Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
File 2 of 2 - Code Amendment 91-10 Environmental Assessment
Page 9 - Council/Agency Minutes - 08/15/94 A motion was made by Winchell, seconded by Leipzig, to continue the public hearing open regarding Code Amendment No. 93-56 regarding carts/kiosks, outdoor sales and displays and introduction of Ordinance No. 3248 to October 3, 1994. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Bauer, Moulton-Patterson, Winchell, Leipzig, Sullivan NOES: None ABSENT Silva, Robitaille (out of the room) (City Council) PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED OPEN FROM AUGUST 2 1994 - CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10 - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 91-32 - PROPOSED ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE - DIVISION 9 REWRITE-=SUPPLEMENTAL ACTION-ON-- NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. .91=32 CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10 - RECREATIONAL' �� VEHICLE AND BOAT PARKING=SHAM RADIO ANTENNAE -APPROVED (640.10)__-J^- --- The Mayor announced that this was the day and hour set to consider a public hearing on the following: APPLICATION NUMBER: Code Amendment No. 91-10 - Environmental Assessment No. 91-32 APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach, Department of Community Development REQUEST: Repeal existing Huntington Beach Ordinance Code (Division 9) and establish a new zoning and subdivision ordinance for inclusion in the Huntington Beach Municipal Code. The new ordinance updates the zoning and subdivision provisions by incorporating current planning principles and planning requirements of state law, deleting duplications and conflicts, and streamlining review processing. COASTAL STATUS: An amendment to the Huntington Beach Local Coastal Program Implementing Ordinances will be filed with the California Coastal Commission following adoption by the City Council. PUBLIC HEARING TOPIC FOR AUGUST 15, 1994 TITLE 23: Provisions Applying in All or Several Districts: Off-Street Parking and Loading; Landscape Improvements; Signs RECREATIONAL VEHICLE AND BOAT PARKING ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES AND HAM RADIO ANTENNAE: Ratification of Mayor Linda Moulton-Patterson's statement at the August 2, 1994 City Council meeting that no changes would be made to current Zoning Code regulations pertaining to the parking of recreational vehicles and boats on R1 properties and ham radio antennae. The Community Development Director reported that this is the sixth public hearing regarding the Division 9 rewrite. Susan Pierce, Community Development Associate Planner, presented a staff report using slides regarding off-street parking and loading, landscape improvements and signs. AW Page 10 - Council/Agency Minutes - 08/15/94 Mayor Moulton-Patterson declared the public hearing open. Communications were received and distributed to Council from the Director of Community Development regarding the parking of recreational vehicles and boats on R1 properties and ham radio antennae; William Beaver and Gail Beaver; E. F. Beaver and Montrose Beaver; Fred Breneman and Jean Breneman dated August 1, 1994; Jo Smith dated August 3, 1994 in opposition to prohibiting RV's in residential driveways and fourteen persons in,opposition to the proposed code changes. The City Clerk announced additional communications received in opposition to code changes affecting Recreational Vehicle and Boat Parking from: fourteen persons in opposition to the proposed code changes, a petition submitted by Jean Polkow listing approximately three hundred thirty signatures, Robert and Fern Dittmer dated August 15, 1994 and Robert A. Polkow received July 27,,.1994. Sterlinq Cohurst stated that he would defer to the president of the Homeowners Association, Bob Riedeser. Bob Riedeser, Meredith Gardens Homeowners Association representative, spoke in support of the proposed code changes affecting recreational vehicle, trailer and boat parking. He spoke in opposition to the visual nuisance caused by parking of oversized vehicles in the street and in front yards. He distributed photographs to Council. Ken Konold spoke in opposition to the proposed code changes affecting recreational vehicle and boat parking. He stated that Meredith Gardens has CCR's that can be enforced and that the regulations should be left the way they are. Bob Polkow stated that the City Clerk has hundreds of petitions in opposition to the proposed code changes affecting recreational vehicle and boat parking. He stated that there would have been more petitions but the City Administrator announced on August 2, 1994 that the recreational vehicle parking and ham radio antenna issues would be pulled for further review. He stated that he bought a home in an R-1 zoned area so that he could park his motor home on his property and that he has a lot of money invested in his home and recreational vehicle. He urged Council to delete the regulations regarding recreational vehicle parking and requested that all persons who wrote in opposition to the proposed code changes by letter or petition be notified of any future public hearings on this issue. Donna Shelton stated that she had thirty-five hundred (3,500) address labels for recreational vehicle owners in the city and that the list does not include all owners of motor homes. She stated that the city does not have the storage facilities for all the recreational vehicles in the city. She stated that residents would leave the city and new people would not move here if they have a recreational vehicle. She stated that recreational vehicles serve a purpose during emergencies such as the Northridge earthquake. Pat Britt, past president of the Meredith Gardens Homeowners Association and current Board member, requested clarification from Councilmember Winchell regarding her statement relative to the parking of recreational vehicles. Page 11 - Council/Agency Minutes- 08/15/94 Councilmember Winchell stated that the current code allows recreational vehicle parking on the driveway and in the side yard next to the driveway if it is paved. Pat Britt spoke in opposition to the paving of the side yard for storage of recreational vehicles and stated that it erodes the property values of the homes in the area. The Planning Director reported. Discussion was held by Councilmember Winchell and staff. Ken Parkman stated that he has owned a recreational vehicle and parked it in his driveway for twenty years. He stated that he had surveyed the storage facilities for recreational vehicles in the city and found that there are only thirty spaces available. He spoke in opposition to the proposed code changes regarding the parking of recreational vehicles. R. G. Dittmer spoke in opposition to the proposed changes affecting recreational vehicle and boat parking. He stated that he and his wife are retired, on a fixed income and cannot afford $600 to $800 per month for storage of the vehicle. He stated that his recreational vehicle is stocked as an emergency shelter for earthquakes and requested that Council not put restrictions on homeowners property. He distributed photographs to Council. Jim Sadler spoke in support of the recommended action to remove any changes to the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance relative to the parking of recreational vehicles and boats on R1, Low Density Residential, properties and the installation of ham radio antennae and to maintain the current provisions contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Bryan Bridges stated that he has lived in an apartment complex for seventeen years and the density has increased in the area and parking problems have gotten worse. He spoke in opposition of the proposal to mandate that all parking spaces that are not assigned to an apartment be open to the public and stated it would allow visitors to other apartment complexes to park in his complex parking spaces. He stated that the federal government has set aside air space for ham radio users and the city should not impose restrictions on the antennas. 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. Councilmember Winchell requested clarification regarding satellite dishes and ham radio antenna. Susan Pierce responded that staff had removed the section regarding satellite dishes in order to fulfill FCC requirements but the ham antennas code would be left as it is. AW Page 12 - Council/Agency Minutes - 08/15/94 A motion was made by Winchell, seconded by Sullivan, to direct staff to remove any changes to the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code relative to the parking of recreational vehicles and boats on R1, Low Density Residential, properties and to remove any changes to the proposed code regarding the installation of ham radio antennae and on both of these, to maintain the current provisions that are contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, parking of recreational vehicles contained in Chapter 231 and ham radio antenna provisions are contained in Chapter 230. The motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Bauer, Robitaille, Moulton-Patterson, Winchell, Leipzig, Sullivan NOES: None ABSENT Silva A motion was made by Winchell, seconded by Sullivan, to approve by straw vote Chapters 231, 232, and 233, (Off-Street Parking and Loading, Landscape Improvements, and Signs) of Title 23 as presented tonight with the exception of the amendment of the previous motion of the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite. An amendment to the motion was made by Leipzig, accepted by Winchell, to remove Section 233.18 on balloons for further review by the Council Committee on the Sign Code. Councilmember Bauer requested clarification regarding parking spaces in an apartment complex. Susan Pierce responded that a number of the unassigned spaces must remain for guest parking in both the current code and the proposed code. Councilmember Sullivan stated that the Council Committee on the Sign Code was still working and would be amending the section relating to signs in the future. The motion as amended carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Bauer, Robitaille, Moulton-Patterson, Winchell, Leipzig, Sullivan NOES: None ABSENT Silva RECESS - RECONVENE The Mayor called a recess of Council/Redevelopment Agency at 10:00 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 10:15 p.m. CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEMS REMOVED The following items were requested by Councilmembers to be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate consideration: (Leipzig) Amicus Brief to support the City and County of San Francisco of appeal to reverse district court ruling regarding "salary test" and League of Cities Annual Conference Delegates; (Sullivan) bid award - Oakview Branch Library, and appropriation of$75,000 for consultant services for review of revised Bolsa Chica Environmental Impact Report. Hi Pij'ItiuT e3i MA CA PROPOSED CHANGES TO OFF-STREET PARKING PROVISIONS On August 15, 1994 the City Council of Huntington Beach will hold public hearings on staff proposed changes of Section 231 .02E1 of the Off-Street Parking & Loading Provisions. Under the .proposed changes Recreational Vehicles and Boats will be prohibited from being parked "in front of or street side setback including driveway" . If these provisions are enacted into law, then all RV's and boats will have to be stored at additional expense to their respective owners Additionally, if the vehicles are stored, they would not be in a position of render emergency aid, as was the case in the recent Northridge earthquakes, when RV' s were used as temporary shelter,` communication centers, as well' as sources of food, water and other supplies. Finally, at issue is whether or not you want government involvement in telling you what you may or may °,not park on your own personal 'property. Please plan to attend the Council meeting at 7:00 pm on August 15, 1994. By the placement of my signature, I certify that I am a registered-voter residing in the, City, of Huntington -Beach and- I am opposed to the proposal pending ,before the City Council that,��would'�prohibi°tRV';s;:and/or°:boatst from" being-parked in the driveways or ;side yards of .private residences.: NAME ADDRESS-,�,.;. TELEPHONE .2. 3. 4. 6. _ .. 7v. 9 _ 10. ,. 11 12. 1.3 14. 15. 16. 18. 19 . 20. R 17Z :1.4 c I ocii, CA 9U116 FOB CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ADMINISTRATIVE COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator 1 c DATE: July 25, 1994 SUBJECT: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10 ZONING AND SUBIDIVISION ORDINANCE REWRITE At the April 25, 1994 City Council study session meeting, staff introduced the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite document, answered questions, and responded to Council's inquiries regarding the document. Binders were distributed which included a summary of the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance, annotated proposed ordinance with index, and cross reference to current Huntington Beach Ordinance Code sections. The City Council established a process for adoption which includes a series of public hearings and study sessions. This is the third study session in a series of study sessions. Attached are tables summarizing highlights of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite document that will be presented at public hearings on August 1, and August 15, 1994. A schedule of hearings is also included. Please refer to the binder when reviewing the attached. This portion of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance contains Title 23 which includes the following: o Chapter 230, Site Standards o Chapter 231, Off-Street Parking and Loading Provisions o Chapter 232, Landscape Improvements o Chapter 233, Signs o Chapter 234, Mobilehome Conversions o Chapter 235, Residential Condominium Conversions o Chapter 236, Noncomforming Uses and Structures Wpierce10033 July 25,1994 CHAPTER 230 Site,'Ytandards This chapter consolidates various standards that are applicable to one or more districts. Many of the provisions are repeated in various districts while others are currently found in Article 973, Miscellaneous Provisions, and Article 963, Unclassified Uses. The site standards are grouped into three parts that are applicable to residential districts, non-residential districts, and all districts. PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 230-2 230.04 Establish unique Not addressed. Allows PC to adopt front and street procedure to modify front side yards in and street side yard setbacks developed when 60% of the frontage residential areas on a blockface does not conform to current front and requirements 230-2 230.08 Residential Maximum height 15 Maximum 15 ft. height Accessory feet; minor accessory except detached garages for Structures standards address single family may exceed smaller structures height if no habitable floor depending on area and area and architecturally height compatible with main dwelling. Total floor area of detached accessory structures not to exceed 600 sq.ft. or 10% of site area. No minor accessory structure standards. 230-3 1230.10 Accessory Conditional Use CUP approval by ZA Dwelling Units Permit(CUP) approval Second Units by PC 230-4 230.12 Home Use Permit approval CUP approval by-ZA for Occupation- by ZA for swimming service or instruction On-site services lessons; no other businesses which involve and instructions instruction or services customers on-site permitted with customers on-site 230-10 230.16 Manufactured Allowed only in MH Allowed in any R zone as Homes zones or sites with single family dwelling -MH suffix provided compliance with standards 230-12 230.20 Park and Addressed only in Requires payment for any Recreation Fee Subdivision Ordinance residential units not covered by Subdivision Ordinance • G:lpierce10033 July 25,1994 Chapter 230 Continued PAGE I SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 230-18 230.40 Helicopter CUP approval by PC CUP approval by PC subject Takeoff and and compliance with to location criteria and site Landing Areas base district standards development standards only 230-27 230.62 Legal Buildi-ng Not addressed Proof of legally created lot Site Required required prior to building permit issuance 230-29 230.70 Measurement of Method varies among Current RI standard Building Height districts applicable_citywide 230-29 230.74 Outdoor Provisions contained in Consolidated; outdoor Facilities various commercial dining added to Commercial and industrial districts and Open Space districts with CUP approval by ZA 230-30 230.76 Screening of Only rooftop Expanded to include all Mechanical mechanical equipment exterior mechanical E ui ment requires sc eening equipment round or roof) 230-31 230.80 Antennae Only satellite antennae Includes any antennae as an addressed accessory use to a permitted use 230-35 230.86 Seasonal Sales Applies to Christmas Expanded to include single tree and pumpkin lots season agricultural product only sales 230-36 230.88 Fencing and Fences between 3 1/2 Allows maximum 6 ft fence Yards ft. and 6 ft. height in any required side or rear allowed only on side yard or rear property lines or at front setback G:\pierce\0033 July 25,1994 , CHAPTER 231 Off-Street Parking and Loadine 13-ovisions Parking provisions of Article 960 have been reorganized into the format of the new code. New provisions have been included which allows the Planning Commission to grant a reduction in parking requirements based on a traffic study that justifies the reduction. And another new provision requires reciprocal ingress and egress access between commercial properties. These provisions codify current policies/conditions of approval. Other changes reflect public and staffs concerns to ensure that all developments in the City provide adequate parking and circulation. PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE — TROPOSED_C®DE 231-02 231.02E1 Parking in Oversize or recreation No parking i equired residential yards vehicles prohibited in setback adjacent to public front of any dwelling street except driveways. or in any required Recreation vehicles and parking space except boats are prohibited in front R1 district allows or street side setback parking in driveway or including driveway paved area between driveway and side property line 231-13 231.08 Reduced Reduction allowed by Also allows reduction with parking for joint use of parking CUP approval by PC based certain uses on actual use, traffic report, transportation demand management plan 231-14 231.12 Handicapped Includes number of Reference to comply with Parking spaces required State law 231-16 231.16B Vertical Not addressed Minimum 7 ft. clearance clearance except that wall mounted cabinets may encroach if 4.5 ft. clearance provided in front 5 ft. of parking space 231-18 231.18d2 Assigned and Requires assigned Requires assigned spaces to unassigned spaces be included with rental of residential dwelling unit without any parking spaces additional cost. All unassigned spaces to be open and accessible to guests and tenants G:\pierce\0033 July 25,1994 Chapter 231 Continued FACE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 231-20 231.18E4 Reciprocal Not addressed; Requires commercial Access required as condition properties to provide of approval reciprocal ingress/egress with ad acent properties 231-23 231.26 Parking Area Implied but not Plan approval required prior Plan addressed to construction, reconstruction or repaving of off-street parking area CHAPTER 232 Landscape Improvements This is a new chapter which consolidates landscaping provisions found in various portions of the Ordinance Code. The landscaping improvement provisions are organized into five sections: general requirements; materials; design standards which include general planting provisions, general tree requirements, and off-street parking facilities; irrigation; and exceptions. New and major changes are listed in the table below. PACE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 232-1 232.02 Applicability Applies to all projects Applies to all projects unless exempt by the except 4 or less residential Director units which must comply onlywith tree requirements 232-1 232.04C Landscape Not addressed Requires landscape materials materials to be installed in a manner that will not create visual obstruction, block access, or conflict with utilities 232-2 232.04D Evidence of Not addressed Requires certification of completion completion filed with Public Works 232-2 232.04E Tree Not addressed Requires replacement of the replacement removal of mature, specimen, or disfigured trees 232-2 232.06 Materials Minimum requirements Requires minimal use of included in various turf, paved areas, and Articles crushed rock; requires drought tolerant materials; refers to Water Efficiency Ordinance ,5 Q\pierce\0033 July 25,1994 Chapter 232 Continued PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 232-3 232.08B Required trees Requirements Identifies tree requirement contained within for single family large and various Articles small lots, multi-family, and non residential developments 232-3 232.08C Parking areas Parking area perimeter Requires 3-5 ft. wide landscaping not planting area along addressed perimeter of parking area 232-5 232.12 Exceptions Requires existing Adds compliance with tree developments at time quantity and size of expansion or requirements exterior alteration to provide 6% of site area in landscaping and 6 ft. wide planters along street frontages. 232-6 Diagrams Diagrams Diagrams included New and revised diagrams through with parking diagrams 232-10 CHAPTER 233 Signs Current provisions of Article 961, Signs, have been incorporated into the new Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance format. Exemptions to the requirement for obtaining a building permit have been expanded.. The Sign Matrix has been revamped for better readability and use. Temporary signs have been renamed promotional activity signs to distinguish them from the temporary signs that may be allowed for a temporary or limited term use. Commercial sign provisions reflect recommendations of the original Sign Committee, which consisted of three Council members and three Planning Commissioners, appointed by the City Council. Staff is recommending that these changes be incorporated with the entire Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Rewrite. Any recommendations by the new Sign Code Committee will be incorporated later. PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 233-7 233.06C Special Sign Approval by PC Approval by ZA Permit 233-7 233.06D Limited Sign Approval by PC Approval by Director Permit •` Wpierce\0033 July 25,1994 PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 233-10 233.08C Freestanding Monument sign Maximum 8 ft. height if sign: sites with maximum 7 ft. height bonus sign(opaque less than 400 ft. background) fronts e Freestanding Maximum 7 ft. height Maximum 8 ft. height if sign: corner monument sign or wall bonus sign(opaque sites signs, but not both background and wall signs Freestanding Not addressed Maximum 10 ft. height with sign: sites with 50 sq. ft. or 60 sq.ft. sign 200 -400 ft. area if bonus sign frontage on Beach Blvd. Freestanding Not permitted Permitted by planned sign sign with multi- program tenant panels Freestanding Not addressed Required on all freestanding sign: street signs address Wall signs Maximum 10%bonus Maximum 15%bonus if if channel letter sin channel letter sign Channel letter Not required Required on commercial signs sites with 5 or more uses 233-18 233.18E Balloons Allowed only for Allowed for any business for automobile dealerships maximum 90 days subject to size criteria and do not exceed height of building. No change to balloons allowed for automobile dealerships 233-20 233.24 Off-site sign Not addressed Reconstruction or relocation reconstruction subject to agreement between City and sign owner Wpierce\0033 July 25,1994 , CHAPTER 234 Mohilehome Park Conversions The provisions contained in this chapter primarily follow existing code (Article 927) with some reorganization. A major change deletes the purchase of a mobilehome that can not be relocated at a depreciated value to the requirement that it be purchased at fair market value determined by an appraiser acceptable to both the landowner and the mobilehome owner. PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 234-3 234.08B Purchase of a Purchased at Purchased at fair market mobilehome depreciated value value that is unable to be relocated CHAPTER 235 Residential Condominium Conversions The provisions within this chapter follow current code, Article 936.5, with the exception that the only zoning provisions applicable to the conversion of apartments to condominiums will be compliance with the parking requirements of Chapter 231 and the landscaping requirements of Chapter 232. Conditional Use Permit and Tentative Map approval by the Planning Commission is required for conversion of 10 or more units, and Conditional Use Permit and Tentative Map approval by the Zoning Administrator is required for conversion of 9 or less units. PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 235-2 235.04 Permits required CUP and map CUP and map approval by approval by PC for 5 PC if 10 or more units; CUP or more units; not and map approval by ZA if 9 permitted if 4 or less or less units units 235-4 235.08B Compliance Compliance with Compliance with parking with zoning planned residential and landscape requirements standards development standards only �b Wpierce\0033 July 25,1994 CHAPTER.236 Nonconforming Uses and Structures This chapter is a reformatting of current code, Article 965. A new provision is introduced to limit the amount of enlargement to.a nonconforming structure for a conforming use. PAGE SECTION .ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 236-2 236.02 Alterations to No limit on Enlargement limited to 50% nonconforming enlargement of a of existing area during any 5 structure or use nonconforming year period structure v\ G:\pierce\0033 July 25,1994 Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Schedule The following table indicates the schedule of public hearings and meetings relative to the processing;of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE SCHEDULE Meeting Date Meeting Type Subject Meeting Status May 12 Meeting Staff presentation to Chamber of Commerce Completed May 19 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Rewrite overview, Completed House General Provisions,Administration,Overlay Districts,Subdivisions May 23 Study Session General Provisions,Administration,Overlay Completed Districts,Subdivisions June 6 Public Hearing Environmental Assessment;General Provisions, Approved General Administration Provisions and Administration June 16 Meeting Staff presentation to Board of Realtors Completed June 20 Public Hearing Overlay Districts,Subdivisions Approved June 23 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Residential,Commercial, Completed House Industrial,Open Space,Public-Semipublic,Specific Plan June 27 Study Session Residential,Commercial,Industrial,Open Space, Completed Public-Semipublic,Specific Plan July 5 Public Hearing Residential,Commercial,Industrial Approved July 18 Public Hearing Open S ace,Public-Semipublic, Specific Plan Approved July 21 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Site Standards, Completed House Mobilehome Park Conversions,Condominium Conversions,Non conforming,Parking and Loading, Landscape Improvements,Signs July 25 Study Session Site Standards,Mobilehome Park Conversions, Pending Condominium Conversions,Non conforming,Parking and Loading,Landscape Improvements, Signs August 1 Public Hearing Site Standards,Mobilehome Park Conversions, Pending Condominium Conversions,Non conforming August 15 Public Hearing Parking and Loading,Landscape Improvements, Pending Signs August 15 Public Hearing Zone Change Introduction Pending September 6 Hearing Adoption Pendin Wpierw\0033 July 25,1994 �_ _._ _ -T_ -_. � . �-�----, � {. ��'�t� i �� Ys. ...„_�T s 1 ��:Y ""S � _ _ _ k ;, _ „�,_ �, � ,� ��� a .� - 4 rc $ .., _A � C3iS-"�a �. � 't> � � _-+ram ��, -_ .���, . _ ,- _ �' �•�,; � � .�.�_e....._...�,..,.. ..........___»�.,�. -_ _ _ _ _ ,.r.� t .*.,.�,., .� .. ��71 ) � = ` I ` I mz0 August 15, 1994 Z o Cj" o m>< �ZAZ00 G wmnDM City Counci 9 r �Mo m D� Huntington Beach, Ca. �-Am- �MZO o Subject: Possible Further Restrictions a 0= om c, Relative to Parking Recreational Vehicles M r' m n MM ln� Z Gentlemen/Ladies , �> I just learned only last week through a neighbor, that this body was considering prohibiting the parking of recreational vehicles on citizens (owners) residential property. It is the 71 purpose of this letter to advise you that I strongly object to this possibility. First off, my wife and I , both retired, moved to and bought our home in Huntington Beach in 1971, approximately/ 23 years ago. Even at that time we had a small camping trailer, since=`'worn out and replaced by a new trailer some three years ago. In all this time, see attached picture, we have never had .any negative comment from anyone in the neighborhood objecting to our narking same in front of our home. To the contrary-, comments we have received have been postive (what a nice trailer, are you enjoying it, etc. etc, may we see inside? , we are considering buying one for ourselves, etc. ) During our working years, we worked hard in order to have our nice home, automobile, trailer and in anticipation of later when we hoped to enjoy same. 4e now live on a fixed and relatively modest income and when something. like this comes along, it is not un-noticed. It would cost' us $600-$800 per year to park this vehicle elsewhere and would be very inconvenient and would do nothing for the city. ode need these kinds of moneys for medical, dental bills, insurance, taxes, etc. etc. There are thousands of recreational vehicles being parked in the same relative fashion. If you were to force storage elsewhere, where is elsewhere? Storage facilities would not be available. Do you want more storage facilities built? If so, adhere? I would also remind you that these type facilities don't help the environment at all. Despite the cost/inconvenience problems pointed out above, we also use the vehicle as an emergency shelter s;hrould this be required; As you know Huntington Beach is on an earthquake fault area and as citizens we are supposed to stock provisions should a quake occur. lj4e use our trailer for this purpose since it. is self-contained (water, gas, shelter, and sewage provisions) which would carry us over for a short period while city facilities are being organized and provided. As mentioned prior in this letter, we are elderly people, ( 74 and 67) and we must plan ahead for such emergencies, if we intend to survive. —D_,�), �-- In closing, we implore you to not do anything that would upset the status quo as it now exists. above all, do not restrict the narking of recreational vehicles on owner/residence' s property. Very .truly yours, Robert and Fern Dittmer 16332 Redlands Lane Huntington Beach, Ca. 92647 ( 714) 842-5927 r d �. CITY OF TINGTON BEACH a INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH APPROVED ROVED BY CITY COUNCIL �/0 __ 3 19� TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council It�FR . VIA: Michael T. Uberua / City Administrator FROM: Melanie S. Fallon Community DevelopVeDirector SUBJECT: SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION ANTENNAE/CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10 DATE: September 27, 1994 At the August 1�,1994, City Council meeting, the City Council announced that the new Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance would not include provisions that would further regulate amateur radio operations (ham radio). Section 230.80 of the new Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance has deleted all references to amateur radio antennae. Staff has been advised by members of Radio Amateur Civil Emergency Services (R.A.C.E.S.) that Section 230.80 continues to impact amateur radio operations. R.A.C.E.S. has requested that this section specifically exempt amateur radio applications from the provisions pertaining to microwave equipment. If the City Council concurs, the following motion has been prepared. Motion to: "Delete Section 230.80 D and 230,80E of the new Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance pertaining to microwave receiving antennae and microwave transmitting and relay equipment and delete conditional use permit approval requirement for microwave antennae and equipment in Section 230.80A." rl g:Aadmin1tr\994sp6 � ROVE 19 JJ CITY OF HUNTINGTON "FY' 'LFRK INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council VIA: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator r�Cf _ FROM: Melanie S. Fallon, Community Development Director, SUBJECT: SUPPLEMENTAL INFORM[A'TION RV PARKING/CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10 DATE: September 27, 1994 As you may already be aware,the City Council took formal action at the August 15th meeting to remove the proposed code section of the new Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance from consideration for change. This means that the existing code will remain in place. EXISTING CODE: 9110.10 Parkin. Parking shall comply with the standards outlined in Article 960.* The parking of motor vehicles,trailers, campers and boats shall be prohibited on all landscaped areas within the front one-half of the lot except as provided below. (a) Oversized vehicles(see Definitions Article 908),campers,trailers and boats on trailers may be parked on the paved driveway area or on a paved area between the driveway and the nearest side property line provided that they do not project over any property line and that the area is kept free of trash,debris and parts. (b) Commercial oversized vehicles (see Definitions Article 908) or special purpose machines shall be prohibited in any yard area. The new Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance contains a modified version of this section. PROPOSED CODE: 231.02 E.1. Parking in Yards in R Districts. No parking shall be permitted in any required setback adjacent to a public street,except driveways and on a paved area between the driveway and the nearest side property line provided that there is no projection over any property line and that the area is kept free of trash, debris, and parts. Oversized vehicles may be parked in the rear or side yard except commercial oversized vehicles shall be prohibited in any yard area. Motion to: "Replace Section 231.02.E.1 of the new Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance with existing code provisions, Section 9110.10 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code." 1 b *Article 960 will no longer exist in the new code. g:\adminitr\994sp5. T T-, CO D r- ANIENDME,NT NO, 9 1-10 WINING ISUBDWISION ORDLNAINICE ()raobcl, 3, 19)4 MOTIONS M 2'r n `-and u t"'al I'%,i- n., and f el ay eq w aillelinac and eqwp,ment il- alnd Subdi,-ision A NT fC, 0Pj-)-r,vkY UON 67 I'll Vf\, TG A it' P as ri 2. FRS E H I T Hlj'IN-flNGTON E BF'AC' V�i-.'A ANTD ADDING IT TO (wfich removes o wid amends the T —H ORDIN N 3 CODE IRE !PU-N:,MqQT --B LAC H-QjL ? WN 0 DIN 2 4, -,A-N7,L -5 R ANC E-1 OF C- TET-'C 10 13EACH REPEALING 'INT THE (J—; U IN V A I s: A00PTIN E W Z ONTING AND C 0 D F AN1 'G A N, SUBDrVISION' CODE." kvhi:,,ll re ea the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code except Article 910 eT)! eo Ri%siden alid amends ihle Hunrington reach MLmicipal Code by adding Titles 2 0, -4 1, 2 73, .'Z 4, -A i I 0 3 2PIA SEP 2 6 1994 Tt_.t. HE:':city t.•t•:iunt._.ii i^t tembe—rs During g the Aiul_qust 15, 15�-N` t t „u n}il se=sion„ - i! was ins rit-it.„.tte by the 4, animi.s passage of chapter %1.,D-21) to delete. any change to ,,..tr codethat r.S E }' ��{{ try ram. I r k-.,•.. !„ ».,F F F� y Yv "• - �a.I I rt.:t��_? r,}r r.�=���.ir tt.i and it•.i antennae ii i•_tt a.l�•a.tit•t!t t.F T;t�t g'f"�:.a.' followed!•„�{�',`' r3�J;'t,`r.�o. release signed ,t``V'`I'.I1„. ) O;U I''}a di [ t ,lut,,:`C 3,4y+ fi"v`,t.»t!"tinistrC.att��r, a posted notice at t,.€t y_t(iand p letter signed by t �„ atlr � ^ t_: t e :.11 el it e;re4.;ar t •mitt these.f=t„i C,il l iCt}„lS:`•'.Zi. �_t- F Firy� „•i�_• •�•• { •"f}!" .!i i^.u••;• r1 Fr f i Fr} �".r-. �. _ �••"•N•.,..•r: •�• - i}„)t„i._,r�.rtt•_e t t•. l E' iriE trt t•" fr3'�It' S"3` t r' r't t. t'S�it�t 5'Srl at !tCa.t;s 6..kY,''t;•t„�tr�� e ,�a.f��Ise.Jr'!tsie o k_ii^i'that :„r t , , t{ts }= e3 t`E park: „ a ttl art- rtL': i .t li ,i 's{i. i`=,a.r,Fi(7i'i•_i_fir.( ._ ra.}$' {{has = ..7�_.!(ts�,i?';»t i l5' ;t_ir i,;�?f'�council�iit,lly!;'j°s l_�i„. {t„t[{t` and _ "ls aid tt{t=tyt{��, ;7}�''i!'y f;t:yt:ti,. p it.t both areas. Their t•..•ir l=.�t•»��!„�t:Er� ..�t„} 'ti=t`.�.�}i.„�tri i•..i[i3t'=«i.t.•�t•.ir•.:'and ty"_�'».itly rtY��'�iti„tF�ri.,,3�„fJ i,l,;•t,»i. !••):';'}, the^F,,'in y;,trry"•iet-1the t::oi",rrtt:_:ii rnernbers during it•g the Septer n�,er 2{'"0: e��i Ctf t it_! a i t"'}e r pr "i{ _tde had been ircorpCir 1e1F. T er r_r? coup t J ei t,..-..rw present to' i" #t e ie:,.1�_r-.r. ,}t k"• ";}: i ` 'y t '{1 {'�,")...} ` s_. (i„»i» ^k"ri y{3 F ( Ei•t i �'t' r•'.„ `d.i,.. to k_�,,,-,-s ed a pr o.3i i..i1 r.in the.i,"•t.:i t„•Se ti 1=.�.t. •.�„ti•„'"`r:'`' rf.�J-5--{4"•{r t tv't..•i t•..•t•„t!!!k„�t��r't-„•! 'i'3}t`„i it"t.�i{.rt•..�t•.•=.�t•_•t r„t�� ',�j�t�rt t t f staff l v I , thek i_a,t t t 15 IRw res.f r r. However,ever, v 4 i though �tr }f ta. r ,.Yr t instructed i_•it•...tt'%d {,t_.M1.lt:'tra,`4`L•ChesH two area,-:;a,-:;1_li t•.tur r t tut tit_ip,;a,f t_•t_%dt_"alone, they ch:,;ise to chanqe them. There is = : t thing d C firit'l„t r F "{itrt our c}t_y i s ,tru.t r 'when staff can,iti-1"iji i_,the i,t: i�t t�'e people. as e:t•i c', '�s�.'•i i �� their e ,,nCie i.`.t t t '.3 t Thepeople yi, e l.;rt r.' . :. will t ! " .. .l . i E_r their I t.i..i .i. , i'-: are • l i • appointed "Io ir -3-control 1} tik" city to �_ i ftitd} l . There are sir4i rr t :7 i this situ a,tbr i is getting t.tir g worse artt„t could soon,t t,;{.t_st.t of r`o t tr ol. r ie '_i urgentlyrequest :} validate.i"= . si} r t1rk i . ;_tr iJi r r'r'it t a. t 2t it {.i iK3 i��i°�,U"r �.t':,�,} the passage ge o chapter ?i t�)-r l�t r.�.r�tt„•1 c7,s,--t."•ir tom'that staff t:„?j0 r iCjt s a.k„•iati.:ge.your ef for',•° V)E f ore the updated' code I•„Jr t:ori"es elf i t•t:ti t e- 117-114) t. t �, � RECEIVED C.1-Ty rLEO, SE? SEP 2 9 199C TO, HB,,-Dty C"u,-.incitl Merr,,bers Ref ererrice R.1111, clocle chlange controversy that disclosed Staff.,aprParently coerced I 9 �a If ter all coun-C-11 nnembers two c.ouncilmerribers.to chancie provisions of Dkdsion , had%eote(l riot to chanqe. any portion that affected R,"(1 park-*Inq The attached copies of correspondence ar e self explanatory. Counclirnan Ralph Bauer stated during'he 11CM council siession that lt%-%las hi,3,intention to as:41*ott-ter Counc1hrriembers to reaffirrf, thi-cory-Imitiment rnade unanirnol.-isiv to the people of that there v'r—ould tie no changes to the R'" code in Division i:� 14 vote to the, x affirmation of the 16 24 urlust 19C is urgentl,.,solicited. Any vote, ci:V. T I P el contrarv%A,11:11 further decav the integrity of clue process in our .1 1 her,are,lit rally thou:-:iands of households in Huntington Beach that no,7,11 f als-ely feel that their priveleges and rights as RY o%qners are securek•and have.riot,been tampered with. The process that allowed the proposed F-.',V parking code ch-.aInge to L-)e forki'larded to counk--.-il from the Plantninci CoirrT*-:--,:,ior,,has proven to be%10--,s--tionaL.4e-.I don't feel that the personal cleasires of T., tekbl,or perhaps just one,rf iember of -_;'taf f shot-Jid destroy ti e.conficlenCe the people of Huntington Beach now have in our city's dernocratic process.lt,:-ihould also be,-noted that during the '210,19,-:-M Council session prole -te matrix and narrative presented to `,�,ihen Dvlsjon,.-'�%i%1a,:-; finali7ed, 'the c d r eN CA Counc-il was erroneous in that CouncllrnemberS,present to vote,were assured that "We have.incorporated our cur rr e-,.nt F--"..V standards f.or the,city". F--".E'S;PEC-.TFULl A �',V" l .f OLKO'Al JEAN POU--."O%e1V C-7114y'-62-4810 4-ATCH 'listed in Q et, 111,ed) 1.Media R-,,elease-R;ich Barnard /.R1-,/P.arkinq notice .Ltr Susan Pierce A lte - mayor Ltr Linda Moi.Jton . k. r1-on,- cc:City Clerk% e, aLm."Y'ITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 Office of Public Information (714) 536-5511 FOR EMW DIATE RELEASE Media contact: Richard Barnard, 536-5577 August 4, 1994 Staff contact: Susan Pierce, 536-5250 #94-69 City staff directed to delete proposed changes to the.City Zoning Code which would have prohibited residents from parking recreational vehicles and boats in front and street side setbacks and in driveways The city of Huntington Beach City Council is currently going through the process of reviewing the rewrite of the city's Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. According to Susan Pierce, Project Manager, the purpose for updating the Zoning Code is to delete inconsistencies in the current code, to include graphic illustrations, and to generally simplify the existing code and make it more"user friendly" for those individuals and businesses wishing to carry on development in the city. The draft rewrite of the Zoning Code was accomplished with the assistance of Blayney-Dyett consultants. The city's Planning Commission reviewed the proposed rewrite of the Zoning Code during 1991 and 1992. Public hearings before the Planning Commission began in June 1993 and concluded in October 1993. The Planning Commission's recommendations were incorporated into the final draft Zoning Code rewrite document and are currently being incrementally forwarded to the City Council for their review and consideration. The City Council review of the Zoning Code rewrite started on April 25, 1994, and is anticipated to be completed in September 1994, with an effective date for the new Zoning Code to occur in October 1994. During the City -More- t a A .s 0 Page 2 August 4, 1994 Council review, issues which are identified as having the potential for controversy are being referred to a City Council/Planning Commission Sub-committee for further review and consideration prior to being brought back before the full City Council for adoption. Over the last week, concern has been expressed to City Council members by a large number of residents regarding a proposal to modify the Zoning Code provisions which deal with the placement of additional restrictions on recreational vehicles and boats located in residential neighborhoods. While this issue has not yet come before the City Council for their consideration, the residents felt compelled to express their concern about the proposed changes. According to Susan Pierce, at the August 2, 1994, City Council meeting the City Council gave direction to the Community Development Department to delete the proposed changes to the Zoning Code which would affect recreational vehicles and boats in residential areas of the community. Susan Pierce said that current Zoning Regulations do provide a degree of control within residential neighborhoods. She said the proposed regulations, which would have prohibited the storage of recreational vehicles within the required front or street side setbacks including the driveway, will be recommended for deletion at the City Council meeting of August 15. -30- NOTICE RV PARKING HAM RADIO ANTENNAE At the August 1, 1994, City Council meeting, the mayor informed the public and staff that no changes would be made to the parking of recreational vehicles on RI properties and no changes would be made to current provisions pertaining to ham radio antennae. a RECEIVED FROM z ry� �fJ4:2�Q�@�ntbr AND MADE A PART OF THE RE R AT THE COUNCIL MEETING OF a o 9 CONNNIE BROOE OF KWAY,CIT CITY Y CLERK ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE SEPTEMBER 19, 1994 D CITY COUNCIL ACTION TO DATE magnum • TITLE 20, General Provisions , and TITLE 24, Administration - Approved June 6, 1994 • TITLE 22 , Overlay Districts, and TITLE 25, Subdivisions - Approved June 20, 1994 • TITLE 21 , Base Districts- Approved July 5 and July 18, 1994 • TITLE 23, Provisions Applying in All or Several Districts - Approved August 1 and August15, 1994 SUBCOMMITTEE ---------------- • MEMBERSHIP ❖ COUNCILMEMBER WINCHELL •:• COUNCILMEMBER LEIPZIG •s PLANNING COMMISSIONER RICHARDSON • FORMULATED RECOMMENDATION ON ISSUES AND OTHER ITEMS TO BE ADDED OR MODIFIED RECOMMENDATIONS . .' t6€f//Y//.•9l/..fCs:•`.•`.::>:::;?:::v:#::'••.;Es::2:;;:3;::::`:,<::C;S.S::;:5::::".'•':"•. ';:::k.s>':»2,'.�?2>9W.i ." ISSUE PROPOSED CODE SUBCOMMITTEE. STAFF .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... WATERFRONT MAX. 7 FT. HEIGHT APPROVE AS CONCUR LOTS: PROPOSED; MODIFY WINDSCREEN MUNICIPAL CODE IF HEIGHT NECESSARY .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... WATERFRONT MAX. 30 INCH APPROVE AS CONCUR LOTS: PROJECTION OVER PROPOSED SOLARIUMS BULKHEAD _._.. ................__.�..................-_.-»._.__.«w_.___-____.........._. .._.......__.............----..............................................».__.._.. - ............ AFFORDABLE REQUIRED IF 3 OR HOLD UNTIL CONCUR HOUSING MORE RESIDENTIAL AFFORDABLE UNITS HOUSING ORDINANCE ADOPTED ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... f •rr{{{•{ff%'rr. �c''L%$j'F,2{:,•:fir// �flF {f},: irr{r .2{ti4i.•.•:•J.-.`rnS-ie.¢R'F.r}»».. Rm"E" CU" MMENDATIONS //S,rr3 --i:::4i�:{•'::Ii�i.vn......wnn'::Fi::isv':Fii$3iJ:ii..n.:':4:i..n..............:i://%fT� .•:"iS':'7.)�%/.G/ SUE PR®POSED SUBCOMMITTEE STAFF CODE ........................................................................____-........._...__'_'_-........................................_-............,.____..............-._--__.._____...___-...............-.................--......-.-___-....._..............,......._........_�_.»....-.......�--------------- .-....... RESIDENTIAL RL, RM, RMH, APPROVE A CONCUR DISTRICT RH, RMP PROPOSED SYMBOLS ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... R H-A DENSITY BASED CHANGE DENSITY. CONCUR DENSITY ON I DU/1900 < 50 ft. of lot frontage sq.ft. ® I du/25 ft. frontage > 50 ft. It frontage ® °I du/1 sq.ft _........._.............._ 11. 11-........... ..................................................... AUTO REPAIR CUP APPROVAL APPROVE AS CONCUR USE IN BY PLANNING PROPOSED COMMERCIAL COMMISSION MISSION wil'tECOMMENDATIONS :f./iiJ`J`JJi^.'S�b`ki-`YFi`$}Yl/i.>vfi.:i�13t:�..............•........:........•.?:i%?t..:....xii�i7�}:e:.Y�iO".�.tT ISSUE P-RIOPIOSIED SYBICOMMITTE'E.EE STAFF ......:.:.r»•, aY.>rxs:??????s:..:yssa?c.:•.:.r:.r CODE ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... FLOOR FLOOR AREA DELETE CONCUR AREA INCREASE NUS F (COMMERCIAL/ CHILD INDUSTRIAL) CARE FACILITIES ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................ .......................................... ................................................... INDUSTRIAL NO CHURCHES HIGHER EDUCATION CONCUR USES OR SCHOOLS AND TRADE SCHOOLS; NO ELEMENTARY OR SECONDARY SCHOOLS OR CHURCHES U RC HES ....................... ........... ..----------................................... RECOMMENDATIONS �tktC's.�s'i::F%i.':::..............a...................N.d....,....,....... :aN.•,'-,•'<:�r". •n/n".»::•.'":A:�S"..�.'.fi.G///// ISSUE PROPOSED SUBCOMMITTEE STAFF CODE .................................................................................................................................................................................................. ........................................................................................................................... RENAMING OS-R, OS-S APPROVE AS CONCUR RECREATIONAL PROPOSED DISTRICTS ............................................................................................................................................................................................ ........................................................................................................................ PLANNED NEW OVERLAY CHANGE NAME TO CONCUR BLOCK DISTRICT PLANNED AREA DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT REQMTS. .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. HIGH-RI 1/5 BLDG. CHANGE TO CONCUR SETBACK® HEIGHT OR 15% MINIMUM 50 FT RESIDENTIAL OF LOT WIDTH/LENGTH RECOMMENDATIONS ISSUE PRO...Pl01S...ElD SUBCOMMITTEE STAFF CODE ...................................................................•................................................. ......................----.....................................................................................................................----.......----.......... ACCESSORY CUP APPROVAL ADD MAXIMUM FLOOR CONCUR DWELLING BY ZONING AREA AND PARK FEE UNITS ADMINISTRATOR REQUIREMENT ................-- ......................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ANTENNAE ADDRESSES ALL MODIFY: ONE CONCUR ANTENNAE (HAM SATELLITE ANTENNAE RADIO ON RESIDENTIAL LOT; ANTENNAE CONDITIONAL USE DELETED BY PERMIT TO DEVIATE CITY COUNCIL) -----------...........**"-"**............... RV PARKING NOT PERMITTED MODIFY TO CONCUR IN FRONT YARD INCORPORATE CURRENT RI STANDARDS .................................................................................................. .......................................................................................................................... ...........-.......................... ................ RECOMMENDATIONS ----------------------------- ISSUE PROPOSED SUBCOMMITTEE STAFF CODE ..........-.............I...................-...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... BALLOONS DISPLAY DELETE AND REFER CONCUR ALLOWED FOR TO SIGN ANY BUSINESS SUBCOMITTEE .............................................. ................................................................-.................................................................................................................................................................................................... MOBILE- FAIR MARKET APPROVE AS CONCUR HOME VALUE PROPOSED BUYOUT .....................I--.................... ............-.......I...................................."..,....................................................... ................-,............................................................................................................... DIRECTOR'S NOT INCLUDE CONCUR DECISIONS ADDRESSED DISTRIBUTION AND ACTION POSTING WITHIN 48 HOURS ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. RECOMMENDATIONS f!!//f��....k.�c2F,�•r`.t•3�: :S'�tS.FS.En:.............,.........::::E:a.":R..::oi>^.r:£:v.'.Ix.� .'+'.c..v;'.2{•n.�s'�"lik3�,0f ISSUE PROPOSED SUBCOMMITTEE STAFF CODE ............................................................................................................................................. .............................................................................................................................................................................. IN-LIEU INCLUDED DELETE AND REQUIRE CONCUR PARKING FEE: CONDITIONAL USE SURETY BOND PERMIT APPROVAL BY REQUIREMENT PLANNING COMMISSION v.���.._.._�........__ ...........................___.�..... �.�.m.m...____.___---_....... _._.__..__......w__m _ _._ ..__._..__._._ ___ �...-_------_._ ____.�_..__-_._,._.-------------- TEMPORARY 2 DAYS CHANGE TO 10 DAYS CONCUR OUTDOOR EVENT APPEAL .....__.._.......I.,.......................1........_._.___......___w____.,....__ ........I......____.__.._..w__. ..._ ...... ........._........ _....»>w...........I._.................. »_,_.--__»_..._._.._..._......, PCH SETBACK 10 FEET CHANGE TO 50 FEET CONCUR ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 10 RECOMMENDATIONS ---------------------------- ISSUE PROPOSED SUBCOMMITTEE STAFF CODE ............ ---------...................................................----.......................................................... LIVING IN NOT ADDRESSED ADD PROHIBITION CONCUR TENTS, ETC. ...........-................................................... .......... ........... . ..-...... 11.......-- -- ...........I............-1.111-1-1.....................--1..............................--................ "BIG BOX" NOT ADDRESSED ADD SPECIFIC CONCUR USES IN CRITERIA; CUP INDUSTRIAL APPROVAL BY ZONES PLANNING COMMISSION ..................... ................ ALQUIST- NOT ADDRESSED DO NOT INCLUDE; CONCUR PRIOLO ADD MAP AND OVERLAY STATE REQUIREMENTS AS APPENDIX ........... .........................I.................. .......--..................-.1............. ..................I--..................... ........................... SEP 16 '94 15:33 ROBERT MAYER CORP P.2/6 �;( � '.5:��'. '7^',xa:'. l Et!�{�, ,M �"•. a ��7'�''.':�•�'"•''•?'{C�:?1��;� �� ia � ��?I�P.r�'..�: h7. :, ! THENVATERFRONT September 16, 1994 Mayor Linda Moulton Patterson y Members of the City Council City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Streetcl Huntington Beach, California 92648 Re: Code Amendment 91-10 " Changes to Article 927 of the Huntington Mach ordinance Code Regarding Conversion of Mobflehome Parks Dear Mayor and City Council: We have became aware today that the Council will consider on September 1% 1994,:possible amendments to article 927. We are writing to voice our opposition to this amendment, Even though the amendment might be revised or clarified by staff in an effort to address our concerns, we believe that the amendment is misguided, illegal and should be rejected. It is our understanding that the proposed amendment would require'that a developer.who is closing a mobilehome park would be required to purchase a tenant's mobilehome at"fair market value"when it cannot be relocated. At the outset,you should be aware that the field of compensation to tenants who are displaced by the conversion of mobilehome' parks is occupied by the state legislature to the exclusion of conflicting local regulations on -the subject. State Government Code Section 65863.7, changed in 1985, expressly prohibits local governments from requiring compensation to tenants that is more than the reasonable cost of relocation. (Recent attempts to include "in-place value" in the statutory scheme have failed.) . 'Phis proposed amendment which would require the purchase of a tenarif s mobile home at "fair market value", no matter how that term might be clarified or restricted, conflicts"with state law. The Legislative Council to the state legislature issued an opinion which stated in part, An ordinance proposed by a charter city that would require a mobilehome ' park owner, in the event the mobilehome park owner converts the park to another use,in certain circumstances to buy the coach or a mobilehome, small coach, or recreational vehicle from its owner as a form of relocation assistance, would conflict with state law and would, therefore;"be invalid." The Robert Mayer Corporation 660 Newport Center Drive, Suite 1050,EO. Box 8680,Newport Beach, CA 92658-8680 •Telephone(714)759.8M,, .SEP 16 '94 15:33 ROBERT MAYER CORP P•.3/6 Mayor Linda Moulton Patterson September 16, 1994, Page 2 Additionally, the Legislative Council went on to state, "We think the phrase 'reasonable cost of relocation' does not include an obligation to purchase the coach in.question." Further, there are several complex issues in determining the meaning of fair market value in this context, though it is not the purpose of this letter to delve-into.those issues. Suffice to say, and regardless of the clarifications that staff may propose, if any form of "market value" is used; the result will have far reaching implications for the proposed development of The Waterfront site, and upon the City itself, who might unwittingly burden itself with many more millions of dollars of liability in the conversion of the Driftwood Mobilehome Park. The City has not yet performed all of its obligations under the Mobile Home Acquisition and Relocation Agreement,and should that agreement for some reason be later extinguished', the City will still be faced with the cost of relocating the existing tenants, by either its obligations under the Disposition and Development ;Agreement for...The Waterfront, or by the eventual termination of Mr. Mayer's lease. Why would the City pass an ordinance that could serve to excessively compensate mobilehome park tenants at the ultimate expense of the City? Lastly, we wish to repeat our request that we be contacted well in advance so as to be.able to reasonably participate in City Council actions that may have an impact on The Waterfront project. We only learned of this matter by accident while attending the August 1st meeting of the Council, and asked at that time for the issue to be postponed until it could be further analyzed. On August 4th,we sent the attached letter to the City staff which includes several important questions. We have not received any answers to these questions,instead with one business day before the September 19th City Council meeting we received a letter that served only to inform us that staff reviewed the issue with a City Council subcommittee in late August and the committee's recommendations will be reviewed'by the Council on September 19th, 1994. We are dismayed that the Council would even give consideration to changes in this ordinance without first pro-actively seeking the consultation of the one mobilehome park owner (and party with the City in agreements providing for the largest redevelopment project in the City) who may be directly.affected by this amendment: We concur with the City Attorney's opinion that the amendment would not affect the current agreements in place, but that should not be an excuse to avoid open cotttrnuriieations with us and to give consideration to all the legal and financial implications to all parties that this proposed ordinance entails. This City is still required under the present agreement to construct a si=ble.relocation mobilehome park in the central park area. If the City is to avoid this obligation, an amendment to the agreement will need to negotiated with park tenants by the City. The City's should do so from within the framework of existing law, rather than under a new regulation that increases the City's minimum liability by millions of dollars. SEP 15 '94 15:34 ROBERT MAYER CORP P.4,/6 Mayor Linda Moulton Patterson September 16, 1994,.page 3 In conclusion, please cease and desist your efforts to amend Article 927 of the City's Ordinance Code. There is no compelling reason at this time to make.such a change; and such change is prohibited by state law. ,Additionally, the effect of the proposed change may in fact increase by millions of dollars.the costs incurred by.the City, and could:further lead to costly litigation if the City sought to enforce this illegal amended ordinance upon uh djling mobilehome park owners in the future. Respectfully Yours, Stephen K. Bone President The Waterfront, Inc. cc: Mr. Michael Uberuaga; City Administrator Mr. Ray Silver, Assistant City Administrator Ms. Ms Melanie.S. Fallon, Director of Community Development Ms. Barabara wiser, Deputy City Administrator Robert L. Mayer Jeffery M. Oderman, Esq. Richard Harlow Ms. "Vickey Talley, Mobilehome Educational Trust att: Letter of August 4, 1994 SEP 16 '94 15:34 ROBERT, MAYER CORP P.5i6 THE. WATT tm �.,,l N August a, 1994 Ms. Mellanie Fallon Director Community Development City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Mach, CA 92648 Re: Ganges to Article 927 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code Regarding Conversion of Mobilehome Barks Dear Mellanie: The Iollowing are a few initial questions we have concerning the proposed cbAnge to the City's code which would substitute "fair market value'for"depreciated value"as-the amount an owner must compensate a mobilehome park tenant. I. Why the change--what compelling reason is behind this? I What analysis has been conducted as to the impacts of the.changi upon mobilehome park owners? I Have mobilehome park owners been contacted for .comment and what have they said? 4. This change would likely make it financially impossible to ever.tonv.ort an existing mobilehome park to another use, except where the City or.Redevelopment Agency assumes much of the financial liability. What advantage:is there to the City to eliminate the possibility of a future mobilehome park conversion,cpnsidering the fact that in some instances at some point in the future there can become a better use for the land, and/or the park's age and decayed infrastructure become problematic? •5. There are very important considerations as to. the assumptions made for the determination of .market value, which the revision fails to address. What consideration has been given to the issue of in-park market value-(which includes consideration of the terms of the existing land lease) vs. market value of the home only? The Robert Mayer Corporation 660 Newport Center Drive,Suite 1050,RO. Box 8680,Newport Beach,CA 92658.wm-Telephone(714)759-8091 SEP 16 '94 15:3,5 ROBERT MAYER CORP P.6i6 Letter to Mellanie Fallon Mobilehome Conversion August 4, 19.94 Page t 6. Pursuant to Zone Change 874, the mobilehome overlay zone at.The Waterfront'site was removed. Does this exempt this site forever from the.effect of this change? 7. Does this change have no effect at The Waterfront without the consent of the developer pursuant to the Development Agreement with the City? 8. In 1998, the City approved an impact of Conversion Report, and relocation Assistance flan,providing for payments of depreciated,value,pursuant to Article.927 for Driftwood. That Relocation Assistance Plan is still effective `if Driftwood residents fail to enter into an agreement with the Agency that supersedes the Relocation Assistance Plan. Does this proposed code amendment fn any way affect the existing approved Relocation Assistance Plan, or any potential amendment to the Plan in the future? 9. If the fair market value is based on an"in-park'valuation which includes in effect an amount for the value of the underlying Iand, the park owner is being ordered to buy back his land from the tenant (even though the tenant doesn't own the land). The proposed change mirrors changes made in some cities that have resulted in signifadart legal challenges, based on the argument of an uncompensated taking of .the land. What research has been conducted with regard to recent court decisions on, this issue? 10. If The Waterfront project fails to move forward, ultimately..the Mayer lease'will expire and the city will own the Driftwood Mobilehome Park. At that tine, does the City wish to be burdened with this restrictive ordinance as the basis to start negotiations with park residents to close the park and convert this land to its highest and best use? rely, Stephen K Bone President The Waterfront, Inc, CC.* bike €Jberuaga Barbara Kaiser Robert Mayer Richard Harlow Ms. Vickey 'Talley, Mobilehome Educational Trust SEP ,1E '94 15:32 ROBERT MAYER CORP P-1/E FACSD41M COVER LET7ER n1E ROBERT MAYER CORPORATION &0 NEVVMRT CBNTER DRIVE, S`TB. 105.0 NEWPORT 13FACK CA 92W (714) 759.8091 FAX (714) 72061017 Please deliver the following pages to: Name: Fax No.: Fxrm: Date: ja `C Time: `c.� �i' � y i From: I l Sent By: 26 a - 4 Total Number of Pages Including Cover Letter: Comments: AND RaENDED ONLY FOR TBE USE OF THE INDrVIDUAL OR ENTUY TO WHOM rr is ADDRESSED. w TaE RFADER OF THE mMAGE 1S N(yr THE RfrENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFEED THAT ANY DL%1DAIKAn0N, DISTRIMION OR COPYING OF THIS CO CATION IS STRTCILY PRO rl'1.U. M -Q—U HAVE BE&MI`4lED TRS'YRANSMISSIGly IN FRRM ELE&W KCnIFY US MWEDIATELY AND RMURN TIM OR GINAL TRANSMISSION TO US AT THE ABOVI ADDRESS VIA nMMAIL nj&ba).''OU -- REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Date: September 6, 1994 CD94-60 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Mem rs Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Prepared by: Melanie S. Fallon,Director of Community Development Subject: NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO.91-32/CODE AMENDMENT NO.91-10 ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REWRITE Consistent with Council Policy? [X] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue,Recommendation,Analysis,Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: The Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite, Code Amendment No. 91-10 and Negative Declaration No. 91-32, was the subject of a public hearing series conducted during June, July, and August 1994. The public hearing was closed on August 15, 1994. At each of the public hearings, the City Council approved the subject matter with few exceptions. These exceptions were referred to a subcommittee for review and recommendation to the City Council. The subcommittee, consisting of Councilmember Grace Winchell, Councilmember Victor Leipzig, and Planning Commissioner Roy Richardson met on August 19, 1994, and will be meeting again to further discuss these issues. Staff is recommending a continuance to the September 19, 1994, meeting to allow completion of the review and incorporation of the recommendations of the subcommittee into the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: "Continue Code Amendment No. 91-32 and Negative Declaration No. 91-32 to the September 19, 1994, City Council meeting." RCA 9/6/94 G:RCA:CD94-60 1 p o s. MAYOR ® Linda Moulton-Patterson City Of I:R tali •to fieac MAYOR PRO TEMPORE ® P. O. BOX 190 • 2000 MAIN STREET • CALIFORNIA 92648 Earle Robitaille COUNCILMEMBERS Ralph Bauer Victor Leipzig Jim Silva Dave Sullivan Grace Winchell August 18, 1994 Dear Concerned Resident: Thank you for your comments regarding the City Zoning Code relating to storage of recreational vehicles in a residential area. As you may already be aware, the City Council took formal action at our August 15 meeting to remove the above section of the Ordinance Code from consideration for change. This means that the existing code will remain in place. Under existing law, a recreational vehicle can be parked in front of your home in a residential neighborhood provided it is parked on the driveway or a,cement apron between the driveway and the closest property line. It cannot be parked on the lawn portion of your front yard or overhang into the public right-of-way. If you have any questions, you might want to speak with the Planning staff at 536-5271. The other City Councilmembers and I appreciate your interest in this and other issues of importance. Please feel free to contact me if we can be of any further assistance to you. Yours truly, Linda Moulton-Patterson, Mayor City of Huntington Beach LMP:PD xc: City Councilmembers 45185 TELEPHONE (714) 536-5553 City of Huntington Beach �— 2000 MAIN STREET CALI FORNIA 92648 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Building 536-5241 Planning 536-5271 August 11, 1994 Jean Polkow 21772 Oceanview Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Subject: RECREATIONAL VEHICLES AND BOAT PARKING Dear Ms. Polkow: Your recent letter to the City of Huntington Beach regarding parking of recreational vehicles and boats on residential properties was referred to me for response. Currently the City Council is reviewing revisions to the Zoning Code. One of the provisions, recreational vehicle and boat parking, has stimulated concern of a large number of residents. In response to receipt of many letters and telephone calls and public appearances at City Council meetings, the Mayor directed the Community Development staff to delete the proposed provision which would prohibit recreational vehicle and boat parking in driveways and to retain the current regulation. Because this direction was not affirmed by a vote of the City Council, the City Council will be taking said action at the City Council meeting of August 15 during the public hearing on the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. Thank you for your concern. The Community Development staff welcomes tl:e opportunity to work with the City's residents to make the City a more pleasant place to live, play and work. If you have additional concerns or questions, please contact me at (714) 536-5250. Sincerely, Susan Pierce, AICP Associate Planner xc: Melanie Fallon Howard Zelefsky City Council SP:lp g:pierce\sp1p0404 �L AP ecble /V clie ,-?A eP-57112y bti!;Inies5 e)ll q )Qzr�'-Mye I -�,--Cewdaly ew P h/eet -h� -1 6aP 4,4n,114 XVWWOM APFT?()V-E0 -h By crFy COUNCIL a1k"'-C1,e.S'1,:n i4je -/�?/ -5,pa,-e 7rOi- aup -L+V6t-,)h 44� P ?c"�' I COUNCIL, , 1, 119 IP7 990, J?C-P '711 '/19 4�/ v/e X9 EST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION llrlpt-e Ile-1 11-el"s e!; VL /0 e4lq j2o Date: September 19, 1994 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members CD94-72 Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrato r Prepared by: Melanie S. Fallon,Director of Community Developmen Subject: NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO.91-32/ CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10 ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REWRITE 0 V-4 3.1 A W, Urfa �c/3 Consistent with Council Policy? [X] Yes New Policy or Exception Oo-cl S.L 57 3 or-4 Statement of Issue,Recommendation,Analysis,Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Transmitted for City Council consideration are Negative Declaration No. 91-32 and Code Amendment No. 91-10, the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite. The current code consists of complex and inconsistent provisions that are difficult to understand. In some cases they are contradictory or conflict with State law. This rewrite will establish a clear, consistent, complete and comprehensive document that implements the General Plan and streamlines the review process. The rewrite was initiated by the City Council in 1990 and, after several code committee meetings and numerous public hearings, the ordinance was approved by the Planning Commission. A public hearing series was also conducted by the City Council during June, July, and August 1994. This project was continued from the September 6, 1994, City Council meeting to allow a subcommittee to meet, discuss and formulate recommendations on issues trailed at the public hearing series. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to` 1. "Approve Negative Declaration No. 91-32;" 2. "Adopt Ordinance No.3291 which removes Articles 937, North Huntington Center Specific Plan, and 964,Pacifica Community Plan, from the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code and establishes them as Specific Plans;" 3. 'Adopt Ordinance No.1*151 which removes Article 900, City Planning Commission, from the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code and amends the Huntington Beach Municipal Code by adding Chapter 2.34; RCA 9/19/94 G:RCA:CD94-60r1:D 4. "Approve Code Amendment No. 91-10,the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance based upon the findings outlined in Attachment No. 4;" and 5. "Adopt Ordinance No. ,2 4 which repeals the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code except Article 910 entitled Residential Agriculture and amends the Huntington Beach Municipal Code by adding Titles 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, and 25." ANALYSIS: Hlstory In June 1990, the City Council authorized the preparation of a contract with Blayney-Dyett to rewrite and update the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code (Division 9). A subcommittee was appointed to give direction and to assist in the review of the rewrite. The membership consisted of a City Council representative, Grace Winchell, and three Planning Commissioners, Ken Bourguignon, Roy Richardson, and Susie Newman. This subcommittee reviewed the various portions of this complex document prepared by the consultant. Planning Staff assumed the editing and completion of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance update and revision during late 1991. Presentations were made to the subcommittee and to the Chamber of Commerce. Study sessions were held with the Planning Commission during 1991 and 1992, and the comments received were incorporated into the draft Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. It was subsequently approved by the Planning Commission at a series of public hearings held between June 15, 1993, and October 19, 1993. Since the document was approved by the Planning Commission, there have been code amendments approved by the City Council. These code amendments have been incorporated into the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance (e.g. indoor swap meets, residential infill developments, and tattoo establishments). Pending code amendments, such as carts/kiosks, will ultimately be incorporated into the document. Three Articles of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code will not be included in the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. Article 900, City Planning Commission, will be relocated to Title 2, Administration and Personnel, of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code; and Articles 937, North Huntington Center Specific Plan, and 964, Pacifica Community Plan, will become specific plans that are kept on file separate from the zoning ordinance. City Council Action to Date At the City Council study session of April 25, 1994, Community Development Department introduced the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite. This presentation included a brief history of zoning as well as background information on authorization of a consultant contract with Blayney-Dyett, appointment of a new subcommittee, and highlights of the major changes and issues. At the conclusion of the meeting, the City Council established a series of public hearings and study sessions that allowed an introduction of the topics scheduled for the following two public hearings. RCA9/19/1994 2 G:RCA:CD94-60r1 Subsequently, six public hearings were held by the City Council. At each of the public hearing series, the City Council approved the subject matter with few exceptions. These exceptions were referred to a subcommittee for review and recommendation to the City Council. The recommendations of the subcommittee have been incorporated into the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. Subcommittee Recommendation: The following is a matrix of the items pulled from the document and referred to the subcommittee. Recommendations of the subcommittee are also indicated and have been included in the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance in legislative form. ISSUES TRAILED FROM THE ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE FOR FURTHER REVIEW # PAGE SECTION ISSUE COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE STAFF CONCERN RECOMMENDATION RECOMMENDATION 1. 210-13 210.06 (T) Waterfront Possible conflicts Agree as proposed; Agree with subcommittee Lots: 7 ft. with CC&Rs; modify Chapter 17.24, maximum provide CC with of the Municipal Code if height for copy of Title 17.24 necessary windscreens 2. 210-13 210.06 (T) Waterfront Possible conflicts Agree as proposed Agree with subcommittee Lots: with CC&Rs; maximum 30 provide CC with inch copy of Title 17.24 projection over bulkhead for patio enclosures (solariums) 3. 210-5 210.04(N) Affordable Hold until current Agree with Council Agree with subcommittee Housing Affordable required with Housing residential Ordinance is acted projects with upon by Council more than 3 units 4. 210-1 210.02 Residential Recognition of Agree as proposed with Agree with subcommittee District new symbols by new symbols RMH-A Names/ the public (OT/TL)density based Symbols: on lot frontage 5. 210-6 210.06 RMH-A Density factor Recommended RMH-A Agree with subcommittee density (OT/TL)density based on lot frontage RCA9/19/1994 3 G:RCA:CD94-60r1 # PAGE SECTION ISSUE COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE STAFF CONCERN RECOMMENDATION RECOMMENDATION 6. 211-5, 211.04 L-5 Auto Repair PC action not Retain proposed Agree with subcommittee 211-6 uses in general appropriate language; Conditional commercial Use Permit approval by district PC 7. 211-13 211.06(P) Commercial/ Delete term Delete from document Agree with subcommittee 212-8 212.06(N) Industrial "density bonus" and submit as a future Density Bonus and check law code amendment. (Floor area increase) 8. 212-2 212.04 Industrial Why change Change to reflect no Agree with subcommittee 212-3 permitted uses permitted uses? elementary or secondary schools,higher education subject to Conditional use permit approval by PC; add personal enrichment; disallow churches 9. 213-1 213.02 Open Space- Check to see if Approve as Agree with subcommittee Park and recreational recommended by PC; no Recreation easements will new open space districts subdistrict affect the new created. designation. Needs clarification 10. 225-1, Chapter 225 Planned Block Need for PC or CC Change chapter name Agree with subcommittee 225-2, Development to initiate zone and term to Planned and change process. Area Development 225-3 Allows modification of development standards;may be requested by 100% of property owners 11. 226-2 226.08 C High-Rise Adequate Change to existing Agree with subcommittee setback from separation setback requirements residential 12. 230-3 230.10 Accessory Appropriate review Add maximum floor area Agree with subcommittee Dwelling by ZA and should and park and recreation Units(Second other changes fee requirement. units) occur? RCA9/19/1994 4 G:RCA:CD94-60r1 # PAGE SECTION ISSUE COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE STAFF CONCERN RECOMMENDATION RECOMMENDATION 13. 230-31 230.80 Antennae Ham radio Modify satellite antennae Agree with subcommittee operators to include purpose; opposition;no require installation on change requested rear half of roof when by Council roof mounted;and allow maximum of one satellite dish antenna on a residential lot 14. 231-02 231.02E1 Parking in Recreation vehicle Modify to incorporate Rl Agree with Subcommittee residential owners opposition; standards and include yards no change definition of oversize requested by vehicle Council 15. 233-18 233.18E Display of Appropriateness Delete and refer to Sign Agree with subcommittee balloons for subcommittee for further any business evaluation 16. 234-3 234.08B Purchase of a Affect on Retain proposed Agree with subcommittee mobilehome Redevelopment language;purchase at Agency's Fair Market Value when participation in unable to be relocated redevelopment of MH parks Explanations and justification for the recommendations for each issue are as follows: Issues 1 and 2 -Windscreens in the Harbour These items were recommendations of the Harbour Code Committee, which was established in early 1992, that are applicable to the Huntington Harbour area. They affect the requirements for projections over the bulkhead and were drafted in response to their suggestions. Because various homeowner associations were represented on the Harbour Code Committee, the subcommittee believes that the CC&Rs of these various homeowner associations should not be detrimentally affected by the proposed code. Issue 3 -Affordable Housing The subcommittee and staff concur with City Council to remove the requirement to include affordable housing in all residential projects which exceed three units until the pending affordable housing code amendment is acted upon by the City Council. Issue 4 -Zoning District Names A majority of the subcommittee concurs the zoning map designators (symbols) for the residential districts be abbreviations of the district names, which will establish uniform nomenclature for zoning and general plan. A legend will be added to the zoning map to reflect the number of dwelling units that may be permitted in each residential district. RCA9/19/1994 5 G:RCA:CD94-60r1 Issue 5 - Oldtown/Townlot Density The subcommittee also recommends that the proposed density factor for the RMH-A (Oldtown/Townlot) district be based on the width of the parcel, e.g., lots 50 feet or less in width = 1 unit per 25 feet of frontage and lots greater than 50 feet in width = 1 unit per 1,900 square feet of net site area. This method of calculating density will reduce the eight methods currently used in this geographic area to two methods which will be based on lot frontage and create fewer nonconformities. It will also remain consistent with the existing General Plan land Use designation of Residential Medium Density. Issue 6 -Auto Uses The subcommittee supports Planning Commission review of all automobile repair uses proposed for location in commercial zones. A higher level of review may reduce the number of facilities with service bays visible from the street or potential adverse impact on nearby residential development. Issue 7- Child Care Facilities Density bonus (floor area ratio increase) is allowed by state law. The subcommittee believes the concept has merit,but recommend this issue be submitted at a later date as a separate code amendment with detailed provisions addressing a maximum density bonus and assurances that the child care facility will not be eliminated. Issue 8 -Industrial Uses The proposed industrial chapter does not include all uses currently allowed by Conditional Use permit. The subcommittee recommends that only private or public schools of higher education be allowed by conditional use permit and allow personal enrichment uses, which include trade schools, dance or karate schools, and health clubs. The subcommittee recommends that no churches be permitted in the industrial districts. No other changes to the list of permitted or conditionally permitted uses are recommended. Issue 9 -Renaming Recreational Zoning Districts Renaming of the recreationally zoned properties to Open Space and the appropriate subdistrict such as shoreline or park and recreation will not create any new open space districts. Therefore, the subcommittee recommends approval of Chapter 213, Open Space District, as proposed. Issue 10 -Planned Block Development City Council concern with the Planned Block Development Overlay focused on the ability of the Planning Commission or City Council to initiate a zone change. Planned Block Development Overlay indicates that the overlay may be initiated by 100% of the property owners or by the City. The subcommittee recommends that the chapter be changed to Planned Area Development Overlay District (PAD)because the term block relates to property on one side of street and lying between two streets. RCA9/19/1994 6 G:RCA:CD94-60r1 Issue 11 -High Rise Setbacks The subcommittee recommends that the current high-rise setback requirements from residential be included in the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance because it provides a greater setback from residential properties. No other changes are recommended by the subcommittee. Issue 12 - Second Units Staff concurs with the subcommittee that the maximum accessory unit(granny unit)floor area and park and recreation fee requirement should be included in the Proposed Code. The changes are indicated in the legislative draft. Issue 13 -Antennae The subcommittee concurred with staff that the antennae provisions need only to apply at this time to satellite dish antenna. Revisions will include provisions to comply with Federal Communication Commission regulations, allow a maximum of one antenna per residential lot, and require installation on rear one-half of roof when roof mounted to reduce visual impact to the street scene. Ham radio and other television antennae may exceed the maximum building height of the district in which they are located by ten feet; an increase in height will continue to be permitted by conditional use permit approval by the Zoning Administrator. Issue 14 -RV Parking At the direction of Council, parking in residential yards has been revised to reflect parking only in driveways or on a paved area adjacent to the driveway and nearest side property line. Other current Rl parking restrictions are included. The subcommittee assisted in the drafting the revised text. Issue 15 -Balloons The subcommittee recommends deletion of the Sign Code provision which would have allowed balloons for any business and referred the issue to the sign committee. The subcommittee also expressed a need to establish provisions to regulate the large inflatable balloons that are currently approved in conjunction with a temporary outdoor event approved by the Zoning Administrator. The Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance will no longer require discretionary review for this type of event. Issue 16 -Mobilehome Buyout The subcommittee discussed the issue related to mobilehome park conversions and the purchase of a mobilehome that cannot be relocated. The subcommittee concurred that the proposed requirement to purchase the mobilehome at fair market value was appropriate, and it does not allow a forced depreciation. No change is recommended for this issue. Additional items have been identified by Community Development staff that should be considered for inclusion in the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. These items have been presented to the RCA9/19/1994 7 G:RCA:CD94-60r1 subcommittee, and their recommendations are shown on the following matrix. The Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance has been edited to include the additional items and are shown in legislative format. OTHER ISSUES FOR INCLUSION OR REVISION # Issue Proposed Concern Subcommittee Staff Recommendation Code Recommendation 1. Announcement Not Amendments to Include distribution and Agree with sub committee of lower level addressed entitlements or posting of action within decisions, waivers granted may 48 hours Director or be made at lower Zoning level without notice Administrator for public appeal for appeal opportunity by PC or CC 2. Include Not Concern with Agree as recommended Allow approved projects provisions to addressed advising public and by staff to remain valid until describe effect applicants on status expiration date or a of this of projects maximum of 2 years if no document on date specified. projects in Applications for CUP progress or accepted as complete will approved be subject to standards in projects. effect at time of submittal. Determine effect on applications accepted for building permit plan review. 3. Temporary 2 days Insufficient period Change to 10 days Agree with subcommittee Outdoor Event appeal period 4. 50 ft. setback Deleted by Recommended for Require 50 ft. setback on Agree with subcommittee on commercial PC inclusion by City commercial properties properties on Council on PCH PCH 5. Delete surety Surety Surety bonds are no Require CUP approval Agree with subcommittee bond from in- bond longer available and by PC lieu parking fee required to bring provision in conformance with DTSP L Issuance of Not Inadvertently omitted Agree with staff Add current provisions permits etc. addressed until appeal period expires RCA9/19/1994 8 G:RCA:CD94-60r1 # Issue Proposed Concern Subcommittee Staff Recommendation Code Recommendation 7. Certificate of Not Inadvertently Agree with staff Add current provisions Occupancy or addressed omitted final inspection withheld until compliance with entitlement conditions of approval 8. Living in tents, Not Inadvertently Agree with staff Add to Chapter 210, trailers, addressed omitted Residential Districts vehicles, temporary structures prohibited 9. Coastal Not Inadvertently Agree with staff Add to Chapter 213, Conservation inclusive omitted Open Space, and Chapter conditional addressed 203,Definitions uses and definitions 10. "Big Box" Not Recommended for Allow"big box" Agree with subcommittee commercial addressed consideration by commercial in users in City Council industrial zone industrial zones standards; require 100,000 square feet minimum building area; single building; 95%of floor area for primary tenant and 5% to secondary tenants; frontage on arterial; with commercial parking ratio;and amend General Plan 11. Create Not Recommended by Not necessary; State Agree with subcommittee. Earthquake addressed Council for law requirements Hazard Overlay inclusion applicable and (Alquist Priolo addressed in General Special Study Plan. Include only as Zone) appendix RCA9/19/1994 9 G:RCA:CD94-60r1 # Issue Proposed Concern Subcommittee Staff Recommendation Code Recommendation 12. Decisions after "Make Will not allow Delete"make a Agree with subcommittee public hearing decision" continuance to decision and...." and another meeting for Change to within 5 formulate discussion unless calendar days to allow findings applicant waives receipt prior to close of within 10 processing time appeal period calendar days after close of public hearing Explanations and justification for the preceding recommendations to the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance are as follows: Additional Item 1 -Lower Level Decisions City Council discussed that lower level decisions be forwarded to the City Council and Planning Commission members within 48 hours. A provision addressing this request has been included on page 248-3. Additional Item 2 -Which Projects are Affected by the Code The subcommittee agreed with staff that provisions should be included to address the effect that the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance will have on projects in progress or approved projects. Provisions are added to allow approved project to remain valid until expiration date or a maximum of two years if no date specified and allow applications submitted for Conditional Use Permit which are accepted as complete to be subject to standards in effect at the time of submittal. See page 202-5. Additional Item 3 - Appeal Period Staff has amended the appeal period for temporary use permits from two days to ten days. See page 241-5 Additional Item 4 -PCH Setback The subcommittee supports Councilmember Winchell's recommendation that the current 50 foot setback be retained for commercial properties adjacent to Pacific Coast Highway. See page 211-10. Additional Item 5 - Surety Bond The subcommittee supports deletion of the surety bond requirement to guarantee payment of in-lieu parking fees and to require participation in this program subject to conditional use permit approval by the Planning Commission. RCA9/19/1994 10 G:RCA:CD94-60r1 Additional Items 6 and 7-Enforcement of Conditions Provisions have been added which address withholding of a permit until expiration of the entitlement appeal period and the withholding of certificate of occupancy or final inspection until compliance with conditions of approval. See page 202-3. Additional Item 8 -Enforcement An omitted provision, which states that living in tents, trailers, vehicles, or temporary structures is prohibited, has been added. Additional Item 9 -Coastal Conservation See Chapter 203, Definitions, and Chapter 213, Open Space, for definitions and conditional uses from the current code that have been added. These conditional use provisions address diking, dredging, maintenance of flood control channels, and mineral extraction. Additional Item 10 -Big Box Commercial uses The subcommittee recommend allowing "big box" commercial uses concept in the industrial districts subject to conditional use permit approval by the Planning Commission. Industrial Districts, has been amended to include a minimum 100,000 square foot building on a site adjacent to an arterial highway of which 95% of the floor area shall be devoted to a single tenant and the remaining 5% may be available to secondary tenants. The City's General Plan will need to be amended to accommodate this change. Additional Item 11 -Alquist-Priolo Overlay The subcommittee believes that an Alquist-Priolo overlay is unnecessary because it is regulated by State law but recommends that the earthquake fault zone map be included as an appendix to the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. Additional Item 12 -Mandatory Decisions See page 248-3 for minor change deleting a mandatory decision 10 days following the close of public hearing. Retention of this provision will not allow a project to be continued to the next meeting for additional information. Decisions and findings will continue to be distributed within 5 days of entitlement action. Approved Ordinances Subsequent to Planning Commission approval of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance, the City Council adopted several ordinances that have not been incorporated. These include swap meets, tattoo parlors, and residential in-fill. Staff has been advised by the City Attorney's Office that these ordinances may be incorporated into the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance prior to the effective date of the implementing ordinance. RCA9/19/1994 1 1 G:RCA:CD94-60r1 The subcommittee recommends that the pending Carts and Kiosk code amendment should be tabled. If the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance is adopted and the current Ordinance Code (Division 9) is repealed, the pending carts and kiosks code amendment will automatically require inclusion in the new Zoning and Subdivision ordinance. Therefore, following adoption of the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance,. staff will incorporate the code amendment into the new code and forward it to the City Council for final action. General Plan Conformance: Code Amendment No. 91-10 is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan. Provisions are included that will implement goals and policies of each of the eleven elements of the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. The Industrial District will require an amendment if the City Council chooses to allow Big Box commercial businesses as a permitted use. Environmental Status: Pursuant to the environmental regulations in effect at this time, the Department of Community Development advertised draft Negative Declaration No. 91-32 for 30 days commencing October 1, 1991, and ending October 30, 1991. The draft negative declaration was never acted upon because the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite continued to be reviewed and amended by staff. As a result, a revised draft negative declaration was advertised for 30 days, and comments received are attached. Prior to any action on Code Amendment No. 91-10, it is necessary for the City Council to review and act on Negative Declaration No. 91-32. Coastal Status: An amendment to the Huntington Beach Local Coastal Program Implementing Ordinances will be filed with the California Coastal Commission following adoption of Code Amendment No. 91-32. FUNDING SOURCE: Not applicable. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Negative Declaration No. 91-32 2. Ordinance Nos. , 3. Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance with recommended revisions. 4. Findings for approval MTU:MSF:SP RCA9/19/1994 12 G:RCA:CD94-60r1 ATTACHMENT 1 9/aa/q c� ORDINANCE NO. 3252 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING THE HUNTINGTON BEACH ORDINANCE CODE BY REMOVING ARTICLES 937 AND 964 THEREOF AND ESTABLISHING THEM AS SPECIFIC PLANS WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach desires to remove Articles 937 and 964 from the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, and establishing said Articles as Specific Plans; and Pursuant to the California State Planning and Zoning Law, the Huntington Beach Planning Commission and Huntington Beach City Council have held separate, duly noticed public hearings relative to amending the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code as provided herein, wherein both bodies have carefully considered all information presented at said hearings; and After due consideration of the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission and all other evidence presented, the City Council finds that the aforesaid removal of Articles 937 and 964 from the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, and establishing said Articles as Specific Plans is proper and consistent with the General Plan, NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. That Article 937 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, entitled "North Huntington Center Specific Plan," is hereby removed from the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, and established as a separate Specific Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. SECTION 2. That Article 964 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, entitled "Pacifica Community Plan," is hereby removed from the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, and established as a separate Specific Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. SECTION 3. That Section 9300 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code is hereby amended to add new subsections (i) and 0)thereto, to read as follows: 9300 Specific plans. The following specific plans are on file in the office of the City Clerk and the Department of Community Development: (a) Seabridge Specific Plan. (b) Huntington Harbor Bay Club Specific Plan. (c) Downtown Specific Plan (c-1) Downtown Specific Plan Areas 1, 7, and 8-A. (c-2) Downtown Specific Plan Areas 2 and 6. (c-3) Downtown Specific Plan Areas 3, 4, 5, 8-B, 9, 10, and 11. V E- X4 - 1 4\Ord S if Pl RIS 94-14T08/03 D (d) Seacliff Specific Plan. (e) Ellis-Goldenwest Specific Plan. (f) Meadowlark Specific Plan. (g) Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan. (h) Magnolia Pacific Specific Plan. (i) North Huntington Center Specific Plan. 0) Pacifica Community Specific Plan. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall become effective 30 days after its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 3rd day of, October , 1994. Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: &94a - ` e&�� City Clerk vity�"Attorney P REVIEWED AND APPROVED: INITIATED AND APPROVED: -�Y t Administrat r Director of Commu y Development 2 4\0rd:Specific Plans-RLS 94-147\08/03/94 Ord. No. 3252 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) I, CONNIE BROCKWAY,the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing ordinance was read to said City Council at an adjourned regular meeting thereof held on the 20th day of September, 1994, and was again read to said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 3rd of October, 1994, and was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council. AYES: Councilmembers: Silva,Bauer, Robitaille,Moulton-Patterson Winchell,Leipzig, Sullivan NOES: Councilmembers: None ABSENT: Councilmembers: None s City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California ORDINANCE NO. 3253 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING THE HUNTINGTON BEACH ORDINANCE CODE BY REMOVING ARTICLE 900 THEREOF AND ADDING IT TO THE HUNTINGTON BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE AS NEW CHAPTER 2.34 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach desires to remove Article 900 from the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, and add said Article to the Huntington Beach Municipal Code as new Chapter 2.34; and Pursuant to the California State Planning and Zoning Law, the Huntington Beach Planning Commission and Huntington Beach City Council have held separate, duly noticed public hearings relative to amending the Huntington Beach Ordinance and Municipal Codes as provided herein, wherein both bodies have carefully considered all information presented at said hearings; and After due consideration of the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission and all other evidence presented, the City Council finds that the aforesaid removal of Article 900 from the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, and adding said Article to the Huntington Beach Municipal Code as new Chapter 2.34 is proper and consistent with the General Plan, NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. That Article 900 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, entitled "City Planning Commission," is hereby removed from the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, and added to the Huntington Beach Municipal Code as new Chapter 2.34 thereof, to read as follows: V 4\G:0rd:P1ngComm RLS 94-146\08/11/9 y Chapter 2.34 CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Sections: 2.34.010 Commission established. 2.34.020 Duties. 2.34.030 Records of commission. 2.34.040 Members. 2.34.050 Appointment. 2.34.060 Term. 2.34.070 Vacancies. 2.34.080 Temporary Absences. 2.34.090 Bylaws. 2.34.100 Advisors. 2.34.110 Assistance for Commission. 2.34.120 Compensation 2.34.010 Commission established. There is hereby established a planning commission in and for the City of Huntington Beach which shall be known as the planning commission of the City of Huntington Beach. The authority to create a planning commission is derived from the Huntington Beach City Charter section 405. 2.34.020 Duties. The duties of the planning commission shall be as provided in the California Government Code Title 7, as may be amended, and as provided by ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach. In addition to powers and duties specified in the Government Code, the planning commission shall have the power and be required to: (a) Recommend to the city council after a public hearing thereon, the adoption, amendment or repeal of a master or general plan, or any part thereof, for guidance in the physical development of the city. (b) Exercise such functions with respect to land subdivisions as shall be provided by the Subdivision Map Act, and by ordinance not inconsistent with the provisions of the Charter. (c) Exercise such functions with respect to zoning, building, land use, precise plans, specific plans, and related matters which may be prescribed by ordinance not inconsistent with the provisions of the Charter. (d) Perform such other functions not inconsistent with the Charter as may be delegated to it by the city council. 2 4\G:0rd:P1ngComm RLS 94-146\08/11/94 2.34.030 Records of commission. Accurate and permanent records of the acts of the commission shall be kept, and such records shall have the same status as records of other administrative department of the city. 2.34.040 Members. The planning commission shall consist of seven(7) members who shall be residents of the city and shall not be officers or employees of the city. 2.34.050 Appointment. Each member of the city council shall appoint one member to the planning commission. 2.34.060 Term. Each member of the planning commission shall serve a four (4)year term commencing on January 1 following a general municipal election at which the appointing council member was elected. In the event the office of any appointing council member becomes vacant during the term thereof, the term of the planning commissioner appointed by such council member shall terminate ninety (90) days after such vacancy occurs. Following expiration of his/her term of office, each member of the planning commission shall continue to serve until his/her successor is appointed and qualified. Members of the planning commission may be removed by at least four(4) affirmative votes of the city council, including the vote of the appointing member; provided, however, that no member of the planning commission may be removed prior to January 1 following any general municipal election. 2.34.070 Vacancies. Vacancies in the planning commission shall be filled by appointment by the city council member or his successor, who made the appointment which is vacated. 2.34,080 Temporary Absences. Any Planning Commissioner who, because of health reasons, or prolonged absence from the City, shall notify the councilmember of which he is the appointee, and such councilmember may appoint an acting commissioner to serve during the period the appointee is to be absent. The acting commissioner shall meet all the requirements of the appointed planning commissioner. 2.34.090 Bylaws. The planning commission shall adopt such bylaws and rules as it deems necessary to provide for its officers and their method of selection, time and place of meetings and for such other matters relative to its work and administration of its duties which are not otherwise provided for by statute or ordinance. 2.34.100 Advisors. The planning commission may request attendance at its meetings of any officer or employee of the city to assist the commission in its deliberations in an advisory capacity but who shall not have the authority to vote upon any matter being considered by the commission. 2.34.110 Assistance for commission. The commission may make such investigations, employ such city help, secure such advice, and have prepared such plans and reports as it may deem necessary to perform its duties and functions. 3 4\G:Ord:P1ngComm RLS 94-146\08/11/94 2.34.120 Compensation. Members of the planning commission may receive compensation for their service. Said compensation shall be set by resolution of the city council. SECTION 2. This ordinance shall become effective 30 days after its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 3rd day of October , 1994. Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Clerk C orne �..�e o_it ,& g--Pyy REVIE APPROVED: INITIATED AND APPROVED: /C4;Tdministra-t& Director of Community Development 4 4\G:0rd:P1ngComm RLS 94-146\08/11/94 Ord. No. 3253 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) I, CONNIE BROCKWAY, the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing ordinance was read to said City Council at an adjourned regular meeting thereof held on the 20th day of September, 1994, and was again read to said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 3rd of October, 1994, and was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council. AYES: Councilmembers: Silva, Bauer, Robitaille, Moulton-Patterson Winchell, Leipzig, Sullivan NOES: Councilmembers: None ABSENT: Councilmembers: None City Clerk and ex-ofl"icio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California ORDINANCE NO. 3254 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY HUNTINGTON BEACH REPEALING THE HUNTINGTON BEACH ORDINANCE CODE AND ADOPTING A NEW ZONING AND SUBDIVISION CODE WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach has previously adopted a comprehensive zoning and subdivision ordinance, entitled the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, Division 9; and Pursuant to the California State Planning and Zoning Law, the Huntington Beach Planning Commission and Huntington Beach City Council have held separate, duly noticed public hearings relative to adopting a new comprehensive zoning and subdivision ordinance, wherein both bodies have carefully considered all information presented at said hearings; and After due consideration of the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission and all other evidence presented, the City Council finds that the aforesaid new ordinance is proper and consistent with the General Plan, NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. That the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, Division 9, is hereby repealed, except Article 910 thereof, entitled Residential Agriculture. 4\Ord:Adopt new Ord Code\RLS 94-146\09/07/94 SECTION 2. That the Huntington Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to add new Titles 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, and 25 thereto, to read as shown on the document attached hereto as Exhibit"A," and incorporated by this reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall become effective 30 days after its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 3rd day of October , 1994. Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Clerk VN-+- ttorney� REVIEWED AND APPROVED: INITIATED AND APPROVED: r City Administratbr Director of Commu ' y Development 1 4\Ord:Adopt new Ord Code\RLS 94-146\08/03/94 EXHIBIT A includes the following: Title 20 General Provisions Title 21 Base Districts Title 22 Overlay Districts Title 23 Provisions Applying in All or Several Districts Title 24 Administration Title 25 Subdivisions Zoning Map (DMs) Ord. No. 3254 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) I, CONNIE BROCKWAY, the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing ordinance was read to said City Council at an adjourned regular meeting thereof held on the 20th d y of September; 1994, and was again read to said City Council at a reg tar meeting thereof held on the 3rd of October, 1994, and was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council. AYES: Councilmembers: Silva, Bauer, Robitaille, Moulton-Patterson Winchell, Leipzig, Sullivan NOES: Councilmembers: None ABSENT: Councilmembers: None City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING DIVISION ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 91-32 1. Name of Proponeht: City of Huntington Beach Address: 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Phone Number: (714) 536-5271 2. Date Checklist Submitted for Review: September 25, 1991; Revised and Recirculated February 19, 1993 3. Concurrent Entitlement(s): N/A 4. Proiect Location: Citywide 5. Proiect Description: Adoption of the City of Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code Update and Revision. For description and background on the proposed update and revision see Attachment #1. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of answers are included after each subsection.) Yet Maybe No 1- Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic substructures? _ _ _X Discussion: Because no site development is involved, adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not result in or create unstable earth conditions or result in changes to geologic substructures. b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? _ X Discussion: Because no site development is involved, adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not result in any disruptions, displacements, compaction of overcovering of soil . Yu Maybe No C. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? Discussion: The proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code revisions do not consist of any development. Therefore, adoption of the document will not result in changes' to topography or ground surface relief features. d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? _ X Discussion: Because no site development is involved in the proposed project, no destruction, covering, or modification of any unique geologic or physical features will occur. e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? X Discussion: No site development is involved in the proposed project which would alter soils through wind or water erosion. f. Changes in depositioo or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? X Discussion: No changes will occur which would result in the deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any inlet or lake. g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? Discussion: Adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not result in the exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards. "Note (a-g): Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some earth impacts. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary, to ensure adequate environmental protection. 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? X Discussion: Adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will allow for a change in density requirements in the existing residential zones which may impact air emissions. Under the proposed zoning designation of RM, RMH and RH residential areas will be developed at a slightly lower density; Townlot and Oldtown areas, redesignated as RMH-A, may be developed at a slightly higher density based on lot area rather than lot frontage as allowed by current code. However, it should be noted that the TLSP and OTSP areas are predominantly developed (approximately 96%) and currently contain approximately S.200 residential units (based upon unit counts conducted in the spring of 1989). Projected development under the proposed RMH-A zoning, assuming 100% recycling of the developed areas and buildout of the existing 4% of vacant land, would allow for development of a total of .� Environmental Checklist -2- (1827D) )Ln Maybe No approximately 6,500 residential units. Development of this degree would be a worse case scenario and would necessitate a resubdivision of the entire area as well as demolition of all structures, many which are single family dwelling recently constructed. Due to the large degree of single family development existing in the area, increases in density resulting from development of infill lots under the proposed zoning code is anticipated to be negligible. Therefore, any additional air emissions generated by the additional density permitted under the proposed zoning code are anticipated to be negligible. Furthermore, although subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some air quality impacts, impacts will be project/site specific and will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary to adequate environmental protection. b. The creation of objectionable odors? — _ X_ Discussion: No site development is proposed as part of the project; therefore, adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not result in the creation of objectionable odors. However, it is possible that future development under the provisions of the proposed ordinance code may result in the generation of odor impacts. Such odor generation impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will be subject to the entitlement process and subsequent environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts, if any, and mitigation measures, if necessary, to ensure adequate environmental protection. C. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? — _ X Discussion: Air movements will not be altered; in addition, no changes in moisture, temperature and climate (either locally or regionally) will occur if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted as proposed. 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? X Discussion: Changes in currents or the course or direction of water movements will not occur if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted as no physical development is proposed which will alter such features. b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? X Discussion: No change in absorption rates, drainage patterns or runoff will occur if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted since no physical development has been included. C. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? X Discussion: No changes to the course or flow of flood waters will occur as the result of the adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. The proposed code has altered provisions for development within floodplain areas. Floodplain development will be subject to higher standards and construction requirements identified by the Federal Flood Insurance Program established by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and recommended by the California Department of Water Resources. Environmental Checklist -3- (18270) W diYN NV d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? Discussion: As no site development is involved, no changes will occur in the aniount of surface water in ate. water body. e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? — _ X Discussion: No direct impacts to surface waters or surface water quality are anticipated'to result if proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted. f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? _ — X Discussion: The direction or rate of flow of ground waters will not be affected if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted as no physical development is included. g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? _ _ X Discussion: Although project adoption will not result in changes to the quantity or quality of ground waters, future facilities which are constructed under the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code could result in physical changes to the environment. Future development projects will be subject to future environmental review to determine the nature and extent of any potential impact and appropriate mitigation measures. h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? Discussion: Adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will allow for a change in density requirements in the existing residential areas which may increase water usage. Under the proposed zoning designation of RM, RMH and RH will be developed at a slightly lower density and TLSP-B and OTSP-2 areas, redesignated as RMH-A, may be developed at a slightly higher density based on lot area rather than lot frontage as allowed by current code. However, it should be noted that the TLSP and OTSP areas are predominantly developed (approximately 96%) and currently contain approximately 5,200 residential units (based upon unit counts conducted in the spring of 1989). Projected development under the proposed RMH-A zoning, assuming 100% recycling and buildout of the area, would allow for development of approximately 6,500 residential units. Development of this degree would be a worse case scenario and would necessitate a resubdivision of the entire area as well as demolition of all structures, many which are single family dwelling recently constructed. Due to the large degree of single family development existing in the area, increases in density resulting from development of infill lots under the proposed zoning code is anticipated to be negligible. Therefore, any additional air emissions generated by the additional density permitted under the proposed zoning code are anticipated to be negligible. Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some water usage impacts. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary to adequate environmental protection. � fiv, ionmental Checklist -4- (1827D) rN •ii -..j �- c, 1�a Maybe N2 i . Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? — — X Discussion: Adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not result in the exposure of people or property to water-related hazards (e.g.. flooding or tidal waves). See 3c. *Note (a-i): Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some water impacts. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary; to ensure adequate environmental protection. 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops.-and aquatic plants)? — — Discussion: Because no site development is involved, neither changes in the diversity of species nor deterioration of vegetation will occur with the adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. b. Reduction of the numbers of any mature, unique, rare or endangered species of plants? _ — X Discussion: Because no site development is involved, reduction of the numbers of any unique, or rare or endangered species of plants will not occur if the project is approved. C. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier.to the normal replenishment of existing species? — — X Discussion: Because no site development is involved, no new species of plant, or barriers to replenishment of existing plant species will result with the adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. d. Reduction in acreage of an agricultural crop? — --- X Discussion: Because no site development is involved, a reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop.will not result from the adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. *Note (a-d): Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some plant impacts. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary, to ensure adequate environmental protection. 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species. or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? — _ X Discussion: Since no site development is proposed, neither changes in the diversity of species nor number of any species of animals will occur with the adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. 4� Environmental Checklist -5- j (1827D) �j Yes Mavbe N b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? _ v Discussion: Since no site development is proposed, reduction of the numbers of any unique or rare or endangered species of animals will not occur with the adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? _ _ X Discussion: Since no site development is proposed, no new species of animals, or barriers to migration of existing animal species will result with the adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? _ X Discussion: Sinde no site development is proposed, no deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat will result from the adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. *Note (a-d): Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some animal impacts. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if �necessary, to ensure adequate environmental protection. 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? Discussion: Adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will allow for a change in density requirements in the existing residential zones which may result in an increase in noise generation and impact noise levels. Under the proposed zoning designation of RMH-A, TLSP and OTSP areas may be developed at a slightly higher density based on lot area rather than lot frontage as currently permitted; residential areas with the proposed zoning designation of RM, RMH and RH will be developed at a slightly lower density. However, it should be noted that the TLSP and OTSP areas are predominantly developed (approximately 96%) and currently contain approximately 5,200 residential units (based upon unit counts conducted in the spring of 1989). Projected development under the proposed RMH-A zoning, assuming 100% recycling and buildout of the area, would allow for development of approximately 6,500 residential units. Development of this degree would be a worse case scenario and would necessitate a resubdivision of the entire area as well as demolition of all structures, many which are single family dwelling recently constructed. Due to the large degree of single family development existing in the area, increases in density resulting from development of infill lots under the proposed zoning code is anticipated to be negligible. Therefore, any additional air emissions generated by the additional density permitted under the proposed zoning code are anticipated to be negligible. Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some noise impacts. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary to adequate environmental protection. o Environmental Checklist -6- (1827D) �i`� 9/ -.S-1- yu C�g NQ b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? T ?� Discussion: See 6a. 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? _ X Discussion: Because ne site development is involved, adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not result in the exposure of people to new light or glare. Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some light and glare impacts. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will be subject to the provisions of the'California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary to adequate environmental protection. 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? — — X Discussion: Adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code does not propose any substantial changes to land uses allowed in the city; however, the revised code will allow for a change in density requirements in the existing residential areas which may impact air emissions. Under the proposed zoning designations of RM, RMH and RH will be developed at a slightly lower density and TLSP and OTSP areas, redesignated as RMH-A, will be developed at a slightly higher density based on lot area rather than lot frontage as permitted under the existing code. However, it should be noted that the TLSP and OTSP areas are predominantly developed (approximately 96%) and currently contain approximately 5,200 residential units (based upon unit counts conducted in the spring of 1989). Projected development under the proposed RMH-A zoning, assuming 100% recycling and buildout of the �..� area, would allow for development of approximately 6.500 residential units. Development of this degree would be a worse case scenario and would necessitate a resubdivision of the entire area as well as demolition of all structures, many which are single family dwelling recently constructed. Due to the large degree of single family development existing in the area, increases in density resulting from development of infill lots under the proposed zoning code is anticipated to be negligible. Therefore, any additional air emissions generated by the additional density permitted under the proposed zoning code are anticipated to be negligible. 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? _ ____ X b. Substantial depletion of any non-renewable natural resource? _ _ X Discussion: The proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code does not propose any alteration to development standards which will result in any noticeable change in the use of non-renewable or natural resources. Furthermore, since no site development is included, adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not result in an increase in the use of natural resources such as energy, water, and raw materials. Environmental Checklist -7- (1827D) YU Maybe N2 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or �../ upset conditions? X Discussion: Since no site development is included, adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not result in any risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances in the event of an accident or upset condition. b. Possible interference,with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? _ — X Discussion: Because no development is included, adoption of the proposed.zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not interfere with an emergency response plan or evacuation plan. *Note (a-b): Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some risk of upset impacts. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent . development projects will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary, to ensure adequate environmental protection. 11 . Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? _ _ X Discussion: The proposed ordinance code will allow for minor increases in density in areas currently designated as the Townlot and Oldtown Districts; however, since these areas are primarily built out location, distribution, density, and growth rate of the human population are anticipated to be negligibl2. 12. Housing. Will the g g g? _ — 1..s proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? X Discussion: The adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not have an impact upon the existing housing and will not result in creating a demand for additional housing. 13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation 'of substantial additional vehicular movement? X Discussion: Adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will allow for a change in density requirements in the existing residential areas which may result in an increase in traffic. Under the proposed zoning designation of RMH-A, TLSP and OTSP areas may be developed at a slightly higher density based on lot area rather than lot frontage as allowed under the current zoning code; RM, RMH and RH will be deveoped at a slightly lower density. However, it should be noted that the TLSP and OTSP areas are predominantly developed (approximately 96%) and currently contain approximately 5,200 residential units (based upon unit counts conducted in the spring of 1989)• Projected development under the proposed RMH-A zoning, assuming 100% recycling and buildout of the area, would allow for development of approximately 6,500 residential units. Development of this degree would be a worse case scenario and would necessitate a resubdivision of the entire area as well as demolition of all structures, many which are single family dwelling recently constructed. Due to the large degree of single family development existing in the area, increases in density resulting from development of infill lots under the proposed zoning code is anticipated to be negligible. Therefore, any additional air emissions generated by the additional density permitted under the proposed zoning code are anticipated to negligible. �.. Environmental Checklist -8- (1827D) YU MLybt No b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new off-site parking? _ _ X Discussion: The proposed zoning and ordinance code does not include any amendments to the existing parking ratios or parking design requirements. Therefore, no impacts to-parking are anticipated. C. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? _ _ X Discussion: Because no site development is proposed, no impacts to the existing transportation facilities are anticipated to result from adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance. d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? _ _ X Discussion: Since no site development is included, neither present patterns of circulation nor the movement of people and/or goods will be affected if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted. e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? _ - X Discussion: Since no site development is included, no waterborne, rail, or air traffic will be affected by adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? _ _ X Discussion: Since no site development is included, no hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrian will not occur if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted. *Note (a-f): Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some traffic/circulation impacts. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary, to ensure adequate environmental protection. 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a.: Fire protection? _ — X Discussion: Adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will have no effect upon or result in the need for new or altered fire protection services. b. ;Police protection? _ _ X Discussion: Adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will have no effect upon or result in the need for new or altered police protection services. C. Schools? _ _ X Discussion: No new school facilities will be required if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted. (nvirunmental Checklist -9- (1827D) Yg; Maybe No d. Parks or other recreational facilities? X Discussion: No new parks and recreation facilities will be required if the proposed zoning and subdivis�_ ordinance code is adopted. e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? X Discussion: No impacts are anticipated upon the maintenance of public facilities or roads as a result of the adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. f. Other governmental services? _ X Discussion: No impacts to other governmental facilities are anticipated as the result of the adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. "Note (a—f): Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some public service impacts. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will-be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary, to ensure adequate environmental protection. 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? X Discussion: No substantial increases in demand upon existing sources of energy or requirements for the development of new sources of energy are anticipated as a result of the adoption of the proposed zoning subdivision ordinance code. b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing source of energy, or require the development of sources of energy? X Discussion: Adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not result in the use of abnormally high amounts of fuel or energy. 'Note (a—b): Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some energy impacts. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary, to ensure adequate environmental protection. 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? Discussion: The adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not create the demand for additional power (i.e., electricity) or natural gas. environmental Checklist _10_ (1827D) Y.0 Maybe NQ b. Communication systems? — _ -X. Discussion: No new demand for communication systems will be created if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted. C. Water? — — X- Discussion: No new demands for domestic water will be created if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted. d. Sewer or septic tanks? — — X Discussion: No new demands for sewer facilities or septic tanks will be created if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted. e. Storm water drainage?_ — X Discussion: Adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not necessitate new storm watdr drainage improvements. f. Solid waste and disposal? _- — X Discussion: No new demands for solid waste disposal facilities will be created if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted. 'Note (a-f): Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some utility impacts. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent , development projects will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary, to ensure adequate environmental protection. 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? — — X- Discussion: The creation of potential health hazards. physical or mental will not result from the adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? — — X Discussion: Adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not result in the exposure of people to potential health hazards. *Note (a-b): Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some human health impacts. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary, to ensure adequate environmental protection. t Environmental Checklist -11- (18270) Yu Mavbe N2 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? j. Discussion: Future development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may be located on sites which result in potential impacts to the aesthetic environment. However development of such facilities will be subject to the entitlement process and additional environmental review. Subsequent environmental documentation will fully analyze the potential impact`s and identify appropriate mitigation measures prior to adoption of the projects. No significant averse aesthetic impacts are anticipated. 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? X Discussion: The proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not create any impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities. 20. Cultural Resources. _ a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? X Discussion: Because no site development is included, no alteration or destruction of archaeological, prehistoric, or historic sites will occur as a result of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code adoption. b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? Discussion: Because no site development is included, no effects, physical or aesthetic, are anticipated to occur as a result of adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. C. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? X Discussion: Because no physical development is included, no unique ethnic cultural values are anticipated to be affected as the result of adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? X Discussion: No known existing religious or sacred uses will be impacted as a result of adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. *Note (a—d): Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some impacts to archeological or cultural resources. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of Potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary, to ensure adequate environmental protection. invil onmentdl Checklist —12— (1827D) f f1i/-,33— Yu vbe No 21. Mandatory Findings of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, sub— stintially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? X Discussion: As presented in the environmental analysis, the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code does not consist of any development and will not have any impact on plant or animal species. b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short—term, to the disadvantage of long—term, environmental goals? (A short—term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long—term impacts will endure well into the future.) X Discussion: As presented-in the environmental analysis adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will allow for minor alterations to density requirements in the existing TLSP—A & B and OTSP 1 & 2 zones. However, over the long—term, the new zoning code will effectively reduce the number of units in the area. No significant adverse impacts are anticipated. C. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively consid— erable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) X Discussion: Cumulative impacts associated with the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code are not significant. d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? — _ X Discussion: Provisions of revised code do not alter development standards in any way which will impact animal/plant species. No significant adverse effects are anticipated to occur to human beings, either directly or indirectly if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted. {nvivonmental Checklist —13— (1827D) DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ' I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL 6E PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Date Sire For: City of Huntington Beach Community Develooment Department a Environmental Checklist -14- C H %/ 3J (1827D) ATTACHMENT #1 Project Description Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code Update and Revision Department of Community Development City of Huntington Beach, California The City of Huntington Beach is proposing a comprehensive update and .revision to its Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code. Since 1946, when the Zoning Ordinance Code was originally adopted, a myriad of amendments and section rewrites have occurred in a patchwork fashion to respond the changing City objectives, State laws and court cases . As a result, contradictory provisions have developed making the Ordinance difficult to implement and enforce. In order to resolve previous interpretation, application and enforcement problems, the City has commissioned a comprehensive update and revision of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Codes . The proposed code revision simplifies the content of the Zoning Ordinance Code by identifying and eliminating inconsistencies and ambiguities, adding charts and diagrams, and reformatting the information by utilizing various print fonts and styles. The proposed code revisions .fall into one of (6) six categories . These six categories include: Reorganization of Regulations, Reorganization of Use Classifications, Renaming and/or Consolidation of Base Zoning Districts and Overlay Districts, Streamlining of Administrative Procedures, Updates to Subdivision Provisions to bring the code into conformance with State law. Each of these changes have been summarized below. Reorganization of Regulations : The proposed Zoning Ordinance has been reorganized into six sections for incorporation into the City of Huntington Beach Municipal Code. A brief description of each section is contained below. • Title 20: General Provisions - establishes the overall organization and applicability of the regulations and includes Definitions and Use Classifications . • Title 21: Base District - specifies the land uses permitted or conditionally permitted in each residential, commercial, industrial, public, and open-space zoning district, and includes special requirements, if any, that are applicable to specific uses . Base-district regulations also include development standards to 'control the height, bulk, location and appearance of structures on development sites, and requirements for landscaping and parking . rN y.. .j�. V • Title 22: Overlay District - modifies base-district provisions for specific purposes, such as oil production, flood protection, high-rise buildings, neighborhood conservation, planned block development or the coastal zone. • Title 23: Provisions Applying in All Districts - includes supplemental site-development standards , parking and loading requirements, signs, mobile home park conversions, condominium conversions and nonconforming uses and structures. • Title 24: Administration - contains detailed procedures for the administration of the zoning ordinance, including requirements for design review, conditional use permits and variances, development agreements, amendments to the ordinance and zoning map, appeals of zoning decisions, and enforcement . • Title 25: Subdivision - contains procedures for - implementation of the Subdivision Map Act, including parcel maps and subdivision maps, vesting tentative maps, dedication and improvements, and administrative requirements . Reorganization of Use Classifications : The proposed Zoning Ordinance utilizes use classification titles to describe groups of similar uses rather than attempt to specifically list all uses that might be permitted as-of-right or with a conditional use permit, as is done in the existing code. The classification titles provide for administrative determination for the most appropriate category for unlisted uses . Renaming/Consolidation of Base Zoning and Overlay Districts : The proposed zoning ordinance renames and/or consolidates the existing 22 base zoning districts into the 13 base districts identified in the attachment A. Streamlining of Administrative Procedures : The proposed zoning ordinance includes revised provisions for administrating the zoning regulations . The revisions are intended to simplify and consolidate procedures for environmental review, conditional use permits , variances, design review, appeals , amendments and enforcement and consist of the following changes . • Conditional Exceptions . Provisions for the conditional exception in the current ordinance have been replaced with provisions for Variances . This term is more familiar to the public and development community. -2- (1835D) 7r_T • Zoning Permit . New regulations are proposed for zoning permits and preliminary plan review. The zoning permit would serve as a "check" for compliance with the zoning regulations . This is done in practice prior to issuance of building permits, but it may be useful to identify a '`- separate procedure to avoid any loopholes, such as a new or expanded use that does not require a building permit . The zoning permit could be called a "zoning certificate" to convey the fact that it is a ministerial permit, not a discretionary permit. • Public Notice Requirements . Notice requirements for public hearings are - simplified by reference to state law. References to the appropriate Government Code sections are declatory of existing law. Additional notice may be given at the direction of the hearing body. Procedure for notices, hearings, decisions and appeals are combined into one chapter . Coastal _Development Permits. Proposed regulations for Coastal Development Permit procedures primarily follow existing requirements . Exemptions and categorical exclusions have been reorganized and streamlined. Policies have been eliminated from Definitions section. Subdivisions Changes have been made to the subdivision provisions to make conform to state law and to facilitate administration. �,.,. Statutory Time Limits. The. Planning Commission or Zoning Administrator has 50 days from the time of the acceptance of the tentative map to act on the tentative map. If an EIR is prepared, the decision is to be made 45 days after certification of the EIR. If there is a negative declaration adopted or a determination that the project is exempt from the requirements of Division 13 of the Public 13 of the Public Resources Code, the decision shall be made 50 days after said action. • Maps . Procedures applicable to tentative tract maps and tentative parcel maps have been combined. The Zoning Administrator may act on Tentative Parcel Maps and Tentative (tract) Maps with 9 or less parcels . The Planning Commission will review and act on maps creating 10 or more parcels . Final Map and Parcel Map procedures likewise have been combined. The City Engineer is authorized to give final approval for Parcel Maps; City Council action will be required only for Final Maps. -3- (1835D) Fi`! li- • Dedications and Reservations. The requirements for dedication have been detailed. Current parkland dedication and in-lieu fee formulas are included as well as provisions addressing local transit facilities, solar easements, supplemental improvements, and collection of development fees . • Improvement Standards . Adopting standard engineering specifications and standard drawings separately rather than including all specifications within the subdivision ordinance is proposed . The chapter identifies when, where and what improvements are required as a pre-requisite for final or parcel map approval . • Mergers, Correction and Amendments of Maps . A distinct section on parcel mergers and unmergers has been included. Procedures include lot line adjustments and the recordation of a covenant to "Hold-as-One-Parcel. " • Appeals : Appeals would be processed under the general provisions established in Chapter 248 . -4- (1835D) { A"%_'HMENT A Proposed Proposed Existing Existing Proposed Major Proposed Base Zoning & Base Zoning & District District Changes in Changes Overlay District Overlay District Designations Names Development in Designations Names Standards Density Base Zoning Districts 1. RL Low Density Residential R1 Low Density Residential Delete open space requirement; None reduce garage setback to 20 feet. 2. RM Medium Density Residential R2 Med. Density Residential Replace building separation w/court; Reduction in all multi—family same standards; see density to RMH & RH for additional changes; bring zoning density based on net lot area. into conformance with General Plan; 1 unit per 2,904 sq. ft. 3. RMH Med—High Density Residential R3 Med—High Density Res. Upperstory setback; change in Reduction in review body; Open space based on 25% density to of floor area; and RM items. bring zoning into conformance with General Plan; 1 unit per 1.742 sq. ft. �1 ti e Proposed Proposed Existing Existing Proposed Major Proposed Base Zoning & Base Zoning & District District Changes in Changes Overlay District Overlay District Designations Names Development in Designations Names Standards Density 6. -PBD Planned Block Development N/A Newly established to allow large sites N/A flexibility in development standarads. 7. -H High Rise -MS Multi-Story Changes setback requirements; includes N/A upperstory setback when adjacent to R district. 8. -MHP Mobilehome -MH Mobilehome Overlay None N/A V � (18180 Proposed Proposea Existing Existing Proposed Major Proposed Base Zoning 8 Base Zoning & District District Changes in Changes Overlay District Overlay District Designations Names Development in Designations Names Standards Density Overlays 1. -0;01 Oil Production -0;01 Oil District None N/A 2. -CZ Coastal Zone _CZ Coastal Zone Condensed; removes site specific N/A requirements. 3. -FP1,-FP2,-FP3 Floodplain -FP1,-FP2, Floodplain Incorporates higher standards required N/A -FP3 and/or recommended by CA Water Resources Dept.; elevate or floodproof 1 ft. above base flood elevation. 4. -IS Interim Study LU Limited Use District Proposed as overlay rather than N/A base district; application of base zone will comply with General Plan; expires in 2 years. 5. -NC Neighborhood Conservation N/A Newly established to allow property N/A owners to initiate programs to revitalize and conserve their neighborhoods. Z .N _7_ (18180 01 11` `Proposed Proposed Existing Existing Proposed Mayor Proposed Base Zoning & Base Zoning & District District Changes in Changes Overlay District Overlay District Designations Names Development in Designations Names Standards Density 13. SP Specific Plan PD Planned Development Deletes PO suffix. None Specific Plans Establishes procedures for development of a specific Olen project. Ellis-Goldenwest SP None; will remain as separate document None-. Holly-Seacliff SP None; will remain as separate document None Downtown 'SP None; will remain as separate document None Meadowlark Specific Plan None; will remain as separate document None Seabridge Specific Plan None; will remain as separate document None Seacliff Specific Plan None; will remain as separate document None North Hunt. Center SP Will be removed from ordinance None code and retained as separate document. Pacifica Community Plan Will be removed fron ordinance None code and retained as separate document. Magnolia Pacific Specific Plan None; will remain as separate document None � Z a^ -6- Proposed Proposed Existing Existing Propcsed.Major Proposed Base Zoning 8 Base Zoning 8 District District Changes in Changes Overlay District Overlay District Designations Names Development in Designations Names Standards Density 12. PS Public—Semipublic CF—E Community Facility—Educ. Designation applies to flood control N/A channels, Edison right—of—way. schools, CF—C Community Facility—Civic churches, etc. PS required for 2 acres N/A or more otherwise base and overlay standards applicable to the site. _�_ (1818D) Proposed Proposed Base Zoning 3 Base Zoni Existing Existing Proposed Major ng b Proposed District District Overlay District Overlay District Changes in Changes Designations Names Designations Names Development in Standards Density 10. IL Limited Industrial MI-A Restricted Manufacturing Adds FAR; allows groupresidential Limited to subject to Planning Commission approval. housing for on- site workers. 11. OS Open Space With 4 subdistricts as follows: OS-WR Open Space-Water Rec. WR Water Recreation None N/A OS-C Open Space-Conservation CC Coastal Conservation Suf. None N/A OS-PR Open Space-Parks & Rec. CF-R Community Facility-Rec. Will require zone change if park N/A no longer needed and declared ROS Recreational Open Space surplus. OS-S Open Space-Shoreline Sl Shoreline None N/A 1 1 � V ,1818D) Proposed Proposed Existing. Existing Proposed Major Proposed Base Zoning & Base Zoning & District District Changes in Changes Overlay District Overlay District Designations Names Development in Designations Names Standards Density 5. RMP Manufactured Home Park MH Mobile Home None _ None MFH Manufactured Home Suffix Deleted; existing section N/A violates State law. 6. CO Commercial Office OP Office Professional Adds floor area ratio, upper story N/A setback and building design standards 7. CG General Commercial Cl Neighborhood Commercial Eliminated. None. C2 Community Business C2 i C4 Consolidated; reduces and changes setback requirements; deletes site angle requirements; see CO. C4 Highway Commercial {. CV Visitor Commercial VSC Visitor Serving Comm. To encourage pedestrian access; None setback eliminated; see CO and CG. IG General Industrial M) Light Manufacturing Combined; increased lot size; Limited to adds FAR; allows group residential housing for on— M2 Industrial subject to Planning Commission approval . site workers. Z N \ '�� —3— (1818D) Proposed Prep:sed Existing Existing Proposed Major Proposed Base Zoning & Base Zoning 8 District Uistrict Changes in Changes Overlay District Overlay District Designations Names Development in Designations Names Standards Density RMH—A Medium—High Density OTSP-1 & 2 Oldtown Specific Plan Combine into 1 district; Density allowed (Subdistrict) Residential—Small Lot Districts Land 2 no open space requirement for sfd; on parcels 50 density based on net lot area rather feet or greater TLSP—A,B Townlot Spec. Plan than site frontage; reduce Oldtown currently exceeds Sections A and B front yard to Townlot standard of General Plan and 12 feet. should be medium high density; will require GPA to correct density; 1 unit per 1,900 sq. ft. 4. RH High Density Residential R4 High Density Residential Same as RM, RMH. Reduction is density to bring zoning into conformance with General Plan; 1 unit per 1,244 sq. ft. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS FOR DRAFT NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 91-32 I . INTRODUCTION This document serves as the Response to Comments on the Draft Negative Declaration No. 91-32. This document contains all information available .in the public record related to the Draft Negative Declaration as of. May 11, 1992 and responds to domments in accordance with Section 15088 of the California 2nvironmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. This document contains five sections. In addition to this Introduction, these sections are Public Participation and Review, Comments, Responses to Comments, and Appendix A. The Public Participation section outlines the methods the City of Huntington Beach has used to provide public review and solicit input on the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration. The Comments section contains . those written comments received from agencies, groups, organizations, and individuals as of April 5, 1993 . The Response to Comments section contains individual responses to each comment. It is the intent of the City of Huntington Beach to include this document in the official public record related to the Draft Negative Declaration. Based on the information contained in the public record the decision makers will be provided with an accurate and complete record of all information related to the environmental consequences of the project . II . PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND REVIEW The City of Huntington Beach notified all responsible and interested agencies and interested groups, organizations, and individuals that a Draft Negative Declaration had been prepared for the proposed project. The City also used several methods to solicit input during the review period for the preparation of the Draft Negative Declaration. The following is a list of actions taken during the preparation, distribution, and review of the Draft Negative Declaration. 1 . A cover letter and copies of the Draft Negative Declaration were filed with the State Clearinghouse on September 27, 1991. The State Clearinghouse assigned Clearinghouse Number 9109101 to the proposed project . A copy of the cover letter and the State Clearinghouse distribution list is available for review and inspection at the City of Huntington Beach, Planning Department, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648. . v /ZTC i 2. An official thirty (30) day public review period for the Draft Negative Declaration was established by the State Clearinghouse. It began on September 27, 1991 --� and ended on October 28, 1991. Public comment letters were accepted by the City of Huntington Beach through October 30, 1991. 3 . Notice of the Draft Negative Declaration was published in the Daily Pilot on October 1, 1991. Upon request, copies of the document were distributed to agencies, groups, organizations, and individuals. 4 . The Draft Negative Declaration was never acted upon, as the revised Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code continued to be reviewed and amended by staff . As a result, a revised Draft Negative Declaration was prepared and published in the Huntington Beach Independent for a 30 day comment period commencing March 4, 1993 and ending April 5, 1993 . Copies of the revised Draft Negative Declaration were -directly distributed to those who commented on the original document as well as the State Clearinghouse and local school districts. 5. An official thirty day (30) day public review period for the revised Draft Negative Declaration was established by the State Clearinghousb. It began on March 1, 1993 and ended on March 31, 1993 . Public ..� comment letters were accepted by the City of Huntington Beach through April 5, 1993 . III . COMMENTS Copies of all written comments to the revised Draft Negative Declaration received as of April 5, 1993 are contained in Appendix A of this document. Only those comments which raised an environmental issue have been retyped verbatim in a comment-response format for clarity. All other comments are hereby acknowledged. IV. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS The revised Draft Negative Declaration No. 91-32 was distributed to responsible agencies, interested groups, organizations, and individuals. The report was made available for public review and comment for a period of thirty (30) days . The public review period for the revised Draft Negative Declaration established by the State Clearinghouse commenced on March 1, 1993 and expired on March 31, 1993 . The City of Huntington Beach accepted comment letters through April 5, 1993 . V 2 Negative Declaration P-t-t 2- No. 91-32 -2- (1872D) Copies of all documents received as of April 5, 1993 are contained in Appendix A of this report. Comments have been numbered with responses correspondingly numbered. Responses are presented for each comment which raised a significant environmental issue. Several comments do not address the completeness or adequacy of the Draft Negative Declaration, do not raise significant environmental issues, or request additional information. A substantive response to such comments is not appropriate within _ the context of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) . Such comments are responded to with a "comment noted" reference. This indicates that the comment will be forwarded to all appropriate decision makers for their review and consideration. Negative Declaration No. 91-32 -3- (1872D) GOPR: Comment: The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named environmental document to selected state agencies for review. The review period is closed and none of the state agencies have comments . This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California. Environmental Quality Act. Please call Tom Loftus at (916) 445-0613 if you have any questions regarding the environmental review process . When contacting the Clearinghouse in this matter, please use the eight-digit State Clearinghouse number so that we may respond promptly. Response Comment acknowledged. SCAG:_ Comment: We have reviewed the above referenced document and determined that it is not regionally significant per Areawide Clearinghouse criteria . Therefore, the project does not warrant Clearinghouse comments at this time. Should there be a change in the scope of the project, we would appreciate the opportunity to review and comment at that time. A description of the project will be published in the March 15, 1993 Intergovernmental Review Report for public review and comment . The project title and SCAG number should be used in all correspondence with SCAG concerning this project . Correspondence should be sent to the attention of the Clearinghouse Coordinator . If you have any questions, please contact Maureen Farley at (213) 236-1886 . Response: Comment Acknowledged . Department of Transportation Comment : Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the update and revision of the City' s Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code. Because the revision and update of the Zoning and Subdivision Code does not state the specificity of a project, Caltrans is unable to Negative Declaration h4 No . 91-32 - ,_ (1872D) determine the impacts of any development upon State facilities. Therefore, District 12 reserves its rights to comment on individual projects affected by this regulation. We look forward to the implementation of this element and improving regional partnership. Once again, thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the proposed project. If clarification is needed, please communicate with Nathaniel H. Pickett, 714-724-2247 or Ms . Aileen Kennedy at 724-2239 . Response: Comment Acknowledged. County of Orange - EMA Comment: Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the above referenced item. The County of Orange has no comment at this time. However, we would appreciate being informed on any further developments. If you have any questions or need to contact us, please call KAri Rigoni at (714) 834-2109 . Response ., Comment Acknowledged. DF -1• Comment : The Department of Fish and Game (Department) has reviewed the referenced document and has the following questions regarding "Attachment A" under the heading of "Proposed Major Changes in Development Standards'° : 1. "Base Zoning Districts, RL: Delete open space requirement; " page 1. How will this change affect the open space requirement associated with any mitigation measures designed to off-set adverse project-related impacts? Response On-site open space (private outdoor living area) for a single family dwelling in the RL district will be satisfied by compliance with site coverage and setback provisions. Development of all residential projects will continue to be subjected to parkland dedication and/or payment of in-lieu fees .` Any mitigation measures necessary to off-set adverse development specific impacts will be generated through the project entitlement process in compliance with CEQA. 3 � Negative Declaration ti T C !� No. 91-32 -5- (1872D) DFG-2: Comment : 2 . "RMH-S, no open space requirement for sfd; " page 2. Same question posed above. Response: Response DFG-2 Applicable to RMH-A district also. DF -3 ' Comment : Pursuant to the Fish and Game Code Section 1802 which states that the Department has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish and wildlife resources, we are concerned that future projects will not receive adequate mitigation measures necessary to off-set adverse project-related impacts if open space requirements are no longer required. Response: Open space (private outdoor living area) will be provided in all single family developments by compliance with setbacks and site coverage. Both private and common outdoor living areas will be required in all multiple family projects . In additidn, parkland dedication and/or in lieu fees are required. The proposed Zoning Code revisions will not alter the City' s environmental review process . Subsequent development under the proposed Zoning Code will still be subject to the CEQA process which is the City' s present means for identifying impacts and imposing adequate mitigation measures to protect and conserve fish and wildlife resources. DF -4• ' Comment : If our concerns are adequately addressed, we will have no opposition to these updates and revisions to the City of Huntington Beach' s Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code. Response: Comment noted and will be forwarded to decision makers for consideration prior to action on the proposed project . Negative Declaration Pre- No . 91-32 -6- (1872D) DF - Comment : Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on this document . If you have any questions, please contact Ms . Cheryl Heffley, Wildlife Biologist, at (310) 694-3578. Response: Comment does pertain to any environmental issue. No reply is warranted. CSA-1: Comment : On behalf of the Huntington Beach City School District . ("District") , Community Systems Associates, Inc. ("CSA") has been requested to provide comments on Negative Declaration No. 91-32 prepared for the Update and Revision of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code ("Amendment") for the City of Huntington Beach ("City") . Response: Comment noted. Comment does not pertain to any environmental issue. No reply is warranted. CSA-2: Comment The District received the Negative Declaration on March 3, 1993 . Pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") , comments to the Negative Declaration may be provided within 30 days of receipt of the Negative Declaration (i .e. , by April 2, 1993) . This letter provides the District 's comments and is intended to comply with the CEQA requirements on behalf of the District . Response: Comment noted. Comment does not pertain to any environmental issue. No reply is warranted. CSA-3: Comment : The District believes that the Amendment may have a significant environmental impact on the District . Additionally, the Negative Declaration and Initial Study prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts of the Amendment are inadequate and do not provide Negative Declaration No. 91-32 -7- (1872D) sufficient information to appropriately evaluate the impacts of the Amendment . More detailed environmental documentation, such as an environmental impact report or revised negative declaration, should he prepared to thoroughly evaluate the potential significant impacts on the Amendment on the District . The environmental documentation prepared for the Amendment should also include measures to mitigate all significant impacts on the Districts . Response: Comment noted and ,:ill be forwarded to decision makers for consideration prior to action on the proposed project. CSA-4 • Comment : All new residential development within the District will have a direct impact on the District. The capital facilities costs to the District to accommodate students generated from new housing units is much greater than the development fees received. Additionally, enrollment at all District schools is near or exceeds capacity. The District has demonstrated these facts to the City in numerous previous letters. Please see the attached letter sent to Mr. Michael T. Uberuaga dated February 12, 1993 for further detail . Response: Comment noted and will be forwarded to decision makers for consideration prior to action on the proposed project . CSA-5. Comment : Question 14(c) , Public Facilities : Schools, claims that the Amendment will not have an effect on the District : "No new school facilities will be required if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted. " (page 91 Apparently this conclusion is based on the fact that some of the proposed zoning changes will allow increased densities, while others will allow reduced densities , thereby resulting in no net change. For example, in the discussion of land use impacts of the Amendment, the Negative Declaration states : Under the proposed zoning designations of RM, RMH and RH will be developed at a slightly lower density and TLSP and OTSP areas , redesigned as RMH-A, will be developed at a slightly higher density based on a lot area rather than lot frontage as permitted under the existing code. (page 7] Negative Declaration k7 ch No . 91-32 -8- ( 1872D) Response: The higher density proposed for the RMH-A areas will allow for approximately 6, 500 residential units . To achieve this density, the entire area must be void of any structures prior to development at the higher density. Because the area is 96% built out, the City does not anticipate a significant increase in student generation. Natural attrition of enrollment levels due to students graduating, families relocating out of the area, etc. open up space for new students . In addition, the school district has several closed schools in the City which may be refurbished and reopened if necessary. Specific development projects will be subject to CEQA, and any adverse project-related impacts on school facilities will be identified and mitigation measures recommended. CSA- Comment • However, the District is approximately one half the size of the City. While the changes proposed may balance Citywide, it is possible that the changes within the District will result in a net increase in density. The environmental documentation prepared for the Amendment should include a map displaying changes in density so it can be determined where the effects of the Amendment will occur. The table in Attachment A which lists the various zoning changes should quantify the effects of each change, not simply include qualitative notes such as "reduction in density" . Response: A map displaying changes in zoning districts has been prepared and will be included. Comment noted and will be forwarded to decision makers for consideration prior to action on the proposed project . C A-,7: Comment - Additionally, no mention is given in the Negative Declaration to the potential impacts of allowing residential development in industrial areas . The Amendment would allow employee housing to be developed in both General Industrial and Limited Industrial zones . Besides the typical impacts on the District of residential development, housing in industrial areas may result in increased bussing and exposure of students to health hazards . District schools are located in residential neighborhoods, so students living in industrial areas would have to walk long distances or be bussed. Students living in industrial areas could be exposed to unsafe air emissions, high noise levels, heavy truck traffic, and other potential safety risks . Negative Declaration ETC ; No . 91-32 -9- ( 1872D) Response; Development of employee residential in the industrial districts will be subject to discretionary review. Any adverse project-related impacts will be generated through the entitlement process in -� compliance with CEQA. SC A-8: Comment : However, Question 17, Human Health, summarily dismisses the potential health hazards of the Amendment, claiming that further environmental review will be done on a project specific basis. while project specific environmental review is certainly necessary, it is not the correct level at which to evaluate the concept of allowing residential development in industrial areas. Rather, the issue should be evaluated at the program level . The Amendment and its environmental documentation should contain guidelines and mitigation measures for preventing the potential health hazards of allowing residential development in industrial areas. Response; Comment noted and will be forwarded to the decision makers for consideration pri6r to action on the proposed project . CSA-9 : Comment : The Amendment also proposes to change the zoning of schools from Community Facility-Education to Public-Semipublic, but does not discuss whether this is simply a name change of if it will actually alter the zoning of District facilities. If this change results in additional restrictions on the use of District land, the District ' s ability to provide educational services to the community could be impacted. The provisions of this zone change should be discussed in greater detail . Response: School district properties are designated Community Facilities Overlay (CF-E) to identify use for publicly owned educational purposes . The underlying zoning is also in effect . The proposed base district Public-Semi public (PS) will continue to allow publicly-owned educational facilities as well as other public- semi-public uses . Negative Declaration i2Ti , No . 91-32 -10- (1872D) CSA-10• Comment • The Huntington Beach City School District and Community Systems Associates , Inc. appreciate having the opportunity to provide these comments concerning Negative Declaration No. 91-32 to the City of Huntington Beach. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Mr. Jerry S. Buchanan at (714) 964-8888, or myself at (714) 838-9900. Response: Comment does not pertain to any environmental issue. No reply is warranted. e Negative Declaration ,E�c No . 91-32 -11- (1872D) STAfE OF CALIFORNIA PETE WILSON, Governor GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH 1400 TENTH STREET ;ACRAMENTO,CA 95814 Mar 31, 1993 JULIE OSUGIC. CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648' y Subject: NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 91-32, HUNTINGTON BEACH SCH # 91091091 Dear JULIE OSUGI: The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named environmental. Q, document to selected state agencies for review. The review period is closed and none of the state agencies have comments. This letter =� --icknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. j Please call Tom Loftus at (916) 445-0613 if you have 7<<ry questions regarding the environmental review process. When .,.� contacting the Clearinghouse in this matter, please use the eight-digit state Clearinghouse number so that we* may respond promptly. J Sincerely, Christine Kinne Acting Deputy Director, Permit Assistance Notice of Completion S.#NOTE 6erer :.• Sute Clear4ngh".w,1400 Tenth SUCCL Sacnntcnto.CA 95814 914'"5-0613 SCH d 1110 tct711101 N�y•it 1ve Declaration No. 91-32 • 2 agancy: City of Huntington Rearh Contact Person: Susan Pierce s,rrtkadtctt: 2000 Main Street per: 714-536-5250 uy ::unt i ngt on Beach ` Zip: County Orange ------------------- �" ------------- Project Location Orange HuntingtonBeach Coun: .. City/Newest Community: C!wsSuetu: N/AC] y wl a Zip Code: Total Acres: Cl y wl e A-cr.or s Poccl No. N/A Section: Twp. Range: Base: Xat,n2Miles: SuteH-•yt: 1 anti 19 Waterways•. Santa Ana River, Huntingtnn Harhnur Airporu:— Railwsys: PE RR School,: city wide ------------------------------------------ Document Type CEOA: 0NOP :`ySupplemenVSuMcquent NEPAI QNOI Other: 0 Joint Document Q Early Cons 0 El It(Prior SCH No.) ❑EA ❑Final Document {§NegDec 0Other 0DraftElS pother D Draft EIR D FONSI ----------------------------------------- Local Action Type Gcnnd Plan Update p Sptciftc Plan ❑Rezone ❑Annexation Central Plan Amendment p Master Plan 0 Prezone D Redevelopment _Central Plan Element 0 Planned Unit Development ❑Use Permit ❑Coastal Permit "orrununity Plan ❑Site Mn - Lard Division Subdia•ision, - ( i�O:her•rnn i ng� •cel.'Asp,Tract%hp.cc.) subdivision update Development Type N/A ;.�7 ✓\ RP ,.dentid: L'nJs 'c�et OW Facilities: 7;% AICD _c""ncc: SO. A.-cj FirploJtei: ❑Transportation: T.pt Crc-.ncc.AL SO. - �:•.•. F.mplo.icr' ❑Mining: Afinvol - _;nd_arial: c?et F�rplgees-. ❑Poww: T}pt Worts E.i cauonel 0 Faste Treatment. T1pe -.2cneatienal \�.` .fo Hazardous Waste:Type ` `.111.��,qo8�- 6431"I'liyiGien code-' - ---------------------- a—-------------- Project Issues Dlacusaed in Document "�Acs;heticNiswl ?t Flood PiairLTlnnding E]Schools/Universities u Water Qudily j Agricultural Lend '-'Forest Land/Fire Hazard ❑Septic Systarn E]Water Supply/Groundwater -3 Au Quality Gcologic/Seismie U Sawa Capacity g]Wcdand/Ripmian ArcheologicaLMistorical f]Minerals 10 Soil ETosioNComprtion/Crading K)Wildlife y Coastal Zone u!Noise f]Solid Waste fl Growth inducing • D7 cnagelAbsorpt ion yPopuUtion;HousingBalance J3ToxiclHarardous Landuse �_-Economic/Jobs Public Services/Facilities Tj Traffic/Circuletion Cumulative Effects_F`=� LA Reaeation/Paks kl`,j Vegetation Other ----------------------------------------- Present Land Use/Zonln"arneral Plan Use _————aEE84oness city wide and-incorporates multiple land use designations a)ect Description "^ ' t:,-• and revisions to the City of Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code. TOY. LOPTUS (5:6; 145-0613 ® CHT SNT QR SNT S _� = }_Aesourc State/Consumer Svcs — W-Cuastal Comm T ..:1' FIC -C. _ d - Fish L Came ••l: 1, .•. _ a Parks L ec/OHP ity — s - --- _ — Reg. NQCB / _ -A PLFaSE NOTE SCH NUMBER ON ALL 9,0MENTS ions LASE FORWARD LAT£ COHYEN75 DIAEC LY TO THE LEAD AGENCY ONLY _ PC-10t.- 112,- _ Planning A " i.PCC: fr.t•c;ces: t Housing L Devel�- ALState Lands Comm ° U 1�ITY O F E C E i V E D MICHAEL M. RUANE 1:I.Ott 24 1993 DIRECTOR, EMA THOMAS B.MA' 5 3 R��G � �+ r` DIRECTOR OF PL. LOCATION : ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AGENCY 300 N. FLOWER ST. PLANNING THIRD FLOOR SANTA ANA,CA MAR 19 1np3 MAILING ADDRESS: JJ P.O.BOX 4048 SANTA ANA,CA 92702-4048 TELEPHONE : Susan PiercelAssociate Planner FILE: NCL 93-14 FAX#:834.2771 City of Huntington Beach DPC:834 4772 Department of Community Development 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 SUBJECT: ND 91-32 - Update/Revision of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code Dear Ms. Pierce: Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the above referenced item. The County of Orange has no comment at this time. However, we would appreciate being informed of any further developments. { z If you have any questions or need to contact us, pl(iase call Kari Rigoni at 7 (714) 834-2109. y. Very truly yours, i Kari A. Rigoni, P nn For: Robert W. White,. Manager Environmental Planning Division CH:crPL02-054 (3077)3031811450496 STATE Of CALIFORNIA—BUSINESS AND TRANSPORTATION AGENCY PETE WILSON, Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 12 a 'SDI PUIIMAN STREET ITA ANA, CA 92705 lit .ry�.r ,,e ` ILL.. cAricl!/TrtiU 91 P.M. UKP.-39 ...... ;:?ton Be (_V', rTjE DE_'LA:.A'1'rr_!r,�I P:rj. aI j:J�=rt '=z: t�?'II+ k�:VI:JIt!;i ` /1 'ME Z(NING AND �l!J4'•�li4ji��il.�i\I ORDiiiAN!-i r.':_!I1L tear c,'Portunity review a:..4. rOmmt ent on the i_•::F_t:a and revision of the City's Zoning ..,u :_•Ll�t�lt'1310ri 'S _.'dinance ,he revisAor. and of the— Zonin- :l.e_::.'vi:,��J:) +_•e}:ie? does rlot state the apE':-i'ticity o* a prcje -�1 J .: I;! uI1rKbie to determine the impacts of any e:ie•re?opme::t .�t.=„`.r_ f i11t e.3. Thi :*refore , i!istrle t �� :'E 1ts to 1 . .I .• �l2.31 Frcjec:s affected b I_tt We 1oolr f rward to the imr,leme::t:r.ticm of this e lerier,c and -proving regional r,ar•tner hip. a- Ijtl^P v7ain, therik you for the opportunity to. revie:— anal V the r-r o loon + r F T n +i s ! t ' �..� V!�� pr rJJ etr V L L•J.L 1 1�•�t V lr��� 1J I)e'vdv� Please e:-,:,.m uni<_ctte with Nathaniel H_ Pickett , 714 724 2247 or M5. IS Aileen ellnzdy at 7L✓4-22139. c� Thank you, ROBERT F. 1c:!crt�t,l:, !:;hi.et Advanced Planning Rrari h !®UTIIERA CAUFORMA AAFOCIATM OF 00WRflN1E11T0 8 West Seventh Street,12th Floor Los Angeles,California 90017-3435 ❑ (213)236-1800 a FAX(213)236-1 March 3, 1993 Ms. Susan Pierce Associate Planner - City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 RE: SCAG Clearinghouse #: I9300139 Project Title: Negative Declaration No. 91-32 Update and Revision of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code Dear Ms. Pierce: We have reviewed the above referenced document and determined that it is not regionally significant per Areawide Clearinghouse criteria. Therefore, the project does not warrant clearinghouse comments at this time. Should there be a change in the scope of the project, we n would appreciate the opportunity to review and comment at that time. A description of the project will be published in the March 15, 1993 Intergovernmental Review Report for public review and comment. The project title and SCAG number should be used in all correspondence with SCAG concerning —Z V this project. Correspondence should be sent to the attention of the Clearinghouse Coordinator. _ If you have any questions, please contact Maureen Farley at (213) 236-1886. O rJ Sincerely, I:RIC H. ROTH Manager, Intergovernmental Review I hn I on0ille(11) of Rialto President, Gaddi Vasquez Orange County-First Vice President. Stella Mendoza City of Brawley-Second Vice President, John Flynn Ventura Cuunly-Past ® Richard Alalorre City of Lus Angeles, Michael Antonovich Los Angeles County, Robert Bartlett City of Monrovia, George Bass City of Bell, Ronald Rates City OF . George Battey,Jr.City of Burbank, Ernanl Bernardi City of Los Angeles, Hal Bernson City of Los Angeles, Walter Bowman City of Cypress, Tom Bradley City of Los lupin Braude City of Los Angeles, Susan Brooks City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Art Brown City of Buena Park, Jim Busby,Jr.City of Victorville, John Cox City of Newport( ,e Uana I os Angeles County. Elmer Digneo City of Loma Linda, Richard Dixon City of Lake Forest, Douglas Drummond City of Long Beach, John Ferraro City of Los Ang, Jean Nlilke Plores City of Los Angeles, Terry Frizzel City of Riverside, Ruth Galanter City of Los Angeles, Sandra Cents City of Costa Mesa, Candace Haggard City of San Clemens/ garland Hardeman City of Inglcwrwal, Robert Hargrave City of Lomita, Mike Hernandez City of Los Angeles. Nate Holden City of Los Angeles, Robert Jamison City of Artesia. Jim 1,01Y( .1y of South I I Monte, Richard Kelly,City of Palm Desert. Bob Kuhn City of Glendora. Abbe Land City of West Hollywood, Darlene h(cBane City of Agoura Hills. John Melton 'rs, .i Paula.Barbara Messina City of Alhambra. Jon Mikels San Bemardino County, Judy Mikels City of Simi Valley.David Myers City of Palmdale, Kathryn Nack City of Pasad- It, a erry City of Brea. Gwenn Norton-Perry City of Chino Hill.. Ronald Parks City of Temecula, Iry Pickier City of Anaheim, Joy Picus City of Los Angeles. Beatrice Proo Cily of I i, ra. Larry Rhinrharl City of Montclair, Mark Ridley-Thomas City of Los Angeles, Albert Robles City of South Gate. Sam Sharp Imperial County, Bob Stone City of Belltluwer. S.ke%city of Walnut. Jeff Thomas City of Tustin, Laurie Tully-Payne City of Highland. Joel Wachs City of Los Angeles. Rita Walters City of Los Angeles, Evelyn Wells City of h Slicael Wai City„t Los Angeles, Judy Wright City of Claremont, Zev Yaroslaysky City of t.os Angeles, Norton Younglove Riverside County STATE OF CALIFORNIA—THE RESOURCES AGENCY PETE WILSON. Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND CAME 330 GOLDEN SHORE, SUITE SO LNG BEACH, CA 90802 310) 590-5113 March 25, 1993 U � � � Ms. Susan Pierce Associate Planner City of Huntington Beach , 5��,,' ' 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 Dear Ms. Pierce: Negative Declaration No. 91-32: City of Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code The Department of Fish and Game (Department) has reviewed the referenced document and has the following questions regarding "Attachment All under the heading of "Proposed Major Changes in Development Standards" : 1. "Base Zoning Districts, RL: Delete open space requirement; " page 1. How will this change affect the open space requirement associated with any mitigation measures designed to off-set adverse project-related impacts? 2 . 'IRMH-S, no open space requirement for sfd. " page 2 . I pCL L Same question posed above. Pursuant to the Fish and Game Code Section 1802 which states that the Department has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish and wildlife resources, we are concerned that future projects will not receive adequate mitigation measures 'necessary to off-set adverse project-related impacts if open space requirements are no longer required. If our concerns are adequately addressed, we will have no opposition to these updates and revisions to the City of DFL Huntington Beach's Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code. 0 Tf A /. Ms. Susan Pierce Mar(.h 25, 1993 Page Two Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on this I s document. • If you have any questions, please contact Ms. Cheryl Heffley, Wildlife Biologist, at (310) 694-3578 . Sincerely, Fred Worthley Regional Manager Region 5 cc: C. Heffley, DFG/WLM K. Lal, DFG/ES ES Files Community Systems Associates, Inc. April 2, 1993 HAND DELIVERED i Ms. Susan Pierce, AICP AN Associate Planner CITY OF HUNTINGTON IBEACHr.t.r � ;::�' •, ;: 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92646 SUBJECT: Negative Declaration No. 91-32 Update and Revision of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code for the City of Huntington Beach Dear Ms. Pierce: On behalf of the Huntington Beach City Schgol District ("District"), Community Systems i Associates, Inc. ("CSA") has been requested to provide comments on Negative Declaration No. 91-32 prepared for the Update and Revision of the Zoning and Cl-,[ Subdivision Ordinance Code ("Amendment") for the City of Huntington Beach ("City"). The District received the Negative Declaration on March 3, 1993. Pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), comments to the Negative Declaration may be provided within 30 days of receipt of the Negative CSA Declaration (i.e., by April 2, 1993). This letter provides the District's comments and is intended to comply with the CEQA requirements on behalf of the District. The District believes that the Amendment may have a significant environmental impact on the District. Additionally, the Negative Declaration and Initial Study prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts of the Amendment are inadequate and do not provide sufficient information to appropriately evaluate the impacts of the Amendment. More detailed environmental documentation, such as an environmental impact report or revised negative declaration, should be prepared to thoroughly evaluate the potential significant impacts of the Amendment on the District. The environmental documentation prepared for the Amendment should also include measures to mitigate all significant impacts on the District. 7Y'I I CAWNO VIA,, - ,Ji ff 200 - TIIS1IN.CAI.IFOHNIA 92680 • (714)833 990n . FA) 171•11 838!0,.)s •� D Ceamuroty Sysle Inc Ms. Susan Pierce CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH April 2, 1993 Page 2 All new residential development within the District will have a direct impact on the District. The capital facilities costs to the District to accommodate students generated from new housing units is much greater than the development fees received. Additionally, C,5A �- enrollment at all District schools is near or exceeds capacity. The District has I demonstrated these facts to the City in numerous previous letters. Please see the i attached letter sent to Mr. Michael T. Uberuaga dated February 12, 1993 for further detail. Question 14(c), Public Facilities: Schools, claims that the Amendment will not have an effect on the District: "No new school facilities will be required if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted." [page 9] Apparently this conclusion is based on the fact that some of the proposed zoning changes will allow increased densities, while others will allow reduced densities, thereby resulting in no net change. For example, in the discussion of land use impacts of the Amendment, the Negative Declaration states: I Under the proposed zoning designations of RM, RMH and RH will be developed at a slightly lower density and TLSP and OTSP areas, redesigned as RMH-A, will be developed at a slightly higher density based on a lot area rather than lot frontage as permitted under the existing code. [page 7] However, the District is approximately one half the size of the City. While the changes proposed may balance Citywide, it is possible that the changes within the District will result in a net increase in density. The environmental documentation prepared for the _ ' Amendment should include a map displaying changes in density so it can be determined where the effects of the Amendment will occur. The table in Attachment A which lists the various zoning changes should quantify the effects of each change, not simply include qualitative notes such as "reduction in density". I Additionally, no mention is given in the Negative Declaration to the potential impacts of allowing residential development in industrial areas. _ The Amendment would allow employee housing to be developed in both General Industrial and Limited Industrial zones. Besides the typical impacts on the District of residential development, housing in industrial areas may result in increased bussing and exposure of students to health 1 �� hazards. District schools are located in residential neighborhoods, so students living in industrial areas.would have to walk long distances or be bussed. Students living in ' industrial areas could be exposed to unsafe air emissions, high noise levels, heavy truck traffic, and other potential safety risks. i However, Question 17, Human Health, summarily dismisses the potential health hazards of the Amendment, claiming that further environmental review will be done on a project 'S specific basis. While project specific environmental review is certainly necessary, it is not ..,, L tnmurory Srsre-s as,o:.ues.rn, �__M MIN Ms. Susan Pierce CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH April 2, 1993 Page 3 the correct level at which to evaluate the concept of allowing residential development in industrial areas. Rather, the issue should be evaluated at the program level. The Amendment and its environmental documentation should contain guidelines and mitigation measures for preventing the potential health hazards of allowing residential development in industrial areas. The Amendment also proposes to change the zoning of schools from Community Facility- Education to Public-Semipublic, but does not discuss whether this is simply a name. change of if it will actually alter the zoning of District facilities. If this change results in C 5 additional restrictions on the use of District land, the District's ability to provide educational services to the community could be impacted. The provisions of this zone change should be discussed in greater detail. The Huntington Beach City School District and Community Systems Associates, Inc. appreciate having the opportunity to provide these comments concerning Negative Declaration No. 91-32 to the City of Huntington Beach. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Mr. Jerry S. Buchanan at (714) 964-8888, or myself at (714) 838-9900. Sincerely, COMMUNITY SYSTEMS ASSOCIATES, INC. G C I John C. Hutt Associate Vice President I attachment 1120piercetich i cc: Mr. Jerry S. Buchanan Assistant Superintendent, Business Services Huntington Beach City School District I! I k'l r A /c: O'i rtt_t� RECEIVED F F a 1 3 1993 HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT 20451 Craimer Lane • P.O.Box 71 Huntington Beach.California 92648 (714)964-8888 February 12, 1993 BOARD OF TRUSTEES Mr. Michael T. Uberuaga Shirley id nt City Administrator City of Huntington Beach Clerk Bra rid 2000 Main Street Clerk Huntington Beach, California 92648 Robert Mann.Ed.D. Member Subject: Mitigation of Development Impacts on the Catherine McGough Huntington Beach City School District Member Bran E. Rechsteiner Dear Mr. Uberuaga: Member This letter is intended to update you and the rest of ADMINISTRATION the City of Huntington Beach ("City") staff, as well as the City Council and Planning Commission, of the Duane A. Dishno.Ed. D. current condition of the Huntington Beach CitySchool Superintendent District "District" cg ("District") and recent legislation concerning school impact mitigation. Alan Rasmussen.Ed. D. ststant Superintendent ersonnevEducauonal The District remains near capacity and unable to Servicesadequately accommodate new students generated by / Jerry Buchanan development without mitigation in excess of statutory Assistant Superintendent development fees. On the bright side, the District is Business Services near completion of its Capital Facilities Strategic Master Plan and Asset Management Program ("Master Plan") . The Master Plan will help the District logically and efficiently plan and construct school. facilities required to accommodate increasing enrollments. Attached is a more detailed discussion of the District ' s facilities and the impacts of development. Additionally, copies of the Master Plan will be transmitted to the City after it is adopted by the District ' s Board. As you know, for the past several months the District has been challenging City approval of development projects and land use actions in an attempt to ensure adequate mitigation of the impacts of these items on the District. Over the course of these months, the City and District have gained a better understanding of each other. Together, we have evolved standard condition of approval language which ensures adequate mitigation of school impacts, while allowing development to proceed. Similar language was made a condition of approval on the Holly-Seacli.ff Specific Plan and NESI project Mr. Michael T. Uberuaga February 12, 1993 Page 2 and has been proposed by City Staff for the Coultrup project. Unfortunately, Senate Bill No. 1287 ("SB 128711) has limited the methods the City and District can employ to mitigate school impacts. The District believes that the basic concept of school mitigation that the City /and District have been pursuing is still sound, but the condition of approval language may need to be modified somewhat. The District has drafted the following modified mitigation language which it feels is legal and in the same spirit as previous City-approved condition of approval language: Prior to the issuance of any building permit, the developer shall mitigate the impacts of the project on school facilities, using any combination of measures listed in Government Code Section 65996 or other legal means, to a level acceptable to the appropriate school district(s) for K-12 . This condition may be waived by the appropriate school district (s) . The District therefore requests that the City impose the proposed mitigation language as a condition -of approval for all development projects and land use actions. Attached is- a detailed discussion of the ramifications of SB 1287. Thank you for your consideration and assistance. If you have any questions or desire additional information, please don't hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Jerry S. Buchanan Assistant Superintendent, Business Services Huntington Beach City School District attachments cc: Mayor and Members of the City Council Chairperson and Members of the Planning Commission Ms. Gail Hutton, City Attorney Mr. Mike Adams, Director of Community Development Mr. Howard Zelefski, Planning Director Mr. Hal Simmons, Planning Department Mr. Jack Bowland, Chairman of GPAC City of Huntington Beach A� 3 7, Mr. Michael T. Uberuaga February 12, 1993 Page 3 cc: Gary A. Burg ner, Ed.D. , Assistant Superintendent .