yy., t'rul �•id _.,Os,'3•P.1�`:,i d `w+ fins sA Ity-d4'v1:jt>p4,._a'7i . s F,4 rs')r,. r�?R6�5f'��3_ •:�i� - -21 _ ` ptd,.. ' •, �.V.`.a?1t�'1 4 i' "w ;" Yr e`�: �'..'ti illF�f'.'�' 'p.l �' '!�„1" y'.";•�Ppt�.7�. 't q.t' i,:, s^s ,} ,fie - �`3, L 8'F v..� �,.+ �C d'.". ik i }r.- I1 . - - •E�»Yi .s d'./i.�aw,+i 1, "' f.l� a iZtaflor'ha slygr {Yi#cJ y�,YSI.�.+l'rl:' .�^'f-'+}W'•.y+eA yk,F'y�S��FzrLiinyI+B� r+�.# or z I a ol-, and "City Gliq'�� - :: = s uEy ncc and ivot be b, f of*has: r_rtrt - C 'x ,,,; .yam � .:+ $;I, o sa�,d AI a1: >:,5 v 10n -0. "-A e,. � �"ndf rqn� d .f' I AJ HUNTINGTON BEACH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE P.O. BOX 272 Huntington Beach, California 92648 .r May 1, 1969 PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT #69-2 Honorable Mayor and City Council City Huntington on Beach gt P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, California 92648 Gentlemen: The Chamber of Commerce wishes to express itself on the subject Planned Residential Developtnent (PRD) ordinance which is presently before the Council for adoption. The PRD type of ordinance is a valuable tool and vehicle to provide the needed flexibility to encourage and hopefully ensure the location and development in our City of highly acceptable new projects incorporating creative new concepts of land use and architectural design. The Chamber strongly supports the adoption of a PRD ordinance with the expectation that very beneficial developments to the overall good and future progress of the City can result. By letter of August 15, 1968, the Building Industry of California recommended to t#e City and the Planning Commission that an ordinance of this type be adopted, tio as to allow greater flexibility for the encouragement of good community type developments. In an address on September 4, 1968,, before the Planning Commission,, the Chamber concurred with the recommendation of the BIA and urged that such an ordinance be adopted. There are a number of ways of drafting a PRD type of ordinance but all of them have in common(t ta�iz geega -1ative�ounri1 guidelines under which the administrative City C.ode'_s. are_to-_ wIthe nece s sary flexibility to achieve truly well-planned community developments. The Chamber has not attempted to draft such an ordinance, but does express its appreciation for the Planning Commission and its Staff for having responded to this need, prepared PRD-Code Amendment #69-2 for this purpose and recommended its adoption to the City Council. No doubt there will be revisions made in the future as we all learn to work with this type of land use. We -hope such revisions will be true improvements to such ordinance and not be such rigorous restrictions as would render such an ordinance and its objectives inoperative and unattainable. The Chamber urges the Council's adoption of Code Amendment #69-2, recognizing that it is a positive step in the direction of enabling our growing City to become a better place to live, work and play. Very Truly Yours, HUNTINGTON BEACH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OS� J. J. Shea, Chairman Legislative Action Committee • 49 40 Plammed Residential Development Ordina= Se Section 1 . Tkat the following sections are hereby added uo the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code and Vall read as follows : - RI S, 9101X Uses. Siit�jeot to a- Site Malyi A. Planned Residential Develonments Wor prosisions of krticle 989 and snecifical ly S. 98979 Developmeut Standards. R 21 3� 9161.4 Uses Sub a-In to a Site Pla A. Planned ResidentW Developments undcr, provIsions of Article 989 and specifically S. 98979 De7elopmoDt Staadards� R�I; S. 92010 Uses WbI I_to a Site Plan A. Pla=pd Residential Developments undr-,r- provisions oy Axticle 989 ara specKicall-,y- S. 93979 Deveiopment Madards, ,P) Flmz ' s idential Developmeaw A ! ad ar ea ued tili Re zed for ot vaershi;'p residential buildings or sites xith.. niorRsnl accessory reMektial n8es, and nerwanentiy wakat'aiaed' co-mduon an undivided iLterest in too com%ou area for use as narks" waterways, golf courseso or oVer re�aveatioa areas for We sole eajo�-mnent of res�3-dents within etch a nroject. it is developed comprehensively as a single entity through the annlication of innovative site plaiaLl.ng techniquee anj is therefore often Unable jo comply with residential ,iovelotment standards as established by the regular Drovisioas o.1V this ordixiaace. 