Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHolly Seacliff Specific Plan - Ordinance 3350 - Code Amendme 'L)4- - Council/Agency Meeting Held: YZ-1/97 (6 - Deferred/Continued to: � W*V� ErApproved ❑ Conditionally A pr ed ❑ Denied 6hy Clerk's Sign ture N� Council Meeting Date: April 7, 1997 Department ID Number: CD 97-14 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ®40 -33 50 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS SUBMITTED BY: MICHAEL T. UBERUAGA, City Administrator PREPARED BY: MELANIE S. FALLON, Community Development Directorh SUBJECT: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 96-2/1-OCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO. 96-3 (HOLLY SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN) (CONTINUED FROM MARCH 17, 1997) Statement of Issue,Funding Source,Recommended Action,Alternative Action(s),Analysis,Environmental Status, Attachment(s) Statement of Issue: Transmitted for your consideration is a request by PLC Land Company to amend the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan (HSSP) to allow RL-3 (small lot detached housing) development in RM and RMH (Residential Medium and Medium High Density) districts and to include Z-lot development in the list of permitted uses in the districts. As a result of this request staff recommends modifications to the standards for residential development in areas designated for RL-1, RL-2 and RL-3 development. The changes to the RL-1 and RL-2 standards are minor and allow for increased building articulation. Similar changes are proposed for the RL-3 district. In addition, staff recommends a common open space requirement, a modification to side yard setback calculations and a decrease in site coverage for the RL-3 district. The applicant is in agreement with the proposed changes. The Planning Commission approved the request on February 11, 1997. Staff recommends approval of the request as approved by the Planning Commission. Funding Source: Not applicable. Recommended Action: PLANNING COMMISSION AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: "Approve Code Amendment No. 96-2 by adopting Ordinance No. (ATTACHMENT NO. 1) and Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 96-3 by approving Resolution No. f47-//6 (ATTACHMENT NO. 2) with findings (ATTACHMENT NO. 3)." REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: April 7, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 97-14 Planning Commission Action on February 11 1997: THE MOTION MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECONDED BY INGLEE, TO APPROVE CODE AMENDMENT NO. 96-2 AND LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO. 96-3, WITH FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL AND FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL (ATTACHMENT NO. 1) CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: LIVENGOOD, HOLDEN, TILLOTSON, SPEAKER, INGLEE NOES: BIDDLE, KERINS ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE MOTION PASSED Alternative Action(s): The City Council may make the following alternative motion(s): 1. "Deny Code Amendment No. 96-2 and Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 96-3 with findings." 2. "Continue Code Amendment No. 96-2 and Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 96- 3 and direct staff accordingly." CD97-14.DOC -2- 03/20/97 5:14 PM REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: April 7, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 97-14 Analysis: A. PROJECT PROPOSAL: Applicant: PLC, 23 Corporate Plaza, Ste. 250, Newport Beach, CA 92660 Location: The Holly Seacliff Specific Plan area is located south of Ellis Avenue and north of Palm Avenue, west of Main Street and east of the City's western boundary. Code Amendment No. 96-3 represents a request to amend the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan (HSSP) to allow RL-3 development in RM (Residential-Medium Density) and RMH (Residential-Medium High Density) districts and to include Z-lot development in the list of permitted uses in the districts pursuant to Section IV.C.6.b. of the HSSP. The development standards for the RM and RMH areas of the HSSP allow for attached single family units, condominiums, townhomes and multi-family projects. The development standards for RL-3 areas specify small lot, detached or attached single family units. The applicant proposes that RL-3 projects be allowed in areas that are designated for RM and RMH land uses so that, if desired, they can build small lot, detached single family units in these areas. (The applicant is not requesting to lower the allowable densities of the RM and RMH areas but to allow a different product type.) The applicant has indicated that the request is necessary to provide greater flexibility in project development and to respond to the higher demand for small lot, detached single family units. PLC also requests that the list of permitted uses in the RM and RMH district be expanded to include Z-lot homes. Z-lot homes are similar to zero lot line developments which are currently permitted in the HSSP. They differ from zero lot line units in their orientation to side property lines. The applicant requests the addition of Z-lot homes to the permitted uses because this type of development allows for larger usable yard areas than the traditional zero lot line development. As a result of PLC's request, staff is recommending modifications to some of the development standards for residential development in areas designated for RL-1, RL-2 and RL-3 development. The HSSP currently does not have development standards for balconies, bay windows and other architectural features in the rear and front yards, nor does it address patio covers in the side or rear yards. The proposed changes by staff would specify required setbacks for these items. These structural improvements are frequently requested by property owners; therefore, it is important that the HSSP identify what the development standards are for them. Another recommended change pertains to side yard setbacks for eaves; the allowances in the HSSP are inconsistent with the Uniform Building Code. Staff also proposes three other changes for the RL-3 district: 1) that site coverage be reduced from 60 to 55 percent, 2) that a certain amount of open space be provided in RL-3 CD97-14.DOC -3- 03/20197 5:14 PM REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: April 7, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 97-14 projects that are developed in RM and RMH land use areas, and 3) that the calculation for side yard setbacks be modified. These changes are in response to PLC's request to build small lot projects in the RM and RMH areas. Pursuant to PLC's request, staff also recommends that a definition of a Z-lot be incorporated in the HSSP. B. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AND RECOMMENDATION: The proposed code amendment was initially considered by the Planning Commission on January 28, 1997 (Attachment No. 9). Staff recommended the Planning Commission take straw votes to approve the changes to the RL-1 and RL-2 standards and continue action on the RL-3 standards to allow additional time for the applicant and staff to resolve two outstanding issues. The Planning Commission voted accordingly and continued the request to February 11, 1997. In addition to the applicant, three members of FANS (Friends and Neighbors of Seacliff) and a representative for Lennar Homes spoke in support of the request. At the February 11, 1997 Planning Commission meeting, two members of FANS and the applicant spoke in favor of the proposed code amendment. Commissioner Biddle raised a question about potential fiscal impacts to the City if less units are built. Staff responded that detached housing generally carries a higher assessed value than attached housing and that this benefit may outweigh any potential loss from fewer units being built. Additionally, staff commented if there are fewer residents because of less units, there likely will be less demand for City services. Finally, staff noted that PLC is obligated, under the terms of the Holly Seacliff Development Agreement, to construct and install a certain amount of infrastructure improvements regardless of the number of units that are constructed. Commissioner Biddle also indicated that the RL-3 lots would be too small, and the street scene would be negatively impacted by too many garages. Commissioner Kerins asked how the proposed code amendment would benefit the city. Staff responded that the code amendment will allow for greater variation in housing product and will open homeownership opportunities to more people. Commissioner Kerins stated that the RL-3 standards for rear yard setback and garage front setback were insufficient. He also indicated that the minimum dimension proposed by staff for the common open space area was too small. Commissioner Kerins raised these same issues at the January 28, 1997 meeting. Staff responded to these issues in the February 11th staff report (Attachment No. 10). Commissioner Inglee commented that if potential buyers find that the RL-3 developments have yard areas that are too small then they can choose to purchase a different lot. The Planning Commission voted to approve the proposed code amendment as recommended by staff and forward it to the City Council. Commissioners Inglee, Holden, Tillotson, Speaker and Livengood voted in favor of the request; Commissioners Biddle and Kerins voted against the request. CD97-14.DOC -4- 03/20/97 5:14 PM REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: April 7, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 97-14 C. STAFF ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION: This analysis discusses how the applicant's request to allow small lot detached single family homes in the RM and RMH areas would affect the overall development concept of the HSSP. Staff's recommendations are largely in response to the applicant's request and are proposed to ensure that the resulting development is compatible with the intent of the HSSP. History The Holly Seacliff Specific Plan was adopted in April 1992. One of the stated goals of the HSSP is to provide a diversity of housing types. The residential areas were planned to provide a range of densities, including large detached single family homes (RL-1), small lot detached single family homes (RL-3) and various types of multi-family dwellings (RM and RMH). There is also an RL-2 category which is analogous to RL development in the rest of the city. In preparing the HSSP, considerable attention was given to the amount of open space that would be provided. In exchange for not providing as many neighborhood parks as would normally be required, the developer at that time was allowed to dedicate approximately 40 acres of land for use as the Harriett M. Wieder Regional Park. In addition, the HSSP calls for three neighborhood parks. The developer will also create an open space/wetlands area south of Ellis Avenue. The HSSP requires that RM and RMH projects provide common open space within their projects. The Specific Plan notes that these private recreational facilities will augment the public recreational opportunities in the area. Citv's Ability to Modify the HSSP Development Standards The Code Amendment consists of two components: changes requested by the applicant and changes recommended by staff. These changes would affect residential property within the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan area. Most of this property is also governed by the Holly Seacliff Development Agreement No. 90-1. The Development Agreement (DA) specifies that changes to the land use regulations (the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan) must be mutually agreed upon by the developer and the City as they apply to properties governed by the (DA). In other words, the City may adopt changes to the HSSP but these changes would not apply to DA properties unless the developer agreed to the changes. Staff has received an opinion from the City Attorney to confirm this. It should be noted that the developer does not have the right to selectively choose what changes they agree to. They must agree to all or none of the changes of the proposed code amendment. To date, the applicant is in agreement with all of the proposed changes. CD97-14.DOC -5- 03/20/97 5:14 PM hEQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: April 7, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 97-14 Applicant's Request to Allow RL-3 Development in RM or RMH areas Within the HSSP there are 12 areas designated for RM or RMH development which permits densities of 15 and 25 units to the acre, respectively. These areas represent 175 gross acres and, if developed with the maximum number of units allowed by the HSSP, could accommodate 2,360 units. To date, there are four approved projects in the RM and RMH areas with a unit total of 476. Only one of the projects has been completed. There is currently one area of the HSSP that is designated for RL-3 development. This area is located between Goldenwest and Gothard Streets and is south of Ellis Avenue. The applicant has an approved project (formerly known as Sherwood/Annandale) at this site for 234 small lot, detached single family homes which will begin construction in 1997. RL-3 projects require a minimum lot size of 3,300 square feet which is equivalent to 13.2 units per acre. Assuming some of the RM and RMH areas are developed consistent with the applicant's request, the maximum number of units that would be built in the HSSP area would decrease. Alternatively, the RM and RMH areas could be developed at their original intended densities. Attachment No. 7 depicts the residential districts of the HSSP; Attachment No. 8 summarizes the development potential of the RM and RMH areas. It shows that if all remaining RM and RMH property were developed at maximum densities there would be 2,172 units; if these same properties were developed with RL-3 projects there would be 1,903 units. Thus, in the extreme case there would be 12.4 percent (269) fewer units. The applicant's request would probably result in a decrease in density in the HSSP area, although the RL-3 development at 13.2 units per acre is comparable to RM development at 15 units per acre. It would likely increase the number of detached single family homes and decrease the number of apartments, condominiums, duplexes and townhomes. The change in product type would also result in a slight decrease in vehicle trips generated, based on remaining land and average densities. Staff supports the applicant's request to construct small lot, detached single family units per the RL-3 standards in the RM and RMH areas. By providing more opportunities for small lot single family subdivisions, there will be greater product differentiation within the HSSP area. Staff does not believe it likely that all of the remaining RM and RMH areas will be developed with the detached single family product and expects that a variety of condominiums, townhomes and apartments will be constructed as originally envisioned when the HSSP was created. The proposed text changes to the HSSP requested by the applicant are presented in the Legislative Draft in Sections III.D.4 and III.D.5 (Attachment No. 4). In response to the applicant's request, staff recommends that a common open space element be required of RL-3 projects developed in the RM and RMH areas. This feature is currently required in RM and RMH projects. Staffs recommendation is discussed in detail below. CD97-14.DOC -6- 03/20/97 5:14 PM REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: April 7, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 97-14 PLC's request also includes amending the list of permitted uses in the RM and RMH districts to include Z-lot homes. A definition of a Z-lot home is proposed by staff and is presented in Attachment No. 4, Section III.B.4. Z-lot developments have become an increasingly attractive alternative to the traditional zero lot line development because they provide larger usable yard areas and result in less building bulk close to the front property line. Staff supports the applicant's request to include Z-lot development in the list of permitted uses finding that it is comparable to other permitted uses in the district. Staffs Request to Modify Development Standards for RL-1, RL-2 and RL-3 Most of the recommended changes are minor in nature. They include items not currently addressed in the HSSP, items in conflict with the Uniform Building Code (UBC), and items based on site plan reviews and previously approved projects. These minor changes are briefly listed below with the recommended setbacks provided in a summary table in Attachment No. 5. The legislative draft of the HSSP is presented as Attachment No. 4. • Balconies, Bay Windows and Fireplaces within front and rear yard setback areas (Not currently in the HSSP) • Patio Covers within side and rear yard setback areas (Not currently in the HSSP) • Eaves within side yard setback area (Resolves conflict with the UBC) • Exterior side yard setback for bay windows, balconies and architectural features (In RL-1 and RL-2 districts, based on other projects) • Minimum required building separation in RL-2 district (Corrects an inconsistency in the HSSP) Three other changes recommended by staff are more significant and would only affect RL-3 development. The changes are to: 1) site coverage, 2) side yard setbacks for the dwelling and garage and 3) open space. These recommendations are discussed in greater detail and are supported by the applicant. • Site Coverage The current site coverage requirement for RL-3 development is 60 percent. All other development in the HSSP is limited to 50 percent site coverage. This standard is consistent with the requirements of the ZSO. Exceptions are made in the zoning code for 55 percent site coverage for lots which abut parks, water, flood control channels, etc. Staff recommends that the RL-3 standard be changed to 55 percent, provided that a certain amount of common CD97-14.DOC -7- 03/20/97 5:14 PM BEQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: April 7, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 97-14 open space is required, as discussed below. If the common open space requirement is not approved, staff recommends that the site coverage requirement be 50 percent. Staff is recommending this change because 60 percent is too high and could create excessive massing and bulk on the RL-3 lots which are intended to be small lots. Coupled with the common open space requirement, the 55 percent site coverage would yield sufficient yard area and minimize massing and bulk. 0 Side Yard Setback Calculation Side yard setbacks for RL-3 development are currently a minimum of three feet on the interior and a minimum of five feet on the exterior. Staff recommends a new standard that recognizes that as a lot increases in width so too should its setback from property lines (and other buildings) because a larger lot typically results in a larger unit. The proposed standard would require the equivalent of 20 percent of the lot width be provided in side yard setback areas with a cap on the maximum that is needed. Specifically, staff recommends a minimum of three feet and a maximum requirement of five feet on the interior side yard and a minimum of six feet, maximum of eight feet on the exterior side yard. The minimums are consistent with the current standards in the HSSP, and the maximums are consistent with standard size residential lot setbacks. The 20 percent calculation method is also used in the Downtown Specific Plan. The Legislative Draft, page III-18, (Attachment No. 4) contains a diagram depicting the setback requirement. This calculation for side yard setbacks will give more flexibility for project design and allow for better building articulation. • Open Space The RL-3 development standards do not currently contain requirements for common open space. (This is because the original RL-3 area includes approximately 17 acres of open space, including a four acre neighborhood park.) In response to the request by PLC to allow RL-3 development in RM and RMH areas, staff believes that such a requirement is necessary. When the HSSP General Development Plan was created it was assumed that the RM and RMH areas would be developed as such and provide the requisite amount of common open space. Combined with the other open space and neighborhood parks envisioned in the HSSP area, this open space would ensure adequate recreation area for residents. Staff believes that the overall balance of open space could be potentially hampered by the applicant's request unless a certain amount of open space is required for the type of development proposed by the applicant. For projects with 20 or more units, staff recommends that 150 square feet of common open space be provided for each unit with less than 40 feet of lot frontage and that 100 square feet per unit be provided for lots with 40 feet or more of lot frontage, with no less than 3,000 square feet and a minimum dimension of 50 feet. This recognizes that larger lots will generally have more private yard area for residents to use. Staffs recommendation would yield an approximate minimum of 600 square feet of open space per unit (common and CD97-14.DOC -8- 03/20/97 5:14 PM REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: April 7, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 97-14 private) for a RL-3 project developed in a RM or RMH area and would also result in more open space on a per unit basis than a RM or RMH project. For project with less than 20 units, staff recommends that a minimum of 600 square feet of open space per unit in either private or common open space be provided. If some of the open space is provided as common, a minimum dimension of 10 feet would be required. This dimension is sensitive to the smaller size of the projects and the option of common or private open space provides flexibility to these smaller size projects. School District Miti at�ion_ The Huntington Beach Union High School District submitted a letter prior to Planning Commission action stating that they are opposed to the code amendment unless a mitigation agreement is reached between the District and PLC (Attachment No. 11). PLC presented an offer to the District on February 4, 1997; the District responded on March 3rd. PLC sent a second proposal to the District on March 19th. D. SUMMARY The proposed code amendment would modify the development standards of the HSSP and permit small lot, detached single family development in areas designated for attached residential units. Many of the changes recommended by staff address setback issues that are currently not addressed in the HSSP or conflict with the Uniform Building Code. The more significant of the changes pertain to RL-3 development and staff's recommendations for less site coverage, potentially greater side yard setbacks and common open space. The proposed changes are reasonable and related to the applicant's request to allow RL-3 development in the RM and RMH areas. Staff and the Planning Commision support the applicant's request contingent upon approval of all the changes proposed. Environmental Status: The City Council approved Final Environmental Impact Report No. 89-1 for the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan in January 1990. The proposed changes to the HSSP will not increase allowable densities in the Specific Plan are or change the nature of the development that was anticipated in the EIR. Pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 4501, Class 20, which supplements the California Environmental Quality Act, minor amendments to the zoning ordinances are exempt from further environmental review. CD97-14.DOC -9- 03/20/97 5:14 PM REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: April 7, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 97-14 Attachment Us : City Clerk's Page Number 1. Ordinance No. 33SOfor Code Amendment No. 96-2 2. Resolution No. 97--1 for Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 96-3 3. Findings for Approval 4. Legislative Draft- vsems. C- — �0-aa ,,Ct 5. Summary Matrix of Proposed CTTiianges 6. Vicinity Map 7. Map of RM, RMH and RL-3 areas 8. Summary of Development Potential in RM and RMH areas of HSSP area 9. Planning Commission Staff Report dated January 28, 1997 10. Planning Commission Staff Report dated February 11, 1997 - 11. Letter from Huntington Beach Union High School District I 12. Request for Council Action dated March 17, 1997 CD97-14.DOC -10- 03/20/97 5:14 PM 3. INDEPENDENT PUBLISH DATE: 5/8/97 - - 97 LEGAL NOTICE - ORDINANCE NO. 3350 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING THE HUNTNGTON BEACH ORDINANCE CODE BY AMENDING THE HOLLY-SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN (CODE AMENDNIENT NO. 96-2) FC/L L 7-,EX � WHEREAS, pursuant to the Planning and Zoning Law, the California Government Code Section 65493 et seg, the Planning Commission and the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, after notice duly given, have held separate public hearings relative to Code Amendment No. 96-2, which will amend the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan to allow RL-3 development in areas designated for RM and RNMH development and to modify the development standards for RL-I, RL-2 and RL-3 development, wherein both bodies have carefully considered all information presented at said hearings; and After due consideration of the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, and all other evidence presented, the City Council finds that the aforesaid amendment to the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan 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. The Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan is amended to incorporate Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated by reference as Code Amendment No. 96-2 to the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Which is part of the City of Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. SECTION 2. This ordinance shall take effect thirty days after its adoption. AVAILABLE IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting held April 21 1997, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers: Julien, Harman, Dettloff, Bauer, Green, Garofalo NOES: Councilmembers: Sullivan ABSENT: Councilmembers: None CITY OF HUN'TINGTON BEACH CONNIE BROCKWAY CITY CLERK L z ORDINANCE NO. 3350 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING THE HUNTINGTON BEACH ORDINANCE CODE BY AMENDING THE HOLLY-SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN (CODE AMENDMENT NO. 96-2) WHEREAS, pursuant to the Planning and Zoning Law,the California Government Code Section 65493 et seq, the Planning Commission and the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, after notice duly given, have held separate public hearings relative to Code Amendment No. 96-2, which will amend the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan to allow RL-3 development in areas designated for RM and RMH development and to modify the development standards for RL-I, RL-2 and RL-3 development, wherein both bodies have carefully considered all information presented at said hearings; and After due consideration of the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, and all other evidence presented,the City Council finds that the aforesaid amendment to the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan 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. The Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan is amended to incorporate Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated by reference as Code Amendment No. 96-2 to the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan which is part of the City of Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. SECTION 2. This ordinance shall take effect thirty days after its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the2lst day of April , 1997. 45�— Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: zZ Z City Clerk City„Attorney REVIEW PrND APPROVED: INITIATED AND APPROVED: I City Administrator Director of Co unity Development d , 1 - -- 4/s:PCD:Ordinance:Amd-96-2 RLS 97-110 + EXHIBIT F} 3350 EXHIBIT A LEGISLATIVE DRAFT d. In the case of proposed development adjacent to existing structures and infill development involving individual lots with a grade differential of three (3) feet or greater between the high point and the low point, determined before rough grading, Use Permit approval shall be required. Use Permit approval shall be based upon a building and grading plan which terraces the building with the grade and which is compatible Nvith adjacent development. 2. Planning Areas The four areas depicted on the Development Plan, bounded by major streets as shoxvii, and labeled 1, 1I, 11I and IV. 3. PlanninQ Unit A sub-area of a Planning Area numbered and identified on the Development Plan and Land Use Table. 4. Z-lot A lot in which the house is laid out in a diagonal between its front and rear yards and the creation of use easements with other residential properties on its sides results in wider usable side yards. C. General Provisions All development activity within the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Area will be subject to the following general conditions and requirements, as noted. 1. Permitted Uses a. Permitted Uses within the Specific Plan Area shall be defined in the Development Standards section for each district or subarea. b. All requests for residential density transfers shall comply with the procedures contained in Section IV-D, Density Transfer Procedure. C. In addition to Permitted Uses, Unclassified Uses shall be permitted in accordance with the regulations contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. y d. Nonconforming Uses shall be permitted within the Specific Plan Area in accordance with the regulations contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 3350 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT f. Maximum Site Coverage iMaximum site coverage shall be fifty (50) percent. The maximum site coverage shall be fifty-five (55) percent for all lots abutting a park, recreation area or public utility right-of-way which is a minimum of 100- feet in clear width. g. Setback (Front Yard) The minimum setback from the front property lines for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be as follows: D,vellings: Fifteen (15) feet. Front entry garages of and carports: Twenty (20) feet. Side entry garages: Ten (10) feet. Balconies, Bay windows, Eaves and Fireplaces: Twelve (12) feet, except eight (8) feet on side entry garage. h. Setback (Side Yard) The minimum setback from the side property lines shall be as follows: 1) Interior Side Yard Dwellings, patio covers, garages, carports and accessory buildings: Minimum of five (5) feet. Eaves: Eighteen41 Thirty (30) inches. Fireplaces: Thirty (30) inches. Bay windows, enfeefed balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Three (3) feet. 2) Exterior Side Yard DNvellings, side garages, carports, and accessory buildings: Minimum of ten (10) feet. Eaves: Eighiee n 41 inches Seven (7) feet. Bay Nvindoxvs, un-ree€ed balconies, open stairways, architectural features Eight (8) fee* and Fireplaces: Seven and one-half(7.5) feet. Unenclosed patio covers: Five (5) feet. 3350 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT i. Setback Rear Yard) The minimum setback from the rear property lines shall be as follows: L = D\vellings: Twenty (20) feet. Garages or accessory buildings: Minimum of five (5) feet. Bay windows, balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Fifteen (15) feet. Unenclosed patio covers: Five (5) feet. j. Building Separation The minimum building separation bet\t'een buildings on the same lot shall be ten (10) feet. k. Open Open space shall be provided on the lot by the required minimum setback areas. I. Pa Parking shall comply with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. m. Miscellaneous Requirements Accessory buildings may be permitted on a lot with a permitted main building. The minimum distance bevveen an accessory building and any other building on the same lot shall be ten (10) feet. Setback requirements are as previously specified. n. Parkwav Landscaping One (1) 36-inch box tree per lot. If a parkway is not provided, the required street tree shall be planted %\ithin the front setback prior to final inspection. 3350 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2. Low Density Residential 2 (RL-2) a. Purpose The Low Density Residential 2 district is intended to provide for single- family detached dwelling units at low densities in Plamling Area I11. b. Permitted Uses 1) Single-family detached dwelling units (including zero lot line, Z-lot and patio homes) and their associated accessory buildings, subject to approval of a conditional use permit and a tentative parcel map or tentative tract map. 2) Golf Course maintenance facility, subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. c. i\-linimum Parcel Size/Frontage A licensed land surveyor or civil engineer shall submit calculations showing lot width, depth and area for any new parcel. 1) The minimum lot size shall be five thousand (5,000) square feet on one-half of the total number of lots and a minimum six thousand (6,000) square foot lots for the balance. 2) The minimum lot frontage shall be fifty (50) feet. The minimum required lot frontage for cul-de-sac and knuckle lots shall be forty- five (45) feet; however if one additional off-street parking space is included, the minimum shall be thirty (30) feet. d. IMaximum Densitv/Intensity The maximum density shall not exceed one (1) dwelling unit per lot. Second units are not permitted. e. \Maximum Building Height The maximum building height shall be Thirty-five (35) feet and a maximum of two (2) stories. f. Maximum Site Coverage Maximum site coverage shall be fifty (50) percent. The maximum site coverage shall be fifty-five (55) percent for all lots abutting a park. recreation area, or public utility right-of-way which Is a Inlnlmulm of 100- feet in clear \\idth. - rh«„Q'7) I 3350 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT g. Setback Front Yard) The minimum setback from the front property lines for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be as follows: = Dwellings: Fifteen (15) feet. Front entry garages of and carports: Twenty (20) feet. Side entry garages: Ten (10) feet. Balconies, Bay windows, Eaves and Fireplaces: Twelve (12) feet, except eight (8) feet on side entry garage. h. Setback (Side Yard) The minimum setback from the side property lines shall be as follows: 1) Interior Side Yard Dwellings, patio covers, garages, carports and accessory buildings: Minimum of five (5) feet. Eaves: Eighteen "4` Thirty (30) inches. Fireplaces: Tliirty (30) inches. Bay windows, uerae€ed balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Three (3) feet. 2) Exterior Side Yard Dwellings, sideentf}garages, carports and accessory buildings: ivlinimum of ten (10) feet. Eaves: Eighteen "Q` inehes Seven (7) feet. Bay v,-indows, unfeefed balconies, open stairways, architectural features Eight (9) f and Fireplaces: Seven and one-half(7.5) feet. Unenclosed patio covers: Five (5) feet. 3) ENceptlon for Zero Lot Line A zero side yard setback or a zero rear yard setback shall be permitted as long as the following requirements are met: • The lot adjacent to the zero setback side or rear yard shall be held under the same ownership at the time of application and the setback for the adjacent lot shall be either zero or a minimum of ten (10) feet. 0 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT • T All architectural features shall comply with the Uniform Building Code. pr-ejec-t ever the pr-epeAy iine, except reaftep eaves ne greater than 2-4- in • The zero setback shall not be adjacent to a public or private right-of-way. • Exposure protection between structures shall be provided as specified by the Fire Department and the Building Division. i. Setback (Rear Yard) The minimum setback from the rear property lines shall be as follows: Dwellings: Twenty (20) feet. Garages or accessory buildings: Five (5) feet. Bay windows, balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Fifteen (15) feet. Unenclosed patio covers: Five (5) feet. j. Building Separation The minimum building separation between buildings on the same lot shall be ten (10) feet. k. Open Space Open space shall be provided on the lot by the required minimum setback areas. 1. Parking Parking shall comply with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. in. Miscellaneous Requirenients Accessory buildings may be permitted on a lot with a permitted main building. The minimum distance between an accessory building and any other building on the same lot shall be sue) ten (10) feet. Setback requirements are as previously specified. Prior to the approval of a tentative tract map adjacent to the Seacliff Golf Course, preliminary landscape plans and development/open space edge treatinents plans should be submitted for City approval. Tlicse plans ti 3350 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT should provide for the review of planting compatibility along the relevant edge of the development. n. Parkway Landscaping One (1) 36-inch box tree per lot. If a parkway is not provided, the required street tree shall be planted within the front setback prior to final inspection. 3. Low Density Residential 3 (RL-3) a. Purpose The Low Density Residential 3 District is intended to provide for single- family detached or attached dwelling units at low densities in Planning Area 11. b. Permitted Uses Single-family detached or attached dwelling units (including zero lot line, Z-lot and patio homes) and their associated accessory buildings, subject to approval of a conditional use permit and tentative parcel map or tentative tract map. c. Minimum Parcel Size/Frontage A licensed land surveyor or civil engineer shall submit calculations showing lot width, depth and area for any new parcel. 1) The minimum lot size shall be three thousand-three hundred (3,300) square feet. 2) The minimum lot frontage shall be thirty (30) feet; however, the minimum required lot frontage for cul-de-sac and knuckle lots shall be twenty (20) feet. d. Nfaximurn Density/Intensity The maximum density shall not exceed one (1) dwelling unit per lot. Second units are not permitted. e. N,laximum Building Height The maximum building height shall be thirty-five (35) feet and a maximum of two (2) stories. 3350 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT f. Maximum Site Coverage Maximum site coverage shall be sixty-(€0) fifty-five (55) percent. g. Setback (Front Yard) The minimum setback from the front property lines for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be as follows: Dwellings: Fifteen (15) feet. Front entry garages or carports: Eighteen (18) feet. Side entry garages: Ten (10) feet. Baywindows, eaves, fireplaces and balconies: S (6 Twelve (12) feet, except 10 feet on side entry garage. h. Setback (Side Yard) The minimum setback from the side property lines shall be as follows: 1) Interior Side Yard Dwellings, patio covers, garages and accessory buildings: minimum aggregate twenty (20) percent of lot frontage at any point of the structure; with minimum three (3) feet on any interior yard but need not exceed five (5) feet for aggregate ten (10) feet]. Eaves: Eighteen Thirty (30) inches. Fireplaces: Thirty (30) inches. Bay windows, eefeefed balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Three (3) feet. 2) Exterior Side Yard Dwellings, garages, carports and accessory buildings: minimum aggregate t`venty (20) percent of lot frontage at any point of the structure; with minimum six(6) feet on any extet•ior yard but need not exceed eight (8) feet for aggregate of thirteen (13) feet]. Bay windows, enr-eefed balconies, open stairways. architectural features Four- ( " f e4. eaves Eighteen "4` inches and Fireplaces: Three and one-half(3.5) feet. Patio covers: Three (3) feet. 3350 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT ILLUSTRATION OF SIDE YARD SETBACKS ----------------r---------------- —__ I 1 I ( la G I 1 1 i 1 I I I 1 1 1 S. sT u I u to 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 I T t i 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ( i I i 1 1 I 1 1 1 I I I 1 I 1 . 1 t 1 sa--------t — 1 STREET ,I Lot Frontage=50 ft. 20%of Frontage=10 ft 3) Exception for Zero Lot Line A zero side yard setback or a zero rear yard setback shall be permitted as long as the following requirements are met: • The lot adjacent to the zero setback side or rear yard shall be held under the same ownership at the time of application and the setback for the adjacent lot shall be either zero or a minimum of six(6) feet. • `T^pei4ien of the dwelling or-any All architectural features shall comply with the Uniform Building Code. prejee-t line,ever-the pr-epei:ty e�ieept Feeftn eaves r, greater than lit • The zero setback shall not be adjacent to a public or private right-of-way. • Exposure protection between stnictures shall be provided as specified by the Fire Department and the Community Development Department. III-is (hssp97) 3350 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT i. Setback (Rear Yard) The minimum setback from the rear property lines shall be as follows: i Dwellings: Fifteen (15) feet. Garages or accessory buildings: Five (5) feet. Balconies, Bay windows, open stairways and architectural features: Twelve (12) feet. Unenclosed patio covers: Five (5) feet. j. Building Separation; ' The minimum building separation between buildings on the same lot shall be six (6) feet. k. Open Space Open space shall be provided on the lot by the required minimum setback areas, except where an RL-3 development is constructed on property designated for RAM and RMH development projects with 20 or more units shall provide common open space (recreation area) as follows: 150 square feet per lot for lots with less than 40 feet of lot frontage, and 100 square feet per lot for lots with 40 feet or more of lot frontage. In no case shall the common open space area be less than 3,000 square feet. The minimum dimension of the common open space area shall be 50 feet. The total common open space area required may be provided in one or more areas as long as each area is a minimum of 3,000 square feet and has a minimum dimension of 50 feet. For projects with less than 20 units, a minimum 600 square feet of open space (private or common) shall be provided per unit. Private open space excludes side and front yard setback areas. If a portion is provided as common 9pen space that area shall have a minimum dimension of 10 feet. 3350 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1. Parkin Parking shall comply with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. m. Miscellaneous Requirements Accessory buildings may be permitted on a lot with a permitted main building. The minimum distance between an accessory building and any other building on the same lot shall be six (6) feet. Setback requirements are as previously specified. All streets within Planning Unit II-1 shall be privately maintained but permit public access. The site plan shall be designed as an inward-oriented planned community. n. Parkwav Landscaping One (1) 36-inch box tree per forty-five (45) feet of street frontage or fraction thereof. If a parkway is not provided, the required street tree shall be planted within the front setback of each lot prior to final inspection. 4. Medium Density Residential (R I) a. Purpose The Medium Density Residential district is intended to provide for single family detached and attached dwelling units, condominiums, townhomes and multi-family residential developments at medium densities. b. Permitted Uses 1) Single-family attached condominiums, townhouses, stacked flats and multi-family dwelling units (including apartments), and customary accessory uses and structures permanently located on a parcel, subject to approval of a conditional use permit and a tentative parcel map or tentative tract map. 2) Single family detached dwelling units (including zero lot line, Z-lot and patio homes) and their associated accessory buildings are permitted in accordance with the development standards contained in the RL-3 District (Section D herein), subject to approval of a conditional use permit and tentative parcel map or tentative tract map. 4450 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2) Landscaping: All setback areas visible from an adjacent public street and all common open space areas shall be landscaped and pennanently maintained in an attractive manner with permanent automatic irrigation faci ' '. automlitres provided. Trees shall be provided at a rate of one (1) 36-inch box tree per sixty (60) feet of street frontage or fraction thereof. 3) A transportation corridor in Planning Area II shall be set aside and maintained in accordance with Development Agreement 90-1 and as illustrated in Exhibit 19. Habitable floor area shall be set back a minimum of ten (10)feet from the southerly five hundred (500) feet on both sides of the corridor. The corridor shall also be landscaped to the extent legal access is available to the developer. �. Medium-High Density Residential (RI11M a. Purpose The Medium-High Density Residential district is intended to provide for single family detached and attached dwelling units, condominiums, townhomes and multi-family residential developments at medium-high I densities. I b. Permitted Uses 1) Single-family attached condominiums, townhouses, stacked flats and multi-family dwelling units (including apartments), and customary accessory uses and structures. i 2) Plan Review: Conditional Use Permit. 3) Single family detached d`ti elling units (including zero lot line, Z-lot and patio homes) and their associated accessory i buildings are permitted in accordance with the development standards contained in the RL-3 District I (Section D herein), subject to approval of a conditional use permit and tentative parcel map oi- tentative tract ` inap. c. Maximum Densitv/lntensity The maximum density shall not exceed density twenty-five (25) unit/gross acres. Ord. No. 3350 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 a regular meeting thereof held on the 7th of March, 1997, and was again read to said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 21st of April, 1997, and was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council. AYES: Julien, Harman, Dettloff, Bauer, Green, Garofalo NOES: Sullivan ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None I,Connie Brockway CITY CLERK of the City of Huntington Beach and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council,do hereby certify that a synopsis of this ordinance has been published in the Independent on , 19 City Clerk and ex-officio derk In accordance with the City Charter of said City of the City Council of the City Connie Brockway City Clerk of Huntington Beach, California Deputy City Clerk G/ordinanc/ordbkpg S/1/97 RESOLUTION NO. 97-16 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ADOPTING LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO. 96-3 (CODE AMENDMENT NO. 96-2)AND REQUESTING ITS CERTIFICATION BY THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION WHEREAS, after notice duly given pursuant to Government Code Section 65090 and Public Resources Code Sections 30503 and 30510,the Planning Commission of the City of Huntington Beach held public hearings to consider the adoption of the Huntington Beach Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 96-3, which is a request to amend the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan; and Such amendment was recommended to the City Council for adoption; and The City Council, after giving notice as prescribed by law,held at least one public hearing on the proposed Huntington Beach Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 96-3, and the City Council finds that the proposed amendment is consistent with the Huntington Beach General Plan,the Certified Huntington Beach Coastal Land Use Plan and Chapter 6 of the California Coastal Act; and The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach intends to implement the Local Coastal Program in manner fully consistent with the California Coastal Act, I NOW, THEREFORE,the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby resolve as follows: 1. That the Huntington Beach Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 96-3, consisting of Code Amendment No. 96-2, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by this reference as though fully set forth herein, is hereby approved. 1 g*97resolAcpa96-3 rls 97-110 i 97-16 2. That the California Coastal Commission is hereby requested to consider, approve and certify Huntington Beach Local Coastal Program Amendment 96-3. I . .- 3. That pursuant to Section 13551(b) of the Coastal Commission Regulations, Huntington Beach Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 96-3 will take effect automatically I upon Coastal Commission approval, as provided in Public Resources Code Sections 30512, I 30513, and 30519. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 7th day of April , 1997. Mayor I ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: L� City Clerk City Attorney i REVIEWED AND APPROVED: INITIATED AND APPROVED: City Administrator Director of Comm ity Development i ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Ordinance No. 3350 (Code Amendment No. 96-2) Exhibit B: Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Area Map 2 g*97reso1:1cpa96-3 rls 97-110 97-16 �d I'� ORDINANCE NO. 3350 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING THE HUNTINGTON BEACH ORDINANCE CODE BY AMENDING THE MOLLY-SEACLIFFSPECIFIC PLAN (CODE AMENDMENT NO. 96-2) WHEREAS,pursuant to the Planning and Zoning Law,the California Government Code Section 65493 et seq,the Planning Commission and the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach,after notice duly given,have held separate public hearings relative to Code Amendment No. 96-2,which will amend the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan to allow RL-3 development in areas designated for RM and RMH development and to modify the development standards for RL-1.RL-2 and RL-3 development,wherein both bodies have carefully considered all information presented at said hearings;and After due consideration of the findings and recommendation of the Planning Commission,and all other evidence presented,the City Council finds that the aforesaid amendment to the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan is proper and consistent with the General Plan; NOW,THEREFORE,the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby ordain as ,L follows: SECTION 1. The Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan is amended to incorporate Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated by reference as Code Amendment No.96-2 to the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan which is part of the City of Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. SECTION 2. This ordinance shall take effect thirty days after its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the2lst day of April , 1997. A40� "zt� Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO/FORM: City Clerk ty Attorney ++ 1-J-b REVIEW D APPROVED: INITIATED AND APPROVED: C ty Administrator Director of Co unity Development 1 4/S:PCD:Ordinance:Amd-96-2 RLS 97-110 �, ; 3350/97-16 EXHIBIT A LEGISLATIVE DRAFT d. In the case of proposed development adjacent to existing structures and infill development involving individual lots with a grade differential of three (3) feet or greater between the high point and the low point, determined before rough grading, Use Permit approval shall be required. Use Permit approval shall be based upon a building and grading plan which terraces the building with the grade and which is compatible with adjacent development. 2. Planning Areas The four areas depicted on the Development Plan, bounded by major streets as shown, and labeled I, II, III and IV. 3. Planning Unit A sub-area of a Planning Area numbered and identified on the Development Plan and Land Use Table. 4. Z-lot . s A lot in which the house is laid out in a diagonal between its front and rear yards and the creation of use easements with other residential properties on its sides results in wider usable side yards. C. General Provisions All development activity within the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Area will be subject to the following general conditions and requirements, as noted. 