� Huntington Beach Union High School District Stanley Oswalt, Ed. D. , Assistant Superintendent Ocean View School District Mark Ecker, Ph. D. , Assistant Superintendent Fountain Valley School District Ms. Barbara Winars, Assistant Superintendent Westminister School District President and Members of the Board of Education Duane Dishno, Ed.D. , Superintendent Huntington Beach City School District Mr. Marshall B. Krupp, President Community Systems Associates, Inc. Mr. Woody Tescher, Consultant Envicom Corporation ATTACHMENT "A" TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION State of the District The Huntington Beach City School District ("District") covers portions. of the City of Huntington Beach and portions of the unincorporated areas of Orange County. The District serves grades K-8 through the operation of eight (8) schools, consisting of six (6) K-5 elementary school and two (2) 6-8 middle schools. Additionally, the District maintains four (4) closed sites, one of which is used as the District office. Of these twelve (12) schools, seven (7) are twenty years old or older, and two (2) are over thirty years old. The District has experienced a variety of enrollment changes over the last thirteen (13)' years. From 1979 to 1987, student enrollments declined at a rate of 4.2% per year. However, a new trend has begun, starting in the 1988 school year, of a gradual, but modest increase in student enrollment. The District's Developer Fee Report identifies an enrollment of 5,303 students in 1987/88. This figure has increased to'5,675 students as 4. of October of 1991, representing an average annual increase of 1.71% between 1987 - 1991. For the 1992/93 school year enrollments have increased to 5,751 students, or an increase of approximately 1.34% from the previous year. The District prepared an Enrollment Projections Study in February of 1992. This study predicted growth of about 2.00% per year throughout the 1990s, based primarily on infill development. ' Additionally, a number of large residential developments (i.e., Holly- Seacliff, Bolsa Chica, Magnolia Pacific, etc.) have been proposed or adopted which may cause significant additional student enrollment increases within the District. The District's operating school facilities are currently facing severe capacity shortcomings, necessitating the addition of portable classrooms, the`construction of new permanent school facilities and/or the reconstruction and expansion of existing school facilities. As of.October 14, 1992, the District's capacity utilization and surplus/deficit capacity can be seen, as follows: A - 1 1992/93 School Year Capacity Utilization Surplus/ School Capacity Enrollment Utilization (Deficit) Eader 780 683 87.56% 97 Hawes 390 414 106.15% (24) Kettler 720 705 97.92% 15 Moffett 690 682 98.84% 8 Perry 540 579 107.22% (39) Smith 720 714 99.17% 6 K-5 Total 3,840 3,777 98.36% 63 Dwyer 780 853 109.36% (73) Sowers 1,110 1,121 100.99% . (11) 6-8 Total .1,890 1,974 104.44% (84) K-8 Total 5,730 5,751 100.37% (21) In practice, students are rarely divisible into uniform class sizes, and individual class enrollments tend to fluctuate over the course of the school year. As such it is difficult to achieve 100% capacity utilization. It is a generally accepted practice to consider school facilities to be impacted if utilization exceeds 85%. Capacity utilization in excess of 100% indicates actual overcrowding of school facilities, resulting in the loading of classrooms above State standards or the use of non-classrooms (i.e., libraries) for classroom purposes. As shown above, the District's facilities are currently overcrowded. All subsequent enrollment increases will require expansion of District facilities. The District is developing a Capital Facilities Strategic Master Plan and Asset Management Program ("Master Plan"). The preliminary draft of the Master Plan projects increases in enrollment for the next ten years, with a total K-8 enrollment of 8,204 by school year 2002-03. The Master Plan projects a total K-8 enrollment of 8,636 at mid- intensity buildout. To accommodate the projected enrollment growth the District will need to develop two to three additional elementary schools (Holly-Seacliff and one to two yet to be located) on the west side of the District. Middle school enrollment increases are anticipated to be accommodated by reopening the Peterson School and by increasing the capacity of the Dwyer School with new permanent construction. Impact of Development The District's Development Fee Report, last updated February 18, 1992, determined that on average, there are 0.1869 K-8 students per occupied housing unit within the District. The District has found, however, that this number is not a good estimator of student yield from new development, because it is based on the total housing stock within the District ,�j A - 2 which includes a number of senior and non-child households. In 1991, Mr. Clyde Glasser of the District conducted a survey of new development within the District and determined a K-6 student generation factor ("SGF") of 0.2695. This includes a K-6 component of 0.2064 and a 7-6 component of 0.611. This survey included the Town Square, Pier Colony, Huntington Place, Seacliff Estates, Ocean Point, The Villas, The Huntington Classics, The Heritage at Huntington Shores, and Central Park developments. These developments depict a representative range of housing types, sizes, and costs. Since originally conducting the survey, Mr. Glasser has monitored its results and analyzed in greater detail the factors that determine student yield. The results of his analyses show there are a large number of variables which influence SGFs, many of which cannot be estimated before a development is planned or even built. Because of this variability, the District believes it is best to use an average SGF rather than factors based on different housing types, sizes, etc. The District feels its survey determined SGF of 0.2695 is the best estimator of student generation for new development. To accommodate additional students generated by development, the District will need to add portable classrooms, refurbish and redesign existing facilities, construct additional permanent classrooms at open schools, reopen one or more schools and/or develop one or more new schools. The District also requires offsite support facilities such as a maintenance and operations yard. The full cost of accommodating an additional student assuming land, new classroom construction (70% permanent and 30% relocatable), and offsite support facilities is $21,767 for K-6 and $33,808 for 7-8. These amounts are in 1992/93 dollars. Multiplying the SGF for each grade level by the District facilities cost per student for that grade level results in the total impact on the District per housing unit. This equates to approximately $6,602. Based on the average size of housing units developed within the District (1,600 square feet), the impact on the District per square foot of residential development is estimated to be $4.13. However, the District has certain facility and land assets which can be employed to partially offset the full impact of development, perhaps the most useful of which are the District's closed schools. In order to house the projected increased student enrollments, the Master Plan contains a school facilities development program. This program calls for the rehabilitation of and expansion of existing schools, reopening of two of the Districts closed sites, and the acquisition and development of three new schools (two schools in addition to the Holly-Seacliff school). Unfortunately, the District's other closed schools cannot be used to house new students, because much of the new residential development will occur on the west side of the District while all the closed schools are on the east side. Sending students to schools far away from their homes would violate the District's commitment to neighborhood schools and require prohibitively expensive bussing. A - 3 The total cost of this development program in 1992 dollars. is estimated to be $56,350,000. The resulting cost to the District per additional housing unit would be approximately $4,612, (based upon 12,219 housing units projected to be developed within the District by mid-intensity buildout). Based on an average housing unit size of 1,600 square feet, the cost to the District per square foot of residential development is estimated to be $2.88. Comparison of Impact Estimates Full Impact Master Plan Impact Impact per Housing Unit $6,601.91 $4,611.67 Impact per Square Foot $4.13 $2.88 To offset the impacts described above, the District is allowed under State law to levy fees on development up to certain maximum levels. Current California Law concerning school development fees was established by Assembly Bill No. 1600 ("AB 1600") and Assembly Bill No. 181 ("AB 181"), and recently amended by Senate Bill No. 1287 ("SB 1287"). AB 1600 and AB 181 allow a total of $1.65 per square foot of residential development and $0.27 per square foot on commercial/industrial development to be collected by school districts. These fees must be shared by non-unified school districts with overlapping territory, such as a high school district and its feeder elementary school districts. Based on a fee sharing agreement with the Huntington Beach Union High School District, the District's share of these fees is 61%, or $1.0065 per square foot for residential development. This amount is clearly much less than the $4.13 full impact or $2.88 Master Plan impact derived above. Senate Bill No. 1287 ("SB 1287"), which became operative January 1, 1993, authorizes school districts to levy development fees higher than allowed pursuant to AB 1600 and AB 181. Pursuant to SB 1287, an additional $1.00 per square foot may be assessed by school districts on residential development. The law is unclear as to whether non-unified school districts must share this additional fee, or if each district may assess a full $1.00 per square foot. Within the next few months it is likely that either a court will render an interpretation of SB 1287 or the State Legislature will clarify its intent. The District is currently assessing a full additional dollar, for a total fee of $2.0065 per square foot. If through subsequent court ruling or legislation, the District is only able to assess a share of the additional $1.00, it will be able to collect a total fee of $1.6165 per square foot. Both fees are still less than the $4.13 full impact or $2.88 Master Plan impact derived above. d A - 4 Comparison of Impact and Fee Estimates Per Housing Unit Per Square Foot Full Impact $6,601.91 $4.13 Master Plan Impact $4,611.67 $2.88 AB 1600 & AB 181 Fees $1,610.40 $1.0065 Shared SB 1287 Fees $2,586.40 $1.6165 Full SB 1287 Fees $3,210.40 $2.0065 However, the increased fee level afforded by SB 1287 will become inoperative if the California electorate rejects Assembly Constitutional Amendment No. 6 ("ACA 6") which will appear on the next Statewide election, currently scheduled in June of 1994. Many development projects and land use actions approved now or in the near future will not result in the pulling of building permits(when school development fees are paid) until after June 1994. Hence, it is uncertain which of these fee structures will be in place when the school development fees are actually paid. Never the less, because all fee levels are lower than the impacts on the District, it is clear that some additional source of mitigation will be .required to offset the impacts on the District. The District feels therefore, that language requiring the complete mitigation of impacts on the District should be made a condition of approval on all development projects and land use actions. Ramifications of SB 1287 on School Impact Mitigation SB 1287 was passed by the State Legislature and signed by the Governor as part of the 1992 budget deal. It became effective January 1, 1993. The intent of this bill was to move a greater share of responsibility for school facilities funding to local school districts. In fact, SB 1287 calls for the phase out of the Leroy F. Greene State School Building Lease-Purchase Program ("State Program") by 1996. SB 1287 is "tied" to ACA 6. If passed by the voters in the next statewide election (currently scheduled for June 1994), ACA 6 will allow school districts to pass general obligation bonds by a simple majority vote rather than the current two-thirds. However, if the California electorate rejects ACA 6, SB 1287 will become inoperative and the State Program will remain intact. As mentioned above, SB 1287 allows school districts to levy an additional development fee of $1.00 per square foot on residential development. As a tradeoff for the increased fee levels, SB 1287 attempted to reduce the number of mitigation measures that can b used to offset school impacts. A - 5 The measures available to mitigate impacts on schools of development projects are limited by Government Code Section 65996. Prior to SB 1287, legislative actions (such as general plan amendments, specific plans, and zone changes) where not considered development projects, so a wider array of mitigation options was available for such actions. SB 1287 attempted to place legislative actions under the requirements Government Code Section 65996. Government Code Section 65996 lists the following seven mitigation measures: (1) Chapter 22 (commencing with Section 17700) of Part 10 of the Education Code. This chapter sets forth the provisions of the State Program created by the Leroy F. Greene State School Building Lease-Purchase Law of 1976. The State Program is funded through statewide general obligation bonds such as those approved by Propositions 152 and 155. Because the demand for state money far exceeds the supply of statewide bond funds, only a small percentage of school projects are funded through the State Program. None the less, the District is applying for funding through the State Program to the fullest extent possible. The District has provisions in all its existing mitigation.agreements with developers that would lower developer contributions to the extent state funding is obtained. Additionally, the State Program will be phased out by 1996 if the California voters approve ACA 6. (2) Chapter 25 (commencing with Section 17785) of Part 10 of the Education Code. This chapter was enacted by the Emergency School Classroom Law of 1979 which includes provisions for the lease of state portable facilities to address emergency overcrowding conditions. It does not provide funding for permanent facilities and is useful only in emergency situations. (3) Chapter 28 (commencing with Section 17870) of Part 10 of the Education Code. This chapter sets forth the provisions of the California School Finance Authority. This is a statewide financing vehicle that school districts can employ to gain the benefits of statewide rather than local financing. It does not provide additional revenue, but is only a financing tool. (4) Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 39327) of Chapter 3 Part 23 of the Education Code. This article provides school districts with the authority to enter into a lease or other agreement for school facilities with non-profit corporations. This allows for the establishment of a non-profit corporation whose function is to sell bonds and build A - 6 school facilities and, in turn, lease the facilities to the school district. However, it does not solve the fundamental question of how the school facilities will be paid for. (5) Section 53080 of the Government Code. This section sets forth the statutory development fees discussed above. (6) Chapter 2.5 (commencing with Section 53311) of Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code. This chapter was established by the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 which allows for the creation of community facilities districts to fund public facilities including schools. The bonds issued to construct public facilities are repaid by annual fees levied against parcels within a community facilities district. (7) Chapter 4.7 (commencing with Section 65970) of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code. This chapter was established by the School Facilities Act which allows a city or county to levy development fees (known as "SB 201 fees") on behalf of a school district to fund interim classroom facilities. Any fees levied pursuant to this chapter reduce the ability of school districts to levy fees pursuant to Government Code Section 53080. In practice, these fees have been superseded by those set forth �- in Government Code Section 53080. Additionally, in Murrieta Valley Unified School District v. County of Riverside, the court ruled that cities or counties can impose non-financial mitigation measures in addition to the seven financial measures listed in Government Code Section 65996. Such non- financial mitigation measures could include density reductions, project phasing, or senior- only housing. Nothing in SB 1287 prohibited the use of such non-financial mitigation measures. Because SB 1287 was only recently adopted, its legal interpretation remains uncertain. It appears that a city or county may not have the power to require financial mitigation measures other than those specified in Government Code Section 65996. Most attorneys agree, however, that a city or county can still deny a legislative action or require non- financial mitigation measures. Additionally, Government Code Section 65996 allows the use of Mello-Roos Community Facilities Districts with charges in excess of State mandated development fees. Some attorneys believe that a city or county may have the ability to require mitigation in excess of fees if the existing General Plan requires adequate school facilities. However, while SB 1287 may have limited the number of mitigation measures available, in no way did it preclude the requirement that development projects or land use actions ►nest comply with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"). The Legislative A - 7 Counsel of California has issued an opinion that SB 1287 "does not prohibit a city, county, or city and county from considering the adequacy of school facilities in the course of adopting'or implementing a general plan, zoning ordinance, or other legislative land .� use.policy." The impacts on the 'District of each project must be evaluated, and all impacts must be mitigated to a level of insignificance. Hence, the net effect of SB 1287 is to limit the types of measures that may be used to mitigate school impacts, but not the total mitigation of impacts. In order to comply with the provisions of SB 1287 while maintaining tfie spirit of school .facilities impact mitigation program that the City and District have evolved, the District is providing draft language for a condition of approval to be added to all development projects and land use actions. The City has applied the following, or similar, language as a' condition of approval to many development entitlements: Prior to the issuance of any building permit, the developer shall enter into a school facilities impact mitigation and reimbursement agreement with the appropriate school district(s)for K-12. This condition maybe waived by the appropriate school district. The District has modified this language as follows: Prior to the issuance of any building permit, the developer shall mitigate the impacts of the project on school facilities, using any combination of measures listed in Government Code Section 65996 or other legal means, to a level acceptable to the appropriate school district(s) for K-12. This condition may be waived by the appropriate school district(s). The District feels that this modified condition of approval language is legally acceptable and roughly equivalent to, though somewhat more restrictive than, the previous condition of approval language. Its application will ensure adequate mitigation of school impacts while allowing development to proceed. The District therefore requests that the City impose this language as a condition of approval for all development projects and land use actions. A - 8 ATTACHMENT "B" SENATE BILL NO. 1287 B - 1 a Emma STATUTES OF 1 1991-1992 REGULAR SESSION Ch. 1354 :e the State of CaliSornia' SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS--FACILITIES—FUNDING of wme unrelated to the adop ' )e signed before a represents ' CHAPTER 1354 of a birth parent in the state ended period of time. to sign a consent for the adopti S.B. No, 1287 t to revocation by reason of AN ACr to add and repeal Article 5(commencing with Section 17760)of Chapter. 22 of Part 10 of the Education Code, to amend Sections.65995 and 65996 of, and to add and repeal Sections 65995,65995.3,and 65996 of,the Government Code,and to repeal Section 3g of Chapter 1209 to read: ; of the Statutes of 1989, relating to school facilltles. d by the birth parent or paten [Approved by Governor September 30, 1992.] :t or parents signing the co s. 5' Dyed with Secretary of State September 30, 1992.] ,cy a written statement re ' o LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST the birth parent or pareii )rm prescribed by the departrn SB 1287, School facilities. 3t or delegated county adop " (1) Under existing law, the State Allocation Board is authorized to a is nor is physically resent apportion funs P Y Y P for school facilities projects, for designated construction purposes, on behalf of appli, agency licensed or authorized school districts under the Leroy F. G Lease-purchase Las sides, or is present for a p 1976. Greene State School Building woke consent may not be ai Department of Social Servi laa ary 1,is bil would repeal that program, pursuant to certain legislative findings, a c on the t. day after si th f the i The bill would state that the changes specified above shall become o e right'to to revoke consent ACA 6 is approved by a majority of the voters voting on that measure.operative on,y „ T .e consent was signed, which g (2) Existing law authorizes local agencies 'to impose limited fees or other charges to read: against certain development projects to fund the construction or reconstruction of school facilities. 3 ome permanent as pro ' This bill would authorize the ve adoptive parents may levy of an additional fee, for school facilities purposes, on errtain residential construction of up to $1 per square foot of assessable space. ecomes permanent as pro vid Existing law prohibits the legislative body of a local agency from levying development t return of the child. In su fees or other requirements for the construction or reconstruction of schools, other than parent or parents so reques ' parsuant to designated statutory authority, een placed have concerns that t This b ill would of the ecify that this prohibition applies to both administrative and legisla- are unfit or present a dangerif . legislative body of a local agency. ,tion is to report their concerrA Under existing law, development fees or other requirements to fund school construction -e child welfare agency. . sr reconstruction may be imposed against residential construction other than new con- return the child. Stmetion only where the resulting increase in assessable space, as defined, resulting from 994. sb de construction exceeds 500 square feet. Existing law also excludes desi Sh ity expenses from the "construction or reconstruction" grated school purposes for which the ndependent adoption filed on 6e+eloper fees or other consideration may be expended, authorizes the expenditure of up shall he governed by the 1 *3M of the fees collected in any fiscal year for administrative costs incurred in collecting me fees or other consideration, defines the "assessable space"of residential development, hall adopt emergency regula ' Ud the "chargeable covered and enclosed space" of commercial or industrial develop- aeat, that are subject to a development fee or other requirement, and specifies that the amount of the maximum developer fee or other requirement shall be increased for emment Code, if the Co �+tion every 2 years. costs mandated by the' for those costs shall �' �s�gnlaw also contains the legislative finding that the provisions of existing law of Division 4 of 'Title 2 of the preceding pars g r reimbursement does not _' �� bill w graph are declaratory of existing law. made from the State Mat ; 'would repeal that legislative finding. i V ernment Code, unless o tin - �� g law prescribes the exclusive methods that may be required by local ome operative on the sail �;; considering,mitigate environmental effects related to the adequacy of school facilities stitution. - w under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), the approv- ins by asterisks Additions or changes indicated by underline; deletions by asterisks 5769 1y�'1� q*� V�<a�i.�. K. i U' r �f «� ✓ t` t r fr . r',T A u� qts; ` � S,. Q�'t .4r V'f { µ,rt r,� `' t �- � ��'�'ri� `r ,,.pa^`(�Mv,,yt•y�.'^•'- y+iv�� � 0^�'�. }+ dk��:dRs.v4YW^1C .e.���li Y"'a' ,AAA^ti.--.i4'�.�.�•L5t i ':�'t i'.. -,fib. • Ch. 1364 STATUTES OF 1�g • 199 al, or the establishment of conditions for the approval, of a development project, which is defined to mean a project undertaken for the purpose of development, including a pro• shal involving the issuance of a permit for construction or reconstruction. Existing law � perr. prohibits a public agency, under CEQA or the Subdivision Map Act, from denying stay approval of a project on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities. (2) This bill would prohibit a public agency, in the exercise of its authority to adopt genera per plans, zoning laws, and other land use legislation, from either denying approval of a enck project on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities or imposing conditions, other this ,sithi the requirement to pay the limited school facilities fees, on the approval of a project for s.reas the purpose of providing school facilities. anen, -° --- �- The bill also would delete the definition of development project, as described above,aM cover would specify that the restrictions described above upon the mitigation of environmental sha)1 �-� effects under CEQA apply to both administrative and legislative action taken by a public Pew" agency under CEQA. The bill would specify that these changes shall have prospective application only. .!9 (4) This bill would specify that the changes described in (2) and (3) are repealed on the a the date that ACA 6 fails to receive the approval of a majority of the voters voting on that 3oard measure. =eetir, ih&-e . The people of the State of California do enact as follows: =der SECTION 1. It is the intent of the Legislature to enact a new program (c) (' financing of school facilities in accordance with the following principles: for the ea:erec (a) Primary financial responsibility for school facilities should rest with school distriem Rymer. (b) School districts should be authorized to raise a sufficient amount of revenue loc24 :Onditic to finance a majority of their school facility needs. :.`.spier (c) The role of the state should be limited to: (2) .41 (1) Using state funds to supplement the local revenues of those school districts hav* x omen .r. low assessed valuation. her (2) Using state funds to finance needed school facilities for those school districts the 'YPlicab. have met or exceeded their debt capacity. (d) Fo. (3) Using state funds to provide interim school facilities for those school districts tha a she elb are unable to supply the expected level of local revenues. "elusive SEC. 2. Article 5 (commencing with Section 17760) is added to Chapter 22 of Part!] .614e,or; of the Education Code, to read: x local g :ot limit Article 5. Repeal of Chapter - mum ftdentja. 17760. This chapter shall remain in effect only until January 1, 1996, and as of tic -`i�h an date is repealed, unless a later enacted statute, which is enacted before January 1, 194E , 'e1 71e deletes or extends that date, y=:ties SEC. 3. Section 65995 of the Government Code is amended to read: �s'•a :r, 65995. (a) Except for a fee, charge, dedication, or other requirement authorized undo t_e!oP":e; Section 53080, or pursuant to Chapter 4.7 (commencing with Section 65970), ro :o '-auras c charge, dedication, or other requirement shall be levied by the legislative body of a 10" ri \othi agency against a development project, as defined in Section 53080, for the constructioer 'eCcin reconstruction of school facilities. r-s�uct (b) In no event shall the amount of any fees, charges, dedications or other req 1 ' I This s ments authorized under Section 53080, or pursuant to Chapter 4.7 (commencing lrol Section 65970), or both, exceed the following: ,"�trr (1) One dollar and fifty cents ($1.50) per square foot of assessable space, in the cased any residential development. "Assessable space," for this purpose, rQns all of square footage within the perimeter of a residential structure, not including any ° walkway, garage, overhang, patio, enclosed patio, detached accessor y structure,or saw ?o• ia: area. The amount of the square footage within the perimeter of a residential strudo n 530� +` 5770 Additions or changes Indicated by undertins; deletions by asterisks ° ��� dea:c r..• r Kr41 S1' � y p ii.� 4,. �r f �Tc r: •'`'SO `� �'�,, ,'p '�' .0 1,'S.� �'�+ •.r. i L4t (.� £a '. ?`,�•,..yap r= JR �, i�• � a " � r ��- 1 ! '. Y. * i' f 4,.7i;+F..r°,j�+s "1r$s t .�t 3+' vd', 1 d'a, i a f *,y`,. '� ,,� "c r Sl+ t-,b't;,,�•�,�_ :. dew.' ^l; ; C,y. � •+�, 'te„iC. +`}.{JSr��,x Iy�p 7f�U'TE1 STATUTESS ®1F,1 1991-1992 REGULAR SESSION ;f a development project, whic$' Ch. 1354 elopment, including a p shall be calculated by the buildingde .striction. Existing law:also pet, in accordance with the standard Praartmentctice of the city or county issuing the building � iivision Map Act, from den structural perimeters. Practice of that city or county in calculating drool facilities. j= (2) In the case of any commercial or industrial development twenty-five cents of its authority to adopt ire per square foot of chargeable covered and enclosed s ace. "Chargeable ($0.25) m either denying approval., enclosed space, for this P Chargeable covered and r imposing conditions;other within the Purpose, means the covered and enclosed space determined to be p g perimeter of a commercial or industrial structure not including on the approval of a pstructure rojecg'i� areas incidental .to the principal use of the development, any storage ��, 10.; unenclosed walkwa or utility or disposal area. P k garage, , Y, The determination of the ch geable t project, as described above,' covered and enclosed space within the perimeter of a commercial or industrial structure the mitigation of environmshall be made by the building department of the city or county grislative action taken by a pu> -=4 in accordance with the buildin s tY issuing the building g tandards of that city or county. . .•J" , ``(3) The amount of the limits set forth in e prospective application..' 1990, and every two years thereafter, according graphs (1) and (2) shall a increased in in the statewide cost index for class B construction, as detto the ermined bustment f or inflation set forth .n (2) and (3) are repealed on tba Board at its January -ity of the voters voting on: ,, _,` �' meeting, which in shall be effective as of th the edatel]of that meeting. The State Allocation Board shall not raise the amount of the ;s district matching share calculated under Section 17705.5 of the Education Code, as a result of the increase i;a '?,�•: under this paragraph lows: , until at least 90 days after the date of that increase• enact a new program (c) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, during p gram for. entered into between a subdivider or builder and a school district, city, wing Principles: '": the term of any contract county, whether general law or chartered, on or before Janu county, or city and should rest with school:dish; �.; payment of a fee, charge, or dedication for the construction of school t rJe '* condition to the a January 1,1, 1sch that requires the icient amount of reven'Ui l approval of residential development, neither Section 53080 nor this ... chapter applies to that residential development.• (2) Any developmetit project for which a final map was approved and of those school districts:hp ;- commenced on or before September 1, 1986, is subject to only the fee,`charge construction dication or other requirement prescnbed in any local ordinance in existence on that date and g�plicabie to the project those school districth" (d) For- • purposes of Section 53080 and this chapter, "residential, commercial, or industri- al development" does not include any facility used exclusively for religious purposes that s for those school districts b thereby exempt from ro =;�' s:• �clusively as a private full-me day school asddescnbed in Section 48222 er the laws of this any facility used added to Chapter 22 of Pam . = Code, or any facility that is owned and occupied by one or more agencies of of the Education ;�`f WtQr)Ocallira government In addition, "commercial or industrial development" includes, but i t'at limited federal state, •.•",, :;' , any hotel, inn, mote], tourist home, or other lodgings aalimum term of occupancy for guests does not exceed 30 days, but not include athe ny r idential hotelA as defined in paragraph (1 anuary 1, 1996, and as of ' � and Safety Code ) of subdivision (b) of Section 50519 of the :acted before January 1; (e) The Legislature finds and declares that the subject of the financingof ' ' halities with development fees is a matter of statewide cone ended to read: l tore hereby occupies the subject matter of mandatomentry school -.•-= ern. For this reason the requirement authorizedent requirements for school facilities finance ttoo theelexclusioneofsal other local with Section 65970), ao te'op� ures on the subject. the legislative body of a Nothing in this section shall be interpreted to limit or prohibit the use 53080, for the constrnc�* eocin a of Chapter 2.5 -, g with Section 53311) of Division 2 of Title 5 to finance the construction or ..•• [ruction of school facilities. dedications, or other This section shall become ino erative on Janus 1 19 hapter 4.7 (comtnencinV J- we ID1ti the date that Assemb ns ituttonal Amendment 693 aof he shall1991-9E2R Deb r fails to receive the a rova of a ma'on <sess able space, in the .-. as o that ate t is sections all become o erativehe voters votin on t easure i purpose, means aD f� re, not including any 4• Section 65995 is added to the Government Code, to read: t,ercce of a structure,or S. (a) F.Ycept for a fee, charge, dedication, or other requirement ter of a residential a ,F.`r; n 53080, or pursuant to p q ement authorized under v •: .• e, dedication; or other requirement hall be levied by the legislative body Asterisks • . (commencing with. Section 65970), no fee, Additions or change, in Dr underline; of a local deletions b r asterisks 5771 .. , '�7LLf 4 -0:Y,tb .yLl I � i ♦ �--, f 117717-3( j A �Fj ° r •. 0 1 .ti a =pig •� aT.mot.' +!, �.s�,. �,. `_ ° .,. A\� -w Xt �c kr'/ /.uyb �,,� ar ��- ;.ary41�,� ej'3 +A,� �(�,9r '�1.. *yy.• ,ei 49i tin} ��'a,'6, }• •` .:z" � #�.jY�••�''Y.,l i;.r .t �•%Y^pi�;l Y�2�•Y `C`�;� f,' may'}A'4.��„ rS°1 7J .Y�,�4• .,� c ,,,T��i'3 •yuty��� Y Ukxi}YF�,' �,}t�. L1�fi t}vr� N •~ �ddJiLrRi'i�.� ~T-?r,a�.a:.' .{.. N Ch. 1354 STATUTES OF.1 9a .: lf91_19 agency against a development project, as defined in Section 53080,whether by administer; five or legislative action, for the construction or reconstruction of school facility (f) Nothin lf�� ._ .�.� (commencing (b) In no event shall the amount of any fees, charges, dedications, or other req� retonstructic ments authorized un4:.4der Section 63080, or pursuant to Chapter 4.7 (commencing � (g) This s( Section 65970), or both, exceed the following: ; A amendment -j (1) One dollar and fifty cents ($1.50) per square fool of assessable space, in the caau: dthe vote: 616 any residential development. "Assessable space," for this purpose, means all of.-,tW SEC. 5. square footage within the perimeter of a residential structure, not including any 65995.3. -0 walkway,garage, overhang,patio, enclosed patio,detached accessory structure,or airwisi area. The amount of the square footage within the perimeter of a residential structj mWnntt o room * shall be calculated by the building department of the city or county issuing the building' permit, in accordance with the standard practice of that city or county in calculating 6overaagrap b ® structural perimeters. ?, constgubparuction construction (2) In the case of any commercial or industrial development, twenty-five cents ($04 (b) This se per square foot of chargeable covered and enclosed space. Chargeable covered.aad ,amendment enclosed space," for this purpose, means the covered and enclosed space determined to l d the votes within the perimeter of a commercial or industrial structure, not including any storiip areas incidental to the principal use of the development, garage,. parking structure SEC. 6. unenclosed walkway, or utility or disposal area. The determinatiofi of the chargeabh 65996. (a1 .r covered and enclosed space within the perimeter of a commercial or industrial struetm environment: shall be made by the building department of the city or county issuing the buddies approval or t permit, in accordance with the building standards of that city or county. &fined in Se AV (3) The amount of the limits set forth in paragraphs (1) and (2) shall be increased is' Public ResoL 1) a 1990; and every two years thereafter, according to the adjustment for inflation set fort! (.. Ch Pto in the statewide cost index for class B construction, as determined by the State Allocation , 1� Chapte. Board at its January meeting, which increase shall be effective as of the date of this' Chapter ' meeting. The State Allocation Board shall not raise the amount of the district matell g share calculated under Section 17705.5 of the Education Code, as a result of the ins _ ) article under this paragraph, until at least 90 days after the date of that increase. Education C< (c) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, during the term of any contrail 2 Section entered into between a subdivider or builder and a school district, city, county, or city slid 2 Chapter county, whether general law or chartered, on or before January 1, 1987, that requires the Government payment of a fee, charge, or dedication for the construction of school facilities sa a Q Chapter a condition to the approval of residential development, neither Section 53080 nor dii rovern-nent chapter applies to that residential development. (b No pub (2) Any development project for which a final map was approved and construction bad 24 Public R commenced on or before September 1, 1986, is subject to only the fee, charge, dedicatim ieay approve or other requirement prescribed in any local ordinance in existence on that date ttrd i tc) This sei applicable to the project. ? :*e u^ntn t_e (d) For purposes of Section 53080 and this chapter, "residential, commercial, or industri• j saon fails al development" does not include any facility used exclusively for religious purposes tlsa t "a`f the is thereby exempt from property taxation under the laws of this state, any facility 1194 SEC. 7, exclusively as a private full-time day school as described in Section 48222 of the Educsti% 66996. (a) Code, or any facility that is owned and occupied by one or more agencies of federal.state, e:*0nrr:er.ta or local government. In addition, "commercial or industrial development" includes,but m 4"9rovai cr t not limited to, any hotel, inn, motel, tourist home, or other lodging for which t'f ► inLtrati� maximum term of occupancy for guests does not exceed 30 days, but does not include am, ':Opp) of the residential hotel, as defined in paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Section 50519 of tl"t `" Health and Safety Code. (1) Chapter .K . (e) The Legislature finds and declares that the subject of the financing of > Chactec facilities with development fees is a matter of statewide concern. For this reason ° Q) Cha ei Legislature hereby occupies the subject matter of mandatory development fees and otb� U) k~;c!e development requirements for school,facilities finance to the exclusion of itil t4z auon Co measures on the subject. q Section 5772 Additions or changes indicated by underline; deletions by asterisks z� ii`•'.. i 'r7' .' ' ;� :'• ',MI.. .f ,��, ''' „ M 'StyWl r • t � SBtYd IJdGO ®�-1 .a� . 1g91-1992 REGULAR SESSION ,i3080, whether by ad Ch. 1354 -construction of school f (f) Nothing in this section shall be interpreted to limit or prohibit the use of Chapter I es, dedications, or other -.Y (commencing with Section 53311) of Division 2 of TStle 5 to finance the construction or Chapter 4.7 (commencing "° meonstruction of school facilities. (g) This section shall remain in effect only until the date that Assembly Constitutional F Amendment 6 of the 1991-92 Regular Session fails to receive the a I assessable space, in the'` d;the voters voting on the measure, and as of that date thispse�ono�ar pealed. this purpose, means all" . SEC. 5. Section 6599b.3 is added to the Government Code, to read: icture, not including any ed accessory structure,or's'• "65995.3. (a) In addition to the fee charge, dedication,or other requirementspecified in -imeter of a"residential atru" subdivision (b) of Section 65995, anadditional fee charge, dedication, or other require- y or county issuing the bull toent of one dollar ($1) per square foot of assessable apace may at city or county in calcu_Ia governing board of a school district against that resi=bpardgntiai construction be the n =stru graphs re and (C) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 53080 for the wmstruction or reconstruction of school facilities. pment, twenty-five cents_",( - pace. "Chargeable cove " -(b) This section shall remain in effect only until the date that Assembly Constitutional enclosed space determiried. Amendment 6 of the 1991-92 Regular Session fails to receive the a'cure, not including any.sto of the voters voting on the measure, and as of that date this psectionois repealed. ,nt, garage, parking stru -SEC. 6. Section 65996 of the Government Code-is amended to read: 'etermination of the charg' 65996. La) The following -nmercial or industrial afro B Provisions shall be the exclusive methods of mitigating or coon g environmental effects related to the adequacy county issuing the b" en tproval or the establishment of conditions for the ap of proval of facilities development tpro'ec the city or county. • •ti tlefined in Section 53080 '�° , pursuant to Division,13 (commencing with Section 21000}of the i) and (2) shall be inc Public Resources Code: :iustment for inflation set,' •21 Chapter 22 (commencing ermined by the State Ali g with Section 17700) of part 10 of the Education Code. ffective as of the date"'i 0 Chapter 25 (commencing with Section 17785) of part 10 of the Education Code. :mount of the district ilia Chapter 28 (commencing with Section 17870) of Part 10 of the Education Code. as a result of the in' Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 39327) of Chapter 3 of Part 23 of he that increase. Education Code. ring the term of any con @ Section 53080 of the Government Code. .istrict, city, county, or� 2Chapter 2.5 (commencing with Section 53311) of Division 2 of Title 5 of the :uary 1, 1387, that req Government Code. ction of school facilities m either Section 53080 nor+ fD Chapter 4.7 (commencing with Section 65970 of Division ' Gosernment Code. ) 1 of Title ? of the J , No public agency s • approved and constructio: Y hall,pursuant to Division 13 (commencing with Section 2100 ,ly the fee, charge, d bltc Resources Code or Division 2 (commencingwith Section 66410} of this ode n existence on that date. 4MY approval of a project on the basis of the adequcy of school facilities. Y ' �e until the ate that Assembl 1 1993 and shall remain inot)era. 11 ential, commercial, or in wn fails to receive the at) royal of tatma�ori of the voters vot n ff 1991-92 Re ]car 3 .y for religious purposes, u of that ate this section s al become o erative. on the measure this state, any facilit3!r SEC. 7• Section 65996 is added to the Government ection 48222 of the Eda ore agencies of federal,' �996. (a) The followingonsnt Code, to read: t="- ievelopment" includes; be the exclusive nmental effects related tothe adequacy of school facilitieswhen s of mitigating Cher lodging for which oval or the establishment of conditions for the a considering the ays, but does not inclu *native or legislative action pursuant to Division 113 (commencing g w project by M of Section 50519-- ) of the Public Resources Code; ( mencmg with Section " �) Chapter 22 (commencingwith ��f th.2 financin of � Cha h Section 17700) of Part 10 of the Education Code. •a R ='� Peer 25 (commencing with Section 17785) of Part 10 of the Education Code. } devek plill-nt fees and �rtic�r�23 (commencing with Section 17870) of Part 10 of the Education Code. the oxclum.on of all' s goon Cud` (commencing with Section 39327) of Chapter 3 of Part 23 of the Section 5:1080 of the Government Code. A[tari[ka � T' t „ Additions or changes Indicated®� underline; deletions by asterisk cated by unru s J??3 •> '. . ,, � �„ h.t��.4�.q r tyoy 'r � ETC R �7• r�dc- �`Sy c2r,�;- d�__�y,•p EW f p1f ��,",� E.'. *fr�- (:. N Ch. 1354 STATUTES of.i M`', "1-1992 REGUI (6) Chapter 2.5 (commencing with Section 53311) of Division 2 of Title 5 of tt The bill would sp Government Code. jat contain designs (7) Chapter 4.7 (commencing with Section 65970) of Division 1 of Title 7 of '� The bill would prc Government Code. y fisting resources c (b) No public agency shall, pursuant to Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000)01 lubbc Instruction obill would I the Public Resources Code or Title 7 (commencing with Section 65000), deny approval of- This project on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities, or impose conditions on Ile istricts when suffic approval of a project for the purpose of providing school facilities that exceed.the (2) The California amounts authorized pursuant to this chapter. fistzicts for.certain (c) This section shall have prospective application only, and shall not affect any act dues for making th; taken by a local agency prior to the effective date of this section. rltnd to pay the cos (d) This section shall remain in effect only until the date that Assembly Constitutional %edures for claim Amendment 6 of the 1991-92 Regular Session fails to receive the approval of a maj This bill would prc of the voters voting on the measure, and as of that date this section is repea Claims Fund for cos at SEC. 8. Section 34 of Chapter 1209 of the Statutes of 1989 is repealed, t tim local agencies zimbursement for tl SEC. 9. (a) The Legislature finds and declares that paragraph (2) of subdivision W of Section 53080 of the Government Code and paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Sectica The people of the , 65995 of the Government Code, as amended by Chapter 1209 of the Statutes of 1989,In SECTION 1. Sect declaratory of existing law. (b) This section shall become operative on the date that Assembly Constitution 31220.5. (a) The I. Amendment 6 of the 1991-92 Regular Session fails to receive the approval of a majority a( (1) The family is o. the voters voting on the measure. - we for, prepare, anc SEC. 10. Sections 1 and 2 of this act shall become operative only upon the approval (2) Social research of Assembly Constitutional Amendment 6 of the 1991-92 Regular Session by a majorkl muse of increased we of voters voting on the measure. criminal activity, (3) The lack of kno, usume parental respe iw contribute substa COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES---COMMUNITY COLLEGES— M Because the sta PARENTING SKILLS AND EDUCATION COURSES usociated with the di: Lid vital interest in ac CHAPTER 1355 13) The Legislature 1.d effective means to S.B. No. 1307 ; -1 use the public ed,, j �portunity to acquire AN ACT to add Section 51220.5 to the Education Code, relating to parenting education. ! cowledge should inc1L [Approved by Governor September 30, 1992.1 f Q) Child developmen [Filed with Secretary of State September 30, 1992.] '21 Effective oarentir 3! Prevention of c--,! LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST � 14) 'utr,*tion. SB 1307, Watson. Parenting education. 3) Household f:nancE (1) Existing law directs the State Department of Education to grant awards, d �) Personal and Earn specified, to support the implementation in school districts of education programs regs.4 r'� Methods, to rornc ing family relationships and parenting. F This bill would require, commencing with the 1993-94 fiscal year, that the adopt ') E:iective decisioni course of study for grade 7 or 8 in each school district include a one-semester course 9) Family and indivic parenting skills and education, as specified, thereby imposing a state-mandated 10'f c) Commencing •,vith program. The bill would require that all pupils beginning grade 7 on or after July 17 shall include th, ec 1993, be offered that course in grade 7 or 8, or both. The bill would require the StO •-cation. All pupil, e' Department of Education to supply each school district that includes grade 7 or 8 =fMe or it_S equi�ale�;t sample curriculum for a course addressing parental skills, as specified. i the Rate De; irm In addition, commencing with the 1993-94 fiscal year, the bill would authorize commaf Zee 7 or 8, a sampl ty colleges to offer parenting skills and education classes to interested individut"' ` x<- ',Pster course or 5774 Additions or changes Indicated by underline; dole lions by asterisks ' Additlons or ` T( -i1 2 4ZM • � k �. � � ac t�• :k • ;' � ,•.for � "f"y:, pi 2S,K .� '`4 , �C p 1§ ,.e.�r i rr^t'� �1 y!� � .{,r �,•�, � � .tY!., ,�, .k ,9:k , i� R' tl i� a. '�l k \ _c 4 ! '.r � 'Y 1. ,j'• r ,aaFt(•' S4 ♦ "1 % i yTJ, J{� o-. -Sn fi - � _:� fSi �,wxrt, lfty'•. l(�-v;�t ,,, �' � t d• 47, ATTACHMENT "C" LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL OPINION p u�• Y. C - 1 k TC -4 ���' set �ampboam t.•• .e _ i' m C i i. 5t M ` ate' Sacramento, California N avow Or December 4, '1992 to"L MUM � � Honorable Millie L. Broldn, JX- 219 State Capitol ���+®®7L FaGil ties Fees 130455 Dear Kr. Brown: ®YT�'s°Sim Ng. 1 Does chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 prohibit a city, county, or city and county. from considering the adequacy of ,school facilities in the course of adopting or implementing a general plan, Zoning ordinance, or other legislative land use policy? OPINION NO. 1 Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 does not prohibit city, . county, or city and county from considering the adequacy of school facilities in the course of adopting- or implementing a general plan, Zoning ordinance, or other legislative land use policy. MALYSIS NO. - I Before assessing the effect of Chapter 1354 of the statutes of 19921 , we consider the existing law regarding the relationship between the development of rsal property and school Facilities construction. This measure is the chaptered version of Senate Bill No. 1287 of the 1991-92 Regular Session. s Honorable Willi* L. Broarn, Jr. - p. 3 - #30455 " Section 65995 also contains two provisions expressing : the Legislature's intent to forbid any local logislation, except as explicitly authorized under the state laws discussed above, that would condition then approval of development accordinq to - impact upon school facilities. First, subdivision (a) of Section _ 65995 prohibits *the legislative. body of any local agency,, including the governing board of a school district (see C lif®rnia Ind SZZX Al2n,6v. Gavernina &,, 206 Cal. App. 3d 2120 224) , from levying any fee or other requirement against as development project to fund the construction or' reconstruction of school facilities except as authorized under Section 53080 or Chapter 4.7 (subd. (a) , See. 65995) . Second, subdivision (a) of Section 65995 expressly declares the intent of the Legislature to preempt local legislation that would require gees or other consideration to be paid as a condition of the approval of development. In this regard, although Secti®r 65995 dots not specifically exclude a local measure that authorizes the denial of a development project on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities, we think that . the restriction placed by the Legislatura upon local legislation that would require that the impact of a development project on school facilities be -mitigated Would be construed to. apply. equally to a local standard that a development project be denied in the absence of that mitigation. A statute is to be construed so as to be given a reasonable result consistent with the legislative purpose, in light of the context of the legislation and its. apparent objective (Cossack v. City = Los Angeles, 11 Cal. 3d 726, 732-733 ; see Clean AIX Cgnstit2._n2y v. California Statg A_U Resources 21.L, 11 Cal. 3d 801, 813) . In addition to the school-related conditions upon development that may be established by local legislative action pursuant to Section 53080 or Chapter 4 .7 , a city or county generally possesses the authority to impose conditions upon the approval of a development project relative to the project's potential burden upon public services or other environmental impact concerns ; this authority may be exercised under existing state law pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, as sat fo-th in Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources code (hereafter "CEQA" ; see Secs . 21002 and 21002 . 1, P. R. C. ; Laurel Uilla H=enwner8 Aaan, v. City Council , 83 cal. App. 3d 515, Sal) and the Subdivision Map Act (Div. 2 (commencing with Sec. 66410) , Title 7) . However, Section 65996, which also is contained in Chapter 4 . 9 , identifies Section 53080 and other specific statutory provisions as the exclusive methods of mitigating environmental effects under CEQA with regard to conditioning the approval of a development project on the adequacy of school facilities, and prohibits any public agency from denying Honorable Willis L. Or , Jr. p. 2 030453 Id i�tina_ � Prior to January 1, 1987, development projects were potentially subject to school facilities leers or other requirements imposed by cities and counties either pursuant to Chapter 4 .7 (consmneinq with Suction 65970) of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Gov t Coda (hereafter otchapter 4 .7") ®r pursuant to their police power generally (See .9kndidfl 'i ass v. (aroma out unim High Aebxml 39 Gal. 3d 878) . Wherit school overcrowding is demonstrated to exi$at, Chapter 4.7 generally prohibits a city or county from approving a rasidenti development unless it first requires, ®accept as specified, that 7 .. land be dedicated, fees be paid, or both, for clazarcomz and related facilities, except as specified (Sacs. 65972 and 65974) . Approval of a residential development includes, for this purpose, the approval of an ordinance rezoning property to a residential use, the granting of a discretionary permit for residential use, or the approval of a tentative subdivision map for residential purposes (see Sec. 65972)-. As of January 1, 1987, however, the law governing school facilities fees and other requirements was amandad by Chapter 887 of the Statutes of 1986. Under that chapter, the Legislatursr•' dried section 53090, granting to school districts the. exprwis athority to levy developer gees and other requirements as "a reasonable mat.hod of financing the expansion and construction' of school facilities resulting from new economic development within the district" (subd. (e) , Sec. 7, Ch. 887 , Stats. 1986) . That authority is expressly made subject, however, to the restrictions set forth in Chapter 4 .9 (commencing with Section 65995) of Division 1 of Title 7 (hereafter i°Chapter 4 . 9" ; para. ( 1) , subd. (a) , Sec. 53080) . Included among those restrictions is section 65995 , which limits the total amount of the developer fees and other requirements to fund the construction or reconstruction ct school facilities that may be levied by school districts under section 53080, by a city or county under Chapter 4 . 7 , or both, to $1. 50 per square foot of assessable space, in the case of residential development, and $0. 25 per square foot of chargeable covered and enclosed space, in the case of commercial or industrial development (subd. (b) , Sec. 65995) . Those dollar limits are increased periodically according to a designated adjustment for inflation (para. (3) , subd. (b) , Sec. 65995) . 2 All section references are to the Government Code , unless therwise indicated. Honorable Willie L. Brown, Jr. ® p. 4 e #30455 pproval of a development project on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities pursuant to CEQA or the Subdivision Vap Act® � The first decision of record in which section 65996 vas judicially con' strued in Mira Ilev21gSM t V. QisgQ, 205 Cal. App. 3d 1201 (hereafter ") , a. Casa in Which, a city council denied a rezoning application that was prerequisite to the approval of a proposed residential development project. In that case, the city council's decision was alleged by the developer to have been based upon the inadequacy of school facilities and, therefore, to have violatedl the prohibitions set forth in section 65996 Mrso supra, P. 1217) . The court in .MiXa began its analysis by distinguishing an application for a "development project, " to which Section 65996 expressly applies, from a request for a zoning amendment. The court hold that a governmental response to an application for the approval of a development project is an adjudicative act, meaning an act that requires the application of an existing rule to a specific set of existing facts ( , supra, pp. 1217-1218; see Land: v. galU=X 21 Monteray, 139 Cal. App. 3d 934, 936) . In contrast, the court characterized a governmental response to a proposed Zoning amendment as a legislative act, which involves• thb formulation- of a generally . applicable ruin or policy .( , supra, p . 2218 ; ve. County o Monterey, supra, p. 936)3. Pursuant. to that distinction, the Mira court characterized section 65996 as a restriction upon only the adjudicative authority of that agency. The court refused to "broaden" the meaning of Section 65996 to include any restriction upon a public agency's authority over proposed zoning amendments or over other matters involving the agency' s exercise of its legislative powers (Mira, supra, p. 1218) . In declining to overturn the city council ' s action on the basis of Section 65996 , the Mira court did not discuss the applicobility to the city council ' s action of subdivision (e) of Section 65995 , or of any other aspect of the preemption doctrine. Thus , the Mira decision failed to address expressly whether subdivision (a) of Section 65995, rather than Section 65996, would be construed to preempt the city council , in the exercise of its legislative powers, from denying a rezoning application on the basis of school facilities impact. s As a legislative act, a zoning decision is afforded more deference than a public agency' s adjudicative decisions (Mira, supra , p. 1218 ; arnel Development Co. v. City of Costa Mesa , 28 Cal . 3d 511 , 522) . • 8® Honorable Willis L. Brown, Jr. p. 5 ® 430455 Subsequent judicial decisions have elaborated, however, upon the scope of Sections 65995 and 65996 in that regard. N. Regional 21-apping 226 Cal. App. 3d 1612 (her tter " ") , involved the refusal of a county to consider the school facilities i=Pact of a proposed zoning change. The court declared that subdivision (e) of Section 65995 preempts only Nr quirements for school finance that a local agency will impose •on a dey0looment ProJectu Jamphasis in original) . .The court explained that, because the local legislative decision in did not involve requirements to be i=pas&d on a development project, but, rather, the legislative enactment of "land-use 3olicies" (emphasis in original) , that decision was not preempted by section 65995 or any other provision'-..,' ' 'Of Chapter 4. 9 (see Uxr, v v. 21 Riyersid®, 228 Cal. App. 3d 1.2121 1230; hereafter "Mu=ieta") Based upon that distinction, the court concluded that the county was not restricted by state late from considering school facilities impact with respect to its decision to grant 'or deny the proposed zoning change (Id. , pp. 1626-1627) . A similar analysis was employed in M meta, supra. In that case, the county approved an amendment to its general plan to permit additional. development to occur as a matter of land use- policy, without considering, pursuant to the requirements of CEQA, the school facilities impact of that general plan amendment (Id�,,- pp. 1218®1219) . The court described a general plan as a "basic land use charter governing the direction of future land use in the local jurisdiction, " and held that the amendment of a general plan is a legislative act that does not involve the approval of 'a "development project" for purposes of Section 65996 (Id. , pp. 1230®1231) . Further, the preemption in subdivision (e) of Section 65995 was held by the court to relate only to the financing of school facilities with development Lees, "a far cry from stating that a public agency cannot include in a general plan amendment land use and development objectives and standards to mitigate the amendment ' s potential negative effects on adequacy of school facilities" (Id. , p. 1234 , fn. 16) . The court concluded, consequently, that neither subdivision (e) of Section 65995 nor Section 65996 preempts a county, when considering a general plan amendment that may . adversely affect the existing condition of inadequate school facilities in a school district, from "considering and providing feasible land use and development mitigating measures" as required by CEQA. The court suggested that these measures could include, for example, the reduction of residential densities or the controlled phasing of residential development within the attendance areas of the school district having inadequate school facilities (Murrieta, supra, p. 1234) . n � , ' 1 Honorable Willis L. Brown; Jr. p. 6 - #30455 The restrictions established in Chapter 4.9 have been construed by the courts, accordingly, to apply to the 10CAl -� imposition of conditions on the approval of individual developmeft projects, but not to the local adoption or amendment of general land use policies. To ize,' section 65995 precludes local agencies, including cities and counties, from adopting any lagislativi .requirement, except to the extant authorised by Section 53050 and Chapter 4 .7, that impose* fees as a 'condition to approval of a development project in order to reduce the project®s negative impact on school facilities (see x, , supra, p. 1334, fn. 16) . Section 65996, in our view, requires that, in the exercise of local adjudicative authority to require under CEQA that -the school facilities impact of a development project be mitigated, only the statutory remedies identified in that section may be utilized, with the result that a local goverraaantal agency =y not amploy CEQA to require individual development projects to otherwise mitigate school facilities as a condition of receiving approval. However, pursuant to the authority discussed above, we conclude that Chapter 4 .9 does not prohibit a city, county, or city and county from- cons.idtring the adequacy of school facilities in the course of adopting or implementing legislative land use policy in the force, for example, of a general plan or zoning ordinance. .�. We next must determine the extent to which the changes in Chapter 4 . 9 made by Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 will alter the existing law described above. 11 . Zffect of Chaotar 13,54 of the Statutes of 1992 Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 amends Sections 65995 and 65996 , and adds and repeals those sections, with the effect that additional language is added to those sections, effective January 1, 1993 , but if Assembly Constitutional Amandnent No. 6 of the 1991-92 Regular Session tails to receive the approval of a majority of the voters voting on that measure, Sections 65995 and 65996 will revert to the versions of those sections in effect under existing law as described above. This analysis will address the changes made by Chapter 1354 of the ;f Honor le Willie L. Brovny Jr. p® 7 #30455 __-catut®s of 1992 Sections 65995 and 65996 that will,: on Janus 1, 1993 We initially consider the provisions .of CkkaPtar 1394 of- the statutes of 1992 that revise Section 65995. Chapter 1.354 of the Statutes of 1992 revises a ivisi, (a) of Section 65995 to read a follovat Y '165995. a) Except for a fee charge, , . : dedication, or other requirement authorized Section 53080, or pursuant to Chapter 4.7 (commencing with Section 65970) , no fee, ch . P •' .,'.¢,. dedication, or other requirement shall be levied y. the legislative body of a local agency against a development project, as defined in Section 5308 ® r whether hyadm�nistratfv� lagiItive for the construction or reconstruction of school facilities. " (Now hording indicated in underline. ) Thus, while the currant provisions of Section 6599.5 rohibit cities, counties, or other local agencies from levying any fee or other requirement, except to the extent authorized by section 53080 and Chapter 4 .7 , as a condition to approval of a development project in order to fund the construction or reconstruction of school facilities, Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 will revise that section to specify that this prohibition applies to the levying of fees or other requirements "wl}ithar by administrative or legislative action. " Generally speaking, a legislative act is described as a governmental act that prescribes a new policy or plan; are administrative act, -by comparison, is an act undertaken to carry out the legislative policies and purposes established by the legislative body (Eishm= V. City 21 Pa10 Alto, 86 Cal . App. 3d gob, 509) . An act is administrative, rather than legislative, if it involves, for example, the determination of specific rights under axisting law with regard to a specific fact situation (Mountain p7efanse LA&glm V. BQArd Supervisors, 65 Cal . App. 3d 723 , 728-729) . 4 Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 also adds Section 65995 . 3 . which will be discussed in Analysis No. a . Honorable Willie L. Draim, Jr. j9. 8 .. $30455 Based upon that distinction, the approval of a development project, including the issuance of any parxit, the granting of- toning variances and conditional use permits, and the approval of tentative subdivision maps is considered an _ administrative act (Igart, supra, p• 1625; LAndi v. ngnterev, supra, p. 936) . By contrast, the approval of a zoning amendment or the amendment of a general plan is not limited in scope to a specific attempt to develop, and is characterized, therefore, as a legislative act ( , supra, p. 1625; see U=ieta, supra, pp. 1230-1231) . Thus, section 65995, as revised by Chapter 1354 of the statutes of 1.9920 will expressly prohibit a city, county, city and . county, or other local agency from either establishinq legislative - standards, or applying any legislatively established standard, so as to requite, as a condition of the approval of any development project, that a fee ba paid or other requirement be mat for the purpose of funding school facilities construction or reconstruction, other than as levied pursuant to Section 53080 or Chapter 4 . 7 . An discussed above, existing law already limits the exercise- of legislative authority to impose a school facilities tee or other requirement against a development proltet. Section 65995, in its current: f orm, prohibits the legislative body, of any local agency from establishing any requirement that a . development - project comply with a school facilities fee or other requirement, other than pursuant to Section 53080 or chapter 4 . 7 , and preempts tre, subj,ect matter of the financing of school facilities from that source as a matter of statewide concern (subds. (a) and (e) , Sec. 65995) . Farther, Section 65996 currently identities Section 53080 and other specific statutory provisions as the exclusive methods of mitigating environmental effects under CEQA with regard to conditioning the approval of a development project on the adequacy of school facilities, and prohibits any public agency from denying approval of a development -project on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities pursuant to CEQA or the Subdivision Map Act. ' Consequently, while existing law limits the authority of a local agency to require that a development project provide financial mitigation of its school facilities irpact in the course Of the agency ' s administrative implementation of Section 53080 and CEQA, the revision to Section 65995 made by Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 further prohibits a local agency from requiring that mitigation in its administrative implementation of any other legislative authority. a HoUcrabIs Willie L. BrOlMe Jr. p® 9 - #30435 - -- We turn na= to the provisi®ne of chapter 1354 of V=- - of 1992 t on 65996. Section .," . revlcod by chapter2354 Of the Statutes of 1922® routs -as :fc .-: '65996®' 111 The following proViSiong Shall . . be the exclusive nothods .of mitigating envircraftantal effects related to the adequacy of school facilities when considering the approval 10= the establi ent of conditions for e a rova.l. of = a development, project atiyeAgti= purnuant, to. " Division 13 (cozmancinq with section 21000) of •:� - Public Resources Code® - Chapter 22 (co=encinq with Section 17700) of part 10 of the Education Coda. Chapter 25 (co=encinq with Section 17755) Of Part 10 of the Education Code® °® } LU Chaptar 28 (co oncing with Section 17870) Of Part 10 of the Education Code. "+d - 1-41 Article 2.5. (commencing with Section . 39327) of Chapter 3 of Part 23 of the Education Code. Code. "-f-ee#- IJU Section 53080 of the Government Chapter 2 . 5 (commencing with Section 53311) of Division . 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code. "J-9}- 121 Chapter 4 .7 (co=encing with Section 65970) of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code. 18 (b) No public agency shall , pursuant to Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code or Title � ( ornaiencin2 �jg� Sanction g� 0) , deny approval of a project on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities,, or impose condisigns o-r the approval of t A PXMI moose Qg trovidinc dcbgal facilities that e c amounts authorised Pursuant -t-a- this cha ter. Honorable Millie L. Drown® Jr. - p. 10 - #30455 "InI have 12r032ective •`� aonlication n2I Aff= AM aaancy. i2rio 12 = af®ctiye l data ng thissecti®fl. "JAI =Is section shall ramain In A mbIX Cons to �onal 19 -� _®__n fails receive tha AppXQY&I = IL u ®zip at votern mD,asure. and m al that data this 629119n I& r®veale�. a (Changes in wording indicated in strikeout and underline. ) tie, begin with the first substantive revision made to Section 65996 by Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 , to the affect that the limitations set forth in that section expressly apply to local mitigation "by administrative or legislative .action" of school facilities impact pursuant to CEQA. Section 21082 of the Public Resources Code, a provision of CEQA, expressly authorizes all public agencies to adopt local legislative measures for the evaluation of projects and the preparation of environmental impact reports and negative declarations pursuant to CEQA. Consequently, this first revision to section 65996 will specify that the restrictions set,.forth in that section apply not only to local administrative action taken under CEQA to require that a development project mitigate its impact on school facilities , but also to mitigation requirements under CEQA that may be imposed under local legislative measures, as may ba adopted pursuant to Section 21082 of the Public Resources Code. The second substantive revision to Section 65996 made by Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 addresses the provision of t::at section that currently prohibits a public agency from denying approval of a project on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities pursuant to CEQA or the Subdivision Map Act. This revision deletes the specific reference to the Subdivision Map Act , as set forth in Division 2 (commencing with Section 66410) of Title 7, instead applying that prohibition to the exercise of local authority under Title 7 (co=encing with Section 65000) in its entirety (hereafter the 11Planning and Zoning Law'') . The Subdivision Map Act provides for the regulation and control of the design and improvement of subdivisions and grants power for that purpose to the legislative bodies of local agencies, including the authority to adopt ordinances to regulate the design and improvement of subdivisions (Secs . 66411, 66418 , 66419 , and 66421) . Honorable Willis L. Brown® Jr. a- p. 11 — #30455 . They Planning and Zoning Law, .which includes the subdivision MAp Act, also includes, for example, Chapter 3 (c cing with Section 65100) of Division 1 of Titl . 7, which contains various provisions governing the adoption or amendment of - a general plan. Rvery city or county, whethar chartexedor general law, is required under that chapter to adopt a - - co=prehansive, long-term general plan, containing specific mandatory elements for the physical development of the city Or county (Sacs. 65300, 65303, and 65700) . Also within the Planning and Zoning Law is Chapter 4 (commencinq with Section 65500) of Division 1 of Titles 7, which , seats forth certain limitations upon local authority ever zoning- Ths *powtr of a city or county to zones is not granted by the gi lature, but derives from the broad "police powesrzu COnfOrred on them by section 7 of Article XX of the California Constitutiem alsr per V. Cotane� 1, 31 Cal. App. 3d 480 63 , disapproved on other grounds, soeiatesd E2M Builders v. Livetr6re, is Cal. 3d 5820 596, fn. 14) and, in the case of charter cities, and cities and counties with authority over municipal affairs, from the chart (Secs. 5 and 6, Art. XI, Cal. Coast. Aeles V. a"ar 1g1knt 21 Healthe 63 Cal. App. 3d 473, 479) . Thus, this revision to Section 65996 prohibits a public agency from denying approval of a project on the basis of the ` -- adequacy of school facilities, not only when acting pursuant to the subdivision Map Act, but also when acting pursuant to ' othesr provisions of the Planning and Zoning Law, including, but not limited to, the adoption or amendment of a general plan or zoning law® Although the adoption or amendment of a general plan or zoning law, as a legislative action, ordinarily involves the establishment of categorical land use policy rather than the approval of a development project (see Murrieta, supra, pp. 1230- 1231. : Hart , supra , pp. 1626-1627) , the apparent effect of this revision will be to specifically prohibit the inclusion within a general plan or zoning law of any provision that would authorizes the denial of individual development projects on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities. In addition to revising Section 65996 to prohibit a public agency, pursuant to CEQA or the Planning and Zoning Law, from denying approval of a project on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities , Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 adds an express prohibition upon the imposition of conditions on the approval of a project for the purpose of providing school facilities that exceed the amounts authorized pursuant to Honorable Willie L. Brown, Jr. - p. 12 - #30455 chapter 4.9 . Thus, Section 65996 Will specifically preclude a public agency from exercising its authority under CZQA or the Planning and Zoning Late, as.discussed above, to require that school facilities fees or other requiremants,, in excess of the amounts 'authorized tinder 'Chapter 4.9, be paid on behalf of any development project as a condition of approval. To summarize,. while existing law limits the authority of a local agency to require that a development project provide financial mitigation of its school facilities impact in the courze of the agency's administrative impleffientation of Section 53080 and CEQA, the revision to Suction 65995 made by Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 further prohibits a local agency from requiring that mitigation in its administrative implementation of any other legislative authority. The revisions made to Section 65996 made by. Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 specify that the restrictions set forth in that section apply not only to local administrative action taken under CEQA to require that a development project mitigate its impact on school facilities, but alffio to mitigation requirements under CEQA that may be imposed under local legislative measures, . as may be adopted pursuant to Section 21052 of the Public Resources Coda. In addition, those revisions specifically prohibit the inclusion within a general plan or zoning law of any provision that Would authorize the denial of individual `s development projects on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities, and preclude a public agency from exercising its administrative or legislative authority under CEQA or the Planning and Zoning .Law, as discussed above, to require that school ' facilities fees or other requirements, in excess of the amounts authorized under Chapter 4 . 9 , be paid on behalf of any development project as a condition of approval. The revisions made to sections 65995 and 65996 by chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 do not purport to address, however, the authority of a local agency to consider the adequacy of school facilities in any context other than the approval of individual development projects, consequently, based upon the analysis set forth above, it is our conclusion that chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 does not prohibit a city, county, or city and county from considering the adequacy of school facilities in the course of adopting or implementing a general plan, zoning ordinance, or other legislative land use policy. • o Honorable Willis L. Brown, Jr. p. 1.3 #30455 a i tarn&t i ye Construct ion o Chanter 1354 of the Statutsm ni You have asks that we consider an alternative interpretation of the revisions made to Sections 65995 and 65926 by Chapter 1354 of the Statutes Of 1992. This alternative argument posits that the legislative intent underlying those . revisions was to revise the meaning of the term "developmarxt prof ct,,10 as used in Sections 65995 and 65996, to include thm legislative action of- a local agency in adopting or amending a general plan or zoning law to establish land use policy. According to this argument, the effect of this construction would be that a local agency would be prohibited by those sections, an - revised by Chapter 1354 of the Statutas of 1992, from tAking into account the impact •on school facilities in deciding on the adoption or amendment of a general plan or zoning law. As quoted above, Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 revises Section 65995 to state that, except as authorized under Section 53080 or Chapter 4 .7 , "no fee, charges dedication, or other requirement shall be levied by the legislative body of a lo(.al agency against a development project, as defined in Section 5308o , uhatbgr ky admi istratimS legislative action. .fox the- construction- or reconstruction of school facilities" (emphasis * ' dded to denote language inserted by eh. 1354 , Stats. 1992) . To begin with, Section 65995, as revised by Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 , retains from existing law the phrase Sea development project, as defined in Section 53080. 11 This is inconsistent with the contention that Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 should be interpreted as a revision of the definition of the term °tdeveloprient project. ,, , More importantly, the only apparent reasonable construction of the clause "whether by administrative or legislative action" within the context of the provision of Section 65995 quoted above, in our opinion, is that the clause modifies the "levying11 by a legislative body of a fee, charge, dedication, or other requirement. It is our view, as expressed in the discussion above, that "whether by administrative or legislative action" is clearly an adverbial clause in this context that addresses the methods pursuant to which that levying of fees or other requirements may occur. The alternative argument requires an interpretation that the phrase "whether by administrative or legislative action" was inserted in Section 65995 after "a development project, as defined in Section 53080" to further define "development project" to mean any administrative or legislative action. In our opinion, it is an unreasonable construction to suggest that the noun "development Honorable Willi* L. nrovn, Jr. p. 14 030455 pproject" was modified by the clause "whether by administrative off' legislativo action" to express the meaning that "development project" in defined to include, for. purposes of Section 65995, any administrative or legislative action. Had the Legislature . actually intended than result, we think it probable that the definition of "development project" in Section 53080 would have been amended or, alternatively, that a statement would have been added to Chapter 4 .9 to the effect that "development project" includes any "administrative or legislative action.14 Furthermore, this alternative interpretation would result in the simultaneous combination within Section 65995 of two inconsistent definitions of the term "development project." JU noted above, Section 65995, is revised by Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992, contains the express reference "a development project, as defined in Section 53080." Section 53080 detinas "development project" to mean "any project undertaken for the purpose of development, and includes a project involving the issuance of a permit for construction or reconstruction, but not a permit to operate". (para. (2) , subd. (a) , See. 53080) . Although "Project" is not defined by 9ectich 53080, 'that term .is defined elsewhere in the Planning and Zoning Law to mean "any activity involving the issuance . to a person of a lease; permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement for use by one or more public agencies" (Sec. 65931) .. A phrase or expression may be interpreted in accordance with its use in other related statutes (Fredi ni v. Qom, 215 Cal. App. 2d 1270, 133) . Therefore, for purposes of Section 65995 , "development project" means an activity undertaken for the purpose of development that involves a public agency ' s issuance to a person of a lease, permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement for use. As so defined, the term "development project"' has been held by the courts to exclude legislative action by a public agency involving the adoption or amendment of general plans and zoning laws (see Mira, supra , p. 1218 ; Nandi v. County = Mgatereyl supra, p. 936) . A construction to the effect that Section 65995 Purports to define "development project" as specified in Section 53080 and, simultaneously, to mean any "administrative or legislative action" of the legislative body of a local agency would thus be internally inconsistent and, consequently, unreasonable . Section 65996 is revised by Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 to state that designated provisions "shall be the exclusive methods of mitigating environmental effects related to the adequacy of school facilities when considering the approval or the establishment of conditions for the approval of a development Project, a fined in Geetion s3ea hy adminiistratiye or ?.g1s1ativa on pursuant to (cEQAJ "' (changes in wording Honorable Willie L. BroWn, Jr. m P• 15 430455 indicated in strikeout and underline) . The analysis not forth gave with raqaxd to the inclusion in Section 65995 of the clause "wheth by -administrative or legislative action" also applies in this parallel cone , to the effect that the clauze "by administrative or legislative action" in Section 65995 zay be construed reasonably, in our view, to refer only to the methods of mitigation utilized .by local agencies when considering the apprcvaj of a development project (see Murrista, supra® p. 1233, fn. 15) Finally, tha legal impact of defining "development project" in Sections 65995 and 65995 to include any "administrative or legislative action" would not appear to have the alleged result of prohibiting a city or county Cram taking into account the impact on school facilities in deciding on the adoption or affiendmant of. a general plan or zoning law® In Section 65995, defining "development project" to include any administrative or legislative act would have the literal effect of prohibiting the legislative 'body of a local agency from levying, other than pursuant to Section 53080 or Chapter 4 .7 , a school facilities fee, charge, dedication, or other requirement against, for example, the legislative -act of adopting or amending a general plan or zoning law. Similarly, in Section 65996, defining ,,development project" to include any administrative or legislative act would have the literal effect of restricting the Mitigation requirements that may be imposed by a local agency under CEQA against its adoption or amendment of a general plan or zoning law. 3 The deletion by Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 of the phrase " , as defined in Section 53080, t1 from Section 65996 could be argued to reflect the legislative intent to revise the meaning of the term "development project, " as used in that section. The Legislature cannot be presumed to have indulged in idle acts (Stafford v. Rea ty Bond Service Co=-,, 39 Cal . 2d 797 , 805 ; p o e v. Folty, 170 Cal . App. 3d 1039 , 1056) . However, Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 does not purport to add language. to Section 65996 that reasonably may be construed to replace the definition of "development project" set forth in Section 53080 . Consequently, pursuant to. the rule of statutory construction that a phrase or expression may be interpreted in accordance With its use in other related statutes (Frediani, v. gta , 215 Cal . App. 2d 127 , 133 ) , we conclude that 10development project" would have the same meaning in Section 65996 as it does in Section 65995 , which defines the term by express reference to Section 53o80 and by use of the definition of the tern "project" in a related section, namely Section 65931 . Xnnorable Willie L. Brown, Jr. - p. 16 - #30455 It is well settled that, in construing a statute, a court may use., a vide variety of extrinsic aide, such as the history of the atatuta, committee reports, staff bill reports, - legislative debates, unpassed amendatory legislation, and evan letters of legislative intent (sae Ig Xj Marriagg g; , 16 Cal. 3d 583, 590-591t EsQ01A v. Suoerigj Cou (A=ur, , 199 Cale App. 3d 4949 499-500) . In this case, for example, the Senate Third Reading analysis of July 30, 1992, states that " [b,y setting the fee cap as are exclusive method for mitigating school impacts: when considering 'legislative' actions, (S.B. 1287] reverses the effect of the Mira decision. " It is equally true, however, that legislative intent may be given effect only if it can reasonably be inferred from the language of the act (see Coulter. v. Pao]., 187 Cal. 181, 185-laws GoQ rich, 160 Cal. 410, 416-417 ; see also Anderson V. Jame„gran CO3M a , 7 Cal . 2d 60, 66-68) . In this case, for the reasons set forth above, it is our opinion that the legislative' intent suggested by the Senate Third Reading analysis, • and by the alternative argument addressed in this discussion, cannot reasonably be inferred from the language in Sections 65995 and 65996 as revised by Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 . We conclude, accordingly, , that this alternative construction of those sections would not be adopted by the courts. ATTACHMENT 2 I PREVIOUSLY DISTRIBUTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL. COPIES ARE ON FILE IN THE CITY CLERKS OFFICE, COMMITNI'd'Y DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, AND AT THE CENTRAL LIBRARY REFERENCE DESK ATTACHMENT 3 11 �� ATTACHMENT 4 ATTACHMENT NO. 4 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10 (ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCEI 1. Code Amendment No. 91-32 is consistent with the requirements set forth in the California GovemmentCode, Title 7, Division 1, Planning and Zoning, and Division 2, Subdivisions. 2. Code Amendment No. 91-32 implements the policies of the Huntington Beach General Plan as provided in the California Government Code, Title 7, Division 1,Planning and Zoning, and Division 2, Subdivisions, and in the California Constitution, Chapter 11, Section 7. 3. Code Amendment No. 91-32 is consistent with the Open Space and Conservation Element of the General Plan by including provisions to a. allow development while preserving and protecting properties with geographical and topographical features and significant historic, scenic and archaeological value; b. manage and preserve water resources; and C. ensure adequate properties are available for open space and recreational purposes. 4. Code Amendment No. 91-32 is consistent with the Seismic-Safety Element of the General Plan by including provisions to regulate development in the floodplain consistent with the recommendations of the California Department of Water Resources and to regulate oil related activities. 5. Code Amendment No. 91-32 is consistent with the Noise Element of the General Plan by including provisions to separate noise generating uses from sensitive uses such as residential and public-semipublic uses. 6. Code Amendment No. 91-32 is consistent with the Recreation Element of the General Plan by including provisions that require dedication of land for park and recreational facilities or payment of parkland dedication in-lieu fees. 7. Code Amendment No. 91-32 is consistent with the Circulation Element of the General Plan by including provisions to require sufficient on-site parking for all uses in the City of Huntington Beach and to minimize adverse environmental and aesthetic effects created by parking facilities. 8. Code Amendment No. 91-32 is consistent with the Scenic Highways Element of the General Plan by including a. building design criteria to enhance the street scene and to reduce building bulk; b. additional landscape requirements along scenic corridors; and RCA 9/19/94 G:RCA:CD94-60r1 4 C. design Frev ew for development in and adjacent to public-semipublic districts, adjacent to State highways,-,and within redevelopment project areas. 9. Code Amendment No. 91-32 is consistent with the Housing Element of the General Plan by including provisions for a variety of housing opportunities by type, tenure, and cost for households of all sizes throughout the City. 10. Code Amendment No. 91-32 is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan by including provisions that address community appearance; parks, recreation and open spaces; natural resources; shoreline; housing; community facilities; residential development; commercial development;tourism; industrial development;high-rise development; and public-semipublic uses. 11. Code Amendment No. 91-32 is consistent with the Community Facilities Element of the General Plan by including a balanced community statement that ensures that prior to approval of any discretionary application it can be established that the development will be supported by adequate public facilities and services. 12. Code Amendment No. 91-32 is consistent with the Coastal Element of the General Plan by including provisions that implement the Coastal Act. 13. Code Amendment No. 91-32 is consistent with the Growth Element of the General Plan by including provisions that address transportation demand and parks and recreation facilities. RCA9/19/1994 2 G:RCA:CD94-60r1 bi'lli- / z/ Fi [/ d� z. r • RECEIVE: OTY '.LERK VTY li: RUNTINGTON August 11, 1994 � ?"/6 Huntington Beach City Clerk 2000 Main St. Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Dear Sir/Madam: I am unable to attend the City Council meeting on 8/15/94. However, by the placement of my signature, I certify that I am a registered voter residing in the City of Huntington Beach and I am opposed to the proposal pending before the City Council that would prohibit RV's and/or boats from being parked in the driveways or side yards of private residences. Sincerely, Lisa L. Biakanja Krist A. Biakanja III 20732 Alicante Lane 20732 Alicante Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Hutington Beach, CA 92646 13 AUG U- e hUNTINGTON BEACH CITY CLERK 2000 riAIN ST. HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92646 l r t August 15, 1994 i`' AUG 15 094 City Councilman Jim Silva iT"i �r ✓� �b=ra( Huntington Beach, Ca. W CITY OMC Subjects Possible Further Restrictions Relative to Parking Recreational Vehicles Gentlemen/Ladies, I just learned only last week through a neighbor, that this body was considering prohibiting the parking of recreational vehicles on citizens (owners) residential property. It is the nur-cose of this letter to advise you that I strongly object to this -Dossibility. First off, my wife and I , both retired, moved to and bought our home in Huntington Beach in 1971, ancroximately 23 years ago. Even at that time we had a small camping trailer, since worn out and replaced by a new trailer some three years ago. In all this time, see attached picture, we have never had any negative comment from anyone in the neighborhood objecting to our narking same in front of our home. To the contrary, comments we have received have been Dostive (what a nice trailer, are you enjoying it, etc. etc, may we see inside? , we are considering buying one for ourselves, etc. ) During our working years, we worked hard in order to have our nice home, automobile, trailer and in anticipation of later when we hoped to enjoy same. ode now live on a fixed and relatively modest income and when something like this comes along, it is not un-noticed. It would cost us $600-$800 ner year to nark this vehicle elsewhere and would be very inconvenient and would do nothing for the city. 14e need these kinds of moneys for medical, dental bills, insurance, taxes, etc. etc._ There are thousands of recreational vehicles being -parked in the same relative fashion. If you were to force storage elsewhere, where is elsewhere? Storage facilities would not be available. Do you want more storage facilities built? If so , Jhere? I would also remind you that these type facilities don't help the environment at all. Despite the cost/inconvenience vroblem.s pointed out above, we also use the vehicle as an emergency shelter sYTould this be required. As you know Huntington Beach is on an earthquake fault area and as citizens we are supposed to stock provisions should a quake occur. Je use our trailer for this purpose since it is self-contained (water, gas, shelter, and sewage -orovisions) r.vhich would carry us over for a short period while city facilities are being organized and provided. As mentioned Trior in this letter, we are elderly people, ( 74 and 67) and we must elan ahead for such emergencies, if we intend to survive. 1 � In closing, we implore you to not do anything that would upset the status quo as it now exists. above all, do not restrict the -oarking of recreational vehicles on owner/residence' s property. `lery truly yours, Robert and Fern Dittmer 16332 Redlands Lane Huntington Beach, Ca. 92647 ( 714) 842-5927 ,r d h5 i�t0 y b ,n aM AUG 1 5 1994 N:" 3 ?"'PS R97" IR 51;� 1 OtU{iJijliii aye�t(tj� CA 92646 f 77 C ' f LEISURE TIME SALES Bob&Jean Polkow 21772 Oceanview Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92646 (714) 962.4010 t:ITINGTAH BCH, CA 92646 �1. 3 : 1 �. 1 �o �--� ���j D Jo Smith 15571 Pelican Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92649 August 3 , 1994 Linda Moulton-Patterson, Mayor City Councilmembers City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Re : Proposed Ordinance Prohibiting Rv' s From Driveways As a 33 .year resident and property owner of the City of Huntington Beach, I would like to state that I am OPPOSED to the proposed ordinance prohibiting me from parking my RV on my private property(driveway) . It is a well maintained RV--not an obstruction to the citizens or an eyesore. Giving it up or housing it off my property is not an option. The following questions remain though about adopting such an ordinance : --What is the pressure behind adopting this ordinance --Are the staff responsible for introducing this ordinance RV owners and residents of Huntington Beach . --What will the next ban be that will infringe on the rights of citizens utilizing their own property I urge you not to adopt this ordinance. Jo Smith c �rYr ;FR : t i' f �tIfHT! £ AUG 5 S l August 1 , 1994 City Council City Clerk 2nd Floor Huntington Beach, CA 92648 ATTN: Connie: To Whom It May Concern: I have just been informed of the Proposed Ordinance that would disallow motorhomes in drive areas of Huntington Beach. I am very against the ordinance of not allowing the parking of the vehicles in the drive. The reasons for moving to Huntington Beach was the fact that we could park our vehicles at our home, to have access to our motorhome at all times and to be assured that it would be cared for and not broken into easily. It is our feeling that we should be able to continue parking our vehicles on our property. Sincerely, Jean and Fred Breneman D� R E C PY E D, MY CLEA VIT I OF HUNTIN97ZI Slmn E v &UG -J� -J� WAIRIjull Evul sk x0as the esT dyluke umv, 4,wr x to cat Oro, serve Oro-Everg0c), rievis but wir neic'! VA are not Mque v As ver".. !ai 211 n f. COWBOYS _ BILL ESTES MD Emergency KIDIANS� ®torho inn It's like going hack in time to the . I days of the Old West when you and your family visit Cheyenne frontier Days.And,in a way,you are.It is,after all,an annual �. western celebration than; been mong the multitude of possi- least, not at night—to the scene going on for almost a century. We uses for a motorhome is of what was probably the most one that no one wants to have frightening experience of their lives. Sure,tllere'sa rodeo.The biggest to try:emergency shelter. I recently Formerly safe havens,our homes ( outdoor rodeo in the country. had occasion to test this aspect of had become menacing,with each And sure there are terrific shows motorhoming and found it to be very aftershock forcing us to wonder if : every night.But there's practical. But 1 don't recommend it it might be another big quake that K" a lot more to Cheyenne as very entertaining. might be even more frightening and t: frontier Days. Our home was hit by the ea11111- du even more daruage.The situation w quake that struck several areas of created a whole new appreciation of Southel•n California in mid-Janucuy, RVs fol'111c. I suspect it(lid as well and while the house survived with for others who were lucky enough �J'J „•,i;yu� 111OdL'1'ale damage, we were among to have unc—and (ur those who , 4 rot Ticketsand Intonnnlion f the thousands of residents who did wished they did. } ( ; Call 1 800 221 6336 I not find the idea of sleeping in our While earthquakes are rather } Cheyenne,Wyoming USA own beds thereafter very enticing. hard On buildings,they don't give As you may recall, the earthquake motorhome suspensions much of t , dished out a violent pounding at a challenge.Traveling America's about 4:30 a.m., followed by hun- highways can be subsLantially more f dreds of aftershocks that have con- claunling—especially those routes .' finned,at this writing,for more than Thal are part of our well-publicized, a week. so-called "crumbling infrastruc- � ' f Fortunately,none of us was injured, ture."But there is help—maybe but the shock of being awakened in not inlnlediately for the highways, the dark by such violence and by very but for motorhome suspensions . o I loud crashing noises(everything in that don't adequately isolate road the house being thrown out of the shock from the coach and its occu- x; cupboards,and neighbors'chinmeys pants.You'll find a comprehensive falling)was,to put it mildly,memo- guide to add-on suspension systems ! rabic.In terms of a motorhome trip, on page 56. it could be described as something Also in this issue is a test report ' akin to riding in the rear of a coach on Airstream's new Classic 36,out- at about 20 mph,without a seat belt, first opportunity to review the coach Over railroad tics spaced about three following its redesign and the de- ` feet apart.The sound effects and parture lrOrll the fully rounded tradi- T304 Stainless Ste0'RV the disorientation we left were inde- tional Airstream exterior shape.As and Tow Vehicle Exhaust scribable. you can see on our cover and in the I have always felt that motorhomes report on page 50, the manufacturer patented racln BORLA PERFORMANCE utilizes its famous are the best wayto travel,and have was able to take sonle Of the con- you exhaust technology to enable you to get max mum power from your recrea- appreciated their potential as einer- tOUr•Out Of the roof line without de- tlonal or tow vehicle.With the engine running more efficiently, BORLA Exhaust also In. gency vehicles, hilt there is Ilothing tracling froin the classic Airstream creases gas mileagel And,the durability of like the real thing to give it person image—quite an impressive job. aircraft-quality T-304 Stainless Steel combined with BORLA's written mililon-mile warranty Serious appreciation.Out-house was And, this Issue includes descrlp- means carefree trawling evermorelEmissions without electricity fora couple Of Lions of sore very interesting des- legal In 50 states.Easy installation. clays and water for four(we were tinations, ranging from Lake Supe- Ilfontura on Send $t. for lucky,compared to others). While rior to a variety of urban farm mar- our complete E neighbors slept in their cars and in kets to San Felipe, in Baja Califor- line azoo. tents o their lawns the first night, All in all, we hope this issue appllca n , ilia. p ions. p1N,eNMANCt INDUSIR 5901 Edison Dr.,Dept,MH,Oxnard,CA 93033 we were cunt-uliable in a motorhome. fuels your wcuulcrlusL It's certainly (905)986-8600-Fax(805)986-8999 Most victims homes were habit- enough to fuel mine. But,due to re- able following the quake, but most cent U•CI1l1.I10LIs events, I don't need just did not want to go back—at much encouragement.