3'.1 f r' ¢Dda' YE`LKOPM.a�.A�l .}T_AN D.��!„L'.y�t."OR s.ePElrI FI LaO .U80 as .i 1,t.�EC�ln. 10 kas.i .� �sAs?S'i All applicable factors cofconsideration of this Article U.. t ..7-reoall aLd be supplemented_ted by the following ':r'C7`t`1sT,t1::.z 1.'s:ii. caded Lo E?stc$W.+1.z_. ,ju3..Ca.F'l:1.nes :for both < h e development ,. s;%c� uses ard t h C- review yl r o c..i._. >1.L. IX p p 1...c!J.Q.. .-o:.i w by Be 4. i'e.W i .. ... B. 09".. i P.l.annf.;d Residential. D')vC:.+.oTlme*':dt s A. S.ys ah and Purysez in order to nro.mG�e c O-e I,, es^.abl .j st basic gulaelives or r'],.pnro :al (`etYnditi:I al i — p. . . or KKK K of Site Plans :i Er r .b.3 ca_.$:.:C.e d Resideavial Developments wi i" car 1;rl!.r_t residential d i s .:i C us Q MIS S city. it w, ., ?5 % : idc1 that tLs,S section snail e0courage b t•.:6L'• Laud j:.,. „1.1<. ., se%4 n%1ueu with. m " :iI ; C use of es Micall; pleasing y ype>z r , 9 '� 7 r site W t Won of �=i,�' c:_L'+.:,.�x.4,,�.,( :�t.i�2. ._i7L.Ctsi;�.,i.�.:•�j., i3LCd ' c''�°j'C)� •y,. aLd B. str.....a�......m,�i.�a«.,�e...de....'....q..W Q U 5 r e a .1 . / p <b. li: g principles / ( y c?.: ax`;.:v'deyoz .'• plani;'.G-d residential dp elopfent_. F.'_„tea `hCii'.ld be of r`c'X.m coa si6e a`i;'i.r)n by too A nC ude 1 . Toe Cli:3•,,)iC)i'}I±:,':,o . n !IEArtTfa,:`ieut. reerk= 3?.L,oL , e'iw.=ir.ie.; :" a.;: s.X i}!,�a%_. ti��=S t�c: r1)'..'�?:s ,.o r t f?La sale u o:3 t':' ort':'...r�'a. of the project l.t::: iC.."._ are 3�•.e*�ua�. e in- size, {.':c ti'.7:.l Mil.v..`y 1F)y ducapi u and ne,r'lI?ar.'d vz a' Ma_1: r:?.,;bancc for loth GATeSeli:,s and zv.t>:re gipf?:,s of res dec:_`;:s. sul f„ed . pin.._.. i1.{, ic" e.itabl1 sd.:.l's rt theme or COLCePL for toe entire rro�erl. Ti.t're 1s often a dz_ ersoi_ iC:['7 NaL ci iE:..sid '' ::l.::al {t utyyadl.ag i��..�•� ..,.. .a..:�!.C�. .d.di _ de ,;i �.,.ed i:4.ia�''sr��:d�:�:d cte.d r 7,i.1.1 1. SnO l Uv.+.' x ._ i ti.61 to ._•d ea ,E a L;::_"i`Lyr:�' ...-,•iiU S MiCUi.., V .....a.l p lOOSM 1 L n:f"a c . t=• are ...E*f;•w_.t:aL u �.{;.;:`�. fr�:�., ~•Y..i.i.E'>. ti_.>.1.'�::.c__, u .+,`,� ~c.'+;..,.t� �G.C u u e B al to �,'.w l L.._ q V..:,.a.`tf'.. a; 1De:2 ltj For the residential districts w;:lE'. Qe.RY.sl:.ties are as follows: Deusity DOW Per Gross Are RI r, 11' � I), lli't:irnrc' Y1 Size ; The minimum SIZO for a planned 2"F":s:_:.e.f?nsl l d'?ve lof)e.Leiti.t shall.I. �.aW c:?.$.loh that A will n.t.'t W l Yam' conflict iti 1..t$3. the df:' lul r,7:.C'n of e-"� Planned Re,^..:1.. t.,.,t:l=:s.3. G`evk'l':7jli!'ie .t as per S. Cr70 4P. a:S';ad iYLe autk'n c1..y..7.Ge Purpown A this Section. -, 'r 31, iE? D 1 . Maximum T)t1tl�u yA'..i lt dki>z�i e,a b'tk�o�.vy�"rn�a e n q n q The i'g�C:��'�.:!_. 6 coverage A the gross reside site structGres shall not exceed fifty 050) peg cent, __` Private e :i o,L J G`� �..7 lg minimum private s t.,. <,Ex`4;; st U d ar.t:i shall apply to planned r•. .°k d E'r,O%1. a. Were vehicles caa park o$ � o: ,.:'i' ` .-Id"s.c'swidth shall be ` D 1 1 side ., .y.�:.+ �?G 4<1 B;i :z`e `;y'�•a:�A. .....£.7 �,.1 i r.. park '1:r�, only 3!:; . ,a I:�l'' �..e.i k: C <, i.x a Strees serves :3.I,a f,i Imr3ry access to ... $:1.,(;. .i. a.s.s>- - - unit and it is 150 feet or more n. J eeF w2 tw, Paved bd:".C3.t l shall be 40 feel, d. if a street to o i e s ss than 350 N e fit:, in length. end of said atreen _ v^(h e 3:'e C;a 1:' J o rt o [.?.rC.-,' .:`_}.a.'_M i±Y ruc'G e d in . Ci c h sides W. .. street. eet S street is ctt)jc'.('e "'0 t; -,e t-I ' cc > j.l.n 2., alloy ...,. feet vo 0:..Ca-w .k".,.n .4y.r.t e +.,,dqgga of pa j vm(an 4a and, 9dc: U _' ,c!r --p ! p(—:rt-yJ The inaide curb radius ou turns stall be 25 feet. h. Construction of base, paving, calbs, and gutte& shall be approved by the DepartmAt of Public Works. 