1. Permitted Uses a. Permitted Uses within the Specific Plan Area shall be defined in the Development Standards section for each district or subarea. b. All requests for residential density transfers shall comply with the procedures contained in Section IV-D, Density Transfer Procedure. C. In addition to Permitted Uses. Unclassified Uses shall be permitted in accordance with the regulations contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. d. Nonconforming Uses shall be permitted Nvithin the Specific Plan Area in accordance with the regulations contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 3350/97-16 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT f. Maximum Site Coverage Maximum site coverage shall be fifty (50)percent. The maximum site coverage shall be fifty-five (55) percent for all lots abutting a park, recreation area or public utility right-of-way which is a minimum of 100- feet in clear width. g. Setback Front Yard) The minimum setback from the front property lines for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be as follows: Dwellings: Fifteen (15) feet. Front entry garages of and carports: Twenty(20) feet. Side entry garages: Ten(10) feet. Balconies, Bay windows, Eaves and Fireplaces: Twelve (12) feet, except eight (S) feet on side entry garage. h. Setback Side Yard) The minimum setback from the side property lines shall be as follows: 1) Interior Side Yard Dwellings, patio covers, garages, carports and accessory buildings: Minimum of five (5) feet. Eaves: Eighteen (18)Thirty (30) inches. Fireplaces: Thirty (30) inches. Bay windows, enree€e balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Three (3) feet. 2) Exterior Side Yard D%vellings,-side-eatr-y garages, carports, and accessory buildings: Minimum of ten (10) feet. Eaves: Eighteen "4` i ,hes Seven (7) feet. Bay windows, u r-eefed balconies, open stairways, architectural features Eigjit (8) f e4 and Fireplaces: Seven and one-half(7.5) feet. Unenclosed patio covers: Five (5) feet. r 3350/97-16 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT i. Setback (Rear Yard) The minimum setback from the rear property lines shall be as folloNvs: Dwellings: Twenty (20) feet. Garages or accessory buildings: Minimum of five (5) feet. Bay windows, balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Fifteen (15) feet. Unenclosed patio covers: Five (5) feet. j. Building Separation The minimum building separation between buildings on the same lot shall be ten (10) feet. k. Open Space Open space shall be provided on the lot by the required minimum setback areas. 1. Parking Parking shall comply with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. m. Miscellaneous Requirements Accessory buildings may be permitted on a lot with a permitted main building. The minimum distance between an accessory building and any other building on the same lot shall be ten (10) feet. Setback requirements are as previously specified. n. Parkwav Landscaping One (1) 36-inch box tree per lot. If a parkway is not provided, the required street tree shall be planted within the front setback prior to final inspection. 3350/97-16 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2. Low Density Residential 2 (RL-2) a. Purpose The Low Density Residential 2 district is intended to provide for single- family detached dwelling units at low densities in Plamiing Area III. b. Permitted Uses 1) Single-family detached dwelling units (including zero lot line, Z-lot and patio homes) and their associated accessory buildings, subject to approval of a conditional use permit and a tentative parcel map or tentative tract map. 2) Golf Course maintenance facility, subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. c. Minimum Parcel Size/Frontage A licensed land surveyor or civil engineer shall submit calculations showing lot«vidth, depth and area for any new parcel. 1) The minimum lot size shall be five thousand (5,000) square feet on one-half of the total number of lots and a minimum six thousand (6,000) square foot lots for the balance. 2) The minimum lot frontage shall be fifty (50) feet. The minimum required lot frontage for cul-de-sac and knuckle lots shall be forty- five (45) feet; however if one additional off-street parking space is included, the minimum shall be thirty (30) feet. d. Maximum Density/Intensity The maximum density shall not exceed one (1) dwelling unit per lot. Second units are not permitted. e. Nfaximum Building Height The maximum building height shall be Thirty-five (35) feet and a maximum of M-o (2) stories. f. Maximum Site Coverage Maximum site coverage shall be fifty (50) percent. The maximum site coverage shall be fifty-five (55) percent for all lots abutting a park. recreation area. or public utility right-of-way \\hich is a mininium of 100- --___. __ feet in clear x\idth. 3350/97-16 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT g. Setback (Front Yard) The minimum setback from the front property lines for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be as follows: Dwellings: Fifteen (15) feet. Front entry garages of and carports: Twenty (20) feet. Side entry garages: Ten (10) feet. Balconies, Bay windows, Eaves and Fireplaces: Tivelve (12) feet, except eight (3) feet on side entry garage. h. Setback (Side Yard) The minimum setback from the side property lines shall be as follows: 1) Interior Side Yard DNvellings, patio covers, garages, carports and accessory buildings: Minimum of five (5) feet. Eaves: Eighteeii (18)Thirty (30) inches. Fireplaces: Thirty (30) inches. Bay windows, enn-eefed balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Three (3) feet. 2) Exterior Side Yard DNvellings, side enti5l garages, carports and accessory buildings: Minimum of ten (10) feet. Eaves: Eighteen "4' ine es Seven (7) feet. Bay windoxvs, unfee€ed balconies, open stairways, architectural features Eight (8) feet and Fireplaces: Seven and one-half(7.5) feet. Unenclosed patio covers: Five (5) feet. 3) Exception for Zero Lot Line A zero side yard setback or a zero rear yard setback shall be permitted as long as the following requirements are met: • The lot adjacent to the zero setback side or rear yard shall be held under the same ownership at the time of application and the setback for the adjacent lot shall be either zero or a minimum of ten (10) feet. 3= '97-16 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT • `T ti f the dwell All architectural features r.v=pv r.avi rt,r-.,ice. shall comply with the Uniform Building Code. preject- vsez the Yrvp .riJ zm., ". ... 11 inelies. • The zero setback shall not be adjacent to a public or private right-of-way. • Exposure protection between structures shall be provided as specified by the Fire Department and the Building Division. i. Setback (Rear Yard) The minimum setback from the rear property lines shall be as follows: Dwellings: Twenty (20) feet. Garages or accessory buildings: Five (5) feet. Bay windows, balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Fifteen (15) feet. Unenclosed patio covers: Five (5) feet. j. Building Separation The minimum building separation bet,,N•een buildings on the same lot shall be ten (10) feet. k. Open Space Open space shall be provided on the lot by the required minimum setback areas. 1. Parking Parking shall comply with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. in. Miscellaneous Requirements Accessory buildings may be permitted on a lot with a permitted main building. The minimum distance between an accessory building and any other building on the same lot shall be six(6) ten (10) feet. Setback requirements are as previously specified. Prior to the approval of a tentative tract map adjacent to the Seacliff Golf Course. preliminary landscape plans and development/open space edge treatments plans should be submitted for City approval. These plans r n n 3350 /97-16 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT f. imaxinnnn Site Coverage Nfaximum site coverage shall be sixty(60) fifty-five (55) percent. g. Setback (Front Yard) The minimum setback from the front property lines for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be as follows: Dwellings: Fifteen (15) feet. Front entry garages or carports: Eighteen (1 S) feet. Side entry garages: Ten (10) feet. Bay,%vindows, eaves, fireplaces and balconies: Twelve (12) feet, except 10 feet on side entry garage. h. Setback Side Yard) The minimum setback from the side property lines shall be as follows: .M . 1) Interior Side Yard Dwellings, patio covers, garages and accessory buildings: minimum aggregate twenty (20) percent of lot frontage at any point of the structure; with minimum three (3) feet on any interior yard but need not exceed five (5) feet [or aggregate ten (10) feet]. Eaves: Eighteei ( Q` Thirty (30) inches. Fireplaces: Thirty (N) inches. Bay windows, mnfee€ed balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Three (3) feet. 2) Exterior Side Yard Dwellings, garages, carports and accessory buildings: minimum aggregate t-Aventy (20) percent of lot frontage at any point of the structure; with minimum six(6) feet on any exterior yard but need not exceed eight (3) feet [or aggregate of thirteen (13) feet]. -Side entry garage er c-aF eF}S: Six (6) f et Bay windows, unFeefed balconies, open stairways, architectural features Four- "` f. e4. ea\-es Eighteen (IS) e'es and Fireplaces: Three and one-half(3.5) feet. Patio covers: Three (3) feet. 3350/97-16 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT should provide for the review of planting compatibility along the relevant edge of the development. n. Parkway Landscaping One (1) 36-inch box tree per lot. If a parkway is not provided, the required street tree shall be planted within the front setback prior to final inspection. 3. Low Density Residential 3 (RL-3) a. Purpose The Low Density Residential 3 District is intended to provide for single- family detached or attached dwelling units at low densities in Plarming Area II. b. Permitted Uses Single-family detached or attached dwelling units (including zero lot line, Z-lot and patio homes) and their associated accessory buildings, subject to approval of a conditional use permit and tentative parcel map or tentative tract map. c. Minimum Parcel Size/Frontage A licensed land surveyor or civil engineer shall submit calculations showing lot width, depth and area for any new parcel. 1) The minimum lot size shall be three thousand-three hundred (3,300) square feet. 2) The minimum lot frontage shall be thirty (30) feet; however, the minimum required lot frontage for cul-de-sac and knuckle lots shall be twenty (20) feet. d. Maximum Density/Intensity The maximum density shall not exceed one (1) d,,velling unit per lot. Second units are not permitted. e. Nlaximum Building Height The maximum building height shall be thirty-five (35) feet and a maximum of two (2) stories. lhcc„97) 3350/97-16 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT ILLUSTRATION OF SIDE YARD SETBACKS ----------------r----------------�--- 1 1 I 1 1 q• 6. 1 1 I i I I 1 I 1 S•T u i ucc N 1 i 1 1 1 1 I 1 3' I • I 1 T 1 1 i 1 I 1 1 i j I I 1 I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 50' 1 50' 1 L----------------i.---------------..i--- STREET Lot Frontage=50 ft. 20%of Frontage=10 tL 3) Exception for Zero Lot Line A zero side yard setback or a zero rear yard setback shall be permitted as long as the following requirements are met: • The lot adjacent to the zero setback side or rear yard shall be held under the same o«nership at the time of application and the setback for the adjacent lot shall be either zero or a minimum of six (6) feet. Nle Peftien ef the dwelling or-any All architectural features shall comply with the Uniform Building Code. p1=ejeet ever the prepei:l�- line, exeept reeftep eaves ne than 24 inches. • The zero setback shall not be adjacent to a public or private right-of-way. e Exposure protection between structures shall be provided as specified by the Fire Department and the Conununity Development Department. I 3350/97-16 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT i. Setback Rear Yard) The minimum setback from the rear property lines shall be as follows: Dwellings: Fifteen (15) feet. Garages or accessory buildings: Five (5) feet. Balconies, Bay windows, open stairways and architectural features: Twelve (12) feet. Unenclosed patio covers: Five (S) feet. J. Building Separation The minimum building separation between buildings on the same lot shall be six (6) feet. k. Open Space Open space shall be provided on the lot by the required minimum setback areas, except where an RL-3 development is constructed on property designated for RIM and RIMH development projects with 20 or more units shall provide common open space (recreation area) as follows: 150 square feet per lot for lots with less than 40 feet of lot frontage, and 100 square feet per lot for lots with 40 feet or more of lot frontage. In no case shall the common open space area be less than 3,000 square feet. The minimum dimension of the common open space area shall be SO feet. The total common open space area required may be provided in one or more areas as long as each area is a minimum of 3,000 square feet and has a minimum dimension of 50 feet. For projects with less than 20 units, a minimum 600 square feet of open space (private or common) shall be provided per unit. Private open space excludes side and front yard setback areas. If a portion is provided as common open space that area shall have a minimum dimension of 10 feet. 4450/97-16 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2) Landscaping: All setback areas visible from an adjacent public street and all common open space areas shall be landscaped and pennanently maintained in an attractive manner with permanent automatic irrigation facilities provided. Trees shall be provided at a rate of one (1) 36-inch boat tree per sixty (60) feet of street frontage or fraction thereof. 3) A transportation corridor in Planning Area II shall be set aside and maintained in accordance with Development Agreement 90-1 and as illustrated in Exhibit 19. Habitable floor area shall be set back a minimum of ten (10) feet from the southerly five hundred (500) feet on both sides of the corridor. The corridor shall also be landscaped to the extent legal access is available to the developer. 5. `tedium-High Density Residential (RAIN) a. Puipose The Medium-High Density Residential district is intended to provide for single family detached and attached d`velling units, condominiums, r townhomes and multi-family residential developments at medium-high densities. b. Permitted Uses 1) Single-family attached condominiums, townhouses, stacked flats and multi-family dwelling units (including apartments), and customary accessory uses and structures. 2) Plan Review: Conditional Use Pen-nit. 3) Single family detached d`velling units (including zero lot line, Z-lot and patio homes) and their associated accessory buildings are permitted in accordance `with the development standards contained in the RL-3 District (Section D herein), subject to approval of a conditional use permit and tentative parcel map or tentative tract snap. c. N-faximum Densitvllntensity The maximum density shall not exceed density twenty-five (25) unit/gross acres. 3350 /97-16 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1. Parking Parking shall comply with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. m. Miscellaneous Requirements Accessory buildings may be permitted on a lot with a permitted main jbuilding. The minimum distance between an accessory building and any other building on the same lot shall be six (6) feet. Setback requirements are as previously specified. All streets within Planning Unit II-1 shall be privately maintained but permit public access. The site plan shall be designed as an inward-oriented planned community. n. Parkwav Landscaping One (1) 36-inch box tree per forty-five (45) feet of street frontage or fraction thereof. If a parkway is not provided, the required street tree shall be planted within the front setback of each lot prior to final inspection. 4. 1Zedium Density Residential (RA-) a. Purpose The Medium Density Residential district is intended to provide for single family detached and attached dwelling units, condominiums, tow-nhomes and multi-family residential developments at medium densities. b. Permitted Uses 1) Single-family attached condominiums, townhouses, stacked flats and multi-family dwelling units (including apartments), and customary accessory uses and structures permanently located on a parcel, subject to approval of a conditional use permit and a tentative parcel map or tentative tract map. 2) Single family detached dwelling units (including zero lot line, Z-lot and patio homes) and their associated accessory buildings are permitted in accordance with the development standards contained in the RL-3 District (Section D herein), subject to approval of a conditional use permit and tentative parcel map or tentative tract map. r 97-16 Ord. No. 3350 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 a regular meeting thereof held on the 7th of March, 1997, and was again read to said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 21st of April, 1997, and was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council. AYES: Julien, Harman, Dettloff, Bauer, Green, Garofalo NOES: Sullivan ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None I,Connie Brockway CITY CLERK of the City of Huntington Beach and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council,do hereby certify that a synopsis of this ordinance has been published in the Independent on • 19 City Clerk and ex-officio Kerk In accordance NN ith the City Charter of said City of the City Council of the City Connie Brockway City Clerk of Huntington Beach, California DelutYCity Clerk G/ordinanc/ordbkpg 5/l/97 ' r LEGEND LOW DENSITY pESiDENTULt i 7�1 1E! y j.. a.ter•c LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 2 �1 �_ �t� ..r w•c ✓(�' N --� pL-� LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL T (•i:.if ter:tS:r��i--ei. -•I r _ _ _J 4-._- [Mr Ar.mN •r•wAc_ _ �yT.iw i'r i.;57�'q:li f'i c'���`-,.�;�' '•irrur:r.i.i�:•iii�.•.wn�r.�::;.ljr�"• ._ L'T?��s �t _.3-i�:..1 �. _:L,�...,.. ......- _ ten►-"j'", �y,.=.r��.-.(°,�i�'.r'-�r-�j #r� -•I c( y J 1 1 ,\ •4'~ti.,- tiy /,•j RM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL •i I1 7{' .,,! #f� \�\ PMII MEDIUM,NIOH DENSITY IRESIDENTIAL r _ 1 / I RL•3 ,� ' \\` MO MIRED DEYELDPMfNT `` R•2 t AL21 ELLIS-GOLGENWEST \ ` I-�' 1 SPECIFIC PLAN _ `� I_ .__ ; - ,\ •i =1 INDUSTRIAL AREA (I \ i __-- l: RM \ E OS OPEN SPACE rw - PLANNING AREA 1-4 ti OS _ ail r 11 PlA11NING UNIT 114 we a L RL-1 I -- --..-. _ RMH �.fl� H iI NE%G..ORNOOD PA..S L.. OS .g �'w+.�fJJi�f•J iii�niiai.7ii�.:rii.�ii•unw•...•��i.�:r SAiL'iI.LL -" i.•.r.....�r.A��....(.�..A�r.••.�•..fw•• I AE�wrrr. 7 •k m T EC6 1 x.a�.br .JRMIIW7=. OLJ RM RMH 111.5 OS o c , ' .. l ) .—_ I. 1-3 �. M_. RL•2 All III �r \ RL•2 �`) _. � •O Ar•Iw•i l � MCI roAsutzoNE � '.\ 000NnAnr- •'\ a own'�•rJnu• �" •� � EXHIBIT 3 ICITY I1OfF` HUNTINGT fOI(N BE (A�)CIH / f� � f'� � f�� GENERAL DEMELOPM NT PLAN II Ill(0)l� L 1v�I'��)[ ; ;' Cl11 ,HIrl[I- A rhll ,lf�` C7 1P I LCII11.3HV, j� IL l,��ll\i �1Hlliilllll ( i �i�u�r� Res. No. 97-16 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 resolution was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council at an adjourned regular meeting thereof held on the 7th day of April, 1997 by the following vote: AYES: Harman, Dettloff, Bauer, Green, Garofalo NOES: Sullivan ABSENT: Julien cG City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California G/resol uti/resbkpg/97-28 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 &_0TICE HEREBY and published in the City of Huntington PUBLIC NOTICE GIVEN that the above Item NOTICE OF Is located in the appealable Beach, County of Orange, State of PUBLIC HEARING Iurlsdlctlon of the Coastal BEFORE THE done and Includes Local California and that attached Notice is a CITY COUNCIL OF Coastal Program Amend- THE CITY OF meet No. 96.3 which has been filed In conjunction true and complete copy as was printed HUNTINGTON BEACH with the above request. and published in the Huntington Beach NOTICE IS HEREBY N FILE: A copy of the file GIVEN that an March 17, proposed request is on and Fountain Valley issues of said Council1997,at Chambers,bens,M In 000 the City Clerk's Office, Council Chambers, 2000 '2000 Main Street, Hunting- Main Street, Huntington ton Beach, California newspaper to wit the issue(s) of: Beach,the City Council will 92648, for Inspection by hold a public hearing on the public. A copy of the the following planning and staff report will be available zoning Item: I to Interested parties at the CODE AMENDMENT NO. City Clerk's Office after 96.2/LOCAL COASTAL March 13,1997. PROGRAM AMENDMENT ALL INTERESTED PER- N O. 9 6-3 (HOLLY- SONS are Invited to attend - 1997 SEACLIFF SPECIFIC., said hearing and express March 6 , PLAN): Applicant: PLC Re- opinions or submit evi- quest:To amend the Holly- dence for or against the Seacliff Specific Plan to application as outlined allow RL-3 development above.If you challenge the (Low Density Residential) City Council's action In In areas designated for RM court, you may be limited (Medium Density Residen- to raising only those Issues I declare, under penalty of perjury, that Val) and RMH (Medium- you or someone else High Density Residential) raised at the public hearing the foregoing is true and correct. and to modify the develop- described In this notice, or ment standards for residen- In written correspondence tial development regarding i delivered to the City at, or setbacks and open space. prior to,the public hearing. ' The sections of the Holly- If there are any further Seacliff Specific Plan pro- questions please call the Executed on March 6 1997 posed for amendment are: Planning Division at 536- III-B (Definttlons) and 111- 5271 and refer to the at Costa Mesa, California. D.1-D.3 (Development above Item. Direct your Standards). Location: The written communications to Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan the City Clerk. area Is generally located south of EIII, Avenue and Connla Brockway, north of Palm Avenue be- p1ty Clerk,Clty of Hun- tween Main Street and the tington Beach, 2000 •City'a western boundary. Main Street,2nd Floor, Project Planner. Mary Beth -- mtington Beach,Cal- Br OTT Ifornla 92648, (714) NOTICE he HEREBY 8-5227 GIVEN that the above Item Is.Rccyategorically exempt No.exempt Counc Signature 4501,Class 20s which nsup- plements the California En- vironmental Quality_Act- 1 EXHIBIT "A" IS PROVIDED AS ATTACHEMENT NO. 1 OF THIS STAFF REPORT L E G EN D LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 1 P.11w.t • .... w�, n RL,Z LOW O1ENSITY RESIDENTIAL 2 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL] — — — .Tows �� aa.•, 'xl - .'P� S�!! !� A v A sows _ s MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL I.1 RESIDENTIAL DENSRV . FIL _......... IHL-3 112\ MD MI%ED DEVELOPMENT II•T _...._ .- _ ....._. AMI r, ..... ...... _ - EE i Fc I COMMERCIAL 2 1................. � � ELLIS-GOLDENWEST �•, � � \ ' ' SPECIFIC PLAN I AREA ................_........_..... I I' .......... ' I I 1 INDU87RUL IF3 f-' '••� .� I I --_ __ AM ,\`•\ ,.a`I OS I OPEN SPACE rp r _ 4 aa / 19 -- rcy� ,RIM�H I I I PLANNING AREA os —— — i I T III `P) H RL R •I PLANNING UNIT I.g I RM1� ;•,-1 �t i1118 Ig I ttl RMH +I NEIGHOORHOOD PARKS L• ,a�'Z: I ,.RM �I1Miiw•P_,.'.,. IIIPPiIMwI11 eti1'.. LLIIR4iwrrPwww�* M! • �„s- G nlPlo Ava ue� fl �. J1111 a] 111-6 RMH ..... ..�..�.t� I AM s ' 111-5 } I............... F-I OS PPSP AM —_ I, [ RL-2 �.� 111.7 1t ........� 1a RL-2 — I I I III . •� _ f IV-4 !1 l g s MID............_ 0 COASTAL ZONE .� DOUNDARr— �• •`.. ol Yoffl.— venue EXHIBIT 3 CITY nO�1F`v7HUN�TINnGnTOINrBEACH �� GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN NOO 1�,�� if -81�, V� L��l>�l� lrU� �A�11\1 111111111111 I I �� ATTACHMENT 3 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL CODE AMENDMENT NO. 96-2 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CODE AMENDMENT NO. 96-2: 1. ;:Code Amendment No. 96-3 to allow RL-3 type projects in areas designated for RM and RMH -development and to modify the development standards for RL-I, RL-2 and RL-3 projects is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The proposed changes encourage innovative design and articulated building elevations and open space areas within subdivisions. The changes also ensure a range of product types. 2. In the case of a general land use provision, the changes are compatible with the uses authorized in, and the standards prescribed for, the zoning district for which it is proposed. The proposed changes would affect the properties designated for residential development in the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan area. The changes modify and clarify the development standards for residential projects. 3. A community need is demonstrated for the change proposed. The Housing Element of the General Plan calls for a mix of housing types to be provided in the community. The proposed change to allow RL-3 development in areas for RM and RMH projects furthers that goal. The modifications to the other development standards are in response to observations of projects and input from residents and developers in order to create standards that reflect current development practice, industry standards and the City's desire for balanced, quality and attractive development. 4. Its adoption will be in conformity with public convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice. The code amendment will provide increase housing opportunities, while ensuring development standards that reflect the goals and objectives of the City. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL- PROJECTS EXEMPT FROM CEOA: The Planning Commission finds that the project will not have any significant effect on the _ environment and is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 4501, Class 20 which supplements the CEQA because minor amendments to zoning ordinances are exempt from further environmental review. (97PCO211-3) - p 314, 7 `m lq NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING �,•� 3�i 3 4 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE 7 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on March 17, 1997, at 7:00 PM in the City Council Chambers, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, the City Council will hold a public hearing on the following planning and zoning item: ❑ CODE AMENDMENT NO. 96-2/LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO. 96-3 (HOLLY-SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN): Applicant: PLC Request: To amend the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan to allow RL-3 development (Low Density Residential) in areas designated for RM(Medium Density Residential) and RMH (Medium-High Density Residential) and to modify the development standards for residential development regarding setbacks and open space. The sections of the Holly- Seacliff Specific Plan proposed for amendment are: III-B (Definitions) and III-D.1-D.3 (Development Standards). Location: The Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan area is generally located south of Ellis Avenue and north of Palm Avenue between Main Street,and the City's western boundary. Project Planner: Mary Beth Broeren NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the above item is categorically exempt per City Council Resolution No. 4501, Class 20 which supplements the California Environmental Quality Act. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the above item is located in the appealable jurisdiction of the .Coastal Zone and includes Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 96-3 which has been filed in conjunction with the above request. ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the City Clerk's Office, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the public. A copy of the staff report will be available to interested parties at the City Clerk's Office after March 13, 1997. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit 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 the Planning Division at 536-5271 and refer to the above item. Direct your written communications to the City Clerk. Connie Brockway, City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street, 2nd Floor Huntington Beach, California 92648 (714) 536-5227 \� ^ � (97cc0317) 1 Council/Agency Meeting Held: 362421 Deferred/Continued to: Yb/4? O Approved ❑ Conditionally Approved ❑ Denied O City Clerk's Signature Council Meeting Date: March 17, 1997 Department ID Number: CD 97-14 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS m��..4 t n;sue SUBMITTED BY: MICHAEL T. UBERUAGA, City Administra or PREPARED BY: MELANIE S. FALLON, Community Development Director fi YLo• 3 3 5 0 - _ �f1-c�. 9-7- Ito SUBJECT: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 96-2/LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO. 96-3 (HOLLY SEA CLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN) Statement of Issue,Funding Source,Recommended Action,Alternative Action(s),Analysis,Environmental Status, Attachment(s) Statement of Issue: Transmitted for your consideration is a request by PLC Land Company to amend the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan (HSSP) to allow RL-3 (small lot detached housing) development in RM and RMH (Residential Medium and Medium High Density) districts and to include Z-lot development in the list of permitted uses in the districts. As a result of this request staff recommends modifications to the standards for residential development in areas designated for RL-1, RL-2 and RL-3 development. The changes to the RL-1 and RL-2 standards are minor and allow for increased building articulation. Similar changes are proposed for the RL-3 district. In addition, staff recommends a common open space requirement, a modification to side yard setback calculations and a decrease in site coverage for the RL-3 district. The applicant is in agreement with the proposed changes. The Planning Commission approved the request on February 11, 1997. Staff recommends approval of the request as approved by the Planning Commission. Funding Source: Not applicable. Recommended Action: PLANNING COMMISSION AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: "Approve Code Amendment No. 96-2 by adopting Ordinance No. (Attachment NO. 1) and Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 96-3 by approving Resolution No. 9 — 1 (Attachment NO. 2) with findings (ATTACHMENT NO. 3)." �D-3 a A� REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: March 17, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 97-14 Planning Commission Action on February 11. 1997. THE MOTION MADE BY LIVENGOOD, SECONDED BY INGLEE, TO APPROVE CODE AMENDMENT NO. 96-2 AND LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO. 96-3, WITH FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL AND FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL (ATTACHMENT NO. 1) CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: LIVENGOOD, HOLDEN, TILLOTSON, SPEAKER, INGLEE NOES: BIDDLE, KERINS ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE MOTION PASSED Alternative Action(s): The City Council may make the following alternative motion(s): 1. "Deny Code Amendment No. 96-2 and Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 96-3 with findings." 2. "Continue Code Amendment No. 96-2 and Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 96- 3 and direct staff accordingly." CD97-14.DOC -2- 03/05/97 4:51 PM REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACT ON MEETING DATE: March 17, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 97-14 Analysis: A. PROJECT PROPOSAL: Applicant: PLC, 23 Corporate Plaza, Ste. 250, Newport Beach, CA 92660 Location: The Holly Seacliff Specific Plan area is located south of Ellis Avenue and north of Palm Avenue, west of Main Street and east of the City's western boundary. Code Amendment No. 96-3 represents a request to amend the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan (HSSP) to allow RL-3 development in RM (Residential-Medium Density) and RMH (Residential-Medium High Density) districts and to include Z-lot development in the list of permitted uses in the districts pursuant to Section IV.C.6.b. of the HSSP. The development standards for the RM and RMH areas of the HSSP allow for attached single family units, condominiums, townhomes and multi-family projects. The development standards for RL-3 areas specify small lot, detached or attached single family units. The applicant proposes that RL-3 projects be allowed in areas that are designated for RM and RMH land uses so that, if desired, they can build small lot, detached single family units in these areas. (The applicant is not requesting to lower the allowable densities of the RM and RMH areas but to allow a different product type.) The applicant has indicated that the request is necessary to provide greater flexibility in project development and to respond to the higher demand for small lot, detached single family units. PLC also requests that the list of permitted uses in the RM and RMH district be expanded to include Z-lot homes. Z-lot homes are similar to zero lot line developments which are currently permitted in the HSSP. They differ from zero lot line units in their orientation to side property lines. The applicant requests the addition of Z-lot homes to the permitted uses because this type of development allows for larger usable yard areas than the traditional zero lot line development. As a result of PLC's request, staff is recommending modifications to some of the development standards for residential development in areas designated for RL-1, RL-2 and RL-3 development. The HSSP currently does not have development standards for balconies, bay windows and other architectural features in the rear and front yards,: nor does it address patio covers in the side or rear yards. The proposed changes by staff would specify required setbacks for these items. These structural improvements are frequently requested by property owners; therefore, it is important that the HSSP identify what the development standards are for them. Another recommended change pertains to side yard setbacks for eaves; the allowances in the HSSP are inconsistent with the Uniform Building Code. Staff also proposes three other changes for the RL-3 district: 1) that site coverage be reduced from 60 to 55 percent, 2) that a certain amount of open space be provided in RL-3 CD97-14.DOC -3- 03/05/97 4:51 PM REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: March 17, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 97-14 projects that are developed in RM and RMH land use areas, and 3) that the calculation for side yard setbacks be modified These changes are in response to PLC's request to build small lot projects in the RM and RMH areas Pursuant to PLC's request, staff also recommends that a definition of a Z-lot be incorporated in the HSSP B PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AND RECOMMENDATION: The proposed code amendment was initially considered by the Planning Commission on January 28, 1997 (Attachment No. 9) Staff recommended the Planning Commission take straw votes to approve the changes to the RL-1 and RL-2 standards and continue action on the RL-3 standards to allow additional time for the applicant and staff to resolve two outstanding issues The Planning Commission voted accordingly and continued the request to February 11, 1997 In addition to the applicant, three members of FANS (Friends and Neighbors of Seacliff) and a representative for Lennar Homes spoke in support of the request. At the February 11, 1997 Planning Commission meeting, two members of FANS and the applicant spoke in favor of the proposed code amendment. Commissioner Biddle raised a question about potential fiscal impacts to the City if less units are built Staff responded that detached housing generally carries a higher assessed value than attached housing and that this benefit may outweigh any potential loss from fewer units being built. Additionally, staff commented if there are fewer residents because of less units, there likely will be less demand for City services Finally, staff noted that PLC is obligated, under the terms of the Holly Seacliff Development Agreement, to construct and install a certain amount of infrastructure improvements regardless of the number of units that are constructed. Commissioner Biddle also indicated that the RL-3 lots would be too small, and the street scene would be negatively impacted by too many garages. Commissioner Kerins asked how the proposed code amendment would benefit the city. Staff responded that the code amendment will allow for greater variation in housing product and will open homeownership opportunities to more people. Commissioner Kerins stated that the RL-3 standards for rear yard setback and garage front setback were insufficient. He also indicated that the minimum dimension proposed by staff for the common open space area was too small Commissioner Kerins raised these same issues at the January 28, 1997 meeting Staff responded to these issues in the February 11th staff report (Attachment No. 10). Commissioner Inglee commented that if potential buyers find that the RL-3 developments have yard areas that are too small then they can choose to purchase a different lot. The Planning Commission voted to approve the proposed code amendment as recommended by staff and forward it to the City Council. Commissioners Inglee, Holden, Tillotson, Speaker and Livengood voted in favor of the request; Commissioners Biddle and Kerins voted against the request. CD97-14.DOC -4- 03/05/97 4:51 PM REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: March 17, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 97-14 C STAFF ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION: This analysis discusses how the applicant's request to allow small lot detached single family homes in the RM and RMH areas would affect the overall development concept of the HSSP. Staffs recommendations are largely in response to the applicant's request and are proposed to ensure that the resulting development is compatible with the intent of the HSSP History The Holly Seacliff Specific Plan was adopted in April 1992 One of the stated goals of the HSSP is to provide a diversity of housing types. The residential areas were planned to provide a range of densities, including large detached single family homes (RL-1), small lot detached single family homes (RL-3) and various types of multi-family dwellings (RM and RMH). There is also an RL-2 category which is analogous to RL development in the rest of the city In preparing the HSSP, considerable attention was given to the amount of open space that would be provided In exchange for not providing as many neighborhood parks as would normally be required, the developer at that time was allowed to dedicate approximately 40 acres of land for use as the Harriett M. Wieder Regional Park In addition, the HSSP calls for three neighborhood parks. The developer will also create an open space/wetlands area south of Ellis Avenue. The HSSP requires that RM and RMH projects provide common open space within their projects The Specific Plan notes that these private recreational facilities will augment the public recreational opportunities in the area City's Ability to Mo&fy the HSSP Development Standards The Code Amendment consists of two components: changes requested by the applicant and changes recommended by staff. These changes would affect residential property within the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan area. Most of this property is also governed by the Holly Seacliff Development Agreement No. 90-1. The Development Agreement (DA) specifies that changes to the land use regulations (the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan) must be mutually agreed upon by the developer and the City as they apply to properties governed by the (DA). In other words, the City may adopt changes to the HSSP but these changes would not apply to DA properties unless the developer agreed to the changes Staff has received an opinion from the City Attorney to confirm this It should be noted that the developer does not have the right to selectively choose what changes they agree to. They must agree to all or none of the changes of the proposed code amendment To date, the applicant is in agreement with all of the proposed changes. CD97-14.130C -5- 03/05/97 4:51 PM REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: March 17, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 97-14 Applicant's Request to Allow RL-3 Development in RM or RMH areas Within the HSSP there are 12 areas designated for RM or RMH development which permits densities of 15 and 25 units to the acre, respectively These areas represent 175 gross acres and, if developed with the maximum number of units allowed by the HSSP, could accommodate 2,360 units. To date, there are four approved projects in the RM and RMH areas with a unit total of 476. Only one of the projects has been completed. There is currently one area of the HSSP that is designated for RL-3 development This area is located between Goldenwest and Gothard Streets and is south of Ellis Avenue The applicant has an approved project (formerly known as Sherwood/Annandale) at this site for 234 small lot, detached single family homes which will begin construction in 1997. RL-3 projects require a minimum lot size of 3,300 square feet which is equivalent to 13 2 units per acre. Assuming some of the RM and RMH areas are developed consistent with the applicant's request, the maximum number of units that would be built in the HSSP area would decrease. Alternatively, the RM and RMH areas could be developed at their original intended densities Attachment No. 7 depicts the residential districts of the HSSP; Attachment No. 8 summarizes the development potential of the RM and RMH areas It shows that if all remaining RM and RMH property were developed at maximum densities there would be 2,172 units; if these same properties were developed with RL-3 projects there would be 1,903 units. Thus, in the extreme case there would be 12.4 percent (269) fewer units The applicant's request would probably result in a decrease in density in the HSSP area, although the RL-3 development at 13.2 units per acre is comparable to RM development at 15 units per acre. It would likely increase the number of detached single family homes and decrease the number of apartments, condominiums, duplexes and townhomes The change in product type would also result in a slight decrease in vehicle trips generated, based on remaining land and average densities. Staff supports the applicant's request to construct small lot, detached single family units per the RL-3 standards in the RM and RMH areas By providing more opportunities for small lot single family subdivisions, there will be greater product differentiation within the HSSP area Staff does not believe it likely that all of the remaining RM and RMH areas will be developed with the detached single family product and expects that a variety of condominiums, townhomes and apartments will be constructed as originally envisioned when the HSSP was created. The proposed text changes to the HSSP requested by the applicant are presented in the Legislative Draft in Sections III.D.4 and III D.5 (Attachment No 4) In response to the applicant's request, staff recommends that a common open space element be required of RL-3 projects developed in the RM and RMH areas This feature is currently required in RM and RMH projects. Staffs recommendation is discussed in detail below. CD97-14.DOC -6- 03/05/97 4:51 PM REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: March 17, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 97-14 PLC's request also includes amending the list of permitted uses in the RM and RMH districts to include Z-lot homes. A definition of a Z-lot home is proposed by staff and is presented in Attachment No. 4, Section III.13.4. ,Z-lot developments have become an increasingly attractiveealternative to the traditional zero lot line development because they provide larger usable yard areas and result in less building bulk close to the front property line. Staff supports the applicant's request to include Z-lot development in the list of permitted uses finding that it is comparable to other permitted uses in the district. Staffs Request to Modify Development Standards for RL-1, RL-2 and RL-3 Most of the recommended changes are minor in nature. They include items not currently addressed in the HSSP, items in conflict with the Uniform Building Code (UBC), and items based on site plan reviews and previously approved projects. These minor changes are briefly listed below with the recommended setbacks provided in a summary table in Attachment No. 5. The legislative draft of the HSSP is presented as Attachment No. 4. • Balconies, Bay Windows and Fireplaces within front and rear yard setback areas (Not currently in the HSSP) • Patio Covers within side and rear yard setback areas (Not currently in the HSSP) • Eaves within side yard setback area (Resolves conflict with the UBC) • Exterior side yard setback for bay windows, balconies and architectural features (In RL-1 and RL-2 districts, based on other projects) • Minimum required building separation in RL-2 district (Corrects an inconsistency in the HSSP) Three other changes recommended by staff are more significant and would only affect RL-3 development. The changes are to: 1) site coverage, 2) side yard setbacks for the dwelling and garage and 3) open space. These recommendations are discussed in greater detail and are supported by the applicant. • Site Coverage The current site coverage requirement for RL-3 development is 60 percent. All other development in the HSSP is limited to 50 percent site coverage. This standard is consistent with the requirements of the ZSO. Exceptions are made in the zoning code for 55 percent site coverage for lots which abut parks, water, flood control channels, etc. Staff recommends that the RL-3 standard be changed to 55 percent, provided that a certain amount of common CD97-14.DOC -7- 03/05/97 4:51 PM REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: March 17, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 97-14 open space is required, as discussed below. If the common open space requirement is not approved, staff recommends that the site coverage requirement be 50 percent. Staff is recommending this change because 60 percent is too high and could create excessive massing and bulk on the RL-3 lots which are intended to be small lots. Coupled with the common open space requirement, the 55 percent site coverage would yield sufficient yard area and minimize massing and bulk. • Side Yard Setback Calculation Side yard setbacks for RL-3 development are currently a minimum of three feet on the interior and a minimum of five feet on the exterior. Staff recommends a new standard that recognizes that as a lot increases in width so too should its setback from property lines (and other buildings) because a larger lot typically results in a larger unit. The proposed standard would require the equivalent of 20 percent of the lot width be provided in side yard setback areas with a cap on the maximum that is needed. Specifically, staff recommends a:minimum of three feet and a maximum requirement of five feet on the interior side yard and a minimum of six feet, maximum of eight feet on the exterior side yard. The minimums are consistent with the current standards in the HSSP, and the maximums are consistent with standard size residential lot setbacks. The 20 percent calculation method is also used in the Downtown Specific Plan. The Legislative Draft, page III-18, (Attachment No. 4) contains a diagram depicting the setback requirement. This calculation for side yard setbacks will give more flexibility for project design and allow for better building articulation. • Open Space The RL-3 development standards do not currently contain requirements for common open space. (This is because the original RL-3 area includes approximately 17 acres of open space, including a four acre neighborhood park.) In response to the request by PLC to allow RL-3 development in RM and RMH areas, staff believes that such a requirement is necessary. When the HSSP General Development Plan was created it was assumed that the RM and RMH areas would be developed as such and provide the requisite amount of common open space. Combined with the other open space and neighborhood parks envisioned in the HSSP area, this open space would ensure adequate recreation area for residents. Staff believes that the overall balance of open space could be potentially hampered by the applicant's request unless a certain amount of open space is required for the type of development proposed by the applicant. For projects with 20 or more units, staff recommends that 150 square feet of common open space be provided for each unit with less than 40 feet of lot frontage and that 100 square feet per unit be provided for lots with 40 feet or more of lot frontage, with no less than 3,000 square feet and a minimum dimension of 50 feet. This recognizes that larger lots will generally have more private yard area for residents to use. Staffs recommendation would yield an approximate minimum of 600 square feet of open space per unit (common and CD97-14.DOC -8- 03/05/97 4:51 PM a - a A \ 1EQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: March 17, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 97-14 private) for a RL-3 project developed in a RM or RMH area and would also result in more open space on a per unit basis than a RM or RMH project. For project with less than 20 units, staff recommends that a minimum of 600 square feet of open space per unit in either private or common open space be provided. If some of the open space is provided as common, a minimum dimension of 10 feet would be required. This dimension is sensitive to the smaller size of the projects and the option of common or private open space provides flexibility to these smaller size projects. School District Mitigation The Huntington Beach Union High School District submitted a letter prior to Planning Commission action stating that they are opposed to the code amendment unless a mitigation agreement is reached between the District and PLC (Attachment No. 11). PLC has presented an offer to the District but the two parties have not yet reached agreement. D. SUMMARY The proposed code amendment would modify the development standards of the HSSP and permit small lot, detached single family development in areas designated for attached residential units. Many of the changes recommended by staff address setback issues that are currently not addressed in the HSSP or conflict with the Uniform Building Code. The more significant of the changes pertain to RL-3 development and staffs recommendations for less site coverage, potentially greater side yard setbacks and common open space. The proposed changes are reasonable and related to the applicant's request to allow RL-3 development in the RM and RMH areas. Staff and the Planning Commision support the applicant's request contingent upon approval of all the changes proposed. Environmental Status: The City Council approved Final Environmental Impact Report No. 89-1 for the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan in January 1990. The proposed changes to the HSSP will not increase allowable densities in the Specific Plan are or change the nature of the development that was anticipated in the EIR. Pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 4501, Class 20, which supplements the California Environmental Quality Act, minor amendments to the zoning ordinances are exempt from further environmental review. CD97-14.DOC -9- 03/05/97 4:51 PM KEQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: March 17, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 97-14 Attachment(s): City Clerk's Page Number 1 Ordinance No 335o for Code Amendment No 96-2 2 Resolution No q-1-I(ofor Local Coastal Program Amendment No 96-3 3 Findings for Approval 4 Legislative Draft - 5 ` Summary Matrix of Proposed Changes 9 6 Vicinity Map 7 Map of RM, RMH and RL-3 areas 8 Summary of Development Potential in RM and RMH areas of HSSP area 9 Planning Commission Staff Report dated January 28, 1997 10 Planning Commission Staff Report dated February 11, 1997 11 Letter from Huntington Beach Union High School District CD97-14.DOC -10- 03/05/97 4.51 PM /97 CA 96-2/LCPA 96-3 Code Amendment No 96-2 Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 96-3 (Holly Seacliff Specific Plan ) REQUEST ♦Amend the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan to allow small lot detached single family housing (RL-3) in areas designated for attached housing (RM and RMH) ♦Modify the development standards for residential development for RL-1, RL-2 and RL-3 districts and include Z-lot development as a permitted use. -2- 4/7/97 CA 96-2/LCPA 96-3 ANALYSIS ♦ There are 12 RM and RMH areas for a total of 175 acres. ♦ If remaining land was developed with RL-3 projects, there could be 269 fewer units (12.4 %) ♦ It is highly unlikely that all remaining RM and RMH areas will be developed with RL-3 projects based on conceptual plans for some of the RM and RMH areas. -3- ANALYSIS (con't.) ♦ Staff supports the request, with the addition of a common open space requirement, because: -*.-It gives developers more flexibility and allows for more product variation and homeownership opportunities. ,-'.'-The loss of units will be minimal. •:-The open space requirement will maintain an overall balance for the area. 4- 4/7/97 CA 96-2/LCPA 96-3 ANALYSIS (con't.) ♦ Staff recommends minor changes to residential development standards to allow or address architectural features such as balconies, patio covers, eaves and bay windows. ♦ Z-lot development would also become a permitted use. This is comparable to zero- lot line development. -s- ANALYSIS (con't.) ♦ Three significant changes would apply to RL-3 development- ❖Requiring common open space (100 or 150 sq. ft. per unit depending on lot frontage, with a 3,000 sq. ft. minimum), ❖Reducing site coverage from 60 to 55 percent, ❖Changing side yard setback calculation so setbacks are greater (to a certain maximum) for wider lots. -6- 4/7/97 i CA 96-2/LCPA 96-3 ANALYSIS (con't.) ♦ The applicant is in agreement with the changes recommended by staff. Staff fords that these modifications will: ❖Improve building articulation and minimize massing. -.