❑ r H See Reader service Page y` 2 LETTERS While my coach was at the fac- tory, my dealer,Doug Ewing, is r 13.11lle Creel: Michigan,drove 80 miles to make sure I was taken care of and this was oil his clay off. • o • 1 just had to write about the ex- e cellenl service by these companies - ,. and hope you will share this with h your readers. —- ��` When I get my magazine I read Lill the letters and tech columns first. They are some of the most informa- tive and important reading for RV - owners. Keep up the good work. I , . E even subscribed to Trader Lilo' just to a_ d get the extra articles for infWmation. t<' '" F Gl'1'a ld Wessel . `` Dundee, MichiganE. 111 Problem Solved a :. After four years of time wasted at r< ° .� _ — — ., garages, lots of money wasted and -,- -==r;'V ,� • '. even a fruitless letter to MotorHome, .., i now know exactly how much gas a _ is in my tank. The so-called best-trained mechan fiy ics at dealerships fooled with my , o tsar. tank and gauge, but (lever could q make the thing work right. After e all the frustration, l happened to see w P a small ad in A9otorHolue. it was Transfer Flow Incorporated.This is their specialty. I called their office �T in Chico, California,at noon.An 1,10 moresdead atVa hoot'later I got a call back from Bill Keep your eugute battery charged evert if'you park your Gainer. I told him about my prob- motorhome for motiths between trips lem and he told me exactly what was wrong and how much it would MFJ-323 �� � cost to fix it. $ 95 1 took my motorhome to Chico "'� and in Iwo hours was on my way •Eligine battery always charged home. For the first time, I can travel •Extends engine battery life wii ho tit worrying about gas levels. •Installs in minutes Check with those who advertise in o No more periodically starting .i engine to charge ry e batte M010111oute before you waste money uwyrat" � at garages. Couldn't start your engine after no obligation. if not delighted,return within William T. Baker parking between trips or leaving your 30 clays fbr prompt rel'und(less s/h). Placerville,California lights on'?Dead battery'? With MFJ's new patented Keep-h-Up Baltew Alainlainer"' our engine battery AC Line Volta a Monitor He Helps Those... Y r D 9 Just finished reading Bill Estes' will always be charged and ready for use. Guard against brown earthquake column. i-ie was really No more periodically starting your J outs and surges that can engine to charge your battery or fnlding :.., damage your expensive lucky to have his motorhome handy. someone to"jump you off." electrical equipment with This is my story: When your motorhome is parked this AC line voltage j My wile and I were thrown out of between trips with the electric cord monitor. Plus into bed at 4:31 a.m.on January 17 just plugged in, MhJ's Kcep /t Up"'keeps MFJ-x5t1 standard AC outlet. like most other Southern Califor- your engine battery charged. Sag9511, Expanded scale reads nians. We live(or'did) in a mobile It also extends your engine's battery 95-135 volts.Color coded scale tells home only a few miles from the life by avoiding deep charge and dis- when AC voltage is okay. 21Ax2'/nxl1/2 shaker's center. After finding Out- charge cycles. It often gives you an extra in.One year unconditional guarantee. clothes and flashlights,we exited season's service from an old battery. our home through a bedroom win- Installs in minutes with just two dow that has only a 6-foot drop— wires.33/4x2x2 in. Order toll free: 800-647-1801 One ear uncurrditionul guarantee, MF.1 i?NTGI2PRISGS,INC. both our doors were jammed solid. Y P - FJ 921 Louisville•Starkville,MS 39759 Our home is in a park with 191 Order from MFJ today and try it - 4 x-4:30 CST.Mon-Fri•FAX:(6Ui)121-655I other mobile homes.Almost all were Motorl lonle,September 1994 MrJ,Circle 159 on Reader Service Card 13 as LETTERS You Can 't Get One knocked off their foundations. r Till r 1979 31-foot Pace Arrow was �� ��] Tua few feet away, and,since we hast returned from an outing, ! �. its water and propane tanks were �A�ES full and its holding tanks were empty. — - ( We entered our coach just as dawn For Less. ��, TAX" was showing its face.We starred out .o�lorsta`e ` of the park,picking up LOL's(little- Call or fax us with any old ladies)on the way. Once out and ;., legitimate deal parked, my wife made coffee and E..• T ��:� ��';,` and we'll beat it. defrosted muffins while 1 drove our car back through the park telling It's that sift pre. everyone I met that we had good water, food and a v,•orking toilet. _ �. , About 10 a.m. my wife started making soup. It was great!It had FB DLA I everything in it that people brought by and donated—turkey,chicken, r7l Rim ham and vegetables. I think it's �,•_ _ � � � called `Hobo Stew."This soup was LAS VEGAS•NEVADA both lunch and dinner for manypeo- a � ° pie.This situation lasted for at least ,£ Largest Dealership in Nevada • Delivery Service Available five days,with the menu changing y Bounder • Flair • American Eagle • Pace Arrow every so often. E Winnebago • Tioga • Falcon • Horizon • Trek by Safari • Patriot by Beaver Our motorhome has been a bless- ing, but it's becoming increasingly a Ask about our FREE vacation packages, including airfare! smaller.However,I'm very thankful I -800-23 I -51 13 ® FAX I -702-435-8014 that we "`"'° m or home. Cliff Kalick Quake City(a.k.a. Mission Hills), California BRAUND SERIES, 90 ELECTRIC' Unloaded but Ready TVANTENNAS tam writing in regard t" the com- 1 ANTENNAS...•::' mcnfs in last f�cccmhcl's"Letters" about carrying guns in a motor- When you choose the Braund home.I also carry a gun,but after Series 90 Auto Concord or the talking to my son,who is a deputy Braund Series 90 Auto sheriff,I keep the gun and shells Skyliner,you're choosing separate. excellence that's also quiet I Ic told me that while on the road and convenient.There's no a noisy,bur motor Inside my motorhome is not considered my bulky home, but just another vehicle.The - your RV,and either antenna concealed weapon law applies,if - 3 can be raised,lowered,and loaded. While in camp,the vehicle . _ rotated for the best picture at the touch of a button.Locate becomes my home and a loaded .� the attractive control panel gun is legal. where It's most convenient Under the probable cause law, for you.Reception of VHF and I think the"Smith and Wesson" UHF TV is outstanding In color bumper sticker may be enough for \ `I or black and white,thanks to a search. Braund's new,two-stage, Carol Coffman high-gain amplifier designed Whittier, California❑ .., f for maximum ringe-area ,t ® • �{ ®;® reception. The Braund Series 90 Auto ® „ ncord or Auto Skyllner Co � V• Antenna...whichever you choose,you know you're choosing the best. Builders of quality recreational vehicle TV antennas since 1957. For more Information write: Is DIVISION OF BARKER MANUFACTURING CO. PORAUH011 730 EAST MICHIGAN AVE.-P.O.BOX 460 It Works Wonders. BATTLE CREEK MI 49016-0460 • MANUFACTURING COMPANY(616)965-2371 «Retoll Sales Only. American Heart Association 14 Barker,Circle 102 on Reader Service Card P1' OVE BY CITY COLII�CI � rs 192L REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTIO cry Date: August 15, 1994 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members CD94-57 Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City AdministratorOW Prepared by: Melanie S. Fallon, Director of Community Development�� < Subject: NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 91-32/CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10 ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REWRITE (Continued from August 1, 1994) Consistent with Council Policy? [X] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue,Recommendation,Analysis,Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Transmitted for City Council consideration is the sixth segment of updated Titles to the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite as part of Code Amendment No. 91-10. This includes three chapters of Title 23, Provisions Applying in All or Several Districts, which address Off-Street Parking and Loading, Landscape Improvements, and Signs. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: "Approve Chapters 231, 232, and 233, (Off-Street Parking and Loading, Landscape Improvements, and Signs) of Title 23, Provisions Applying in All or Several Districts, of the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite as recommended by the Planning Commission, and close the public hearing." ANALYSIS: A summary of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance was prepared for distribution to the public that summarizes the organization, major changes, and highlights of the proposed ordinance. A formatted version of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance as approved by the Planning Commission was prepared that includes references to current Ordinance Code sections. RCA8/15/94 G:RCA\CD94-57 �� Since the document was approved by the Planning Commission, there have been code amendments approved by the City Council that must be incorporated into the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance (e.g., indoor swap meets). Pending code amendments, such as Design Review Board changes and carts/kiosks, will ultimately be incorporated into the document. At the City Council study session of April 25, 1994, Community Development Department staff introduced the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite. This presentation included a brief history of zoning as well as background information on authorization of a consultant contract with Blayney-Dyett, appointment of a subcommittee, and highlights of the major changes and issues. At the conclusion of the meeting, the City Council agreed to a series of public hearings and study sessions that will allow an introduction of the topics scheduled for the following two public hearings. On June 6, 1994, the City Council opened the public hearing on the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and approved Titles 20, General Provisions, and 24, Administration. Titles 22, Overlay Districts, and 25, Subdivisions, were approved at the June 20, 1994, City Council meeting. At the third public hearing on July 11 1994, Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Chapters of Title 21, Base Districts, were approved, and the remaining chapters of Title 21, Base Districts, were approved on July 18, 1994. Chapters 230, 234, 235, and 236 of Title 23, Provisions Applying in All or Several Districts, were approved on August 1, 1994. TITLE 23, Provisions Applying in All or Several Districts This portion of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance contains the following: o Chapter 230, Site Standards o Chapter 231, Off-Street Parking and Loading Provisions o Chapter 232, Landscape Improvements o Chapter 233, Signs e Chapter 234, Mobilehome Park Conversions o Chapter 235, Residential Condominium Conversions o Chapter 236, Nonconforming Uses and Structures Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Highlights The following information is provided for the subject of this public hearing on Off-Street Parking and Loading, Landscape Improvements, and Signs. The other chapters of Title 23 were approved at the August 1, 1994, public hearing. The tables identify only the significant changes to the provisions contained in Off-Street Parking and Loading, Landscape Improvements, and Signs. RCA8/15/94 2 GARCA\CD94-57 1 CHAPTER 231 Off-Street Parking and Loading Provisions Parking provisions of Article 960 have been reorganized into the format of the new code. New provisions have been included which allows the Planning Commission to grant a reduction in parking requirements based on a traffic study that justifies the reduction. Another new provision requires reciprocal ingress and egress access between commercial properties. These provisions codify current policies/conditions of approval. Other changes reflect public and staff's concerns to ensure that all developments in the City provide adequate parking and circulation. PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 231-02 231.02E1 Parking in Oversize or recreation No parking in required residential yards vehicles prohibited in setback adjacent to public front of any dwelling street except driveways. or in any required Recreation vehicles and parking space except boats are prohibited in front RI district allows or street side setback parking in driveway or including driveway paved area between driveway and side propertyline 231-13 231.08 Reduced Reduction allowed by Also allows reduction with parking for joint use of parking CUP approval by PC based certain uses on actual use, traffic report, transportation demand management plan 231-14 231.12 Handicapped Includes number of Reference to comply with Parking spaces required State law 231-16 231.16B Vertical Not addressed Minimum 7 ft. clearance clearance except that wall mounted cabinets may encroach if 4.5 ft. clearance provided in front 5 ft. of parking space 231-18 231.18d2 Assigned and Requires assigned Requires assigned spaces to unassigned spaces be included with rental of residential dwelling unit without any parking spaces additional cost. All unassigned spaces to be open and accessible to guests and tenants RCA8/15/94 3 G:\RCA\CD94-57 Chapter 231 Continued PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 231-20 231.18E4 Reciprocal Not addressed; Requires commercial Access, required as condition properties to provide of approval reciprocal ingress/egress with adjacent properties 231-23 231.26 Parking Area Implied but not Plan approval required prior Plan addressed to construction, reconstruction or repaving of off-street parking area CHAPTER 232 Landscape Improvements This is a new chapter which consolidates landscaping provisions found in various portions of the Ordinance Code. The landscaping improvement provisions are organized into five sections: general requirements; materials; design standards which include general planting provisions, general tree requirements, and off-street parking facilities; irrigation; and exceptions. New and major changes are listed in the table below. PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 232-1 232.02 Applicability Applies to all projects Applies to all projects unless exempt by the except 4 or less residential Director units which must comply only with tree requirements 232-1 232.04C Landscape Not addressed Requires landscape materials materials to be installed in a manner that will not create visual obstruction, block access, or conflict with utilities 232-2 232.04D Evidence of Not addressed Requires certification of completion completion filed with Public Works 232-2 232.04E Tree Not addressed Requires replacement of the replacement removal of mature, specimen, or disfigured trees 232-2 232.06 Materials Minimum requirements Requires minimal use of included in various turf, paved areas, and Articles crushed rock; requires drought tolerant materials; refers to Water Efficiency Ordinance RCA8/15/94 4 G:\RCA\CD94-57 i Chapter 232 Continued PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 232-3 232.08B Required trees Requirements Identifies tree requirement contained within for single family large and various Articles small lots, multi-family, and non residential developments 232-3 232.08C Parking areas Parking area perimeter Requires 3-5 ft. wide landscaping not planting area along addressed perimeter of parking area 232-5 232.12 Exceptions Requires existing Adds compliance with tree developments at time quantity and size of expansion or requirements exterior alteration to provide 6% of site area in landscaping and 6 ft. wide planters along street frontages. 232-6 Diagrams Diagrams Diagrams included New and revised diagrams through with parking diagrams 232-10 CHAPTER 233 Sikns Current provisions of Article 961, Signs, have been incorporated into the new Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance format. .Exemptions to the requirement for obtaining a building permit have been expanded.. The Sign Matrix has been revamped for better readability and use. Temporary signs have been renamed promotional activity signs to distinguish them from the temporary signs that may be allowed for a temporary or limited term use. Commercial sign provisions reflect recommendations of the original Sign Committee, which consisted of three Council members and three Planning Commissioners, appointed by the City Council. Staff is recommending that these changes be incorporated with the entire Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Rewrite. Any recommendations by the new Sign Code Committee will be incorporated later. PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 233-7 233.06C Special Sign Approval by PC Approval by ZA Permit 233-7 233.06D Limited Sign Approval by PC Approval by Director Permit RCA8/15/94 5 G:\RCA\CD94-57 PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 233-10 233.08C Freestanding Monument sign Maximum 8 ft. height if sign: sites with maximum 7 ft. height bonus sign (opaque less than 400 ft. background) frontage Freestanding Maximum 7 ft. height Maximum 8 ft. height if sign: corner monument sign or wall bonus sign (opaque sites signs, but not both background and wall signs Freestanding Not addressed Maximum 10 ft. height with sign: sites with 50 sq. ft. or 60 sq.ft. sign 200 - 400 ft. area if bonus sign frontage on Beach Blvd. Freestanding Not permitted Permitted by planned sign sign with multi- program tenant panels Freestanding Not addressed Required on all freestanding sign: street signs address Wall,signs Maximum 10%bonus Maximum 15% bonus if if channel letter sin channel letter sign Channel letter Not required Required on commercial signs sites with 5 or more uses 233-18 233.18E Balloons Allowed only for Allowed for any business for automobile dealerships maximum 90 days subject to size criteria and do not exceed height of building. No change to balloons allowed for automobile dealerships 233-20 233.24 Off-site sign Not addressed Reconstruction or relocation reconstruction subject to agreement between City and sign owner Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Schedule The following table indicates the schedule of public hearings and meetings relative to the processing of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. RCA8/15/94 6 G:\RCA\CD94-57 ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE SCHEDULE Meeting Date Meeting Type Subject Meeting Status May 12 Meeting Staff presentation to Chamber of Commerce Completed May 19 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Rewrite overview, Completed House General Provisions,Administration,Overlay Districts, Subdivisions May 23 Study Session General Provisions,Administration, Overlay Completed Districts, Subdivisions June 6 Public Hearing Environmental Assessment;General Provisions, Approved General Administration Provisions and Administration June 16 Meeting Staff presentation to Board of Realtors Completed June 20 Public Hearing Overlay Districts, Subdivisions Approved Junc'23 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Residential, Commercial, Completed House Industrial, Open Space,Public-Semipublic, Specific Plan June 27 Study Session Residential, Commercial,Industrial,Open Space, Completed Public-Semipublic, Specific Plan July 5 Public Hearing Residential, Commercial,Industrial Approved July 18 Public Hearing Open Space,Public-Semipublic, Specific Plan Approved July 21 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Site Standards, Completed House Mobilchome Park Conversions,Residential Condominium Conversions,Non conforming,Parking and Loading,Landscape Improvements, Signs July 25 Study Session Site Standards,Mobilehome Park Conversions, Completed Condominium Conversions,Non conforming,Parking and Loading,Landscape Improvements, Signs August 1 Public Hearing Site Standards,Mobilehome Park Conversions, Approved Residential Condominium Conversions, Nonconforming Uses and Structures August 15 Public Hearing Off-Street Parking and Loading,Landscape Pending Improvements,Signs August 15 Public Hearing Zone Change Introduction To be rescheduled September 6 Hearing Adoption Pending FUNDING SOURCE: Not applicable. MTU:MSF:SP RCA8/15/94 7 G:\RCA\CD94-57 PROOF OF PUBLICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA) ) SS. County of Orange ) PUBLIC NOTICE and subdivision ordinance) I am a Citizen of the United States and a NOTICE OF for inclusion in the Hun- NOTICE Beach' Municipal resident of the County aforesaid' I am PUBLIC HEARING Code. The new ordinance, r CODE AMENDMENT updates the zoning and' NO.91.10 subdivision provisions byi over the age of eighteen years, and not a ENVIRONMENTAL incorporating;current plan- party to or interested in ASSESSMENT NO. ning principles and plan) the belo.A, ' ning requirements of state 91.32 PROPOSED '', law, deleting duplications entitled matter. I am a principal clerk of UBDIVIAND i and conflicts, and stream• NG SUBDIVISION �� lining review processing. ' the HUNTINGTON BEACH INDEPENDENT a ORDINANCE l ENVIRONMENTAL' ron. � NOTICE IS 'HEREBYI I TUS: Covered by Environs newspaper of general circulation, printed GIVEN that the Huntington ; mental Assessment No.91; g p Beach City Council will � 32. hold a public hearing in the I COASTAL STATUS: Ara and published in the City of Huntington Council C , hambers at the' amendment to the Hun! Huntington Beach Civic ; tington Beach Local Beach, County of Orange, State of Center, 2000 Main Street Coastal Program Imple; Huntington Beach, Califor= meriting Ordinances will be California, and that attached Notice is a nia, on the date and at the' filed with the California time indicated below to re-' Coastal Commission fol' true and complete copy as. was printed stave and consider the' lowing adoption by the City' statements off all all persons' Council: and published in the Huntington Beach who wish to heard rela- :FILE: copy of the' ti've to the application de-� proposed request-as on file) , and Fountain Valley issues of said scribed below. in the Community Develop- The City of Huntington merit Department, 2000'I Beach City Council has Main Street, Huntington) newspaper to wit the issue(s) of: scheduled a series of pub- Beach, California.. 92648,I lic hearings to facilitate the for inspection by the pub- public review of the pro- lic. A copy of the staff re•1. posed Zoning.And Subdivi- port will be,available to in•' sion Ordinance. The dates terested parties in the City) and subject matter for each) Clerk's,office after June 3,; July 30, 1994 meeting are as listedi 1994.' below. The City Council) ALL INTERESTED PER- may continue the public SONS are invited to attend hearing series should the said hearing and, express subject matter require ad- opinions or submit to the ditional time. City Clerk,written evidence August 15,1994 for or against the applica- TITLE 23: tion as outlined above. If Parking and Loading you .challenge the City Landscape Improvements Council's action in court, declare, under penalty of perjury, that Signs you may be limited to rais- APPLICATION NUMBER: ing only those issues you the foregoing is true and correct. CODE AMENDMENT NO. or,someone else raised at 91-10( ENVIRONMENTAL the public hearing de- ASSESSMENT NO.91-32. scribed in this notice, or in APPLICANT: City of Hun- a written correspondence Vtington Beach, Department delivered to the City at, or of Community Develop- prior to,the public hearing. Executed on July 30 , 1994 ment. If there are any further REQUEST: Repeal exist- questions please call at Costa Mesa, California. ing Huntington Beach Ordi- Susan Pierce, Associate nance Code (Division 9) Planner,at 536-5271. and establish a new zoning Connie Brockway,' City Clerk, City of Hun. tington Beach, 2000 Main Street, Hun. tington Beach, CA 92648. (714) 536- 5227. }� �l� Published Huntington.// ✓G% Beach-Fountain Valley In- dependent July 30,1994, / Signature 075st38 PROOF OF PUBLICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA) ) SS. County of Orange ) I am a Citizen of the United States and a PUBLIC NOTICE,. ! and subdivision ordinance; resident of the County aforesaid; I am NOTICE OF for inclusion in the Hun, PUBLIC HEARING tington Beach Municipal over the age of eighteen years, and not a CODE AMENDMENT Code. The new ordinance updates the zoning and party to or interested in the below NO.91.10 subdivision provisions by ENVIRONMENTAL incorporating current plan- entitled matter. I am a principal clerk of 911-32PROP0 PROPOSED ninMENT NO. g requ�ements and of state, ZONING AND law, deleting duplications the HUNTINGTON BEACH INDEPENDENT, a SUBDIVISION and conflicts, and stream.lining review processingg. NOORDINAN HEREBY ENVIRONMENTAL STAI newspaper of general circulation, printedTICE ISTUS: Covered by Environ-, and published in the City of Huntington GIVEN that the Huntingtorj mental Assessment No.91. Beach City Council will 32 Beach, County of Orange, State of holda hearingt the COASTAL STATUS: n-, Councill Ch Chambers at the amendment to the Hun-, Huntington Beach Civic tington Beach Local; California, and that attached Notice is a Center, 2000 Main Street; Coastal Program Imple•i Huntington Beach, Califor, menting Ordinances will be', true and complete copy as was printed nia, on the date and at the filed with the California time indicated below to re•� Coastal Commission fol•I and published in the Huntington Beach ceive and consider the lowing adoption by,theCity; statements of all persons Council. and Fountain Valley issues of said who wish to be heard relai ON FILE: A copy of the, five t0 the application de; proposed request is on file scribed below. 1 in the Community Develop- newspaper to wit the issue(s) of: The City of Huntington ment Department, 2000 Beach City Council has Main Street, Huntington scheduled a series of pub-, Beach, California 92648, lic hearings to facilitate the, for inspection by the pub- public review of the pro- lic. A copy of the staff re-1 July 30, 1994 posed Zoning And Subdivi-I port will be available to in-! sion Ordinance. The dates, terested parties in the City', and subject matter for eachV Clerk's office after June 3, ' meeting are as listed 1994. below. The City Council ALL INTERESTED PER- may continue the public SONS are invited to attend hearing, series should the said hearing and express subject matter require ad- opinions or submit to the ditional time. City Clerk,written evidence August 15,1994 for or against,the applica- I declare, under penalty of perjury, that TITLE23: tion as outlined above. If Parking and Loading you challenge the City Landscape Improvements Council's action in court, the foregoing is true and correct. Signs you may be limited to rais- APPLICATION NUMBER: Ing only those issues you) CODE AMENDMENT NO. ,, or someone else raised at, 91-10/ ENVIRONMENTAL the public hearing de-' IASSESSMENT NO.91-32. I scribed in this notice, or in Executed on July 30 199 4 APPLICANT: City of Hun- a written correspondence i tington Beach, Department I delivered to the City at, or of Community Develop- prior to,the public hearing.) at Costa Mesa, California. iment. If there are any further REQUEST: Repeal exist- questions please calll ling Huntington Beach Ordi- Susan Pierce, Associate finance Code (Division 9) planner,at 536-5271. I, and establish a new zoning Connie Brockway,', J City Clerk, City of Hun•I tington Beach, 20001 Main Street, Hun•I tington Beach, CA', 92648. (714) 536• 5227. Published, Huntington) Signature Beach-Fountain Valley In- dependent July 30,1994. 075sl38 i 7/� -Z I) J'e-p'LY)J h NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING V CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 91-32 PROPOSED ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers at the Huntington Beach Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. The City of Huntington Beach City Council has scheduled a series of public hearings to facilitate the public review of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. The dates and subject matter for each meeting are as listed below. The City Council may continue the public hearing series should the subject matter require additional time. , August is, 1994 TITLE 23: ® Parking and Loading ® Landscape Improvements ® Signs APPLICATION NUMBER: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10/ ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 91-32 APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach, Department of Community Development REQUEST: Repeal existing Huntington Beach Ordinance Code(Division 9) and establish a new zoning and subdivision ordinance for inclusion in the Huntington Beach Municipal Code. The new ordinance updates the zoning and subdivision provisions by incorporating current planning principles and planning requirements of state taw, deleting duplications and conflicts, and streamlining review processing. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Covered by Environmental Assessment No. 91-32. COASTAL STATUS: An amendment to the Huntington Beach Local Coastal Program Implementing Ordinances will be filed with the California Coastal Commission following adoption by the City Council. ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the Community Development Department, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties in the City Clerks office after June 3, 1994. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit to the City Clerk, written evidence for or against the application as outlined above. If you challenge the City Council°s action in court,you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to, the public hearing. If there are any further questions please call Susan Pierce, Associate Planner, at 536-5271. Connie Brockway City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92645 (714)536-5227 !%6ufio&SadAffen 20701 B&"Bh*4#79 p MwaVtm Beach,CA 926M t'cn HUNTINGTON BENCH CITY CLERK 2000 MAIN ST HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92646 j. 1 ', � APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL -- 19a REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION CITY UR ate: August 15, 1994 CD94-63 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator ° Prepared by: Melanie S. Fallon, Director of Community Development Subject: SUPPLEMENTAL ACTION ON NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 91-32/CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10 REGARDING RECREATIONAL VEHICLE AND BOAT PARKING AND HAM RADIO ANTENNAE Consistent with Council Policy? [X] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue,Recommendation,Analysis,Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: `7 At the August 2, 1994, City Council meeting, Mayor Linda Moulton-Patterson informed the public and staff that no changes would be made to the current Zoning Code regulations pertaining to the parking of recreational vehicles and boats on R1 properties and to ham radio antennae. This action should be confirmed by a vote of the City Council. RECOMMENDATION: Planning Commission and Staff Recommendation: Motion to: "Direct staff to remove any changes to the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance relative to the parking of recreational vehicles and boats on Rl, Low Density Residential, properties and (myedragfi'' the installation of ham radio antennae and to maintain the current provisions contained in the j��1705��Huntington Beach Ordinance Code." Cole °n ANALYSIS: Following the City Council study session on July 25, 1994, numerous residents contacted staff and members of the City Council to express their opinion regarding the possible changes to the Zoning Ordinance which affect the parking of recreational vehicles and boats and the installation of ham radio antennae. At the August 1 and 2, 1994 City Council meetings, the Mayor and City RCA/15/94 1 G:RCA\CD94-63 rf r related to these concerns. This action needs to be made in the form of a motion with a vote of the Council. FUNDING SOURCE: Not applicable. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: The City Council may refer these concerns to the Zoning Code subcommittee appointed by the City Council for recommendation. MTU:MSF:SP RCA8/15/94 2 G:RCA\CD94-63 VAL � Paz REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION c c Date: June 20, 1994 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members CD94-39 Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrato V Q—� Prepared by: Melanie S. Fallon,Director of Community Development�� Subject: NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO.91-32/CODE AMENDMENT NO.9140 ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REWRITE _ (Continued from June 6, 1994) Consistent with Council Policy? [X] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception c sk .._T YL rn Statement of Issue,Recommendation,Analysis,Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments: �:;-, STATEMENT OF ISSUE:�t"L �� Transmitted for City Council consideration is the second segment of updated Titles to the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite as part of Code Amendment No. 91-10. This includes Titles 22, Overlay Districts, and 25, Subdivisions. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: "Approve Titles 22, Overlay Districts, and 25, Subdivisions, of the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite as recommended by the Planning Commission, and continue the public hearing to July 5, 1994." ANALYSIS: A summary of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance has been prepared for distribution to the public which summarizes the organization, major changes, and highlights of the proposed ordinance. A formatted version of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance as approved by the Planning Commission has been prepared that includes references to current Ordinance Code sections. Since the document was approved by the Planning Commission, there have been code amendments approved by the City Council that must be incorporated into the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance(e.g. indoor swap meets). Pending code amendments, such as outdoor dining, tattoo establishments, and carts/kiosks, will ultimately be incorporated into the document. I_ At the City Council study session of April 25, 1994, Community Development Department staff introduced the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite. This presentation included a brief history of zoning as well as background information on authorization of a consultant contract with Blayney-Dyett, appointment of a subcommittee, and highlights of the major changes and issues. At the conclusion of the meeting, the City Council agreed to a series of public hearings and study sessions that will allow an introduction of the topics scheduled for the following two public hearings. On June 6, 1994, the City Council opened the public hearing on the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and approved Titles 20, General Provisions, and 24, Administration. Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance fEghlights The following information is provided for the subject of this public hearing on Overlay Districts and Subdivisions. RCA 6/20/94 2 G:RCA:CD94-39 'T'I'T'LE 22 Overlay Districts This portion of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance contains the following: • Chapter 220, O Oil Production Overlay District Chapter 221, CZ Coastal Zone Overlay District • Chapter 222, FP Floodplain Overlay District • Chapter 223, IS Interim Study Overlay District Chapter 224, NC Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District Chapter 225, PBD Planned Block Development Overlay District Chapter 226, H High-Rise Overlay District Chapter 227, MHP Mobilehome Overlay District The following table identifies the primary changes to this Title: SUBJECT CURRENT PROPOSED Oil drilling Use Permit approval by ZA CUP approval by PC Proposed structures in Floodproofing required or Floodproofing required or build at floodplain areas build at the base flood least one foot above base flood elevation elevation Renaming and new LUD, Limited Use District Interim Study Overlay District zoning categories -Q, Qualified Suffix Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District Not included Planned Block Overlay District Multi-story building: Minimum 10 ft. Minimum 20 ft setback from public street Multi-story building: Minimum 50 ft. One-fifth of building height setback from residential Multi-story building: Not addressed High rise upper story setback upper story setback required adjacent to residential. Benefits of Title 22 These chapters of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance provide city staff and the public a document that is organized into major sections that are easier to use and understand. Overlay districts allow development in special or sensitive areas and include measures to ensure compatibility with these areas. Community Development staff believes that the level of conditional use permit review and approval to allow oil drilling should be at the Planning Commission level. This is based on the public concerns that RCA 6/20/94 3 G:RCA:CD94-39 arose during the public hearing process of the oil drilling site at California Street and Delaware Street (Angus Oil). Recommendations of the California Department of Water Resources, acting as agent for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, were incorporated into the Floodplain Overlay Provisions. A new provision requires floodproofing or elevation of buildings one foot above the base flood elevation. This provision will reduce flood insurance premiums for property owners. The Interim Study Overlay District will allow the City an opportunity to study the proposed uses for an area while still allowing uses subject to conditional use permit review and approval. This new overlay district will apply to properties currently zoned Limited Use District and to properties not certified by the Coastal Commission. Two other new zoning overlay districts,Neighborhood Conservation and Planned Block Overlay, will provide opportunities for property owners to develop specific criteria applicable to their area, such as maximum building height,building design, etc. The Neighborhood Conservation Overlay will replace the-Q, Qualified Suffix. The Planned Block Overlay includes provisions to allow flexibility with the base district standards to a group of property owners. This concept is similar to a Specific Plan, but on a smaller scale. New setback requirements in the High-Rise Overlay chapter are to require increased setbacks from residential properties and from the street while affording opportunities for variations in building design. RCA 6/20/94 4 G:RCA:CD94-39 S ' TITLE 25 Subdivisions This portion of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance contains the following ® Chapter 250, General Provisions ® Chapter 251, Tentative Maps ® Chapter 252, Vesting Tentative Maps ® Chapter 253, Final Maps and Parcel Maps ® Chapter 254, Dedications and Reservations ® Chapter 255, Improvements ® Chapter 256,Reversions to Acreage ® Chapter 257, Mergers ® Chapter 258, Enforcement The following table identifies the primary changes to this Title: SUBJECT CURRENT PROPOSED Tentative (Tract)Map for subdivision of 9 Action by PC Action by ZA or less parcels Tentative (Tract)Map for subdivision of Action by PC Action by PC 10+parcels Public hearing for Tentative Parcel and Not required Required with 300' Tract Maps radius notification Submittal requirements for Final or Parcel Not cited Action by City Map review and acceptance Engineer Review and acceptance of(Final)Parcel Action by City Council Action by City Maps Engineer Enforcement of subdivision provisions Not cited Action by City Engineer Standards for on-site and off-site Not cited Action by Director improvements and requirements for plans, security, agreements, construction, inspection and completion Lot merger requirement for residential sites Not cited Action by Director consisting of multiple lots Benefits of Title 25 These chapters of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance also provide city staff and the public a document that is organized into major sections that are easier to use and understand. Subdivision provisions are up-to-date and provide developers with the information necessary to process tentative,final, and parcel maps in the City of Huntington Beach. Zoning provisions contained in Chapter 210,Base Districts, allow small multifamily residential developments to be acted upon by the Zoning Administrator and require larger residential developments to be approved by the Planning RCA 6/20/94 5 G:RCA:CD94-39 Commission. To allow concurrent processing of a multi-family development project by one discretionary body and reduce the development's processing time, Title 25, Subdivisions, contains provisions for Tentative(tract)maps consisting of 9 or less parcels to be acted upon by the Zoning Administrator and tentative(tract) maps consisting of 10 or more parcels to be acted upon by the Planning Commission. The Zoning Administrator will continue to act on all Tentative Parcel Maps. Another time saving provision results from allowing parcel map acceptance by the City Engineer, which is an administrative process that certifies that the parcel map is in conformance with the tentative parcel map and that it complies with all city and state subdivision requirements. Final (tract) maps will continue to be accepted by the City Council, after being ensured by the City Engineer that the map also complies with the tentative map and city and state provisions. Parcel and Final Map acceptance is a ministerial action. FUNDING SOURCE: Not applicable. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Rewrite Meeting Schedule MTU:MSF:SP RCA 6/20/94 6 G:RCA:CD94-39 ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE SCHEDULE Meeting Date Meeting Type Subject Meeting Status May 12 Meeting Staff presentation to Chamber of Commerce Completed May 19 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Rewrite overview, Completed House General Provisions,Administration,Overlay Districts, Subdivisions May 23 Study Session General Provisions,Administration,Overlay Completed Districts, Subdivisions June 6 Public Hearing Environmental Assessment;General Provisions, Approved General Administration Provisions and Administration June 16 Meeting Staff presentation to Board of Realtors Pending June 20 Public Hearing Overlay Districts, Subdivisions Pending June 23 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Residential,Commercial, Pending House Industrial, Open Space,Public-Semipublic, Specific Plan June 27 Study Session Residential,Commercial,Industrial,Open Space, Pending Public-Semipublic, Specific Plan July 5 Public Hearing Residential, Commercial,Industrial Pending July 18 Public Hearing Open Space,Public-Semipublic, Specific Plan Pending July 21 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Supplemental Site Pending House Standards,Mobilehome Park Conversions, Condominium Conversions,Non conforming, Parking and Loading,Landscape Improvements, Signs July 25 Study Session Supplement Site Standards,Mobilehome Park Pending Conversions, Condominium Conversions,Non conforming,Parking and Loading,Landscape Improvements, Signs August 1 Public Hearing Supplement Site Standards,Mobilehome Park Pending Conversions,Condominium Conversions,Non conforming August 15 Public Hearing Parking and Loading,Landscape Improvements, Pending Signs August 15 Public Hearing Zone Change Introduction Pending September 6 Hearing Adoption Pending RCA 6/20/94 7 G:RCA:CD94-39 APPROVIED S MW p QUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION CITY CLERK Date: August 1, 1994 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members CD94-54 Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator l � Prepared by: Melanie S. Fallon, Director of Community Development - -� Subject: NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 91-32/CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10 ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REWRITE (Continued from July 18, 1994) Consistent with Council Policy? [X] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue,Recommendation,Analysis,Fun�ddiinngg Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Transmitted for City Council consideration is the fifth segment of updated Titles to the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite as part of Code Amendment No. 91-10. This includes Site Standards, Mobilehome Park Conversions, Residential Condominium Conversions, and the Nonconforming Uses and Structures Chapters of Title 23, Provisions Applying in All or Several Districts. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: `Approve Chapters 230, 234, 235, and 236 (Site Standards, Mobilehome Park Conversions, Residential Condominium Conversions, and Nonconforming Uses and Structures) of Title 23, Provisions Applying in All or Several Districts, of the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite as recommended by the Planning Commission, and continue the public hearing .o August 15, 1994." ANALYSIS: A summary of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance was prepared for distribution to the public that summarizes the organization, major changes, and highlights of the proposed ordinance. A formatted version of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance as approved by the Planning Commission was prepared that includes references to current Ordinance Code sections. o RCA8/1/94 G:RCA\CD94-54 Since the document was approved by the Planning Commission, there have been code amendments approved by the City Council that must be incorporated into the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance (e.g., indoor swap meets). Pending code amendments, such as Design Review Board changes and carts/kiosks, will ultimately be incorporated into the document. At the City Council study session of April 25, 1994, Community Development Department staff introduced the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite. This presentation included a brief history of zoning as well as background information on authorization of a consultant contract with Blayney-Dyett, appointment of a subcommittee, and highlights of the major changes and issues. At the conclusion of the meeting, the City Council agreed to a series of public hearings and study sessions that will allow an introduction of the topics scheduled for the following two public hearings. On June 6, 1994, the City Council opened the public hearing on the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and approved Titles 20, General Provisions, and 24, Administration. Titles 22, Overlay Districts, and 25, Subdivisions, were approved at the June 20, 1994, City Council meeting. At the third public hearing on July 11 1994, Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Chapters of Title 21, Base Districts, were approved, and the remaining chapters of Title 21, Base Districts, were approved on July 18, 1994. TITLE 23, Provisions Applying in All or Several Districts This portion of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance contains the following: o Chapter 230, Site Standards o Chapter 231, Off-Street Parking and Loading Provisions o Chapter 232, Landscape Improvements Chapter 233, Signs Chapter 234, Mobilehome Park Conversions Chapter 235, Residential Condominium Conversions Chapter 236, Nonconforming Uses and Structures Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Highlights The following information is provided for the subject of this public hearing on Site Standards, Mobilehome Park Conversions, Residential Condominium Conversions, and Nonconforming Uses and Structures, Title 23. The remaining chapters of Title 23 will be sixth in a series of public hearings scheduled for the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite. RCA8/1/94 2 G:\RCA\CD94-54 The tables identify only the significant changes to the provisions contained in Site Standards, Mobilehome Park Conversions, Residential Condominium Conversions, and Nonconforming Uses and Structures. CHAPTER 230 Site Standards This chapter consolidates various standards that are applicable to one or more districts. Many of the provisions are repeated in various districts while others are currently found in Article 973, Miscellaneous Provisions, and Article 963, Unclassified Uses. The site standards are grouped into three parts that are applicable to residential districts, non- residential districts, and all districts. PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 230-2 230.04 Front and street Not addressed Allows PC to adopt side yards in procedure to modify developed front an street side yard residential areas setbacks when 60% of the frontage on a blockface do not conform to current front yard requirements 230-3 230.10 Accessory Conditional Use CUP approval by ZA Dwelling Units Permit (CUP) Second Units approval by PC 230-4 230.12 Home Use Permit CUP approval by ZA Occupation: approval by ZA for for service or On-site services swimming lessons; instruction businesses and instructions no other instruction which involve or services customers on-site permitted with customers on-site 230-10 230.16 Manufactured Allowed only in Allowed in any R zone Homes MH zones or sites as single family with -MH suffix dwelling provided compliance with standards 230-12 230.20 Park and Addressed only in Requires payment for Recreation Fee Subdivision any residential units not Ordinance covered by Subdivision Ordinance RCA8/1/94 3 GARCA\CD94-54 PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 230-18 230.40 Helicopter CUP approval by CUP approval by PC Takeoff and PC and compliance subject to location Landing Areas with base district criteria and site standards development standards 230-27 230.62 Legal Building Not addressed Proof of legally created Site Required lot required prior to building ermit issuance 230-29 230.70 Measurement of Method varies Current RI method Building Height among districts applicable citywide 230-29 230.74 Outdoor Provisions Consolidated; outdoor Facilities contained various dining added to commercial and Commercial and Open industrial districts Space districts with CUP approval by ZA 230-31 230.80 Antennae Only satellite Includes any antennae antennae addressed as an accessory use to a permitted use 230-35 230.86 Seasonal Sales Applies to Expanded to include Christmas tree and single season pumpkin lots only agricultural product sales CHAPTER 234 Mobilehome Park Conversions The provisions contained in this chapter primarily follow existing code, Article 927, with some reorganization. A major change deletes the requirement that, when a mobilehome cannot be relocated, it shall be purchased by the developer at a depreciated value. The Proposed Code requires that it be purchased at fair market value as determined by an appraiser acceptable to both the landowner and the mobilehome owner. PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 234-3 234.08B Purchase of a Purchased at Purchased at fair mobilehome depreciated value market value that is unable to be relocated RCA8/1/94 4 G:\RCA\CD94-54 CHAPTER 235 Residential Condominium Conversions The provisions within this chapter follow current code, Article 936.5, with the exception that the only zoning provisions applicable to the conversion of apartments to condominiums will be compliance with the parking requirements of Chapter 231 and the landscaping requirements of Chapter 232. Conditional Use Permit and Tentative Map approval by the Planning Commission is required for conversion of 10 or more units, and Conditional Use Permit and Tentative Map approval by the Zoning Administrator is required for conversion of 9 or less units. This action is consistent with the review process established in Chapter 210, Residential Base Districts, and Title 25, Subdivisions. PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 235-2 235.04 Permits required CUP and map CUP and map approval approval by PC for by PC if 10 or more 5 or more units; not units; CUP and map permitted if 4 or approval by ZA if 9 or less units less units 235-4 235.08B Compliance Compliance with Compliance with with zoning planned residential parking and landscape standards development requirements only standards CHAPTER 236 Nonconforming Uses and Structures This chapter is a reformatting of current code, Article 965. A new provision is introduced to limit the amount of enlargement to a nonconforming structure. RCA8/1/94 5 G:\RCA\CD94-54 The definitions for nonconforming use and nonconforming structure are contained in Chapter 203. Because the terms have been revised, they now have new meanings. The new definition for a nonconforming structure is a structure that was lawfully erected but which does not conform with the current development standards, e.g., setbacks, height. The new definition for a nonconforming use is a use of a structure or land that was lawfully established and maintained, but which does not conform with the current zoning ordinance, e.g., 4 dwelling units on a site where only one is permitted, or a residence in a commercial zoning district. PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 236-2 236.02 Alterations to Maximum 10% Maximum 10% nonconforming enlargement of a enlargement of a structure or use nonconforming structure for a structure nonconforming use. Enlargement of a nonconforming structure limited to 50% of existing area during any 5 year period Zonin,u and Subdivision Ordinance Schedule The attached table indicates the schedule of public hearings and meetings relative to the processing of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. FUNDING SOURCE: Not applicable. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Rewrite Meeting Schedule MTU:MSF:SP RCA8/1/94 6 G:\RCA\CD94-54 ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE SCHEDULE Meeting Date Meeting Type Subject Meeting Status May 12 Meeting Staff presentation to Chamber of Commerce Completed May 19 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Rewrite overview, Completed House General Provisions,Administration,Overlay Districts, Subdivisions May 23 Study Session General Provisions,Administration, Overlay Completed Districts, Subdivisions June 6 Public Hearing Environmental Assessment;General Provisions, Approved General Administration Provisions and Administration June 16 Meeting Staff presentation to Board of Realtors Completed June 20 Public Hearing Overlay Districts, Subdivisions Approved June 23 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Residential,Commercial, Completed House Industrial,Open Space,Public-Semipublic, Specific Plan June 27 Study Session Residential,Commercial,Industrial,Open Space, Completed Public-Semipublic, Specific Plan July 5 Public Hearing Residential, Commercial,Industrial Approved July 18 Public Hearing Open Space,Public-Semipublic, Specific Plan Approved July 21 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Site Standards, Completed House Mobilehome Park Conversions,Residential Condominium Conversions,Non conforming,Parking and Loading,Landscape Improvements, Signs July 25 Study Session Site Standards,Mobilehome Park Conversions, Completed Condominium Conversions,Non conforming,Parking and Loading,Landscape Improvements, Signs August I Public Hearing Site Standards,Mobilehome Park Conversions, Pending Residential Condominium Conversions, Nonconforming Uses and Structures August 15 Public Hearing Off-Street Parking and Loading,Landscape Pending Improvements, Signs August 15 Public Hearing Zone Change Introduction Pending September 6 Hearing Adoption Pending RCA8/1/94 7 G:\RCA\CD94-54 41,0014;o4ove.11 /I� me /t FE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ADMINISTRATIVE COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator V�--� DATE: July 25, 1994 SUBJECT: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10 ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REWRITE At the April 25, 1994 City Council study session meeting, staff introduced the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite document, answered questions, and responded to Council's inquiries regarding the document. Binders were distributed which included a summary of the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance, annotated proposed ordinance with index, and cross reference to current Huntington Beach Ordinance Code sections. The City Council established a process for adoption which includes a series of public hearings and study sessions. This is the third study session in a series of study sessions. Attached are tables summarizing highlights of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite document that will be presented at public hearings on August 1, and August 15, 1994. A schedule of hearings is also included. Please refer to the binder when reviewing the attached. This portion of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance contains Title 23 which includes the following: o Chapter 230, Site Standards • Chapter 231, Off-Street Parking and Loading Provisions Chapter 232, Landscape Improvements o Chapter 233, Signs Chapter 234, Mobilehome Conversions Chapter 235, Residential Condominium Conversions o Chapter 236, Noncomforming Uses and Structures Wpierce\0033 July 25,1994 CHAPTER 230 Site Standards This chapter consolidates various standards that are applicable to one or more districts. Many of the provisions are repeated in various districts while others are currently found in Article 973, Miscellaneous Provisions, and Article 963, Unclassified Uses. The site standards are grouped into three parts that are applicable to residential districts, non-residential districts, and all districts. PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 230-2 230.04 Establish unique Not addressed. Allows PC to adopt front and street procedure to modify front side yards in and street side yard setbacks developed when 60% of the frontage residential areas on a blockface does not conform to current front and requirements 230-2 230.08 Residential Maximum height 15 Maximum 15 ft. height Accessory feet; minor accessory except detached garages for Structures standards address single family may exceed smaller structures height if no habitable floor depending on area and area and architecturally height compatible with main dwelling. Total floor area of detached accessory structures not to exceed 600 sq.ft. or 10% of site area. No minor accessory structure standards. 230-3 230.10 Accessory Conditional Use CUP approval by ZA Dwelling Units Permit (CUP) approval Second Units by PC 230-4 230.12 Home Use Permit approval CUP approval by ZA for Occupation- by ZA for swimming service or instruction On-site services lessons; no other businesses which involve and instructions instruction or services customers on-site permitted with customers on-site 230-10 230.16 Manufactured Allowed only in MH Allowed in any R zone as Homes zones or sites with single family dwelling -MH suffix provided compliance with standards 230-12 230.20 Park and Addressed only in Requires payment for any Recreation Fee Subdivision Ordinance residential units not covered by Subdivision Ordinance G:\pierce\0033 July 25,1994 Chapter 230 Continued PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 230-18 230.40 Helicopter CUP approval by PC CUP approval by PC subject Takeoff and and compliance with to location criteria and site Landing Areas base district standards development standards only 230-27 230.62 Legal Building Not addressed Proof of legally created lot Site Required required prior to building permit issuance 230-29 230.70 Measurement of Method varies among Current R1 standard Buildingeight districts applicable citywide 230-29 230.74 Outdoor Provisions contained in Consolidated; outdoor Facilities various commercial dining added to Commercial and industrial districts and Open Space districts with CUP approval by ZA 230-30 230.76 Screening of Only rooftop Expanded to include all Mechanical mechanical equipment exterior mechanical Equipment requires screemng equipment round or roof) 230-31 230.80 Antennae Only satellite antennae Includes any antennae as an addressed accessory use to a permitted use 230-35 230.86 Seasonal Sales Applies to Christmas Expanded to include single tree and pumpkin lots season agricultural product only sales 230-36 230.88 Fencing and Fences between 3 1/2 Allows maximum 6 ft fence Yards ft. and 6 ft. height in any required side or rear allowed only on side yard or rear property lines or at front setback G:\pierce\0033 July 25,1994 CHAPTER 231 Off-Street Parking and Loading Provisions Parking provisions of Article 960 have been reorganized into the format of the new code. New provisions have been included which allows the Planning Commission to grant a reduction in parking requirements based on a traffic study that justifies the reduction. And another new provision requires reciprocal ingress and egress access between commercial properties. These provisions codify current policies/conditions of approval. Other changes reflect public and staff s concerns to ensure that all developments in the City provide adequate parking and circulation. PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 231-02 231.02E1 Parking in Oversize or recreation No parking i equired residential yards vehicles prohibited in setback adjacent to public front of any dwelling street except driveways. or in any required Recreation vehicles and parking space except boats are prohibited in front RI district allows or street side setback parking in driveway or including driveway paved area between driveway and side property line 231-13 231.08 Reduced Reduction allowed by Also allows reduction with parking for joint use of parking CUP approval by PC based certain uses on actual use, traffic report, transportation demand management plan 231-14 231.12 Handicapped Includes number of Reference to comply with Parking spaces required State law 231-16 231.1613 Vertical Not addressed Minimum 7 ft. clearance clearance except that wall mounted cabinets may encroach if 4.5 ft. clearance provided in front 5 ft. of parking space 231-18 231.18d2 Assigned and Requires assigned Requires assigned spaces to unassigned spaces be included with rental of residential dwelling unit without any parking spaces additional cost. All unassigned spaces to be open and accessible to guests and tenants G:\pierce\0033 July 25,1994 Chapter 231 Continued PAGE I SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 231-20 231.18E4 Reciprocal Not addressed; Requires commercial Access required as condition properties to provide of approval reciprocal ingress/egress with adjacent pro erties 231-23 231.26 Parking Area Implied but not Plan approval required prior Plan addressed to construction, reconstruction or repaving of off-street parking area CHAPTER 232 Landscape Improvements This is a new chapter which consolidates landscaping provisions found in various portions of the Ordinance Code. The landscaping improvement provisions are organized into five sections: general requirements; materials; design standards which include general planting provisions, general tree requirements, and off-street parking facilities; irrigation; and exceptions. New and major changes are listed in the table below. PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 232-1 232.02 Applicability Applies to all projects Applies to all projects unless exempt by the except 4 or less residential Director units which must comply only with tree requirements 232-1 232.04C Landscape Not addressed Requires landscape materials materials to be installed in a manner that will not create visual obstruction, block access, or conflict with utilities 232-2 232.04D Evidence of Not addressed Requires certification of completion completion filed with Public Works 232-2 232.04E Tree Not addressed Requires replacement of the replacement removal of mature, specimen, or disfigured trees 232-2 232.06 Materials Minimum requirements Requires minimal use of included in various turf, paved areas, and Articles crushed rock; requires drought tolerant materials; refers to Water Efficiency Ordinance GApierce\0033 July 25,1994 Chapter 232 Continued PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 232-3 232.0813 Required trees Requirements Identifies tree requirement contained within for single family large and various Articles small lots, multi-family, and non residential developments 232-3 232.08C Parking areas Parking area perimeter Requires 3-5 ft. wide landscaping not planting area along addressed perimeter of parking area 232-5 232.12 Exceptions Requires existing Adds compliance with tree developments at time quantity and size of expansion or requirements exterior alteration to provide 6% of site area in landscaping and 6 ft. wide planters along street frontages. 232-6 Diagrams Diagrams Diagrams included New and revised diagrams through with parking diagrams 232-10 CHAPTER 233 Sins Current provisions of Article 961, Signs, have been incorporated into the new Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance format. Exemptions to the requirement for obtaining a building permit have been expanded.. The Sign Matrix has been revamped for better readability and use. Temporary signs have been renamed promotional activity signs to distinguish them from the temporary signs that may be allowed for a temporary or limited term use. Commercial sign provisions reflect recommendations of the original Sign Committee, which consisted of three Council members and three Planning Commissioners, appointed by the City Council. Staff is recommending that these changes be incorporated with the entire Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Rewrite. Any recommendations by the new Sign Code Committee will be incorporated later. PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 233-7 233.06C Special Sign Approval by PC Approval by ZA Permit 233-7 233.06D Limited Sign Approval by PC Approval by Director Permit G:\pierce\0033 July 25,1994 PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 233-10 233.08C Freestanding Monument sign Maximum 8 ft. height if sign: sites with maximum 7 ft. height bonus sign (opaque less than 400 ft. background) frontage Freestanding Maximum 7 ft. height Maximum 8 ft. height if sign: corner monument sign or wall bonus sign(opaque sites signs, but not both background and wall signs Freestanding Not addressed Maximum 10 ft. height with sign: sites with 50 sq. ft. or 60 sq.ft. sign 200 - 400 ft. area if bonus sign frontage on Beach Blvd. Freestanding Not permitted Permitted by planned sign sign with multi- program tenant panels Freestanding Not addressed Required on all freestanding sign: street signs address Wall signs Maximum 10%bonus Maximum 15%bonus if if channel letter sin channel letter sign Channel letter Not required Required on commercial signs sites with 5 or more uses 233-18 233.18E Balloons Allowed only for Allowed for any business for automobile dealerships maximum 90 days subject to size criteria and do not exceed height of building. No change to balloons allowed for automobile dealerships 233-20 233.24 Off-site sign Not addressed Reconstruction or relocation reconstruction subject to agreement between City and sign owner G:\pierce\0033 July 25,1994 CHAPTER 234 Mobilehome Park Conversions The provisions contained in this chapter primarily follow existing code (Article 927) with some reorganization. A major change deletes the purchase of a mobilehome that can not be relocated at a depreciated value to the requirement that it be purchased at fair market value determined by an appraiser acceptable to both the landowner and the mobilehome owner. PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 234-3 234.08B Purchase of a Purchased at Purchased at fair market mobilehome depreciated value value that is unable to be relocated CHAPTER 235 Residential Condominium Conversions The provisions within this chapter follow current code, Article 936.5, with the exception that the only zoning provisions applicable to the conversion of apartments to condominiums will be compliance with the parking requirements of Chapter 231 and the landscaping requirements of Chapter 232. Conditional Use Permit and Tentative Map approval by the Planning Commission is required for conversion of 10 or more units, and Conditional Use Permit and Tentative Map approval by the Zoning Administrator is required for conversion of 9 or less units. PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 235-2 235.04 Permits required CUP and map CUP and map approval by approval by PC for 5 PC if 10 or more units; CUP or more units; not and map approval by ZA if 9 permitted if 4 or less or less units units 23 5-4 23 5.08B Compliance Compliance with Compliance with parking with zoning planned residential and landscape requirements standards development standards only G:\pierce\0033 July 25,1994 CHAPTER 236 Nonconforming Uses and Structures This chapter is a reformatting of current code, Article 965. A new provision is introduced to limit the amount of enlargement to a nonconforming structure for a conforming use. PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 236-2 236,02 Alterations to No limit on Enlargement limited to 50% nonconforming enlargement of a of existing area during any 5 structure or use nonconforming year period structure G:\pierce\0033 July 25,1994 Zoning-and Subdivision Ordinance Schedule The following table indicates the schedule of public hearings and meetings relative to the processing of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE SCHEDULE Meeting Date Meeting Tjpe Subject Meeting Status May 12 Meeting Staff presentation to Chamber of Commerce Completed May 19 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Rewrite overview, Completed House General Provisions,Administration, Overlay Districts, Subdivisions May 23 Study Session General Provisions,Administration,Overlay Completed Districts, Subdivisions June 6 Public Hearing Environmental Assessment; General Provisions, Approved General Administration Provisions and Administration June 16 Meeting Staff presentation to Board of Realtors Completed June 20 Public Hearing Overlay Districts, Subdivisions Approved June 23 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Residential,Commercial, Completed House Industrial,Open Space,Public-Semipublic, Specific Plan June 27 Study Session Residential, Commercial,Industrial, Open Space, Completed Public-Semipublic, Specific Plan July 5 Public Hearing Residential,Commercial,Industrial Approved July 18 Public Hearing Open Space,Public-Semipublic, Specific Plan Approved July 21 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Site Standards, Completed House Mobilehome Park Conversions,Condominium Conversions,Non conforming,Parking and Loading, Landscape Improvements, Signs July 25 Study Session Site Standards,Mobilehome Park Conversions, Pending Condominium Conversions,Non conforming,Parking and Loading,Landscape Improvements, Signs August 1 Public Hearing Site Standards,Mobilehome Park Conversions, Pending Condominium Conversions,Non conforming August 15 Public Hearing Parking and Loading,Landscape Improvements, Pending Signs August 15 Public Hearing Zone Change Introduction Pending September 6 Hearing Adoption Pending Wpierce\0033 July 25,1994 RMNED Cay CORK CITY IF BELM CAUF. JUL 28 It 10 Ai At 8 1994 AM!QtV fArldi SuBjECT: P 0 2 S edlon 23 1.1-) My husband hx-,- submithd a int palMg of recrealkNial 1 cEyrot Inare a H'ie clri:- nig".p -n-, t. and W no may have Mated. A haq always wanted a MaraverAc of M j,he in H so as plift 1 insisted we but...j-, lt a to and 13 Wtahed hi mkit conditka-l- Cyr Mway three fmt hi;m garage.. "'...o iiie, as fl three Whea 1-.". th,,,A son W he paMs A pop aqW --ii u., n c- t"ne front Moon faol Mack th, .6tiI..., F -EVAL Q FARKED UN All- "J'RE'El, VACANI DRIVERYAll. This is in on-dir.-.�i.. -`,cl 1 felt 1 to i Wed My slaa behns wriNyl His it tor and wz-, is we have jwhk hearings so youi brin!..-- _ctf F_d c-!, ic.!n R tit 9 to W., 1 h.-� �t;e 11772 Dwarolow Lone RECENED CHY CORN MY up HUNTINGTOh PACK, CoW, JUL V 10 314?1 '94 Tt"Di: r4l untinigtor'-,B each C ity ci=il 'UB i E T� and in e*i-,--.,r.....t,.*�i,.,!.,!f.--.!.,..-,!I Q a special Nerest qprouip iin; our Umt Nowns on M..-e, 0, that irdend to remain in rid, M.'eir rel.irerni-ent thit, lathe laboi a�ro-.Illll of I.Ir!orre 1 , ncl others nre.. �ill.lr-,.—,,&d ar,!cil moved to our tt,),..!,,!-.,!,r'°:'.Iri,,;�I use of 1-he., -!-j*..,,ir----.n-[,e!,.J ror in vie--iin, the'horne la.,biied! "t, c111 ificir thi.e... wir"ic-le our -frord-IL -1 e r,--vith a nt --:�.ncl a of -.-a ie b focit "j.'...ate on P2 '-:we home is on Me Taide curve of a Wya shoot Intersection) AW"; allo.tied to a,.n in firont , 'r-o-1,i"or ' % el Me hf T! s nto b [ftiA ovrnoda trav at te o ,ii i eaut .,l 1.1 bc i %fe and 1 haw re'..!*!?,-.-,!-,'. All our a!-,lll,-.,,,a.nc---!pJanning seemed to ctor hot nc m., have teen%vell made ,rindl our staff re4vrote it us.-Pli. lf reir Waned up" versiori il thert. for to ticket a-- clir-r-IB rio,.,.%;have done noMin.rj, more than ve n to in Me pas-.1. issiuie it r*.-, 'c"of illon. the DreD 1 us that Lje affe! tac -,,kiouild R.-,,F3 the ol or !.n -r? Dr -a-1 'heiu is le jj,col 3d ini, - U th ' , id; a ,.j many tines in the joast. Yourf.; vor, blie.. lion is ..-.n dc! the aspeds of SYs 4th staff they the F nic.ations -n-i.r.-m a,I i o v cn.r i n s t 11 a 11 o in, o f A rr,a I e L."..r i ic! (F C:C:)... h a,,- oi,-.� i ii j- Ito re--a ::,i.n or of Mciii* Yforta They shuAd be bethir infot -:111, or, tpil—rh; I. L.i.s.-t another i :<arli-q.-1 o rt more To for their peilorm;ance rrir-,4ritl f: eff".-jrt to ext..,--! le.re a e s. RespectfuNy ,BE 21772 Chmanvievy Lane PROOF OF PUBLICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA) S S• pU6LIC IdOTIC� `REOOEST: Repeal exist- ?trig Huntington Beach Ordi, County of Orange ) NOTICE OF nanand a -Code (Division and establish a new zoning PUBLIC HEARING CODE AMENDMENT and subdivision ordinance for inclusion in the Hun- .NO.91.10 tington Beach Municipal I am a Citizen of the United States and a ENVIRONMENTAL Code. The new ordinance ASSESSMENT NO. updates the zoning and resident of the County aforesaid; I am 91 ZONING ANDED ncorrporatngsubdivisionpcurrent plant' over the age of eighteen years and not a SUBDIVISION ning principles and plan-' r Wing requirements of slate i ORDINANCE law, deleting duplications " party to or interested in the below NOTICE IS HEREBY and conflicts,and stream; (GIVEN that the Huntington lining review processingg entitled matter. I am a principal clerk of Beach city Council will ENVIRONMENTAL STA- hold a public hearing in the TUS: Covered by Environ• the H U NTI N GTO N BEACH INDEPENDENT, a ,Council Chambers at the mental Assessment No.91•• IHuntingtcn Beach Civic 32 Center, 2000 Main Street, COASTAL STATUS: All newspaper of general circulation, printed Huntington Beach, Cafifor- p 9 amendment to the Hun- inia, on the date and at the tington Beach Local and published in the City of Huntington timeindicated below tor-- Coastal Program Imple- ceive and consider the menting Ordinances will be Beach, County of Orange, State of statements of all.persons 'filed with the California) who wish to be heard rela• (Coastal Commission fol- California, and that attached Notice is a tive to the application de, lowing adoption by the City scribed below. Council. printed The City of Huntington ON FILE: copy of the true and complete copy as was p Beach City Council has proposed request uest is on file gton Beach scheduled a series of pub- in Community Develop- and published in the Huntin lic hearings to facilitate the merit Department, 2000 public review of the pro- Main Street, Huntington and Fountain Valley issues of said posed Zoning And Subdivi- .Beach, California 92648, sion Ordinance. The dates i for inspection by the pub- newspaper to wit the issue(s) of: and subject matter,for each lic. A copy of the staff re- meeting are as listed I port will be available to in- below. 'The City Council Wrested parties in the City may continue the public Clerk's office after June 3, i hearing series should the 1994 July 21 1994 subject matter require ad- ALL INTERESTED PER- , ditional time. SONS are invited to attend Titles 20 through 22, 24 said hearing and express r _-"_ opinions or submit to the Tthrough 25 public hearings City Clerk,written evidence previously held. for or against the applica- i, August 1,1994 tion as outlined above. If TITLE 23: Provisions AR you challenge the City plicant in All or Several Dis- council's action in court, tricts you maybe limited to rais- I declare, under penalty of perjury, that Site Standards mg only those issues you Mobilehome Park Conver• or someone else raised at sions " the public hearing de- the foregoing is true and correct. Residential Condominium _ Conversions Non Conforming" Use; scribed in this notice, or in and Structures a written correspondence August 15,1994 delivered to the City at,July or TITLE 23:Continued' prior to,the public hearing. Executed on y 21 , 199 4-- Parking Loading If there are any further Landscape Improvements '(questions please call at Costa Mesa, California. Signs Susan Pierce, Associate APPLICATION NUMBER: Planner,at 536.5271. CODE AMENDMENT NO. Connie -Brockway, 191-10/ ENVIRONMENTALi City Clerk, City*of Hun- JASSESSMENT NO.91-32. I APPLICANT: City of Hun- Main Street, Hun- tington Beach, 2000 ,tington Beach, Department lof. Community Develop.' tington, Beach, 'CA 92648.. (714), 536-, 5227. (\ /��/ Published Huntington Beach-Fountain Valley In- dependent July 21,1994. / o74.ns Signature _ l� PROOF OF PUBLICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA) SS. PUBLIC NOTICE I f REQUEST: Repeal exist County of Orange Img Huntington Beach 9)I 'NOTICE OF 'Hance, Code (Divisionn )i PUBLIC HEARING land establish a new zoning) CODE AMENDMENT sand Hun- N0:91-10 inclusion in the subdivision ordinance ifor I am a Citizen of the United States and a ENVIRONMENTAL ;tington Beach Municipall resident of the County aforesaid; I am ASSESSMENT NO: (updates Code. The n zoning ew ordinance) 91.32PROPOSED subdivision heprovisions aby over the age of eighteen years, and not a ZONING AND incorporating current plan-'SUBDIVISION ning principles and plan-` party to or interested in the below ORDINANCE ning requirements of state NOTICE IS -HEREBY' law, deleting duplications entitled matter. I am a principal clerk of GIVEN that the Huntington and conflicts, and stream- Beach City Council will lining review processing the HUNTINGTON BEACH INDEPENDENT, a hold a public hearing in the 1 ENVIRONMENTAL -STA- Council Chambers at the TUS: Covered by Environ- Huntington Beach Civic i mental Assessment No.91- newspaper of general circulation, printed Center, 2000 Main Street, : 32. Huntington Beach, Califor-I COASTAL STATUS: An and published in the City of Huntington nia, on the date and at the amendment to the Run- time indicated below to re- tington Beach Local Beach, County of Orange, State of calve. and consider the Coastal Program Imple- statements of'all persons menting Ordinances will be, California, and that attached Notice is a who wish to be heard rela• filed with the California tive to the application de- Coastal Commission fol-' true and complete copy as was printed scribed below. slowing adoption by the City The City of 'Huntington Council. ' Beach City Council has ON FILE: A copy'of the and published in the Huntington Beach scheduled a series of pub• proposed request is on file lic hearings to facilitate the in the Community Develop- and Fountain Valley issues of said public review of the pro- iment Department, 2000 posed Zoning And Subdivi- Main Street, Huntington newspaper to wit the issue(s) of: sion Ordinance. The dates (Beach, California 92648, and subject matter for each for inspection by the pub- meeting are as.'listed lic. A copy of the staff re- below.; The Cit Council port will be available to in- may continue the public terested parties in the City hearing series should the t Clerk's office after June 3, July 21, 1994 su tio bject matter require ad- '1994.- dinal time. ALL INTERESTED PER' - dy Titles 20 through 22, 24 ;SONS are invited to attend said hearing and express through 25 public hearings 'opinions or submit to the previously held. City Clerk,written evidence August 1,1994 for or against the applica- TITLE 23: Provisions Ap- ition as outlined above. If Iplicant in All or Several Dis- you chalien�e the City tricts- Council's action in court, declare, under penalty of perjury, that I Site Standards 4you may be limited to rais- i Mobilehome Park Conver- ing only those issue: ycu the foregoing is true and correct. Isions ,or someone else raised of g g � Residential Condominium the public hearing de- Conversions I Non Conforming Uses scribed in this notice, or in .and Structures a written correspondence August 15,1994 delivered to the City at, or Executed on July 21 1994 TITLE 23:Continued prior to,the public hearing. Parking Loading If there are any further at Costa Mesa, California. Landscape Improvements (questions please call Signs I Susan Pierce, Associate APPLICATION NUMBER: I Planner,at 536-5271. CODE .AMENDMENT NO. Connie Brockway, 191.10/ ENVIRONMENTAL 1 ! n. 'ASSESSMENT NO.91-32. City Clerk, City of Hu ' APPLICANT: City of Hun- (tington Beach, 2000 `tington,Beach, Department I Main. Street, Hun. !of Community Develop•: tington, Beach, CA �j Lment.:— =---- 92648. (714) 536• 5227. iPublished Huntington Beach-Fountain Valley In. dependent July 21, 1994. / Signature - `074-774-776 5 0 A, Y O Olen - 7/mil NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10 , ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 91-32 PROPOSED ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers at the Huntington Beach Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. The City of Huntington Beach City Council has scheduled a series of public hearings to facilitate the public review of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. The dates and subject matter for each meeting are as listed below. The City Council may continue the public hearing series should the subject matter require additional time. August 1, 1994 TITLE 23: Provisions Applicant in All or Several Districts Site Standards tracts ® Mobilehome Park Conversions ® Residential Condominium Conversions • Non Conforming Uses and Structures August 15, 1994 TITLE 23: Continued ® Parking and Loading ® Landscape Improvements ® Signs APPLICATION NUMBER: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10/ ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 91-32 APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach, Department of Community Development REQUEST: Repeal existing Huntington Beach Ordinance Code(Division 9) and establish a new zoning and subdivision ordinance for inclusion in the Huntington Beach Municipal Code. The new ordinance updates the zoning and subdivision provisions by incorporating current planning principles and planning requirements of state law, deleting duplications and conflicts and streamlining review processing. r ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Covered by Environmental Assessment No. 91-32. COASTAL STATUS: An amendment to the Huntington Beach Local Coastal Program Implementing Ordinances will be filed with the California Coastal Commission following adoption by the City Council. ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the Community Development Department, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties in the City Clerk's office after June 3, 1994. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit to the City Clerk, written evidence for or against the application as outlined above. If you challenge the City Council's action in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to, the public hearing. If there are any further questions please call Susan Pierce, Associate Planner, at 536-5271. Connie Brockway City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 (714) 536-5227 41 . �7_ 1,Y 19 Y My 0 IFRK. REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Date: July 18, 1994 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members CD94-44 Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrato � Prepared by: Melanie S. Fallon, Director of Community Development Subject: NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 91-32/CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10 ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REWRITE (Continued from July 5, 1994) Consistent with Council Policy? [X] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue,Recommendation, Analysis,Funding Source,Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Transmitted for City Council consideration is the fourth segment of updated Titles to the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite as part of Code Amendment No. 91-10. This includes Open Space, Public-Semipublic, and Specific Plan Chapters of Title 21, Base Districts. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: "Approve Chapters 213, 214, and 215 (Open Space, Public-Semipublic, and Specific Plan) of Title 21, Base Districts, of the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite as recommended by the Planning Commission, and continue the public hearing to-August 1 g.1994. ANALYSIS: A summary of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance has been prepared for distribution to the public which summarizes the organization, major changes, and highlights of the proposed ordinance. A formatted version of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance as approved by the Planning Commission has been prepared that includes references to current Ordinance Code sections. Since the document was approved by the Planning Commission, there have been code amendments approved by the City Council that must be incorporated into the proposed Zoning RCA7/18/94 G:RCA\CD94-44 and Subdivision Ordinance (e.g. indoor swap meets). Pending code amendments, such as tattoo establishments and carts/kiosks, will ultimately be incorporated into the document. At the City Council study session of April 25, 1994, Community Development Department staff introduced the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite. This presentation included a brief history of zoning as well as background information on authorization of a consultant contract with Blayney-Dyett, appointment of a subcommittee, and highlights of the major changes and issues. At the conclusion of the meeting, the City Council agreed to a series of public hearings and study sessions that will allow an introduction of the topics scheduled for the following two public hearings. On June 6, 1994, the City Council opened the public hearing on the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and approved Titles 20, General Provisions, and 24, Administration. Titles 22, Overlay Districts, and 25, Subdivisions, were approved at the June 20, 1994, City Council meeting. At the third public hearing on July 5, 1994, Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Chapters of Title 21, Base Districts, were approved. TITLE 21, Base Districts: This portion of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance contains the following: o Chapter 210, R Residential Districts o Chapter 211, C Commercial Districts o Chapter 212, I Industrial Districts • Chapter 213, OS Open- District o Chapter 214, PS Public-Semipublic District o Chapter 215, SP Specific Plan District Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Highlights The following information is provided for the subject of this public hearing on Open Space, Public-Semipublic, and Specific Plan Base Districts, Title 21. Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Base Districts were approved at the July 5, 1994, public hearing. The tables identify only the significant changes to the Open Space, Public-Semipublic, and Specific Plan districts' standards. RCA7/18/94 2 GARCA\CD94-44 CHAPTER 213 Open Space This is a new zoning district that combines several existing districts. The standards of the existing districts have been retained. PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 213-1 213.02 Renaming ROS, CF-R OS-PR Open Space Parks Zoning Districts and Recreation subdistrict S 1 OS-S Open Space - Shoreline subdistrict CC, -CC OS-C Open Space - Conservation subdistrict WR OS-WR Open Space - Water Recreation subdistrict Benefits of Chapter 213 This chapter consolidates open space/recreational base districts into one district. Four subdistricts are created with ROS and CF-R combined into a parks and recreational subdistrict and CC and -CC suffix combined into a conservation subdistrict. Because the current coastal conservation district is located within the Coastal Zone, the term"coastal" is redundant and has been eliminated in the new subdistrict. The Open Space District provides a suitable classification for large public or private sites permanently designated for park or open space use. The district conserves and protects the City's open space resources and achieves a visually pleasing and compatible relationship between buildings and structures, parking areas, walkways and planting areas, and the natural environment. Additional development standards have been included to ensure that only compatible development occurs in open space areas. Mitigation measures applicable to the conservation subdistrict have been eliminated and are more appropriately addressed through the environmental review process. These subdistricts respond to the General Plan categories of Open Space (Water, Conservation and Recreation). RCA7/18/94 3 GARCA\CD94-44 CHAPTER 214 Public-Semipublic This is a new zoning district that will apply to school and college sites, other public land, and to institutional holdings. Development standards closely follow those currently applicable to commercial properties as indicated in the following table. PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 214-2 214.08 Minimum Lot Not Addressed 2 acres Area 214-2 214.08 Minimum Front Not Addressed 10 feet except 50 feet on Yard Beach, Edinger, and PCH 214-2 214.08 Minimum Side Not Addressed 0 feet except 10 feet street Yard side 214-2 214.08 Minimum Rear Not Addressed None Yard 214-2 214.08 Building Height Not Addressed 50 feet 214-2 214.08 Floor Area Not Addressed 1.5 Ratio Benefits of Chapter 214 This district applies to the public-semi-public classifications contained in Chapter 204 and includes schools, hospitals, churches, fire stations, and other uses when located on sites of two (2) acres or more. This district replaces the designations currently placed on government uses and schools CF-C and CF-E. CHAPTER 215 Specific Plant Benefits of Chapter 215 This chapter sets forth the procedure to create Specific Plans. The SP district will be adopted by ordinance with an accompanying Specific Plan (development standards and provisions applicable to the district only). The Planning Commission will administer the SP plan as it would a conditional use permit. No longer will the zoning map contain the names of the various specific plans. Instead the symbol SP would be applied to the specific plan area and a number based on the order of adoption. The Specific Plan development standards would be retained in a separate document, not within the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. RCA7/18/94 4 G:\RCA\CD94-44 Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Schedule The following table indicates the schedule of public hearings and meetings relative to the processing of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. FUNDING SOURCE: Not applicable. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Rewrite Meeting Schedule MTU:MSF:SP RCA7/18/94 5 G:\RCA\CD94-44 k k ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE SCHEDULE Meeting Meeting Type Subject Meeting Status Date May 12 Meeting Staff presentation to Chamber of Commerce Completed May 19 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Rewrite Completed House overview, General Provisions, Administration, Overlay Districts, Subdivisions May 23 Study Session General Provisions, Administration, Overlay Completed Districts, Subdivisions June 6 Public Hearing Environmental Assessment; General Approved Provisions, Administration General Provisions and Administration June 16 Meeting Staff presentation to Board of Realtors Completed June 20 Public Hearing Overlay Districts, Subdivisions Approved June 23 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Residential, Completed House Commercial, Industrial, Open Space, Public- Semipublic, Specific Plan June 27 Study Session Residential, Commercial, Industrial, Open Completed S ace, Public-Semi ublic, Specific Plan July 5 Public Hearing Residential, Commercial, Industrial Approved July 18 Public Hearing Open Space, Public-Semipublic, Specific Plan Pending July 21 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Supplemental Pending House Site Standards, Mobilehome Park Conversions, Condominium Conversions, Non conforming, Parking and Loading, Landsca e Improvements, Signs July 25 Study Session Supplement Site Standards, Mobilehome Park Pending Conversions, Condominium Conversions, Non conforming, Parking and Loading, Landscape Improvements, Signs August 1 Public Hearing Supplement Site Standards, Mobilehome Park Pending Conversions, Condominium Conversions, Non conforming August 15 Public Hearing Parking and Loading, Landscape Pending Im rovements, Signs August 15 Public Hearing Zone Change Introduction Pending September 6 Hearing Adoption Pending RCA7/1 S/94 6 G:\RCA\CD94-44 ' APPROVED BY CI'I y COUNCIL 4�2 � - c REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTIO Date: July 5, 1994 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members CD94-41 Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator �—�— Prepared by: Melanie S. Fallon, Director of Community Development Subject: NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 91-32/CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10 ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REWRITE (Continued from June 20, 1994) Consistent with Council Policy? [X] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue,Recommendation, Analysis,Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments: 4?AP STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Ge 20 711111, f Transmitted for City Council consideration is the third segment of updated Titles to the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite as part of Code Amendment No. 91-10. This includes Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Chapters of Title 21, Base Districts. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: "Approve Chapters 210, 211, and 212 (Residential, Commercial, and Industrial) of Title 21, Base Districts, of the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite as recommended by the Planning Commission, and continue the public hearing to July 18, 1994." ANALYSIS: A summary of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance has been prepared for distribution to the public which summarizes the organization, major changes, and highlights of the proposed ordinance. A formatted version of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance as approved by the'Planning Commission has been prepared that includes references to current Ordinance Code sections. Since the document was approved by the Planning Commission, there have been code amendments approved by the City Council that must be incorporated into the proposed Zoning t and Subdivision Ordinance (e.g. indoor swap meets). Pending code amendments, such as outdoor dining, tattoo establishments, and carts/kiosks, will ultimately be incorporated into the document. At the City Council study session of April 25, 1994, Community Development Department staff introduced the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite. This presentation included a brief history of zoning as well as background information on authorization of a consultant contract with Blayney-Dyett, appointment of a subcommittee, and highlights of the major changes and issues. At the conclusion of the meeting, the City Council agreed to a series of public hearings and study sessions that will allow an introduction of the topics scheduled for the following two public hearings. On June 6, 1994, the City Council opened the public hearing on the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and approved Titles 20, General Provisions, and 24, Administration. Titles 22, Overlay Districts, and 25, Subdivisions, were approved at the June 20, 1994, City Council meeting. TITLE 21, Base Districts: This portion of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance contains the following: e Chapter 210, R Residential Districts • Chapter 211, C Commercial Districts • Chapter 212, I Industrial Districts Chapter 213, OS Open-District Chapter 214, PS Public-Semipublic District • Chapter 215, SP Specific Plan District Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Highlights The following information is provided for the subject of this public hearing on Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Base Districts, Title 21. The remaining chapters of Title 21 will be the fourth in the series of public hearings scheduled for the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite. The tables identify only the significant changes to the Residential, Commercial, and Industrial districts' standards. RCA 7/5/94 2 G:RCA:CD94-41 CHAPTER 210 Residential ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE Renaming zoning districts RI RL-Low Density Res. R2 RM-Medium Density Res. R3 RMH-Medium High Res. R4 RH-High Density Res. MH RMP-Manufactured Home Park OT, TL RMH-A-Medium High Res.