1. Alighting system shall be installed on nrivate streets eqpal Am illumination to ou, public streets. Off-Street Parking C Off-street parking shaLl be supplied at the same Patio as for the district or districts in which such dovelopmeDt is prorosed to be located. All parking s9aces, lots, compounds,, az2,d structures shall conform to A:eticle C), ax..d be con-4,eirdently accessible to the dwelling uaits they are inteaded to serve. 4. Recreatioa, Leisure, and Open Space kreas: ninimum , square footages of -iisable open space for recreatiou. aid leisure use Kall be As followv� District Per Unit RI 1200 R2 400 R Enclosed recreation or IeisuK areas may -be utildzed V fulfill not more Ka r fifteen (15) percent of this requirement, tho rest & be supplied in open space , K Waterways may be utilized to fulfill this requirnment, but a minimum of thipty-five 'pC'.rceat of the vequired open spoce areas per lot Mal! be in opea land areas. -4- c, Recreation and insare areas way- incindw, Same co arts or rooms, swimmitg pools smoo6 boo,". dock axeas, Sardened roots or gToLnds, poWng greers, play lots. wr ot.her areaz .111 se resiawto Q Hie de7elopment; W not lucludifg PAVSK PaMs. WCOUW, decks ny areas used exciuslMy for pedestriar accusew1w . d. Inese mWimw square Notage requikewents for open space aveas stall mat be couNdared Q.ti requireme0a or AMMes 974 an 9;8,� Park and Reweation Facilities. e. All such areas Wall be permanently Wntaw�wi and it Wall ce inculbemt an tie spolicabc to provide ev,dence of sum, Building AQW : Nm maximum building neio& QW ! not exceed that nermitted by the d0trict on dlatrinw i�-i wL41.eL, dkLe pianwed resNeatiail. developmu"; Psi propose& '�o be iocated. sigvs: All SigLS SAM awfow to S" AT60,114 Aesidea&W Districts M the Sign Cods and sEj applicable provislaws of the diatrUtCs) in wniw% Me development is propcsW to be loaaced. Landscaping: All vacreatica, lKenke , apea spare areas hela in ccumozo and We requireQ Plan,& Y—w� vKHA parMg we as stall be 2 ad;dsnape6 anq permaae,Wy- maiMalsea w au attrw =e waawar. Landscapiog may include lamas. creas shrubs, an-,I other piau, wateriali; wA aenerative dysxj -' elements suck aS 10UMLaWS, POOIS� WAWaYS, WLWOI SCUIptnXe, pjarterS, ZeSCM, aVV 91WIjaO elewaYS3 ar'e incarporaGW 2S aV InlOgEal laM 01 W- landucapina plan. T Trazi. collection Araw . All "rask COUCCAIO� shall be screeced Vrom view from aay ratlic AII-i' Ot wag and Inbe6ra"M into the develapwent _ U tarmorlaus aud asWencioa mawer. Was tops,-, Stall be Own ah we submMed plot rlan� 1. Aqy Wer applicable devel6nment slan&M wl. Divialon 9. 0k COMMon as deemed gecasskry S� tkse PlasM.g Oammission way be raqvired in Mw OU protect the Woul wd Purpose of this M and Article . Ov Assoc WK Ons; awl COSUNWOUS CovenaM, andRestrickan J_q eskablIsWeL, ariwi., tke iallowiag requAkemeWs stall W Obs:rwed , areas private swets WN! aw, aEd ap'pax� rarwl Ur weliNg VOW 2. All pzooksiote tor a conwasity assoaiailw. Hnu wor perpetual Mainvenancy Q too COMMOU area and recrearkon area shall ne anproyea uy We Plawninp, Qpartmw aK Legal DeparAnaLO, Me OMP"Oh Anticles W 2nnorporallo" , BY-Mus Q' '! Management Coutrac suall be SOMM6 to Ae Plaw1ug Deparwam and Legal Deperhmeas lar a"Ppre a 4 T b O MR ' S Stall COWalu at 3WSZ 100 WIOWIQ- 1. The i1creatio". isisure aud upen Sown arew! anall be rasenve& Wr W exclusivy qse at res Mrs` s wnbW Me project aad Inair non- Ow.els metier tevaass snail be jeqn1re" "C 1611 by assaWsling rolve mad Mew* Walk up pvnaVL� -1. for �ualaviaJam, of Wd rules. c� Any inerest is the common area (iLOvdigg pKvate streets) held by the Vdividual parcel owLers caL Lot be devised., coAveyed or Wicated separate aad apart krom the devIse conveyance'', aad/or dedication ok the individual parcel for a life in being plus 21 years, excepting ttin mad be accompiished under tKe same you n ditios or grouLds as are availab-le -omder judicial partition , d. If tae deveiopmeat is constructed U Mcrevemw or several final maps, reciprocal COU"s a reciprocal management agreement shall be established that will cause a merging of incre- ments as they are completed. The end result shall be one homes association with coamor area,,',-1 commoa to all and one management for the eutire project. WaaKagy All pla=ed Pesidential deyelopments which comply with all pertiae& provisions of Divisioa ? and specifically Article 98S, avall be considered ceder standar''' Site Plaa action by the Planning CommIssiou. Excep How to such applicable provikioas may be gramed tzz,,d sr t,;b_,e Site Plan procedure whe:L ?Jhe applic&u: 1, S-uch excePWO's shall Lot Le adverse to the pdblic 2. Such exceptioLs shail not miolate S. 98900 Site Mar - Wer, and PuyRoal, or be in norfl.ict ityttb -�Zz ' HKOPS oi in Z 96SIX ACQ=' "'L e Coamission. 