*-Provide for more flexibility in product design. ❖Ensure adequate open space for the area. -7- PRIOR ACTIONS ♦ On 2/11/97 Planning Commission recommended approval of the Code Amendment. ♦Five Commissioners voted for the request; two voted against ♦ Concerns were for rear and front setbacks (for which no changes are proposed) and common open space for RL-3 development. -8- 4/7/97 r CA 96-2/LCPA 96-3 PLANNING COMMISSION & STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS ♦Approve Code Amendment No. 96-2 ♦ Transmit these changes in the City's LCP to the California Coastal Commission by approving Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 96-3 -9- 4/7/97 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 4 4 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT HOLLY-,SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN VOLUME 1 OF 2 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH SPECIFIC PLAN 9 O ADOPTED APRIL 20, 1992 ORDINANCE NO. 3128 SPECIFIC PLAN 9 AMENDMENTS Date Ordinance No. Adopted April 20, 1992 Ordinance No. 3128 Amended May 19, 1992 Ordinance No. 3145 Amended September 21, 1992 Ordinance No. 3170 Amended August 2, 1994 Ordinance No. 3243 Amended August 15, 1994 Ordinance No. 3244 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Description Rage I. INTRODUCTION A. Purpose and Intent.......................................................................:..................I-1 BGoals .........................................................................:..................................I-1 C. Project Area Description................................................................................I-2 D. Planning Background.........................:...........................................................I-2 II. DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT A. General Development Plan.............................................................................II-1 B. Land Use Categories.................................:....................................................II-1 1. Residential..........................................................................................II-1 2. Mixed Development...........................................................................It-2 3. Commercial........................................................................................II-3 4. Industrial............................................................................................II-3 5. Open Space........................................................................................II-3 C. Circulation Plan.............................................................................................II-3 D. Open Space/Recreation System.....................................................................II-4 E. Grading Guidelines........................................................................................II-4 F. Public Facilities..............................................................................................II-6 G. Community Theme Guidelines....................................................................II-12 III. ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Purpose and Intent....................................................................................:.III-1 B. Definitions...................................................................................................III-1 Modified C. General Provisions......................................................................................III-2 D. Development Standards............................................................................III-10 1. Low Density Residential I...........................................................III-10 Modified 2. Low Density Residential 2...........................................................III-13 Modified 3. Low Density Residential 3............................................. ..........III-16 Modified 4. Medium Density Residential.........................................................III-20 Modified 5. Medium High Density Residential................................................III-23 Modified 6. Mixed Development......................................................................III-26 7. Commercial...................................................................................III-31 8. Industrial.......................................................................................III-32 9. Open Space...................................................................................III-32 i (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT Section Description Page IV. ADMINISTRATION A. Development Phasing Plan.......................................................................IV-1 B. Public Facilities Improvement Responsibilities .......................................IV-1 C. Methods and Procedures...........................................................................IV-2 D. Density Transfer Procedure ......................................................................IV-3 E. Acreage/Boundary Changes......................................................................IV-5 V. LEGAL DESCRIPTION....................................................................................V-1 VI. MITIGATION MEASURES .............................................................................VI-1 HOLLY-SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN TECHNICAL APPENDIX (Separate Document) ii (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit No. Title Following Page 1 Vicinity Map.............................................................................................I-2 2 Existing Zoning.........................................................................................I-2 3 General Development Plan.........:............................................................II-1 4 Planning Area I Development Plan.....".....................................................II-1 5 Planning Area II Development Plan........................................................II-1 6 Planning Area III Development Plan........................................................I1-1 7 Planning Area IV Development Plan.......................................................II-1 8 Circulation Plan.........................................................:.............................1I-3 9 Open Space, Park and Trail Plan.............................................................II-4 10 Infrastructure Schematic Plan- Drainage and Sewer Systems................11-6 11 Infrastructure Schematic Plan- Water Systems.......................................1I-6 12 Community Theme Plan........................................................................II-12 13 .Main Street Streetscape Section.............................................................-1.I-14 14 Goldenwest Street Streetscape Section..................................................I1-14 15 Gothard Street Streetscape Section........................................................1I-14 16 Overlay Areas ........................................................................................III-3 17 Recreation/Open Space Corridor Section..............................................III-4 18 Commercial/Industrial Separation.........................................................III-4 19 Transportation/Trail Corridor Section.................................................III-22 20 Biological Resources ............................................................................VI-10 iii (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT LIST OF TABLES Table No. Table Following Pages 1 Land Use Table........................................................................................II-1 2 Development Phasing Plan......................................................................IV-1 iv (hssp97) I. INTRODUCTION LEGISLATIVE DRAFT I. INTRODUCTION A. Purpose and Intent The Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan provides the development standards, design theme and administrative procedures necessary to implement the policies of the City of Huntington Beach General Plan and the Holly-Seacliff Master Plan (General Plan Amendment 89-1). The Specific Plan also provides for application of mitigation measures contained in Final Environmental Impact Report 89-1 and implements the provisions of Development Agreement No. 90-1.for the Holly- Seacliff area. B. Goals The purpose of the Specific Plan is to implement the goals of the Holly-Seacliff master plan, including: • Distribution of planned residential uses, definition of permitted housing types, and provision of a diversity of housing types. • Location, character and intensities of planned commercial, industrial and mixed development uses. • Alignments and design of arterial highways and locations of traffic control devices. • Design of community open spaces,parks,trails and recreation facilities. • Grading guidelines. • Design of required public facilities to serve existing and proposed development. • Design and implementation of the community theme elements. This Specific Plan is regulatory in nature and serves as zoning for the Holly- Seacliff area. Subsequent development plans,vesting tentative tract maps, tentative tract maps, parcel maps and other entitlement requests for the project site must be consistent with both this Specific Plan,the City of Huntington Beach General Plan and the Holly-Seacliff General Plan Amendment No. 89-1. I-1 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT C. Project Area Description Location The Specific Plan covers 565 acres located in the central portion of the City of Huntington Beach as depicted in Exhibit 1 (Vicinity Map) A legal description of properties included in the Specific Plan project area may be found in Section V Present land uses surrounding the site include Huntington Central Park, Ocean View Mobile Estates and industrial uses to the north, residential and office uses to the east, the Huntington Beach Civic Center, Huntington Beach High School, Seacliff Country Club and residential uses to the south, and the Bolsa Chica lowlands to the west The Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan excludes properties contained in the previously adopted Ellis-Goldenwest Specific Plan Exhibit 2 illustrates the existing zoning within the Specific Plan area Regional access to the project site is provided from the San Diego Freeway (I- 405) directly from the Goldenwest interchange Pacific Coast Highway(State Highway 1)provides access from coastal areas to the north and south Local access is provided via Edwards, Goldenwest, Gothard and Main Streets and Ellis, Garfield and Yorktown Avenues D. Planning Background There are a number of previous approvals related to land use regulations affecting the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Area These previous approvals include 1. The Ellis-Goldenwest Specific Plan,approved by the Huntington Beach City Council through its adoption of Ordinance No 2998 on June 26, 1989 (Not a part of the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan) 2 Final Environmental Impact Report No 88-2 prepared for the Ellis- Goldenwest Specific Plan(adopted on May 1, 1989, by Resolution No 6022) 3 Holly-Seacliff General Plan Amendment No 89-1 approved by the City Council through its adoption of Resolution No 6098 on January 8, 1990 4 Final Environmental Impact Report No 89-1 prepared for the Holly- Seacliff General Plan Amendment(adopted on January 8, 1990, by Resolution No 6097) 5 Holly-Seacliff Development Agreement No 90-1 (adopted on November 5, 1990,by Ordinance No 3080) I-2 (hssp97) 90 S W W ix J O SLATER AVENUE C7 cc Lu Z a .- <A N 3 TALBERT AVENUE Q CENTRAL W T a PARK 0 ELLIS AVENUE ' A FI LD AVENUE G R E YORKTOWN AVENUE HIGH SCHOOL \civic CENTER AVENUE SEACLIFF ADAMS AVENUE COUNTRY CLUB Lu A1c��,c La D O .. m �- O w ce U Q O Lu O m DC to y�G y� EXHIBIT 1 VICINITY MAP CITY OFF �H�U�NTInNnGTON BEACH fORM\ M 16 If O , ' (YI col MI 7 ; •4 , IPRFZONED) I �- CD . 1 MI co CD Lis: �, R.t..�._..� _ - RI 7.•7 -�--�- , sl aa..... 1 --------— - MI-0-CD JM101 'R2 RA-0 7 . .r..lt M2-0 ELLIS-GOLDENWEST SPECIFIC PLAN —ttD` "U° :DP M. CD • /I I MI-01 ml .YCD� MI-cl , oP P .. ,��b• / S 1 7rnT PG j .co 1 Y.O I. �- _ R2 OP •trrsw ) / Fi4-0 !� CI-0 ! RA-0 C� i3 MI MI R2 ` c �1,r .}? / 2-01 o RA-0 __� R2 �� ' MI-A LRA_ �'►" 'pry °"Q tY a R4-q ' 4t- ' .�rr'owz q �Rzl M I �,tSf •'r q 4 u + c 1 6 1 a ti ��.n- -t` •��� ~f/oA " �'� •_ .'�r_i�, . . 7rn , R .i coR 2( .✓i7Yc7 ) I ifA R4 " .iatu.••', RI - oo CZ-O 7''-d +•CbyA,~ .T_•�- a ' 1 q j ). RO$'0 RI R2 O PO >`-8 t: .o-A t •L. a c'0C R4 01' ) RI RI /� /^,�llrr��4F y. . ' ,d. 2 :c R2 0 yg »•.1 eo' RI a C2'O-CD rr a•2-0 �'. 'ole S L- ROS-0 L RI 1 RI gDSp Rr �j RI; 't,, �3 RI to>q _ wE_.�iui;, f 7iaD \.. .•Pw.I n Oi f I 0P'0L'D 7 I.r o co ROS-0 '.,.; R, C2-0-CD R2 o Po-co f' -4ti7 ,I RI RI z ' ..� 4-0 R4 OIL ;•; �`-• h2 pO G'CZ, �• / RI R «p , ,X. CF-C 1'1 CF-E-CD J,JO J Rz 0-CD a: ROS-0 v __ a i ahzPDocz n�nn I �cDo °i ' .' . > +�.:.- tCF-E-CD 1 II A I� »� �4�� -11 � EXHIBIT 2 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH EXISTING ZONING HOLLV-21EACL ORF ARI Op�CO�f��O p[�Q�] �ni�lllll�l LEGISLATIVE DRAFT The Holly-Seacliff Development Agreement establishes the contractual development responsibilities between the City of Huntington Beach, Pacific Coast Homes and Garfield Partners regarding project phasing, open space dedications, infrastructure improvements, reimbursable costs and other obligations for each party. Although the Holly-Seacliff Development Agreement applies only to the portions of the Holly-Seacliff area to be developed by the parties specified in the Agreement, it does provide for the future public infrastructure improvements for all the Holly-Seacliff area. The Specific Plan is an integral component for the implementation of the Development Agreement. The Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan is divided into four Planning Areas (I through IV) and establishes the general provisions and procedures to implement development of the Holly-Seacliff area under General Plan Amendment No. 89-1. I-3 (hssp97) 1 i i II. DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT LEGISLATIVE DRAFT II. DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT A. General Development Plan The development concept for the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan is designed in concert with the site's cultural and natural features to provide for a variety of compatible land uses residential, commercial, mixed development, industrial, open space, parks and recreation areas The Holly-Seacliff area will be a large master-planned community located within the central area of the City of Huntington Beach Residential areas are planned at a range of densities to provide a variety of housing types, ranging from large detached single-family homes to various types of multi- family dwellings The lower-density residential areas are located in the western and central portions of the project and the area abutting Seacliff Country Club The medium density areas are predominately located in the eastern and central portion of the community, along Garfield Avenue, Main Street and Gothard Street Medium-high density areas are planned along Garfield Avenue, near planned commercial and industrial uses A total of 475 residential units are also planned as part of a mixed development project as part of the Seacliff Village area An industrial park area is centrally located within the community, at the intersection of the major arterial roadways for convenient access and exposure Neighborhood and convenience commercial centers will be located along Garfield Avenue to serve the residents' shopping and service needs The Specific Plan also identifies public facilities including three neighborhood parks The project is divided into four individual Planning Areas (I through IV), as shown on Exhibit 3, General Development Plan and Exhibits 4,5,6, and 7 A summary of land uses within each Planning Area can be found on Table 1, Land Use Table The purpose of identifying individual Planning Areas is to allow development of individual distinct identities, focusing on the particular character of land uses within each of the specific areas B. Land Use Categories The following sections describe the development concepts for each land use within the four Planning Areas 1. Residential Land Uses The Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan provides for a range of residential densities and a variety of housing types, consistent with residential densities permitted throughout the City of Huntington Beach II-1 (hssp97) '''• ' .y LEGEND rl I 5 `• j\j pL 1 LOW DEN9ITV RESIDENTIAL 1 i1 „i bz 1 s.M►c I LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL f .IWAC Y � yt § 3j ., (q _ ••��jjJ�I�' .. F01f Ar.mn » RL f LOW DEIIStT7 RESIDENTIAL f �t2a s Ri4RF{ '1..y3..� '�"PrnS - Y.L�-" x`i �P��.•.�.�PiL��. • .► .j .x ►.i�N' .y W►C �1 �`\v. ' i, RM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL Frr--I 1 ��� 1 i - - RMH MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DENSITY - _►....o. RL-11 \z- - ORES.»EoorcL WHO DEVELOPMENT RL-9 �- ,.� 112 111 _ �__ OCOMM ERCUL I 12 I ELLIS GOLDENWEST y \ I RL-1 SPECIFIC PLAN I I \ INDUSTRIAL AREA t II IF8 OS OPEN SPACE 1 RM H PLANNING AREA 14 RE X OS ;z I O11PLANNING UNIT 1-4 1.19 / RM RL•1 I I 1 IIIB {� R�I IH �I NEIO HSORNOOD PARKS OS 11 `... a �Jri»�f� riii7i.ii+isi'�LJ`i�lii�r�ir�►Ji�JCiT3J.iAuiJEprZKy A.�n.�w..�n.�..�..�..�r.wr»..� �nnrr. 17 ,y,3i ti9 ,.{ IL111 111U {�t G yD.Id Av.nw ...may RM I 1119 IIH 111� r """ .I` c RM RMH C -- 1 —�— t— V6 1115 �• OS�4 . = I I RM ;-s e T •���� A ; �N-3— �y RL•2 1117 � ' �RL -.. �y CI.Y Are- -- I -- nw - / PJ 4 / p MO --- $ A. •COASTAL ZONE / ':� oy own v.nu. / 41k A EXHIBIT 3 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN CJdC�L11--, "�t,s�(-/^�Cc 0,H G�, /A\ 6 Pore,G[IG;0C (�(L&(�l TABLE 1 HOLLY-SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN LAND USE TABLE PLANNING PLANNING LAND USE CATEGORY GLOSS TOTAL MAXIMUM AVERAGE DEV AREA UNIT ACRES UNITS GROSS GROSS STANM DENSITY DENSITY (PAGQ 1 1-1 RESIDENTIAL-LOW DENSITY 1 6 15 4 2 5 111-10 1-2 RESIDENTIAL-LOW DENSITY 1 26 90 4 3 5 111-10 1-3 RESIDENTIAL-LOW DENSITY 1 16 55 4 34 111-10 1-4 OPEN SPACE 16 111-28 SUBTOTAL 64 160 II II-1 RESIDENTIAL-LOW DENSITY 3 62* 310 7 41 111-15 II-2 RESIDENTIAL-MEDIUM DENSITY 40 415 15 11 0 III-17 II-3 RESIDENTIAL-MEDIUM DENSITY 34* 390 15 130 III-17 11-4 RESIDENTIAL-MEDIUM-HIGH DENSITY 9 170 25 166 III-20 II-5 RESIDENTIAL-MEDIUM-HIGH DENSITY 4 75 25 188 111-20 11-6 RESIDENTIAL-MEDIUM-HIGH DENSITY 4 75 25 188 III-20 II-7 RESIDENTIAL-MEDIUM-HIGH DENSITY 6 100 25 166 III-20 II-8 INDUSTRIAL 32 III-28 SUBTOTAL 191 1,535 III 111-1 RESIDENTIAL-MEDIUM DENSITY 19 260 15 150 III-17 III-2 RESIDENTIAL-LOW DENSITY 2 105 550 7 3 8 111-12 III-3 RESIDENTIAL-MEDIUM DENSITY 11 140 15 150 III-17 111-4 RESIDENTIAL-MEDIUM-HIGH DENSITY 10 220 25 250 III-20 111-5 RESIDENTIAL-MEDIUM DENSITY 18 240 15 150 III-17 III-6 COMMERCIAL 7 III-27 III-7 RESIDENTIAL-LOW DENSITY 2 12* 40 7 69 III-12 111-8 OPEN SPACE 16 111-28 SUBTOTAL 198 1,450 IV IV-1 RESIDENTIAL-MEDIUM DENSITY 16 155 15 97 111-17 IV-2 RESIDENTIAL-MEDIUM DENSITY 8 120 15 150 111-17 IV-3 INDUSTRIAL 9 111-28 IV-4 MIXED DEVELOPMENT 53 475 25 144 111-22 IV-5A INDUSTRIAL 22 III-28 IV-6 COMMERCIAL 4 III-27 SUBTOTAL 112 750 TOTAL 565 3,895 * Includes 4-acre Neighborhood Park LLt 4eJ w ♦^� jj I-1 I; RL-1 ; 6 AC _wrsrAno. 15 D E � / m ■ 1-2 10 E 90 DU ; ■ � v W 1-4 I N OS 16 AC is fil � I-3 l 116 AC 55 DU ¢� 1 H � 1 n+eld venue a COASTALZONE/ 1rf 3OUNDARY— NOTE See Exhibit 10 for Landscape Legend EXHIBIT 4 PLANNING AREA I CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH DEVELOPMENT PLAN �Y 0 Ellis Avenue�sx �■R� RYA■� ■ iss��■.��■R■�R�-�� = ...C'14�'5�����wslT I RL-3 II-2 62 U 1 40 AC = I o INCLUDES 4 AC 415 DU _? PA K I 11-6 .; I •x RMH 4 AC II.3 `\ ' 75 DU RM \ 34 AC 390 DU II-5 'INCLUDES 4 AC I PARK - _,` RMH — 4 AC 1` 75 DU ' Ilt s r II-4 j 32;A RMH .�e� II-7 9 AC RMH 170 DU ti 6 AC I I f I I ` � 100 DU At Gorfieid AveOut nue r r J NOTE See Exhibit 10 for Landscape Legend EXHIBIT' 5 PLANNING AREA II CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH DEVELOPMENT PLAN L J"-..��.�-- �._ =...�1 L `i_ J _ �„`,� I I II I I I FEMIAPY 11 1"I COASTALZONE BOUNDARY r • ® OS Garfield Avenue F� I III-4 III-5 N�VJQ6 19A �,: RM RMH RM ,v �Aa 260 DU 11 AC 10 AC 140 DU 220 DU 240 DU y OS o`P� I III-7 RL- - . '> !a, ---------�--�� 12 AC'40 DU - •. INCLUDES + ��v ��.ff�f'• AC PARK / • - --. 1112 1 �� • RL-2 I , ••��rcaa� 109 AC \CFa Avenue -� 550 DU I ••.._:• � III o t mi �1 N ra•� 1 O / C �r f t ff�••/ {j _-ft/�fffffff of•fa�,f�� iffli NOTE See Exhibit 10 for Landscape Legend EXHIBIT 6 PLANNING AREA III CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH DEVELOPMENT PLAN r Garfield Avenue �Y �. IV 5 1 I �I I4C _ RM --i 22 AC m 16 AC -1 155 DU ■ o � L � } IV-3 �IIV-2 I RM SAC 9 AC 120 DU j—Cloy Avenue IV q IV-4 /c H MD y 475 DU I�$ c V f Ir Yo.ktown Avenue NOTE See Exhtbtt 10 for Landscape Legend EXHIBIT 7 PLANNING AREA IV CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH DEVELOPMENT PLAN _4Ill1ll111ll 1 FORMN LEGISLATIVE DRAFT a Low Density The Low Density categories are characterized by densities ranging from 4 to 7 dwelling units per acre Lots located in Planning Area I (RL-1) will be oriented to maximize their relationship to the linear park and provide unobstructed coastal views from blufftop areas Permitted uses include lot sale subdivisions and detached single-family home subdivisions Low-density uses (RL-2) in Planning Area III are planned for areas abutting the private Seacliff Golf Course Low-density (RL-3) uses in Planning Area II are planned as small lot detached single-family homes oriented in a traditional neighborhood setting b Medium Density The Medium Density (RM) category is planned to include densities ranging from 7 to 15 dwelling units per gross acre Product types include single-family detached, single-family attached, and multi- family residential homes Medium Density areas are planned within Planning Areas II, III and IV The single-family attached products will be two-story townhomes or flats The multi-family units will be two and three- story condominiums/stacked flats and apartments c Medium-High Density The Medium-High Density(RMH) category is characterized by densities ranging from 15-25 dwelling units per gross acre Product types include multi-family uses such as condominium/stacked flats and apartments Single-family attached units will be permitted,however this category will be primarily multi-family uses Medium-High density areas are planned within Planning Areas II and III, along Garfield Avenue 2. Mixed Development The Mixed Development category allows for the creative combination of commercial and residential uses in a compatible manner Residential products are expected to include townhomes,condominiums, stacked flats and apartments The location for this use is in Planning Area IV, directly II-2 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT across from the Civic Center The proposed uses will be clustered around the existing Seacliff Village retail center providing a focal point for the entire project area 3. Commercial Land Uses Commercial land uses within the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Area are planned along Garfield Avenue within Planning Areas III and IV The uses for these sites are expected to be those characteristic of a neighborhood commercial center, designed mainly to meet the local community shopping needs and reduce trips outside of the project area 4. Industrial The Industrial area, which currently is the center of oil production and oil- related services and storage uses, is intended to be developed as light industrial The Industrial land uses within Holly-Seacliff are located at the intersection of Garfield Avenue and Goldenwest Street and Clay Avenue and Stewart Street, within Planning Areas II and IV 5. Open Space Open Space areas are designated within Planning Areas I and III These areas are planned to be incorporated into the Bolsa Chica Linear Regional Park which will feature trails and passive recreation uses C. Circulation Plan The Circulation Plan, Exhibit 8, depicts the general alignments and classifications of arterial highways within the Specific Plan area The Circulation Plan is in accordance with provisions contained in the Holly- Seacliff Development Agreement 90-1 The Development Agreement provides a phasing plan for street improvements to correspond to the phased development in the Specific Plan area and to comply with and satisfy mitigation measures contained in Final Environmental Impact Report No 89-1 Additionally, as stated in the Development Agreement, development projects within the Specific Plan area will be conditioned to participate in construction or fair-share funding associated with required infrastructure improvements needed to serve the Holly-Seacliff area The overall circulation concept relies on a hierarchy of circulation features ranging from major arterials to local residential streets The system is designed to accommodate City-generated through-traffic while discouraging intrusion into individual neighborhood areas Orange County Transit District bus stops shall be provided at locations as shown on Exhibit 12. Additional bus stops may be required at the time of development II-3 (hssp97) LEGEND H j Z ! MAJOR ARTERIAL MHWAY TTLSSS 8I" DIvId.d G W .rMld Aa*—n (East of Ooks—asG ld.nwa Oesl 81r.N(South of OulNld) ERS Avsnu. MODIFIED MAJOR NtONWAY 8 Una Df.a.d OsAWa As.—(E.al of S..Pol.l W.M.l Oo1d.—I) V' \�• GolMrtwesl Street(North of Garfield) +ov j PRIMARY HIGHWAY — 1! RL-1 (� u.n. Dlrld.d Ellis A—(West of Gomard) ,�-• Main Slrasl RL-3 Se.polnlSDesl R M �g Yorslown A—* MODIFIED SECONDARY HIONWAY I \ 'ELLIS GO e L.