-Small Lot Subdistrict Residential Day Care, Limited Use Permit approyal by ZA Permitted Multi Family Dwellings All Apartments: Use Permit 2-4 units: permitted approval by ZA 5-9 units: CUP approval All Condos: Conditional by ZA Use Permit approval by PC 10+units: CUP approval by PC Senior Housing Allowed in districts with - Allowed in any zone SR suffix Required Affordable Housing Not addressed Required if project consists of 4 or more units Density Calculation Lot frontage/width Net site area Area Net site area Gross area Adjusted gross area Multi-family Development Vary depending on whether Consistent development Standards small or large apartment standards for any type of complex or if condo multi-family development development Multi-Family Building Separation Condos: Varies with unit Courts; open space areas orientation adjacent to building walls with required windows Site Coverage Maximum 55% in Townlot, Maximum 50% Oldtown and RI waterfront lots Open Space Single family 600-1200 Single family: Site sq.ft. coverage and Setbacks Multifamily: patios, balconies, common areas, Multifamily: Courts, main recreation. areas atios, balconies Balconies No specific limitations Open design re uired RCA 7/5/94 3 G:RCA:CD94-41 Upper Story Setback Minimum 10 ft in Townlot RM, RMH, RH: 10 ft. and Oldtown average required (This R2, R3, R4: Not addressed includes RMH-A subdistrict Front or Street Side Yard Planting area not specified Minimum 40% visible yard Landscaping to be planting area Waterfront Lots: Windscreens Maximum 9 ft. high Maximum 7 ft. high Waterfront Lots: Patio Enclosures 5 ft. projection over Maximum 30 inch bulkhead with 80% of one projection end open Benefits of Chapter 210 This chapter consolidates all residential development standards into one area. Zoning District names are changed to reflect the General Plan terms which indicate the type of residential development allowed in a specific area of the City. Limited Residential Day Care is now a permitted use; the current use permit process is in conflict with State law. Multi-family standards are applicable to both apartment and condominium projects, and therefore, afford the same quality of life opportunities to all residents. The urban design guidelines of a project should not be different because of the form of ownership. Multi-family development discretionary review and approval will be determined by the number of dwelling units, not the type of ownership. The larger developments will be acted upon by the Planning Commission; and the smaller ones will be either permitted or acted upon by the Zoning Administrator. Building design and bulk controls are included to encourage and provide opportunities for variations in building design. Courts are proposed in multifamily developments to provide building separation and additional opportunities for private recreational use. A court is basically an open space area and must be provided adjacent to any building wall with a required window (pursuant to the Building Code); the court provides additional light and ventilation to these rooms with required windows. Upper story setbacks are now included in the RM, RMH, and RH districts similar to Downtown Specific Plan provisions. Open space for single family homes has been deleted and open space for multi-family development is replaced by courts, balconies, and patios. Another building design enhancement standard to reduce the appearance of building bulk is the requirement that balconies only constructed of see-through materials may project into required yards. A pleasing street scene will be created by a requirement that a minimum area of any yard visible from the street be landscaped. Reduction in the height of a windscreen and the patio enclosure projection were recommended by the Harbour Code committee to increase visibility of the waterways. RCA 7/5/94 4 G:RCA:CD94-41 CHAPTER 211 Commercial ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE Renaming Zoning Districts OP - Office Professional CO - Office Commercial Cl, C2, C4 CG- General Commercial VSC - Visitor Serving CV- Visitor Commercial Commercial Clubs and Lodges CUP approval by PC CUP approval by ZA Laboratories UP approval by ZA if CUP approval by ZA if greater than 1,500 s .ft greater than 2,500 s .ft Day Care, General CUP approval by PC CUP approval by ZA if less than 2,500 sq.ft.; CUP approval by PC if greater than 2,500 s .ft. Auto Repair (Vehicle Equip. UP approval by ZA CUP approval by PC Repair) Car Wash(Automobile Washing) UP approval by ZA Unattended: CUP approval by ZA Attended: CUP approval by PC Front setback OR 10 feet CO, CG: 10 feet except C1, C2, C4:50 feet 50 feet on Beach and Edinger unless 25 feet landscaping provided VSC: 10 feet CV: none Floor Area Ratio None CO: 1.0 CG, CV: 1.5 Building Height OP: 38 feet CO: 40 feet Building Design Not addressed Front or street side building wall offsets required Building Face at Setback Line Not addressed 40% of building wall may be located at the minimum setback line with additional landscaping Density Bonus Not addressed Permitted when child care facilities included in project RCA 7/5/94 5 G:RCA:CD94-41 Benefits of Chapter 211 This renames the commercial districts, consolidates three commercial districts into one, CG, General Commercial, and incorporates all commercial development standards into one chapter. Changes to the permitted uses will streamline the development review process. Changes to the development standards will encourage pedestrian activity and allow greater visibility to the commercial business while requiring building design variations that will provide more attractive streetscape. Floor area ratio is provided and will assist property owners in determining the maximum building that can be constructed on a site. A new provision refers to State law which allows a floor area ratio increase when child care facilities are included in a commercial project. CHAPTER 212 Industrial ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE Renaming Zoning Districts MI-A IL -Limited Industrial M1, M2 IG- General Industrial Public or Private Schools CUP approval by PC Only trade schools allowed and subject to CUP approval by ZA Marine sales and Service Boat Building permitted All aspects of category permitted Nurseries CUP approval by PC Permitted Service Stations Not addressed CUP approval by PC Vehicle Repair UP approval by ZA Permitted Single Room Occupancy Not addressed CUP approval by PC Minimum Lot Area 10,000 - 20,000 s .ft. 20,000 s .ft. Floor Area Ratio Not addressed 0.75 Benefits of Title 22 This chapter renames the industrial districts and consolidates two industrial districts into one. Changes to the permitted uses will streamline the development review process. Service stations, which were allowed in the industrial districts until the mid 1980's, are being reintroduced to the industrial districts with primary sales and services to businesses within the industrial districts. Floor area ratio is provided and will assist property owners in determining the maximum building that can be constructed on a site. Minimum lot area is increased to allow better parking, circulation pattern, and truck access while providing better separation between buildings on adjacent lots. RCA 7/5/94 6 G:RCA:CD94-41 FUNDING SOURCE: Not applicable. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Rewrite Meeting Schedule MTU:MSF:SP RCA 7/5/94 7 G:RCA:CD94-41 ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE SCHEDULE Meeting Meeting Type Subject Meeting Status Date May 12 Meeting Staff presentation to Chamber of Commerce Completed May 19 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public:. Rewrite Completed House overview, General Provisions, Administration, Overlay Districts, Subdivisions May 23 Study Session General Provisions, Administration, Overlay Completed Districts, Subdivisions June 6 Public Hearing Environmental Assessment; General Approved Provisions, Administration General Provisions and Administration June 16 Meeting Staff presentation to Board of Realtors Completed June 20 Public Hearing Overlay Districts, Subdivisions Approved June 23 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Residential, Completed House Commercial, Industrial, Open Space, Public- Semipublic, Specific Plan June 27 Study Session Residential, Commercial, Industrial, Open Completed Space, Public-Semipublic, Specific Plan July 5 Public Hearing Residential, Commercial, Industrial Pending July 18 Public Hearing Open Space, Public-Semi ublic, Specific Plan Pending July 21 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Supplemental Pending House Site Standards, Mobilehome Park Conversions, Condominium Conversions, Non conforming, Parking and Loading, Landsca e Improvements, Signs July 25 Study Session Supplement Site Standards, Mobilehome Park Pending Conversions, Condominium Conversions, Non conforming, Parking and Loading, Landsca e Improvements, Signs August 1 Public Hearing Supplement Site Standards, Mobilehome Park Pending Conversions, Condominium Conversions, Non conforming August 15 Public Hearing Parking and Loading, Landscape Pending Im rovements, Signs August 15 Public Hearing Zone Change Introduction I Pending September 6 Hearing Adoption I Pending RCA 7/5/94 8 G:RCA:CD94-41 CHAPTER 210 AND MADE A FA�i�' � THE COUNCIL M . SING OF S OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK Residential CONNIE EROOKWAY,CITY CLERK PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT COIF PROPOSED CODE 201-1 210.02 Renaming zoning districts R1 RL-Low Density Res. R2 RM-Medium Density Res. R3 RMH-Medium High Res. R4 RH-High Density Res. MH RMP-Manufactured Home Park RMH-A-Medium High Res.- OT, TL Small Lot Subdistrict 210-3 210.04 Residential Day Care, Limited Use Permit approval by ZA Permitted 210-3 210.04 Multi Family Dwellings All Apartments: Use Permit approval by 24 units: permitted ZA 5-9 units: CUP approval by ZA All Condos: Conditional Use Permit 10+ units: CUP approval by PC approval by PC 210-1 210.02 Senior Housing Allowed in districts with -SR suffix Allowed in any zone 210-3 210.04 210-4 210.08 210-15 210-5 210.06(T) Required Affordable Housing Not addressed Required if project consists of 4 or more units 210-5 210.06 Density Calculation Lot frontage/width Net site area 210-6 Area Net site area Gross area Ad'usted gross area 210-6 210.06 Multi-family Development Vary depending on whether small or large Consistent development Standards apartment complex or if condo standards for any type of multi- development family development 210-7 210.06(E) Multi-Family Building Separation Condos: Varies with unit orientation Courts; open space areas adacent 210-9 210.06(N) to building walls with required windows PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 210-6 210.06 Site Coverage Max 55% in Townlot, Oldtown and R1 Maximum 50% waterfront lots 210-9 210-06(N) Open Space Single family: 600-1,200 sq.ft. Single family: Site coverage and 210-11 210.06(0) Multi-family: patios, balconies, common Setbacks areas, main recreation. areas Multifamily: Courts, patios, balconies 210-12 210.06 P Balconies Nospecific limitations Open design required 210-12 210.06(Q) Upper Story Setback Minimum 10 ft in Townlot and Oldtown RM, RMH, RH: 10 ft. average R2, R3, R4: Not addressed required (This includes RMH-A subdistrict) 210-13 210.06(R) Front or Street Side Yard Planting area not specified Minimum 40% visible yard to be Landscaping lantin area 210-13 210.06 T Waterfront Lots: Windscreens Maximum 9 ft. high Maximum 7 ft. high 210-13 210.06(T) Waterfront Lots: Patio Enclosures 5 ft. projection over bulkhead with 80% of Maximum 30 inch projection one end open —HAPTER 211 Commercial PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 211-1 211.02 Renaming Zoning Districts OP - Office Professional CO - Office Commercial C1, C2, C4 . CG - General Commercial VSC - Visitor Serving Commercial CV - Visitor Commercial 211-3 211.04 Clubs and Lodges CUP approval by PC CUP approval by ZA 211-4 211.04 Laboratories UP approval by ZA if greater than 1,500 CUP approval by ZA if greater 211-6 L-1 s .ft than 2,500 s .ft 211-4 211.04 Day Care, General CUP approval by PC CUP approval by ZA if less than 211-6 L-2 2,500 sq.ft.; CUP approval by PC if greater than 2,500 s .ft. 211-5 211.04 Auto Repair(Vehicle Equip. UP approval by ZA CUP approval by PC 211-6 L-5 Repair) 211-5 211.04 Car Wash (Automobile Washing) UP approval by ZA Unattended: CUP approval by 211-6 L-7 ZA Attended: CUP approval by PC 211-9 211.06(E) Front setback OP: 10 feet CO, CG: 10 feet except 211-10 C1, C2, C4:50 feet 50 feet on Beach and Edinger unless 25 feet landscaping provided VSC: 10 feet CV: none 211-9 211.06(P) Floor Area Ratio None CO: 1.0 211-13 CG, CV: 1.5 211-9 211.06 Building Height _OP: 38 feet CO: 40 feet 211-11 211.06(N) Building Design Not addressed Front or street side building wall 211-13 211.06(0) offsets required 21 1-13 21 1.06(0) Building Face at Setback Line Not addressed 40% of building wall may be located at the minimum setback line with additional landscaping 211-13 211.06(P) Density Bonus Not addressed Permitted when child care facilities included in project CHAPTER 212 lmIustriol PAGE SECTION ISSUE CIAME'NT CODE _ PROPOSED CODE 212-1 212.02 Renaming Zoning Districts M I-A IL - Limited Industrial M I, M2 IG - General Industrial 212-4 212.04 Public or Private Schools CUP approval by PC Only trade schools allowed and L-6 _ _ _ _ subject to CUP approval by Z.A 212-2 212.04 Marine sales and Service Boat Building permitted All aspects of'category permitted 212-2 212.04 Nurseries _ _CUP appproval by PC Permitted 212-3 212.04 Service Stations Not addressed CUP approval by PC 212-4 LA 212-3 212.04 Vehicle Repair UP±ipproval by ZA Permitted 212-5 212.04 K Single Room Occupancy __Not addressed CUP approval by PC 212-6 212.06 Minimum Lot Area 10,000 - 20,000 sq.11. 20,000 sc .It. 212-6 212.06 Floor Area Ratio Not addressed 0.75 RECEIVED FROM CHAPTER 210 AND MADE APART pFTH RE -g THE COUNCIL MEETING F OFFICE OF THE C[r` CL£AK Residential CONNIE BRWKWAy wycl.OK PAGE SECTION ISSUE C[ RRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 201-1 210.02 Renaming zoning districts R1 RL-Low Density Res. R2 RM-Medium Density Res. R3 RMH-Medium High Res. R4 RH-High Density Res. MH RMP-Manufactured Home Park RMH-A-Medium High Res.- OT, TL Small Lot Subdistrict 210-3 210.04 Residential Day Care, Limited Use Permit approval by ZA Permitted 210-3 210.04 Multi Family Dwellings All Apartments: Use Permit approval by 2-4 units: permitted ZA 5-9 units: CUP approval by ZA All Condos: Conditional Use Permit 10+ units: CUP approval by PC approval by PC 210-1 210.02 Senior Housing Allowed in districts with -SR suffix Allowed in any zone 210-3 210.04 210-4 210.08 210-15 210-5 210.06(T) Required Affordable Housing Not addressed Required if project consists of 4 or more units 210-5 210.06 Density Calculation Lot frontage/width Net site area 210-6 Area Net site area Gross area Adjusted gross area 210-6 210.06 Multi-family Development Vary depending on whether small or large Consistent development Standards apartment complex or if condo standards for any type of multi- development family development 210-7 210.06(E) Multi-Family Building Separation Condos: Varies with unit orientation Courts; open space areas adacent 210-9 210.06(N) to building walls with required windows PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 210-6 210.06 Site Coverage Max 55% in Townlot, Oldtown and R1 Maximum 50% waterfront lots 210-9 210-06(N) Open Space Single family: 600-1,200 sq.ft. Single famil3 Site coverage and 210-11 210.06(0) Multifamily: patios, balconies, common Setbacks areas, main recreation. areas Multifamily: Courts, patios, balconies 210-12 210.06 P Balconies Nospecific limitations Open design required 210-12 210.06(Q) Upper Story Setback Minimum 10 ft in Townlot and Oldtown RM, RMH, RH: 10 ft. average R2, R3, R4: Not addressed required (This includes RMH-A subdistrict 210-13 210.06(R) Front or Street Side Yard Planting area not specified Minimum 40% visible yard to be Landscaping planting area 210-13 210.06 T Waterfront Lots: Windscreens Maximum 9 ft. high Maximum 7 ft. high 210-13 210.06(T) Waterfront Lots: Patio Enclosures 5 ft. projection over bulkhead with 80% of Maximum 30 inch projection one end open a : CHAPTER 211 Commercial PAGE SECTION ISSUE' CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 211-1 211.02 Renaming Zoning Districts OP - Office Professional CO - Office Commercial C1, C2, C4 CG- General Commercial VSC - Visitor Serving Commercial CV - Visitor Commercial 211-3 211.04 Clubs and Lodges CUP approval by PC CUP approval by ZA 211-4 211.04 Laboratories UP approval by ZA if greater than 1,500 CUP approval by ZA if greater 211-6 L-1 s .ft than 2,500 s .ft 211-4 211.04 Day Care, General CUP approval by PC CUP approval by ZA if less than 211-6 L-2 2,500 sq.ft.; CUP approval by PC if greater than 2,500 s .ft. 211-5 211.04 Auto Repair(Vehicle Equip. UP approval by ZA CUP approval by PC 211-6 L-5 Repair) 211-5 211.04 Car Wash (Automobile Washing) UP approval by ZA Unattended: CUP approval by 211-6 L-7 ZA Attended: CUP approval by PC 211-9 211.06(E) Front setback OP: 10 feet CO, CG: 10 feet except 211-10 C1, C2, C4:50 feet 50 feet on Beach and Edinger unless 25 feet landscaping provided VSC: 10 feet CV: none 211-9 211.06(P) Floor Area Ratio None CO: 1.0 211-13 CG, CV: 1.5 211-9 211.06 Building Height OR 38 feet CO: 40 feet 211-11 211.06(N) Building Design Not addressed Front or street side building wall 211-13 21 1.06 O offsets required ` 211-13 21 1.06(0) Building Face at Setback Line Not addressed 40% of building wall may be located at the minimum setback line with additional landscaping 211-13 211.06(P) Density Bonus Not addressed Permitted when child care facilities included in project CHAPTER 212 Lrrhistrial PAGE SECTION ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE 212-1 212.02 Renaming Zoning Districts M I-A IL - Limited Industrial M I, M2 _ IG - General Industrial 212-4 212.04 Public or Private Schools CUP approval by PC Only trade schools allowed and L-6 _ _ _ subject to CUP approval by ZA 212-2 212.04 Marine sales and Service Boat Building permitted — All aspects of-category permitted 212-2 212.04 Nurseries _CUP approval by PC Permitted 212-3 212.04 Service Stations Not addressed CUP approval by PC 212-4 I.A 212-3 212.04 Vehicle Repair UP a m-oval by ZA — Permitted 212-5 212.04 K Single Room Occupancy _ Not addressed CUP approval by PC 212-6 212.06 Minimum Lot Area 10,000 - 20,000 sq,fl. 20,000 sc .R. 212-6 212.06 Floor Area Ratio Not addressed 0.75 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ADMINISTRATIVE COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator�l DATE: June 27, 1994 SUBJECT: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10 ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REWRITE At the April 25, 1994 City Council study session meeting, staff introduced the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite document, answered questions, and responded to Council's inquiries regarding the document. Binders were distributed which included a summary of the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance, annotated proposed ordinance with index, and cross reference to current Huntington Beach Ordinance Code sections. The City Council established a process for adoption which includes a series of public hearings and study sessions. This is the second study session in a series of meetings, public hearings and study sessions. Attached are tables summarizing highlights of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite document that will be presented at public hearings on July 5, and July 18, 1994. A schedule of hearings is also included. Please refer to the binder when reviewing the attached. TITLE 21 BASE DISTRICTS This portion of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance contains the following: Chapter 210, Residential Districts j. Chapter 211, Commercial Districts 'rr, Chapter 212, Industrial Districts -�' Chapter 213, Open Space District Chapter 214, Public-Semipublic District r Chapter 215, Specific Plan DistrictWr The following tables identify the primary changes in each chapter of this Title. G:\pierce\0013 v C ¢ CHAPTER 210 Residential ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE Renaming zoning districts RI RL-Low Density Res. R2 RM-Medium Density Res. R3 RMH-Medium High Res. R4 RH-High Density Res. MH RMP-Manufactured Home Park OT, TL RMH-A-Medium High Res.-Small Lot Subdistrict Residential Day Care, Limited Use Permit approval by ZA Permitted Multi Family Dwellings All Apartments: Use Permit 2-4 units: permitted approval by ZA 5-9 units: CUP approval All Condos: Conditional by ZA Use Permit approval by PC 10+units: CUP approval by PC Senior Housing Allowed in districts with- Allowed in any zone SR suffix Required Affordable Housing Not addressed Required if project consists of 4 or more units Density Calculation Lot frontage/width Net site area Area Net site area Gross area Adjusted gross area Multi-family Development Vary depending on whether Consistent development Standards small or large apartment standards for any type of complex or if condo multi-family development development Multi-Family Building Separation Condos: Varies with unit Courts; open space areas orientation adacent to building walls with required windows Site Coverage Max 55% in Townlot, Maximum 50% Oldtown and R1 waterfront lots Open Space Single family 600-1,200 Single family: Site sq.ft. coverage and Setbacks Multifamily: patios, balconies, common areas, Multifamily: Courts, main recreation. areas patios, balconies GApierce\0013 Residential continued ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE Balconies No specific limitations Open design required Upper Story Setback Minimum 10 ft in Townlot RM, RMH, RH: 10 ft. and Oldtown average required (This R2, R3, R4: Not addressed includes RMH-A subdistrict Front or Street Side Yard Planting area not specified Minimum 40% visible yard Landscaping to be planting area Waterfront Lots: Windscreens Maximum 9 ft. high Maximum 7 ft. high Waterfront Lots: Patio Enclosures 5 ft. projection over Maximum 30 inch bulkhead with 80% of one projection end open GApierce\0013 CHAPTER 211 Commercial ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE Renaming Zoning Districts OP - Office Professional CO - Office Commercial C1, C2, C4 CG- General Commercial VSC - Visitor Serving CV - Visitor Commercial Commercial Clubs and Lodges CUP approval by PC CUP approval by ZA Laboratories UP approval by ZA if CUP approval by ZA if greater than 1,500 s .ft greater than 2,5 00 s .ft Day Care, General CUP approval by PC CUP approval by ZA if less than 2,500 sq.ft.; CUP approval by PC if greater than 2,500 sq.ft. Auto Repair(Vehicle Equip. UP approval by ZA CUP approval by PC Repair) Car Wash (Automobile Washing) UP approval by ZA Unattended: CUP approval by ZA Attended: CUP approval by PC Front setback OR 10 feet CO, CG: 10 feet except C1, C2,C4:50 feet 50 feet on Beach and Edinger unless 25 feet landscaping provided VSC: 10 feet CV: none Floor Area Ratio None CO: 1.0 CG, CV: 1.5 Building Height OR 38 feet CO: 40 feet Building Design Not addressed Front or street side building wall offsets required Building Face at Setback Line Not addressed 40% of building wall may be located at the minimum setback line with additional landscaping Density Bonus Not addressed Permitted when child care facilities included in project G:\pierce\0013 CHAPTER 212 Industrial ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE Renaming Zoning Districts MI-A H- -Limited Industrial M1, M2 IG- General Industrial Public or Private Schools CUP approval by PC Only trade schools allowed and subject to CUP approval by ZA Marine sales and Service Boat Building permitted All aspects of category permitted Nurseries CUP approval by PC Permitted Service Stations Not addressed CUP approval by PC Vehicle Repair UP approval b ZA Permitted Sin le Room Occupancy Not addressed CUP approval by PC Minimum Lot Area 10,000 - 20,000 s .ft. 20,000 s .ft. Floor Area Ratio Not addressed 0.75 CHAPTER 213 Open Space This is a new zoning district that combines several existing districts. The standards of the existing districts have been retained. ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE Renaming Zoning Districts ROS, CF-R OS-PR Open Space Parks S 1 and Recreation subdistrict CC, -CC OS-S Open Space - WR Shoreline subdistrict OS-C Open Space - Conservation subdistrict OS-WR Open Space - Water Recreation subdistrict G:\pierce\0013 CHAPTER 214 Public-Semipublic This is a new zoning district that will apply to school and college sites, other public land, and to institutional holdings. This district will allow the City to consider what the appropriate use of the site may be should the public or semipublic use be discontinued. This district replaces the designations currently placed on government uses and schools (CF-C and CF-E) It will apply to the public-semi-public classifications contained in Chapter 204 and includes hospitals, churches, fire stations, and other uses when located on sites of two (2) acres or more. Development standards closely follow those currently applicable to commercial properties as indicated in the following table. ISSUE CURRENT CODE PROPOSED CODE Minimum Lot Area Not Addressed 2 acres Minimum Front Yard Not Addressed 10 feet except 50 feet on Beach, Edinger, and PCH Minimum Side Yard Not Addressed 0 feet except 10 feet street side Minimum Rear Yard Not Addressed None Building Height Not Addressed 50 feet Floor Area Ratio Not Addressed 1.5 CHAPTER 215 Specific Plan The Specific Plan District will be used to create Specific Plans. The SP district will be adopted by ordinance with an accompanying Specific Plan (development standards and provisions applicable to the district only). The Planning Commission will administer the SP plan as it would a conditional use permit. No longer will the zoning map contain the names of the various specific plans. Instead the symbol SP would be applied to the specific plan area and a number based on the order of adoption. The Specific Plan development standards would be retained in a separate document, not within the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Schedule The following table indicates the schedule of public hearings and meetinghs relative to the processing of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. G:\pierce\0013 ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE SCHEDULE Meeting Date Meeting Tjpe Subject Meeting Status May 12 Meeting Staff presentation to Chamber of Commerce Completed May 19 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Rewrite overview, Completed House General Provisions,Administration,Overlay Districts, Subdivisions May 23 Study Session General Provisions,Administration, Overlay Completed Districts, Subdivisions June 6 Public Hearing Environmental Assessment;General Provisions, Approved General Administration Provisions and Administration June 16 Meeting Staff presentation to Board of Realtors Completed June 20 Public Hearing Overlay Districts, Subdivisions Approved June 23 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Residential,Commercial, Pending House Industrial, Open Space,Public-Semipublic, Specific Plan June 27 Study Session Residential,Commercial,Industrial,Open Space, Pending Public-Semipublic, Specific Plan July 5 Public Hearing Residential,Commercial,Industrial Pending July 18 Public Hearing Open Space,Public-Semipublic, Specific Plan Pending July 21 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Supplemental Site Pending House Standards,Mobilehome Park Conversions, Condominium Conversions,Non conforming,Parking and Loading,Landscape Improvements, Signs July 25 Study Session Supplement Site Standards,Mobilehome Park Pending Conversions,Condominium Conversions,Non conforming,Parking and Loading, Landscape Improvements, Signs August 1 Public Hearing Supplement Site Standards,Mobilehome Park Pending Conversions,Condominium Conversions,Non conforming August 15 Public Hearing Parking and Loading,Landscape Improvements, Pending Signs August 15 Public Hearing Zone Change Introduction Pending September 6 Hearing Adoption Pending G:\pierce\0013 FROM AND MACE A PART OF THE RECORD AT COUNCIL MEETING 1V/ tOnG C XW ` N MWC OFFICE 0.THE CITY CLE K2'ry I��-�� aA IVIJI 1 CONNIF OOKWA1' CITY CLERK To: Barbara r From: Jim La Date: June 27, 1994 Subject: Inclusion of Major Retail within Large Industrial Sites At a recent discussion of the proposed changes to the City's zoning and sub- division ordinance, Division Nine, mention was made of the possibility of attracting enough major retail tenants to one location so as to create a "destination" shopping center. The specific location which is most often mentioned is part of the McDonnell Douglas under-utilized land at the North- West corner of Springdale and Bolsa. If enough destination retailers could be attracted to that site to make such a center viable, it would be very helpful if such a use were included in the City ordinance so that the development could proceed through entitlements without requiring a general plan amendment with it's more time consuming environmental impact report. As you know, this particular location will be a difficult sell to the retail community based on the areas demographics, so anything that the City can do to make it easier to bring in a power center or a factory outlet center should be considered. a • Summary Of Proposed Zoning 310 And Subdivision Ordinance The City of Huntington Beach is in the process of rewriting the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and is requesting public comment Goal and Objectives of the and input. The Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance is a set of rules Update that govern the physical development of our City. Since the Zoning The goal of the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance affects how your property may be devel- and Subdivision ordinance is to oped,public comment is essential in creating a complete and compre- establish a clear, concise, complete, hensive set of rules. This summary is not the Proposed Zoning and and consistent document that Subdivision Ordinance,but rather an introduction and a generalized implements the General Plan and streamlines the review process. The synopsis In order to allow public input. main objectives of the provisions are: to: WHAT IS ZONING? WHY IS THE ZONING AND SUBDIVISION *Establish categories of uses with In its basic form,zoning is intended to ORDINANCE BEING similar characteristics that are not repetitive or cumbersome; protect the public health,safety,and UPDATED? welfare of the citizens of Huntington •Create districts that clearly Beach. Zoning does this by dividing In 1946 the City adopted its first respond to the General Plan's the City into areas,or zones,and land use and urban design establishingregulations that trovern zoning ordinance. Since that time a re g b myriad of amendments have occurred policies, the use,placement,spacing,and size in of land and buildings within those Patchwork fashion that incorporate • highly complex standards and rules Allow regulations to be tailored to areas. For example,the Zoning each district by establishing speck limitations that apply in 405 freeway one or more districts; •Allow architects, developers and property owners design ♦ flexibility within the framework of standards that clearly indicate what will be approved; J0 - — '♦ and IC *Create new subdivision regulations pacific ocean that incorporate new proce- City of Huntington Beach dures for processing tentative, vesting,final and parcel maps Ordinance specifies that no industrial for everything from parking to granny consistent with the State uses can be built in the middle of a units. Many of the changes were Subdivision Map Act. residential neighborhood in order to generated by new city objectives,state protect the health of residents and the law,and court cases. The Zoning The Proposed Zoning and economic value of the houses. Zoning Ordinance has become difficult to Subdivision Ordinance must be i program that implements policies understand and,in some cases, is o a of the General Plan,the"constitution 11 contradictory;therefore,many out-of- clear, complete, concise and of our City. date provisions have developed. consistent TENTATIVE SCHEDULE Ola PUBLIC REVIEW FAR 0.5 The Proposed Zoning and Subdivi- sion Ordinance must receive final FAR 1.0 approval by the City Council. The following tentative schedule of City Council meetings has been set: *April 25-City Council Study FAR 1.5 Session +May 23-City Council Study Session, Floor Area Ratio(FAR) is determined by dividing the gross floor area of all +June 6-Public Hearing Introduc- buildings on a lot by the area of the lot. tion +June 6-Aug. 15-Public Hearing Series Typical diagram of the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance *June 6-General Provisions and Administration BACKGROUND AND (3)subdivision provisions which +June 20-Subdivisions, and the Oil, PROCESS govern the division of land within the Coastal Zone, Floodplain, City. State law requires the Zoning Interim Study, Neighborhood and Subdivision Ordinance to be Conservation, Planned Block The Proposed Zoning and Subdivi- consistent with the General Plan. The Development, High-Rise, sion Ordinance,originally prepared by Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Mobilehome overlay districts Blayney-Dyett,a planning consulting becomes the key tool for implement- +June 27-City Council Study firm,has been refined by the Commu- ing the goals,objectives,and policies Session nity Development Department and of the General Plan. The Ordinance is *July 5-Residential, Commercial incorporates ideas offered by mem- more specific than the General Plan and Industrial districts bers of the Huntington Beach Division and contains lists of specific uses +July 18-Open Space, Public- 9 Rewrite Advisory Committee. This permitted in each zone and develop- Semipublic, Specific Plan committee included representatives of ment standards,including setbacks, districts the City Council,Planning Commis- building height,dwelling units +July 25- City Council Study sion,and Design Review Board. permitted,etc. Session *August 1 -Supplemental Site The document was reviewed and Development Standards, amended by the Planning Commission The Zoning Ordinance consists of Mobilehome Park Conversions, at a series of public hearings that zoning provisions, zoning maps Condominium Conversions, began June 15, 1993 and ended and subdivision provisions Nonconforming Uses October 19, 1993. *August 15-Parking and Loading, � Landscape Improvements and The Zoning and Subdivision Ordi- Signs HOW THE PROPOSED nance must follow the 4-C's rule. It *August 15-Zone Change Introduc- ZONING AND must be clear, complete,concise,and consistent. In addition,the ordinance tion SUBDIVISION must be reasonable. The Proposed *September 6-Zoning and Subdivi- sion Ordinance Adoption and ORDINANCE WORKS Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance is a reasonable ordinance. It includes Zone Change Adoption The Proposed Zoning and Subdivi- provisions to allow flexibility to comply with the regulations and a Please call the City Clerk or sion Ordinance consists of(1)zoning process to allow minor deviations the Community Development provisions which establish various under specific circumstances. Finally, Department to verify these classes of zoning districts and govern the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision meeting dates the use of land and placement of Ordinance streamlines the review buildings and improvements within process. the districts;(2)a zoning map;and ® ' J® City of Huntington Beach It �n� ® 2000 MAIN STREET CALI FORMIA 92648 OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Telephone(714)536-5553 April 25, 1994 Dear Huntington Beach Citizen: Your City government is preparing a new Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance for the City. This ordinance is a comprehensive update of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. It will establish new zoning districts, rename current zoning districts, and introduce new development standards. These new provisions will streamline the review process for permits. The City Council is holding public hearings on the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance that will regulate the development of the City of Huntington Beach for the next 20 years. At the conclusion of the public hearings, the City Council will hold a public hearing on a zone change to change the names of the various zoning districts citywide to correspond with those contained in the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. Please take the time to read this public summary of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and make your comments known to the members of the City Council or direct your written comments to Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director, or Susan Pierce, Associate Planer, Department of Community Development. Sincerel , Linda Moulton-Patterson Mayor LMP:lp splp0247 Anjo,Japan SISTER CITIES u aitakere. Nv%% Zealand 0 0 Public Space MAJOR CHANGES The public-semipublic or PS district applies to school and college sites, other public land and to institutional PROCESSING AND DESIGN STANDARDS holdings. This allows the City to ENTITLEMENTS consider what the appropriate use of New standards are proposed which the site may be if the public or Procedures pertaining to the adminis- will address upper story setbacks, semipublic use is discontinued. tration of the zoning provisions and building wall offsets and architectural standards are contained in Title 24: projections into residential setback/ Specific Plan Administration. A separate chapter yard areas. Courtyards will be The specific plan or SP district is used specifies uniform requirements for required opposite windows in multi- to create special land use districts and notices,hearings,findings,decisions family residential development;this outline the development standards for and appeals. Many uses of property feature will be used for building selected areas throughout the City. will have the level of review changed separation,and may be credited from the Planning Commission to the toward open space requirements. TITLE 22: Overlay Districts Zoning Administrator. This will reduce processing time and cost to the ZONING DISTRICTS *The O Oil Production Overlay applicant. District establishes categories and The Proposed Zoning and Subdivision standards for oil production and SUBDIVISIONS Ordinance reduces the number of base related operations. This district districts from 22 to 13 with subdis- enables the utilization of land for oil Major changes to the review process tricts for different residential densities related activities that are compatible are: (1)allow the Zoning Administra- or geographic subareas. The base with surrounding development for to act on tentative maps for up to districts are as follows: nine residential lots or units as well as *The CZ Coastal Zone Overlay all tentative parcel maps;(2)allow the RL Low Density Residential District applies to those areas that lie City Engineer to grant parcel map RM Medium Density Residential within the coastal zone. This district approval in lieu of acceptance by the RMH Medium-High Density ensures that those properties are City Council;and(3)establish Residential developed in a manner that is consis- specific procedures for final and RH High Density Residential tent with the Coastal Act. parcel maps and improvements. RMP Manufactured Home Park CO Office Commercial *The Floodplain Overlay District DENSITY/INTENSITY CG General Commercial provisions are patterned after the CV Visitor Commercial current model ordinance format The Proposed Zoning and Subdivision IG General Industrial prepared by the California Department Ordinance establishes a unified IL Limited Industrial of Water Resources. It recommends method of determining density for all OS Open Space new construction or substantial residential development. It will be PS Public-Semipublic improvement to structures located in a based on net(after dedication)lot area SP Specific Plan floodplain be elevated one foot above unlike current methods which provide the base flood elevation or flood- different formulas based on apartment proofed. or condominium development — _- ;- cc standards. Floor area ratios will be _ �� *The IS Interim Study Overlay established to control the amount of ==' cc District is anew overlay and applies to building area in commercial and 1=`-ICJ _ an area where land use and regulatory industrial districts. The floor area RAM controls are undergoing study. This ratio provision will allow property - district requires approval of a condi- owners to determine the maximum tional use permit for any development amount of construction allowed prior RNil] ^p�,.. ��� project during the period of study. IN to preparing a conceptual develop- — The overlay zoning expires at the end ment plan. - of two years unless extended. � Flood Mi.(FP--:) Portion of zoning map with overlays • • TITLE HIGHLIGHTS Required Setback TITLE 20: General Provisions 1 Max.two stories without The Use Classifications contained in 'cal break Chapter 204 describe groups or categories of uses with similar characteristics. Major categories include residential,commercial, industrial,public,temporary and accessory. CV District: Upper Story Setback TITLE 21: Base Districts Residential Upper story setback diagram The residential or R district regula- tions provide standards for single and ORGANIZATION Title 23: Provisions Applying in All multi-family residential development. Districts One major change in this district is Includes supplemental site develop- that varying open space provisions for The Proposed Zoning and Subdivi- single family residential have been sion Ordinance will become Volume 2 ment standards,parking and loading g Y requirements,landscape improve- deleted. of the Huntington Beach Municipal ments,signs,mobilehome park Code. Volume 2 will consist of six conversions,condominium conver- Commercial major categories called Titles. These sions,and nonconforming uses and The commercial or C district regula- are: structures. tions provide controls for neighbor- hood and community shopping areas, Title 20: General Provisions Title 24: Administration professional offices,general commer- Establishes the overall organization Contains detailed procedures for the cial areas, and visitor-commercial and applicability of the regulations administration of the zoning ordi- areas. Major changes include the and includes Definitions and a listing nance, including requirements for elimination of discretionary review for of permitted uses by categories with some uses, the establishment of floor similar characteristics. conditional use permits,variances, design review,development agree- area ratio,and the consolidation of the ments,amendments to the zoning current C 1,C2,and C4 zoning Title 21: Base Districts districts into one General Commercial Specifies the land uses permitted or ordinance text and zoning map, p p appeals of zoning decisions,and (CG)district. conditionally permitted in each residential,commercial, industrial, enforcement. Industrial public and semi-public,and open- Title 25: Subdivisions The industrial or I district regulations space zoning district. Base district Contains procedures for implementing are distributed into two categories- provisions also include development and supplementing the Subdivision limited industry and general industry standards to control the height,bulk, with a floor area ratio to regulate location and appearance of structures Map Act, including tentative maps,parcel maps, intensity. on development sites. final maps,vesting h'• tentative maps,dedications and improvements,and administrative Open Space Title 22: Overlay Districts requirements. The open space or OS district is Modifies the base-district provisions intended mainly for public parks,golf for specific purposes,such as oil courses,and other open space areas. production,flood protection,high-rise It provides areas for public or private buildings,neighborhood conservation, use and areas for preservation and planned block development,or the The Proposed Zoning and Subdivi- enhancement. coastal zone. sion Ordinance is organized into six major categories o *The NC Neighborhood Conservation ,( *Notice requirements for public Overlay District is a new overlay and I ft hearings are simplified by reference to may be used in areas with distinctive wmeg hfae�nenn3 i� oft State law. Procedures for hearings, building features,streetscape,site slop ua i I decisions,and appeals are combined planning or-land-use patterns. It 9! into one chapter. offers a vehicle for neighborhood or City initiated proposals to modify land iL 261 *Preliminary provisions for Coastal use controls and development stan- ' Development Permit procedures have dards with a Neighborhood Conserva- �` been streamlined. Policies have been 3 Rfti Lion Plan. eliminated from definitions. *The PBD Planned Block Develop- _ITSepoffara *A City Council Resolution pertaining ment Overlay District is a new overlay Parking diagram to Development Agreements has been and may be used in areas where *Landscape improvements are included as Chapter 246. multiple owners want to cooperate on contained in Chapter 232. New a development plan and need flexibil- diagrams are included. Enforcement provisions are pro- ity in the application of standards to posed to allow the Director authority achieve coordinated planning. to revoke discretionary permits and Transfers of density among parcels *Current sign regulations are reorga- enforce the Zoning and Subdivision could be permitted. nized and contained in Chapter 233. Ordinance. Abatement of use and lien New provisions allow commercial procedures are included. •The HHigh-Rise Overlay District corner sites to have both a monument establishes development standards and sign and wall signs. TITLE 25: Subdivisions locational criteria for all high-rise buildings. Standards also include •Mobilehome park conversions to .procedures applicable to tentative another use are regulated by State law upper story setback for high-rise tract maps and tentative parcel maps development adjacent to an R district. with supplemental standards contained have been combined. The Zoning in Chapter 234. Administrator may act on Tentative *The MHP Mobilehome Overlay Parcel maps and Tentative(tract) District applies to non-residentially *Residential condominium conversion Maps with 9 or less parcels. The of existing apartments is allowed zoned sites that are developed with a Planning Commission will review and mobilehome park and allows the use- pursuant to Chapter 235. Conversion act on maps creating 10 or more required to comply projects will be re roj q . to continue with reasonable transition p parcels. Final Map and Parcel Map to the uses permitted by the base with current parking and landscaping procedures likewise have been zoning district. No change in current requirements. combined. The City Engineer is provisions is proposed. authorized to give final approval for •Nonconforming uses and structures parcel Maps;City Council action is TITLE 23: Regulations Applying in are governed by Chapter 236. Provi- required only for Final Maps. All or Several Districts sions follow existing code,however, enlargements of nonconforming *Other new provisions include a *Chapter 230 consolidates supple- structures during any five year period separate chapter identifying when, mental standards and special standards are limited to 50%of the area of the where and what improvements are into three categories,residential,non- existing structure. required as a prerequisite for final or residential,and all districts. New parcel map approval. And sections on standards to allow and regulate TITLE 24: Administration parcel mergers and unmergers, heliports,antennas,and seasonal sales procedures for lot line adjustments, are also included. *The provisions for administration of and enforcement are included. the ordinance are intended to simplify •Off-street parking and loading and consolidate procedures for 4 environmental review, conditional use provisions are contained in Chapter 231 and essentially reflect current Permits,variances,design review, requirements. However,recreational appeals,amendments, and enforce- vehicles will be prohibited from ment. Conditional exceptions in the parking in any residential front yard or current ordinance are replaced with street-side yard. the term"variance". City Council Members HOW CAN YOU HELP? Take the time to review the proposed changes presented Mayor Linda Moulton-Patterson in this summary. Your comments and participation are Mayor Pro Tem Earle Robitaille vital to the success of this document. If you have any -- comments, either pro or con,please communicate them to Council Members Ralph Bauer the Huntington Beach City Council either in writing or at Victor Leipzig any of the public hearings. Please address any written Jim Silva comments to: David Sullivan Grace Winchell City of Huntington Beach Community Development Department Planning Commission Members Zoning and Subdivision Update 2000 Main Street Chairperson Shirley Dettloff Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Vice Chair Phil Inglee If you need more detail than this summary provides,you Commission Members Bob Biddle may obtain copies of the Proposed Zoning and Gary Gorman Subdivision Ordinance at the City of Huntington Beach Edward Kerins Department of Community Development, located in the Susie Newman Civic Center and the Main Street Library. You may also Roy Richardson contact Susan Pierce of the Department of Community Development at(714)536-5271. ® City of Huntington Beach Community Development Department Zoning and Subdivision Update 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach,CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION APRaMMM COUNCIL. Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members �' I9`L s A �` Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator �` ���'"""L �r �,L� f� Prepared by: Melanie S. Fallon,Director of Community Development 3 Subject: NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO.91-32/CODE AMENDMENT NO.91-10 ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REWRITE Consistent with Council Policy? [X] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception � ,/ Statement of Issue,Recommendation,Analysis,Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments: �+® p / m"'�'�.� 1 A� y [di/'eGTi,%'�!/�/ �y![r Gvoira/s]s�?%� `✓c/�.ii�uc rc�- in e si.� �3�� �• ���� '��[CGf GsQC�SI!J.'b5"7� /oC�MY �EdI/N S �X-07%//� /T'+i�7//J/f/l�it'�D�'"� '��.� �E� C�7'/7I7©G(/9G�J L?`✓G1 ATEMENT OF ISSUE: /pub/>'c:zP�J �.i��f, i� offer �vr a-��ed+-� orvp�,�-�a��fj• Transmitted for City Council consideration are Negative Declaration No. 91-32 and Code Amendment No. 91-10,the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite. The rewrite was initiated by the City Council in 1990 and, after several code committee meetings and numerous public hearings, approved by the Planning Commission. The current code consists of complex and inconsistent provisions that are difficult to understand. In some cases they are contradictory or conflict with State law. This rewrite will establish a clear, consistent, complete and comprehensive document that implements the General Plan and streamlines the review process. The purpose of this meeting is to introduce the document, open the public hearing, receive testimony on portions of the document, and approve Titles 20, General Provisions, and Title 24, Administration. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: "Approve Titles 20, General Provisions, and 24, Administration, of the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite as recommended by the Planning Commission, and continue the public hearing to June 20, 1994." ANALYSIS: HistoN In June 1990,the City Council authorized the preparation of a contract with Blayney-Dyett to rewrite and update the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code(Division 9). A subcommittee was appointed to give direction and to assist in the review of the proposed rewrite. The membership consisted of a City Council representative, Grace Winchell, and three Planning Commissioners, Ken'Bourguignon, Roy Richardson, and Susie Newman. This subcommittee reviewed the various portions of this complex document prepared by the consultant. Planning Staff assumed the editing and completion of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance update and revision during late 1991. Presentations were made to the subcommittee and to the Chamber of Commerce. Study sessions were held with the Planning Commission during 1991 and 1992, and the comments received were incorporated into the draft Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. It was subsequently approved by the Planning Commission at a series of public hearings held between June 15, 1993 and October 19, 1993. A summary of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance has been prepared for distribution to the public which summarizes the organization, major changes, and highlights of the proposed ordinance. A formatted version of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance as approved by the Planning Commission has been prepared that includes references to current Ordinance Code sections. Since the document was approved by the Planning Commission, there have been code amendments approved by the City Council that must be incorporated into the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance(e.g. indoor swap meets). Pending code amendments, such as outdoor dining,tattoo establishments, and carts/kiosks, will ultimately be incorporated into the document. City Council Action to Date At the City Council study session of April 25, 1994, Community Development introduced the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite. This presentation included a brief history of zoning as well as background information on authorization of a consultant contract with Blayney-Dyett, appointment of a subcommittee, and highlights of the major changes and issues. At the conclusion of the meeting, the City Council agreed to a series of public hearings and study sessions that will allow an introduction of the topics scheduled for the following two public hearings. The following schedule for public hearings, study sessions, and community meetings has been tentatively set. RCA 6/6/94 2 G:RCA:CD94-35 ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE SCHEDULE Meeting Date Meeting Type Subject May 12 Meeting Staff presentation to Chamber of Commerce May 19 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Rewrite overview,General House Provisions,Administration, Overlay Districts,Subdivisions May 23 Study Session General Provisions,Administration, Overlay Districts, Subdivisions June 6 Public Hearing Environmental Assessment;General Provisions,Administration June 16 Meeting Staff presentation to Board of Realtors June 20 Public Hearing Overlay Districts, Subdivisions June 23 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Residential,Commercial,Industrial, House Open Space,Public-Semipublic, Specific Plan June 27 Study Session Residential,Commercial,Industrial, Open Space,Public- Semipublic, Specific Plan July 5 Public Hearing Residential,Commercial,Industrial July 18 Public Hearing Open Space,Public-Semipublic, Specific Plan July 21 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Supplemental Site Standards, House Mobilehome Park Conversions, Condominium Conversions,Non conforming,Parking and Loading,Landscape Improvements, Signs July 25 Study Session Supplement Site Standards,Mobilehome Park Conversions, Condominium Conversions,Non conforming,Parking and Loading,Landscape Improvements,Signs August 1 Public Hearing Supplement Site Standards,Mobilehome Park Conversions, Condominium Conversions,Non conforming August 15 Public Hearing Parking and Loading,Landscape Improvements, Signs August 15 1 Public Hearing Zone Change Introduction September 6 1 Hearing Adoption In addition to these meetings, staff has set up meetings with the Chamber of Commerce and Board of Realtors as well as workshops for public review prior to each of the City Council study sessions. At the April 25, 1994, City Council study session,binders were distributed which included a summary of the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance, annotated proposed ordinance with index, and cross reference to current Huntington Beach Ordinance Code sections. City Council discussion on Titles 20, 24, 22, and 25 was held at the May 23 study session and the May 19 workshop. Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Highlights The following information is provided for the subject of tonight's public hearing on General Provisions and Administration. RCA 6/6/94 3 G:RCA:CD94-35 Title 20 General Provisions This portion of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance contains the following: • Chapter 200,Title, Components and Purposes • Chapter 201, Organization, Applicability, and Interpretation • Chapter 203, Definitions • Chapter 204,Use Classifications SUMMARY TITLE 20 GENERAL PROVISIONS Chapter 200, Title, Components and Purposes; Chapter 201, Organization, Applicability, and Interpretation; Chapter 203, Definitions; Chapter 204, Use Classifications SUBJECT CURRENT PROPOSED Zoning Map 40 pages Single zoning map Balance Community Statement None Balanced community statement Public Notice Varies: Consistent 300 ft. legal notice ZA- abutting property owners requirement on all discretionary PC - 300 ft. radius applications Zoning Code Administration Located throughout the Consolidates duties and Duties and Responsibilities Ordinance Code responsibilities into one chapter Illustrated Definitions None Illustrated definitions Permitted Uses Extensive listings of permitted Six categories of uses or conditionally permitted uses (residential, commercial, industrial, public-semipublic, accessory, temporary Title 24 Administration This portion of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance contains the following: • Chapter 240, Zoning Permits;Environmental Review; Fees and Deposits • Chapter 241, Conditional Use Permits and Variances; Waivers of Development Standards • Chapter 242 (not used) • Chapter 243 (not used) • Chapter 244, Design Review: • Chapter 245, Coastal Development Permit • Chapter 246,Development Agreements • Chapter 247, Amendments • Chapter 248, Notices, Hearings, Findings, Decisions, and Appeal • Chapter 249,Enforcement RCA 6{6{94 4 G:RCA:CD94-35 SUMMARY TITLE 24 ADMINISTRATION Chapter 240, Zoning Permits,Environmental Review,Fees and Deposits; Chapter 241, Conditional Use Permits and Variances,Waivers of Development Standards; Chapter 244, Design Review; Chapter 245, Coastal Development Permit Chapter 246,Development Agreements; Chapter 247, Amendments; Chapter 248, Notices,Hearings,Findings,Decisions, and Appeals; Chapter 249, Enforcement PROPOSED REQUIREMENTS CURRENT REVIEW PROPOSED BODY REVIEW BODY Grading or stockpiling of 25,000 cubic yards None Planning Commission of import or export Variances: setbacks, separation between Zoning Administrator Zoning Administrator buildings; less than 10%deviation in site coverage Variances: all others Zoning Administrator or Planning Commission Planning Commission Extension of time Planning Commission or Director Zoning Administrator Changed plans: affect condition of approval Planning Commission or Planning Commission Zoning Administrator or Zoning Administrator Changed plans: no substantial change Planning Commission or Director Zoning Administrator Transfer of CUP Director; some are not Director transferable Deviation(10%)of landscaping, open space, Zoning Administrator Director or setback standards for projects without required entitlement Benefits of Titles 20 and 24 These chapters of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance provide city staff and the public a document that is organized into major sections that are easier to use and understand. An index includes reference to the sections contained in these chapters. The level of discretionary review has been reduced in many instances, and will reduce the processing time for property owners, developers, and subdividers. FUNDING SOURCE: Not applicable. RCA 6/6/94 5 G:RCA:CD94-35 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Summary MTU:MSF:SP RCA 6/6/94 6 G:RCA:CD94-35 i i '— ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING DIVISION ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 91-32 1 . Name of Proponent: City of Huntington Beach Address 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Phone Number: (714) 536-5271 2. Date Checklist Submitted for Review: September 25, 1991; Revised and Recirculated February 19, 1993 3. Concurrent Entitlement(s): N/A 4. Proiect Location: Citywide 5. Proiect Description: Adoption of the City of Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code Update and Revision. For description and background on the proposed update and revision see Attachment #1. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of answers are, included after each subsection.) Yes Mavbe No 1 . Earth. Will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic substructures? _ _ _X Discussion: Because no site development is involved, adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not result in or create unstable earth conditions or result in changes to geologic substructures. b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of. the soil? — X Discussion: Because no site development is involved, adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not result in any disruptions, displacements, compaction of overcovering of soil . D i .S Yes Maybe No C. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? Discussion: The proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code revisions do not consist of any development. Therefore, adoption of the document will not result in changes' to topography or ground surface relief features. d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? _ _ X Discussion: Because no site development is involved in the proposed project, no destruction, covering, or modification of any unique geologic or physical features will occur. e. Any increase in wih4 or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? — _ X Discussion: No site development is involved in the proposed project which would alter soils through wind or water erosion. f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? X Discussion: No changes will occur which would result in the deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any inlet or lake. g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? Discussion: Adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not result in the exposures' of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards. *Note (a-g): Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some earth impacts. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary, to ensure adequate environmental protection. 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? _ _ X Discussion: Adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will allow for a change in density requirements in the existing residential zones which may impact air emissions. Under the proposed zoning designation of RM, RMH and RH residential areas will be developed at a slightly lower density; , Townlot and Oldtown areas, redesignated as RMH-A, may be developed at a slightly higher density based on lot area rather than lot frontage as allowed by current code. However, it should be noted that the TLSP and OTSP areas are predominantly developed (approximately 96%) and currently contain approximately 5,200 residential units (based upon unit counts conducted in the spring of 1989). Projected development under the proposed RMH-A zoning, assuming 100% recycling of the developed areas and buildout of the existing 4% of vacant land, would allow for development of a total of Environmental Checklist -2- �1(18270) Yg£ Maybe No approximately 6,500 residential units. Development of this degree would be a worse case scenario and would necessitate a resubdivision of the entire area as well as demolition of all structures, many which are single family dwelling recently constructed. Due to the large degree of single family development existing in the area, -increases in density resulting from development of infill lots under the proposed zoning code is anticipated to be negligible. Therefore, any additional air emissions generated by the additional density permitted under the proposed zoning code are anticipated to be negligible. Furthermore, although subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some air quality impacts, impacts will be project/site specific and will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects .which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary to adequate environmental protection. b. The creation of objectionable odors? X Discussion: No site development is proposed as part of the project; therefore, adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not result in the creation of objectionable odors. However, it is possible that future development under the provisions of the proposed ordinance code may result in the generation of odor impacts. Such odor generation impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will be subject to the entitlement process and subsequent environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts, if any, and mitigation measures, if necessary, to ensure adequate environmental protection. C. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? X Discussion: Air movements will not be altered; in addition, no changes in moisture, temperature and climate +�. (either locally or regionally) will occur if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted as proposed. 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? X Discussion: Changes in currents or the course or direction of water movements will not occur if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted as no physical development is proposed which will alter such features. b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? X Discussion: No change in absorption rates, drainage patterns or runoff will occur if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted since no physical development has been included. C. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? X Discussion: No changes to the course or flow of flood waters will occur as the result of the adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. The proposed code has altered provisions for development within floodplain areas. Floodplain development will be subject to higher standards and construction requirements identified by the Federal Flood Insurance Program established by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and recommended by the California Department of Water Resources. Environmental Checklist —3— (1827D) r� 3 d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? v Discussion: As no site development is involved, no changes will occur in the aoiount of surface water in water body. e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? — _ X Discussion: No direct impacts to surface waters or surface water quality are anticipated -.to result if proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted. f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? X Discussion: The direction or rate of flow of ground waters will not be affected if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted as no physical development is included. g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? X Discussion: Although project adoption will not result in changes to the quantity or quality of ground waters, future facilities which are constructed under the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code could result in physical changes to the environment. Future development projects will be subject to future environmental review to determine the nature and extent of any potential impact and appropriate mitigation measures. h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? Discussion: Adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will allow for a change in density requirements in the existing residential areas which may increase water usage. Under the proposed zoning designation of RM, RMH and RH will be developed at a slightly lower density and TLSP-B and OTSP-2 areas, redesignated as RMH-A, may be developed at a slightly higher density based on lot area rather than lot frontage as allowed by current code. However, it should be noted that the TLSP and OTSP areas are predominantly developed (approximately 96%) and currently contain approximately 5,200 residential units (based upon unit counts conducted in the spring of 1989). Projected development under the proposed RMH-A zoning, assuming 100% recycling and buildout of the area, would allow for development of approximately 6,500 residential units. Development of this degree would be a worse case scenario and would necessitate a resubdivision of the entire area as well as demolition of all structures, many which are single family dwelling recently constructed. Due to the large degree of single family development existing in the area, increases in density resulting from development or infill lots under the proposed zoning code is anticipated to be negligible. Therefore, any additional air emissions generated by the additional density permitted under the proposed zoning code are anticipated to be negligible. Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some water usage impacts. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary to adequate environmental protection. fnvironmental Checklist -4- (18270) Yes, Maybe No i . Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? _ _ X Discussion: . Adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not result in the exposure of people or property to water—related hazards (e.g., flooding or tidal waves). See 3c. *Note (a—i): Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some water impacts. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary; to ensure adequate environmental protection. 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops,_and aquatic plants)? X Discussion: Because no site development is involved, neither changes in the diversity of species nor deterioration of vegetation will occur with the adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. b. Reduction of the numbers of any mature, unique, rare or endangered species of plants? _ — X Discussion: Because no site development is involved, reduction of the numbers of any unique, or rare or endangered species of plants will not occur if the project is approved. C. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? X Discussion: Because no site development is involved, no new species of plant, or barriers to replenishment of,.existing plant species will result with the adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. d. Reduction in acreage of an agricultural crop? X Discussion: Because no site development is involved, a reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop will not result from the adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. *Note (a—d): Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some plant impacts. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary, to ensure adequate environmental protection. S. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? _ X Discussion: Since no site development is proposed, neither changes in the diversity of species nor number of any species of animals will occur with the adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. Environmental Checklist —5— (18270) �r Yes Maybe No b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? Discussion: Since no site development is proposed, reduction of the numbers of any unique or rare or endangered species of animals will not occur with the adoption -of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. C. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? _ X Discussion: Since no site development is proposed, no new species of animals, or barriers to migration of existing animal species will result with the adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat?`- — _ X discussion: Since no site development is proposed, no deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat will result from the adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. *Note (a-d): Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some animal impacts. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary, to ensure adequate environmental protection. 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? Dicussion: Adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will allow for a change in density requirements in the existing residential zones which may result in an increase in noise generation and impact noise levels. Under the proposed zoning designation of RMH-A, TLSP and OTSP areas may be developed at a slightly higher density based on lot area rather than lot frontage as currently permitted; residential areas with the proposed zoning designation of RM, RMH and RH will be developed at a slightly lower density. However, it should be noted that the TLSP and OTSP areas are predominantly developed (approximately 96%) and currently contain approximately 5,200 residential units (based upon unit counts conducted in the spring of 1989). Projected development under the proposed RMH-A zoning, assuming 100% recycling and buildout of the area, would allow for development of approximately 6,500 residential units. Development of this degree would be a worse case scenario and would necessitate a resubdivision of the entire area as well as demolition of all structures, many which are single family dwelling recently constructed. Due to the large degree of single family development existing in the area, increases in density resulting from development of infill lots under the proposed zoning code is anticipated to be negligible. Therefore, any additional air emissions generated by the additional density permitted under the proposed zoning code are anticipated to be negligible. Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some noise impacts. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary to adequate environmental protection. Environmental Checklist -6- (18270) SSI.fL L`flY�R �n b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X Discussion: See 6a. 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? _ _ X Discussion: Because no site development is involved, adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not result in the exposure of people to new light or glare. Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some light and glare impacts. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will be subject to the provisions of the'California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary to adequate environmental protection. 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? X Discussion: Adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code does not propose any substantial changes to land uses allowed in the city; however, the revised code will allow for a change in density requirements in the existing residential areas which may impact air emmissions. Under the proposed zoning designations of RM, RMH and RH will be developed at a slightly lower density and TLSP and OTSP areas, redesignated as RMH-A, will be developed at a slightly higher density based on lot area rather than lot frontage as permitted under the existing code. However, it should be noted that the TLSP and OTSP areas are predominantly developed (approximately 96%) and currently contain approximately 5,200 residential units (based upon unit counts conducted in the spring of 1989). Projected development under the proposed RMH-A zoning, assuming 100% recycling and buildout of the ``..� area, would allow for development of approximately 6,500 residential units. Development of this degree would be a worse case scenario and would necessitate a resubdivision of the entire area as well as demolition of all structures, many which are single family dwelling recently constructed. Due to the large degree of single family development existing in the area, increases in density resulting from development of infi,ll lots under the proposed zoning code is anticipated to be negligible. Therefore, any additional air emissions generated by the additional density permitted under the proposed zoning code are anticipated to be negligible. 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? X b. Substantial depletion of any non-renewable natural resource? X Discussion: The proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code does not propose any alteration to development standards which will result in any noticeable change in the use of non—renewable or natural resources. Furthermore, since no site development is included, adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not result in an increase in the use of natural resources such as energy, water, and raw materials. Environmental Checklist —7— (1827D) Yrd Maybe No 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not ter, limited to oil , pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? _ X Discussion: Since no site development is included, adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not result in any risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances in the event of an accident or upset condition. b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? — _ X Discussion: Because no development is included, adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not interfere with an emergency response plan or evacuation plan. *Note (a—b): Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some risk of upset impacts. However, impacts will be .project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will_be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary, to ensure adequate environmental protection. 11 . Population.. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? — X Discussion: The proposed ordinance code will allow for minor increases in density in areas currently designated as the Townlot and Oldtown Districts; however, since these areas are primarily built out location, distribution, density, and growth rate of the human population are anticipated to be negligible 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? _ — X Discussion: The adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not have an impact upon the existing housing and will not result in creating a demand for additional housing. 13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation 'of substantial additional vehicular movement? X Discussion: Adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will allow for a change in density requirements in the existing residential areas which may result in an increase in traffic. Under the proposed zoning designation of RMH—A, TLSP and OTSP areas may be developed at a slightly higher density based on lot area rather than lot frontage as allowed under the current zoning code; RM, RMH and RH will be deveoped at a slightly lower density. However, it should be noted that the TLSP and OTSP areas are predominantly developed (approximately 96%) and currently contain approximately 5,200 residential units (based upon unit counts conducted in the spring of 1989). Projected development under the proposed RMH—A zoning, assuming 100% recycling and buildout of the area, would allow for development of approximately 6,500 residential units. Development of this degree would be a worse case scenario and would necessitate a resubdivision of the entire area as well as demolition of all structures, many which are single family dwelling recently constructed. Due to the large degree of single family development existing in the area, increases in density resulting from development of infill lots under the proposed zoning code is anticipated to be negligible. Therefore, any additional air emissions generated by the additional density permitted under the proposed zoning code are anticipated to negligible. Environmental Checklist —$— (18270) Yu Maybe No b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new off-site parking? _ _ X Discussion: The proposed zoning and ordinance code does not include any amendments to the existing parking ratios or 'parking design requirements. Therefore, no impacts to•parking are anticipated. C. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? _ _ X Discussion: Because no site development is proposed, no impacts to the existing transportation facilities are anticipated to result from adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance. d. Alterations is present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? _ — X Discussion: Since no site development is included, neither present patterns of circulation nor the movement of people and/or goods will be affected if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted. e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? X Discussion: Since no site development is included, no waterborne, rail, or air traffic will be affected by adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? _ _ X Discussion: Since no site development is included, no hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrian will not occur if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted. *Note (a-f): Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some traffic/circulation impacts. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary, to ensure adequate environmental protection. 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a.r Fire protection? X Discussion: Adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will have no effect upon or result in the need for new or altered fire protection services. b. Police protection? X Discussion: Adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will have no effect upon or result in the need for new or altered police protection services. C. Schools? X Discussion: No new school facilities will be required if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted. Environmental Checklist -9- (1827D) Yes, Maybe No d. Parks or other recreational facilities? X Discussion: No new parks and recreation facilities will be required if the proposed zoning and subdivisi—_.. ordinance code is adopted. e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? X Discussion: No impacts are anticipated upon the maintenance of public facilities or roads as a result of the adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. f. Other governmental services? X Discussion: No impacts to other governmental facilities are anticipated as the result of the adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. *Note (a—f): Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some public service impacts. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent develop'lment projects will-be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary, to ensure adequate environmental protection. 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? X Discussion: No substantial increases in demand upon existing sources of energy or requirements for the development of new sources of energy are anticipated as a result of the adoption of the proposed zoning subdivision ordinance code. b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing source of energy, or require the development of sources of energy? X Discussion: Adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not result in the use of abnormally high amounts of fuel or energy. *Note (a—b): Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some energy impacts. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary, to ensure adequate environmental protection. 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? X Discussion: The adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not create the demand for additional power (i .e., electricity) or natural gas. Environmental Checklist —10— (1827D) ii/ Yes Maybe No b. Communication systems? X Discussion: No new demand for communication systems will be created if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted. e. Water? X Discussion: No new demands for domestic water will be created if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted. d. Sewer or septic tanks? X Discussion: No new demands for sewer facilities or septic tanks will be created if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted. e. Storm water drainage?_ _ — X Discussion: Adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not necessitate new storm water drainage improvements. f. Solid waste and disposal? X Discussion: No new demands for solid waste disposal facilities will be created if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted. *Note ('a-f): Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some utility impacts. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be, subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary, to ensure adequate environmental protection. 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? _ _ X Discussion: The creation of potential health hazards, physical or mental will not result from the adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? X Discussion: Adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will not result in the exposure of people to potential health hazards. *Note (a-b): Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some human health impacts. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary, to ensure adequate environmental protection. .Environmental Checklist _11_ (18270) Yes Maybe No 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? (; Discussion: Future dev�`;'opment under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may be located on sites which result in potential impacts to the aesthetic environment. However development of such facilities will be subject to the entitlement process and additional environmental review. Subsequent environmental documentation will fully analyze the potential impact`s and identify appropriate mitigation measures prior to adoption of the projects. No significant averse aesthetic impacts are anticipated. 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? X Discussion: The proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will°-not create any impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities. 20. Cultural Resources. _ a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? X Discussion: Because no site development is included, no alteration or destruction of archaeological, prehistoric, or historic sites will occur as a result of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code adoption. b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? Discussion: Because no site development is included, no effects, physical or aesthetic, are anticipated to occur as a result of adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. C. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? X Discussion: Because no physical development is included, no unique ethnic cultural values are anticipated to be affected as the result of adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? X Discussion: No known existing religious or sacred uses will be impacted as a result of adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code. "Note (a—d): Subsequent development under the provisions of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code may result in some impacts to archeological or cultural resources. However, impacts will be project/site specific. Subsequent development projects will be subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As such, projects which have a potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts will be subject to environmental review to determine the nature and extent of potential impacts and any mitigation, if necessary, to ensure adequate environmental protection. environmental Checklist —12— (1827D) Yu Maybe No 21 . Mandatory Findings of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, sub— stantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? X Discussion: As presented in the environmental analysis, the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code does not consist of any development and will not have any impact on plant or animal species. b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short—term, to the disadvantage of long—term, environmental goals? (A short—term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long—term impacts will endure well into the future.) X Discussion: As presented-in the environmental analysis adoption of the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code will allow for minor alterations to density requirements in the existing TLSP—A & B and DTSP 1 & 2 zones. However, over the long—term, the new zoning code will effectively reduce the nuimber of units in the area. No significant adverse impacts are anticipated. C. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively consid— erable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) X Discussion: Cumulative impacts associated with the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code are not significant. d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X Discussion: Provisions of revised code do not alter development standards in any way which will impact animal/plant species. No significant adverse effects are anticipated to occur to human beings, either directly or indirectly if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted. Environmental Checklist —13— (1827D) � 7 DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL 5E PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Date Si g-�e' For: City of Huntington Beach Community Development Department a Environmental Checklist -14- C h %/ "� (1827D) ATTACHMENT #1 Project Description Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code Update and Revision Department of . Community Development City of Huntington Beach, California The City of Huntington Beach is proposing a .comprehensive update and revision to its Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code. Since 1946, when the Zoning Ordinance Code was originally adopted, a myriad of amendments and section rewrites have occurred in a patchwork fashion to respond the changing City objectives, State laws and court cases . As a result, contradictory provisions have developed making the Ordinance difficult to implement and enforce. In order to resolve previous interpretation, application and enforcement problems, the City has commissioned a comprehensive update and revision of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Codes. The proposed code revision simplifies the content of the Zoning Ordinance Code by identifying and eliminating inconsistencies and . ambiguities, adding charts and diagrams, and reformatting the information by utilizing various print fonts and styles . The proposed code revisions fall into one of (6) six categories . These six categories include: Reorganization of Regulations, Reorganization of Use Classifications, Renaming and/or Consolidation of Base Zoning Districts and Overlay Districts, Streamlining of Administrative Procedures, Updates to Subdivision Provisions to bring the code into conformance with State law. Each of these changes have been summarized below. Reorganization of Regulations : The proposed Zoning Ordinance has been reorganized into six sections for incorporation into the City of Huntington Beach Municipal Code. A brief description of each section is contained below. • Title 20: General Provisions - establishes the overall organization and applicability of the regulations and includes Definitions and Use Classifications. • Title 21: Base District - specifies the land uses permitted or conditionally permitted in each residential, commercial, industrial, public, and open-space zoning district, and includes special requirements, if any, that are applicable to specific uses . Base-district regulations also include development standards to control the height, bulk, location and appearance of structures on development sites, and requirements for landscaping and parking. • Title 22: Overlay District - modifies base-district provisions for specific purposes, such as oil production, flood protection, high-rise buildings , neighborhood conservation, planned block development or the coastal zone. , • Title 23 : Provisions Applying in All Districts - includes supplemental site-development standards, parking and loading requirements, signs, mobile home park conversions , condominium conversions and nonconforming uses and structures . • Title 24 : Administration - contains detailed procedures for the administration of the zoning ordinance, including requirements for design review, conditional use permits and variances , development agreements, amendments to the ordinance and zoning map, appeals of zoning decisions, and enforcement . • Title 25: Subdivision - contains procedures for implementation of the Subdivision Map Act, including parcel maps and subdivision maps, vesting tentative maps, dedication and improvements , and administrative requirements . Reorganization of Use Classifications : The proposed Zoning Ordinance utilizes use classification titles to describe groups of similar uses rather than attempt to specifically list all uses that might be permitted as-of-right or with a conditional use permit, as is done in the existing code. The classification titles provide for administrative determination for the most appropriate category for unlisted uses . Renaming/Consolidation of Base inning and Overlay Districts : The proposed zoning ordinance renames and/or consolidates the existing 22 base zoning districts into the 13 base districts identified in the attachment A. Streamlining of Adminis rative Procedures: The proposed zoning ordinance includes revised provisions for administrating the zoning regulations . The revisions are intended to simplify and consolidate procedures for environmental review, conditional use permits,. variances, design review, appeals, amendments and enforcement and consist of the following changes . Conditional Exceptions . Provisions for the conditional exception in the current ordinance have been replaced with provisions for Variances . This term is more familiar to the public and development community. -2- (1835D) 1c� • Zoning Permit . New regulations are proposed for zoning permits and preliminary plan review. The zoning permit would serve as a "check" for compliance with the zoning regulations . This is done in practice prior to issuance of building permits, but it may be useful to identify a separate procedure to avoid any loopholes, such as a new or expanded use that does not require a building permit . The zoning permit could be called a "zoning certificate" to convey the fact that it is a ministerial permit, not a discretionary permit . • Public Notice Requirements . Notice requirements for public hearings are simplified by reference to state law. References to the appropriate Government Code sections are declatory of existing law. Additional notice may be given at the direction of the hearing body. Procedure for notices, hearings, decisions and appeals are combined into one chapter. Coastal -Development Permits . Proposed regulations for Coastal Development Permit procedures primarily follow existing requirements . Exemptions and categorical exclusions have been reorganized and streamlined. Policies have been eliminated from Definitions section. Subdivisions Changes have been made to the subdivision provisions to make conform to state law and to facilitate administration. �..