3. The enceptions requested concew colt' flubs eeviona 0 Wkyoulk aud incTUMS Z of S. RusideaKei bovelogweals. ih-a. zVzr Roma ora�o'wly�d .L n a�.�m ro CAS�L<i s C.4. tv e4y e `i `y�.Ufa; 'ove applicant knt stall pay a fee baw, on AS type of use Q be zSVOWN to 1 l '.p j A. po fro"Mo ^A -,, A j y Tito wu yWon 'A M cii.ollo a-� O ZA 0 HHHUREM Beach NaRMHE commNSW P.O. SOX 990 CALIFORNIA 92648 it June 2, 1969 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: Planning Commission SUBJECT: Code Amendment No. 69-2 (Planned Residential Development) ATTN: Doyle Miller, City Administrator Paul Jones, City Clerk Gentlemen: The Planning Commission at their May 27, 1969, meeting considered your request to review Code Amendment No. 69-2 (Planned Residential Development Ordinance) -with the possibility of imposing a minimum limitation on the square footage for single family lots in a planned resi- dential development. It was the consensus of the Commission to incorporate an amendment to Code Amendment No. 69-2 providing for a minimum square footage. Respectfully s itted, K. A. Reynolds Secretary, Planning Commission KAR:b d F/V/ COTE KeMMNT N0 69-2 May 6 9 1969 Plamed Residential Development Ordinance Section 1® That the following sections are hereby added to the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code and shall read as £ol.lows a RI S. 91,0144 Uses Subject to a Site Ad PI a fined Residential Developments under provisions of Article 989 and specifically S. 9897, Development'.Standards. R2 S. 91.61.4 Uses Subject to a Site Plan A. Planned. Resideptial Developments under provisions of Article 989 and specifically S. 9897, Development Standards. R3 S. 9201 .4 Uses Subiect t® a Site Plan A. Planned Residential. Developments under provisions of Article 989 and specifically S-0 9897, Development Standards® S. 9700 (P) Pl.a ed Residential Developments A land area utilized for individual ownership of residential buildings or sites with normal accessory residential uses, and permanently maintained common property with an undivided interest in the common area for use as parksq watexvays, golf courses, or other recreation areas that are integrated with the dwelling units and for the sole enjoyment of resi&nts within such a project. It is developed compre- hensively as a single entity through the application of i ovative site planning teahniques and is therefore often unable to comply with residential development standards as established by the regular provisions of this ordinance. t S. 9897 DEVELOP - �°. STANDARDS FOR SPECIFIED USES SUBJECT TO A SITE PLAN All applicable factors of consideration of this Article shall prevail and be supplemented by the following provisions intended to establish guidelines for both the development: of such uses and the revim.? process o f_,applications by the Pl a=ing Commission. S® 9897.1 Planned Residential Developments A. Intent and P gose e In carder to promote better l ivinn enviro-h-Ments, this section shall establish basis. Suideli s for approval, conditional approval,s or denial. of Site Plans for Pla ed Residantial._ Developmnts within certain residential districts of this cltya `It is intended that this section shall encourage better land planning techniques with maxim= use of eathitically' of architecture, landscaping, and site layout and. design.i: . Pa General1PlEEgJ&n& Princigl.esa Certain general. planning m:�naaxsm—a�xmn - acns -acmu�a - principles which often characterize planned residential dev-9lopmeffits and .should be of prime consideration by the Planning Comission irzlu,d : Im The development of permanent recreation, leisllre, and open sW,,.e areas for t1he sole use of residents of bt`M project which are adegtmte In size, access- ibility, landscaping, utilization and permanence of intez�ce for both present and future needs of reside'ntso 2nThe development of the project is carried out under a unified, congrehansive plan which established a -hp- e or concept for the entire project 3. 