- Of,lded i IC PLAN RL-1 SPECIFIC PLAN \ � OarlNld Avenue(wosl of Seapolm) i AREA \ I SECONDARY HIGHWAY OWasO RM \ i Edward.Stresl Eel.Avenw(East of OotMrd) RMH Gote.rd Soso NOTE OS R See Toclml.al App—Ax Ior rl8nlbf way MH I ropr homenU sM sulpinp plans AR local RL-1 1 flMH strasushown.n.If p.DNeunas$ RMH ( doslpnslod wd111*wNcn may be prWsto , OS / c«n.a Awmw RM C RMH I C 1 RM cf s%-, • RM ems^^ f vl 1 RM RL-2 \ �RL-2 _i �EM�vsnus Clay AY.mr. MD COACTAI ZONE ROUNOARy--- ot Own vonw EXHIBIT 8 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH CIRCULATION PLAN LEGISLATIVE DRAFT A transportation corridor has been designated within Planning Area II See Development Standards for Residential Medium and Medium High Densities for details All streets shown on the Circulation Plan are public streets unless otherwise indicated All public streets shall be developed to local street standards (as a minimum) as shown on the Standard Plans of the Public Works Department All new traffic signals installed as part of development within the Specific Plan area shall be equipped with "Opticom" control devices Detailed street plans and operational criteria can be found in the Holly Seacliff$necific Plan Technical Appendix D. Open Space/Recreation System The Specific Plan designates 44 acres of open space and park uses (see Exhibit 9) Thirty-two (32) acres within Planning Areas I and III are to be dedicated per Development Agreement 90-1 to the City for the Bolsa Chica Linear Regional Park, which is planned to form a continuous open space corridor along the bluffs between Talbert Avenue and the Pacific Coast Highway for trails and passive recreation use Three neighborhood park areas with a minimum of four acres each are designated per Development Agreement 90-1 within the residential neighborhoods in Planning Areas II and III These neighborhood facilities will provide local open space and recreational amenities Neighborhoods within the Specific Plan area will be linked to major open space/recreation facilities such as Huntington Central Park and the Bolsa Chica Linear Regional Park by bike lanes on all arterials Private recreational facilities will typically be provided within the multi-family residential projects for the use of the residents within these developments, adding to the public recreational opportunities available within the HollySeacliff project E. Grading Guidelines Grading will be required to construct streets, infrastructure and other site improvements and to create properly drained development areas Another grading objective will be to balance cut and fill within the project area It is intended that borrow sites, stockpiling and normal grading operations and procedures will occur within each of the individual planning areas The major grading constraint for the area is the elevation of existing public infrastructure facilities as they relate to the existing grades in the area. All reasonable efforts will be taken in the design of improvements and building pads to minimize the amount of grading required to accomplish workable and safe elevations through good engineering practices II-4 (hssp97) • CEMRA1►ARK L E G E N D •��•• CLASS 1 BIKE IRAII h �F .kt•���_�A$ '�'i"o' �h i �- CLASS D BIKE IRAR + •EiEr���`tt'bs � nwG ax4`a. .,„w"YE'..s cai .a+ ' SIRAv.nu.�j$d EOY[SIRIAN IRAII ♦N� 7 � _— - - i�:•�i�li i-' i�y i'd•.i`�,P�i�Y�ir"i��:i'3 �ii•N�i1:i�'•i �:i�"e.—. ••y�':Ai f i 7,t#f � t y/� ,`. i 9E RECREATION AREA N 61 LINEAR PARK +,s.` y • A� RL-t ` (I SCENIC CORRIDOR -✓ <, RL-3 y RM I IRANS►OR / r •�•••••• /RAIL CORRIDOR ELLIS GOLDENWEST I \ I PARK SITE AS IDENTIFIED IN r i RL-1 �SPE AREA LAN N60 \ I H61 RECREAl10N EIfMEN e RM i • RMH iii RMH • RL-t I I * RMH i �Q*+� ctiRi4• . r lei a SRfii'i1ya�i4�Rwaa .ni a►.rrn..i•�.•�••, 1� . N3f• ' • Yil tit _— C%x ' � r ••�. 6RAMM Avnw RM + i {' yy,, •► RM RMH I 1 RM r ` lopA �r }`t a. I RM RM In 36 RL ewr A..nw �"w y MD +f 0d �i[�mr1`�Td'��P }�* £ +a. �n '1�W+�R tAa s' lYT-.`I� � 4h"q, t ilai i BOUNDARY— tl$�GOIi�CODRsif • .• A . • ti A f S.c 1/a own AVOnw � ,v �j4M wA3'fi � � EXHIBIT 9 , whyti h OPEN SPACE, CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH PARKS, ARD TRAILS LAN LEGISLATIVE DRAFT All grading within the Specific Plan area will require a grading permit and will be governed by soils, foundation and other geotechnical reports prepared by registered professional civil and geotechnical engineers, building codes, established engineering practices and City ordinances The maximum slope ratio, horizontal to vertical,will be 2 1 unless otherwise recommended by a geotechnical engineering report and approved by the City Grading will occur in Planning Area I to lower grades near the intersection of Edwards Street and Garfield Avenue to meet safe highway design criteria, to increase useable areas within the linear park and to create and enhance coastal view opportunities In Planning Area II, grading will be necessary for the construction of arterial and local street improvements and the installation of master-planned drainage and sewer improvements within unimproved ravines The ravine areas will be incorporated into a neighborhood linear park feature with slopes no greater than 2 1, in accordance with the schematic cross section on Exhibit 17 Within Planning Area III, grading will be required to create and stabilize development areas and to direct runoff to master-planned facilities Within Planning Area IV, grading will occur primarily in the Mixed Development area, concurrent with the widening of Goldenwest Street and removal of the existing abandoned reservoir The following guidelines are provided to enhance the visual form and character of manufactured slopes within the community 1) Grading shall be consistent with City policies and incorporate safe grading techniques to provide for proper engineering practices and ensure adequate site drainage 2) Blended and variable slopes shall be employed to restore a natural appearance within the framework of grading that is geologically safe 3) There shall be a smooth transition where graded slopes meet existing grades A transition at both the top and toe of slopes should also be provided 4) Graded slopes shall be revegetated or landscaped per City approval II-5 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT F. Public Facilities 1. Infrastructure Plan The Infrastructure Schematic Plan,Exhibits 10 and 11, identifies existing and proposed storm drain, sewer and water facility improvements to serve development within and surrounding the Specific Plan area A specific analysis of infrastructure requirements and detailed design, construction and phasing plans can be found in the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Technical Appendix The Technical Appendix also includes detailed arterial street sections, right-of-way requirements,traffic control systems and phasing plan Developers within the Specific Plan area will be responsible for the construction of public facilities improvements on a fair-share basis, as described in Section IV, Administration a Storm Drains Existing storm drainage facilities are maintained by the City of Huntington Beach, Public Works Department The majority of the Holly Seacliff project area will dram via improved swales or proposed underground conduits into four primary runoff outlets The first of these primary outlets consists of drainage collected from the northwest portion of the project draining north This runoff is either collected in a proposed storm dram system from Edwards Street northeasterly to the Ellis Avenue crossing, or drains in an improved swale north to the Ellis Avenue crossing The second primary runoffarea consists of flows collected from the northeast and central portion of the project The existing swales in Planning Area II will be upgraded and improved to accommodate both sewer and underground storm drain facilities Storm drain systems will be added in Goldenwest Street from Garfield Avenue to midway between Ellis and Garfield Avenues, and in the realigned Gothard Street from Ernest Avenue to midway between Ellis and Ernest Avenues The third primary runoff area consists of flows collected in the most westerly and southwesterly portion of the area All runoff from these areas drains to the south and through a detention basin at the downstream end of the Seacliff golf course This basin has been designed to accommodate the future flows from development II-6 (hssp97) L EGEND i t i N 11 0 STORM INIMS i A l I ,•� �I I ® SEWER LINES -- I 1sew.rlm slolwn(� N ---- I f( ) V V I Cho Er4b"I- NOTE / S-T-AekM App M-la bdIM-U "" vI :; EH.SE. Sewn lm 5I n ' /- I..w.__I RL 7 � RL"3 �i RM ih I 1 OOLOENWEST / I �• �� \ i $ ECIFlC PLAN AREA Ili / RM OS i( I MH RW I i I III I RMH RMH os �•...,` 1 L J I -- ---- ---------_---_—_—_— RM RMH I C _- r,••— RM I RM OSJ,tc/� RM — — i _ RIMl R1.-2 \ ,\ 1 \ RL-2 1 `r�Y ArlMA �I i / flay A.—, kl MD COASTAL TONE � i EXHIBIT 10 Drainage and Sewer Systems CITY OF HUN INGTON BEACH INFRASTRUCTURE SCHEMATIC PLAN �i� C) LL,V-SFI�C R.0F I�' , RE,A SP C RF OC PLAN d llllllll I I II" - WopM L EGEND os 91A00n ---- r I POTABLE WATER ... ... PtapnW TAtm W R—o4 iI •— �. �I •» •_�EWA"IA+Ac1 bulbs aw lot. •�! y, �i IIIj bOA eerotmxbd) ,I€ i i t EEI RECLAIMED WATER t �I't 1 t [t t Aram II` ...__-_-----:._......_».-- ----...-•.. ............ .. � WAben AnOAnaaIAIAA li• ��i i N � Ii=i NOTE dd Meal lM Alm rAAUoe1wA o"thl. RL-1 =�irimra.y ! III RL-9 T ':+ RM �If r �I ELU"OLOENWEST -.I RL•1 �_, II SPECIFIC PLAN ' f j !i AREA RM f -1i€t I i� RMH MH RL ~vi I I #IiI ��RMH os _ I_ •• _:i -�� : m.. _ - _ I � CwIMW�PtoOONld/ RM t� RMH _—C IM IIC PwoSt". RM ! I � � RM OS , / ` -- II ..... ' RM t i v� �� \ _�_ I �• RM jo `rAb AveMM •� E+blAq / CWY Avmm�• Pwp SWIM /P �I � MO � $� t I \ COASTAL Z BOUNDA ONE RY—'• /'� - •—•— v , V*,TIONn Avanoi—^ fi EXHIBIT 11 Water Systems CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INFRASTRUCTURE SCHEMATIC PLAN c;100 L LVttsERAACLUEE n1In, EnA 9PECHHC MR M ,411111111111 1 1 lam LEGISLATIVE DRAFT The fourth drainage area consists of flows leaving the project area through the southeast portion of the site Flows from this area will be transported off the site via an extended storm drain system in Garfield or through the developed areas of the Pacific Ranch project Developers shall be responsible for the construction or funding of drainage facilities within their project and/or off-site facilities necessary to serve the development If a developer is required to construct or to oversize these facilities beyond their fair-share to serve other projects, the developer shall enter into a reimbursement agreement with the City Storm dram system improvement requirements and design criteria may be found in the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Technical Appendix b Sewer Facilities Existing sewer facilities for the project area are maintained by the City of Huntington Beach, Public Works Department and the Sanitation District of Orange County, District Nos 3 and 11 The City's Master Plan of Sewers indicates that four major trunk lines and one City pump station will be required to ultimately collect and convey sewerage from the project area Generally, sewer lines 8-inches in diameter and smaller, required for interior streets and individual developments, will be the responsibility of developers on a project-by-project basis. Developers shall be responsible for the construction or funding of sewer facilities within their project and/or off-site facilities necessary to serve the development If a developer is required to construct or to oversize these facilities beyond their fair-share to serve other projects,the developer shall enter into a reimbursement agreement with the City Sewer system improvement requirements and design criteria may be found in the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Technical Appendix II-7 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT c Water Facilities The majority of the project area lies within the Reservoir Hill Assessment District, which operates as part of the City of Huntington Beach Water System. Although development throughout this district is currently minimal, main lines and transmission lines to service this entire area have been installed as part of this District. Because the existing booster station near Clay Avenue and Goldenwest Street is operating at capacity, plans have been made for the construction of a new booster pump station near Huntington Street and Garfield Avenue To properly service the project site, some additional 12-inch water lines are required within the arterial highways Other smaller water lines will also be necessary in local interior streets within the project to provide water service to internal lots To mitigate project impacts on the City's water system, a 9-million gallon reservoir, water well,booster pump and a major water transmission main will be constructed outside the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Area to provide adequate water service and storage capacity for the area Developers shall be responsible for the construction or funding of water facilities within their project and/or off-site facilities necessary to serve the development If a developer is required to construct or to oversize these facilities beyond their fair-share to serve other projects,the developer shall enter into a reimbursement agreement with the City_ Water system improvement requirements and design criteria may be found in the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Technical Appendix d Fire and Emergency Medical/Police As mitigation of project-related impacts, a Public Safety Facility (Talbert Station)will be constructed, furnished and equipped with fire and medical apparatus The facility will be constructed on land provided by the City outside of the Specific Plan Area A police substation will also be constructed, furnished and equipped as part of the Public Safety Facility. The Specific Plan requires participation by developers in a fair-share funding program for these facilities II-8 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT e Reclaimed Water The City of Huntington Beach Water Master Plan proposes the use of reclaimed water for irrigation purposes The City of Huntington Beach Public Works Department, Water Division, is currently coordinating with the Orange County Water District(OCWD) for a supply of reclaimed water to serve portions of the City It is anticipated that the City will be served via inclusion in OCWD's proposed Green Acres Reclamation Facilities Project(GAP) The possible use of reclaimed water for some irrigated areas should decrease the future use of potable water throughout the developed Holly-Seacliff area Should the City implement and connect to the Green Acres system of reclaimed water, such a system can be used to irrigate major open space features only, such as landscaped medians, parkways and parks,using County-provided water Developers shall be responsible for the construction or funding of reclaimed water facilities necessary to serve the development If a developer is required to construct or to oversize these facilities beyond their fair-share to serve other projects, the developer shall enter into a reimbursement agreement with the City Reclaimed water system improvement requirements and design criteria may be found in the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Technical Appendix R f Parks The proposed linear park areas in Planning Areas I and III will be dedicated, and neighborhood parks in Planning Areas I1 and III will be improved as provided for in the Holly-Seacliff Development Agreement Properties not included in the Development Agreement will be subject to the City Park Acquisition and Development Fee Ordinance g Library Facilities Public library facilities are provided by the City of Huntington Beach approximately one-half mile north of the Specific Plan Area All new development is assessed for library services through the payment of a cultural enrichment fee at the issuance of building permits II-9 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT h Schools The Specific Plan Area is located within the Huntington Beach City School District(Grades K-8) and the Huntington Beach Union High School District(Grades 9-12) All development within the Specific Plan Area is subject to the payment of school impact fees at the time of issuance of building permits, in accordance with Government Code Section 53080 School facility impact mitigation measures per Final Environmental Impact Report No 89-1 shall be applied to development within the Specific Plan Area (see Section VI) Schools shall be permitted in any Planning Area within the Specific Plan in order to accommodate elementary students generated by the development of the Specific Plan and surrounding areas A potential school site within the Specific Plan boundaries may be established by means of a general plan amendment Any new school facility shall be developed in accordance with the construction and planning standards and requirements of the City of Huntington Beach,the Huntington Beach City School District,the State of California Architects Office and the State of California Department of Education In order to comply with mitigation measures identified in Environmental Impact Report No 89-1,proposed future development within the Specific Plan may be required to dedicate and convey land to the school district,pay additional school impact fees and/or provide other revenues to facilitate the financing of construction and land for new school facilities In addition, mitigation may be achieved by providing.new or existing permanent or temporary classroom facilities. Compliance with the above shall be addressed concurrent with the filing of the first tentative tract map The developer shall demonstrate to the City's satisfaction and upon receipt of the School District's review that the mitigation measures identified in Final Environmental Impact Report No 89-1 have been or will be implemented prior to the approval of any tentative tract maps A School Facilities Impact Mitigation and Reimbursement Agreement shall be a condition of approval for any subdivision, tentative tract,or parcel map within the Specific Plan The Agreement shall provide for the adequate mitigation of impacts on the elementary school district by providing adequate funding of school facilities necessary to serve the student population generated II-10 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT by the proposed development This condition may be waived by the Board of Trustees of the Huntington Beach City School District 2. Utilities There are several public utility service providers identified by the Holly- Seacliff Specific Plan Although adequate facilities exist for the current service needs of the Holly-Seacliff area, additional facilities may be required as development occurs a Electricity Electrical service to the area is provided by the Southern California Edison Company Existing transmission and distribution lines are adequate to service current and potential future needs Developers may be required to relocate or underground existing facilities concurrent with project development. b Natural Gas Natural gas service in the Specific Plan Area is provided by the Southern California Gas Company Adequate facilities exist for current and projected future needs Developers may be required to relocate existing facilities concurrent with project development c Telephone Telephone service in the Specific Plan Area is provided by General Telephone(GTE) Developers should coordinate with GTE for the relocation of existing facilities and installation of new service d Cable Television Cable television service within Huntington Beach is provided by Paragon Cable. Developers should coordinate with Paragon Cable for the installation of new service e Solid Waste Disposal Rainbow Disposal Company currently provides solid waste disposal services for the Holly-Seacliff area Based on service projections and anticipated demand increase,an adequate level of service will be maintained No solid waste disposal facilities are planned to be located in Specific Plan Area. II-11 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT G. Community Theme Guidelines The Community Theme Guidelines are intended to provide for the development of neighborhoods, open spaces,buildings and streetscapes having a distinctive visual identity to promote individual neighborhood identities and to promote interrelationships between complementary land uses and community open space features. The major elements of the Community Theme Plan include landscaping, walls, signage and monumentation, street furniture and open space/pedestrian linkage features as described below Exhibit 12 illustrates the general location of required community landscaping and monumentation All development proposals within the Specific Plan area shall conform to the community theme guidelines and shall incorporate appropriate community theme elements Concurrent with the filing of the first tentative tract map in the Specific Plan area, Community Design Guidelines shall be submitted which will address pedestrian linkages between planning areas,design and function of the swales, type of street furniture and greater definition of neighborhoods 1 Landscaping • Landscaping shall be provided as outlined below, subject to the following general criteria • Plant materials will consist of low-maintenance trees, shrubs and ground covers approved by the City of Huntington Beach • In graded areas and public open space areas where structures or other improvements are not built, landscaping should consider the use of native or naturalized drought tolerant species which can provide wildlife habitat,with a gradual transition to more ornamental species along the development edge. • The landscaping of development within the plan should be designed to minimize visual impacts of adjacent parcels Special consideration should be given to orientation of residences(particularly windows and decks)to respect the privacy of adjacent residents to the extent feasible. • All landscaped medians located within arterial streets shall be maintained by the City of Huntington Beach,provided medians are designed and constructed per City standards and approval All other landscaping improvements shall be maintained by a landscape maintenance district, community association,homeowners association or other method acceptable to the City I1-12 (hssp97) I L E G EN D l•,r 1 •w I I�^IJ e I Q l MEDIANPIANTINTI fMA nnvn � COYNUNIiY IDENTITY W.sM,pton F1 .1► COMMUMTY GATEWAYS w 11 hl.n.Data P.bn at q e.ryv i INgMs RL•1 110.s,nmry la«Rnealon • Oeld.rm«I MesaI I slpn waS 11 MAJOR INTERSECTIONS Ts Iwgnls In Ner.«ee coma 12 ELLIS OOLDENWEST o~skew '` sete«vs Sro"*.l .vsrgn.n u d stay RL•1 SPECIFId PLAN J \ PI«1lrq AREA • I STREETSCAPESISTREET J 11-3 O IDENTITY TREES RM ( Inler.ta pl.m4q nI a« _RMH o par simlaNtuels ofMalest'"Is IC - 116 D� NENINSORNOODENTRIES t R f �+ Acnnt o«s a.mq OS 118 I MH I IOW—ed t000dan I cop. 1-3 11-4 RMH 115 N.he'IvooO la«mk.tlon r{ RL-1 t OS ( i }� �� -RMH i EM Bus STOP w; fill ` 4anm d A nrow ,. RM I 1113 RM RMH 1 C �+ ( Ii5 Iv 1 � Iv I I RM m a — — IVOS� �`` yam...... {I RM -_ -- ` ' IV-3 RM L- RL-2 m ftsa«I 1112 - ✓. lr-V A MM Ck V Av1 Am III IV r MD I COASTAL ZONE , o BOUNDARY—a — IO14 uvw AL 111U. EXHIBIT 12 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH COMMUNITY THEME PLAN Nd(0)L(L V-0' -./A CL0FF AREA V)P EMSIGC P ILA INK] 'd!1111111111 I I IUVVA LEGISLATIVE DRAFT a Arterial Highway Medians • Landscaped medians shall be provided along Goldenwest Street, Gothard Street between Ellis Avenue and Ernest Avenue,Main Street, Seapomt Street and Garfield Avenue where approved by the City • Washmgtoma robusta(Mexican Fan Palm) shall be planted in informal groupings in all medians throughout the specific plan area • Flowering shrubs and ground cover will accent the palm groupings. • Main Street median planting will consist of the existing mix of Washmgtoma robusta and Phoenix canariensis(Canary Island Date Palm) b Community Gateways • A minimum 25 foot landscape area(measured from curb face) shall be provided at community gateway locations identified on Exhibit 12 for appropriate landscaping and community monumentation • Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Date Palm), Phoenix dactylifera(Date Palm), Washingtonia robusta(Mexican Fan Palm) in clusters, Erythrma caffra(Coral Tree), Chamaerops humilis (Mediterranean Fan Palm)or other City-approved tree, at varying heights. • Broadleaf evergreen understory planting • Community identification monumentation accented with flowering ground cover. c Major Intersections • A minimum 25 foot landscape area(measured from curb face) shall be provided at major intersections identified on Exhibit 12 for enhanced landscape treatment. • Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Date Palm),Phoenix dactylifera(Date Palm), Washmgtoma robusta(Mexican Fan Palm) in clusters, Erythrina caffra(Coral Tree), Chamaerops humilis (Mediterranean Fan Palm)or other City-approved tree, at varying heights. II-13 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT • Broadleaf evergreen understory planting d Streetscape/Street Identity Trees • A minimum 15 foot landscape area shall be provided along all arterial highways within the specific plan area for appropriate parkway landscaping Along Main Street,the 15 foot landscape area shall consist of 6 feet of public right-of-way and a 9 foot private landscape easement Typical landscaped street sections are found on Exhibits 13, 14 and 15 • The parkways for each street shall consist of informally-spaced groups of two tree varieties from the list below Botanical Name Common Name Brachychiton acerifolius Flame Tree Casuarina cummnghamiana River She-Oak Cupamopsis anacardiodes Carrotwood Eucalyptus ficifolia Red Flowering Gum Eucalyptus sideroxylon rosea Red Iron Bark Gum r Ficus rubiginosa Rusty Leaf Fig Koelreuteria bipinnata Chinese Flame Tree Magnolia grandiflora Samuel Sommer "Samuel Sommer" Magnolia Melaleuca quinquenervia Cajeput Tree Pinus canariensis Canary Island Pine Pinus eldarica Mondel Pine Pinus sylvestns Erect Scotch Pine Pistacia atlantica Mt Atlas Pistache Platanus acerifolia London Plane Tree II-14 (hssp97) EXISTING PALM TREES 6 MEDIAN 1 I 9' 12' 41 41 12' i 9' cool ro Row. R.O.W. EXHIBIT 13 MAIN ST REET Looking North, between Huntington and Clay CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 120' R.O.W. STREET SECTION HOLLY BEAC CUFF AREA SPECOFOC PLAN o 11111 1 1,1 1 15 �1 I .42' It -1' 42',L 6' i ar 2 L15' R.O.W. RO.W. EXHIBIT 14 GOLDENWEST ST REET Looking North, between Ellis and Ernest CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 110' R.O.W. STREET SECTION HOLLY SEACLUFF AREA SPECOFUC PLAN 1111 I 1 1 1 ,0 1 ,1 � l In It le 15' 42' 42' 15' RO.U1. C� RO.UJ. EXHIBIT 15 GOTHA RD STREET Looking North, between Ellis and Ernest CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 84' R.O.W. STREET SECTION HOLLY SGACLUFF AREA SPECUFUC PLAN o1111a 1 110 1 ,s � , LEGISLATIVE DRAFT Podocarpus gracilior Fern Pine Schinus molle California Pepper e Neighborhood Entries • A minimum 20 foot landscape area(measured from curb face) shall be provided at each neighborhood entry • The accent trees at each neighborhood entry are to be repeated throughout the neighborhood streetscape. • Neighborhood identification sign/wall • Tree, shrub and ground cover species will be consistent with neighborhood character and architectural theme, and will contrast with the adjacent arterial street tree 2 Walls, Signage and Monumentation a All single-family residential and industrial areas along an arterial highway shall be screened by a minimum six-foot high solid masonry wall. b The design and materials of residential walls shall be consistent within each planning unit c Community walls will vary by neighborhood and reflect neighborhood theme and architecture,while utilizing the same materials in varied combinations for a consistent community image These materials may consist of stone, brick,decorative block or tubular steel in different combinations for each of the individual neighborhoods d The horizontal form of continuous solid walls shall be softened by the use of pilasters or landscape materials e Multiple-family residential areas may be screened by a combination of solid and open fencing materials f The location,design and materials for all walls facing an arterial highway within the Specific Plan area shall be subject to approval of the Director of Community Development. g. All proposed signs with the Specific Plan shall conform with the Sign Ordinance of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code I1-15 (hssp97) \ LEGISLATIVE DRAFT h A monument sign or other architectural feature shall be constructed within the landscaped setback area of all Community Gateway locations identified on Exhibit 12 i Neighborhood entry signs shall be located within the landscaped setback area for each neighborhood entry. j Commercial, industrial and mixed-use project identification signs may be located within the landscaped setback area adjacent to an arterial highway k The location,design and materials for all proposed community gateway, neighborhood entry and project identification signs shall be subject to the approval of the Director of Community Development 3 Street Furniture a Street lighting may be placed within arterial medians or within adjoining sidewalk and setback areas. b Street lighting should be standardized throughout the Specific Plan area Street lighting along arterials shall be of Marbelite Cobra Head type and 30 feet in height Street lighting along local streets shall be of Marbelite Cobra Head type and 25 feet in height Street lighting may have custom decorative features within Planning Areas if approved by the City c Bus stops and shelters shall be provided in the locations identified- on Exhibit 12. d The design of any proposed bus shelters shall be reviewed by the Orange County Transit District and approved by the Director of Community Development 4 Open Space/Pedestrian Linkages The Specific Plan incorporates and is surrounded by numerous sigmficant open space and recreational features, including Huntington Central Park, the Bolsa Chica Linear Regional Park and neighborhood parks The following guidelines are intended to maximize the interrelationship of land uses within the Specific Plan area to both internal and external community amenities. a Bicycle lanes shall be provided on all arterial highways within the Specific Plan area. II-16 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT b. Bicycle lanes shall be connected to recreational trails within public and private park and open space areas at locations deemed appropriate by the Director of Public Works. C. Sidewalks shall be provided adjacent to all arterial highways within the Specific Plan area. d. Sidewalks shall be connected to pedestrian trails located within public and private park and open space areas where feasible. e. Pedestrian access shall be provided to all neighborhood commercial areas from adjacent residential neighborhoods to discourage unnecessary automobile trips. f. Residential, commercial, industrial and mixed-use projects shall be designed to encourage pedestrian and bicycle access as well as automobile access. g. Where feasible, pedestrian access should be provided between adjoining residential projects. h. Bus stops and shelters shall be provided as indicated on Exhibit 12 to facilitate public transportation within the Specific Plan area. II-17 (hssp97) III. ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS LEGISLATIVE DRAFT III. ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Purpose and Intent The purpose of this section is to provide the specific development and density standards and regulations that will be applied for each type of development permitted within the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan. Unless otherwise stated,the Specific Plan will be the zoning document for the Planning Areas identified in the Development Plan. This section contains the definitions, general provisions and development standards. The following Zoning and Development Standards apply to all properties within the Specific Plan area. All references to the "Huntington Beach Ordinance Code" mean the current Code, except for properties included in Development Agreement 90-1 which are subject to the Code in effect at the time of adoption of Development Agreement 90-1. B. Definitions The following definitions shall apply to the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan. Terms not defined herein shall have the same definitions as used in the City of Huntington Beach Ordinance Code in effect at the time of adoption of the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan. 1. Building Height Building height shall be defined as a vertical dimension measured from the top of the highest roof feature, including mechanical equipment screening, to the top of the subfloor/slab directly underneath. In addition, the following standards shall apply: a. Datum(100) shall be set at the highest point of the curb along the front property line. If no curb exists, datum shall be set at the highest centerline of the street along the front property line. b. The differential between top of subfloor and datum shall be a maximum of two (2) feet as determined by Public Works. In the event that any subfloor, stemwall or footing is proposed greater than two (2) feet above datum,the height in excess shall be deducted from the maximum allowable ridgeline height. C. Roofs shall have a 5/12 pitch or greater. III-I (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT d. In the case of proposed development adjacent to existing structures and infill development involving individual lots with a grade differential of three(3) feet or greater between the high point and the low point, determined before rough grading, Use Permit approval shall be required. Use Permit approval shall be based upon a building and grading plan which terraces the building with the grade and which is compatible with adjacent development. 2. Planning Areas The four areas depicted on the Development Plan, bounded by major streets as shown, and labeled I, II, III and IV. 3. Planning Unit A sub-area of a Planning Area numbered and identified on the Development Plan and Land Use Table. 4. Z-lot A lot in which the house is laid out in a diagonal between its front and rear yards and the creation of use easements with other residential properties on its sides results in wider usable side yards. C. General Provisions ' All development activity within the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Area will be subject to the following general conditions and requirements, as noted. 1. Permitted Uses a. Permitted Uses within the Specific Plan Area shall be defined in the Development Standards section for each district or subarea. b. All requests for residential density transfers shall comply with the procedures contained in Section IV-D, Density Transfer Procedure. C. In addition to Permitted Uses, Unclassified Uses shall be permitted in accordance with the regulations contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. d. Nonconforming Uses shall be permitted within the Specific Plan Area in accordance with the regulations contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, III-2 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT e. Oil and gas production shall be permitted within the Specific Plan Area in accordance with the regulations contained in the Development Standards section herein and the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. The continued operation,redrilling and servicing of existing oil and gas wells shall be permitted throughout the Specific Plan Area, subject to applicable City regulations and compliance with the mitigation measures contained in Final Environmental Impact Report No. 89-1, see Section VI. The drilling of new oil and gas wells and consolidation of existing operations shall be permitted only within Planning Units II-8 and IV-5, subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit and compliance with applicable City regulations and mitigation measures contained in Final Environmental Impact Report No. 89-1. 2. Overlay Areas Additional regulations to those stated in the Development Standards section herein are applicable in the following areas: a. Flood Plain Zone Overlay Development within the Flood Plain Zone Overlay, identified in Exhibit 16, shall comply with the regulations contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. b. Alquist-Priolo Zone Overlay All development projects within the Alquist-Priolo Zone Overlay identified in Exhibit 16 shall be required to submit a geotechnical investigation identifying any active traces of the Newport/Inglewood Fault and establishing any required building setback lines prior to issuance of a building permit. C. Coastal Zone Overlay All development projects located entirely or partially within the Coastal Zone boundary identified on Exhibit 16 shall require approval of a Coastal Development Permit in accordance with the regulations contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. III-3 (hssp97) LEGEND COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY ,� AWN fII j "�FLOOD PLAIN BOUNDARY - -.-----_--•—••-----------_---/ l._—___I 0---_-_ ••_••�••_��-.��.-�r-._• "�. ALOUIS11RIOLO ZONE ACCESS PLAN I ..-__-J Ij III // •._•.�� '®� WINDROW TREES SWALE AREA II j`I Il,z,� \ I� " ------- --- ----------- ,� r �j• Csa�lhld Awnw J//�� III `���...,-�`1 j � �•,�-. ..� •... III �� II. SOOIA1NoARVONE /•./ •`•••1 �Yoi�loirn�Arinu°—__---.y , l EXHIBIT 16 CITY OF.. HUNTINGTON BEACH OVERLAY AREA RO(1,LLB ll ME-b%C LO FF AA INEnA 9lrJ(EC0U--0Ge LP LA UV 4!1111111111 1 1 ►u;m\ LEGISLATIVE DRAFT d. Access Plan Overlay Exhibit 16 identifies parcels in Planning Areas II and IV where coordination of access on Garfield Avenue is necessary for safe and efficient traffic movement. All development applications within this overlay area shall require approval of an access plan by the Public Works Department. e. Windrow Trees and Swales Exhibit 16 shows areas in Planning Area II of existing "windrow" trees and swales. Wherever feasible, existing windrows should be preserved within park sites or replaced to maintain the aesthetic benefits they contribute to the community. Further studies should be completed to assess the health of these trees. Where it is not feasible, as determined by the City of Huntington Beach, to preserve healthy, mature trees,trees may be replaced with 36" box trees at a 1:1 ratio. Landscaping plans specifying the number and type of replacement trees shall be submitted for review and approval by the Huntington Beach Public Works Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. The existing swales should be incorporated into a recreation/open space corridor including landscaping and a recreation trail per the typical cross section shown on Exhibit 17. 3. Parkin Parking shall be provided for all development projects in accordance with the regulations contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 4. Landscaping a. Landscaping shall be required as defined within the Development Standards in Section III for each district. b. All projects fronting on an arterial highway shall be responsible for installing landscaping consistent with the Community Theme Guidelines outlined in Section II-G. C. Residential and industrial/commercial uses shall be adequately separated. Since all such uses in the Specific Plan area are separated by streets, new development and redevelopment shall include a minimum of 15 foot landscape area with a 6 foot high solid masonry wall. Buildings shall be set back as required by the development standards. See Exhibit 18. III-4 (hssp97) (00, MINIMUM f I I I I I I MAX 2:1 SLOPE g l I DIKING/ MIN 101 BIKING TRAIL EXHIBIT 17 RECREATION/OPEN SPACE CORRIDOR CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH TYPICAL CROSS SECTION HOLLY SEACILOFF AREA SPEC UFOC PLAN 1111111�1 1 1 INDUSTRIAL/ RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL ' 1000 VARIES 51 VARIES 15' VARIES DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS STANDARDS EXHIBIT 18 COMME RCIALANDUST RIAL AND RESIDENTIAL CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH TYPICAL SEPARATION FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT HOLLY BEAC LOFF AREA SPECOFOC PLAN 111111 1 11 1 1 [cam 0 5 10 15 LEGISLATIVE DRAFT d. Developers shall consult with the Public Works Department regarding landscaping conservation measures and shall submit landscape and irrigation plans for approval. e. Wherever feasible, trees suitable for use by raptors should be preserved or replaced in accordance with Final Environmental Impact Report No. 89-1. 5. Walls and Fences A plan showing the proposed location, size and materials of all proposed walls and fences shall be submitted for review and approval by the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. 6. Signs and Outdoor Lighting A plan showing the proposed location, size and materials of all proposed signs and outdoor lighting shall be submitted for review and approval by the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of the building permit. All signs shall conform to the regulations contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Outdoor lighting shall be designed to provide adequate illumination of on-site areas without intruding upon surrounding properties or sensitive uses. 7. Public Facilities and Infrastructure All development projects shall construct or fund required public facilities and infrastructure per a Holly-Seacliff Public Facilities Development Fee Ordinance in conformance with the Public Facilities Plan (Section II-F) and the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Technical Appendix. Developers shall consult with the Orange County Transit District regarding locations for bus stops, turnouts and shelters prior to the approval of a tentative tract map or issuance of a building permit. 8. Utilities All development projects shall be required to install adequate utility services necessary to serve the development. All utilities shall be placed underground and identified in easements, excluding street lights and electrical transmission lines of 66 kV or greater. Utility systems shall be designed to conserve the use of electrical energy and natural resources. Developers shall coordinate with the gas, electricity,telephone and cable TV companies regarding energy conservation and proper planning, phasing and sizing of lines. III-5 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 9. Fire Protection and Emergency Vehicle Access All development projects shall comply with the regulations contained in Chapter 17.56 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code (Fire Code). A plan showing the location of fire hydrants and emergency vehicle access shall be submitted for review and approval by the Fire Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. All projects involving the closure of public streets shall be reviewed by the Fire Department for adequate emergency apparatus access. 10. Environmental Requirements Development within the Specific Plan Area shall implement the mitigation measures contained in Final Environmental Impact Report No. 89-1 (see Section VI). General mitigation measures are identified within the Specific Plan. Other mitigation measures are triggered by specific permits or entitlement requests and must be addressed at that time. In addition, each development project shall include an environmental mitigation monitoring program prior to approval. In compliance with the mitigation measures contained in Final Environmental Impact Report No. 89-1, the following studies or plans may be required as a condition of project approval prior to the issuance of grading and/or building permits, final inspection, or certificate of occupancy as indicated: a. Geotechnical Investigation A geotechnical investigation addressing potential hazards due to seismic activity, erosion, tsunami, liquefaction and subsidence including recommendations for grading and the placement and design of structures, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Public Works Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. b. Soils Report A soils report containing recommendations regarding the placement of fill, design of slopes, slabs, footings and foundations shall be submitted for review and approval by the Public Works Department prior to the issuance of a grading permit. In areas containing active, idle or abandoned oil and gas wells or storage tanks, a report indicating the location and status of all facilities and any contaminated soils and methane,together with recommended mitigation measures, shall be submitted to the Fire Department III-6 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT prior to the issuance of a building permit. Mitigation from Final Environmental Impact Report 89-1 has been attached (see Section VI). The methane zone can include areas that do not contain oil wells. A study should be required for all areas within the methane zone. C. Hydrology Report A hydrology report identifying the design of all proposed drainage and flood control facilities required to accommodate projected runoff shall be submitted for review and approval by the Public Works Department prior to the issuance of a grading permit. d. Cultural Resources Report For development projects in areas identified as archaeological or paleontological sites in Section 4.11 of Final Environmental Impact Report No. 89-1, the mitigation measures listed in the Final Environmental Impact Report shall apply. These mitigation measures are included in Section VI of this document. A report containing the results of any test excavations and data/materials recovered and conclusions shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of a grading permit. C. Noise Report A noise report will be required for development projects abutting an arterial highway or within a helicopter flight corridor to identify recommended design features prior to issuance of a building permit. 11. Maintenance Mechanisms For development projects which include privately-owned streets, parking, recreation, open space, landscaped areas, or community buildings or facilities, the developer shall submit a legal instrument or instruments setting forth a plan or manner of permanent care and maintenance of such areas and facilities. No such instrument shall be acceptable until approved by the City Attorney as to legal form and effect, and by the Director of Community Development as to suitability for the proposed use of said areas and facilities. If the common areas are to be conveyed to a homeowners' association,the developer shall file a Declaration of Covenants to be submitted with the application for approval,that will govern the association. III-7 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT These covenants shall include: a. The homeowners' association shall be established prior to the sale of the last dwelling unit. b. Membership shall be mandatory for each buyer and any successive buyer. C. The open space restrictions shall be permanent. d. Provisions to prohibit parking upon other than approved and developed parking spaces shall be written into the covenants, conditions and restrictions for each project. e. If the development is constructed in increments or phases which require one or more final maps, reciprocal covenants, conditions, or restrictions, reciprocal management and maintenance agreements shall be established which will cause a merging of increments as they are completed, and embody one homeowners' association with common areas for the total development. 12. Affordable Housing All developers of residential projects shall be required to submit an affordable housing plan in conjunction with any subdivision in accordance with the City's adopted Housing Element. An affordable housing plan shall provide for on-site affordable housing within the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan. The contents of the affordable housing plan shall include the following: a. Fifteen(15)percent of the total units proposed shall be for households earning less than 120%of the Orange County Median Income. b. A detailed description of the type, size, location and phasing of the units being built. C. The estimated applicable sales price and rental rate of the units. d. Residential projects for households earning less than 80% of the Orange County Median Income may request a subsidy by one or more of the following: 1. Direct financial assistance. 2. Reduction in fees and/or exactions. III-8 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 3. Deviations from specific development standards of the Holly- Seacliff Specific Plan. Exception: An In-Lieu Fee may be applied on small projects. Parcels one (1) acre in size or less may pay a fee established by the City Council in lieu of providing on-site affordable housing units. 13. Parks The final design of neighborhood parks, as well as any requests for private recreation facilities parks credit, shall be reviewed by the Community Services Commission. 14. Lot Consolidation The City should consider adoption of a redevelopment plan or other strategy to assemble encyclopedia lots and other non-buildable parcels in Planning Areas II and IV. 15. Air Quality Conservation Measures Development within the specific Plan area should consider the following during project design: bicycle facilities, bus turnout lanes, bus shelters, park and ride areas, energy conserving lighting an traffic signal synchronization, where feasible. 16. Non-Residential Building Materials Non-residential building materials should be compatible with nearby residential structures and should minimize glare. 17. Department of Fish and Game Notification Upon City approval of any grading or development plans within streambed areas under the jurisdiction of the California Department of Fish and Game, the Developer shall be required to notify and obtain appropriate permits from the Department of Fish and Game. III-9 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT D. Development Standards 1. Low Density Residential (RL-1) a. Purpose The Low Density Residential District is intended to provide for single- family detached dwellings at the lowest density. b. Permitted Uses 1) Lot sale subdivisions, subject to approval of a tentative parcel map or tentative tract map. 2) Single-family home subdivisions, subject to approval of a conditional use permit and a tentative parcel map or tentative tract map. 3) Single-family detached dwelling units and associated accessory buildings, subject to issuance of a building permit. c. Minimum Parcel Size/Frontage A licensed land surveyor or civil engineer shall submit calculations showing lot width, depth and area for any new parcel. 1) The minimum lot size shall be seven thousand (7,000) square feet. 2) The minimum lot frontage shall be sixty (60) feet. The minimum required lot frontage for cul-de-sac and knuckle lots shall be forty-five (45) feet; however, if one additional off-street parking space is included,the minimum shall be thirty(30) feet. d. Maximum Density/Intensity The maximum density shall not exceed one (1) dwelling unit per lot. Exception: A second unit may be added to an existing single-family residence upon approval of a Conditional Use Permit in accordance with standards contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. e. Maximum Building Height The maximum building height shall be thirty-five (35) feet and a maximum of two (2) stories. III-10 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT f Maximum Site Coverage Maximum site coverage shall be fifty (50) percent. The maximum site coverage shall be fifty-five (55)percent for all lots abutting a park, recreation area or public utility right-of-way which is a minimum of 100- feet in clear width. g. Setback (Front Yard) The minimum setback from the front property lines for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be as follows: Dwellings: Fifteen(15) feet. Front entry garages eF and carports: Twenty (20) feet. Side entry garages: Ten (10) feet. Balconies, Bay windows, Eaves and Fireplaces: Twelve (12) feet, except eight (8) feet on side entry garage. h. Setback (Side Yard) The minimum setback from the side property lines shall be as follows: 1) Interior Side Yard Dwellings, patio covers, garages, carports and accessory buildings: Minimum of five (5) feet. Eaves: Eighteen ( 4` Thirty (30) inches. Fireplaces: Thirty (30) inches. Bay windows,unfeefed balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Three (3) feet. 2) Exterior Side Yard Dwellings, side enti=y garages, carports, and accessory buildings: Minimum of ten(10) feet. Eaves: Eighteen (8) i ehes Seven (7) feet. Bay windows,uiueefed balconies,open stairways, architectural features Eight(8) feet and Fireplaces: Seven and one-half(7.5) feet. Unenclosed patio covers: Five (5) feet. III-I I (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT i. Setback(Rear Yard) The minimum setback from the rear property lines shall be as follows: Dwellings: Twenty (20) feet. Garages or accessory buildings: Minimum of five (5) feet. Bay windows, balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Fifteen (15) feet. Unenclosed patio covers: Five (5) feet. j. Building Separation The minimum building separation between buildings on the same lot shall be ten (10) feet. k. Open Space Open space shall be provided on the lot by the required minimum setback areas. 1. Parking Parking shall comply with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. in. Miscellaneous Requirements Accessory buildings may be permitted on a lot with a permitted main building. The minimum distance between an accessory building and any other building on the same lot shall be ten(10) feet. Setback requirements are as previously specified. n. Parkway Landscaping One (1) 36-inch box tree per lot. If a parkway is not provided,the required street tree shall be planted within the front setback prior to final inspection. III-12 (hssp97) .ti LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2. Low Density Residential 2 (RL-2) a. Purpose The Low Density Residential 2 district is intended to provide for single- family detached dwelling units at low densities in Planning Area III. b. Permitted Uses 1) Single-family detached dwelling units (including zero lot line, Z-lot and patio homes) and their associated accessory buildings, subject to approval of a conditional use permit and a tentative parcel map or tentative tract map. 2) Golf Course maintenance facility, subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. c. Minimum Parcel Size/Frontage A licensed land surveyor or civil engineer shall submit calculations showing lot width, depth and area for any new parcel. 1) The minimum lot size shall be five thousand (5,000) square feet on one-half of the total number of lots and a minimum six thousand (6,000) square foot lots for the balance. 