- Statutory Time Limits . The Planning Commission or Zoning Administrator has 50 days from the time of the acceptance of the tentative map to act on the tentative map. If an EIR is prepared, the decision is to be made 45 days after certification of the EIR. If there is a negative declaration adopted or a determination that the project is exempt from the requirements of Division 13 of the Public 13 of the Public Resources Code, the decision shall be made 50 days after said action. • Maps . Procedures applicable to tentative tract maps and tentative parcel maps have been combined . The Zoning Administrator may act on Tentative Parcel Maps and Tentative (tract) Maps with 9 or less parcels . The Planning Commission will review and act on maps creating 10 or more parcels . Final Map and Parcel Map procedures likewise have been combined. The City Engineer is authorized to give final approval for Parcel Maps; City Council action will be required only for Final Maps . -3- (1835D) Ff; yi_ z-( • Dedications and Reservations . The requirements for dedication have been detailed. Current parkland dedication and in-lieu fee formulas are included as well as provisions addressing local transit facilities, solar easements, supplemental improvements, and collection of development fees . • Improvement Standards . Adopting standard engineering specifications and standard drawings separately rather than including all specifications within the subdivision ordinance is proposed. The chapter identifies when, where and what improvements are required as a pre-requisite for final or parcel map approval . • Mercers , Correction and Amendments of Maps . A distinct section on parcel mergers and unmergers has been included. Procedures include lot line adjustments and the recordation of a covenant to "Hold-as-One-Parcel . " • Appeals .- Appeals would be processed under the general Provisions established in Chapter 248 . -4- (1835D) 7.2 ATTACHMENT A Proposed Proposed Existing Existing Proposed Major Proposed Base Zoning & Base Zoning & District District Changes in Changes Overlay District Overlay District Designations Names Development in Designations Names Standards Density Base Zoning Districts 1. RL Low Density Residential R1 Low Density Residential Delete open space requirement; None reduce garage setback to 20 feet. 2. RM Medium Density Residential R2 Med. Density Residential Replace building separation w/court; Reduction in all multi—family same standards; see density to RMH & RH for additional changes; bring zoning density based on net lot area. into confonmance with General Plan; 1 unit per 2,904 sq. ft. 3. RMH Med—Nigh Density Residential R3 Med—High Density Res. Upperstory setback; change in Reduction in review body; Open tpace based on 25% density to of floor area; aAd RM items. bring zoning into conformance with General Plan; 1 unit per 1,742 sq. ft. Proposed Proposed Existing Existing Proposed Major Proposed Base Zoning b Base Zoning & District District Changes in Changes Overlay District Overlay District Designations Names Development in Designations Names Standards Density 6. —PBD Planned Block Development N/A - Newly established to allow large sites N/A flexibility in development standarads. 7• —H High Rise —MS Multi—Story Changes setback requirements; includes N/A upperstory setback when adjacent to R district. 8. —MHP Mobilehome _MH Mobilehome Overlay None N/A g— � (1818D t t Proposed Proposed Existing Existing Proposed Major Proposed Base Zoning & Base Zoning & District District Changes in Changes Overlay District Overlay District Designations Names Development in Designations Names Standards Density Overlays 1. —0;01 Oil Production —0;01 Oil District None N/A 2. -CZ Coastal Zone -CZ Coastal Zone Condensed; removes site specific N/A requirements. 3. -FP1,-FP2,-FP3 Floodplain -FP1,-FP2, Floodplain Incorporates higher standards required N/A -FP3 and/or recommended by CA Water Resources Dept.; elevate or floodproof 1 ft. above base flood elevation. 4. -IS Interim Study LU Limited Use District Proposed as overlay rather than N/A base district; application of base zone will comply with General Plan; expires in 2 years. 5. —NC Neighborhood Conservation N/A Newly established to allow property N/A owners to initiate programs to revitalize and conserve their neighborhoods. �n z _7— (18180 �U Proposed Proposed Existing Existing Proposed Major Proposed Base Zoning & Base Zoning & District District Changes in Changes Overlay District Overlay District Designations Names Development in Designations Names Standards Density 13. SP Specific Plan PO Planned Development Deletes PD suffix. None Specific Plans Establishes procedures for development of a specific Plan project. Ellis-Goldenwest SP None; will remain as separate document None Holly-Seacliff SP None; will remain as separate document None Downtown SP None; will remain as separate document None Meadowlark Specific Plan None; will remain as separate document None Seabridge Specific Plan None; will remain as separate document None Seacliff Specific Plan None; will remain as separate document None North Hunt. Center SP Will be removed from ordinance None code and retained as separate document. Pacifica Community Plan Will be removed fron ordinance None code and retained as separate document. Magnolia Pacific Specific Plan None; will remain as separate document None �^ j -6- f f � Proposed Proposed Existing Existing Propcsied.Major Proposed Base Zoning & Base Zoning & District District Changes in Changes Overlay District Overlay District Designations Names Development in Designations Names Standards Density 12. PS Public—Semipublic CF—E Community Facility—Educ. Designation applies to flood control N/A channels, Edison right-of-way, schools, CF-C Community Facility-Civic churches, etc. PS required for 2 acres N/A or more otherwise base and overlay standards applicable to the site. -�- (1818D) f� Proposed Proposed Existing Existing Proposed Major Proposed Base Zoning & Base Zoning & District District Charges in Changes Overlay District Overlay District Designations Names Development in Designations Names Standards Density. 10. IL Limited Industrial MI—A Restricted Manufacturing Adds FAR; allows group residential Limited to subject to Planning Commission approval . housing for on— site workers. 11. OS Open Space With 4 subdistricts as follows: OS—WR Open Space—Water Rec. WR Water Recreation None N/A OS—C Open Space—Conservation CC Coastal Conservation Suf. None N/A OS—PR Open Space—Parks & Rec. CF—R Community Facility—Rec. Will require zone change if park N/A no longer needed and declared ROS Recreational Open Space surplus. OS-S Open Space-Shoreline S1 Shoreline None N/A -� (1818D) U Groposed Proposed Existing. Existing Proposed Major Proposed Base Zoning & Base Zoning & District District Changes in Changes Overlay District Overlay District Designations Names Development ;n Designations Names Standards Density 5. RMP Manufactured Home Park MH Mobile Home None None MFH Manufactured Home Suffix Deleted; existing sgCtion N/A violates State law. 6. CO Commercial Office OP Office Professional Adds floor area ratio, upper story N/A setback and building design standards 7. CG General Commercial Cl Neighborhood Commercial Eliminated. None. C2 Community Business C2 & C4 Consolidated; reduces and changes setback requirements; deletes site angle requirements; see CO. C4 Highway Commercial 8. CV Visitor Commercial VSC Visitor Serving Comm. To encourage pedestrian access; None setback eliminated; see CO and CG. 9. IG General Industrial M1 Light Manufacturing Combined; increased lot size; Limited to adds FAR; allows group residential housing for on- M2 Industrial subject to Planning Commission. approval. site workers. `�O s- (1818D) Proposed Proposed Existing Existing Proposed Major Proposed Base Zoning & Base Zoning & District District Changes in Changes Overlay District Overlay District Designations Names Development in Designations Names Standards Density RMH—A Medium—High Density OTSP-1 & 2 Oldtown Specific Plan Combine into 1 district; Density allowed (Subdistrict) Residential—Small Lot Districts Land 2 no open space requirement for sfd; on parcels 50 density based on net lot area rather feet or greater TLSP-A,B Townlot Spec. Plan than site frontage; reduce Oldtown currently exceeds Sections A and B front yard to Townlot standard of General Plan and 12 feet should be medium high density; will require GPA to correct density; 1 unit per 1,900 sq. ft. 4. RH High Density Residential R4 High Density Residential Same as RM, RMH. Reduction is density to bring zoning into conformance with General Plan; l unit per 1,244 sq. ft. JV �• �; (1818D) RESPONSE TO COMMENTS FOR DRAFT NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 91-32 I . INTRODUCTION This document serves as the Response to Comments on the Draft Negative Declaration No. 91-32. This document contains all information available in the public record related to the Draft Negative Declaration as of May 11, 1992 and responds to comments in accordance with Section 15088 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. This document contains five sections. In addition to this Introduction, these sections are Public Participation and Review, Comments, Responses to Comments, and Appendix A. The Public Participation section outlines the methods the City of Huntington Beach has used to provide public review and solicit input on the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration. The Comments section contains those written comments received from agencies, groups, organizations, and individuals as of April 5, 1993 . The Response to Comments section contains individual responses to each comment. It is the intent of the City of Huntington . Beach to include this document in the official public record related to the Draft Negative Declaration. Based on the information contained in the public record the decision makers will be provided with an accurate and complete record of all information related to the environmental consequences of the project . II . PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND REVIEW The City of Huntington Beach notified all responsible and interested agencies and interested groups, organizations, and individuals that a Draft Negative Declaration had been prepared for the proposed project. The City also used several methods to solicit input during the review period for the preparation of the Draft Negative Declaration. The following is a list of actions taken during the preparation, distribution, and review of the Draft Negative Declaration. 1. A cover letter and copies of the Draft Negative Declaration were filed with the State Clearinghouse on September 27, 1991. The State Clearinghouse assigned Clearinghouse Number 9109101 to the proposed project . A copy of the cover letter and the State Clearinghouse distribution list is available for review and inspection at the City of Huntington Beach, Planning Department, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648. F_ -,q �- /RTC i 2 . An official thirty (30) day public review period for the Draft Negative Declaration was established by the State Clearinghouse. It began on September 27, 1991 and ended on October 28, 1991. Public comment letters were accepted by the City of Huntington Beach through October 30, 1991. 3 . Notice of the Draft Negative Declaration was published in the Daily Pilot on October 1, 1991. Upon request, copies of the document were distributed to agencies, groups, organizations, and individuals . 4 . The Draft Negative Declaration was never acted upon, as the revised Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code continued to be reviewed and amended by staff . As a result, a. revised Draft Negative Declaration was prepared and published in the Huntington Beach Independent for a 30 day comment period commencing March 4, 1993 and ending April 5, 1993 . Copies of the revised Draft Negative Declaration were directly distributed to those who commented on the original document as well as the State Clearinghouse and local school districts. 5 . An official thirty day (30) day public review period for the revised Draft Negative Declaration was established by the State Clearinghouse. It began on March 1, 1993 and ended on March 31, 1993 . Public comment letters were accepted by the City of Huntington Beach through April 5, 1993 . III . COMMENTS Copies of all written comments to the revised Draft Negative Declaration received as of April 5, 1993 are contained in Appendix A of this document. Only those comments which raised an environmental issue have been retyped verbatim in a comment-response format for clarity. All other comments are hereby acknowledged. IV. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS The revised Draft Negative Declaration No. 91-32 was distributed to responsible agencies, interested groups, organizations, and individuals. The report was made available for public review and comment for a period of thirty (30) days . The public review period for the revised Draft Negative Declaration established by the State Clearinghouse commenced on March 1, 1993 and expired on March 31, 1993 . The City of Huntington Beach accepted comment letters through April 5, 1993 . Negative Declaration No . 91-32 -2- (1872D) Copies of all documents received as of April 5, 1993 are contained in Appendix A of this report. Comments have been numbered with responses correspondingly numbered. Responses are presented for each comment which raised a significant environmental issue. Several comments do not address the completeness or adequacy of the Draft Negative Declaration, do not raise significant environmental issues, or request additional information. A substantive response to such comments is not appropriate within the context of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) . Such comments are responded to with a "comment noted" reference. This indicates that the comment will be forwarded to all appropriate decision makers for their review and consideration. Negative Declaration No . 91-32 -3- (1872D) PR• Comment : �s The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named environmental document to selected state agencies for review. The review period is closed and none of the state agencies have comments . This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. Pleaae call Tom Loftus at (916) 445-0613 if you have any questions regarding the environmental review process . When contacting the Clearinghouse in this matter, please use the eight-digit State Clearinghouse number so that we may respond promptly. Response- Comment acknowledged. SCAG: .Comment • we have reviewed the above referenced document and determined that it is not regionally significant per Areawide Clearinghouse criteria . Therefore, the project does not warrant Clearinghouse comments at this time. Should there be a change in the scope of the project, we would appreciate the opportunity to review and comment at that time. A description of the project will be published in the March 15, 1993 Intergovernmental Review Report for public review and comment . The project title and SCAG number should be used in all correspondence with SCAG concerning this project . Correspondence should be sent to the attention of the Clearinghouse Coordinator . If you have any questions, please contact Maureen Farley at (213) 236-1886 . Response : Comment Acknowledged. Department of Transportation Comment ; Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the update and revision of the City' s Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code. Because the revision and update of the Zoning and Subdivision Code does not state the specificity of a project, Caltrans is unable to Negative Declaration No . 91-32 2rc - y ( 1872D) determine the impacts of any development upon State facilities . Therefore, District 12 reserves its rights to comment on individual projects affected by this regulation. We look forward to the implementation of this element and improving regional partnership. Once again, thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the proposed project. If clarification is needed, please communicate with Nathaniel H. Pickett, 714-724-2247 or Ms . Aileen Kennedy at 724-2239 . Response: Comment Acknowledged. County of Orange - EMA Comment Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the above referenced item. The County of Orange has no comment at this time. However, we would appreciate being informed on any further developments . If you have any questions or need to contact us, please call KAri Rigoni at (714) 834-2109 . Response: Comment Acknowledged. DF -1• Comment : The Department of Fish and Game (Department) has reviewed the referenced document and has the following questions regarding "Attachment All under the heading of "Proposed Major Changes in Development Standards" : 1. "Base Zoning Districts, RL: Delete open space requirement; " page 1. How will this change affect the open space requirement associated with any mitigation measures designed to off-set adverse project-related impacts? Response: On-site open space (private outdoor living area) for a single family dwelling in the RL district will be satisfied by compliance with site coverage and setback provisions . Development of all residential projects will continue to be subjected to parkland dedication and/or payment of in-lieu fees. Any mitigation measures necessary to off-set adverse development specific impacts will be generated through the project entitlement process in compliance with CEQA. Negative Declaration ti T C No. 91-32 -5- ( 1872D) DF - Comment • 2. "RMH-S, no open space requirement for sfd; " page 2 . Same , question posed above. Response: Response DFG-2 Applicable to RMH-A district also. DF -3 : Comment • Pursuant to the Fish and Game Code Section 1802 which states that the Department has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish and wildlife resources, we are concerned that future projects will not receive adequate mitigation measures necessary to off-set adverse project-related impacts if open space requirements are no longer required. Response• Open space (private outdoor living area) will be provided in all single family developments by compliance with setbacks and site coverage. Both private and common outdoor living areas will be required in all multiple family projects . In additidn, parkland dedication and/or in lieu fees are required. The proposed Zoning Code revisions will not alter the City' s environmental review process . Subsequent development under the proposed Zoning Code will still be subject to the CEQA process which is the City' s present means for identifying impacts and imposing adequate mitigation measures to protect and conserve fish and wildlife resources . } DFG-4 : Comment • If our concerns are adequately addressed, we will have no opposition to these updates and revisions to the City of Huntington Beach' s Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code. Response Comment noted and will be forwarded to decision makers for consideration prior to action on the proposed project . Negative Declaration No . 91-32 -6- ( 1872D) DF - : Comment : Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on this document . If you have any questions, please contact Ms. Cheryl Heffley, Wildlife Biologist, at (310) 694-3578. Response: Comment does pertain to any environmental issue. No reply is warranted. CSA-1: Comment : On behalf of the Huntington Beach City School District ( "District") , Community Systems Associates, Inc. ("CSA") has been requested to provide comments on Negative Declaration No. 91-32 prepared for the Update and Revision of the Zoning . and Subdivision Ordinance Code ( "Amendment") for the City of Huntington Beach ("City") . Response: Comment noted. Comment does not pertain to any environmental issue. No reply is warranted. CSA-2: Comment The District received the Negative Declaration on March 3, 1993 . Pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA" ) , comments to the Negative Declaration may be provided within 30 days of receipt of the Negative Declaration (i .e. , by April 2, 1993) . This letter provides the District ' s comments and is intended to comply with the CEQA requirements on behalf of the District . Response; Comment noted. Comment does not pertain to any environmental issue. No reply is warranted. CSA-3 : Comment : The District believes that the Amendment may have a significant environmental impact on the District . Additionally, the Negative Declaration and Initial Study prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts of the Amendment are inadequate and do not provide Negative Declaration No . 91-32 -7- (1872D) l sufficient information to appropriately evaluate the impacts of the Amendment . More detailed environmental documentation, such as an environmental impact report or revised negative declaration, should be prepared to thoroughly evaluate the potential significant impacts on the Amendment on the District . The environmental documentation -r prepared for the Amendment should also include measures to mitigate all significant impacts on the Districts . Response: Comment noted and ;aill be for.-7arded to decision makers for consideration prior to action on the proposed project . CSA-4 ., Comment : All new residential development within the District will have a direct impact on the District . The capital facilities costs to the District to accommodate students generated from new housing units is much greater than the development fees received. Additionally, enrollment at all District schools is near or exceeds capacity. The District has demonstrated these facts to the City in numerous previous letters . Please see the attached letter sent to Mr. Michael T. Uberuaga dated February 12, 1993 for further detail . Response : Comment noted and will be forwarded to decision makers for consideration prior to action on the proposed project . CSA-5: Comment : Question 14 (c) , Public Facilities : Schools, claims that the Amendment will not have an effect on the District : "No new school facilities will be required if the proposed zoning and subdivision ordinance code is adopted. " [page 91 Apparently this conclusion is based on the fact that some of the proposed zoning changes will allow increased densities, while others will allow reduced densities, thereby resulting in no net change. For example, in the discussion of land use impacts of the Amendment, the Negative Declaration states : Under the proposed zoning designations of RM; RMH and RH will be developed at a slightly lower density and TLSP and OTSP areas, redesigned as RMH-A, will be developed at a slightly higher density based on a lot area rather than lot frontage as permitted under the existing code. (page 7) Negative Declaration X-1 No . 91-32 -8- (1872D) Response• The higher density proposed for the RMH-A areas will allow for approximately 6, 500 residential units . To achieve this density, the �- entire area must be void of any structures prior to development at the higher density. Because the area is 96% built out, the City does not anticipate a significant increase in student generation. Natural attrition of enrollment levels due to students graduating, families relocating out of the area, etc. open up space for new students . In addition, the school district has several closed schools in the City which may be refurbished and reopened if necessary. Specific development projects will be subject to CEQA, and any adverse project-related impacts on school facilities will be identified and mitigation measures recommended. CSA-6: Comment • However, the District is approximately one half the size of the City. While the changes proposed may balance Citywide, it is possible that the changes within the District will result in a net increase in density. The environmental documentation prepared for the Amendment should include a map displaying changes in density so it can be determined where the effects of the Amendment will occur . The table in Attachment A which lists the various zoning changes should quantify the effects of each change, not simply include qualitative notes such as "reduction in density" . Response• A map displaying changes in zoning districts has been prepared and will be included. Comment noted and will be forwarded to decision makers for consideration prior to action on the proposed project . CSA-�7: Comment : Additionally, no mention is given in the Negative Declaration to the potential impacts of allowing residential development in industrial areas . The Amendment would allow employee housing to be developed in both General Industrial and Limited Industrial zones . Besides the typical impacts on the District of residential development, housing in industrial areas may result in increased bussing and exposure of students to health hazards . District schools are located in residential neighborhoods, so students living in industrial areas would have to walk long distances or be bussed. Students living in industrial areas could be exposed to unsafe air emissions, high noise levels, heavy truck traffic, and other potential safety risks . Negative Declaration k;,TC `� No . 91-32 -9- ( 1872D) Response: Development of employee residential in the industrial districts will be subject to discretionary review. Any adverse project-related impacts will be generated through the entitlement process in �~ compliance with CEQA. CSA-8: Comment : However, Question 17, Human Health, summarily dismisses the potential health hazards of the Amendment, claiming that further environmental review will be done on a project specific basis . While project specific environmental review is certainly necessary, it is not the correct level at which to evaluate the concept of allowing residential development in industrial areas . Rather, the issue should be evaluated at the program level. The Amendment and its environmental documentation should contain guidelines and mitigation measures for preventing the potential health hazards of allowing residential development in industrial areas . Response: Comment noted and will be forwarded to the decision makers for . consideration pri6r to action on the proposed project . CSA-9 : Comment : ...s' The Amendment also proposes to change the zoning of schools from Community Facility-Education to Public-Semipublic, but does not discuss whether this is simply a name change of if it will actually alter the zoning of District facilities. If this change results in additional restrictions on the use of District land, the District ' s ability to provide educational services to the community could be impacted . The provisions of this zone change should be discussed in greater detail . Response: School district properties are designated Community Facilities Overlay (CF-E) to identify use for publicly owned educational purposes . The underlying zoning is also in effect . The proposed base district Public-Semi public (PS) will continue to allow publicly-owned educational facilities as well as other public- semi-public uses . Negative Declaration A? i(N No . 91-32 -10- (1872D) CSA-10• Comment : The Huntington Beach City School District and Community Systems Associates , Inc. appreciate having the opportunity to provide these comments concerning Negative Declaration No. 91-32 to the City of Huntington Beach. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Mr. Jerry S. Buchanan at (714) 964-8888, or myself at (714) 838-9900 . Response: Comment does not pertain to any environmental issue. No reply is warranted. Negative Declaration �Lo No . 91-32 -11- (1872D) STA fE OF CALIFORNIA r rz® PETE WILSON, Governor GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH 1400 TENTH STREET SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 .1 p Agar 31, 1993 JULIE OSUGI �� . CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH � � � � E. � 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 Subject: NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 91-32, HUNTINGTON BEACH SCH # 91091091 Dear JULIE OSUGI: The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named environmental. document to selected state agencies for review. The review period is closed and none of the state agencies have comments. This letter - acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. i J Please call Tom Loftus at (916) 445-0613 if you have -tCly questions regarding the environmental review process. When contacting the Clearinghouse in this matter, please use the eight-digit <_ State Clearinghouse number so that we' may respond promptly. J Sincerely, Christine Kinne Acting Deputy Director, Permit Assistance R r C 141-'AewD i�¢ Notice of Completion _ See NOTEDercv —' State Clearinghouse.1400 Tenth Street,SWramcnto.CA 95814 916,A445.0613 SCH 0 '1/0 9/ 0 5 sctTltlet Ncy,,t ive DccIarst1on No. 91-32 - —dAgcnq: City of Huntington Beach Contact Person: Susan Pierce S_rat Address: —2000 Main street phony 714-536-5250 !!untington Beach Zip: County: Orange -- ————————————— ——————————————————————————— Pro)ect Location (bunt,: Orange City/Nearest Community: Huntington Beach ct y wie'-- city Cross Streets: Zip Code: Total Acres: Wilde Assessor's Parccl No. N/A Section: Twp. Range: Base: With in2Miles: SuteHwya: 1 and 19 Waterways:-Santa Ana River- Hnntin9tnn Harhmir Airports:—_ Railways: PERR Schools: City-wide —————————————————————————————————— Document Type CECA: ❑NOP 7❑Supplemcnt/Subsequent NEPA7 ❑NOI Other: ❑Joint Document ❑Early Cons ❑EIR(Prior SCH No.) ❑EA ❑Final Document UNegDec GOther ❑Draft EIS ❑Other ❑Draft EIR ❑FONSI ----------------------------------------- Local Action Type General Plan Update ❑Specific Plan ❑Rezone ❑Annexation General Plan Amendment ❑Muter Plan ❑Prezone ❑Redevelopment Plan Element p Planned Unit Development ❑Use Permit ❑Coastal Permit ommuniey Plan Cl Site Plan /� Land Division(Subdivision. 710:her7nn i n9 f --- •\Iuap,Tract%lip.cc.) subdivision update ————————————— Development Type N/A r✓\ -------------- Rendenual: Unas ?.nct ❑Wdte�,Facilities: T,r+e A1GD .4.'Scc Sgfl. i:'Ct F-.ploleei' ❑Traifsponation: Type C:n: crciz!: Sq;i Fmp/orrs'. ❑Mining: Afinarol 77:iC ❑Power: pe R'aut c,1,,cational - ❑Waste Treatment: Type ..f 4iarArdous Waste: T'pe a— ont --— ————————————————————— — ————————————— Project Issues Discussed in Document f7t Ars:hetie/�'isual ,'x Flood PlainTlooding E3 SchoolsAlniversities E]Water Quality J Agricultural Land 'Forest Land/Fire Hazard ❑Septic Systems g]Water Supply/Groundwater '3.Air Qualiry -3 Geologic/Seismic :K]Sewer Capacity :0 Wcdand/Ripuiart [2 Archeologic&L'Historical ❑Minerals -{]Soil Erosion/Compaction/Grading Z]Wildlife 51 Coastal Zone Noise :E)Solid Waste fl Growth Inducing ya D+ai sgcJAbsorpt ion ,t PopulcionlHousing Balance o ToxiclHaurdous Landuse Economic/jobs Public Sen•ices/Facilities Traffic/Circulation Cumulative Effects Reereation/Pa.—" lt]Vegetation Other ----------------------------------------- - Present Land Use/Zoning/Ceneral Plan Use ———Pr3}zones.ect is city wide andincorporates an multiple land use designations ———— _ ————————————————————— aJect Description 1— 7— ' and revisions to the City of Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code. TOY. LOPTUS (916; 445-0613 CMT SNT CPIT SNT _ ® — a Recourcee State/Consumer Svcs &_Coastal Conch V�, A i2l _Fish 6 Came .r 'ar d Parks L ec/OHP A ity _ --- ---- -- Reg. NQCB _&_D11R PLEASE NOTE SCH NUMBER ON ALL COMMrNTS � * a� Ions PLEASE PORIIARD LAT£ COMKENTS DIRECTLY TO THE LEAD AGENCY ONLY WC.itr--s — ,Trans Planning `+ .. " • L — Housing i Devel r'sc,u.cps:'S! L 1 EEEaeC--- A7t v State Lands Comm . x^ r k' �, Z. 4 E C E i V E D MICHAEL M. RUANE U -rNr ®� DIRECTOR, EMA C THOMAS B. MA7 ; a=�� � - ^ DIRECTOR OF PLA, a 5 3 ���ciPE LOCATION : ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AGENCY 300 N. FLOWER ST. PLANNING THIRD FLOOR SANTA ANA,CA MAD 1 A 1993 MAILING h1I� P.O.BOX 4048 J J SANTA ANA,CA 92702.4048 TELEPHONE: (714)834-4643 Susan PiercelAssociate Planner FILE: NCL 93-14 FAX#:834-27i1 City of Huntington Beach DPC:834-4772 Department of .Community Development 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 SUBJECT: ND 91-32 - Update/Revision of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code Dear Ms. Pierce: Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the above referenced item. The County of Orange has no comment at this time. However, we would appreciate - being informed of any further developments. W 3 If you have any questions or need to contact us, please call Kari Rigoni at (714) 834-2109. c -u Very truly yours, Kara A. Rigoni, P nn For: Robert W. White,. Manager Environmental Planning Division CH:crPL02-054 (3077)3031811450496 STATE Of CAIIFORN1A-BUSINESS AND TRANSPORTATION AGENCY PETE WILSON, Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 12 2501 PUIIMAN STREET SANTA ANA, CA 92705 L_ RE VE � [_� '—LT Fir;rl 1091 .. �'`•_7r1' r t%� T? LA FA_ � _'�I �: �? . U i- .i.� . r'FS i t!1\ii i.L.V T it rnT , . ifir �C -evi<3w an'J o r + h� C ' L i`•.,I1u C21 t�"it• and reviY=ioll o � l7 _ its" ol:i:.�_' a~:a .._ub�ii�,�i:;ion �h - ^l1 ct'.^: P o revision a '.`1 a_,r. }e t t' -' n 1 ..� I� na- �c� ?.n s1 d.t the S-D cific .t"y C� a Fro4--' . -� ui?c.::l+� -O dote.-mine the lr,,i:acts +_?t etZv r y e- e opl.^ent Ihz_,refore , District i.. �'f_'.✓'='r��" ltJ 3 _r:,a` viduai pre j ec,.s atl ected b., thi ;ly c _tt, n. WE' ].c"Dk f'i:sward to the impleme::tatiun i is 'phis -V ',',proving regioned partner-ship. r t;l,_.nk v 1 -r the. opportunity ,:_r revi_.,,` a;� ? v or the r.ropo3Gd project . Ti iif�G_ tlr�ll is needed. t L j-Meese or_+;11111'unicate with Nathaniel H. Pickett , 714 724--2247 Gr Ms. G Thank you, ROBERT F. jr) { , r Advanced P1r;:.r.ing Branch !OUYNE"CALIFORMARVOCIATM of 818 West Seventh Street,12th Floor a Los Angeles,California 90017-3435 u (213)236-1800 ® FAX(213)236-1 ..i March 3, 1993 Ms. Susan Pierce Associate Planner City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 RE: SCAG Clearinghouse #: I9300139 Project Title: Negative Declaration No. 91-32 Update and Revision of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code Dear Ms. Pierce: We have reviewed the above referenced document and determined that it is not regionally significant per Areawide Clearinghouse criteria. Therefore, the project does not warrant clearinghouse comments at this time. Should there be a change in the scope of the project, we n would appreciate the opportunity to review and comment at that time. A description of the project will be published in the March 15, 1993 Intergovernmental Review Report for public review and comment. The project title and SCAG number should be used in all correspondence with SLAG concerning this project. Correspondence should be sent to the attention of the Clearinghouse Coordinator. If you have any questions, please contact Maureen Farley at (213) 236-1886. 0 Sincerely, ERIC H. ROTH Manager, Intergovernmental Review ,John lA nuville City of Rialto President, Gaddi Vasquez Orange County-First Vice President. Stella Mendoza City of Brawley-Second Vice President, John Flynn Ventura County-Pa,r President a Richard Alatorre City of Los Angeles, Michael Antonovich Los Angeles County, Robert Bartlett City of Monrovia, George Bass City of Bell, Ronald Bates City o' Alamit,,,, George Battey,Jr.City of Burbank. Ernani Bernardi City of Los Angeles, Hal Bernson City of Los Angeles, Walter Bowman City of Cypress, Tom Bradley City of Los le,. Marvin Braude City of Los Angeles, Susan Brooks City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Art Brown City of Buena Park, Jim City Busby,Jr.City of Victorville, John Cox City of NewportZ b ane Duna Los Angeles County. Elmer Digneo City of Loma Linda, Richard Dixon City of Lake Forest, Douglas Drummond City of Long Beach, John Ferraro of Los Ang, an Milke Flores City of Los Angeles. Terry Frizzel City of Riverside, Ruth Galanter City of Los Angeles, Sandra Gents City of Costa Mesa, Candace Haggard City of San Clemen,,_" Garland Hardeman City of Inglewood, Robert Hargrave City of Lomita, Mike Hernandez City of Los Angeles, Nate Holden City of Los Angeles, Robert Jamison City of Artesia. Jim Kelly(ay of South 1'1 Monte, Richard Kelly,City of Palm Desert. Bob Kuhn City of Glendora. Abbe Land City of West Hollywood, Darlene hlcBane City of Agoura Hills, John Melton (lty of Santa Paula,Barbara Messina City of Alhambra. Jon Mikels San Bernardino County. Judy Nlikels City of Simi Valley,David Myers City of Palmdale, Kathryn Nack City of Pasad- , Bev Perry City of Brea. Gwenn Norton-Perry City of Chino Hill,. Ronald Parks City of Temecula. Iry Pickier City of Anaheim, Joy Picus City of Los Angeles, Beatrice Proo City of I•n„Rivera. Larry khinehart City ul Montclair, Mark Ridley-Thomas City of Los Angeles. Albert Robles City of South Gate, Sam Sharp Imperial County. Bob Slone City of Bellflower."I homas Sykcs(:*Iry ut Walnut. Jeff Thomas City of Tu,tin. Laurie Tully-Payne City of Highland, Joel Wachs City of Los Angeles, Rita Walters City of Los Angeles. Evelyn Wells City of Lynwood, Michael Wrar C"y of I,, Angeles. Judy Wright City o(Claremom, Zev Varoslaysky City of Los Angeles, Norton Vounglove Riverside County STATE OF CALIFORNIA—THE RESOURCES AGENCY PETE WILSON, Govemor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME 330 GOLDEN SHORE, SUITE SO m ' ONG BEACH, CA 90802 (310) 590-5113 March 25, 1993 Ms. Susan Pierce �. in! � Associate Planner ` City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 Dear Ms. Pierce: Negative Declaration No. 91-32 : City of Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code The Department of Fish and Game (Department) has reviewed the referenced document and has the following questions regarding "Attachment All under the heading of "Proposed Major Changes in Development Standards" : 1. "Base Zoning Districts, RL: Delete open space requirement; :' page 1. How will this change affect the open space requirement associated with any mitigation measures designed to off-set adverse project-related a.. impacts? 2 . "RMH-S, no open space requirement for sfd;" page 2 . Same question posed above. Pursuant to the Fish and Game Code Section 1802 which states that the Department has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish and wildlife resources, we are �F=v -3 concerned that future projects will not receive adequate mitigation measures necessary to off-set adverse project-related impacts if open space requirements are no longer required. If our concerns are adequately addressed, we will have no opposition to these updates and revisions to the City of r)t-C Huntington Beach's Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code. �- Ms. `Susan Pierce March 25, 1993 Page Two Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on this I �,icJ document. If you have any questions, please contact Ms. Cheryl Heffley, Wildlife Biologist, at (310) 694-3578 . Sincerely, i� A lG��,-✓,7 / Fred W'//ovr/th�le(/y'✓vU� Regional Manager Region 5 cc: C. Heffley, DFG/WLM K. Lal, DFG/ES ES Files i'�. A _-.. �l®fig s,l=; II���®. df' r►�-..i des Community Systems Associates, Inc. April 2, 1993 HAND DELIVERED Ms. Susan Pierce, AICP ttii l, U0 ;c�c�? Associate Planner CITY OF HUNTINGTON LEACH-t 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 SUBJECT: Negative Declaration No. 91-32 Update and Revision of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code for the City of Huntington Beach Dear Ms. Pierce: On behalf of the Huntington Beach City School District ("District"), Community Systems 1 Associates, Inc. ("CSA") has been requested to provide comments on Negative Declaration No. 91-32 prepared for the Update and Revision of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Code ("Amendment").for the City of Huntington Beach ("City"). The District received the Negative Declaration on Larch 3, 1993. Pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), comments to the Negative Declaration may be provided within 30 days of receipt of the Negative C"A Declaration (i.e., by April 2, 1993). This letter provides the District's comments and is intended to comply with the CEQA requirements on behalf of the District. The District believes that the Amendment may have a significant environmental impact on the District. Additionally, the Negative Declaration and Initial Study prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts of the Amendment are inadequate and do not provide sufficient information to appropriately evaluate the impacts of the Amendment. More c-A detailed environmental documentation, such as an environmental impact report or revised negative declaration, should be prepared to thoroughly evaluate the potential significant impacts of the Amendment on the District. The environmental documentation prepared for the Amendment should also include measures to mitigate all significant impacts on the District. toE-I (:AM;';()VIA, • "MIf1 200 • TUSTIN,CA(-IFOHNIA92680 - (714)83899t)o - FA} (714)838'09A ::i`. ik- Ccmmundy 5�-temt Assnc;te: ;n, -. 66`i��__ - v�r i Ms. Susan Pierce CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH April 2, 1993 Page 2. All new residential development within the District will have a direct impact on the District. The capital facilities costs to the District to accommodate students generated from new housing units is much greater than the development fees received. Additionally, C,5A�- enrollment at all District schools is near or exceeds capacity. The District has demonstrated these facts to the City in numerous previous letters. Please see the attached letter sent to Mr. Michael T. Uberuaga dated February 12, 1993 for further detail. Question 14(d), Public Facilities: Schools claims that the Amendment will not have an effect on the District: "No new school facilities will be required if the proposed zoning and I subdivision ordinance code is adopted." [page 9] Apparently this conclusion is based on. the fact that some of the proposed zoning changes will allow increased densities, while others will allow reduced densities, thereby resulting in no net change. For example, in the discussion of land use impacts of the Amendment, the Negative Declaration states: i I Under the proposed zoning designations of RM, RMH and RH will be developed at a slightly lower density and TLSP and OTSP areas, redesigned as RMH-A, will be developed at a slightly higher density based on a lot area rather than lot I frontage as permitted under the existing code. [page 7] However, the District is approximately one half the size of the City. While the changes proposed may balance Citywide, it is possible that the changes within the District will result in a net increase in density. The environmental documentation prepared for the Amendment should include a map displaying changes in density so it can be determined where the effects of the Amendment will occur. The table in Attachment A which lists the various zoning changes should quantify the effects of each change, not simply include qualitative notes such as "reduction in density". j Additionally, no mention is given in the Negative Declaration to the potential impacts of allowing residential development in industrial areas. The Amendment would allow employee housing to be developed in both General Industrial and Limited Industrial zones. Besides the typical impacts on the District of residential development, housing in _ industrial areas may result in increased bussing and exposure of students to health �` �� hazards. District schools are located in residential neighborhoods, so students living in industrial areas would have to walk long distances or be bussed. Students living in industrial areas could be exposed to unsafe air emissions, high noise levels, heavy truck ( traffic, and other potential safety risks. l However, Question 17, Human Health, summarily dismisses the potential health hazards ( of the Amendment, claiming that further environmental review will be done on a project ( - specific basis. While project specific environmental review is certainly necessary, it is not i C mmurory Sy,fe as ASso:.tes.InC z-._am Ms. Susan Pierce CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH April 2, 1993 Page 3 the correct level at which to evaluate the concept of allowing residential development in industrial areas. Rather, the issue should be evaluated at the program level. The i Amendment and its environmental documentation should contain guidelines and mitigation measures for preventing the potential health hazards of allowing residential development in industrial areas. The Amendment also proposes to change the zoning of schools from Community Facility- Education to Public-Semipublic, but does not discuss whether this is simply a name change of if it will actually alter the zoning of District facilities. If this change results in / -7 additional restrictions on the use of District land, the District's ability to provide educational services to'the community could be impacted. The provisions of this zone change should be discussed in greater detail. The Huntington Beach City School District and Community Systems Associates, Inc. appreciate having the opportunity to provide these comments concerning Negative Declaration No. 91-32 to the City of Huntington Beach. If you have any questions or H —! require additional information, please contact Mr. Jerry S. Buchanan at (714) 964-8888, 1 or myself at (714) 838-9900. Sincerely, I COMMUNITY SYSTEMS ASSOCIATES, INC. 9N, C John C. Hutt Associate Vice President attachment 1120piercel.jch i cc: Mr. Jerry S. Buchanan Assistant Superintendent, Business Services Huntington Beach City School District i k,l A u � r • 0'1 r-I6.t, RECEIVra FEB 1 3 1993 HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT 20451 Craimer Lane • P.O.Box 71 Huntington Beach.California 92648 (714)964 8888 O ' 4fr February 12 , 1993 BOARD OF TRUSTEES Mr. Michael T. Uberuaga SPr85id City Administrator City of Huntington Beach Brian Garland Clerk 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 Robert Mann. Ed. D. Member Subject: Mitigation of Development Impacts on the Catherine McGough Huntington Beach City School District Member Brian E. Rechsteiner Dear Mr. Uberuaga: Member This letter is intended to update you and the rest of ADMINISTRATION the City of Huntington Beach ("City") staff, as well as the City Council and Planning Commission, of the Duane A Dishno.:Ed. D. current condition of the Huntington Beach City School Superintendent District ("District" )) and recent legislation concerning school impact mitigation. Alan Rasmussen. Ed. D. Assistant Superintendent Personnel/Educational The District remains near capacity and unable to Services adequately accommodate new students generated by Jerry Buchanan development without mitigation in excess of statutory Assistant Superintendent development fees. On the bright side, the District is Business Services near completion of its Capital Facilities Strategic Master Plan and Asset Management Program ("Master Plan") . The Master Plan will help the District logically and efficiently plan and construct school, facilities required to accommodate increasing enrollments. Attached is a more detailed discussion of the District ' s facilities and the impacts of development. Additionally, copies of the Master Plan will be transmitted to the City after it is adopted by the District ' s Board. As you know, for the past several months the District has been challenging City approval of development projects and land use actions in an attempt to ensure adequate mitigation of the impacts of these items on the District. Over the course of these months, the City and District have gained a better understanding of each other. Together, we have evolved standard condition of approval language which ensures adequate mitigation of school impacts, while allowing development to proceed. Similar language was made a condition of approval on the Holly-Seacli.ff Specific Plan and NESI project Mr. Michael T. Uberuaga February 12 , 1993 Page 2 and has been proposed by City Staff for the Coultrup project. Unfortunately, Senate Bill No. 1287 (11SB 128711) has limited the methods the City and District can employ to mitigate school impacts. The District believes that the basic concept of school mitigation that the City and District have been pursuing is still sound, but the condition of approval language may need to be modified somewhat. The District has drafted the following modified mitigation language which it feels is legal and in the same spirit as previous City-approved condition of approval language: Prior to the issuance of any building permit, the developer shall mitigate the impacts of the project on school facilities, using any combination of measures listed in Government Code Section 65996 or other legal means, to a level acceptable to the appropriate school district(s) for K-12. This condition may be waived by the appropriate school district(s) . The District therefore requests that the City impose the proposed mitigation language as a condition -of approval for all development projects and land use actions. Attached is- a detailed discussion of the ramifications of SB 1287. Thank you for your consideration and assistance. If you have any questions or desire additional information, please don't hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Jerry S. Buchanan Assistant Superintendent, Business Services Huntington Beach City School District attachments cc: Mayor and Members of the City Council Chairperson and Members of the Planning Commission Ms. Gail Hutton, City Attorney Mr. Mike Adams, Director of Community Development Mr. Howard Zelefski, Planning Director Mr. Hal Simmons, Planning Department Mr. Jack Bowland, Chairman of GPAC City of Huntington Beach ;. Mr. Michael T. Uberuaga February 12 , 1993 Page 3 cc: Gary A. Burg ner, Ed. D. , Assistant Superintendent _r Huntington Beach Union High School District Stanley Oswalt, Ed. D. , Assistant Superintendent Ocean View School District Mark Ecker, Ph.D. , Assistant Superintendent Fountain Valley School District Ms. Barbara Winars, Assistant Superintendent Westminister School District President and Members of the Board of Education Duane Dishno, Ed.D. , Superintendent Huntington Beach City School District Mr. Marshall B. Krupp, President Community Systems Associates, Inc. Mr. Woody Tescher, Consultant Envicom Corporation ATTACHMENT "A" TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION State of the District The Huntington Beach City School District ("District") covers portions of the City of Huntington Beach and portions of the unincorporated areas of Orange County. The District serves grades K-8 through the operation of eight (8) schools, consisting of six (6) K-5 elementary school and two (2) 6-8 middle schools. Additionally, she District maintains four (4) closed sites, one of which is used as the District office. Of these twelve (12) ;schools, seven (7) are twenty years old or older, and two (2) are over thirty years old. The District has experienced a variety of enrollment changes over the last thirteen (13) years. From 1979 to 1987, student enrollments declined at a rate of 4.2% per year. However, a new trend has begun, starting in the 1988 school year, of a gradual, but modest increase in student enrollment. The District's Developer Fee Report identifies an enrollment of 5,303 students in 1987/88. This figure has increased to 5,675 students as �- of October of 1991, representing an average annual increase of 1.71% between 1987 - 1991. For the 1992/93 school year enrollments have increased to 5,751 students, or an increase of approximately 1.34% from the previous year. The District prepared an Enrollment Projections Study in February of 1992. This study predicted growth of about 2.00% per year throughout the 1990s, based primarily on infill development. Additionally, a number of large residential developments (i.e., Holly- Seacliff, Bolsa Chica, Magnolia Pacific, etc.) have been proposed or adopted which may cause significant additional student enrollment increases within the District. The District's operating school facilities are currently facing severe capacity shortcomings, necessitating the addition of portable classrooms, the construction of new permanent school facilities and/or the reconstruction and expansion of existing school facilities. As of October 14, 1992, the District's capacity utilization and surplus/deficit capacity can be seen, as follows: A - 1 1992/93 School Year Capacity Utilization Surplus/ School Capacity Enrollment Utilization (Deficit) Eader 780 683 87.56% 97 Hawes 390 414 106.15% (24) Kettler 720 705 97.92% 15 Moffett 690 682 98.84% 8 Perry 540 579 107.22% (39) Smith 720 714 99.17% 6 K-5 Total 3,840 3,777 98.36% 63 Dwyer 780 853 109.36% (73) Sowers 1,110 1,121 100.99% (11) 6-8 Total . 1,890 1,974 104.44% (84) K-8 Total 5,730 5,751 100.37% (21) In practice, students are rarely divisible into uniform class sizes, and individual class enrollments tend to fluctuate over the course of the school year. As such it is difficult to achieve 100% capacity utilization. It is a generally accepted practice to consider school facilities to be impacted if utilization exceeds 86%. Capacity utilization in excess of 100% indicates actual overcrowding of school facilities, resulting in the loading of classrooms above State standards or the use of non-classrooms (i.e., libraries) for classroom purposes. As shown above, the District's facilities are currently overcrowded. All subsequent enrollment increases will require expansion of District facilities. The District is developing a Capital Facilities Strategic Master Plan and Asset Management Program ("Master Plan"). The preliminary draft of the Master Plan projects increases in enrollment for the next ten years, with a total K-8 enrollment of 8,204 by school year 2002-03. The Master Plan projects a total K-8 enrollment of 8,636 at mid- intensity buildout. To accommodate the projected enrollment growth the District will need to develop two to three additional elementary schools (Holly-Seacliff and one to two yet to be located) on the west side of the District. Middle school enrollment increases are anticipated to be accommodated by reopening the Peterson School and by increasing the capacity of the Dwyer School with new permanent construction. Impact of Development The District's Development Fee Report, last updated February 18, 1992, determined that on average, there are 0.1869 K-8 students per occupied housing unit within the District. The District has found, however, that this number is not a good estimator of student yield from new development, because it is based on the total housing stock within the District A - 2 which includes a number of senior and non-child households. In 1991, Mr. Clyde Glasser of the District conducted a survey of new development within the District and determined a K-8 student generation factor ("SGF") of 0.2695. This includes a K-6 component of 0.2084 and a 7-8 component of 0.611. This survey included the Town Square, Pier Colony, Huntington Place, Seacliff Estates, Ocean Point, The Villas, The Huntington Classics, The Heritage at Huntington Shores, and Central Park developments. These developments depict a representative range of housing types, sizes, and costs. Since originally conducting the survey, Mr. Glasser has monitored its results and analyzed in greater detail the factors that determine student yield. The results of his analyses show there are a large number of variables which influence SGFs, many of which cannot be estimated before a development is planned or even built. Because of this variability, the District believes it is best to use an average SGF rather than factors based on different housing types, sizes, etc. The District feels its survey determined SGF of 0.2695 is the best estimator of student generation for new development. _ To accommodate additional students generated by development, the District will need to add portable classrooms, refurbish and redesign existing facilities, construct additional permanent classrooms at open schools, reopen one or more schools and/or develop one or more new schools. The District also requires offsite support facilities such as a maintenance and operations yard. The full cost of accommodating an additional student assuming land, new classroom construction (70% permanent and 30% relocatable), and offsite support facilities is $21,767 for K-6 and $33,808 for 7-8. These amounts are in 1992/93 dollars. Multiplying the SGF for each grade level by the District facilities cost per student for that grade level results in the total impact on the District per housing unit. This equates to approximately $6,602. Based on the average size of housing units developed within the District (1,600 square feet), the impact on the District per square foot of residential development is estimated to be $4.13. However, the District has certain facility and land assets which can be employed to partially offset the full impact of development, perhaps the most useful of which are the District's closed schools. In order to house the projected increased student enrollments, the Master Plan contains a school facilities development program. This program calls for the rehabilitation of and expansion of existing schools, reopening of two of the Districts closed sites, and the acquisition and development of three new schools (two schools in addition to the Holly-Seacliff school). Unfortunately, the District's other closed schools cannot be used to house new students, because much of the new residential development will occur on the west side of the District while all the closed schools are on the east side. Sending students to schools far away from their homes would violate the District's commitment to neighborhood schools and require prohibitively expensive bussing. A - 3 9 �_ The total cost of this development program in 1992 dollars is estimated to be $56,350,000. The resulting cost to the District per additional housing unit would be approximately$4,612, (based upon 12,219 housing units projected to be developed within the District by mid-intensity buildout). Based on an average housing unit size of 1,600 square feet, the cost to the District per square foot of residential development is estimated to be $2.88. Comparison of Impact Estimates Full Impact Master Plan Impact Impact per Housing Unit $6,601.91 $4,611.67 Impact per Square Foot $4.13 $2.88 To offset the impacts described above, the District is allowed under State law to levy fees on development up to certain maximum levels. Current California Law concerning school development fees was established by Assembly Bill No. 1600 ("AB 1600") and Assembly Bill No. 181 ("AB 181"), and recently amended by Senate Bill No. 1287 ("SB 1287"). AB 1600 and AB 181 allow a total of $1.65 per square foot of residential development and $0.27 per square foot on commercial/industrial development to be collected by school districts. These fees must be shared by non-unified school districts with overlapping territory, such as a high school district and its feeder elementary school districts. Based on a fee sharing agreement with the Huntington Beach Union High School District, the District's share of these fees is 61%, or $1.0065 per square foot for residential development. This amount .is clearly much less than the $4.13 full impact or $2.88 Master Plan impact derived above. Senate Bill No. 1287 ("SB 1287"), which became operative January 1, 1993, authorizes school districts to levy development fees higher than allowed pursuant to AB 1600 and AB 181. Pursuant to SB 1287, an additional $1.00 per square foot may be assessed by school districts on residential.development. The law is unclear as to whether non-unified school districts must share this additional fee, or if each district may assess a full $1.00 per square foot. Within the next few months it is likely that either a court will render an interpretation of SB 1287 or the State Legislature will clarify its intent. The District is currently assessing a full additional dollar, for a total fee of $2.0065 per square foot. If through subsequent court ruling or legislation, the District is only able to assess a share of the additional $1.00, it will be able to collect a total fee of $1.6165 per square foot. Both fees are still less than the $4.13 full impact or $2.88 Master Plan impact derived above. A - 4 Comparison of Impact and Fee Estimates Per Housing Unit Per Square Foot Full Impact $6,601.91 $4.13 Master Plan Impact $4,611.67 $2.88 AB 1600 & AB 181 Fees $1,610.40 $1.0065 Shared SB 1287 Fees $2,586.40 $1.6165 Full SB 1287 Fees $3,210.40 $2.0065 However, the increased fee level afforded by SB 1287 will become inoperative if the California electorate rejects Assembly Constitutional Amendment No. 6 ("ACA 6") which will appear on the next Statewide election, currently scheduled in June of 1994. Many development projects and land use actions approved now or in the near future will not result in the pulling of building permits (when school development fees are paid) until after June 1994. Hence, it is uncertain which of these fee structures will be in place when the school development fees are actually paid. Never the less, because all fee levels are lower than the impacts on the District, it is clear that some additional source of mitigation will be .required to offset the impacts on the District. The District feels therefore, that language requiring the complete mitigation of impacts on the District should be made a condition of approval on all development projects and land use actions. Ramifications of SB 1287 on School Impact Mitigation SB 1287 was passed by the State Legislature and signed by the Governor as part of the 1992 budget deal. It became effective January 1, 1993. The intent of this bill was to move a greater share of responsibility for school facilities funding to local school districts. In fact, SB 1287 calls for the phase out of the Leroy F. Greene State School Building Lease-Purchase Program ("State Program") by 1996. SB 1287 is "tied" to ACA 6. If passed by the voters in the next statewide election (currently scheduled for June 1994), ACA 6 will allow school districts to pass general obligation bonds by a simple majority vote rather than the current two-thirds. However, if the California electorate rejects ACA 6, SB 1287 will become inoperative and the State Program will remain intact. As mentioned above, SB 1287 allows school districts to levy an additional development fee of $1.00 per square foot on residential development. As a tradeoff for the increased fee levels, SB 1287 attempted to reduce the number of mitigation measures that can be ,,.. used to offset school impacts. A - 5 The measures available to mitigate impacts on schools of development projects are limited by Government Code Section 65996. Prior to SB 1287, legislative actions (such as general plan amendments, specific plans, and zone changes) where not considered development projects, so a wider array of mitigation options was available for such actions. SB 1287 attempted to place legislative actions under the requirements Government Code Section 65996. Government Code Section 65996 lists the following seven mitigation measures: (1) Chapter 22 (commencing with Section 17700) of Part 10 of the Education Code. This chapter sets forth the provisions of the State Program created by the Leroy F. Greene State School Building Lease-Purchase Law of 1976. The State Program is funded through statewide general obligation bonds such as those approved by Propositions 152 and 155. Because the demand for state money far exceeds the supply of statewide bond funds, only a small percentage of school projects are funded through the State Program. None the less, the District is applying for funding through the State Program to the fullest extent possible. The District has provisions in all its existing mitigation agreements with developers that would lower developer contributions to the extent state funding is obtained. Additionally, the State Program will be phased out by 1996 if the California voters approve ACA 6. (2) Chapter 25 (commencing with Section 17785) of Part 10 of the Education Code. This chapter was enacted by the Emergency School Classroom Law of 1979 which includes provisions for the lease of state portable facilities to address emergency overcrowding conditions. It does not provide funding for permanent facilities and is useful only in emergency situations. (3) Chapter 28 (commencing with Section 17870) of Part 10 of the Education Code. This chapter sets forth the provisions of the California School Finance Authority. This is a statewide financing vehicle that school districts can employ to gain the benefits of statewide rather than local financing. It does not provide additional revenue, but is only a financing tool. (4) Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 39327) of Chapter 3 Part 23 of the Education Code. This article provides school districts with the authority to enter into a lease or other agreement for school facilities with non-profit corporations. This allows for the establishment of a non-profit corporation whose function is to sell bonds and build A - 6 school facilities and, in turn, lease the facilities to the school district. However, it does not solve the fundamental question of how the school facilities will be paid for. (5) Section 53080 of the Government Code. This section sets forth the statutory development fees discussed above. (6) Chapter 2.5 (commencing with Section 53311) of Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code. This chapter was established by the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 which allows for the creation of community facilities districts to fund public facilities including schools. The bonds issued to construct public facilities are repaid by annual fees levied against parcels within a community facilities district. (7) Chapter 4.7 (commencing with Section 65970) of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code. This chapter was established by the School Facilities Act which allows a city or county to levy development fees (known as "SB 201 fees") on behalf of a school district to fund interim classroom facilities. Any fees levied pursuant to this chapter reduce the ability of school districts to levy fees pursuant to Government Code Section 53080. In practice, these fees have been superseded by those set forth in Government Code Section 53080. Additionally, in Murrieta Valley Unified School District v. County of Riverside, the court ruled that cities or counties can impose non-financial mitigation measures in addition to the seven financial measures listed in Government Code Section 65996. Such non- financial mitigation measures could include density reductions, project phasing, or senior- only housing. Nothing in SB 1287 prohibited the use of such non-financial mitigation measures. Because SB 1287 was only recently adopted, its legal interpretation remains uncertain. It appears that a city or county may not have the power to require financial mitigation measures other than those specified in Government Code Section 65996. Most attorneys agree, however, that a city or county can still deny a legislative action or require non- financial mitigation measures. Additionally, Government Code Section 65996 allows the use of Mello-Roos Community Facilities Districts with charges in excess of State mandated development fees. Some attorneys believe that a city or county may have the ability to require mitigation in excess of fees if the existing General Plan requires adequate school facilities. However, while SB 1287 may have limited the number of mitigation measures available, in no way did it preclude the requirement that development projects or land use actions must comply with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"). The Legislative A - 7 Counsel of California has issued an opinion that SB 1287 "does not prohibit a city, county, or city and county from considering the adequacy of school facilities in the course of adopting'or implementing a general plan, zoning ordinance, or other legislative land. .✓ use.policy, The impacts on the District of each project must be evaluated, and all impacts must be mitigated to a level of insignificance. Hence, the net effect of SB 1287 is to limit the types of measures that may be used to mitigate school impacts, but not the total mitigation of impacts. In order to comply with the provisions of SIB 1287 while maintaining the spirit of school facilities impact mitigation program that the City and District have evolved, the District is providing draft language for a condition of approval to be added to all development projects and land use actions. The City has applied the following, or similar, language as a condition of approval to many development entitlements: Prior to the issuance of any building permit, the developer shall enter into a school facilities impact mitigation and reimbursement agreement with the appropriate school district(s) for K-12. This condition maybe waived by the appropriate school district. The District has modified this language as follows: Prior to the issuance of any building permit, the developer shall mitigate the impacts of the project on school facilities, using any combination of 'measures listed in Government Code Section 65996 or other legal means, to a level acceptable to the appropriate school district(s) for K-12. This condition may be V waived by the appropriate school district(s). The District feels that this modified condition of approval language is legally acceptable and roughly equivalent to, though somewhat more restrictive than, the previous condition of approval language. Its application will ensure adequate mitigation of school impacts while allowing development to proceed. The District therefore requests that the City impose this language as a condition of approval for all development projects and land use actions. A - 8 ..�. ATTACHMENT "B" SENATE BILL NO. 1287 B - 1 T, A STATUTES OF 1 1991-199Z REGULAR SESSION Ch. 1354 -s outside the State of California` y„' ;, SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL DISTII;ICTS--FACILITIES—FUNDING d of time unrelated to the adop ' be signed before a representsJCHAM nt of a birth parent in the state : : R 1354 ctended period of time. S.B. No. 1287 t to sign a consent for the adop ' �ACT�add and rapes!Article 5(commencing act to revocation by reason of' g with Section 17760)of Chapter 22 of Part 10 of the Education Code, to amend Sections.65996 and 65996 of, and to add and repeal Sections 65995,65996.3,and 66996 of,the Government Code,and to repeal Section 34 of Chapter 1209 e, to read: ;,' of the Statutes of 1939, relating to school facilities. ied by the birth part;nt or pares t. [Approved by Governor September 30, 1992.] —� ent or parents signing the co ins; 5 °"` Ined with Secretary of State September 30, 1992.] Iency a written statement revo to the birth parent or parer LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST form prescribed by the departttd SB 1287, School facilities. lent or delegated county adop' (1) Under existing law, the State Allocation Board is authorized to apportion fun( rnia nor is physically present for school facilities projects, for designated construction purposes, on behalf of a In a agency licensed or authorized' school districts under the Leroy F. Greene State School Building Lease-Purchase Lai resides, or is present for a p 1976. revoke consent may not be ai to Department of Social Servi This bill would repeal that program, pursuant to certain legislative findings, a January 1, 1996. ant on the 121st day after si The bill would state that the changes specified above shall become operative on,y u of the right:to revoke consent ACA 6 is approved by a majority of the voters voting on that measure. " r the consent was signed, which g (2) Existing law authorizes local agencies to impose limited fees or other charges against certain development projects to fund the construction or reconstruction of school le, to read: r balities. has become permanent as pro, This bill would authorize the levy of an additional fee, for school facilities •u rospective adoptive parents map purposes, on 6irtain residential construction of up to $1 per square foot of assessable space.' d Existing law prohibits the legislative body of a local agency from levying development becomes permanent as provi lest return of the child. In su fees or other requirements for the construction or reconstruction of schools, other than rth parent or parents so reques ' Parsuant to designated statutory authority. s been placed have concerns that f Thisbill would specify that this prohibition applies to both administrative and legisla- e action of the legislative� le A are unfit or present a dangez; gi body of a local agency. option is to report their concernO Under existing law, development fees or other requirements to fund school construction -fate child welfare agency. . or reconstruction may be imposed against residential construction other than new con- -ly return the child. t11tion only where the resulting increase in assessable space, as defined, resulting from she construction exceeds 500 square feet. Existing law also excludes designated school 1994. °.aality expenses from the "construction or reconstruction' ' purposes .for which the r independent adoption filed on, 41eloper fees or other consideration may be expended, authorizes the expenditure of up ate shall be governed by the )> m 3,6 of the fees collected in any fiscal year for administrative costs incurred in collecting *s fees or other consideration, defines the "assessable space" of residential development, -, s shall adopt emergency regale the "chargeable eable covered and enclosed space" of commercial or industrial develop- fit, that are subject to a development fee or other requirement, and specifies that amount of the maximum developer fee or other requirement shall be increased or ;overnment Code, if the Co hfilition every 2 years. tins costs mandated by the �� -ts for those costs shall be' b ing law also contains the legislative finding that the provisions of existing law ntle 2 Of: i )0) of Division 4 of ' n the preceding paragraph are declaratory of existing law. for reimbursement does not '" a bill would repeal that legislative finding. be made from the State Existin Government Code, unless o - g law prescribes the exclusive methods that may be required by local °es to mitigate environmental effects related to the adequacy of school facilities a become operative on the saris '- �t mnsiderin unstitution. -.. , g, under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), the approv- s Additions or changes indicated D underline; deletions by asterisks 9letions by asterisks :� ,- g Y 5769 y ad Airb { �'t act. r .'S34."�' M1..� � � .,�,•t� '�,• wF ,��1 �''� 6)� ._ly�'�� �'.i 1b"`�' "r?. • p„ ', ,.yrk t`±�...7 r..n .kin y�. :.yy,,'F„ 'z?�:y�"�`i�z e; ..•p• :± {`:, ,. �.. F .,7',^'kV'nh^�y..:w��� Y"..,v,'�q .,. e `''J`,+ . ..� -. �. ts� �'., k q W%^_ 4 �-�f�r``� t'�?�"�,.�.�.,' �� 'e. s �t�., � �. x �s� 4 } ��•d, ,s� .��f -� ,C�'�,,�yb� 1;��tg�3v�. ���' 4� �, k�e�tk � � t�'�'„y41�•,vi �ss"'4� � "d�rir. Ch. 1354 STATMs op 1 1991 `<.-�•ai al, or the establishment of conditions for the approval, of a development project, which h defined to mean a project undertaken for the purpose of development, including a pray shalt involving the issuance of a permit for construction or reconstruction. Existing law alu perri prohibits a public agency, under CEQA or the Subdivision Map Act, from denying strvc approval of a project on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities. (2) This bill would prohibit a public agency, in the exercise of its authority to adopt genera) per plans, zoning laws, and other land use legislation, from either denying approval of a enclo project on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities or imposing conditions, other than Withi , ,. the requirement to pay the limited school facilities fees, on the approval of a project for Areas the purpose of providing school facilities. anenc - The bill also would delete the definition of development project, as described above,am cover would specify that the restrictions described above upon the mitigation of environmental sWl effects under CEQA apply to both administrative and legislative action taken by a publk permi agency under CEQA. (3) The bill would specify that these changes shall have prospective application onlp• 1990, (4) This bill would specify that the changes described in (2) and (3) are repealed on t W a the Boarddate that ACA 6 fails to receive the approval of a majority of the voters voting on tbat measure. �eetin share � The people of the State of California do enact as follows. :nder SECTION 1. It is the intent of the Legislature to enact a new (c) 0 gi program fog tha ►_aterec financing of school facilities in accordance with the following principles: aunty, (a) Primary financial responsibility for school facilities should rest with school distrim hymen (b) School districts should be authorized to raise a sufficient amount of revenue locab anditio to finance a majority of their school facility needs. !hapter (c) The role of the state should be limited to: (2) Az (1) Using state funds to supplement the local revenues of those school districts hs°W' mmmen x othez .....,,,,,,I• low assessed valuation. ) b rpplica . (2) Using state funds to finance needed school facilities for those school districts the rd have met or exceeded their debt capacity. d Fo (3) Using state funds to provide interim school facilities for those school districts tlge a ;hereb are unable to supply the expected level of local revenues. "zclusive SEC. 2. Article 5 (commencing with Section 17760) is added to Chapter 22 of Part It -ode,or, of the Education Code, to read: x local g :ot limit, =uimum Article 5. Repeal of Chapter "Kidentia 17760. This chapter shall remain in effect only until January 1, 1996, and as of t+.ac 'M-th an date is repealed, unless a later enacted statute, which is enacted before January 1, 199 'ei 'The deletes or extends that date. ,-=iities SEC. 3. Section 65995 of the Government Code is amended to read: -?'slatur, 65995. (a) Except for a fee, charge, dedication, or other requirement authorized uD,* Section 53080, or pursuant to Chapter 4.7 (commencing with Section 65970), ro 110- lures c charge, dedication, or other requirement shall be levied by the legislative body of a loa ti \'othi agency against a development project, as defined in Section 53080, for the constructivee "er,cir reconstruction of school facilities. ''�rstract (b) In no event shall the amount of any fees, charges, dedications, or other requfl 1 This ments authorized under Section 53080, or pursuant to Chapter 4.7 (commencing T arnl ti Section 65970), or both, exceed the following: '9a-0� - (1) One dollar and fifty cents�($1.50) per square foot of assessable space, in the cased z.:- aa9.�or_} low, any residential development. Assessable space, for this purpose, means all Of 0, square footage within the perimeter of a residential structure, not including any 0L ' ram_ walkway, garage, overhang, patio, enclosed patio, detached accessory structure,or sires a. ja a area. The amount of the square footage within the perimeter of a residential str� n �30t �a a•^t+e dedi( 5770 Additions or changes Indicated by underline; deletions by asterisks ° u r �� � k 1 t�il`''•c .�� '�;� t � ,M �,"R'$ ,;.'� " '-.� f;� � s�:, I sj; �� x '�gk ^+,4 ��£. . S TATU'TE9 O)F; T ' ' 1991-1992 REGULAR S9FSSION of a development project, whi P ch' ` Ch— 1354 r,4 a of development, including a p shall be calculated by the building de reconstruction. Existing law:a)� permit, in accordance with the sttandard Practice a of that° county issuing the building •�' rmi bdivision Map Act, from den structural perimeters. city or county in calculating school facilities. ,f(2) In the case of any commercial or industrial development twenty-five cents 0 se of its authority to adopt ge per square foot of chargeable covered and enclosed space. "Chargeable covered i and rom either denying approval,,. enclosed space, for this purpose, means the covered and enclosed space determined to b or imposing conditions;other Within the perimeter of a commercial or industrial structure not includinge :s, on the approval of a pNee�t� areas incidental .to the principal use of the development, garage, any storage �"3 1a.; unenclosed .walkway, or utility or disposal area. g • pan g structure, ent project, as described above;' covered and enclosed space within the perimeter of1a commercial termination of the chargeable on the mitigation of environm ' shall be made by the building department of the ci 'or countyor tune legislative action taken by a pubs Omit► in accordance with the building standards of that city or cunty. .the building `(3) The amount of the limits set forth in Paragraphs J 1990, and eve P graphs (1) and (2) shall be increased in have prospective application .. ,;" every two years thereafter, according to the adjustment for inflation set forth d in (2) and (3) are repealed our to the statewide cost index for class B construction, as determined b ,J Board at its January meetin Y the State Allocation .jority of the voters voting Om: r,.~ g, which increase shall be effective as Of the date of that meeting. The State Allocation Board shall not raise the amount of the district matching �s share calculated under Section 17705.5 of the Education Code, as a result of the increas follows.- to 'J °�' under this paragraph, until at least 90 days after the date of that increase. -.� .(c) (1) Notwithstanding enact a new program for: g any other provision of law, during the term of any contract entered into between a subdivider or builder and a school district, city lowing principles: county, whether general law or chartered on or before January , county, or city and �s should rest with school diatr payment of a fee, charge, or dedication for the construcho oflschool facilities requires the :fficient amount of revenue l X; condition to the approval of residential development, neither Section 53080 nor this - � Chapter applies to that residential development.- ttr (2) Any development project for which a final map was approved and con :es Of those school districts. s ": cemmencedq n or before September 1, 1986, is subject to only the fee,'charge, dedication, and opplior other requirement prescribed in any local ordinance in existence on that date and cable to the project , ties for those school districtri;l (d) For purposes of Section 53080 and this chapter, "residential, commercial, or industri- a]development" does not include any facilityon �►' ties for those school districts b thereby exempt from Property used exclusively for religious purposes that 'es' - � �`' ezdusivelY as a private full-time days chool as des under he la in Section tale, any facility used '' Code,or an is added to Chapter 22 Of Pt - y facility that is Owned and occupied by one Or more agencies oof f federal, state, local government. In addition, to or industrial development" includes, but is limited to, any hots], inn, motel, tourist home, Or Others lodging mum term Of occupancy for guests does not exceed 30 days, but of include a for which n e Ater _ um term hotels as defined in �aele and Safe Paragraph (1) of subdivision y January 1, 1996, and as of> Safety Code. (b) of Section 50519 of the enacted before January 1;Yid; (e) The Legislature finds and declares that the subject of the financing of school heilihes with development fees is a matter of statewide concern. :mended to read: Y" o ture hereby occupies the subject matter of mandatory development For this reason the m pment fees and other er requirement authorized i>o 42� P ent requirements for school facilities finance to the exclusion of all local !g with Section 65970), >m lures on the subject. by the legislative body of s Nothing in this section shall be interpreted ion 53080E for the construct encin rP ted to limit or prohibit the use of Chapter 2.5 ,,v.� g with Section 53311) of Division 2 of Title 5 to finance the construction or �struction of school facilities. es, dedications, or other r 'Y This section shall become Chapter 4.7 (commencing! me mo erative on Janus 1 1993 and shall remain inonera- p tins the ate that Ass embl nstitutional Amendment 6 of the 1991-92 Re lar } i assessable space, in the L fails to receive the a rova of a ma'ori �__ P ° that ate t is sections all become o erative he voters votin on t e measure this purpose, means all �� educe, not including any 4• Section 65995 is added to the Government Code, to read: �!1 accessory structure,ar �i $10,1-dedication, (a) Except for a f w -imeter of a residential gtrC� "r 53080E or u ee, charge, dedication, or other requirement authorized under p r then to Chapter 4.? (commencing with. Section 65970), no fee, or other requirement shall be levied by the legislative body one by sateriaha ' ,� 7 ` y of a local a• Addillons or changes Indicated by underline; deletions by asterisks ° ° ° ' 5771 . v t *C 7Z 1 S ° 'frw+r,,� 4 A A [ A'r y fAe t LY ec�': ",� + s + P r •' ti �',: r, ,•a.7,Fa.1v I'�,. t s �,A y t ti ,r +"�'. '`� � ...Af;'7 x�`§',` # ,tom t`.�.,��yyto�'•v fi�:� r, �' r _',� J,"�.°i. t r�i �',r��7�''t2 � ,,�p" 1p::5'• i' �'..Y'e? ?} � �;+�, Ifi�.. i��r t f,..:i�.,,�r•k r„.&• .:k,.'M;k"r,C� � �l.,C!'"v�I� "�`� x�S�! �',� i�.,* Sr�,,�".`"•. y,�s... x ^f• a� 'y 41,1 ZOOM Ch. 1354 STATUTES OF 1y91-1992 agency against a development project, as defined in Section 53080,whether by adminia�; tive or legislative action, for the construction or reconstruction of school facilities; (f) Nothin; (b) In no event shall the amount of an fees, charges, dedications, or other (commencing Y g r'e'q�ttit� reconstructic menns authorized under Section 63080, or pursuant to Chapter 4.7 (commencing VA " Section 65970), or both, exceed the following- (g) This sE :..: ..*?C 9mendment (1) One dollar and fifty cents ($1.50)per square foot of assessable space, in the case at d the vote, any residential development. "Assessable space," for this purpose, means all of.-jW SEC. 5. square footage within the perimeter of a residential structure, not including any 65995.3. ._;. walkway,garage, overhang,patio,enclosed patio, detached accessory structure,or a area. The amount of the square footage within the perimeter of a residential stsuct i subdivision shall be calculated by the building department of the city or county issuing the builds ` meat of one permit, in accordance with the standard practice of that city or county in calculat" governing b 6°b�`�p structural perimeters. ', . csv ennstruction (2) In the case of any commercial or industrial development, twenty-five cents ($0.24 (b) This se u per square foot of chargeable covered and enclosed space. Chargeable covered tied ;amendment ' enclosed space," for this purpose; means the covered and enclosed space determined to be of the votes within the perimeter of a commercial or industrial structure, not including any storage f areas incidental to the principal use of the development, garage,. parking structure, SEC. 6. unenclosed walkway, or utility or disposal area. The determinatioh of the chargeabb 65996. (a •-$. covered and enclosed space within the perimeter of a commercial or industrial structure environment shall be made by the building department of the city or county issuing the budding approval or I permit, in accordance with the building standards of that city or county. defined in Se tee, r (3) The amount of the limits set forth in paragraphs (1) and (2) shall be increased its Public Resot '. 1990, and every two years thereafter, according to the adjustment for inflation set for6 L Chapte y�y in the statewide cost index for class B construction, as determined by the State Allocates ' �1 Chapte Board at its January meeting, which increase shall be effective as of the date of that Chapte meeting. The State Allocation Board shall not raise the amount of the district matchitg share calculated under Section 17705.5 of the Education Code, as a result of the increan _(4) Article under this paragraph, until at least 90 days after the date of that increase. Education G (c) (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, during the term of any contra c3 2Section entered into between a subdivider or builder and a school district, city, county,or city* n Chapte county, whether general law or chartered, on or before January 1, 1987, that requires lha Government payment of a fee, charge, or dedication for the construction of school facilities as a 0 Chapte _,;,Q_ condition to the approval of residential development, neither Section 53080 nor tw Government chapter applies to that residential development. (b) No pub (2) Any development project for which a final map was approved and construction bag ;U Public R commenced on or before September 1, 1986, is subject to only the fee, charge, dedicatim ieny approv, or other requirement prescribed in any local ordinance in existence on that date tub $ (c) This se applicable to the project. ? 'Te u the (d) For purposes of Section 53080 and this chapter, "residential, commercial, or industrr { s,on fails al development" does not include any facility used exclusively for religious purposes that 1 as of th is thereby exempt from property taxation under the laws of this state, any, facility 04 SEC. 7. exclusively as a private full-time day school as described in Section 48222 of the Educatin 65996 (a) Code, or any facility that is owned and occupied by one or more agencies of federal,atatt- M*Onmenr< or local government. In addition, "commercial or industrial development" includes,but a I AMval or t not limited to, any hotel, inn, motel, tourist home, or other lodging for which tY binistrativ maximum term of occupancy for guests does not exceed 30 days, but does not include 20 "Opp) of the residential hotel, as defined in paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Section 50519 of fire Health and Safety Code. fl) Chanter . (e) The Legislature finds and declares that the subject of the financing of s (2) Chapte, facilities with development fees is a matter of statewide concern. For,this reason tdd Q) Chapter Legislature hereby occupies the subject matter of mandatory development fees and otw (4) -krticie development requirements for school facilities finance to the exclusion of all loco �at,ion Cc measures on the subject. 15) Section 5772 Additions or changes indicated by underline; deletions by asterisks l�Tt- A.: Z � r " . t" ei$" �b -'s3,5tkt.4;:• °`. St. A6 �'t°"�aaa-f+ ' xS`. STATUTES 0 '1991-1992 REGULAR SESSION 03 section 53080, whether by ad . Ch. 1354 reconstruction of school a(0 Nothing in this section shall be interpreted to limit or prohibit the use of Chapter 2.5 , arges, dedications, or other (commencing with Section 53311) of Division 2 of Title 5 to finance the construction t to Chapter 4.7 (commencing teeonstruction of school facilities. constru n or (g) This section shall remain in effect only until the date that Assembly Constitutional F Amendment 6 of the 1991-92 Regular Session fails to receive the approval of a majority of of assessable space, in the` ` ;the voters voting on the measure, and as .of that date this section is repealed. for this purpose, means all'o . : structure, not including any SEC. 5. Section 65995.3 is added to the Government Code, to read: ached accessory structure, or'if" '65995.3. (a) In addition to the fee, charge dedication, or other requirement specified in perimeter of a residential stru�' r mlidivision (b) of Section 65995, an additional fee, charge, dedication, or other require- city or county issuing the bu>7 mot of one dollar ($1) per square foot of assessable space may be levied by the that city or county in calcula -:, governing board of a school district against that residential construction described in subparagraphs B) and C of paragraph( ) P graph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 5308 velopment, twenty-five cents+(" Mstruction or reconstruction of school facilities. 0 for the !d space. "Chargeable cove `(b) Tliis.section shall remain in effect only until the date.that Assembly Constitutional and enclosed space determined, Amendment 6 of the 1991=92 Regular Session fails to receive the approval of a majority tructure, not including any sto d,the voters voting on the measure, and as of that date this section is repealed. pment, garage, parking stru -SEC. 6. Section 65996 of the Government Code is amended to read: to determination of the ch- 65996. La2 The following provisions shall be the exclusive methods of mitigating commercial or industrial stru ®vironmental effects related to the adequacy of school facilities when considering th or county issuing the bu�T gMval or the establishment of conditions for the approval of a development projec the that city or county. � 'ti � dPfined in Section 53080 � , pursuant to Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the hs (1) and (2) shall be iner Public Resources Code: e adjustment for inflation.seGf 1)-Chapter 22 (commencing with Section 17700) of part 10 of the Education Code. determined by the State All ,Q Chapter 25 (commencin >e effective as of the dat!` g with Section 17785) of Part 10 of the Education Code. he amount of the district ma Chapter 28 (commencing with Section 17870) of Part 10 of the Education Code. )n Code, as a result of the in' Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 39327) of Chapter 3 of P date of that increase. cation Code. art 23 of the during the term of any con @ Section 53080 of the Government Code. col district, city, county, or cite j6 Chapter 2.5 (commencing with Section 53311) of DivisiE n 2 of January 1, 1987; that req �'ernment Code. Title 5 of the struction of school facilities neither Section 53080 nor' Chapter 4.7 (commencing with Section 65970) of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code. t ��b No public as approved and constructio agency shall, pursuant to Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of d only the fee, charge, d i Public Resources Code or Division 2 (commencing with Section 66410) of this code, ce in existence on that date. g approval of a project on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities. =� a This section shall become ino erative on Jan u 1 1993 and shall remain inooera- ` we until the ate that Assembl P esidential, commercial, or in r wn fails to receive the a rove' of ---- ril of the voters voting on the2m a Aar isively for religious purposerf as of that ate this sections al become o erative. .vs of this state, any facili SEC measure in Section 48222 of the Edn 7• Section 65996 is added to the Government Code, to read: )r more agencies of federal,``.� �996. (a) The following provisions shall be the exclusive methods of mitigating rial development" includes" (�*Onmental effects related to the adequacy of school facilities when considering the or other lodging for whidt val or the establishment of conditions for the approval 30 days, but does not inclu. � trative or le slative action on1of a development project by ision (b) of Section 50519., °r ;° )of the Public Resources CodePursuant to Division 13 (commencing with Section Chapter Z2 (commencing jt t t of the finanein of g with Section 17700) of Part 10 of the Education Code. g Chapter 25 (commencing with Section 17785) of Part 10 of the Educatio It: concern. For this reasa� Chapter 28 (commencin Gtry development fees and g with Section 17870 of Part 10 of the Education Code. � Article 2„' ) t" the exclusion of an .� '' Codes (commencing ) lion g with Section 39327 of Chapter 3 of Part 23 of the na by asterisks Section 53080 of the Government Code. '�, Additions or Changes Indicated by underline; deletions by asterisks a� k . ' . 5773 M. ff s §s —a �..F w��rdr�r,1y-• r�y. .2���� { �yd ! at .,�� .fin �wdt3. �U k r ° s;nt /ETC i I Z�• a *aA � . tom.. •Ate x$+ ��" "- r:�.a; ,.... �e. { � s. r'.r� 'y��' '� " .�i', "N-,%' :*`��k;`-"``�. Ch. 1354 STATUTES OF.g'"�= 1�91-1992 REGUI 14 (6) Chapter 2.5 (commencing with Section 53311) of Division 2 of Title 5 of The bill would sp, Government Code. fat contain designa (7) Chapter 4.7 (commencing with Section 65970) of Division 1 of Title 7 of tj� The bill would prc Government Code. y mating resources c (b) No public agency shall, pursuant to Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000)i ?ablic Instruction o: the Public Resources Code or Title 7 (commencing with Section 65000), deny approval ofg This bill would r project on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities, or impose conditions on* istricts when suffie approval of a project for the purpose of providing school facilities that exceed.64 (2) The California amounts authorized pursuant to this chapter. fi tricts for.certain (c) This section shall have prospective application only, and shall not affect any acQ dares for making th; taken by a local agency prior to the effective date of this section. F-ad to pay the cos (d) This section shall remain in effect only until the date that Assembly Constitutiond 7%edures for claim Amendment 6 of the 1991-92 Regular Session fails to receive the approval of a majorty This bill would pro of the voters voting on the Lneasure, and as of that date this section is repeala C1>lims Fund for cos SEC. 8. . Section 34 of Chapter 1209 of the Statutes of 1989 is repealed. :k .',at local agencies SEC. 9. simbursement for d (a) The Legislature finds and declares that paragraph (2) of subdivision w of Section 53080 of the Government Code and paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Sectim The people of the : 65995 of the Government Code, as amended by Chapter 1209 of the Statutes of 1989,am declaratory of existing law. SECTION 1. Sect: (b) This section shall become operative on the date that Assembly Constitutioad 51220.5. (a) The I Amendment 6 of the 1991-92 Regular Session fails to receive the approval of a majority of (1) The family is of the voters voting on the measure. are for, prepare, anc SEC. 10. Sections 1 and 2 of this act shall become operative only upon the approval (2) Social research of Assembly Constitutional Amendment 6 of the 1991-92 Regular Session by a majors muse of increased we of voters voting on the measure. ciminal activity. (3) The lack of kno• usurne parental resp( iso contribute substa COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES—COMIMUNITY COLLEGES— (4) Because the sU O.. PARENTING SKILLS AND EDUCATION COURSES usociated with the di: ud vital interest in a( CHAPTER 1355 tb) The Legislature ►zd effective means to S.B. No. 1307 ; � use the public edi 1 Tportunity to acquire AN ACT to add Section 51220.5 to the Education Code, relating to parenting education. ! cowledge should inch [approved by Governor September 30, 1992.) 11) Child developmen [Filed with Secretary of State September 30, 1992.] i 2) Effective parendi 3) Prevention of chi LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST � 41 `utrition. SB 1307, Watson. Parenting education. 