13mere. is often a, diversification of rasi&nitial o-TeLling tylpiz include.ng detached, att c d� - lt-1-story dwellings to create a Imterogeneous Ob 4. Vehicular and peclestrian traffic are separated, but convenient cireula,�id and ac-' cess to dwelling is and accessory seats is maintained® For Vne. residential districts the densities are as follo s � y District Units Per Gross Aare. RI 6 R2 18 R3 29 For the purpose of this see-tion, gross acreage shall not include waterways that aze dedi d or proposed for dedication for public. use. D. Mnimm Sizes The size for a pied residential dq nt sham be such that it will not be in conflict with the da—inition of a Plamed Residential velop nt as per S. 9700 P) and the Intent and PUTPOSQ Of this Section, E. Deve t S da-ds 1. a .ding Coves =-* The mexibuild-.n cove-rage ®f the grass re.-Adential site NY roofed structures shall not e eed fifty (50) por c��t.. 2. Single Family Detached Homes**, Where dt�taclwd skrngla family homes are proposed on individual lots similar to those found in a stam- da:-d type subdivision and such lots da not abut comon opean space ;used for recreation and leisuve yarpases, th `m:L.A lot size for said lots shall conform to the :requir merits of Che base district =Iess saiel plan has been Bete;Mia d by the g I rs'n iD Commission, With concur e ce of the City al=.Mil to meet t'Is intent and pt=rod- of this rd-.nanee 3m 30 Private Streets: The f ollovIng MirAMM private street standards shall apply to plamed residential de�reAo ��o as Where vehicles can park on both sides the paved width shall be 40 feet. b® Where vehicles can park on only one side tbe paved width shall be 33 feet. c. if a street serves as primary access to a dwelling it and it is 130 feet or more in length, the paved width shall be 40 feet. de if a .street is less than 350 fact in length, a 36 foot peed width may be provided if a standard turn-around is constructed at the end of said street. e. A minimum 28- foot paved width shall be provided where carports are @onstrtnted on both sides of the street fQ When a strut is adjacent to the tract property line, allow 2 feet edge. of the pavwent and such tract property linao ga The inside curb radius on t s "shal 25 feet . h. Construction of. base p pavingg curbs., and gutters- shall be approved byVe. Department of Public WorksV L. A lighting system shall be installed on private, streets equal in illumination to lighting on public streets 4. Off-Street Parking: Off-street taking shall bas. Supplied at the saw ratio as for the d-istrict or. districts in vArldh such development is proposed. to be located. All Wking spacesp lots., compounds, and structures shall conform to Article 97 and be conveniently acces,41ble. to tbA dvalli unt+a taley 5 o Rezreation,, Lai , and Open Spy Areas.- square footaps of usable open apme for re@reati®n and leisure use shall he as follows8 District SA o Ft Per unit RI 1200 R2 400 R3 300 a® Enclosed radian or leisurs &row may be utilized t® fulfill not more thm fiftew (15) Est ®f this wv*dmmt 9 the rest to be supplied in open spa@e. b. Prlvit,4 'watsmays may he utilized t® fulfill this requi=mmt but a minUm of tt . -five (35)..-. percent of the r�quirsd o1mm space areas per lot shall be in opm land Cc Recreation and lei areas way i lu 8 &am Courts ®r TO , swimming p®O15, sauna baths, private dock s, Wdened roofs ®r gromds, putting gxwnsv play lots, or other ea all the residents of the davelo ut- but not including private patios, balconies, docks or other areas used solely by the rasidmt ®f an indiyl d lli t and areas used e=lusively for pedestrian accesways, d. These minim= aqua= footage uir nts for Open space areas shall not be @w@Id@md fulfill any requimments of Articles 974 or 998, Park and Recreation F ilities. e. All such areas shall bs Pagmarantly maintained and it shall be incumbent ®n the applicant to provide evLdsme of such. ®sm 60 Building Height.