5) Household nanc, (1) Existing law directs the State Department of Education to grant awards, e1 �1 Persona] and faa specified, to support the implementation in school districts of education programs regal; r} Personal to roam ing family relationships and parenting. p This bill would require, commencing with the 1993-94 fiscal year, that the adopW =) Effective decision course of study for grade 7 or 8 in each school district include a one-semester course 9) Family and indivi( parenting skills and education, as specified, thereby imposing a state-mandated loci: c) Commencing 'xith program. The bill would require that all pupils beginning grade 7 on or after July 1 7 Shall include the ec 1993, be offered that course in grade 7 or 8, or both. The bill would require the Sto %4"nation. All pupils e Department of Education to supply each school district that includes grade 7 or 8 with fr3e or its equivalent sample curriculum for a course addressing parental skills, as specified. the State Departm In addition, commencing with the 1993-94 fiscal year, the bill would authorize cor=oi ode or 8, a camp] ty colleges to offer parenting skills and education classes to interested individoabsemescer course or 5774 Additions or changes Indicated by underline; deletions by asterisks Additions or t - WEE h -P 'P�n t•s ��'.. �;i� '�ri •� � ; ' � ���- �� c1i• ^�r �x�'�r 7� "� xt fi' � , „� " __u.` �'b, :r, ,'''', ••�".F ''�� Ali - .. .r _ ...ter... _.._ ..,._._. . .f.." .. i 'I N t ATTACHMENT "C" LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL OPINION a 4 t C - 1 ® elm dame *Napalm Ae 'Ad Gown-4, got', % Ir mamas 4MMM JOE �s` fill,,MllbeLlgw AVACLePM s c+► sacramento, California mT. Tp+gms�+i December 4® 1992SIMMa Honorable Willis L4 Brown# Jr® _ 219 State Capitol s��+no1 Facilities Fees30455 Dear fir. Brown: ATTF'�'�TO� NO. 1 Does Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 prohibit a city, county, or city and county. from considering the adequacy of school facilities in the course of adopting or implementing a general plan, Zoning ordinance, or other legislative land use policy? OPINION NO. 1 Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 does not prohibit a city, . county, or city and county from considering the adequacy of school facilities in the course of adoptingL or implementing a general plan, Zoning ordinance, or other legislative land use policy. SALYSIS NO-.-A Before assessing the effect of Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 19929 , we consider the existing law regarding the relationship between the development of real property and school facilities construction. This measure is the chaptered version of Senate Bill No. 1287 of the 1991-92 Regular Session. �` '` 14. .e; Rancrable Willie L. Brown, Jr. - p. 3 - #30435 ' Section 65995 also contains two provisions expressing the Legislature'a . intent to forbid any local legislation, except � as aisplieitly authorized under the state laws discussed above, that would condition the approval of development according to - impact upon school facilities. First,. subdivision (a) of 65995` prohibits 'the legislative body of any local agency, - - includinAy the governing board of a school district (see califa=iw Indust v. G=fi=i= &L,, 206 Cal. App. 3d 212, groin levying any fee or other requirement against a development project to fund the construction or' reconstruction of school facilities except as authorized under Section 53080 or Chapter 4.7 Nubd. (a) , Sec. 63995) . Second, subdivision (a) of Section 65995 expressly doclarms the intent of the Legislature to preempt local legislation that would require fees or other consideration .to be paid as a condition of the, approval of development. 2n this regard, although Section 65995 does not specifically exclude a local iaeasure that authorizes the denial of a development project on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities, we think that tho restriction placed by the Legislature upon local legislation that would require that the impact of a development project on school facilities be -mitigated would be construed to. apply equally to a local standard that a development project be denied in .the absence of that mitigation. A statute is to be construed so as to be given a reasonable result consistent with the legislative purpose, in light of the context of the legislation and its apparent objective (Cossack V. rjty 21 Los Angeles, 11 Cal. 3d 726, 732-733 ; see Clean $jX CoEstitg=v v. California State &K Resources JD&L, 11 Cal. 3d 801, 813) . In addition to the school-related conditions upon development that may be established by local legislative action pursuant to Section 53080 or Chapter 4 .7, a city or county generally possesses the authority to impose conditions upon the approval of a development project relative to the project's potential burden upon public services or other environmental impact concerns ; this authority may be exercised under existing state law pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, as set forth in Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources code (hereafter "CEQA" ; see Secs. 21002 and 21002 . 1, P.R. C. ; L&UXftl LLUIS Iiam®owners Asn, V. City Council, 83 cal. App. 3d 515, 521) and the subdivision Map Act (Div. 2 (commencing with sec. 66410) , Title 7) . However, Section 65996, which also is contained in Chapter 4 . 9, identifies Section 53080 and other specific statutory provisions as the exclusive methods of mitigating environmental effects under CEQA with regard to conditioning the approval of a development project on the adequacy of school facilities, and prohibits any public agency from denying Honorable Willie L. Browns Jr. - P. 2 030455 �' 1. Existino Z.av Prior to January 1, 1987, development projects were potentially subject to school facilities lees or other requirements imposed by cities and counties either pursuant to Chapter 4 .7 (comm=cinq with Station 65970) of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Govarnmant Coda (hereafter "Chapter 4 .7") or pursuant to their pclico power generally (see f_n_s r . v. grasaont . , 39 Cal. 3d 878) . Where school overcrowding is demonstrated to exist, Chapter 4.7 generally prohibits a city or county from approving a residential development unless it first requires, except as specified, that . rand be dedicated, fees be paid® or both, for classrooms and related facilities, except as specified (sacs. 65972 and 65974) . Approval of a residential development includes, for this purposes the approval of an ordinance rezoning property to a residential us®, the granting of a discretionary permit for residential use, or the approval of a tentative subdivision map for residential purposes (see Sec. 65972) . As of January 11 1987, however, the law governing school facilities tees and other requirements was amended by Chapter 887 of the Statutes of 2986. Under that chapter, the Legislatures: added Section 53060, granting to school districts the, express authority to levy developer fees and other requirements as "a �-- reasonable method of financing the expansion and construction of school facilities resulting from new economic development within the district" (subd. (e) , Sec. 7, Ch. 887 , Stats. 1986) . That authority is expressly made subject, however, to the restrictions sat forth in Chapter 4 .9 (commencing with Section 65995) of Division 1 of Title 7 (hereafter "Chapter 4 . 9" ; pars. (1) , subd. (a) , Sec. 53080) . Included among those restrictions is Section 65995 , which limits the total amount of the developer fees and other requirements to fund the construction or reconstruction of school facilities that may be levied by school districts under Section 53080, by a city or county under chapter 4 .7 , or both, to $1. 50 per square foot of assessable space, in the case of residential development, and $0. 25 per square foot of chargeable covered and enclosed space, in the case of commercial or industrial development (subd. (b) , Sec. 65995) . Those dollar limits are increased periodically according to a designated adjustment for inflation (para. (3) , subd. (b) , Sec. 65995) . 2 All section references are to the Government Code, unless otherwise indicated. Honorable Willis L. Drown, Jr. . approval of a development project on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities pursuant to CEQA or the Subdivision Map Act. The first decision of record in which Section 65996 was judicially construed is ueyel ant v. 205 Cal. App. 3d 1201 (hereafter NSA®) , a. case in which a = - city council denied a rozoninq application that was prerequisite to the approval of a proposed residential development project. In that case, the city council's decision was alleged by the develop®r to have boon based upon the inadequacy of school facilities and, therefore, to have violated the prohibition sat forth in Section 65296 (Mira, supra, p. 1217) . The court in .iffira began its analysis by distinguishing an application for a "development project, " to Which Section 65996 expressly applies, from a request for a zoning amendment. The court hold that a governmental response to an application for the approval of a development project is an adjudicative act, meaning an act that requires the application of an existing rule to a Opecific set of existing facts ( , supra, pp. 1217-1218; see v. gDl= = l ontfiXU, 139 Cal. App. 3d 934, 936) . In contrast, the court charactorized a governmental .response to a proposed zoning amendment as a legislative act, which- involves. the formulation• of a generally .applicable rule or policy ' (Mira, supra, p. 1218 ; v.,- Cournty cJ Monterey, supra, p. 93 6)3. Pursuant. to that distinction, the Mira court characterised Section 63996 as a restriction upon only the adjudicative authority of that agency. The court refused to "broaden" the meaning of Section 65996 to include any restriction upon a public agency's authority over proposed zoning amendments or over other matters involving the agency' s exercise of its legislative powers (Mira, supra, p. 1218) . In declining to overturn the city council ' s action on the basis of Section 65996 , the Mfrs court did not discuss the applicgbility to the city council ' s action of subdivision (a) of Section 65995, or of any other aspect of the preemption doctrine. Thus, the Mira decision failed to address expressly whether subdivision (e) of Section 65995, rather than Section 65996 , would be construed to preempt the city council , in the exercise of its legislative powers, from denying a rezoning application on the basis of school facilities impact. 3 As a legislative act, a zoning decision is afforded more deference than a public agency' s adjudicative decisions (Mira, supra, p. 1218 ; Arnel Development Co. v. City of Costa Mesa , 28 Cal . 3d 511 , 522) . .Honorable Willis L. brown, Jr. a p. 5 - #30435 Subsequent judicial decisions have elaborated, however, upon the scope of Sections 65995 and 65996 in that regard. v. Regional l.annim 226 Cal. App. 3d 1612 (hereafter * ") , involved the refusal of - a county to consider the school facilities impact of a proposed - . zoning change. The court declared that subdivision (a) of Section .65993 preempts only "requirements for school finance that a local agency will impose -on a alyfil®oment w (emphasis in original) . The court weplained that, because the local legislative decision in Mira did not involve requirements to be imposed on a development project, but, rather, the legislative enactment of "land-use policies", (emphasis in original) , that doeision was not preempted by Section 65995 or any other provision*-. of Chapter 4 .9 (sea Murrieta V&11gy g V. 21 aimersida, 228 Cal. App. 3d 1212, 1230; hereafter "Murrieta") . Based upon that distinction, the court concluded that. the county was not restricted by state law from considering school facilities impact with respect to its decision to grant or deny the proposed zoning change (rd. , pp. 1626-1627) . A similar analysis was employed in Murrista, supra. In that case, the county approved an amendment to its general plan to permit additional. development to occur as a matter of land use- policy, without considering., pursuant to the requirements of CEQA, the school facilities impact of that general plan amendment (Id:-,. pp. 1218-1219) . The court described a general plan as a "basic land use charter governing the direction of futures land use in the local jurisdiction, " and held that the amendment of a general plan is a legislative act that does not involve the approval of a "development project" for purposes of Section 65996 (Id. , pp. 123Q-1.231) . Further, the preemption in subdivision (e) of Section 65995 was held by the court to relate only to the financing of school facilities with development fees, "a far cry from stating that a" public agency cannot include in a general plan amendment land use and development objectives and standards to mitigate the amendment ' s potential negative effects on adequacy of school facilities" (Id. , p. 1234 , fn. 16) . The court concluded, consequently, that neither subdivision (e) of Section 65995 nor Section 65996 preempts a county, when considering a general plan amendment that may adversely affect the existing condition of inadequate school facilities in a school district, from "considering and providing feasible land use and development mitigating measures" as required by CEQA. The court suggested that these measures could include, for example, the reduction of residential densities or the controlled phasing of residential development within the attendance areas of the school district having inadequate school facilities (nurrieta, supra, p. 1234) . monorable Willis L. Srown .79. The restrictions astablished in Chapter 4-9 have b*4a construed by the eon, aCcardinglyp to apply to the local, imposition of coaaditions an a approval of individual developuent projectsp but not tO the 1OC41 QdOPtiOn or amendment of qen land use policies® To is®," section 63995 precludes local agencies, including cities and countioa, from adopting aYay legislativd reguir ant, except to the firtaftt authorized by Section 53080 and Chapter 4 .7, that impoaas fees are a 'condition to approval of a development project in order to reduce the project's negative impact an wool facilities (zQ* , supra, p. 1224, fn. 16) . Section 659960 in our Vieve, r ires that, in the exercise of local adjudicative authority to require under CEQA that -the school facilities impact of a development project be mitigated, only the statutory remedies identifiod in that section may be utilized, with the result that a local g®ve tal agency may not employ CrQA to require individual davalopment projects to otherwise mitigate school facilities as a condition of receiving approval. However, pursuant to the authority discussed above, we conclude that Chapter 4 .9 does not prohibit a city, county, or city and county from- considering the adequacy of school facilities in the course of adopting or implementing legislative land use policy in the forte, for example, of a general plan or zoning ordinance. --� We next must determine the extent to which the changes in Chapter 4 .9. made by chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 will alter the existing law described above. IT . gffect of Chaotar 1354 of the Statu.t A of 1992 Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 amends Sections 65995 � and 65996 , and adds and repeals those sections, with .the effect that additional language is added to those sections, effective January 1, 1993 , but if Assembly Constitutional Amendment No. 6 of the 1991-92 Regular Session fails to receive the approval of a majority of the voters voting on that measure, Sections 65995 and 65996 will revert to the versions of those sections in effect under existing law as described above. This analysis will address the changes made by Chapter 1354 of the Honorable Millie L. Brown, Jr. - p: 7 - #30435 * -Atatut®s of 1992 g� Sections 65995 and 65996 that willA 4tlsct. on January 1, 1993r. -we initially consider the provisions -Of Chapt^r 13U of : the Statutes of 1922 that revise Section 65995. x . ? Chapter 1354 of the Statutes Of 1992 revises. gfvisiora Y (a) of Section 65995 to read as follovss 0165995. (a) Except for a foe, charge, is . dedication, or other requirement authorized Section 530800 or pursuant to Chapter 4.7 "'44 - (co=encing Frith Sociion 65970) , no feet charge►. dedication, or other requirement shall be lovisd by the legislative body of a local agency against a development project, as dsafinod in Section 53080, Whethpy administrative = l9gislatiy® action, for the construction or reconstruction of school : facilities. (Now wording indicated in underline. ) Thus, while the current provisions of Section 6'g99.°5 prohibit cities, counties, or other local agencies from. levying �... any fee or other requirement, except to the extent authorized by section 53080 and Chapter 4 .7 , as a condition to approval of a development project in order to fund the construction cr reconstruction of school facilities, Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 Will revise that section to specify that this proh b:ition applies to the levying of: fees or other requirements ";f}ether by administrative or legislative action. " Generally speaking, a legislative act is described as a governmental act that prescribes a new policy or plan; an administrative act, by comparison, is an act undertaken to carry out the legislative policies and purposes established by the legislative body (ZjAb= v. City = 2alo Alto, Be Cal . App. 3d 506 , 509) . An act is administrative, rather than legislative, if it involves, for example, the determination of specific rights under existing law with regard to a specific fact situation (Mountain p fe ensa LgAGUI V. Bad DI suoeryisora, 65 Cal. App. 3d 723 , 728-729) . 4 Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 also adds Section 65995 - 3 , which will be discussed in Analysis No. 2 . Honorable Millie L. Brown, Jr. p. a ® 030433 Based upon that distinction, the approval of a development project, including the ioBuanee of any paxmit, the -- granting of• zoning variances and conditional use permits, and the approval of tentative ssbdivizion maps is considered an administrative act , supra, p. 16258 L&ndl v. ntx 21 _ ntmrmv, supra, P. 936) . By contrast, the approval of a zoning amendment or the amendment of a general plan is not limited in scope to a specific attempt to develop, and is characterized,. therefore, as a legislative act , supra, p. 1625; see iota, ,supra, pp. 1230-1231) . Thus, Section 65995, as. r®vic3ed by Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992, will expressly prohibit a city, county, city and . county, or other local agency from either establishing legislative - standards, or applying any legislatively established standard, so as to raquits, as a condition of the approval of any development proj&4ct, that a fee be paid or othar requirement be nat for the purpose of funding school facilities construction or reconstruction, other than as levied pursuant to Section 53080 or Chapter 4 . 7 . As discusted above, existing law already limits the exercise. of legislative authority to impose a school facilities fee or other requirement against a development project. Section 6.5995, in its current: form, prohibits the legislative body. of any local agency from establishing any requirement that a development . project comply with a school facilities fee or other requirement, � other than pursuant to section 53080 or Chapter 4 . 7 , and preempts the, subj.ect matter of the financing of school facilities from that source as a matter of statewide concern (subds. (a) and (e) , Sec. 65995) . Further, Section 65996 currently identifies Section 53080 and other specific statutory provisions as the exclusive methods of mitigating environmental effects under CEQA with regard to conditioning the approval of a development project on the adequacy of school facilities, and prohibits any public agency from denying approval of a development project on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities pursuant to CEQA or the Subdivision Map Act. ' Consequently, while existing law limits the authority of a local agency to require that a development project provide financial mitigation of its school facilities impact in the course of the agency ' s administrative implementation or Section 53080 and CEQA, Leh® revision to Section 65995 made by Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 further prohibits a local agency from requiring that mitigation in its administrative implementation of any other legislative. authority. ZMarable Willis I,. Brown, Jr. - p. 9 #30455 - - i �. We terra naxt to the provisidns of Chaptar 1334 of - - es of 1992 that on 65996. Section 659li®- T*Vinod by chaptar 2354 of th® StatUtes of 1222® resAs as -ifoll 065996." 151. The following provisions shall be the exclusive methods of mitigating mwircrawntal effects related to the adequacy of ochool facilities when considering the approval the establishment of conditions for the a roval. of = a devel® projectsP. L .4,.s�, hx st mt3va � �.ecwislatiy® Azti= pursuant to.- " Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the ' ' - Public Resources Code: - 1,.1 chapter 22 (commencing with Section 17700) of Part 10 of the Education Coda. " 121 Chapter 25 (comzaencinq with Section 17785) of Part 10 of the Education Code.. °®. 1 Chapter 28 (commencing with Section 17870) of Part 10 of the Education Code. "-fd�- 141 Article 2.5. (commencing with Section 39327) of Chapter 3 of Part 23 of the Education Code. Section 53080 of the Government Code. 4°¢ - 1§1 Chapter 2. 5 (co=encing with Section 53311) of Division , 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code. " $- Chapter 4 .7 (commencing with Section 65970) Of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code. 10 (b) No public agency shall , pursuant to Division 13 (commencing with Section .21000) of the Public Resources Code or Bjyjejen offime ca-ncx Title � ( S®ct M B5000) , deny approval of a project on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities- or impose conditions 2n the approval of A R= ecg f= =9 PU=0M 21 =ovid ina lchool facilities that excee =1amounts authorized pursuant to Ihi2 chanter. Honorable Willie L. Brawn, Jr. - p. 10 - 030455 • °'1Sd1. =in eee ion ll hava prosne�ive aoo IccAtIpn nly- &nd shall h by a local acencY, lori4 $Q = Ofgoct yedata � s®cticR. - "LU =is section mill ramain Ja aggs= snIx ' until =A gLar& that A511 bl' Constitutional Amendment I g =& ECUUI&X Sonsign fails ®�ve =1 PprovftI 21 a majority, -q.1 sha V=exn ger=i2n j& arenealed." (Changes In wording indicated in strikeout and underline. ) We, begin with the first substantive revision made to Section 65996 by Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 , to the effect that the limitations set forth in that section expressly apply to local mitigation "by administrative or legislative .action" of school facilities impact pursuant to CEQA. Section 21082 of the Public Resources Code, a provision of CEQA, expressly authorizes all public agencisa to adopt local legislative *easures for the evaluation of projects and the preparation of environmental impact reports and negative declarations pursuant to CEQA. Consequently, this first revision to Section 65996 will specify that the restrictions set-forth in that section, apply not only to local administrative action taken under CEQA to require that a development project mitigate its impact on school facilities, but also to mitigation requirements under CEQA that may be imposed under local legislative measures, as may be aO,opted pursuant to section 21082 of the Public Resources Cade. The second substantive revision to Section 65996 made by Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 addresses the provision of that section that currently prohibits a public agency from denying approval of a project on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities pursuant to CEQA or the Subdivision Map Act . This revision deletes the specific reference to the Subdivision Map Act , as set forth in Division 2 (commencing with Section 66410) of Title 1, instead applying that prohibition to the exercise of local authority under Title 7 (commencing with Section 65000) in its entirety (hereafter the "Planning and Zoning Law") . The Subdivision Map Act provides for the regulation and control of the design and improvement of subdivisions and grants power for that purpose to the legislative bodies of local agencies, including the authority to adopt ordinances to regulate the design and improvement of subdivisions (Secs . 66411, 66418 , 66419 , and 66421) . Honorable 'Willis L. Brown® Jr. The Planning and Zoning Law, which includes the ` subdivision Mp Act, also includes, for example, Chapter 3 (c ancinq with .Section 65100) of Division 1 of Titlt_7, Vhich contaiAO various provisions govarning the adoption or amendment of a gone plan. Every city or county, vhather chartered or goncral law, is required under that chapter to adopt a comprohmnsive, long-terza general plan, containing specific mandatory elements for the physical development of the city or county (Secs. 65300, 65302, and 65700) , Also within the Planning and Zoning Law is Chapter 4 (c encing with Section 65800) of Division 1 of Title 78 which , sets forth certain limitations upon local authority ever zoning. Tho "pawdr of a city or county to zone is not granted by the Legislature, but derives from the broad "police powarsu conferred on them by Section 7 of Article X1 of the California Constitution (TAA,= v. C= C^a4'nr t r 31 Cal. App. 3d 48, 62 , disapproved on other grounds, Associated LQM Sui V. Citx al l,Jve=dre, 1S Cal. 3d 5s2, 596, fn. 14) and, in the case of charter cities, and cities and counties with authority over municipal affairs, from the charter (Secs. 5 and 6, Art. XI, Cal. Const. B = 21 121 AngAZAs V. artm®nt g,g Eealth, 63 Cal. App. 34 473 , 479) . Thus, this revision to Section 65996 prohibits a public agency from denying approval of a project an the basis of the adequacy of school facilities, not only when acting pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act, but also when acting pursuant to other provisions of the Planning and Zoning Law, including, but not limited to, the adoption or amendment of a general plan or zoning law. Although the adoption or amendment of a general plan or zoning law, as a legislative action, ordinarily involves the establishment of categorical land use policy rather than the approval of a development project (see Murrieta, supra, pp. 1230- 1231. ; Hart , supra, pp. 1626-1627) , the apparent effect of this revision will be to specifically prohibit the inclusion within a general plan o: zoning last of any provision that would authorize the denial of individual development projects on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities. In addition to revising Section 65996 to prohibit a public agency, pursuant to CE®A or the Planning and Zoning Law, from denying approval of a project on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities, Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 adds an express prohibition upon the imposition of conditions on the approval of a project for the purpose of providing school facilities that exceed the amounts authorized pursuant to Honorable Millie L. Brown, Jr. - p. 12 - #30455 Chapter 4.9 . Thus, Section 65996 will specifically preclude a ` public agency; from exercising its authority under C*QA or the Planning and zoning Law, As.,discussed above, to require that school facilities fees or other requirements, in excess of the amounts •authorized %index `Chapter 4.9, ba paid on behalf of any development project as a condition of approval. To summarize, while existing law limits the authority of a local agency to require that a development project provide financial mitigation of .its school facilities impact in the course of the agency's administrative implementation of Section 53080 and CEQA, the revision to Section 65993 made by Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 further prohibits a local agency from requiring that mitigation in its administrative implementation of .any other legislative authority. The revisions made to Section 65996 made by Cbcapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 specify that the restrictions set forth in that section apply not only to local administrative action taken under CEQA to require that a development project mitigate its impact on school facilities, but also to mitigation requirements under CEQA that may be imposed under local legislative m®asures, as may be adopted pursuant to Section 21082 of the Public Resources code. In addition, those revisions specifically prohibit the inclusion within a general plan or zoning law of any provision that would authorize the denial of individual development projects on the basis of the adequacy of school facilities, and preclude a public agency from exercising its administrative or legislative authority under CEQA or the Planning and Zoning .Law, as discussed above, to require that school • facilities gees or other requirements, in excess of the amounts authorized under Chapter 4 . 9, be paid on behalf of any development project as a condition of approval. The revisions made to Sections 65995 and 65996 by Chapter 1354 of the' Statutes of 1992 do not purport to address, however, the authority of a local agency to consider the adequacy of school facilities in any context other than the approval of individual development projects. Consequently, based upon the analysis set forth above, it is our conclusion that Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 does not prohibit a city, county, or city and county from considering the adequacy of school facilities in the course of adopting or implementing a general plan, zoning ordinance, or other legislative land use policy. . o HonorablO Willie L. Brown, Jr. p. 13 030455 �' x� 1 e na can ofntar 1354 ®f the Statutes 21 You have asked that we consider an a.lternative interpretation of the ravizions made to Sections 65995 and 65926 - by Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992. This alternative argument pom its that the legislative intent underlying those revi€aions was to revise the Meaning of the term (development project 11 az used in sections 65995 and 65996, to include the legislahvO action of a local agency in adopting or amending a genmral plan or zoning last to establish land use policy. _ According to this argument, the effect of this construction wed bG that a local agency would be prohibited by those sections, - revised by ChaptOr 1354 of the Statutes of 1992, from taking into account the impact on school facilities in deciding on the adoption or amendment of a general plan or zoning later. As quoted above, Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 revises section 65995 to state that, except as authorized under Section 53080 or Chapter 4a90 "no fee, charge, dedication, or other requirement shall be levied by the legislative body of a lo(aa,l agency against a development project, as defined in Section 53080 , er ky admini stratiye legislative action. .for the- ' construction• or reconstruction of school facilities" (emphasis - added to denote language inserted by Ch. 1354 ; state. 1992) . To begin with, Section 65995, as revised by Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 , retains from existing law the phrase "a development project, as defined in Section 53080. 11 This is inconsistent with the contention that Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 should be interpreted as a revision of. the definition of the term "development project. 91 more importantly, the only apparent reasonable construction of the clause "whether by administrative or legislative action10 within the context of the provision of Section 65995 quoted above, in our opinion, is that the clause modifies the "levying" by a legislative body of a tee, charge, dedication, or other requirement. it is our view, as expressed in the discussion above, that "whether by administrative or legislative action" is clearly an adverbial clause in this context that addresses the methods pursuant to which that levying of fees or other requirements may occur. The alternative argument requires an interpretation that the phrase "whether by administrative or legislative action" was inserted in Section 65995 after "a development project, as defined in Section 53080" to further define "development project" to mean any administrative or legislative action. In our opinion, it is an unreasonable construction to suggest that the noun "development )7-r Ll I i, Honorable Willis L. Brown, Jr. - p. 14 - #30455 . projec;" was modified by the clause "Whather by administrative or legisalative ectiona to ®xpresi the meaning that "development project" is defined to include, for.purpoaan of Section 65995, wq administrative or legislative action. Had the Iagislatura - actually intended that rasult, we think it probable that the definition of "development project" in Section 33080 would have been amended or, alternatively, that a statement would haves been added to Chapter 4 .9 to the effect that "development project" includes any "administrative or legislative action." Furthermore, this alternative interpretation would rasult in the simultaneous combination within Section 65995 of tva inconsistent definitions of the term "development project." An noted above, Section 65995, is revised by Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992, contains the express reference f°a development project, as defined in section 53080." Section 53080 defines "development project" to mean "any project undertaken for the purpose of development, and includes a project involving tha issuance of a permit for construction or reconstruction, but not a permit to operate". (para. (2) , subd. (a) , Sec. 53080) . Although "project" is not defined by 9ectich 53080, ' that term ,is defined elsewhere in the Planning and Zoning Law to mean "any activity involving the isssuance . to a person of a lease', permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement for use by one or more public agencies" (Sec. 65931) .. A phrase or expression may be interpreted in accordance with its use in other related statutes (rXediani v. Qom, 215 Cal. App. 2d 127 F 133) . Therefore, for .purposes of Section 65995 , "development project" means an activity undertaken for the purpose of development that involves a public agency ' s issuance to a person of a lease, permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement for use. As so defined, the term "development project" has been held by the courts to exclude legislative action by a public agency involving the adoption or amendment of general plans and zoning laws (see Mira, supra, p. 1218 ; Landi v. County gg =nterZyt supra, p. 936) . A construction to the effect that Section 65995 purports to define "development project" as specified in Section 53080 and, simultaneously, to mean any "administrative or legislative action" of the legislative body of a local agency would thus be internally inconsistent and, consequently, unreasonable. Section 65996 is revised by Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 to state that designated provisions "shall be the exclusive methods of mitigating environmental effects related to the adequacy of school facilities when considering the approval or the establishment of conditions for the approval of a development project, e-- de- fin-d in Geetien 53989 , hy administrative or legislative action pursuant to [CEQA) 'B (changes in wording i Hancrabla Millie L. Brown, Jr. p• 15 030455 indicated in strik®out and underline) . The analysis set forth above with regard to the inclusion in Section 65995 of the clause 90,whether by -administrative or legislative action" also applies in this parallel context, to the effect that the clause "by aft"iatrativQ or legislative action". in Section 65996 may be construed reasonably, in our visa, to refer only to the methods of mitigation utilized.by local agencies when considering the approval of a development project (see Murrieta, supra, p. 1233, fn.- 15) . . ' Finally, the legal impact of defining "development projact" in Sections 65995 and 65996 to include any a"administrativa or legislative action" would not appear to have the alleged result of prohibiting a city or * county from taking . into account the impact on school facilities in deciding on the adoption or amendment of. a general plan or zoning law. In Section 65995, defining "development project" to include any adminictrative or legislative act would have the literal effect of prohibiting the legislative body of a local agency from levying, other than pursuant to Section 53080 or Chapter 4 .7 , a school facilities fee, charge, dedication, or other requirement against, for example, the legislative -act of adopting or amending a general plan or zoning law. Similarly, in Section 65996, defining l/development project!' to include any administrative or legislative act would have the literal effect of restricting the mitigation requirements that may be imposed by a local agency under CEQ, against its adoption or amendment of a general plan or zoning law. 3 The deletion by Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 of the phrase 11 , as defined in Section 53080, 11 from Section 65996' could be argued to reflect the legislative intent to revise the meaning of the term "development project, " as used in that section. The Legislature cannot be presumed to have indulged in idle acts (Stafford v. Realty Bond Service Corn . , 39 Cal . 2d 797 , 805 ; People v. Folpy, 170 Cal . App. 3d 1039 , 1056) . However, Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 does not purport to add language to Section 65996 that reasonably may be construed to replace the definition of "development project" set forth in Section 53080 . Consequently, pursuant to. the rule of statutory construction that a phrase or expression may be interpreted in accordance with its use in other related statutes (Frediani v. gam, 215 Cal. App. 2d 127 , 133) , we conclude that "development project" would have the same meaning in Section 65996 - as it does in Section 65995 , which defines the term by express reference to Section 53080 and by use of the definition of the terra "project" in a related section, namely Section 65931 . L � t a Ronorable Willie L. Brown, Jr. - p. 16 - #30453 It is well settled that, in construing a statute, a court may use a vide variety of extrinsic aidg., such as the history of the statuta, committee reports, staff bill reports, - legislative debates, unpassed amendatory legislation, and even letters of legislative intent (see In IA Marriace gj Ao , 16 Cal. 3d 583, 590-591; ftovle V. Suverior COU= (Arthur Rtle 199 Cal. App. 3d 494 , 499-500) . In this case, for example, the Senate Third Reading analysis of July 30, 1992, states that " (b]y setting the fee cap as an exclusive method for mitigating school impacts when considering ' legislative' actions, [S.D. 12871 reverses the effect of the Mira decision." it is equally true, however, that legislative intent may be given effect only it it can reasonably be inferred from the language of the act. (see Coulter. v. Pool, 187 Cal. 181, 185-186 ; Gno4rich, 160 Cal. 410, 416-417 ; see also Anderson v. I .M. seen Z23M.A., 7 Cal. 2d 60, 66-68) . In this ease, for the reasons set forth above, it is our opinion that the legislative intent suggested by the senate Third Reading analysis, • and by the alternative argument addressed in this discussion, cannot reasonably be. inferred from the language in Sections 65995 and 65996 as revised by Chapter 1354 of the Statutes of 1992 . We conclude, accordingly, , that this alternative construction of those s.ections would not be adopted by the courts. -4 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING y CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 91-32 PROPOSED ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers at the Huntington Beach Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. The City of Huntington Beach City Council has scheduled a series of public hearings to facilitate the public review of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. The dates and subject matter for each meeting are as listed below. The City Council may continue the public hearing series should the subject matter require additional time. June 6, 1994 TITLE 20: General Provisions • Title, Components, and Purpose • Organization, Applicability, and Interpretation • Definitions • Use Classifications TITLE 24: Administration • Zoning Permits (._ • Conditional Use Permits and Variances; Waiver of Development Standards • Design Review • Coastal Development Permit • Development Agreements • Amendments • Notices, Hearings, Findings, Decisions and Appeals • Enforcement June 20, 1994 TITLE 25: Subdivisions • General Provisions • Tentative Maps • Vesting Tentative Maps • Final Maps and Parcel Maps • Dedications and Reservations • Improvements • Reversions to Acreage • Mergers • Enforcement . s NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING (Continued) June 20, 1994 TITLE 22: Overlay District (continued) • Oil Production • Coastal Zone • Floodplain • Interim Study e Neighborhood Conservation • Planned Block Development • High-Rise • Mobilehome July 5, 1994 TITLE 21: Base Districts • Residential • Commercial • Industrial July 18, 1994 TITLE 21: Continued • Open Space • Public/Semi-Public • Specific Plan August 1, 1994 TITLE 23: Provisions Applicant in All or Several Districts • Site Standards • Mobilehome Park Conversions • Residential Condominium Conversions • Non Conforming Uses and Structures August 15, 1994 TITLE 23: Continued • Parking and Loading • Landscape Improvements • Signs APPLICATION NUMBER: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10/ ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 91-32 APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach, Department of Community Development REQUEST: Repeal existing Huntington Beach Ordinance Code (Division 9) and establish a new zoning and subdivision ordinance.for inclusion in the Huntington Beach Municipal Code. The new ordinance updates the zoning and subdivision provisions by incorporating current planning principles and spIp0306 2 planning requirements of state law, deleting duplications and conflicts, and streamlining review processing. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Covered by Environmental Assessment No. 91-32. COASTAL STATUS: An amendment to the Huntington Beach Local Coastal Program Implementing Ordinances will be filed with the California . Coastal Commission following adoption by the City Council. ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the Community Development Department, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties in the City Clerk's office after June 3, 1994. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit to the City Clerk, written evidence for or against the application as outlined above. If you challenge the City Council's action in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to, the public hearing. If there are any further questions please call Susan Pierce, Associate Planner, at 536-5271. Connie Brockway City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 (714) 536-5227 sp1p0306 3 PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT: 6&h4.,vW MEETING: �� yvA NUMBER OF OTHER PUBLIC HEARINGS: j (PER- Initial) AUTHORIZATION: Ray ilver Assistant City Administrator ------ -Appr6ved byCity Administration COVER SHEET FOR CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARINGS N/A YES NO ( ) Has the City Administrator's Office authorized the public hearing to be set? -+ - (Attach Asst. City Administrator's approval slip) tt y genus�cY, . W ( ) Is day of public hearing correct-Monday/Tuesday? ( ( ) Does Heading of Notice Reflect City Council Hearing (Not PC) If appeal, is appellant's name shown on legal notice? (y (>4 ( ) If the project includes residential use, is "legal challenge paragraph" included? If Coastal Development Permit, has the Master Legal Notice Document been used. ( ) (>q ( ) Is there an Environmental Status to be approved by Council? ( ) Is Title Company verification letter attached? ( ) ( ) Were the latest Assessor's Parcel Rolls used? ( ( } ( } Are the appellant/applicant's names and addresses on mailing labels? ( ( ) ( ) If Coastal Development Permit, are the RESIDENT labels attached and is the Coastal Commission Office on the labels? For Public Hearings at the City Council level, please insert the below paragraph-of the public hearing notice "ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit to the City Clerk written evidence for or against the application as outlined above. If there are any further questions,please call (insert name of Planner) at 536-5271 CONNIE BROCKWAY, CITY CLERK CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STREET - 2ND FLOOR HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92648 (714) 536-5227 PUBHER PUBLIr,NOTdPt S PUBLIC NOTICES PUBLIC NO :=PUBLIC:NOTICES E NOTICE OF PU I IG HEARING MENT°NO.,92 5 CODE AMEND DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN CODE AMEIVDMENT7 "VILLAGE CONCEPT"AND DOWNTOWN PARKING MASTER PLAN i (CONTINUED FROM APRIL 6, 1994,CITY COUNCIL MEETING) s NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public,heanngninnthe Council Chambers at the Huntington Beach Civic Center,2000 Main Street,Huntington Beach,California,on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements.of all,persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. -° I DATE/TIME: Monday,June 6, 1994,7:00 PM i, APPLICATION NUMBER: Code Amendment No:'92-5/DowntownSpecific Plan Code Amendment/ a; "Village Concept'°an Downtown Parking Master Plan: APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach - LOCATION: An area bounded by Golden West Street,Pacific Coast`Highway,Beach Boulevard j ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan REQUEST: To amend the Downtown-Specific Plan for the,purpose of scaling down development`s standards,creating three(3)planning nodes,=establishing affordable housing standards and_ a comprehensive parking management plan. j ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Covered by the Downtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report fl i COASTAL STATUS: Local Coastaf Plan Amendment ON FIL A copy of the proposed request is on file in the City._Clerk's. Office; 2000 Main- HuntingtonStreet;_.} Beach,California 92648,f4 inspection by the public:.A copy of.the staff report will be available to interested parties at City,Clerk's Office after June 3; 1994. 0, f ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions orfsubmit to.the City.. Clerk written evidence for or against the application as outlined above. If you challenge the City Councils, action in court,you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone elseraised'at the public hearing y described in this notice,or in.written correspondence delivered to,the City at,or prior to;the public heaniig lf. 3 there are any further questions please call Herb Fauland,Associate Plaiiner'at(714).536-527I a ' Connie Brockway,City Clerk i City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main,Street,-_2nd Floor Huntington Beach;CA 92648_�,(7,1"4)536-5227 t Aj DDUJ 5i7 D -PACIFIC- = OCEAN 9 - I Afft CODE AM NDMENT #92 5 ,g= DOWNTOWN SPE,ClAL PLAN � 1 Ar PROOF OF PUBLICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA) SS. County of Orange ) I am a Citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the below entitled matter. 1 am a principal clerk of the HUNTINGTON BEACH INDEPENDENT, a newspaper of general circulation, printed and published in the City of Huntington Beach, County of Orange, State of California, and that attached Notice is a true and complete copy as was printed and published in the Huntington Beach and Fountain Valley issues of said newspaper to wit the issue(s) of: May 26, 1994 I declare, under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on May 26 199 4 at Costa Mesa, California. / Signature 14. rv_ r Ilu nJITIuES PUBLIC NOTI. PUBLIC NOTICES 96TtCES NOTICE PUBLIC HEARING CODS Al\ MENT N0. 91-10 c ENVIRONMENI. L ASSESSMENT NO. 91-32 PROPOSED ZONING:_ SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a publi6hearing inkhe Council Chambers at the Huntington Beach Civic Center,2000 Main Street,Huntington Beach,California,on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. to . The City of Huntington Beach City Council has scheduled a series of public hearing's to facilitate t6d"public review of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. The dates and subject matter for each meeting are as listed below. The City Council may continue the public hearing series should the subject matter require additional time. June 6, 1994 TITLE 20; General Provisions • Title,Components,and Purpose �. • Organization,Applicability,and Interpretation • Definitions G Use Classifications ,v TITLE 24: Administration • Zoning Permits ++ • Conditional Use Permits and Variances; Waiver of Development Standards 3' • Design Review or.. • Coastal Development Permit 'L • Development Agreements tr • Amendments • Notices,Hearings,Findings,Decisions and Appeals • Enforcement June 20, 1994 TITLE 25: Subdivisions • General Provisions • Tentative Maps • Vesting Tentative Maps ' ' • Final Maps and Parcel Maps • Dedications and Reservations . • Improvements • Reversions to Acreage • Mergers • Enforcement Jiine 20, 1994' TITLE 22: Overlay District (continued) • Oil Production �' • . Coastal Zone f� �( • Floodplain s • Interim Study • Neighborhood Conservation • Planned Block Development • High-Rise I • Mobilehome July 5, 1994 TITLE 21: Base Districts 1 • Residential • Commercial g • Industrial b Jobl y 18, 1994 TITLE 21: Continued • Open Space + / • Public/Semi-Public, • Specific Plan august 1;.1994. TITLE 23:Ttovisi6ns,Applicant in All`6i Several I3sstncts ' Y - Site Standards" >. Mobilehore-Park Eoriversions, Residential Condominium Conversions s ;Non Conforming'Llses."and Structures August 15,_1994 Continued Parking'and Loading . , ,Landscape Improvements' Signs - APPLICATION NUMBER CODE AMENDMENT NO.91 101. - ` " ENVIRONMENTAL ASSES83AENT'NO 91-32 t WPLICANT" City eof Huntington Beacly°,Department of Community Development' tEQUEST; Repeal existing Huntington Beach Ordinance Code(Di vYsion 9):and establish a new zoning and subdivision ordinance.for inclusion in the . ' Huntington Beach Ivlurucipal` od'e. The new'.`,ordinance.update`s the Toning' a - . and subdivision provisions by incorporating current planning principles and planning reggirements`of-staie jkw;deleting duplications and=conflicts;r and ;: streamlining review process qVIRONMENTAL STATUS., Covered by Environmental Assessment No:91 32 &STAL`STATUS: An amendment to the Huntington Beach Local Coastal Program, M Implementing Ordinances:will be filed with,the'California Coastal Commission followmg;adoption bythe•City Council.; ON,FILE: A copy of the proposed request-is.on file in the CommunrtyDevelopment Department:2000'"lvlatn Street Huntington Beach,C'ahfo'rnia 9264`8'j'or it : - - inspection_by the•'pubhc.,A copy,of the staffreport will be available to interested partiesin the City°Clerles'office`afler June':3,'.1994._ " INTERESTED.PERSONS"are mvited,to attend said`hearing'and express opinions or submit the City Clerk,written evidence for or-against the application.as outlined above If you" ehallehie the City Council"',action in court;'you may be liniitedto raising"only those issues you or someone"else raised at the public hearing described in this notice,-or in.written correspondence elidered to the City'at;or prior to,`the:public hearing If there are any further questions please tall Susan Pierce,,Associate Planner,at 536-5271 Connie Brockway.- r" City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street i- - Iiuntington,Beach,CA 92648 °;_`�(71.4),536-5227 PROOF OF PUBLICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA) ) SS. County of Orange ) I am a Citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the below entitled matter. I am a principal clerk of the HUNTINGTON BEACH INDEPENDENT, a newspaper of general circulation, printed and published in the City of Huntington Beach, County of Orange, State of California, and that attached Notice is a true and complete copy as was printed and published in the Huntington Beach and Fountain Valley issues of said newspaper to wit the issue(s) of: May 26, 1994 I declare, under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on May 26 199 4 at Costa Mesa, California. Signature 3 Y MINUTES CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Room B-8, Civic Center Huntington Beach,California Monday, April 24, 1994 Mayor Pro Tempore Robitaille called the adjourned regular meeting of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency to order at 6:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ROLL CALL PRESENT: Bauer,Robitaille, Winchell,Leipzig, Sullivan ABSENT: Silva,Moulton-Patterson PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments on the following Action Item: ORDINANCE NO.3234-ADOPTED-AMENDMENT NO. 1-HOLLY-SEACLIFF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO.90-1 (600.10) The City Clerk presented Ordinance No.3234- 'AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ADOPTING AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE HOLLY-SEACLIFF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 90-1." Public hearing and introduction approved April 18, 1994. Following a second reading by title,on motion by Leipzig, second Bauer,Ordinance No. 3234 was adopted by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Bauer,Robitaille, Winchell,Leipzig, Sullivan Noes: None Absent: Silva,Moulton-Patterson STUDY SESSION-DIVISION 9 REWRITE(PLANNING CODE) The City Clerk presented a communication from the Community Development Director transmitting Code Amendment No. 91-10,the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Rewrite. Melanie Fallon, Community Development Director,using slides,presented an overview regarding the proposed new Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. The slide presentation included the following topics: "What is Zoning?","History of and Examples of First Zoning Ordinances","History of Huntington Beach Zoning Ordinance" including the Division 9 Rewrite Committee's meeting with the consultant Blaney- Dyett Company. She stated the goals and objectives of the proposed new zoning ordinance. Howard Zelefsky,Planning Director,reported on the topics of"How the Zoning and Subdivision Works" and"Major Changes". Susan Pierce, Associate Planner, reported on the topics of"Density/Intensity", "Design Standards","Zoning Districts","Open Space","Entitlement Changes", and "Code Familiarization". Following the viewgraphs,discussion was held between the Community Development Director, City Council and Planning Commissioner Dettloff regarding the procedure used by the Planning Commission to review the proposed code. Page#2-Council/Agency Minutes-4/25/94 It was the consensus of the City Council that September 6, 1994 would be the target adoption date for the code. The following five recommendations contained in the Community Development Director's Slide Presentation were reviewed and commented on by City Council: Recommended Action No 1 -Public Hearing Series-Planning Code Division 9 Divide Zoning& Subdivision Ordinance Into Manageable Portions and Schedule Public Hearings Series. The following public hearing series as prepared by staff was concurred with by Council and it was agreed that September 6, 1994 would be the target adoption date. Public Hearing Series • JUNE 6-TITLE 20, General Provisions,and TITLE 24,Administration • JUNE 20-TITLE 25, Subdivisions, and TITLE 22,Overlay Districts • JULY 5 -TITLE 21,Base Districts(Residential, Commercial and Industrial) • JULY 18-TITLE 21,Base Districts(Open Space,Public-Semipublic, Specific Plan) • AUGUST 1 -TITLE 23,Provisions Applying in All or Several Districts(Supplemental Site Standards,Mobilehome Park Conversions,Condominium Conversions,Nonconforming) • AUGUST 15 -TITLE 23,PROVISIONS APPLYING IN ALL OR SEVERAL DISTRICTS(Parking and Loading,Landscape Improvements, Signs) • AUGUST 15 -ZONE CHANGE INTRODUCTION • SEPTEMBER 6-ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ADOPTION AND ZONE CHANGE ADOPTION Recommended Action No. 2-Fourth Monday City Council Meetings to Review Planning Code- Division 9 Council did not concur with the recommendation of staff that prior to each City Council meeting a study session be held to review the section of Division 9 under consideration. Instead,the City Council directed that the fourth Monday of each month be set aside as a Council meeting to consider the subjects for the Division 9 public hearing. Recommended Action No.3-Take Consensus On Each Section of Division 9-Planning Code As Presented With.Section NOT Concurred With To Be Returned to Council The City Council determined that rather than to take action on each item presented,a consensus would be taken or each item and the items not concurred with would be brought back to City Council following study with the subcommittee. Recommended Action No.4-Adoption of Division 9 Planning Code Rewrite At Conclusion City Council concurred with Staff Recommended Action No. 4. Recommended Action No.5-If Needed Consider a Council/Planning Commission Subcommittee Council concurred that if needed,to consider forming a City Council/Planning Commission subcommittee to study the areas in which City Council does not reach concurrence. It was determined that the Planning Commission would be asked if they would like to form a committee and that the subcommittee's work would be needed following the first hearing in June. -2 i� Page#3 -Council/Agency Minutes-4/25/94 Discussion Re: Proposed Division 9-Planning Code Rewrite Councilmember Bauer stated his concerns that safeguards be implemented in delegating such broad authority to the Zoning Administrator;the consistency of the document with the General Plan,the document as it attempts to improve the cash flow to the city by encouraging new business and increase demand for homes; mechanism needed to reach objective of city attractiveness;obtain community input to ensure that proposed Division 9 Rewrite is user friendly. Councilmember Winchell stated that she also would like input from those persons who will use the code to ensure that they view it as an improvement. She stated she would like to see in writing the substantive changes because the main thrust of the re-write was clean-up and reorganization. She stated that there are some substantive changes and yet the City Council has not yet analyzed any philosophical changes in this code. Councilmember Winchell commented on the problem of the Specific Plans being referred to in the code but not in readable form. She requested consideration of this matter. Councilmember Sullivan stated he would not favor parcel map approval by the City Engineer in lieu of acceptance by Council unless there was an appeal process. He stated his concern with items going to a lower level of approval (the Zoning Administrator)and stressed the need for lower decisions to be in the hands of the Council within two days. He spoke regarding the Planned Block Development and stated his concern with the rights of the smaller property owner. He stated concerns with the proposed revisions for conversions of apartments to condominiums and proposed City Council resolution pertaining to Development Agreements. Councilmember Leipzig questioned if there were any substantive changes in zoning and the Planning Director and Community Development Director responded that there would be no change in zoning only in what the zoning is called. Discussion was held regarding the method by which the information on the proposed re-write would be disseminated to the public. ADJOURNMENT-COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY On motion by Winchell, second Bauer, Council adjourned the adjourned regular meetings of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach. City Clerk of the Redevelopment Agency and City Clerk and ex-officio City Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California ATTEST: City Clerk/Clerk Mayor/Chairman g:cc\94425 -3 - REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Date: April 25, 1994 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Submitted by: Michael T. Uberua a City Administratorv'" l Y g � Y Prepared by:by: Melanie S. Fallon, Director of Community Development Subject: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10/ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REWRITE i4pp,,o oeb S4-a4 %re cce Ans 4-T' Consistent with Council Policy? [X] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception �, pG') H . Y a-S �y Statement of Issue,Recommendation,Analysis,Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments: L STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Transmitted for City Council consideration is Code Amendment No. 91-10, the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Rewrite. It was initiated by the City Council in 1990 and, after several code committee meetings and numerous public hearings, approved by the Planning Commission. The current code consists of complex and inconsistent provisions that are difficult to understand. In some cases they are contradictory or conflict with State law. This Rewrite will establish a clear, consistent, complete and comprehensive document that implements the General Plan and streamlines the review process. The purpose of this meeting is to introduce the document and establish a process for adoption. RECOMMENDATION: Give staff direction relative to a schedule for study sessions and public hearings and to a method for addressing Ordinance Code changes that have occurred subsequent to the Planning Commission approval of the Rewrite document. ANALYSIS: In June 1990, the City Council authorized the preparation of a contract with Blayney-Dyett to rewrite and update the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code (Division 9). A subcommittee was appointed to give direction and to assist in the review of the proposed rewrite. The membership consisted of a City Council representative, Grace Winchell, and three Planning Commissioners, Ken Bourguignon, Roy Richardson, and Susie Newman. This subcommittee reviewed the various portions of this complex document prepared by the consultant. Planning Staff assumed the editing and completion of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance update and revision during late 1991. Presentations were made to the subcommittee and to the Chamber of Commerce. Study sessions were held with the Planning Commission during 1991 and 1992, and the comments received were incorporated into the draft Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. It was subsequently approved by the Planning Commission at a series of public hearings held between June 15, 1993 and October 19, 1993. A summary of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance has been prepared for distribution to the public which summarizes the organization, major changes, and highlights of the proposed ordinance. A formatted version of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance as approved by the Planning Commission has been prepared that includes references to current Ordinance Code sections. Since the document was approved by the Planning Commission, there have been code amendments approved by the City Council that must be incorporated into the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance (e.g. indoor swap meets). Pending code amendments regarding outdoor dining and carts/kiosks will ultimately be incorporated into the document. FUNDING SOURCE: Not applicable. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Summary 2. Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance MTU:MSF:SP RCA 4/25/94 2 z&srca :Y w ITY • TON WE XCH SummaryProposedOf Zoning 3® And Subdivision Ordinance The City of Huntington Beach is in the process of rewriting the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and is requesting public comment Goal and Update es of the te and input. The Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance is a set of rules Update that govern the physical development of our City. Since the Zoning - The goal ofthe Proposed zoning and Subdivision Ordinance affects how your property may be devel- andSubdiviston ordinance is to oped,public comment is essential in creating a complete and compre- establish a clear, concise, complete, hensive set of rules. This summary is not the Proposed Zoning and and consistent document that Subdivision Ordinance,but rather an introduction and a generalized implements the General Plan and streamlines the review process. The synopsis in order to allow public input main objectives of the provisions are to: WHAT IS ZONING? WHO' IS THE ZONING AND ,Establish categories of uses with SUBDIVISION similar characteristics that are In its basic form,zoning is intended to ORDINANCE BEING not repetitive or cumbersome, protect the public health,safety,and UPDATED? welfare of the citizens of Huntington 4Create districts that clearly Beach. Zoning does this by dividing In 1946 the City adopted its first respond to the General Plan's the City into areas,or zones, and land use and urban design establishing regulations that govern zoning ordinance. Since that time a 41� myriad of amendments have occurred policies; the use,placement, spacing, and size of land and buildings within those in patchwork fashion that incorporate highly complex standards and rules e Allow regulations to be tailored to areas. For example,the Zoning each district by establishing specific limitations that apply in 405 freeway one or more districts; • ` � •Allow architects, developers and property owners design ♦ flexibility within the framework ♦ of standards that clearly indicate what will be approved, — — - and t •Create new subdivision regulations pacific ocean that incorporate newproce- City of Huntington Beach dures for processing tentative, vesting,final andparcel maps for everything from parking to granny consistent with the State Ordinance specifies that no industrial Subdivision Map Act. uses can be built in the middle of a units. Many of the changes were residential neighborhood in order to generated by new city objectives, state protect the health of residents and the law,and court cases. The Zoning The Proposed Zoning and economic value of the houses. Zoning Ordinance has become difficult to understand and, in some cases, Subdivision Ordinance must be . is a program that implements policies clear, complete, concise and of the General Plan,the "constitution" contradictory;therefore,many out-of- p date provisions have developed. consistent of our City. w L 1 y • e TENTATIVE SCHEDULE OF ]PUBLIC REVIEW FAR 0.5 The Proposed Zoning and Subdivi- sion Ordinance must receive final approval by the City Council. The FAR 1.0 following tentative schedule of City Council meetings has been set: *April 25-City Council Studv FAR 1.5 Session Way 23-City Council Study ' Session *June 6-Public Hearing Introduc- Floor Area Ratio(FAR) is determined by dividing the gross floor area of all tion buildings on a lot by the area of the lot. *June 6-Aug. 15-Public Hearing - Series Typical diagram of the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance *June 6-Title 20, General Provi- sions, and Title 24,Administra- BACKGROUND AND (3)subdivision provisions which tion govern the division of land within the *June 20- Title 25, Subdivisions, PROCESS City. State law requires the Zoning and Title 22, Overlay Districts and Subdivision Ordinance to be (Oil, Coastal Zone, Floodplain, The Proposed Zoning and Subdivi- consistent with the General Plan. The Interim Stud}, Neighborhood sion Ordinance,originally prepared by Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Conservation, Planned Block Blayney-Dyett, a planning consulting becomes the key tool for implement- Development, High-Rise, firm,has been refined by the Commu- ing the goals,objectives,and policies Mobilehome) nity Development Department and of the General Plan. The Ordinance is *July 5-Title 21, Base Districts incorporates ideas offered by mem- more specific than the General Plan (Residential, Commercial and bers of the Huntington Beach Division and contains lists of specific uses Industrial) 9 Rewrite Advisory Committee.,This permitted in each zone and develop- •July 18- Title 21, Base Districts committee included representatives of ment standards, including setbacks, (Open Space, Public- the City Council,Planning Commis- building height, dwelling units Semipublic, Specific Plan) sion, and Design Review Board. permitted, etc. *August I- Title 23, Provisions Applying in All or Several The document was reviewed and Districts(Supplemental Site amended by the Planning Commission The Zoning Ordinance consists of Development Standards, at a series of public hearings that zoning provisions,zoning naps Mobilehome Park Conversions, began June 15, 1993 and ended and subdivision provisions Condominium Conversions, October 19, 1993. Nonconforming The Zoning and Subdivision Ordi- •August 15-Title 23, Provisions g Applying in All or Several HOW THE PROPOSED nance must follow the 4-C's rule. It Districts(Parking and Loading, must be clear, complete,concise,and Landscape Improvements, ZONING AND consistent. In addition,the ordinance Signs) SUBDIVISION must be reasonable. The Proposed *August 15-Zone Change Introduc- ORDINANCE WORKS Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance is tion a reasonable ordinance. It includes *September 6-Zoning and Subdivi- provisions to allow flexibility to P g The Proposed Zoning and Subdivi- comply with the regulations and a Sion Ordinance Adoption and sion Ordinance consists of(I)zoning p y b Zone Chan e Ado fiat process to allow minor deviations g P provisions which establish various under specific circumstances. Finally, classes of zoning districts and govern the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Please call the City Clerk or the the use of land and placement of p g Community Deg elo meat Depart- Ordinance streamlines the review P P buildings and improvements within ment to verify these meeting dates the districts;(2)a zoning map;and process. O q � 1 0 � TITLE HIGHLIGHTS Required Setback TITLE 20• General Provisions 1 Max. two Stories wltllout The Use Classifications contained in .Cal break Chapter 204 describe groups or categories of uses with similar characteristics. Major categories include residential,commercial, industrial,public,temporary and accessory. CV District: Upper Story Setback TITLE 21: Base Districts Residential Upper story setback diagram The residential or R district regula- tions provide standards for single and ORGANIZATION Title 23: Provisions Applying in All multi-family residential development. -Districts One major change in this district is Includes supplemental site develop- that varying open space provisions for The Proposed Zoning and Subdivi- g g single family residential have been Sion Ordinance will become Volume 2 ment standards,parking and loading y requirements, landscape improve- deleted. of the Huntington Beach Municipal menu,signs,mobilehome park Code. Volume 2,vvill consist of six conversions,condominium conver- Commercial major categories called Titles. These The commercial or C district regula- are: sions,and nonconforming uses and structures. provide rovide controls for neighbor- hood and community shopping areas, Title 20: General Provisions Title 24: Administration professional offices,general commer- Establishes the overall organization Contains detailed procedures for the cial areas,and visitor-commercial and applicability of the regulations administration of the zoning ordi- areas. Major changes include the and includes Defmitions and a listing nance, including requirements for elimination of discretionary review for of permitted uses by categories with some uses, the establishment of floor similar characteristics. conditional use permits,variances, design review,development agree- area ratio,and the consolidation of the, men ts, amendments to the zoning current C 1,C2, and C4 zoning Title 21: Base Districts ordinance text and zonins map, districts into one General Commercial Specifies the land uses permitted or CG district. conditionally permitted in each appeals of zoning decisions,and residential,commercial,industrial, enforcement. Industrial public and semi-public, and open- The industrial or I district regulations s g ulations ace zoning district. Base district Title 25: Subdivisions p b Contains procedures for implementing are distributed into two categories- provisions also include development and supplementing the Subdivision limited industry and general industry standards to control the height,bulk, Map Act, including tentative maps, with a floor area ratio to regulate location and appearance of structures parcel maps,final maps,vesting intensity. on development sites. tentative maps,dedications and improvements,and administrative Open Space Title 22: Overlay Districts requirements. The open space or OS district is Modifies the base-district provisions intended mainly for public parks,golf for specific purposes,such as oil courses,and other open space areas. production,flood protection,high-rise It provides areas for public or private buildings,neighborhood conservation, use and areas for preservation and planned block development, or the The Proposed Zoning and Subdivi- enhancement. coastal zone. sion Ordinance is organized into six major categories Public Space MAJOR CHANGES The public-semipublic or PS district applies to school and college sites, other public land and to institutional PROCESSING AND DESIGN STANDARDS holdings. This allows the City to E TITLEMENTS consider what the appropriate use of New standards are proposed which the site may be if the public or [Procedures pertaining to the adminis- will address upper story setbacks, semipublic use is discontinued. ,6tion of the zoning provisions and building wall offsets and architectural standards are contained in Title 24: projections into residential setback/ Specific Plan Administration. A separate chapter yard areas. Courtyards will be The specific plan or SP district is used specifies uniform requirements for required opposite windows in multi- to create special land use districts and notices,hearings, findings, decisions family residential development;this outline the development standards for and appeals. Many uses of property feature will be used for building selected areas throughout the City, �,,,ill have the level of review changed separation, and maybe credited ;from the Planning Commission to the toward open space requirements. TITLE 22: Overlay Districts :Zoning Administrator. This will 'seduce processing time and cost to the ZONING DISTRICTS °The O Oil Production Overlay applicant. District establishes categories and The Proposed Zoning and Subdivision standards for oil production and SUBDIVISIONS Ordinance reduces the number of base related operations. This district i districts from 22 to 13 with subdis- enables the utilization of land for oil :Major changes to the review process tricts for different residential densities related activities that are compatible 'are: (1)allow the Zoning Administra- or geographic subareas. The base with surrounding development �_ or to act on tentative maps for up to districts are as follows: amine residential lots or units as well as °The CZ Coastal Zone Overlay fall tentative parcel maps;(2) allow the RL Low Density Residential District applies to those areas that lie miry Engineer to grant parcel map RM Medium Density Residential within the coastal zone. This district ;approval in lieu of acceptance by the RMH Medium-High Density ensures that those properties are `City Council; and(3)establish Residential developed in a manner that is consis- specific procedures for final and RH High Density Residential tent with the Coastal Act. arcel maps and improvements. RMP Manufactured Home Park 1 CO Office Commercial °The Floodplain Overlay District 'DENSITY/INTENSITY CG General Commercial provisions are patterned after the CV Visitor Commercial current model ordinance format The Proposed Zoning and Subdivision IG General Industrial prepared by the California Department iOrdinance establishes a unified IL Limited Industrial of Water Resources. It recommends Pi ethod of determining density for all OS Open Space new construction or substantial residential development. It will be PS Public-Semipublic improvement to structures located in a based on net(after dedication)lot area SP Specific Plan floodplain be elevated one foot above unlike current methods which provide the base flood elevation or flood- idifferent formulas based on apartment proofed. ,or condominium development , cc standards. Floor area ratios will be E_ ;�% ; °The IS Interim Study Qverlay iestablished to control the amount of ~ __'=r?J� '' cc. District is a new overlay and applies to ' 1 =I_j I an area where land use and regulatory :building area in commercial and ^� : g D' 'industrial districts. The floor area controls are undergoing study. This 6tio provision will allow property - N district requires approval of a condi- !owners to determine the maximum — tional use permit for any development [amount of construction allowed prior P0111 +. -f�, project during the period of study. 'C The overlay g expires at the end to preparing a conceptual develop- = Y zoning b ment plan. — of t.vo years unless extended. i P 1 1 fk od ri.;- rr•:� i i 1 Portion of-zoning map with overlays *The NC Neighborhood Conservation *Notice requirements for public Overlay District is a new overlay and I '& hearings are simplified by reference to may be used in areas with distinctive abea? State law. Procedures for hearings, building features, streetscape,site 90P IN decisions,and appeals are combined planning or land-use patterns. It I . I into one chapter. offers a vehicle for neighborhood or City initiated proposals to modify land I *Preliminary provisions for Coastal use controls and development stan- I Development Permit procedures have dards with a Neighborhood Conserva- 3f4 . ��ft been streamlined. Policies have been tion Plan. s ; eliminated from definitions. *The PBD Planned Block Develop- —�` •A City Council Resolution pertaining ment Overlay District is a new overlay Parking diagram to Development Agreements has been and may be used in areas where included as Chapter 246. multiple owners want to cooperate on *Landscape improvements are contained in Chapter 232. New .Enforcement provisions are ro- a development plan and need flexibil- P P diagrams are included. posed to allow the Director authority ity in the application of standards_ to P achieve coordinated planning. g to revoke discretionary permits and. •Current sign regulations are reorga- Transfers of density among parcels b enforce the Zoning could be permitted. and Subdivision nized and contained in Chapter 233. Ordinance. Abatement of use and lien New provisions allow commercial procedures are included. *The H High-Rise Overlay District corner sites to have both a monument establishes development standards and sign and wall signs. TITLE 25: Subdivisions locational criteria for all high-rise •Mobilehome park conversions to • buildings. Standards also include Procedures applicable to tentative another use are regulated by State law upper story setback for high-rise tract maps and tentative parcel maps with supplemental standards contained have been combined. The Zoning development adjacent to an R district. b in Chapter 234. Administrator may act on Tentative *The MHP Mobilehome Overlay Parcel maps and Tentative(tract) -Residential condominium conversion Maps with 9 or less parcels. The District applies to non-residentially P P zoned sites that are developed with a of existing apartments is allowed planning Commission will review and pursuant to Chapter 235. Conversion -act s creating 10 or more mobilehome park and allows the use D projects will be required to comply on maps parcels. Final Ma and Parcel Ma to continue with reasonable transition with current parking and landscaping p p p to the uses permitted by the base procedures likewise have been zoning district. No change in current requirements. combined. The City Engineer is provisions is proposed. authorized to give final approval for p p p •Nonconforming uses and structures parcel Maps;City Council action is are governed by Chapter 236. Provi- TITLE 23• Regulations Applying in required only for Final Maps. All or Several Districts sions follow existing code,however, enlargements of nonconforming .Other new provisions include a identifying chapter separate structures during any five year period se when mental standards and special standards *Chapter 230 consolidates supple- are limited to 50%of the area of the p p where and what improvements are prerequisite for a as required u . re final or into three categories,residential,non- existing structure q P q residential, and all districts. New parcel map approval. And sections on standards to allow and regulate TITLE 24 Administration parcel mergers and unmergers, heliports, antennas, and seasonal sales procedures for lot line adjustments, are also included. *The provisions for administration of and enforcement are included. the ordinance are intended to simplify *Off-street parking and loading and consolidate procedures for environmental review,conditional use provisions are contained in Chapter Permits,variances,design review, 231 and essentially reflect current requirements. However,recreational appeals,amendments,and enforce- ment. Conditional exceptions in the vehicles will be prohibited from current ordinance are replaced with parking in'any residential front yard or street-side yard. the term"variance". CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH- HOW CAN YOU HELP? City Council Members Take the time to review the proposed changes presented Mayor _ Linda Moulton-Patterson in this summary. }'our comments and participation are Mayor Pro Tern Earle Robitaille vital to the success of this document. Ifyou have any comments, either pro or con,please communicate them to Council Members Ralph Bauer the Huntington Beach City Council either in writing or at Victor Leipzig arty of the public hearings. Please address any written Jim Silva comments to: David Sullivan Grace Winchell Citt,of Huntington Beach Community Development Department Planning Commission Members Zoning and Subdivision Update 2000 Main Street - 'Chairperson Shirley Dettloff Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Vice Chair Phil In-lee Ifyou need more detail than this summary provides,you Commission Members Bob Biddle may obtain copies of the Draft Zoning and Subdivision Gary Gorman Ordinance at the City of Huntington Beach Department of Edward Kerins Community Development, located in the Civic Center and Susie Newman the Main Street Library. You may also contact Susan Roy Richardson Pierce of the Department of Community Development at (714)536-5271. City of Huntington Beach �1 y Community Development Department 7� Zoning and Subdivision Update - �- 2600 Main Street Huntington Beach,CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH �E/VT/eE /l/EW D/�'D/NAiV�E oN OFCIcE Foie 7�ccl3cic �'£U/�u� CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH :", .- -., .- zoning and subdivision ordinance 1994 a i ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE ZONING WHAT IS SUBDIVISIONZONING? , ORDINANCE i - ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ZONING ORDINANCE ® PROTECTS THE HEALTH, - ' SAFETY,l AND WELFARE OF � HISTORY OF -a DIVIDES THE CITY INTO ZONING AREAS AND ESTABLISHES REGULATIONS FOR THOSE AREAS ® IMPLEMENTS POLICIES OF THE GENERAL PLAN l ®In the history of the world,a rather recent a At same time high density-center cities came phenomena - under attack by housing reformers and fire ®In America until late 1800s-private property and health departments in order to: use of land was sacrosanct. ►separate incompatible uses -bakeries, ■Between 1880-1901 City Beautiful movement cleaning establishments in basements of flourished. (City Planning as a profession tenements evolved from this.) ►1885 -Modesto, CA banned steam laundries ®It defined how cities row and how to (Chinese)from affluent residential g neighborhood incorporate parks and boulevards. a make tenements more livable ®Washington DC-Philadelphia -Boston .regulate height New York- Kansas City ►number of stories % of lot coverage I ■LOS ANGELES- 1909 WENT ALL THE'kVAY TO EXAMPLES OF FIRST ZONING SUPREME COURT ORDINANCES ►7 INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS ■BOSTON - 1904 ► REST OF CITY RESIDENTIAL(business ►WOODEN BUILDINGS LIMITED TO 45 FT. permitted as "residential exception" w/conditions ■1915 SUPREME COURT-LA HAD NOT ACTED ►BUSINESS DISTRICT LIMITED TO 125 FT. i ARBITRARILY IN THE EXERCISE OF POLICE ► OTHER AREAS LIMITED TO 80 FT. POWER ■WASHINGTON - 1899 i ►FACTS: OUTLYING AREA CONTAINING ►NON FIREPROOF RESIDENTIAL BRICKYARD WAS ANNEXED INTO LA BUILDINGS • 60 FT. ►AREA ZONED RESIDENTIAL ► ►AFTERWARDS BRICKYARDS PROHIBITED IN RESIDENTIAL STREET: 90 FT. ►ON WIDEST STREETS :130 FT. j RESIDENTIAL ZONES i - j i i ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ! HB ZONING HISTORY ORDINANCE ■CITY INCORPORATED IN 1904 ■FIRST ZONING ORDINANCE 1946 WHY UPDATE? � ■ 1946-1994 PATCHWORK AMENDMENTS AND REWRITES I i i I , , THESE AMENDMENTS HAVE MADE THE DOCUMENT ZONING AND SUBDIVISION � ORDINANCE ■ HARD TO UNDERSTAND ■ COMPLEX AND j CONTRADICTORY PROGRESS TO DATE ■ OUT-OF-DATE ■ IN CONFLICT WITH STATE LAW AND RECENT I COURT CASES I� ! ii I I j DIVISION 9 REWRITE PROGRESS TO DATE COMMITTEE ®1989 - OK TO SOLICIT BIDS s MEMBERSHIP ®1990 - BLAYNET-DYETT CONTRACT ►GRACE WINCHELL APPROVED ► KEN BOURGUIGNON ► RECOMMENDS MAJOR PLANING ► SUSAN NEWMAN AND LAND USE IMPROVEMENTS ► ROY RICHARDSON ► REORGANIZES, UPDATES, AND REWRITES ORDINANCE CODE ■MEET WITH CONSULTANT AND ► GIVE DIRECTION INCLUDES VISUAL AIDS ®SUBCOMMITTEE APPOINTED PROGRESS TO DATE continued PROGRESS TO DATE continued ■ 1991 STAFF ASSUMES 1993 -1994 STAFF COMPLETION OF DOCUMENT INCORPORATES PLANNING ® 1991-1992 PLANNING COMMISSION COMMISSION REVISIONS STUDY SESSIONS ■STAFF.PREPARES SUMMARY � ® 1993 CHAMBER OF COMMERCE DOCUMENT PRESENTATION I '� ■ ®JUNE 16 - OCTOBER 19, 1993, APRIL 25, 1994, CITY COUNCILSTUDY SESSION PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING SERIES ZONING AND N SUBD VISION GOAL OF THE UPDATE ■NCE ESTABLISH A. DOCUMENT WHAT ARE THE GOAL THAT IS AND OBJECTIVES OF - CLEAR THE ZONING CODE - CONCISE REWRITE? - COMPLETE CONSISTENT i OBJECTIVES OF THE UPDATE j OBJECTIVES continued ■ STREAMLINE THE REVIEW ■ USER FRIENDLY FOR PROCESS HOMEOWNERS, ARCHITECTS, REALTORS ® SIMPLIFY THE DOCUMENT ■ COMPLY WITH STATE ■ REORGANIZE, REFORMAT LAW AND RECENT AND REDESIGN ! COURT CASES j i OBJECTIVES continued FOLLOWING PRESENTATIONS ■ PROVIDE DESIGN •HowARDZELEFSKY- FLEXIBILITY ■HOW THE ZONING AND SUBDIVISION WORKS w MAJOR CHANGES IERCE- ■ ESTABLISH NEW ZONING •SUSANPY/INTE �+ ■DENSITY/INTENSITY DISTRICTS ■DESIGN STANDARDS DISTRICTS eZONING DISTRICTS ■ ELIMINATE ■OPEN SPACE �q I ■ENTITLEMENT CHANGES CONTRADICTORY ■CODE FAMILARIZATION ■MELANIE FALLON- PROVISIONS oHOW DO WE GET THIS ADOPTED? I i ZONING AND N SURD VISION CONTENTS NCE HOW THE ZONING ® zoNING PROVISIONS AND SUBDIVISION ® ZONING IVIe4P � ORDINANCE WORKS ■ SUBDIVISION i PROVISIONS i I i i THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE IS THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE ■ REASONABLE IS REQUIRED TO DE ■ FLEXILE CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN ■ IMPLEMENTS THE GENERAL PLAN ® IS MORE SPECIFIC THAN %. THE GENERAL PLAN i THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE ® STREAMLINES THE REVIEW PROCESS j MAJOR CHANGES ■ ALLOWS FLEXIBILITY MAJOR CHANGES MAJOR CHANGES - PROCESS ■ PROCESSING OF ■ MANY USES HAVE LEVEL OF APPLICATIONS REVIEW CHANGED FROM PLANNING COMMISSION TO ■ DEVELOPMENT ZONING ADMINISTRATOR STANDARDS ■ ZONING MAP ■ SEVERAL USES HAVE NO DISCRETIONARY REVIEW ■ SUBDIVISIONS MAJOR CHANGES - ZONING MAP ZONING MAP ® NAME CHANGE FOR ® ONE ZONING MAP I ZONING DISTRICTS LIEU OF 40 SECTIONAL DISTRICT MAPS ® CONSOLIDATION OF ZONING DISTRICTS ® NEW ZONING DISTRICTS i MAJOR CHANGES - MAJOR CHANGES - SUBDIVISIONS DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ® TENTATIVE MAP ® DENSITY/INTENSITY APPROVAL j ® PARCEL MAP APPROVAL ® DESIGN STANDARDS NEW STANDARDS REGARDING ! ® OPEN SPACE IMPROVEMENTS TO PROPERTY 1 - BASIS FOR DENSITY DENSITY/INTENSITY CALCULATIONS ® DENSITY BASED ON NET CURRENT CODE PROPOSED (multiple methods to CODE LOT AREA (AFTER calculate density) DEDICATION' e 1 UNIT PER LOT s NET LOT AREA *NET LOT AREA ONLY ® FLOOR AREA RATIO ®GROSS LOT ESTABLISHED FOR AREA v ADJUSTED LOT f COMMERCIAL AND AREA INDUSTRIAL e LOT WIDTH & AREA i ! DESIGN STANDARDS ZONING DISTRICTS CURRENT PROPOSED ® UPPER STORY ■ R1 ■RL residential low SETBACKS j ■R2 ■ RM res.medium ® BUILDING WALL OFFSETS ■ R3 ■RMH res. med high ® ARCHITECTURAL ■ R4 ■ RH res. high PROJECTIONS ■ MH ■RMH res.mobile ® COURTS IN LIEU OF OPEN SPACE PROPOSED � I i ' I CURRENT PROPOSED CURRENT ■ OP ■ CO comm.office ® M1-A ® IL ind. light ■ 11 ® CG comm.general ■ M1 & M2 IG ind. general ® ® C2 RA, ROS, S1 ■ OS open space , CC, WR, ■ C'4' ® CV comm.visitor CF-R ■VSC ■ PS public space ■ CF-E CF-C o e S P specific plan I� OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICTS OPEN SPACE CURRENT PROPOSEDRESIDENTIA-E CURRENT, ', PROP SEDI�� ■OIL ■ INTERIM STUD ■FLOODPLAIN ■ PLANNED SFD-VARIES 900-1,200 sq.%l SETBACKS SITE COVERAGE "- ■COASTAL BLOCK HIGH RISE DEVELOPMEN APT'S 25%OF FLOOR' sETeACKs AREA WCOMMON COURTS,SITE ■ MOBILEHOME ® NEIGHBORHO AREA COVERAGE CONSERVATIO j CONDOS- VARIES SAME AS ABOVE 400-1200 sq.ft./UNIT 2500.10,000 sq.ft.t' REC.AREA I i ! i i j ENTITLEMENT CHANGES ENTITLEMENT CHANGES cont. USE CURRENT NEW REQUIRED 10+APARTMENT ZA PC . AUTO USES11T_ ZA NONE UNITS ! INDUSTRIAL REQUIRED: 5-9 CONDO UNITS PC ZA ALL;UHUL PC ZA BEVERAGE DAY CARE IN RES. PC ZA i SALES.IN ZONES COMMERCIAL ZONING AND SUBDIVISION RECOMMENDED ACTION ORDINANCE I #1 DIVIDE ZONING & SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE WHERE DO WE GO '- INTO MANAGEABLE ! FROM HERE? i PORTIONS AND SCHEDULE PUBLIC HEARING AS FOLLOWS: ! I PUBLIC HEARING SERIES PUBLIC HEARING SERIES cont. ■JUNE 6 -TITLE 20, General Provisions, and j ■AUGUST 1 -TITLE 23, Provisions Applying TITLE 24, Administration in All or Several Districts (Supplemental Site ■JUNE 20 -TITLE 25, Subdivisions, and TITLE Standards, Mobilehome Park Conversions, 22, Overlay Districts Condominium Conversions, ■JULY 5 -TITLE 21, Base Districts Nonconforming) (Residential, Commercial and Industrial) ! ■AUGUST 15-TITLE 23, PROVISIONS ■JULY 18 -TITLE 21, Base Districts (Open APPLYING IN ALL OR SEVERAL DISTRICTS Space, Public-Semipublic, Specific Plan) (Parking and Loading, Landscape Improvements, Signs) i ■AUGUST 15-ZONE CHANGE INTRODUCTION ■SEPTEMBER 6 -ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ADOPTION AND ZONE CHANGE ADOPTION i I i I I BASIS FOR DENSITY CALCULATIONS CURRENT CODE PROPOSED (multiple methods to CO calculate density) 1 UNIT PER LOT NET LOT AREA * NET LOT AREA ONLY o GROSS LOT AREA ® ADJUSTED- LOT AREA e LOT WIDTH & AREA I i i DESIGN STANDARDS im UPPER STORY SETBACKS BUILDING WALL OFFSETS ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTIONS COURTS IN LI EU OF OPEN i SPACE - I i � I I i i ZONING DISTRICTS �� ® RL residential low R2 RIVI res. medium R3 ® RMI-H res. med high ® R4 ® RH res. high ® M H - ® RM H res. mobile ,I I CURRENT PR®POSE® OP ® CO comm. office ® Cl ® C G comm. genera i ® C2 C4 ® CV comm. visitor ® VSC i I ,I -- - - R® P�►_ ®S. S`� . ® �� open space I� C ENS mM I -A L ind. light 2 IG ind. general 1N OS ®pen space 9 ROS, , CC9 R, C ® CC F®E, CF® PS public space P specific plan i 1 OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICTS CURRENTPR SE ®IL INTERIMSTUD L L, IN mPLANNED COASTAL BLOCK ®EVEL P ® HIGH RISE IVIN � ® G ILEHO E ® NEIGH !� CONSERVATIO I�� i OPEN SPACE RESIDENTIAL URRENT PR P E® USE i SFD -VARIES 900 - 1,200 sq.ft. SETBACKS, SITE COVERAGE APTS 25% OF FLOOR SETBACKS, AREA WCOMMON' COURTS, SITE AREA COVERAGE j CONDOS VARIES SAME AS ABOVE 400-1200 sq.ft. l UNIT j 2500-19,000 sq.ft: t. - REC. AREA i • . i I i ENTITLEMENT CHANGES i U E URREN 10+M APARTIVIENT ZA PC UNITS, 5-9 CONDO UNITS, PC ZA. - ®AY CARE IN RES. PC ZA i ZONES i �I ENTITLEMENT CHANGES Cont. i USE CURRENT NEW INDUSTRIAL ZA NO i REQUIRED AUTO USES. IN ZA NONE INDUSTRIAL REQUIRED COHOL _ PC ZA BEVERAGE SALES IN COMMERCIAL ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE i WHERE DO WE CEO FROM HERE? I � �i RECOMMENDED ACTION ##1 DIVIDE ZONING SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE I NT ' LIANA SA LE l PORTIONS A H UL PUBLIC HEARING AS PUBLIC HEARING SERIES i ® JUNE 6 - TITLE 20, General Provisions, and TITLE 24, Administration ® JUNE 20 - TITLE 25, Subdivisions, and TITLE 22, Overlay Districts ® JULY 5 - TITLE 21, Ease Districts (Residential, Commercial and Industrial) ® JULY 16 - TITLE 21, Ease Districts (Open Space, Public-Semipublic, Specific Plan) 'i IES cont. PUBLIC HEARING R- E ® AUGUST 1 - TITLE 3, Provisions Applying in All or Several D stricts (Supplemental Site Standards, Mobile ome Park onversions, i Condominium Co version , Nonconforming) i ® AUGUST 15 - TITL 2 PROVISIONS APPLYING IN ALL SEVERAL DISTRICTS (Parking and Lo in , Landscape Improvements igns ® AUGUST 15 ONE C ANGE INTRODU ION ® SEPTE ER 6 - ZONING ND SUBDIVISION ADOP ON AND ZONE CH GE ADOPTION RECOMMENDATION continued ' #2 i PRIOR TO EACH CITY COUNCIL MEETING, CONDUCT A STUDY SESSION TO GO THROUGH THE DETAILS OF THE EVENING'S MATERIALS I,I RECOMMENDATION continued 3 TAKE ACTION ON EACH SECTION PRESENTED 4 ADOPTION AT CONCLUSION i i I i i i I 1RECOMMENDATION -continue IF NEEDED, CONSIDER � COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION SUBCOMMITTEE t � LL � PROOF OF PUBLICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA) _ S S. Planned, Block Develop- -- PUBLIC NOTICE merit ALL INTERESTED PER SONS are invited to attend NOTICE OF I High-Rise said hearing and express County of Orange ) PUBLIC HEARING Mobilehome opinions or submit to the CODE AMENDMENT July 5,1994 City Clerk,written evidence NO.91.10 TITLE 21:Base Districts for or against the applica- ENVIRONMENTAL Residential _ tion as outlined above. If Commercial you challen a the City am a Citizen of the United States and a ASSESSMENT NO. Industrial 91.32 PROPOSED Jul 18,1994 you may action,d court, Y you may be limited to rais- resident of the County aforesaid; I am ZONING AND TITLE 21:Continued in those issues you �`, SUBDIVISION Open Space g only or someone else.raised at over the age of eighteen ears and not a ORDINANCE Public/Semi-Public the public hearing de- g g / NOTICE IS HEREBY Specific Plan scribed in this notice, or in party to or interested in the below GIVEN that the Huntington August 1,Provisions a written correspondence Beach City Council will TITLE 23:,Provisions Ap- delivered to the City at, or hold a public hearing in the plicant in All or Several Dis- prior to,the public hearing., entitled matter. I am a principal clerk of Council Chambers at the tricts If there are any further Huntington Beach Civic Site Standards questions please call the H U NT I N GTO N BEACH INDEPENDENT, a Center; 2000 Main Street, Mobilehome Park Conver- Susan Pierce, Associate Huntington Beach, Califor- sions Planner,a4 536-5271. nia, on the date and at the Residential Condominium I Connie Brockway, newspaper of general circulation, printed _ _ _ time indicated below to re- Conversions and published in the City of Huntington calve and consider the Non Conforming Uses Clty Clerk, City of Hun- statements of.all persons and Structures tington Beach, 2000 Beach, County of Orange State of who wish to be heard rela- August 15,1994 Maln Street, Hun- i tive to the application de TITLE 23:Continued tington Beach, CA Parkin Loading scribed below. g g California, and that attached Notice Is a The City of Huntington Landscape Improvements 5227. 2 7. (714) 536- Beach City Council has ,Signs 5227.. true and complete copy as was printed scheduled a series of pub- APPLICATION NUMBER: Published Huntington lic hearings to facilitate the: CODE AMENDMENT NO. Beach-Fountain Valley In- andpublished in the Huntington Beach public review of the Pro-, 91-10/ ENVIRONMENTAL dependent June 9,1994. p posed Zoning And Subdivi ASSESSMENT NO.91-32. 062684 sion Ordinance. The dates', APPLICANT: Cityof Hun- -- — t and Fountain Valley issues of said i� and subject matter for each tington Beach, Department newspaper to wit the issue(s) of: I m Community Develop- meeting are as, listed merit. below. The City Council REQUEST: Repeal exist- imay continue the public ing Huntington Beach Ordi- �. (hearing series should the Hance Code (Division 9), subject matter require ad- and establish a new zoning ditional time. and subdivision ordinance June 6,1994 for inclusion in the. Hun- TITLE 20: General Provk tington Beach Municipal sions Code. The new ordinance June 9, 1994 Title, Components, and1 updates, the zoning and Purpose Isubdivision provisions by Organization, Applicabil-; incorporating current plan- ity,and Interpretation ning principles and plan- befinitions ? ning requirements of state Use Classifications. 4 law, deleting duplications. I declare, under penalty of perjury, that TITLE 24:Administration : and conflicts, and stream- Zoning Permits 'I liningg review processing the foregoing is true and correct. Conditional Use Permits ENVIRONMENTAL STA- and Variances; Wavier oft TUS: Covered by Environ- Development Standards , mental Assessment No.91- Design.Review 32. Coastal Development Per, COASTAL STATUS: An mit amendment to t the Hun. Executed on June 9 I gg 4 Development Agreements tington Beach Local Amendments . 1 Coastal Program Imple- at Costa Mesa, California. Notices, Hearings, Find- menting Ordinances will be ings, Decisions and Ap-, filed with the California; peals Coastal Commission fol-i Enfor ent lowing adoption by the City June 20,1994? I Council. TITL n7,"ions ON.FILE: A copy of the) General Provisions . proposed request is on,file Tentative Maps in the Community Develop-' Vesting Tentative Maps ment Department, 2000� ff Final Maps and Parcel Main Street, Huntington] Maps r Beach, California 92648,E Dedications and Reserve-, for inspection by the pub-( u/ itionslic. A copy of the.staff re- Improvements port will be;available to In- SI nature Reversions to Acreage terested parties in the City g Mergers Clerk's office after June 3J Enforcement 1994 TITLE 22:Overlay District Oil Production Coastal Zone Floodplain Interim Study. Neighborhood Conserva tion _ -- Al. L 74 ale�aenolenYL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING rhn CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 91-32 PROPOSED ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers at the Huntington Beach Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. The City of Huntington Beach City Council has scheduled a series of public hearings to facilitate the public review of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. The dates and subject matter for each meeting are as listed below. The City Council may continue the public hearing series should the subject matter require additional time. June 6, 1994 TITLE 20: General Provisions ® Title, Components, and Purpose e Organization, Applicability, and Interpretation • Definitions • Use Classifications TITLE 24: Administration • Zoning Permits • Conditional Use Permits and Variances; Waiver of Development Standards O Design Review ® Coastal Development Permit ® Development Agreements Amendments Notices, Hearings, Findings, Decisions and Appeals • Enforcement June 20, 1994 TITLE 25: Subdivisions General Provisions ® Tentative Maps • Vesting Tentative Maps • Final Maps and Parcel Maps • Dedications and Reservations • Improvements i Reversions to Acreage • Mergers 0 Enforcement NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING (Continued) June 20, 1994 TITLE 22: Overlay District (continued) • Oil Production • Coastal Zone • Floodplain • Interim Study • Neighborhood Conservation • Planned Block Development • High-Rise • Mobilehome July 5, 1994 TITLE 21: Base Districts • Residential • Commercial • Industrial July 18, 1994 TITLE 21: Continued • Open Space • Public/Semi-Public. • Specific Plan August 1, 1994 TITLE 23: Provisions Applicant in All or Several Districts • Site Standards • Mobilehome Park Conversions • Residential Condominium Conversions • Non Conforming Uses and Structures August 15, 1994 TITLE 23: Continued • Parking and Loading • Landscape Improvements • Signs APPLICATION NUMBER: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10/ ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 91-32 APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach, Department of Community Development REQUEST: Repeal existing Huntington Beach Ordinance Code (Division 9) and establish a new zoning and subdivision ordinance for inclusion in the Huntington Beach Municipal Code. The new ordinance updates the zoning and subdivision provisions by incorporating current planning principles and spIp0306 2 planning requirements of state law, deleting duplications and conflicts, and streamlining review processing. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Covered by Environmental Assessment No. 91-32. COASTAL STATUS: An amendment to the Huntington Beach Local Coastal Program Implementing Ordinances will be filed with the California Coastal Commission following adoption by the City Council. ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the Community Development Department, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties in the City Clerk's office after June 3, 1994. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit to the City Clerk, written evidence for or against the application as outlined above. If you challenge the City Council's action in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to, the public hearing. If there are any further questions please call Susan Pierce, Associate Planner, at 536-5271. Connie Brockway City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 (714) 536-5227 sp1p0306 3 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STREET/P.O. BOX 190 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92648 Fax Number (714) 374-1557 ***PLEASE DELIVER THE FOLLOWING MATERIAL AS SOON AS POSSIBLE*y 17,),, ** TO: FAX NO. Gd � PHONE NO. 40 FROM: NUMBER OF PAGES (INCLUDING COVER PAGE) DATE SENT: ---G TIME SENT: 4v� . OPERATOR'S NAME PLEASE NOTIFY OPERATOR MMEDIATELIF NOT RECEIVED PROPERLY (714) 536-5227 * * * * * * * COMMENTS: CHARGE FOR THIS MATERIAL: PLEASE REMIT TO THE ADDRESS ABOVE PROOF OF PUBLICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA) _ 1 S S• PUBLIC NOTICE Coastal Zone COASTAL STATUS: An 'l Flood lain amendment ,to the. Hun- p tington Beach Local NOTICE OF Interim Study 'Coastal Program imple- County of Orange ) PUBLIC HEARING II Neighborhood Conserve. menting Ordinances will be ,CODE AMENDMENT ition filed with the California NO.91.10 Planned Block Develop- Coastal Commission fol. ENVIRONMENTAL ment 'lowing adoption by the City I am a Citizen Of the United States and a High-Rise Council. ASSESSMENT NO. Mobilehome ON FILE: A co of the resident of the County aforesaid; I am 91.32 PROPOSED July 5,1994 proposed request on file ZONING AND TITLE 21:Base Districts , ,n the Community Develop- over the age Of ei SUBDIVISION Residential Department, 2000 g Main hteen years, and not a ORDINANCE Commercial M party to or interested in the below NOTICE IS HEREBY ; Indust4al Main street, Huntington GIVEN that.the Huntington Jul 18,1994 1r Beach, California 92648, 9 y for inspection by the pub- entitled matter. I am a principal clerk Of Beach City Council will TITLE 29:Continued' Ala A copy of the staff re hold a public hearing in the Open Space port will be available to in-' Council Chambers at the j Public/gern[-Public terested parties in the City the HUNTINGTON BEACH INDEPENDENT, a Huntington Beach Civic Specific Plan Clerk's office after June 3, i Center, 2000 Main Street, ' August 1,1994 1994. newspaper of general circulation, printed Huntington Beach, Califor- TITLE 23: Provisions Ap- ALL INTERESTED PER- nia,on the date and at the plicant in All or Several Dis• SONS are invited to attend and published in the City of Huntington time indicated below to re- tricts said hearing and express ceive and consider the ; Site Standards opinions or submit to the Beach COUn of Oran e State Of f statements of all persons Mobilehome Park Conver- City Clerk,written evidence ty g who wish to be heard rela. lions for or against the applica- tive to the application de- Residential Condominium tion as outlined above, if California, and that attached Notice is a scribed below. , Conversions you challenge the City true and complete copy as was printed The city of Huntington Non Conforming Uses Council's action in court, Beach City Council has and Structures you may be limited to rail- scheduled a series of pub- August 15,1994 ing only those issues you and published in the Huntington Beach lic hearings to facilitate the TITLE 23:Continued or someone else raised at public .review of the Pro- Parking Loading the public hearing de. and Fountain Valley issues of said posed Zoning And Subdivi Landscape Improvements scribed in this.notice,or in sion Ordinance. The dates Signs a written correspondence to wit the issue(s) of: and subject matter for each APPLICATION NUMBER:; delivered to the City at, or newspaper meeting are -as listed CODE AMENDMENT NO. prior to,the public hearing. below. The City Council 91.10/ ENVIRONMENTAL! If there are any further may continue the public ASSESSMENT NO.91-32. , questions please call r hearing.series-should the. APPLICANT: City of Hun Susan 'Pierce, Associate subject matter require ad- tington Beach, Department;I Planner,at 536-5271. ditional time. of Community Develop June 6, 1994 ment. Connie Brockway, TITLE 20: General Provi- REQUEST: Repeal exist City Clerk, City of Hun. ' sions Ing Huntington Beach Ord[ tington Beach, 2000 July 9, 1994 Title, 'Components, and nance Code (Division 9)' Main Street, Hun. Purpose and establish a new zoning, tington Beach, CA Organization, Applicabil- and subdivision'ordinance 92648. (714) 536 ity,and Interpretation for inclusion in the Hun- 5227, Definitions tington Beach Municipall Published Huntingtor Cla Beach-Fountain Valle ssifications Code. The new ordinance I declare under penalty of perjury, that TITLE uses 4:Administration up Use dates the zoning and Zoning Permits subdivision provisions by dependent JuiY Y In 9,1994. the foreQoina is true and correct. Conditional Use Permits incorporating current plan- 1 071s0T b and Variances; Wavier of ning ,principles and plan- Development Standards ning requirements of state Design Review law, deleting duplications ° Coastal Development Per. and conflicts, and stream- mit lining review processing Executed on July 9 1991 Development Agreements TENVIRONM NA SS A- i Amendments by Env[r Notices, Hearings,. Find- mental Assessment No.91- at Costa Mesa, California. ings, Decisions and Ap-32._— - —~ peals Enforcement June 20,1994 TITLE 25:Subdivisions General Provisions Tentative'Maps Vesting Tentative Maps Final Maps and Parcel Maps Dedications and Reserva- tions Improvements Signature Reversions to Acreage Mergers Enforcement TITLE 22:Oveilay.Disti[ct Oil Production , a PROOF OF PUBLICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA) SS. ----- - PUBLIC'NOTICE I Coastal Zone COASTAL STATUS: An County of Orange ) FloodpIn I amendment to the Hun NOTICE OF I Interim Study i tingtori Beach Local PUBLIC HEARING Neighborhood Conserva- :Coastal Program Imple AMENDMENT tion 'menting Ordinances will be CODE AM � Planned Block Develop-1 'filed with the California NO. END I am a Citizen of the United States and a on fol- ENVIRONMENTAL High-Rise Mont IowingadoptonCoastal ibyi the City ASSESSMENT NO. Mobilehome Council. resident Of the County aforesaid; I am 91.32PROPOSED July5,1994 ' ON FILE: A copy of the over the age of eighteen years, and not a ZONING AND TITLE i se,Districts Me'proposed request is on e SUBDIVISION 'Residential m the Community Develop- ORDINANCE Commercial. 'ment .Department, 2000 part`' to Or interested In the below NOTICE IS HEREBY Ilndustri'C 'Main Street, Huntington GIVEN that the Huntington .duly 18,1KkI - 'Beach, California, 92648, entitled matter. I am a principal clerk o Beach City Council will jTIp�a I!Continuj6d 'fo As Inspection o by the p hold a pubttic hearing In'the p ,port will be available to in- ff re th e H U NT I N GTO N BEACH INDEPENDENT, a Council Chambers at the I Pubuc/Semi-Public Huntington Beach Civic .Specific Plan terested parties in the City August 1,1994 Clerk's office after June 3, newspaper of general circulation, printed HuntingtonOBeach,n.Caitoi--jTITLE 23: Provisions Ap- 1994. nia;on the date and at4he ,p icant in All or Several Dis- ALL INTERESTED PER- and published in the City of Huntington tame;indicated below to re- tricts SONS are invited to attend ceive and consider the'� Site Standards said hearing and express Beach, County of Orange, State Of statements of all persons Mobilehome Park Conver- opinions or submit to the who wish to'be heard vela-°sions City Clerk,written evidence California, and that attached Notice IS a five to the application'do,- Residential Condominium for or against the applica. scribed below. Conversions tion as outlined above. 1'1 true and complete Copy as was printed The City of Huntington'.Non Conforming Uses you challenge the City Beach City Council has I and Structures Council's' 'action in court and published in .the • Huntington Beach scheduled a series ofpub_ August 15,1994 you may be limited to rais ;lic hearings to facilitate the TITLE23-Continued ing only those issues yot public review of the Pro-I Parking Loading or someone else raised a and Fountain- Valley issues of said. osed Zoning.And Subdivl-'l Landscape improvements the public hearing de sion Ordinance. The dates Signs scribed in this notice, or it newspaper to wit the issue(s) of: and subject matter for each CODE AMENDMENT NUMBER: a writtenred coresponde City no meeting are as listed 91-10/ ENVIRONMENTAL prior to,the public hearing below. The City Council) o may continue-the public ASSESSMENT NO.91-32. �If there are any furthe I.hearing series should the APPLICANT: City of Hun- questions please cal I subject matter require ad-'tington Beach, Department Susan Pierce, Associat, ditional time. of Community Develop• Planner,at 536.5271. June 6,,1994 Mont. Connie Brockway TITLE 20, General Provi- REQUEST: Repeal exist- City Clerk, City of Hun sions ing Huntington Beach Ordi• tington Beach, 2001 July 9, 1994 Title, Components, and nance Code (Division 9) 1, and establish a new zoning M'a I n Street, H u n Purpose } Organization, Applicabil- and subdivision ordinance tington Beach, i ;ity,and interpretation for inclusion in the Hun- 92648. (714) 539 Definitions tington Beach Municipal 5227- Code: The new ordinance Published Huntingto declare, under penalty of perjury, that TUse ITLE updates the.zonin and TITLE 24:Administration � 9 Beach-Fountain Valley h Zoning Permits subdivision provisions by — ---„ the foregoing is true and correct. Incor oratin current Ian- _. 'the e ,o re g b Conditional Use Permits P 9 P y and Variances- Wavier of�!n,ing principles and plan.. Development Standards ng requirements of state Design Review- law, deleting duplications Coastal Development Per-:lining ,conflicts, and stream- Executed on Jul 9 n dining review processing y 1 J Development Agreements ENVIRONMENTAL STA- Amendments ;TUS: Covered by Environ- at Costa Mesa, California. Notices, Hearings, Find- mental Assessment No.91- ings, Decisions and Ap- peals Enforcement June 20,1994. TITLE 25:Subdivisions General Provisions -� Tentative Maps :";Vesting Tentative Maps •Final Maps and Parcel, Maps Dedications and Reserva- �G�(� lions Ii I Improvements I Signature, I Reversions to Acreage Mergers 1 Enforcement TITLE 22:.Overlay District I Oil Production 4 --y�4fC;OFOT--rICf Gr10 J' F (_r'J � NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10 /� ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 91-32 PROPOSED ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public hearing 7/ in,the Council Chambers at the Huntington Beach Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. The City of Huntington Beach City Council has scheduled a series of public hearings to facilitate the public review of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. The dates and subject matter for each meeting are as listed below. The City Council may continue the public hearing series should the subject matter require additional time. June 6, 1994 TITLE 20: General Provisions ® Title, Components, and Purpose ® Organization, Applicability, and Interpretation ® Definitions ® Use Classifications TITLE 24: Administration ® Zoning Permits ® Conditional Use Permits and Variances; Waiver of Development Standards ® Design Review ® Coastal Development Permit ® Development Agreements ® Amendments ® Notices, Hearings, Findings, Decisions and Appeals ® Enforcement June 20, 1994 /TITLE 25: Subdivisions ® General Provisions ® Tentative Maps Vesting Tentative Maps o Final Maps and Parcel Maps ® Dedications and Reservations ® Improvements ® Reversions to Acreage ® Mergers 0 Enforcement NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING - (Continued) June 20, 1994 TITLE 22: Overlay District (continued) • Oil Production • Coastal Zone • Floodplain • Interim Study •...... ...Neighborhood Conservation ® Planned Block Development • High-Rise • Mobilehome July 5, 1994 TITLE 21: Base Districts • Residential • Commercial -- - —` ® Industrial a July 18, 1994 TITLE 21: Continued • Open Space Public/Semi-Public Specific Plan August 1, 1994 TITLE 23: Provisions Applicant in All or Several Districts • Site Standards • Mobilehome Park Conversions • Residential Condominium Conversions • Non Conforming Uses and Structures August 15, 1994 TITLE 23: Continued • Parking and Loading • Landscape Improvements • Signs APPLICATION NUMBER: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10/ ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 91-32 APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach, Department of Community Development REQUEST: Repeal existing Huntington Beach Ordinance Code (Division 9) and establish a new zoning and subdivision ordinance for inclusion in the Huntington Beach Municipal Code. The new ordinance updates the zoning and subdivision provisions by incorporating current planning principles and spIp0306 2 - planning requirements of state law, deleting duplications and conflicts, and streamlining review processing. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Covered by Environmental Assessment No. 91-32. COASTAL STATUS: An amendment to the Huntington Beach Local Coastal Program Implementing Ordinances will be filed with the California Coastal Commission following adoption by the City Council. ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the Community Development Department, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties in the City Clerk's office after June 3, 1994. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit to the City Clerk, written evidence for or against the application as outlined above. If you challenge the City Council's action in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to, the public hearing. If there are any further questions please call Susan Pierce, Associate Planner, at 536-5271. Connie Brockway City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 (714) 536-5227 sp1p0306 3 PROOF OF PUBLICATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA) S S° PUBLIC NOTICE -Dedications,and Reserva-County of Orange ) NOTICE OF lions ON FILE: A copy of the Improvements propesed,request is on file PUBLIC HEARING Reversions to Acreage m the Community Develop- CODE AMENDMENT Mergers ment. Department, 2000 N0.91.10 Enforcement Main Streeallt, Huntington I am a Citizen of the United States and a ENVIRONMENTAL OlProduonrlayDistrict oeanspectionobyathe2pub- ASSESSMENT NO. Coastal Zone lic. A copy of the staff re- resident of the County aforesaid; am 91-32 PROPOSED Floodplain port will be available to in- ZONING AND. Interim Study terested parties in the City over the age of eighteen years, and not a SUBDIVISION Neighborhood Conserva- Clerk's office after June 3, ORDINANCE tion 1994. PER- partyto or interested in the below NOTICE IS HE Planned Block Develop- ALL INTERESTED PER- (' GIVEN that the Huntington :ment SONS are invited to attend Beach Cit council. a°r!':4 }high-Rise said.hearing and express entitled matter. I am a principal clerk o hold a public hearing in the Mobilehome opinons or submit to the the HUNTINGTON BEACH INDEPENDENT a — July5,eDi for orerk,ns writttheen evidenceli - Council Chambers at the I TITLE'21:Base Districts for or against the applica- If newspaper of general circulation printed Huntington Beach Civic) Residential lion as outlined above. y i Center, 2000 Main,Stre2t,� � Commercial you challenge the City Huntington Beach, Califor- Industrial Council's action in court, and published in the City of Huntington nia,on the date and at the'I July 18,1994 You may be limited to rais- time indicated below to re TITLE 21:Continued ing only those issues you Beach, County of Orange, State of I ceive and consider then, open Space --- statements of ail'persons; public/Semi-Public or someone else raised at who wish to be heard rela Sp ecific Plan the public hearing de- California, and that attached Notice is a p g five to the application de-' August 1,1994 scribed in this notice, or in true and complete copy as W3S printed scribed below. TITLE 23: Provisions Ap-i a written correspondence The City of Huntington', plicant in All or Several Dis- (delivered to the City at, or and published in the Huntington Beach Beach City Council hastpub -il riite priorer the public hearing. scheduled a series of pub-i� Site Standards .If there are any further tic hearings to facilitate the'' Mobilehome Park Conver- questions please .call and Fountain Valley Issues of said public review of the Pro sions Susan Pierce, Associate posed Zoning And Subdtvi-'' Residential Condominium Planner,at 536-5271. newspaper to wit the issue(s) of: sion Ordinance. The dates Conversions Connie Brockway, and subject matter for each Non Conforming Uses City Clerk, City of Hun. meeting are as listed and Structures tington Beach, 2000 below. The City Council August 15,.1994 Main Street 'Hun- may continue the public TITLE 23:Continued, hearing series should the Parking Loading" tington Beach, CA subject matter require ad- Landscape Improvements 92648. (714) 536. ditional time. Signs 5221., June 16, 1994 June 6,1994 APPLICATION,,NUMBER:. Published Huntington TITLE 20: General Provi- CODE AMENDMENT NO. Beach-Fountain Valley In- sions 91-10/ ENVIRONMENTAL dependent June 16,1994. Title, Components, and ASSESSMENT NO,91-32. p Purpose APPLICANT: City of Hun- 063.689 Organization, Applicabil• tington Beach, Department ity,and Interpretation of Community Develop- declare, under penalty of perjury that Definitions ment. , Use Classifications REQUEST: Repeal exist- TITLE 24:Administration ing Huntington Beach Ordi- the foregoing is true and correct. Zoning Permits nance Code (Division 9) Conditional Use Permits and establish a new zoning, and Variances; Wavier of and subdivision ordinance; Development Standards for inclusion in the Hun- Design Review tington Beach Municipal' Coastal Development Per. Code. The hew ordinance) Executed on June 16 , 199 4 mit updates the zoning and; Development Agreements subdivision provisions by[ at Costa Mesa, California. Amendments incorporating current plan Notices, Hearings, Find- ning principles and plan ings, Decisions and•AP- ning requirements of states peals law, deleting duplications) Enforcement and conflicts, and stream June 20,1994 lining review processingg. TITLE 25:Subdivisions ENVIRONMENTAL processing Provisions TUS: Covered by Environ-, Tentative Maps mental Assessment No.91- / Vesting Tentative Maps 32, Final Maps and Parcel COASTAL' STATUS: An )� ✓ ��" Maps amendment tothe Hun- tington Beach ch Local Coastal Program Im e- Signature menting Ordinances will be filed with the California Coastal Commission fol- lowing adoption by the City Council.�_— � ,07a4OFE171 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 91-32 PROPOSED ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers at the Huntington Beach Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. The City of Huntington Beach City Council has scheduled a series of public hearings to facilitate the public review of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. The dates and subject matter for each meeting are as listed below. The City Council may continue the public hearing series should the subject matter require additional time. June 6, 1994 TITLE 20: General Provisions ® Title, Components, and Purpose ® Organization, Applicability, and Interpretation ® Definitions ® Use Classifications TITLE 24: Administration • Zoning Permits ® Conditional Use Permits and Variances; Waiver of Development Standards • Design Review ® Coastal Development Permit ® Development Agreements ® Amendments s Notices, Hearings, Findings, Decisions and Appeals ® Enforcement June 20, 1994 TITLE 25: Subdivisions ® General Provisions 0 Tentative Maps ® Vesting Tentative Maps ® Final Maps and Parcel Maps ® Dedications and Reservations ® Improvements Reversions to Acreage ® Mergers ® Enforcement NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING - (Continued) June 20, 1994 TITLE 22: Overlay District (continued) • Oil Production ® Coastal Zone • Floodplain • Interim Study •...... _ .Neighborhood Conservation • Planned Block Development • High-Rise • Mobilehome July 5, 1994 TITLE 21: Base Districts • Residential • Commercial • Industrial July 18, 1994 TITLE 21: Continued • Open Space • Public/Semi-Public • Specific Plan August 1, 1994 TITLE 23: Provisions Applicant in All or Several Districts • Site Standards • Mobilehome Park Conversions • Residential Condominium Conversions • Non Conforming Uses and Structures August 15, 1994 TITLE 23: Continued • Parking and Loading • Landscape Improvements • Signs APPLICATION NUMBER: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10/ ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 91-32 APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach, Department of Community Development REQUEST: Repeal existing Huntington Beach Ordinance Code(Division 9) and establish a new zoning and subdivision ordinance for inclusion in the Huntington Beach Municipal Code. The new ordinance updates the zoning and subdivision provisions by incorporating current planning principles and sp1p0306 2 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 91-32 PROPOSED ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers at the Huntington Beach Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. The City of Huntington Beach City Council has scheduled a series of public hearings to facilitate the public review of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. The dates and subject matter for each meeting are as listed below. The City Council may continue the public hearing series should the subject matter require additional time. June 6, 1994 TITLE 20: General Provisions • Title, Components, and Purpose • Organization, Applicability, and Interpretation Definitions Use Classifications TITLE 24: Administration Zoning Permits Conditional Use Permits and Variances; Waiver of Development Standards Design Review Coastal Development Permit • Development Agreements Amendments Notices, Hearings, Findings, Decisions and Appeals Enforcement June 20, 1994 /TITLE 25: Subdivisions 6 General Provisions Tentative Maps 6 Vesting Tentative Maps Final Maps and Parcel Maps • Dedications and Reservations Improvements • Reversions to Acreage • Mergers Enforcement Y planning requirements of state law, deleting duplications and conflicts, and streamlining review processing. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Covered by Environmental Assessment No. 91-32. COASTAL STATUS: An amendment to the Huntington Beach Local Coastal Program Implementing Ordinances will be filed with the California Coastal Commission following adoption by the City Council. ' ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the Community Development Department, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties in the City Clerk's office after June 3, 1994. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit to the City Clerk, written evidence for or against the application as outlined above. If you challenge the City Council's action in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to, the public hearing. If there are any further questions please call Susan Pierce, Associate Planner, at 536-5271. Connie Brockway City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 (714) 536-5227 sp1p0306 3 /1L� 1412�u:s Jt t14 rYt�t i FU �M1 MIT?; � 1 ,.Code Aruen�ltneln#"Ate 9'�10:: �;�ne�ronimental Assessment , "Prolrosea Zoning and Sutiw, dryisian OCdinance ' Flo#rce is heralry Gruen#fat the Hunfington Bea�h,Grty; CRN ne will hnld a a .0 . <:hearing, Chambem t#Ire Fluntrngtc Beath Civl.e Cetr,:ZUO Main �Streetr Hun�rng#©n neach,(afrfomla,Mtn the date and at the t,rtiind��ated I<elnwl#a:reeerue and sortslder ', tt a sta#ernen#s of tl puraans `wha unsh:#©�e heard�1a#we�:' to#Ite applrcatron�lescrrbed helgru -' a the City of k�etlttngton He�Gft Grty Caun'IE has sifiedulad a sent �t pu trc bearings ta,taci rtate the pYUJI lewiew ai the n �,pr�Pnsed;;Zkntng and SPbdl�rsain. '= F}t�rnan�e,�tte rJates`aitd-subt�t matfehtdr ;each 1Peehtlg�e as ttste�hetn�.The;t*tty, Gf3kt(tett�Rawconttittf�the�luhjrG h��flrfl , serlessfuxtid#�esu6}et�ma#�rre�? adai-,u §Oup ,1UBB 6y'Np �t��f1t�F41t1$t0E13� a + ts➢ttl(lI1Fi211ts ati(tCtCf3E35a xif�tigetilYdttPtt,�p(1�1[�16ltltSf t, +xPtlll$IPI1S r, °fist ClisttieatrPrk T ¢�lrzntttsfiratrnn� sZCutrng PerntlTS n � r � ,� • 6JtEiktlt3fldtll�t�tttftt3 �2CtenGEXS,, .zx lue ai�eW OPment Staridar�s •tlestgnReurewt �,_ �I?Pasiet[tevstapttletttF�errtrit � '' + }a�rttentA��ynents �Ottetttimetlts tPttees,Heatings nErtPg"s fleeastt7 1 attdAp�teafs •-00,11 mont, k bijb$0'1 ry Fie 25.Subdt+�isIens r, ��etlet�kPra�nstgns �, ®'fentafitiie t�1a�'s = sing Tertwe Maps •l rrtai�vlsa�tPar`c�itr♦Iaps -ism tSed�attans�tctResecuans °lcn}lttntemenfs �`°' ®tt€Ye15(PnStQACC�e sit + el�eTs - �tryrylt���P[(4yyt�N.l6ttti x,zc�.� �tttEt4lti�Natl�R' '- �?�1'l�2€t�ed��kiQCtf tlesfCts�lt�lEl,. - Y O,t�SttjltiiN�� .�� r n S��iD111t11el�Ydt� � x au •Ralph burheod Gnnservabon .i•PCartned8lack�7eve#rtpinartt ��,� �, attCY 5..W�,, zx �F•REstt�rt62i't ����` z,� ' �`,, •tEymmy,Er�rai ����.� � ��fl�"� I ,i#rRlttLLla�n�F nxyf3. j� '9 TiNet R x•Apen Space~ :+�ubltcejrir'PWWrc * ` ; �' •�tecttfcPFan :'t'��23't?rtitinAn>€}s tCApbd�nttla Atf"rir` �evera[Dtstrrcis ��x �h t +Mobi#Ehottk'Park Gonverstarts 'a .f#esrde jai GondommtutnGoraretsia ' ryNonGoramurrRUsesandStroctttre ' August 15:t994` AA F#tle 23s Gor�rnued +Park#ng a Loadurg � .;•Lan a rosrerit�ts dscap,�IP �r , M APOfbatib Mnt Guilt Am rdment Nc 9f SOtENtfrmmentASsessrrntNrr 93 . Rpp#a#;artt~Gtty 6f=Hstnt+m,#to��eacfr Departmettt!of Gommunt�y DeveloprnenC �Rerptest Repeal exashng Huri6rrgton ' ;each Qrd#nanee God" (Dr+rtsturt9j and �Eshbltsha-nevrmn{nga°itdsubd#aisionnrdt� ;,' nance�tnetustat to the.Huntingtu, Beach- , y=Municipa(Gode i#tenew ordinance:upda�s; . z the zenmg end s krdturp�on prausslanshy > Mcorporattng}cuneptylanntng prtne�t#eSactdf atan9%regmrements of state#aw deleurig k dupitcadans and enrtlfies and skea[ithMnq 'areview prac�sstng. E nYkaftenfir's, Q5 tirJYetEd Fri '} fnvironr�enlaf Assessment No�'#�;� ,�Coasta`I Sbtus Ari'y2ndmernteftte :`°; � ;Hifntrngtorr�3each'Luta#Goastai�#oggm°; #mpleirfentittg©r haneesw#tChe h7er#ettdr ,; the Galttdrrti.�.....f omm�sstont©flowtrt� adopttanh}+:theGi4yGpi#pctC On ale_A copyrtfi�t�re proposediequest ' is<on#tte,m ti)E Gpmmumtq Deve[opmert� , Departmeu#,2pQfC fain Street L#ubutgttnt ':9each�alfahtta R2�8 tar i{rspecUoct`by #Ete�pub#tc`A.cap�t ottle,stat(repQr�kd#6e availa#aCe`to tntereste padtos tnrt ,' Glert(sotficeai�c.krne3 ts94 ��': 8KttnIeteatcdf�e€scns�e�nyttedfa al rid mod'tearing aruf,`express opf(llorrsxo.:�:' submit to tte,Gitter s wrItttlat evidenced ; ara�r�ttl�eapp#>caho�a�ootftr�d�ouE� i y©u cC�allertgEthe City GounctfS actin m; court,g8u mad 6e hrfsltEd�t rais�itg on#y-::''. thQsE Issues you ur snmeer��else iatsed at , �pubC�#tearmg describedut this�nt�or - in w`ntfeo correspondence deitvered to the GiCy at or pnoz to a public#reartngK#tthere '. are any;ftther rptesGats Afease�'caif Susan P#b€€�,Assttc�Plarrnerat(liA�5�,6-5271 4"� Corinre�B[ackwap,45htCtek ' �� C�o�HunUngtmr Beach 2tlfl@ P�arn r�; S#reetttuntingtortuBeaeh CA;�264$ (113% Apeh�enf' NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 91-32 PROPOSED ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers at the Huntington Beach Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. The City of Huntington Beach City Council has scheduled a series of public hearings to facilitate the public review of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. The dates and subject matter for each meeting are as listed below. The City Council may continue the public hearing series should the subject matter require additional time. June 6, 1994 TITLE 20: General Provisions • Title, Components, and Purpose • Organization, Applicability, and Interpretation • Definitions • Use Classifications TITLE 24: Administration • Zoning Permits • Conditional Use Permits and Variances; Waiver of Development Standards • Design Review • Coastal Development Permit • Development Agreements • Amendments • Notices, Hearings, Findings, Decisions and Appeals • Enforcement June 20, 1994 /TITLE 25: Subdivisions • General Provisions • Tentative Maps • Vesting Tentative Maps • Final Maps and Parcel Maps • Dedications and Reservations • Improvements • Reversions to Acreage • Mergers ® Enforcement i' NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING (Continued) June 20, 1994 TITLE 22: Overlay District (continued) • Oil Production • Coastal Zone • Floodplain • Interim Study •...... -..Neighborhood Conservation • Planned Block Development • High-Rise • Mobilehome July 5, 1994 TITLE 21: Base Districts • Residential • Commercial • Industrial July 18, 1994 TITLE 21: Continued • Open Space • Public/Semi-Public • Specific Plan August 1, 1994 TITLE 23: Provisions Applicant in All or Several Districts • Site Standards • Mobilehome Park Conversions • Residential Condominium Conversions • Non Conforming Uses and Structures August 15, 1994 TITLE 23: Continued • Parking and Loading • Landscape Improvements • Signs APPLICATION NUMBER: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10/ ENVIRONMENTAL:ASSESSMENT NO. 91-32 APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach, Department of Community Development REQUEST: Repeal existing Huntington Beach Ordinance Code (Division 9) and establish a new zoning and subdivision ordinance for inclusion in the Huntington Beach Municipal Code. The new ordinance updates the zoning and subdivision provisions by incorporating current planning principles and sp1p0306 2 1 a planning requirements of state law, deleting duplications and conflicts, and streamlining review processing. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Covered by Environmental Assessment No. 91-32. COASTAL STATUS: An amendment to the Huntington Beach Local Coastal Program Implementing Ordinances will be filed with the California Coastal Commission following adoption by the City Council. ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the Community Development Department, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties in the City Clerk's office after June 3, 1994. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit to the City Clerk, written evidence for or against the application as outlined above. If you challenge the City Council's action in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to, the public hearing. If there are any further questions please call Susan Pierce, Associate Planner, at 536-5271. Connie Brockway City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 (714) 536-5227 sp1p0306 3 6 I NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 91-32 PROPOSED ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers at the Huntington Beach Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. The City of Huntington Beach City Council has scheduled a series of public hearings to facilitate the public review of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. The dates and subject matter for each meeting are as listed below. The City Council may continue the public hearing series should the subject matter require additional time. June 6, 1994 TITLE 20: General Provisions • Title, Components, and Purpose • Organization, Applicability, and Interpretation • Definitions 0 Use Classifications TITLE 24: Administration • Zoning Permits • Conditional Use Permits and Variances; Waiver of Development Standards • Design Review • Coastal Development Permit • Development Agreements • Amendments • Notices, Hearings, Findings, Decisions and Appeals • Enforcement June 20, 1994 /TITLE 25: Subdivisions • General Provisions • Tentative Maps • Vesting Tentative Maps • Final Maps and Parcel Maps • Dedications and Reservations • Improvements • Reversions to Acreage • Mergers • Enforcement {' t NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING (Continued) June 20, 1994 TITLE 22: Overlay District (continued) • Oil Production • Coastal Zone • Floodplain • Interim Study •._... _..Neighborhood Conservation • Planned Block Development • High-Rise • Mobilehome July 5, 1994 TITLE 21: Base Districts • Residential • Commercial • Industrial July 18, 1994 TITLE 21: Continued • Open Space • Public/Semi-Public • Specific Plan August 1, 1994 TITLE 23: Provisions Applicant in All or Several Districts ® Site Standards • Mobilehome Park Conversions • Residential Condominium Conversions • Non Conforming Uses and Structures August 15, 1994 TITLE 23: Continued • Parking and Loading • Landscape Improvements • Signs APPLICATION NUMBER: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10/ ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 91-32 APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach, Department of Community Development REQUEST: Repeal existing Huntington Beach Ordinance Code (Division 9) and establish a new zoning and subdivision ordinance for inclusion in the Huntington Beach Municipal Code. The new ordinance updates the zoning and subdivision provisions by incorporating current planning principles and spIp0306 2 4 planning requirements of state law, deleting duplications and conflicts, and streamlining review processing. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Covered by Environmental Assessment No. 91-32. COASTAL STATUS: An amendment to the Huntington Beach Local Coastal Program Implementing Ordinances will be filed with the California Coastal Commission following adoption by the City Council. ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the Community Development Department, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties in the City Clerk's office after June 3, 1994. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit to the City Clerk, written evidence for or against the application as outlined above. If you challenge the City Council's action in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to, the public hearing. If there are any further questions please call Susan Pierce, Associate Planner, at 536-5271. Connie Brockway City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 (714) 536-5227 spIp0306 3 i, 14+ Ox ,Me CITY OF HUN°TINGTON BEACH L01V INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator L 'ir FROM: Melanie S. Fallon, Community Development Director DATE: May 19, 1994 RE: ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REWRITE At the April 25, 1994 City Council study session meeting, staff introduced the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite document, answered questions, and responded:-1 Council's inquiries regarding the document. Binders were distributed which included a summary of the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance, annotated proposed ordinance with index, and cross reference to current Huntington Beach Ordinance Code sections. The City Council established a process for adoption which includes a series of public hearings and study sessions. Attached are tables summarizing highlights of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite document that will be presented at public hearings on June 6 and 20, 1994. A schedule of hearings is also included. Please refer to the binder when reviewing the information described on the tables. Please forward this information to the City Council for their May 23, 1994 Study Session. MFS:SP pierce:memoz&s I t CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ADMINISTRATIVE COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator DATE: May 23, 1994 SUBJECT: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 91-10 ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE REWRITE At the April 25, 1994 City Council study session meeting, staff introduced the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite document, answered questions, and responded to Council's inquiries regarding the document. Binders were distributed which included a summary of the Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance, annotated proposed ordinance with index, and cross reference to current Huntington Beach Ordinance Code sections. The City Council established a process for adoption which includes a series of public hearings and study sessions. Attached are tables summarizing highlights of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance rewrite document that will be presented at public hearings on June 6 and 20, 1994. A schedule of hearings is also included. Please refer to the binder when reviewing the attached. pierce:memoz&s ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE SCHEDULE Meeting Meeting Type Subject Date May 12 Meeting Staff presentation to Chamber of Commerce May 19 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Rewrite House overview, General Provisions, Administration, Overlay Districts, Subdivisions To be Meeting Staff presentation to Board of Realtors scheduled May 23 Study Session General Provisions, Administration, Overlay Districts, Subdivisions June 6 Public Hearing Environmental Assessment; General Provisions,Administration June 20 Public Hearing Overlay Districts, Subdivisions June 23 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Residential, House Commercial, Industrial, Open Space, Public- Semipublic, Specific Plan June 27 Study Session Residential, Commercial, Industrial, Open Space, Public-Semipublic, Specific Plan Jul 5 Public Hearing Residential, Commercial, Industrial July 18 Public Hearing Open Space, Public-Semipublic, Specific Plan July 21 Workshop/Open Staff presentation to public: Supplemental House Site Standards, Mobilehome Park Conversions, Condominium Conversions, Non conforming, Parking and Loading, Landscape Improvements, Signs July 25 Study Session Supplemental Site Standards, Mobilehome Park Conversions, Condominium Conversions,Non conforming, Parking and Loading,Landscape Improvements, Signs August 1 Public Hearing Supplemental Site Standards, Mobilehome Park Conversions, Condominium Conversions,Non conforming August 15 Public Hearing Parking and Loading, Landscape Improvements, Signs August 15 Public Hearing Zone Change Introduction September 6 1 Hearing Adoption g/piercelmemoz&s SUMMARY TITLE 20 GENERAL PROVISIONS Chapter 201, Title, Components and Purposes; Chapter 202, Organization, Applicability, and Interpretation; Chapter 203, Definitions; Chapter 204, Use Classifications CURRENT PROPOSED Zoning Map consisting of 40 pages Single zoning ma Not addressed Balanced community statement Public Notification Varies: Consistent 300 ft. legal notice ZA, abutting property owners and PC, requirement on all discretionary property owners within 300 ft. applications Duties and responsibilities for zoning code Consolidates duties and responsibilities administration located throughout the into one chapter document Definitions without illustrations Illustrated definitions Permitted or conditionally permitted uses All uses listed within six categories listed throughout the document (residential, commercial, industrial, public-semipublic, accessory, temporary) SUMMARY TITLE 24 ADMINISTRATION Chapter 240, Zoning Permits, Environmental Review,Fees and Deposits; Chapter 241, Conditional Use Permits and Variances,Waivers of Development Standards; Chapter 244, Design Review; Chapter 245, Coastal Development Permit Chapter 246, Development Agreements; Chapter 247,Amendments; Chapter 248, Notices, Hearings, Findings, Decisions, and Appeals; Chapter 249, Enforcement REQUIREMENTS CURRENT REVIEW PROPOSED BODE' REVIEW DODO' Grading or stockpiling involving 25,000 None required Planning Commission cubic yards of import or export Variances for setbacks, separation between Zoning Administrator Zoning Administrator buildings; less than 10% deviation in site coverage Variances for all other development Zoning Administrator Planning Commission standards or Planning Commission Extension of time request for entitlements Planning Commission Director or Zoning Administrator Changed plans: affect condition of approval Planning Commission Planning Commission or Zoning or Zoning Administrator Administrator Changed plans: no substantial change Planning Commission Director; all will be or Zoning transferable Administrator Transfer of CUP Director; some are not Director transferable Extension of time Planning Commission Director or Zoning Administrator Waiver of landscaping, open space, or Zoning Administrator Director setback standards for projects without required entitlement TITLE 24 ADMINISTRATION continued REQUIREMENTS CURRENT REVIEW PROPOSED REVIEW BODE' DODO' Development agreement processing Planning Commission Planning Commission and and City Council (City City Council Council Resolution establishedprocess) Amendment procedures (re-established zone Planning Commission Planning Commission and change and code amendment procedures and City Council City Council previously repealed) Appeals to Director's decisions None Planning Commission Consolidation and expansion of enforcement Director, Zoning Director, Zoning and, revocation provisions, new provisions Administrator, Administrator, Planning for penalties, abatement, and liens Planning Commission, Commission, City Council City Council SUMMARY TITLE 22 OVERLAY DISTRICTS Chapter 220, O Oil Production Overlay District; Chapter 221, CZ Coastal Zone Overlay Distract; Chapter 222, FP Floodplain Overlay District; Chapter 223, IS Interim Study Overlay; 224, NC Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District; Chapter 225, PBD Planned Block Development Overlay District; Chapter 226, H High-Rise Overlay District; Chapter 227, MHP Mobilehome Overlay District CURRENT PROVISIONS NEW PROVISIONS Drilling permit by Use Permit Drilling permit by CUP approved by approved by ZA PC Floodproofing or elevation to the Floodproofing or elevation 1 foot base flood elevation above base flood elevation LUD, Limited Use District Interim Study Overlay District -Q, Qualified Suffix Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District Not included Planned Block Overlay District Multi-story limit not stated Establish high rise height Multi-story buildings require High rise street setback- 20 ft minimum 10 ft. setback from street minimum Multi-story buildings require High rise setback from residential 1/5 minimum 50 ft. from residential of building height Multi story setback adjacent to High rise upper story setback residential consistent for all stories adjacent to residential SUMMARY TITLE 25 SUBDIVISIONS Chapter 250, General Provisions; Chapter 251, Tentative Maps; Chapter 252, Vesting Tentative Maps; Chapter 253, Final Maps and Parcel Maps; Chapter 254, Dedications and Reservations; Chapter 255, Improvements; Chapter 256, Reversions to Acreage; Chapter 257, Mergers; Chapter 258, Enforcement REQUIREMENTS CURRENT PROPOSED REVIEW BODY REVIEW BODY Public hearing Not required Zoning Administrator, Planning Commission Tentative Tract Maps 9 or less parcels Planning Commission Zoning Administrator Tentative Tract Maps 10+ parcels Planning Commission Planning Commission Submittal requirements for Final or Parcel Not cited City Engineer Map review and acceptance Acceptance of Final Parcel Maps Cit Council City Engineer Acceptance of Final Tract Maps City Council City Council Standards for on-site and off-site Not cited City Engineer improvements and requirements for plans, security, agreements, construction, inspection and completion Lot merger requirement for residential sites Not cited Director consisting of multiple lots Enforcement of subdivision provisions Not cited Director I' MINUTES CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Room B-8, Civic Center Huntington Beach, California Monday, May 23, 1994 Mayor Moulton-Patterson called the adjourned regular meetings of the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency to order at 5:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ROLL CALL PRESENT: Bauer, Robitaille, Moulton-Patterson, Winchell, Leipzig, Sullivan ABSENT: Silva CLOSED SESSION The Mayor called a Closed Session of the City Council pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 to meet with its designated representative William Osness, Director of Personnel and Daniel Cassidy, Esq., Liebert, Cassidy and Frierson Re: Labor Relations matters - Meet and Confer regarding the following employee organizations: Police Officers' Association (POA), Municipal Employees Association (MEA), Marine Safety Officers' Association (MSOA), Municipal Employees Organization (MEO), Fireman's Benevolent Association (FBA) and Police Management Association (PMA). The Mayor called a Closed Session of the City Council pursuant to Government Code. Section 54957 to consider Personnel Matters - Performance Evaluation of City Administrator. RECESS - RECONVENE The Mayor called a recess of Council at 5:30 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 6:30 P.M. in the Council Chamber. 1994-95 CITY BUDGET - DISCUSSION ITEMS The City Clerk presented a communication from the Director of Administrative Services dated May 23, 1994 setting forth discussion items as follows: Budget Concepts, Estimated Shortfall, State Budget, Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) Unfunded Liability, Potential Ballot Proposition, Budget Timetable. Page 2 - Council/Agency Minutes - 05/23/94 Robert Franz, Director of Administrative Services, announced that two documents had been distributed to the City Council: "Month of May Revision State Budget Slide 10A" and "Fiscal Policies Slide 2X. The City Administrator reported on the topics covered in Slide 2A - Expenditures Supported by Revenues, Maintain 3% to 5% Reserve, No New Capital Improvements unless all Costs Funded, Enterprise Funds, Enterprise Funds Should Reflect All Costs, Reserves in Excess of 5% Available for Capital Projects and Phase in Period Required. The City Administrator reviewed.the.discussion.item topics;including Slides 3 through 17. The topics included Budget Problems; Definitions, City General Fund, Shortfall Estimates, General Fund Reserves, Fund Balance History, Alternatives Solutions, Impact of Alternative Solutions, City Shortfall Solutions During the Recession, State Budget--2 Year Perspective, State Budget Shortfall Estimates, Revenue Losses to the State During the Recession (5 Years), PERS Unfunded Liability Estimated Costs, PERS Unfunded Liability 1994-95, Potential Local Ballot Initiative, Budget Timetable May-June and July-September. Councilmember Bauer commented on areas he would like addressed including the feasibility of Enterprise Funds and Profit Centers, Performance Based budgeting, public expectation of same level services with lowered level of resources. The MSI Study as it relates to the budget was commented upon by Councilmember Leipzig. The fact that the City does not yet know the State budget plans was discussed. The City Administrator commented on regionalization and privatization of city services. Mayor Moulton-Patterson asked the City Administrator if he would investigate consolidating with school districts as well as with other cities and the City Administrator stated that he planned to do so. BEACH CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM The City Clerk presented a communication from the Director of Community Services dated May 23, 1994, entitled, "Beach Capital Improvement Program - City Council Presentation - May 23, 1994". Ron Hagan, Community Services Director, reported on the South Beach Master Plan, Maxwell's Master Plan, Bluff-Top, Bluff Bottom Master Plan. He referred to wall drawings. Jim Pickel, Purkiss-Rose Associates, reviewed wall exhibits, including Bluff Top Project, Pier Plaza. The Community Services Director reported on the financing of the South Beach Master Plan -- cost and revenue projections and funding sources for projects. He spoke regarding the Maxwell's operation. The Community Services Director spoke regarding the importance of separating bike and pedestrians and commented on the number of claims filed against the city from accidents. A report was made on the parking history of the South Beach Parking Area. -2- Page 3 - Council/Agency Minutes - 05/23/94 The Director of Administrative Services reported on the Maxwell's operation and lease and the plans for rebuilding Maxwell's. The need for more financial information from a financial consultant was discussed. The use of Certificates of Participation and the issuance of new debt was discussed by Councilmember Sullivan and the Director of Administrative Services. Discussion was held between the Community Services Director and Councilmember Bauer regarding procedure and process to attain completion of project, use of Certificates of participation and the parking plan at the Central Library. Councilmember Robitaille presented questions regarding the priority of Tower Zero. YOUTH SPORTS FACILITIES PRESENTATION The City Clerk presented a communication from the Director of Community Services dated May 23, 1994 entitled, "Youth Sports Facilities Presentation--City Council. Ron Hagan, Community Services Director, reported referring to wall drawings. Jim Engle, Deputy Director/Beach, Recreation & Development, reported on three potential park or school sites for youth sports complexes. (1) Huntington Central Park (Old Mushroom Farm Area -- east of Goldenwest Street, North of Ellis Avenue, sixteen acres west of Goldenwest Street at Talbert Avenue terminus, southwest of Goldenwest and Gothard Streets) (2) Park View School/Murdy Park (3) Peterson School (One block east of Beach Boulevard, south of Indianapolis Avenue) Jim Engle presented slides. He reported on proposed uses at Huntington Central Park stating that roller hockey would also be a proposed sport. He presented the constraints and opportunities on each site. Mr. Engle also reported on the portion of the report entitled Other Opportunities For Youth Sports Facilities: Ocean View High School, Dwyer School, Irby Park, Bolsa Chica Linear Park, Lagenbeck Park, School Fields. He reported on the status of city efforts for joint projects. The Community Services Director stated it was planned to set up a Youth Sports Task Force from the community. Councilmember Sullivan thanked Mr. Hagan and Mr. Engle stating that it was an outstanding report particularly for pointing out the pros and cons. He congratulated the Department all the way back to former Recreation and Parks Director Norm Worthy, who had enormous vision. Presentation by Chuck Beauregard -- Save Our Kids -Youth Sports Chuck Beauregard, representing Save Our Kids, 5942 Edinger Avenue, Suite 307, Huntington Beach, was introduced to the Council by staff. Mr. Beauregard presented written information to the City Council. He stated that some of the Save Our Kids Board members were present: Board Members include: (Representing Baseball/Softball) Vicki Czuleger, Past President of -3 - .... .. .. .. ..... Page 4 - Council/Agency Minutes - 05/23/94 Robinwood Little League, Mike Simon, Robinwood Little League, Philip Baumfeld, Past President of Ocean View Little League, John Ringer, Huntington Beach Girls' Softball, (Representing Soccer) Tim Phelps - Commissioner of Region 56, Paul McLoed, Commissioner of Region 143, Bruce Bricks, President South Coast Soccer Club, AYSO Referee, USSF Referee, Dr. Ann Chlebicki, representing Aquatics and Richard Henderson representing pre-school sport. Mr. Beauregard reviewed his communication that was presented on slides. He referred to a research document, The Benefits of Parks and Recreation produced by the Ontario -Ministry of Tourism and Recreation in 1.992,,which he stated he would be glad to provide to Council. He used a slide to present figures and information from the City Planning Department outlining the 1993-94 Community Profile. He referred to a Register Newspaper article dated April 14, 1994, Huntington Considers Sports Complex. Mr. Beauregard presented other slides showing current use of school parks. He stated that Save Our Kids had three stated objectives: Save Our Kids wants: (1) The City to establish its youth as the City's number one priority, (2) The City Council to pass a resolution that before the City can allow the sale or zoning of a public park or school land currently being used for a Youth Sport activity, the city must find or develop a new facility or enhance a current facility to accommodate the displaced activity. Such replacement facility must be a long term solution (3) The city to establish a defined plan for satisfying the land, water and facilities needs for the youth of the City of Huntington Beach for the next 25 years. The materials referred to by Mr. Beauregard were filed with the City Clerk. ZONING AND SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE (DIVISION 9 RE-WRITE) The City Clerk presented a communication from Melanie Fallon, Director of Community Development dated May 19, 1994 entitled Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Rewrite. The Community Development Director presented an overview of the proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and the proposed public hearing schedule. Susan Pierce, Associate Planner, reviewed the current and proposed Title 20 General Provisions and summaries of Title 24 Administration, Title 22 - Overlay Districts and Title 25 - Subdivisions. Request For Opinion Re: Conditional Use Permits Councilmember Leipzig stated that he would like to see the law where the City Council can extend conditional use permits. The City Attorney reported. Councilmember Leipzig stated his desire to see this opinion in writing. -4- Page 5 - Council/Agency Minutes - 05/23/94 ADJOURNMENT - COUNCIUREDEVELOPM ENT AGENCY The Mayor adjourned the adjourned regular meetings of the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach to Monday, June 6, 1994 at 5 p.m., Room B-8, Council Chamber, Civic Center. Clerk of the Redevelopment Agency and City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California ATTEST: City Clerk/Clerk Mayor/Chairman gninutes\940523am -5 - HUNTINGTON BEACH CODE REFERENCE CURRENT CODE NEW CODE Article 900 CITY PLANNING COMMISSION 9001 Commission Established Relocated to Title 9002 Duties 212.01(D) 9002.1 Records of Commission. Relocated to Title 2 9003 Members Relocated to Title 2 9003.1 Appointment Relocated to Title 2 9003.2 Term Relocated to Title 2 9003.3 Vacancies Relocated to Title 2 9003.4 Temporary Absences Relocated to Title 2 9004 Bylaws Relocated to Title 2 9005 Advisors Relocated to Title 2 9006 Assistance for Commission Relocated to Title 2 9007 Compensation Relocated to Title 2 Article 902 GENERAL INFORMATION AND APPLICATION 9020 Purpose 201.06 9021 Application 201.04, 202.04, 202.08 9022 Enforcement Penalties Chapter 249 Article 906 DISTRICTS 9060 Districts 202.06 9061 District maps One map Article 908 DEFINITIONS 9080 Definitions 203.06 Chapter 91 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Article 910 RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURE 9100 General Provisions deleted 9101 Permitted Uses deleted 9102 Prohibited deleted 9103 Minimum Parcel Size/Frontage deleted 9104 Maximum Density/Intensity deleted 9105 Maximum Building Height deleted 9106 Maximum Site Coverage deleted 9107 Setbacks deleted 9108 Parking deleted 9109 Miscellaneous Requirements deleted Article 911 LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (R1) 9110 General provisions (R-1) 210.02 911.0.1 Permitted uses 210.04 9110.2 Minimum parcel size/frontage 210.06 9110.3 Maximum density/intensity 210.06 9110.4(a) Building Height/Datum 230.70 9110.4 Building Height/Maximum 210.06 9110.4(c) 3rd Story 210.06(L)(I)(D) 9110.5 Maximum site coverage 210.06 9110.6 Setback (front yard) 210.06 9110.7 Setback(side yard) 210.06 9110.8 Setback(rear yard) 210.06 9110.9 Open space deleted 9110.10 Parking 210.06 9110.11 Miscellaneous requirements 210.06 Article 912 MEDIUM[ DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R2), M[EDIUM[HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R3), AND HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R4) DISTRICTS_ 9120 General provisions 210.02 9120.1 Permitted uses 210.04 9120.2 Minimum parcel size/frontage 210.06 9120.3 Maximum density/intensity 210.06 9120.4 Maximum building height 210.06 9120.5 Maximum site coverage 210.06 9120.6 Setback(front yard) 210.06 9120.7 Setback(side yard) 210.06 9120.8 Setback (rear yard) 210.06 9120.9 Open space 210.06(0) 9120.10 Parking and Loading 210.06 9120.11 Miscellaneous requirements 210.06 Article 913 OLDTOWN AND TOWNLOT DISTRICTS 9136 General provisions 210.02 9130.1 Permitted uses 210.04 9130.2 Minimum parcel size/frontage 210.06 9130.3 Maximum density/intensity 210.06 9130.4 Maximum building height 210.06 9130.5 Maximum site coverage 210.06 9130.6 Setback (front yard) 210.06 9130.7 Setback(side yard) 210.06 9130.8 Setback(rear yard) 210.06 9130.9 Open space--Two units or less 210.06(0) 9130.9.1 Open space--Three or more units 210.06(0) 9130.10 Fencing 210.06, 230.88 9130.11 Parking and Loading 230.88 9130.12 Landscaping 210.06(R) 9130.13a Trash Enclosures 210.06, 230.78 9130.13b Accessory Buildings 210.06, 230.08 9130.13c Building Separation 230.08, 230.68, 210.06(P), 210.06(Q) 9130.13d Garages with Upper Story Living Areas deleted 9130.13e Single Unit Design Standards deleted div9indx 2 Article 914 MOBILEHOMES 9140 General provisions 210.02 9141 Permitted uses 210.04, 210.16 9142 Maximum density 210.06 9143 Maximum height 210.06 9144 Open space 210.06(0) 9145 Screening requirements 210.14 9146 Setbacks 210.14 9147 Maximum site coverage 210.14 9148 Parking requirements 210.06 9149 Miscellaneous requirements 210.14 Article 915 PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS (PRD) PLANNING DEVELOPMENT SUFFIX (-PD) 9150 General provisions deleted 9150.1 Permitted uses 210.04 9150.2 Submittal requirements deleted 9150.3 Appearance standards deleted 9150.4 Maximum density 210.06 9150.5 Maximum site coverage 210.06 9150.6 Maximum height 210.06 9150.7 Setback(front yard) 210.06 9150.8 Setback(side yard) 210.06 9150.9 Setback(rear yard) 210.06 9150.10 Building separation 210.06(N) 9150.11 Building orientation deleted 9150.12 Building bulk 210.12B 9150.13 Open space 210.06(0) 9150.14 Main recreation areas deleted 9150.15 Minimum Floor Area 210.06(M) 9150.16 Private Access Ways deleted 9150.17 Parking/Loading 210.06 9150.18 Landscaping 210.06R 9150.19 Miscellaneous 9150.19a address signs deleted 9150.19b cable tv deleted 9150.19c laundry areas deleted 9150.19d lighting 210.06(S) 9150.19e storage deleted 9150.19f street signs deleted 9150.19g trash 230.78 9150.19h vehicular storage deleted 9150.19i projecting decks 210.06T 9150.20 Homeowner or community associations 210.12 9150.21 Special permit deleted Article 916 MANUFACTURED HOME SUFFIX(-MFH) 9160 General provisions deleted 9161 Development standards 230.16A 9162 Surrender of registration 213.16C div9indx 3 - Article 917 SENIOR RESIDENTIAL SUFFIX (-SR) 9170 General provisions 210.02 9171 Application of article deleted 9172 Maximum site coverage 210.06 9173 Repealed, Ordinance No. 2866, 15 Oct 86 9174 Open space 210.08 9175 Special permit deleted 9176 Design standards 210.08 9177 Parking and Loading 210.06 9178 Density bonus 230.14 Article 920 OFFICE PROFESSIONAL DISTRICT 9200 General Provisions 211.02 9220.1 Permitted Uses 211.04 9200.2 Use Permit 211.04 9200.3 Conditional Use Permit 211.04 9200.4 Minimum Parcel Size/Frontage 211.06 9200.5 Maximum Building Height 211.06 9200.6 Setbacks 211.06 9200.7 Parking, Loading and Landscaping 211.06 Article 922 COMMERCIAL DISTRICT STANDARDS 9220 General provisions 211.02 9220.1 Permitted uses 211.04 9220.2 Restricted uses 211.04 9220.3 Minimum parcel size/frontage 211.06 9220.4 Maximum density/intensity 211.06 9220.5 Maximum building height 211.06 9220.6 Maximum site coverage 211.06 9220.7 Setbacks 211.06 9220.8 Fencing 211.06, 230.88 9220.9 Parking, loading and landscaping 211.06 9220.10 Outside uses--Storage and display 230.74 9220.11 Game arcades 230.38 9220.12 Dancing/live entertainment 211.04 9220.13 Hotels/motels 211.04 9220.14 Service stations 230.32 9220.15 Single Room Occupancy/Living Units 230.46 Article 224 VISITOR SERVING COMMERCIAL DISTRICT (VSC) 9240 General provisions 211.02 9241 Permitted uses 211.04 9242 Minimum parcel size/frontage 211.06 9243 Maximum height 211.06 9244 Maximum site coverage 211.06 9245 Setbacks 211.06 9246 Open space deleted 9247 Parking, loading and landscaping 211.06 9248 Miscellaneous provisions 211.06 div9indx 4 Article 927 MOBILEIIOME OVERLAY ZONES/REMOVAL/REZONING/CHANGE OF USE 9270 Application of article. 227.02, 234.02 9270.1 Definitions. 234.04 9270.2 Criteria for application of zone. 227.06 9270.3 Use permitted. 227.08 9270.4 Removal of the mobilehome park overlay zone, MH/zone or change of use. 227.10, 234.14 9270.5 Relocation assistance plan--Standards 234.08 9270.6 Acceptance of reports. 234.12 9270.7 Action by Planning Commission. 234.14 9270.8 Fees required 240.06 Article 930 Specific Plans 9300 Specific Plans Separate Documents Article 936.5 RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION 936.5.0 Application of article deleted 936.5.1 Definitions 235.02 936.5.2 Permit required 235.04 936.5.3 Fees required 235.06 936.5.4 Limitations on projects 235.04 936.5.5 Development plan required 235.06 936.5.6 Special code compliance inspection report 235.06A 936.5.7 Pest control 235.06A 936.5.8 Covenants, conditions and restrictions 235.06B 936.5.9 Notice of intent--Service 235.10A 936.5.10 Notice of intent--Contents 235.1 OA 936.5.11 Notice of public hearing 235.1013 936.5.12 Notice of final disposition 235.1013 936.5.13 Notice of public report 235.1013 911 36.5.14 Notice of final map approval 235.1OB 936.5.15 Right to purchase 235.10C 936.5.16 Vacation of units 235.1 OD 936.5.17 Increase in rents 235.10E 936.5.18 Relocation assistance 235.10G 936.5.19 Notice to new tenants 235.10A 936.5.20 Development standards deleted 936.5.21 Maximum density deleted 936.5.22 Site coverage deleted 936.5.23 Setback from public streets deleted 936.5.24 Setback from interior property lines--Garages or under in height deleted 936.5.26 Setback from interior property line--Buildings over thirty (30) feet in height deleted 936.5.27 Building separation--Distance deleted 936.5.28 Building height deleted 9-16.5.29 Building bulk deleted 936.5.30 Open space--Common deleted 936.5.31 Open space--Private deleted 936.5.32 Main recreation area--Minimum size--Projects div9indx 5 more than four(4) acres deleted 936.5.33 Main recreation area--Minimum size--Projects four(4) acres or less deleted 936.5.34 Minimum floor area deleted 936.5.35 Private access widths deleted 936.5.36 Parking and loading 235.08B 936.5.37 Landscaping 235.08B 936.5.38 Address signs deleted 936.5.39 Cable tv deleted 936.5.40 Fire hydrant system deleted 936.5.41 Laundry areas deleted 936.5.42 Lighting deleted 936.5.43 Outside storage space deleted 936.5.44 Sewer and water systems deleted 936.5.45 Signs deleted 936.5.46 Street signs deleted 936.5.47 Street trees deleted 936.5.48 Trash collection areas deleted 936.5.49 Vehicular storage deleted 936.5.50 Sound attenuation 235.08A 936.5.51 Locks 235.08A 936.5.52 Solar water heating deleted 936.5.53 Fire protection 235.08A 936.5.54 Security 235.08A 936.5.55 Special permit deleted 936.5.56 Density bonus and other incentives for providing low-moderate income housing 235.14 936.5,57 Contents of proposal 235.14 936.5.58 Affordability deleted 936.5.59 Planning Commission considerations 235.12 936.5.60 Vacancy rate analysis required 235.06D 936.5.61 Findings 235.16 936.5.62 Action by Planning Commission 235.16 936.5.63 Prerequisites to approval of a final map deleted Article 937 NORTH HUNTINGTON CENTER SPECIFIC PLAN Retained as Separate Document Article 940 FLOODPLAIN SUFFIX (-FP1, -FP2, -FP3) 9400 Statutory Authority deleted 9400.1 Findings of Fac 222.02 9400.2 Statement of Purpose 222.02 9400.3 Methods of Reducing Flood Hazards 222.08 9400.4 Establishment of Areas 222.04A 9400.5 Areas Designated 222.04B 9400.6 General Provisions 222.10 9400.7 Application 222.04B 9400.8 Director--Responsibilities 222.10C 9400.9 Permit Review 222.1 OD 9400.10 -FP1 Permitted Uses 222.12A 9400.11 -FPI Conditional Uses 222.12A div9indx 6 9400.12 -FP1 Prohibited Uses 222.12A 9400.13 -FP2 Permitted Uses 222.1213 9400.14 -FP2 Prohibited Uses 222.1213 9400.15 -FP2 Standards of Construction 222.14A 9400.16 -FP3 Permitted Uses 222.12C 9400.17 -FP3 Prohibited Uses 222.12C 9400.18 -FP3 Standards of Construction 222.1413 9400.19 Variances/Appeal--General 222.16 9400.20 Variances/Appeals--Requirements 222.16 9400.21 Variances/Appeals--Findings 222.16 9400.22 Definitions 222.06 Article 941 LIMITED USE AND RECREATIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICTS (LU AND ROS) 9410 General provisions 213.02 9411 Permitted uses--Limited use deleted 9412 Permitted uses--Recreational open space 213.08 9413 Minimum parcel size/frontage 213.08 9414 Maximum building height 213.08 9415 Maximum site coverage 213.08 9416 Setbacks 213.08 9417 Fencing 213.08 9418 Parking, Loading and Landscaping 213.08 9419 Signs 213.08 Article 942 SHORELINE DISTRICT (51),WATER RECREATION AND COASTAL CONSERVATION (-CC) DISTRICTS 9420 General provisions--Shoreline district 312.02 9420.1 Permitted uses 213.06 9420.2 Maximum height 213.08 9420.3 Parking deleted 9420.4 Location requirements 213.08 9420.5 Signs 213.08 9421 General provisions--Water recreation district 213.02 9421.1 Permitted uses 213.06 9421.2 Development standards 213.08 9422 General provisions--Coastal conservation district 213.02 9422.1 Definitions 4ole+ed- zo 9422.2 Coastal conservation suffix(-CC) 213.02 9422.3 Coastal conservation suffix--Removal of deleted 9422.4 Uses generally deleted 9422.5 Use permit required 213.06 9422.6 Conditional use permit required 213.06 9422.7 Prohibited uses deleted 9422.8 Required permits and agreements deleted 9422.9 Development standards--Mitigation measures deleted 9422.10 Mitigation measures--Dredging deleted 9422.11 Mitigation measures--Diking or filling deleted 9422.12 Mitigation measures--Vegetation deleted 9422.13 Mitigation measures--Reduction of disturbances deleted 9422.14 Mitigation measures--Litter control deleted 9422.15 Mitigation measures--Flood control deleted 9422.16 Mitigation measures--Construction div9indx l 7 , and improvements deleted 9422.17 Mitigation measures--Duty of applicant deleted 9422.18 Degraded wetland restoration deleted 9422.19 Findings--Environmentally sensitive habitats deleted Article 946 CIVIC DISTRICT SUFFIX (-CD), COMMUNITY FACILITIES OVERLAY (CF), MULTISTORY SUFFIX (-MS), AND QUALIFIED CLASSIFICATION (Q) 9460 General provisions--Civic district. deleted 9460.1 Application deleted. 9460.2 Submittal requirements. deleted 9461 General provisions--Community facilities. 214.04 9461.1 Application 214.04, 213.04 9462 General provisions--Multistory 226.02 9462.1 Application 226.04 9462.2 Permitted uses 226.06, 226.08. 9462.3 Residential uses 226.08 9462.4 Commercial and industrial uses 226.06, 226.08 9463 General provisions--Qualified deleted 9463.1 Application 224.10 Article 951 MI-A DISTRICT 9510 General Provisions 212.02 9510.01 Permitted Uses 212.04 9510.01.1 Prohibited Uses deleted 9510.02 Minimum Parcel Size/Frontage 212.06 9510.03 Maximum Density/Intensity 212.06 9510.04 Maximum Building Height 212.06 9510.05 Maximum Site Coverage 212.06 9510.06 Setback (Front Yard) 212.06 9510.07 Setback (Side Yard) 212.06 9510.08 Setback (Rear Yard) 212.06 9510.09 Setback (Upper Story) 212.06 9510.10 Open Space deleted 9510.11 Parking 212.06 9510.12 Loading 212.06, 231.18E 9510.13 Landscaping 212.06 9510.14 Mixed Use Developments 212.04, 212.06 9510.15 Outside Storage deleted 9510.15.1 Temporary Recreational Vehicle Storage deleted 9510.16 Waste Disposal deleted 9510.17 Miscellaneous Requirements - Fencing 230.88 Lighting, Building Materials deleted 9510.18 Performance Standards 212.06, 230.82 Article 953 M1 DISTRICT 9530 General Provisions 212.02 9530.01 Permitted Uses 212.02 9530.01.1 Prohibited Uses deleted 9530.02 Minimum Parcel Size/Frontage 212.06 9530.03 Maximum Density/Intensity 212.06 div9indx 8 9530.04 Maximum Building Height 212.06 9530.05 Maximum Site Coverage 212.06 9530.06 Setback (Front Yard) 212.06 9530.07 Setback (Side Yard) 212.06 9530.08 Setback (Rear Yard) 212.06 9530.00 Setback (Upper Story) 212.06 9530.10 Open Space deleted 9530.11 Parking 212.06 9530.12 Loading 212.06, 231.04 9530.13 Landscaping 212.06 9530.14 Mixed Use Developments 212.06 9530.15 Outside Storage deleted 95 30.16 Automotive Uses -- Dismantling and Storage 212.06 9530.17 Performance Standards 212.06 Article 955 M2 DISTRICT 9550 General Provisions 212.02 9550.01 Permitted Uses 212.04 9550.01.1 Prohibited Uses deleted 9550.02 Minimum Parcel Size/Frontage 212.06 9550.03 Maximum Density/Intensity 212.06 9550.04 Maximum Building Height 212.06 9550.05 Maximum Site Coverage 212.06 9550.06 Setback (Front Yard) 212.06 9550.07 Setback (Side Yard) 21106 9550.08 Setback (Rear Yard) 212.06 9550.09 Setback (Upper Story) 212.06 9550.10 Open Space deleted 9550.11 Parking 212.06 9550.12 Loading 212.06 9550.13 Landscaping 212.06 9550.14 Performance Standards 212.06 Article 960 QFF-STREET PARKING, LOADING, AND LANDSCAPING 9600 GENERAL PROVISIONS 231.02A, 231.0413 9600.1 Parking compliance deleted 9600.2 Surplus parking 231.02G.1 9600.3 Inoperable motor vehicle 231.02G.2 9600.4 Location , 231.02E 9600.5 Expansion of use with nonconforming parking 231.0213 9601 DESIGN STANDARDS 231.18 9601.1 Public Works requirements 231.18A 9601.2 Circulation design 231.1813 9601.3 Illumination 231.18C 9601.4 Protection 231.16C 9601.5 Stall dimensions 231.14, 231.16A 9601.6 Parking structures 231.18G 9602 NUMBER OF SPACES REQUIRED 231.0413 9602.1 Handicapped parking 231.12 9602.2 Non-residential use 231.04 9602.3 Residential uses 231.04 9603 RESIDENTIAL REGULATIONS 231.18D div9indx 9 9603.1 Coastal parking 231.1813.6 9603.2 Private garages and carports 231.18D.1 9603.3 Turning radius 231.18D.3 9603.4 Driveway width 231.18D.4 9603.5 Access 231.02E 9603.6 Open parking 231.02E 9603.7 Guest parking 231.18D.5 9603.8 Enclosed parking deleted 9603.9 Planned residential developments 231.18D.7 9603.10 Distribution and assignment 231.18D.2 9603.11 Screening deleted 9603.12 Driveway air space 231.18D.8 9603.13 Storage space 231.18D.9 9604 NON-RESIDENTIAL REGULATIONS 231.18E 9604.1 Designated parking 231.18E.1 9604.2 Parking controls 231.18E.2 9604.3 Parking location 231.02E 9604.4 Driveway width 231.18E.3 9604.5 Loading space 231.04A 9604.6 Loading location 212.06, 231.18E.5 9604.7 Loading design 231.18E.6 9604.8 Landscape buffer 231.18E.7 9605 SEASONAL AND TEMPORARY LOTS 231.18F 9605.1 Parking lot standards 231.18F 9605.2 Certificate to operate deleted 9605.3 Failure to comply deleted 9606 PARKING REQUIREMENT ALTERNATIVES deleted 9606.1 Joint and mixed uses 231.06 9606.2 In lieu fees within the Downtown Specific Plan area 23 1.10 9606.3 Special Permit 231.20 9607 SCREENING AND LANDSCAPING 232.02, 232.04 9607.1 General provisions 232.08A 9607.2 Interior landscaping 232.06C.3 9607.3 Front and exterior side yards 232.06C.1, 232.06B 9607.4 Planter walk areas 232.08C.5 9607.5 Irrigation 232.10 9607.6 Curbing 232.08C.7 9607.7 Landscaping requirement exception 232.12 Article 961 SIGNS 9610.1_ General provisions deleted 9610.2 Permit procedure 233.06 9610.3 Exempt signs 233.04 9610.4 Prohibited signs 233.22 9610.5 Permitted signs--Schedule .233.08 9610.6 Planned sign program 233.26 9610.7 Special sign permit 233.06C 9610.8 Nonconforming signs--Limited sign permit 233.06D, 233.28 9610.9 Miscellaneous provisions 233.10, 233.12, 233.14, 233 8 9610.10 Definitions 233.02 div9indx 10 Article 962 SP-1. SP-2 SPECIAL ZONES 9620 Special Zones Established deleted 9621 Special Zones, Requirements and Limitations, deleted 9621.1 SP-1 Special Zone (Cemetery) 204.08A, Chapter 214 9621.2 Uses Permitted 204.08A 9622.1 SP-2 Special Zone (Pet Cemetery) deleted 9622.2 Uses Permitted 204.10 Article 963 UNCLASSIFIED USES 9630 Permitted uses deleted 9631 Contractor's storage yards/mulching operations 230.90 9632 Landfill disposal sites 230.92 9632.1 Landfill disposal sites/definitions 230.92A 9632.2 Operations plan 230.92B 9632.3 Approval of operations site 230.92C 9632.4 Hazardous waste sites 230.92D 9632.5 Operations plan 230.92E 9632.6 Exemptions 230.92F 9632.7 Excavation activity prohibited 230.92G 9633 Wind energy conversion systems deleted 9634 Child day care facilities 204.08G 9634.1 Small family day care homes 204.08A 9634.2 Large family day care homes 204.1OF 9634.3 Day care centers deleted 9635 Bed and breakfast 230.42 9636 Alcoholic beverage sales 211.04N, 212.04 9637 Density bonus and other incentives for the provision of affordable housing for qualifying residents, lower income and very low income households 230.14 9637.1 Definitions 230.06, 230.14B 9637.2 Target rents/mortgage payments 230.14C 9637.3 Affordability requirements 230.14D 9637.4 Procedure 230.14E 9637.5 Rea}}uured findings for aup oval 230.14F y(038 lr)TO, Swap Meets/Flea Ma✓/refs 2306V Article 964 PACIFICA COMMUNTI'Y PLAN Retained as a Separate Document Article 965 NONCONFORMING PROVISIONS 9650 General provisions 236.02 9651 Destruction of a nonconforming structure or use 236.04 9652 Alterations to a nonconforming structure or use 236.06 9653 Exception deleted Article 967 COMMERCIAL EQUINE STANDARDS 9670 General provisions deleted 9670.1 Permitted uses 230.48A div9indx 11 9670.2 Minimum parcel size/frontage 230.4813.1 9670.3 Density/riding areas 230.4813.2 9670.4 Maximum building height 230.4813.3 9670.5 Setbacks 230.4813.4 9670.6 Corral design 230.4813.5 9670.7 Wash rack 230.4813.6 9670.8 Insect and rodent control 230.48C 9670.9 Miscellaneous operating requirements 230.481) 9670.10 Off-street parking and landscaping 230.48E Article 968 OIL DISTRICTS 9680 Purpose deleted 9680.1 Definitions 203.06 9680.2 Creation of Combined Districts 220.02, 220.04 9680.3 Plan Required 220.08 9680.4 Criteria for Approval of Plan 220.10 9681 "O" Districts Established 220.02, 220.14 9681.1 Portable Equipment Required 220.16 9681.2 Minimum Surface Area Required 220.06 9681.3 Information Required 220.18 9682 "0" Districts Established 220.02, 220.14 9682.1 Minimum Surface Area Required 220.06 9682.2 Dedication Requirements 220.20 9682.3 Waiver or Reduction of Dedication Requirements 220.06 9682.4 Criteria for Waiver of Reduction of Dedication Requirements 220.24 9682.5 Hearing and Appeal 220.04 968 -968 ----- -- 9686 Article 969.9 UFFIX 969.9.0 Purpose "CZ" COASTAL ZON 221.02 969.9.1 Definitions 203.06 969.9.2 Area of Applicability deleted 969.9.3 Application 221.04 969.9.4 Coastal Development Permit 221.06 969.9.5 Public Access to Coastal Resources 221.10 969.9.5.1 Dedication of Vertical Access 221.1013 969.9.5.2 Dedication of Lateral Access 221.1013 969.9.5.3 Access Dedication Policies 221.10A 969.9.5.4 Easement for Public Access Required 221.1013 969.9.5.5 Public Use Areas. Signs Required 221.12 969.9.6 Visual Resources 221.14 969.9.7 Community Facilities 221.16 969.9.8 Diking, Dredging and Filling 221.18 969.9.9 Hazards 221.20 969.9.10 Buffer Requirements 221.22 969.9.11 Energy 221.24 969.9.12 Residential Density Limitations 221.26 969.9.13 Height Restrictions 221.28 div9indx 2 ) 969.9.15 Signs 221.34 969.9.16 Permitted Uses for Land Use Designations deleted 969.9.17 Recreation Designation deleted 969.9.18 Development Standards. Recreation District deleted 969.9.19 General Industrial District. Permitted Uses deleted 969.9.20 Resource Production District. Permitted Uses deleted 969.9.21 General Commercial District. Permitted Uses deleted 969.9.22 Public, Quasi Public and Institutional District Permitted Uses deleted 969.9.23 Residential Low, Medium and High-Density Districts Permitted Uses deleted 969.9.24 Planned Residential Developments Conditional Uses deleted 969.9.25 Mobilehome Districts. Permitted Uses deleted 969.9.26 Districts With Oil Suffixes. Permitted Uses deleted 969.9.28 Flood Plain Districts (-FP1, FP2) deleted 969.9.29 Conditional Use Permit Required--Any District deleted Article 970 ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS 9700 General Provisions 240.04A 9701 Environmental Processing 240.04D 9701.1 Administrative Fees 240.06 9702 Environmental Assessment Committee Established 240.04B 9702.1 Committee Membership 240.04B 9702.2 Duties 240.04B 9703 Environmental Determination 240.04E 9704 Mitigation Measures 240.04F 9704.1 Monitoring and Reporting Program 240.04G 9705 Appeal 240.04A ARTICLE 973 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 9730 Height limitations. Exception 230.72 9730.2 Public uses. All districts deleted 9730.4 Dedication required 230.84A 9 730.6 Exceptions to required dedication 230.84B 9730.8 Horticultural uses 230.84B 9730.10 Right-of-way dedication determinants 230.84C 9730.12 Improvement required 230.84D 9730.14 Improvement deferred 230.84D 9730.16 Installation of improvements. Exception 230.84D 9730.18 Encroaching doors or entry gates deleted 9730.20 . Screening and rooftop mechanical features 230.76 9730.22 Minor accessory structures deleted 9730.24 Agricultural stands 230.86 9730.26 Christmas tree and pumpkin sales lots 230.86 9730.28 Trailer, temporary structures or construction offices 230.16 9730.30 Commercial coaches deleted 9730.32 Subdivision sales offices and model homes 230.18 9730.34 Use permits required for multiple dwellings 210.04C 9730.36 Home occupations. Conditions 230.12 9730.38 Inspection of premises 230.12C 9730.40 Home occupation application deleted div9indx 13 p.8�k7_3 9730.42 Revocation of home occupation permit. Appeal 248.04 9730.44 Commercial, professional and industrial uses Housing of goods 230.34 9730.48 Nonrelated persons. Twenty-four hour care 204.06E 9730.50 Applications. Criteria for deleted 9730.52 Temporary commercial parking lots 23 1.18 9730.54 Temporary conunercial parking lots. Revocation of use permit 241.16 9730.56 Seasonal parking lots 23 1.18 9730.57 Seasonal parking lots. Conformance to standards prior to permit. Revocation of permit 231.18F, 241.16 9730.58 Automobile related standards deleted 9730.60 Trash areas 230.78 9730.62 Archeological remains deleted 9730.64 Temporary outdoor events 241.20 9730.66 Residential parking requirements. Coastal zone 231.18D.5 9730.68 Private garages and carports. Residential uses 231.18D 9730.70 Certificate of occupancy 240.02 9730.80 Certificate to operate deleted 9730.85 Satellite dish antennas 230.80 9730.85.1 General provisions 230.80 9730.85.2 Satellite dish antennas attached to main structures 230.80 9730.85.3 Satellite dish antennas detached from main structures 230.80 9730.85.4 Satellite dish antennas--Exception 230.80 9730.86 Transportation demand management 230.36 9730.86.1 Purpose and intent 230.36A 9730.86.2 Definitions 230.3613 - 9730.86.3 Applicability 230.36C 9730.86.4 Site de a opp ent standards 230.36D y7 3n.87 Re61 Z% ? In i'/ /�eVelo,o�,e - ' `/ v�s�a zs Z 'de.� a! �c.ot- lJefi�'/Article 975 203.0� 7 ADULT BUSINESSES 9750 Purpose deleted 9751 Definitions 204.I OA 9752 Conditional use permit 211.04 9753 Limitation on location 211.04C 9754 Violation and penalty 249.08, 249.10 Article 977 YARDS AND FENCING 9770 General provisions 230.88 9771 Permitted Fences and Walls 230.88A 9772 Required Walls 230.8813 9773 Street Intersection Visibility 230.88C Article 978 SETBACK 9780 Initiation of Proceeding Prescribed deleted 9780.1 Petition: Map deleted 9780.2 Initiation by Motion deleted 9781 Power to Establish Setback Line deleted 9782 Public Hearing deleted 9783 Resolution Recommending Setback deleted div9indx 14 9784 Adoption of Setback Plan by Council deleted Public Hearing: Notice deleted 9785 Change by Council deleted 9786 Effect of Setback Ordinance deleted 9787 Enforcement of Setbacks deleted 9787.1 Setback Requirements deleted Article 980 GENERAL, 9800 Effect of recommendations of commission Relocated to Title 2 9800.1 Notice of decisions of commission 248.10 9801 Provisions--Exceptions applicable deleted 9801.1 Interpretation--Requirements as minimum deleted 9801.2 Private agreements 202.04J 9801.3 Conflicting ordinances 202.041 9801.4 Redevelopment project areas deleted 9802 Local planning and district regulations 201.06 Article 981 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR 9810 Zoning Administrator 202.10E 9811 Duties 202.10E, 241.04, 250.12D 9811.1 Conditional exceptions 241.04 9811.1.1 11241.1O13 9811.2 Use permits 241.10A 9811.2.1 241.10A 9811.2.2 241.10A 9811.2.3 241-l OA 9811.2.4 Time limit 241.16 9811.3 Tentative parcel maps 250.12D 9811.3.1 Lot line adjustment 250.12D 9811.4 Site plan amendments 241.18 9811.5 Relocation permits deleted 9811.5.1 " deleted 9811.6 Administrative review deleted 9811.6.1 Administrative review--Time limit deleted 9812 Authority deleted 9812.1 fldeleted 9812.2 itdeleted 9812.3 deleted 9812.3.1 251.08 9812.3.2 248.10 9812.5 deleted 9813 Applications 241.06 9813.1 Filing 202.04C 9813.2 Filing fees 241.06, 240.06 9814 Hearing 241.08 9814.1 Time of hearing 248.02 9814.2 Notice of hearing 248.04 9814.3 Hearing date continuance deleted 9814.4 Findings of fact and decision time limit 248.08, 248.10 9814.5 Notice of Zoning Administrator's decision 248.10 div9indx 15 9814.6 Records of hearings deleted 9815.4 Appeal by applicant or interested party to the Planning Commission and thereafter to City Council 248.18, 248.20 9815.4.1 Time limit 241.14, 248.16 9815.4.2 Form and content 248.20A, 248.20B 9815.4.3 Filing place and notification 248.20A, 248.20C 9815.4.4 Filing fee 248.06, 240.26 9815.4.5 Hearing date continuance deleted 9815.4.6 Decision by the appeal body 248.20D 9815.4.7 Finding of fact and decision time limit deleted 9815.4.8 Notice of appeal body decision 248.10 9816 Revocation for delay 249.06 9816.1 Time limit 241.16A 9816.1.1 to deleted 9816.1.2 It241.16C 9817 Change of district classification deleted 9818 Application after denial 248.12 9820 Effectuation 202.04 Article 983 CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION 9830 Grounds For Recommendation 241.02A, 241.04 9831 Petition for Exceptions--Form 241.06 9832 Plans and Other Matters--Showing Required 241.06 9832.1 Exceptional Circumstances 241.1013 9832.2 Necessity to Property Rights 241.10B 9832.3 Absence of Detriment 241.1013 9832.4 Good Faith deleted 9833 Hearing and Findings of Hardship Required 241.10C 9834 Reason for Procedural Provisions deleted 9835 Change of District Boundary deleted 9836 Terms, Conditions, Time Limit, Guarantees 241.12, 241.16 9837 Revocation for Delay 249.06 9837.1 Time Limit 241.16A, 248.16 9837.2 Any building or structure set up, erected, built, moved or maintained and/or any use of property contrary to the provisions of the Article 202.04D 9838 Change of District Classification deleted 9839 Application After Denial 248.12 Article 984 CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS 9840 Conditional Use Permits--Intent and Purpose 241.02A 9841 Applications 241.06 9841.1 Filing 241.04C 9841.2 Filing Fee 241.06, 240.26 9841.3 Public Hearing 241.08 9841.4 Denial by Planning Commission 241.10 9841.5 Conditional Use Permit Approval 241.12, 241.04 div9indx 16 9841.5,l Site Plan Amendments 241.18 9841.6 Hearing Date Continuance deleted 9841.7 Finding of Fact and Decision 248.08, 248.10 98411 Failure to Act deleted 9841.9 Notice of Decision 248.10 984130 Effective Date of Approval 241.14, 248.16 9842 Appeal to or Challenge by the City Council 241.14 9842.1 Time Limit 241.14 9842.2 Form and Content 248.10 9842.3 Report deleted 9842.4 Filing Fee 248.06, 240.26 9842.5 Notice of Time of Hearing 248.20C 9842.5.1 Hearing Date Continuance deleted 9842.6 Action by City Council 248.20D 9842.6.1 Finding of Fact and Decision deleted 9842.6.2 Notice of City Council Decision 248.10 9843 Time Limit 241.16 9843.1 Revocation for Delay by City Council 249.06 9843.2 Actual Construction Defined deleted 9843.3 Discontinued Use of Land, Building or Premises 241.16 9843.4 Extension of Time Limits 248.16 9844 Unlawful Use 202.04D 9845 Failure to Comply. Certificate of Occupancy Withheld 241.16 9846 Hearing 249.06 9847 Application After Denial 248.12 9848 Certificate of Occupancy and Final Building Inspection Withheld 202.04 Article 985 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 9850 Design Review Board Established deleted 9851 Duties 244.02, 244.04, 202.10, 148.18 9852 Appeals 202.10E 248.20 9853 Membership 244.04A 9853.1 Terms of Office 244.04A 9853.2 Bylaws deleted 9853.3 Secretary deleted 9854 Application 244.02 9854.1 Design Criteria 244.06 9854.2 Design Factors 244.06 9854.3 Design Review Board Guidelines 244.06 Article 986 APPLICATIONS 9860 Form of Applications 241.06 9861 Verification of Application. Data 202.04C 9862 Rejection of Faulty Application deleted 9863 Fees to Cover Costs 240.06, 241.06 9864 Filing Fee deleted 9865 Additional Fees deleted 9866 Filing, Reference of Applications 202.10C 9867 Repealed - Ord 3138-6/92 9868 Multiple Applications 241.0813 div9indx 17 Article 987 HEARINGS 9870 Public Hearing 248.02 9870.1 Setting of Public Hearing 248.02 9870.2 Hearing By Commission Before Favorable Recommendation 248.04 9870.3 (Repealed Ord. Nos. 495, 556, 1782-11/72) 9871 Notice of Hearings. Newspaper Publication 248.04 9872 Additional Notice 248.04 9872.1 Posting Notices: Time 248.04 9872.1.1 Distance Between Notices deleted 9872.1.2 Extension Beyond Limits of Property deleted 9872.1.3 Limits of Extension deleted 9873 Form of Posted Notices deleted 9874 Mailing Notices in Lieu of Posting 248.04, 202.04A 9875 Time of Hearing 248.02 9876 Rules: Continuances deleted 9877 Failure of Commission to Act 248.22 9878 Summary Denial deleted Article 988 APPEAL 9880 Appeal By Applicant or Interested Parties 248.02A 9881 Challenge By City Council 248.28 9882 Report deleted 9883 Notice 248.20G 9884 Action of Appeal 248.20D 9885 Issuance of Permits or Entitlements Prohibited d4lote& -2 a pfC M Article 989 SITE PLAN 9890 Site Plans - Intent& Purpose deleted 9891 Applications deleted 9891.1 Filing deleted 9891.2 Filing Fee deleted 9891.3 Hearings deleted 9891.4 Action by Commission deleted 9881.5 Effective Date of Approval deleted 9892 Appeal to or Challenge byThe City Council deleted 9892.1 Time Limit deleted 9892.2 Form and Content deleted 9882.3 Report deleted 9892.4 Filing deleted 9892.5 Notice of Time and Hearing deleted 9892.6 Action by City Council deleted 9893 Time Limit deleted 9894 Discontinuance of Use deleted 9895 Application After Denial deleted 9896 Effectuation deleted div9indx g Article 989.5 COASTAL, DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 989.5.0 Purpose 245.02 989.5.1 Definitions 245.04 989.5.2 General Requirements 245.06 989.5.3 Exemption. Additions to Existing Single-Family Dwellings 245.08A 989.5.3.1 Exemption. Existing Structures Other Than Single-Family Dwellings 245.08A 989.5.3.2 Exemption. Dredging of Navigation Channels 245.0813 989.5.3.3 Exemption. Maintenance and Repair of Shoreline Protective Works 245.08C 989.5.3.4 Exemption. Utility Connections 245.08D 989.5.3.5 Exemption. Replacement of Destroyed Structures 245.08E 989.5.3.6 Exemption. Development Projects in Coastal Zone deleted 989.5.3.7 Exemption. Public Service Emergency Measures 245.08 989.5.3.8 Exemption. Ongoing Repair and Maintenance by Public Agencies and Utilities 245.08G 989.5.3.9 Exemption. Lot Line Adjustments deleted 989.5.3.10 Exemption. Agricultural Crops deleted 989.5.3.11 Exemption. Land Division for Public Recreation deleted 989.5.3.12 Categorical Exclusions. General 245.10 989.5.3.13 Categorical Exclusions. Minor Developments 245.08H 989.5.3.14 Categorical Exclusions. Districts in Exclusion Areas245.1 OA 989.5.3.15 Categorical Exclusions. Miscellaneous Activities 245.08I, 245.1 OB, 245.1 OC, 245.1 OD 989.5.4 CDP Procedures 245.12-245.30 989.5.5 Appeals 245.32 989.5.6 Application After Denial 245.34 989.5.7 Expiration of CDP 245.36 989.5.8 CDP Amendment 245.38 989.5.9 Enforcement Provisions deleted 989.5.10 Revocation 249.06 989.5.11 Procedures for Open Space Easements and Public Access 245.40 CITY SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE Article 990 GENERAL PROVISIONS 9900 Citation and Authority 250.02 9901 Conformity to General Plan and Waiver 250.04 9902 Definitions 250.10 9903 Advisory Agencies 250.12 9904 Prohibition 258.02 9905 Filing Fees 250.16 9906 Engineering and Inspection Fees 255.12A, 255,12D Article 99fl SUBDIVISION COMMITEE 9910 Subdivision Committee 250.12G 9911 Duties of Committee 250.12G 9912 Meeting of Committee 251.08A 9913 Procedures deleted div9indx 19 Article 992 PARCEL MAP PROCEDURES 9920 Parcel Map Requirement 250.14B. 9920.1 Waiver of Parcel Map 250.14B 9920.2 Certificate of Compliance 258.06 9921 Tentative Parcel Map Requirement 250.14B Article 993 TENTATIVE MAPS 9930 Filing of(Subdivision) 251.02. 9930.1 Tentative Parcel Map 251.04, 250.14B 9930.2 Tentative Map 251.04, 250.14A Article 994 EXPIRATION, EXTENSIONS, AND RECORDATION OF MAPS 9940 Expiration of Tentative Maps and Tentative Parcel Maps 251.14 9941 Extension on Tentative Maps and Tentative Parcel Maps 251.16 9942 City Council Approval and Recordation of Final Maps and Parcel Maps deleted Article 995 APPEALS 9950 Appeals, Advisory Agency 251.12 9951 Appeal Fee 248.26 9952 Notice 248.20C Article 996-A DEDICATION 9960 Dedication Regulations for Streets, Alleys, Drainage, Public Utility Easements and Other Public Easements 254.02 9960.1 Waiver of Direct Access to Streets 254.04 9960.2 General Design. Streets deleted 9960.3 Lot Merger 257.02 9960.4 Notice of Merger. Hearing 257,04, 257.06 9960.5 Review or Appeal to Planning Commission 257.10 9960.6 Review by or Appeal to City Council 257.10 9960.7 Recordation of Notice. Effect deleted Article 996-B PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES 9961.1 Purpose 254.08A 9961.2 Requirements 254.08B 9961.2.1 Option to Defer Fees 254.08K 9961.3 General Standard 254.08C 9961.4 Standards and Formula for Dedication of Land 254.08D 9961.5 Population Density 254.08E 9961.6 Formula for Fees in Lieu of Land Dedication 254.08F 9961.7 Criteria for Requiring Both Dedication and Fee 254.08G 9961.8 Amount of Fee in Lieu of Land Dedication 254.08H 9961.9 Subdivision Not Within General Plan deleted div9indx 20 9961.10 Determination of Land or Fee 254.08I 9961.11 Credit for Private Open Space 254.08J 9961.12 Credit for Special Facilities deleted 9961.13 Credit for Site Improvement and Development 254.08K 9961.14 Procedure 254.08F 9961.15 Commencement of Development 254.08L 9961.16 Exemptions 254.08M 9962 School Site Dedication Requirements 254.1 OA 9962.1 Procedure 254.1 OB 9962.2 Payments to Subdivider for School Site Dedication 254.1 OC 9962.3 Exemptions 254.1OD 9963 Reservation Requirements 254.12A 9963.1 Standards and Formula for Reservation of Land 254.1213 9963.2 Procedure 254.08C 9963.3 Payment 254.08D 9963.4 Termination 254.12E 9964 Drainage and Sewer Facilities. Payment of Fees Required 254.20 9965 Bridge Crossings and Major Thoroughfares. Purpose 254.16 9966 Supplemental Improvements Required 254.18A 9966.1 Supplemental Improvements. Reimbursement Agreement. Funding Procedures 254.18C, 254.18D 9966.2 Supplemental Improvements. Drainage, Sewerage, Bridges, and Major Thoroughfares deleted 9967 Soil Reports 251.06C, 251.06D 9968 Final Map. Monuments 253.1OF 9968.1 Bench Marks deleted 9968.2 Field Notes deleted. 9968.' Recordation 253.1OF 9969 Environmental Impact 251.06A 9969.1 Grading and Erosion Control deleted Article 997 IMPROVEMENT SECURITY 9970 Improvement Security Required 255.16A 9971 Improvement Security Amount 255.16C, 255.16E 9972 Improvement Security. Special Assessment Proceeding. Reduction deleted 9973 Improvement Security, Release 255.16G Article 998 REVERSION TO ACREAGE 9980 Reversion to Acreage by Final Map 256.02 9981 Initiation of Proceedings by Owners 256.04A 9982 Initiation of Proceedings by City Council 256.04B 9983 Data for Reversion to Acreage 256.06 9984 Fees deleted 9985 Proceedings Before the City Council 256.10 9986 Return of Fees, Deposits. Release of Securities deleted 9987 Delivery of Final Map 256.12 9988 Effect of Filing Reversion Map with the County Recorder 256.12 div9indx 21 I Article 999 VESTING TENTATIVE MAPS 9990 Citation and authority deleted 9990.1 Purpose and Intent deleted 9990.2 Consistency 252.14 9990.3 Application 252.02 9990.4 Vesting Tentative Map--Conditional Use Permit required 252.02C 9990.5 Expiration of Vesting Tentative Maps 252.08 9990.6 Extension on Vesting Tentative Maps 252.08 9990.7 City Council Approval and recordation of Final Vesting Map 252.1OC1 9990.8 Expiration of vesting rights conditioned on approval of final map 252.1 OC 9990.9 Application for one-year extension 252.08, 252.1 OC.3 9990.10 Filing and processing "_.,t 252.04 9990.11 Other departments--review required deleted 9990.12 Fees 252.06 9990.13 Vesting on approval of Vesting Tentative Map 252.10 9990.14 Vesting Tentative Map--Conditions attached to vested right 252.1OB 9990.15 Vested rights affected by building permit application 252.1OC div9indx 22 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 9300 Specific plans. The following specific plans are on file in the office of the City Clerk and the Department of Community Development: (a) Seabridge Specific Plan. (b) Huntington Harbor Bay Club Specific Plan. (c) Downtown Specific Plan (c-1) Downtown Specific Plan Areas 1, 7, and 8-A. (c-2) Downtown Specific Plan Areas 2 and 6. (c-3) Downtown Specific Plan Areas 3, 4, 5, 8-B, 9, 10, and 11. (d) Seacliff Specific Plan. (e) Ellis-Goldenwest Specific Plan. (f) Meadowlark Specific Plan. (g) Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan. (h) Magnolia Pacific Specific Plan. (i) North Huntington Center Specific Plan. (j) Pacifica Community Specific Plan. 4\Ord:Specific Plans-RLS 94-147\08/03/94 r Date/Time 4/28/98 11:18:27 AM City of Huntington Reach Page 1 Office of the City Clerk Records Ref Category Subject Entered Status Document Expires Box ID Label 640.10 12/31/94 Active 5234 Code Amendment#91-10 Environmental Assessment#91- 32 Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance (Division 9 Rewrite)4/94 TO 10/94 (2 of 2) Ordinances 3252/3253/3254 640.10 7/18/94 Active 5172 Code Amendment#91-10/Environmental Assessment#91- 32 - Proposed Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance (Division 9 Rewrite) -7/18/94 (File 1 of 2) Ordinance 3252/3253/3254 Total Records Detailed: 2