- The maxi maxim= building height shall not exceed that permitted by the district. or districts in which the plamed residential development is proposed to be located. 76 Signsp All signs shall conform to Sd 9764n1 Residential Districts of the Sign Code and any applicebte provisions of the district(s) in which the development is proposed to be located. 80Landscaping: All recreation. leisure, open space areas held in common and the required planted areas within parking areas shall be landscaped and permnently maintained in an attractive matmer. Landscaping may include lawns, trees, shrubs, and other living plant materials; and decorative design elements such as fountains pools, WalWays, benches, sculpture, planters, fences and similar elements which are inc®rporated as an integral part of the Landscaping plan. o gash Collection Areas: All trash collection areas shall .be screened from view from any public right of way and integrated into .the development in a harmonious and attractive manmr. Such areas shall be shown on the subrditted plot plan. 10. Any other appi cable development standard of Division 9 or conditio*'as deemed necessary by the Flaming Cc ission: may be required in order to protect the Intent and Purpose of this Section and. Article. F o Common Areas: (Home or Community Associations; and Conditions Covenants, and Restrictions). In the estab- lishment of permar4ntly maintained, comon open areas the following requirements shall be observed: l o Common areas ineluding private streets shall. not be p � dedicated separate and apart from the individual parcel or dwelling unit. aim 2 . All provisions for a community ty association and for Perpetual mintenance ®f the eonzion area azid recreation area shall, be approved by t e Planning . Department and Legal Tepartme t. 30 The C R's, Articles of Incorporation, By-L -ws and Management Contract shall ba submitted to the Planning Department said legal Department for approval 44 The C O s shall contain at least the following rovi Sions o a4 The recreation, leisure one open space areas shall be reserved for Che exclusive use of residents within the project and :h-eir on- paying guests b.a Qv;- er s and/or tenants shall be required to abide by association ales an-d there shall be penalties for violation of said rules. c o Any interest in the coamon area (including private streets hold by the individimal parcel otraers can not be devised, contr yed or dedicated separate and apart from the devi i-e' c onveyance, and/or dedication of the ind'.`.Vidual Parcel for a life in 'being plus 21 years, exveptingg this way be accomplished under Ptbe same conditions or grounds as are aval labl.e under judicial par-titio . d. if the development is const cted in nacre ents or several ZiV.al maps, raeipr cal CURIS and, reciprocal maneageme t are eemier� ��a l be established that will cause a ergil:_IIS of incre- ments as they. are eamqp tt.e tc � The end result shall be one 110mes association wr t ornmoll areas com on to all and one m�,,na eme t for 2he entire project, -7- G m Exceq �Ons o All planned residential developments which comply with all pertinent provisions ®f Division 9 and specifically Article 989, shall be considered under standard Site Plan action by the Planning Commission. Exceptions t® such applicable provisions may be granted under the Site Plan procedure when the applicant shows 1s Such exceptions shall not be adverse to the public interest. 2. Such exceptions shall not violate S m 9890, Site Plan - Intent and PuKR®se, ®r be in conflict with the factors of consideration in S. 9891.4 Action by the Commission. 3. The excpti®us requested concern only subsections O through and including E of So 9897.1, Planned Residential Developments Section 20 That the following section of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code is hereby amended and shall read as folgcvdso S o 9591,,2 Films. At the time the application is filed, the applicant shall pay a fee based on the type of use to be reviewed as followsb A. On Premise Sale $10 a 00 Consumption of Alcoholic Beverages Bo Pled Residential $100.00 Developments m�o ,. 40 Huntington Harbour 'Property Owners Association, Inc. P. O. BOX 791 SUNSET BEACH, CALIFORNIA May 12, 1969 City Council of Huntington Beach Council Chambers City Hall, Civic Center Huntington- Beach, Calif. Gentlemen, The attached letter, dated may 10, 1969, was sent to the. Planning Commission.: In addition, the Huntington Harbour Property Owners Association (HHPOA) had a representative :of its Boa'rd. at the last meeting of the Planning Commission. Because the Planned Development ruling will be made.:, so soon, when Code Amendment 68-2 is acted on by the Council a week from- today,, i felt that you should be kept informed of''the HHPOA position on this matter. Very truly yours, Donal d:;N, biller Vice P:resitlent: Emal'ington Rarbour Propor ty Own= Also atlon Inc P. O. BOX 791 SUNSET BEACH, CALIFORNIA Play 10, 1069 Planning Commission City of Huntington Beach Post Office Box 190 Huntington Beach, Calif. Gentleman, The Huntington Harbour Property Owners Association is concerned about the future development of Huntington Harbour. Therefore, at a meeting of the Boaro of Directors held April 28, 1969, the following tl>,o motions ;p,,ere passed 1 . The Huntington Beach :Planning Commission should be advised that the Huntingtoh Harbour Property Owners Association requests that the proposed Planned Development Ordinance includo a require- ment that all owner`s; of property within_,300® of any such development be notified prior, to granting of permit, in a manner similar to procedure now 'Used f' r zoning variances, and that a public hearing be held prior , to the granting of ,such permit, 2. The .Huntington Harbour Proper ty' Owners Association recom mends that .a minP'um of 5, 000 square` feat of land,. contiguous to each single.-family dwelling unit bs maintained for, all development done under the proposed PD Ordiinance, 3't is not ;the indent of thr HHPOA tb frustrate the developers of land in` Huntington Harbour,_' buV: we._do wish to preserve the medium-density character and quality marine residential, identity that is synonymous with Huntington Harbour. Very truly yours, Donald N, Iiiler � Vice-President 2. Single Familv Detached Homes : a. Where detached single family homes are proposed on individual lots similar to those found in a standard type subdivision and such lots do not abut common open space used Ifor recreation and leisure pur- poses , the minimum lot size for said lots shall conform to the requirements of the base district unless said plan has been determined by the Planning Commission with concurrence of the City Council to meet the intent and purpose of this ordinance. ba Where detached single family homes are proposed on individual lots similar to those found in a standard type subdivision and such lots abut common open space used for recreation and leisure purposes , the minimum lot size for said lots shall not be less than 5000 sq . ft. unless said plan has been determined by the Planning Commission with concurrence of the City Council to meet the intent and purpose of this ordinance. v 2 . Single Family Detached Homes: a. Where detached single family homes are proposed on individual lots siinilar to those found in a standard type subdivision and such lots do not ° abut common open space used for recreation and leisure purposes, the minimum lot size for said lots shall conform to the requirements of the base district unless said plan has been determined `t by the Planning Commission with concurrence of ' the City Council to meet the intent and pur- pose of this ordinance. b. Where detached single family homes are proposed on individual lots similar to those found in s a standard type subdivision and such lots abut' s common open space used for recreation and lei- ; sure purposes, the minimum lot size for said lots shall not be less than 5,000 sq. ft. un- less said plan has been determined by the Planning Commission with concurrence of the City Council to meet the intent and purpose of ,this ordinance. i j n