2) The minimum lot frontage shall be fifty (50) feet. The minimum required lot frontage for cul-de-sac and knuckle lots shall be forty- five (45) feet; however if one additional off-street parking space is included, the minimum shall be thirty (30) feet. d. Maximum Density/Intensity The maximum density shall not exceed one (1) dwelling unit per lot. Second units are not permitted. e. Maximum Building Height The maximum building height shall be Thirty-five (35) feet and a maximum of two (2) stories. f Maximum Site Coverage_ Maximum site coverage shall be fifty (50) percent. The maximum site coverage shall be fifty-five (55)percent for all lots abutting a park, recreation area, or public utility right-of-way which is a minimum of 100- feet in clear width. III-13 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT g. Setback(Front Yard) The minimum setback from the front property lines for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be as follows: Dwellings: Fifteen(15) feet. Front entry garages of and carports: Twenty (20) feet. Side entry garages: Ten(10) feet. Balconies, Bay windows, Eaves and Fireplaces: Twelve (12) feet, except eight (8) feet on side entry garage. h. Setback(Side Yard) The minimum setback from the side property lines shall be as follows: 1) Interior Side Yard Dwellings, patio covers, garages, carports and accessory buildings: Minimum of five (5) feet. Eaves: Eighteen 41 Thirty (30) inches. Fireplaces: Thirty(30) inches. Bay windows,up.r-ee€ed balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Three(3) feet. 2) Exterior Side Yard Dwellings, side-ems garages,carports and accessory buildings: Minimum of ten(10) feet. Eaves: Eigl: ee "4` :.,ehes Seven (7) feet. Bay windows,unfeefed balconies, open stairways,architectural features Eight (8) feet and Fireplaces: Seven and one-half(7.5) feet. Unenclosed patio covers: Five (5) feet. 3) Exception for Zero Lot Line A zero side yard setback or a zero rear yard setback shall be permitted as long as the following requirements are met: • The lot adjacent to the zero setback side or rear yard shall be held under the same ownership at the time of application and the setback for the adjacent lot shall be either zero or a minimum of ten(10) feet. III-14 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT • No pei4ia of tl+e dwelling o All architectural features shall comply with the Uniform Building Code.pfejeet- the p pert. line xceept r o tap eaves no gr-ea4er-than 24 inekes • The zero setback shall not be adjacent to a public or private right-of-way. • Exposure protection between structures shall be provided as specified by the Fire Department and the Building Division. i. Setback(Rear Yard) The minimum setback from the rear property lines shall be as follows: Dwellings: Twenty (20) feet. Garages or accessory buildings: Five (5) feet. Bay windows, balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Fifteen (15) feet. Unenclosed patio covers: Five (5) feet. j. Building Separation The minimum building separation between buildings on the same lot shall be ten (10) feet. k. Open Space Open space shall be provided on the lot by the required minimum setback areas. 1. Parkin Parking shall comply with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. m. Miscellaneous Requirements Accessory buildings may be permitted on a lot with a permitted main building. The minimum distance between an accessory building and any other building on the same lot shall be sip(6) ten (10) feet. Setback requirements are as previously specified. Prior to the approval of a tentative tract map adjacent to the Seacliff Golf Course,preliminary landscape plans and development/open space edge treatments plans should be submitted for City approval. These plans III-15 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT should provide for the review of planting compatibility along the relevant edge of the development. n. Parkway Landscaping One (1) 36-inch box tree per lot. If a parkway is not provided,the required street tree shall be planted within the front setback prior to final inspection. 3. Low Density Residential 3 (RL-3) a. Purpose The Low Density Residential 3 District is intended to provide for single- family detached or attached dwelling units at low densities in Planning Area II. b. Permitted Uses Single-family detached or attached dwelling units (including zero lot line, Z-lot and patio homes) and their associated accessory buildings, subject to approval of a conditional use permit and tentative parcel map or tentative tract map. c. Minimum Parcel Size/Frontage A licensed land surveyor or civil engineer shall submit calculations showing lot width, depth and area for any new parcel. 1) The minimum lot size shall be three thousand-three hundred (3,300) square feet. 2) The minimum lot frontage shall be thirty(30) feet; however,the minimum required lot frontage for cul-de-sac and knuckle lots shall be twenty (20) feet. d. Maximum Density/Intensity The maximum density shall not exceed one (1) dwelling unit per lot. Second units are not permitted. e. Maximum Building Hecht The maximum building height shall be thirty-five (35) feet and a maximum of two (2) stories. III-16 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT f. Maximum Site Coverage Maximum site coverage shall be six fifty-five (55) percent. g. Setback (Front Yard) The minimum setback from the front property lines for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be as follows: Dwellings: Fifteen(15) feet. Front entry garages or carports: Eighteen (18) feet. Side entry garages: Ten(10) feet. Baywindows,eaves, fireplaces and balconies: Sim Twelve (12) feet, except 10 feet on side entry garage. h. Setback (Side Yard) The minimum setback from the side property lines shall be as follows: 1) Interior Side Yard Dwellings, patio covers, garages and accessory buildings: minimum aggregate twenty (20) percent of lot frontage at any point of the structure; with minimum three (3) feet on any interior yard but need not exceed five (5) feet [or aggregate ten (10) feet]. Eaves: Eighteen"4` Thirty (30) inches. Fireplaces: Thirty (30) inches. Bay windows,eerse€ed balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Three (3) feet. 2) Exterior Side Yard Dwellings, garages, carports and accessory buildings: minimum aggregate twenty (20) percent of lot frontage at any point of the structure; with minimum six(6) feet on any exterior yard but need not exceed eight (8) feet [or aggregate of thirteen (13) feet]. Side a tfR, gar-age or-ear-ports.. Si*(6) feet. Bay windows, uflfeefed balconies, open stairways, architectural features Fr(4) feet, eaves Eighteen ( 8) :nehes and Fireplaces: Three and one-half(3.5)feet. Patio covers: Three (3) feet. III-17 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT ILLUSTRATION OF SIDE YARD SETBACKS ----------------i----------------T--- i 1 i ( 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 a'1. s' 1 1 1 6' 4' I I 1 i 15' S'T w 1 w U 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 I 1 1 I I 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I t I 1 1 1 1 50' I 50' L---------------- ----------------i--- STREET Lot Frontage=50 ft. 20%of Frontage=10 ft. 3) Exception for Zero Lot Line A zero side yard setback or a zero rear yard setback shall be permitted as long as the following requirements are met: • The lot adjacent to the zero setback side or rear yard shall be held under the same ownership at the time of application and the setback for the adjacent lot shall be either zero or a minimum of six (6) feet. • No peEtie of the dwelling o y All architectural features shall comply with the Uniform Building Code.prajec-t ever-the pr6pet4y line, o „t rooftop eaves ne greater-than 2 inehes. • The zero setback shall not be adjacent to a public or private right-of-way. • Exposure protection between structures shall be provided as specified by the Fire Department and the Community Development Department. III-18 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT i. Setback (Rear Yard) The minimum setback from the rear property lines shall be as follows: Dwellings: Fifteen(15) feet. Garages or accessory buildings: Five (5) feet. Balconies, Bay windows, open stairways and architectural features: Twelve (12) feet. Unenclosed patio covers: Five (5) feet. j. Building Separation The minimum building separation between buildings on the same lot shall be six (6) feet. k. Open Space Open space shall be provided on the lot by the required minimum setback areas, except where an RL-3 development is constructed on property designated for RM and RMH development projects with 20 or more units shall provide common open space (recreation area) as follows: 150 square feet per lot for lots with less than 40 feet of lot frontage, and 100 square feet per lot for lots with 40 feet or more of lot frontage. In no case shall the common open space area be less than 3,000 square feet. The minimum dimension of the common open space area shall be 50 feet. The total common open space area required may be provided in one or more areas as long as each area is a minimum of 3,000 square feet and has a minimum dimension of 50 feet. For projects with less than 20 units, a minimum 600 square feet of open space (private or common) shall be provided per unit. Private open space excludes side and front yard setback areas. If a portion is provided as common open space that area shall have a minimum dimension of 10 feet. III-19 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 1. Par in Parking shall comply with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. in. Miscellaneous Requirements Accessory buildings may be permitted on a lot with a permitted main building. The minimum distance between an accessory building and any other building on the same lot shall be six (6) feet. Setback requirements are as previously specified. All streets within Planning Unit II-1 shall be privately maintained but permit public access. The site plan shall be designed as an inward-oriented planned community. n. Parkway Landscaping One (1) 36-inch box tree per forty-five (45) feet of street frontage or fraction thereof. If a parkway is not provided,the required street tree shall be planted within the front setback of each lot prior to final inspection. 4. Medium Density Residential (RM) a. Purpose The Medium Density Residential district is intended to provide for single family detached and attached dwelling units, condominiums, townhomes and multi-family residential developments at medium densities. b. Permitted Uses 1) Single-family attached condominiums, townhouses, stacked flats and multi-family dwelling units (including apartments), and customary accessory uses and structures permanently located on a parcel, subject to approval of a conditional use permit and a tentative parcel map or tentative tract map. 2) Single family detached dwelling units (including zero lot line, Z-lot and patio homes) and their associated accessory buildings are permitted in accordance with the development standards contained in the RL-3 District (Section D herein), subject to approval of a conditional use permit and tentative parcel map or tentative tract map. III-20 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT c. Maximum Density/IntensitX The maximum density shall not exceed fifteen (15) units/gross acre. d. Maximum Building Height Maximum building height shall be: Dwellings: Forty (40) feet and a maximum of three (3) stories. Accessory Buildings: Thirty-five (35) feet. Vertical identification elements for non-habitable common area structures may be twenty-five(25) feet higher than the maximum building height. e. Maximum Site Coverage Maximum site coverage shall be fifty (50) percent. The maximum site coverage shall be fifty-five (55)percent for all lots abutting a park, recreation area or public utility right-of-way which is a minimum of 100- feet in clear width. f. Setback (Front Yard) The minimum setback from the front property lines for all structures, except stairways, exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be as follows: Dwellings: fifteen(15) feet. Front entry garages or carports: Twenty (20) foot minimum, or five (5) foot minimum without driveway parking. Side entry garages: Ten(10) feet. Eaves, fireplaces, open space easements and balconies: Five (5) feet. g. Setback (Side Yard) The minimum setback from the side property lines shall be as follows: 1) Interior Side Yard Dwellings, garages and accessory buildings: Minimum of five (5) feet. Also, fifteen(15) foot minimum building structure separation for one (1) and two (2) story buildings on the same lot. Twenty (20) foot minimum building structure separation for three (3) story buildings on the same lot. III-21 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT Eaves: Eighteen(18)inches. Fireplaces: Thirty (30) inches. Bay windows,unroofed balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Three (3) feet. 2) Exterior Side Yard Dwellings, garages and accessory buildings: Minimum of ten(10) feet. Side entry garages or carports: Ten (10) feet. Eaves: Eighteen(18)inches. Fireplaces: Seven and one-half(7.5) feet. Bay windows, unroofed balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Eight(8) feet. h. Setback (Rear Yard, The minimum setback from the rear property lines shall be as follows: Dwellings and open, unroofed stairways and balconies: Five (5) feet. Garages/accessory buildings: Five (5) feet. i. Open Space A minimum of 75 square feet per dwelling unit shall be provided in private open space. In addition, the following minimum common open space per dwelling unit shall be provided: 250 square feet(1 bedroom unit); 300 square feet(2 bedroom unit); 350 square feet(3 bedroom unit). J• Parking Parking shall comply with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. k. Miscellaneous Requirements 1) Building Offset: Structures having dwellings attached side-by-side shall be composed of not more than six (6) dwelling units unless such structures provide an offset on the front of the building a minimum of two (2) feet for every two dwelling units in the structure. III-22 (hssp97) a n� ir' HIKING/BIKING i TRAIL I 65' PROPERTY PROPERTY LINE LINE EXHIBIT 19 TYPICAL CROSS SECTION CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH TRANSPORTATION/TRAIL CORRIDOR HOLLY Y SE&CLOFF AREA SPECOFUC PL H o I I I 111 s 1 ,o R� LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2) Landscaping: All setback areas visible from an adjacent public street and all common open space areas shall be landscaped and permanently maintained in an attractive manner with permanent automatic irrigation facilities provided. Trees shall be provided at a rate of one (1) 36-inch box tree per sixty (60) feet of street frontage or fraction thereof. 3) A transportation corridor in Planning Area II shall be set aside and maintained in accordance with Development Agreement 90-1 and as illustrated in Exhibit 19. Habitable floor area shall be set back a minimum of ten(10) feet from the southerly five hundred(500) feet on both sides of the corridor. The corridor shall also be landscaped to the extent legal access is available to the developer. 5. Medium-High Density Residential (RMH) a. Pur2ose The Medium-High Density Residential district is intended to provide for single family detached and attached dwelling units, condominiums, townhomes and multi-family residential developments at medium-high densities. b. Permitted Uses 1) Single-family attached condominiums, townhouses, stacked flats and multi-family dwelling units (including apartments), and customary accessory uses and structures. 2) Plan Review: Conditional Use Permit. 3) Single family detached dwelling units (including zero lot line, Z-lot and patio homes) and their associated accessory buildings are permitted in accordance with the development standards contained in the RL-3 District (Section D herein), subject to approval of a conditional use permit and tentative parcel map or tentative tract map. c. Maximum Density/Intensity The maximum density shall not exceed density twenty-five (25) unit/gross acres. III-23 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT d. Maximum Building Height Maximum building height shall be: Dwellings: Forty-five (45) feet and three (3) stories. Accessory buildings: Thirty-five (35) feet. Vertical identification elements for non-habitable common area structures may be twenty-five (25) feet higher than the maximum building height. e. Maximum Site Coverage Maximum site coverage shall be fifty (50) percent. The maximum site coverage shall be fifty-five (55)percent for all lots abutting a park, recreation area or public utility right-of-way which is a minimum of 100- feet in clear width. f. Setback Front Yard) The minimum setback from the front property lines for all structures, except stairways, exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be as follows: Dwellings: fifteen(15) feet. Front entry garages or carports: Twenty (20) foot minimum, or five (5) foot minimum without driveway parking. Side entry garages: Ten (10) feet. Eaves, fireplaces, open/unroofed building stairways and balconies: Five (5) feet. Accessory buildings: Ten(10) feet. g. Setback (Side Yard) The minimum setback from the side property lines shall be as follows: 1) Interior Side Yard Dwellings, garages and accessory buildings: Minimum of five (5) feet. Also, fifteen(15)foot minimum building structure separation for one (1) and two (2) story buildings on the same lot. Twenty (20) foot minimum building structure separation for three (3) story buildings on the same lot. Eaves: Eighteen(18) inches. Fireplaces: Thirty (30) inches. Bay windows, unroofed balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Three (3) feet. III-24 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2) Exterior Side Yard Dwellings and accessory buildings: Ten(10) feet. Side entry garages or carports: Ten (10)feet. Eaves: Eighteen(18) inches. Fireplaces: Seven and one-half(7.5) feet. Bay windows, unroofed balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Eight(8) feet. h. Setback (Rear Yard) The minimum setback from the rear property lines shall be as follows: Dwellings, open/unroofed building stairways and balconies: Five (5) feet. Garages/accessory buildings: Three (3) feet. i. Open Space A minimum of 75 square feet per dwelling unit shall be provided in private open space. In addition, the following minimum common open space per dwelling unit shall be provided: 250 square feet(1 bedroom unit); 300 square feet(2 bedroom unit); 300 square feet(2 bedroom unit); 350 square feet(3/bedroom unit). j. Parking Parking shall comply with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. k. Miscellaneous Requirements 1) Building Offset: Structures having dwellings attached side-by-side shall be composed of not more than six(6) dwelling units unless such structures provide an offset on the front of the building a minimum of two (2) feet for every two dwelling units in the structure. 2) Landscaping: All setback areas visible from an adjacent public street and all common open space areas shall be landscaped and permanently maintained in an attractive manner with permanent automatic irrigation facilities provided. Trees shall be provided at a rate of one (1) 36-inch box tree per forty-five (45) feet of street frontage or fraction thereof. 3) A transportation corridor in Planning Area II shall be set aside and maintained in accordance with Development Agreement 90-1 and as illustrated in Exhibit 19. Habitable floor area shall be set back a III-25 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT minimum of ten(10) feet from the southerly five hundred (500) feet on both sides of the corridor. The corridor shall also be landscaped to the extent legal access is available to the developer. 6. Mixed Development(MD) a. Purpose The Mixed Development District is intended to provide for a variety of commercial uses, facilities supporting the surrounding community and the opportunity for residential uses. Commercial uses may include retail sales, services, professional, administrative and medical office uses. Such uses shall be planned so as to create compatibility to each other and the surrounding area. Development within the Mixed Development District may combine residential and commercial uses in either of two ways: • vertically, where the ground level is reserved for commercial uses and the upper floor(or floors) contains multifamily dwellings; • and/or horizontally, where residential uses are developed in conjunction with commercial uses as an integrated development, either in attached or in separate building complexes. A comprehensive site plan for the entire district shall be submitted and reviewed by the Planning Commission prior to or concurrent with entitlements for new development to ensure compatibility between surrounding uses,proposed uses and activities in this area. Concurrent with the filing of the comprehensive site plan, a comprehensive pedestrian access plan shall be submitted which provides linkages between residential and commercial project areas. A comprehensive,permanent set of covenants, conditions and restrictions covering limitation of the mixed development entitlement, including a list of permitted uses and any conditions of approval for the project, and all development, performance and management standards shall be required as a condition of approval. III-26 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT b. Permitted Uses The following primary uses and structures shall be permitted, subject to approval of a conditional use permit and appropriate subdivision map: 1. Residential Uses --All residential uses including single-family and multi-family housing, apartments, condominiums and stock cooperatives. 2. Office Uses --Professional,general and medical offices. 3. Commercial Uses -- Commercial uses such as retail shops, restaurants, automobile service stations and theaters. c. Comprehensive Site Planning Requirements: 1. Any application for a conditional use permit and/or tentative map shall be accompanied by a comprehensive site plan for development of the entire Mixed Development area. This requirement does not apply to a minor expansion(10 percent or less) of the existing commercial center. 2. The comprehensive site plan shall provide a well-planned vehicular circulation system, pedestrian accessways segregated from arterials and internal streets, and aesthetically pleasing landscape features. Buildings shall be oriented and designed to minimize visual intrusion upon existing residential areas. 3. A Planned Sign Program for the entire Mixed Development area shall be submitted for approval by the Planning Commission for all commercial and residential uses. The Planned Sign Program shall be processed concurrent with the first entitlement. d. Maximum Density/Intensity 1. Retail: In accordance with Development Agreement No. 90-1, a minimum of 100,000 square feet gross leasable area of retail uses shall be maintained. A maximum of 200,000 total square feet of gross leasable area of retail uses may be permitted. 2. Office: A maximum of 100,000 square feet of gross leasable area of office uses may be permitted. 3. Residential:The maximum number of residential dwelling units shall be 475. III-27 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT e. Site Development Standards The following standards shall apply to all development: 1. Building site area: The building site area is the entire net mixed development planning unit. 2. Maximum Building Height: Maximum building height shall be: Eighty (80) feet Vertical identification elements shall not exceed the maximum building height. * Building height shall be measured from the closest arterial street. 3. Maximum Site Coverage Maximum site coverage for the entire mixed development area shall be fifty (50)percent of net site area. If any structure exceeds sixty- five(65) feet in height, then the maximum site coverage for the entire mixed development area shall be forty (40)percent of the net site area. 4. Building Setbacks and Orientation a) Arterial Setbacks* 1) Along Main Street and Yorktown Avenue, the minimum building setback shall be the greater of: a) Twenty-five (25) feet, or b) A horizontal distance equal to the building height (one to one setback). 2) Along Goldenwest Street, the minimum building setback shall be the greater of: a) Twenty-five (25) feet, or b) One to one for buildings less than thirty (30) feet in height, or c) Two to one for buildings between thirty(30) and sixty-five (65) feet in height, or III-28 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT d) Four to one for buildings greater than sixty-five (65) feet in height. 3) Structures facing arterial streets shall be designed to avoid visual intrusion upon existing residential areas. A line-of-sight/visual intrusion study shall be provided for future development which will analyze visual impacts to existing residential development. The study shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Commission. 4) Structures shall be sited to provide a break in massing along arterial streets. 5) Building elevations along arterials shall incorporate one or more of the following to create visual interest: a) Facade relief, b) Fenestration, c) Horizontal/vertical offsets and/or d) Upper story setbacks b) General Building Setbacks: 1) Front setbacks: a) Ten(10) feet minimum from the interior street line or property line if building is under twenty- five (25) feet in height. b) Fifteen(15)feet minimum from the interior street line or property line if building is between twenty- five (25) and thirty-five (35) feet in height. c) Twenty(20) feet minimum from the interior street line or property line if building is over thirty-five (35) feet in height. d) Twenty (20)percent of the building facade shall step back an average of ten(10) feet from the interior street line or property line along interior streets. III-29 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 2) Side and Rear Setbacks: a) Ten(10) foot minimum from the side or rear property line for structures thirty-five (35) feet or less in height. b) Fifteen(15) foot minimum from the side or rear property line if building is over thirty-five (35) feet in height. c) Eaves, cornices, chimneys, outside staircases, balconies and similar architectural features may project up to fifty(50) percent into the required setback not to exceed six (6) feet. 5. Free-standing residential projects shall conform to the Medium High Density Residential development standards. 6. Residential components of integrated development projects shall conform to the mixed-use provisions. Open space and parking requirements shall conform to the Medium High Density Residential development standards. f. Lighting: All lighting, exterior and interior, shall be designed and located to minimize impacts to adjacent properties. g. Commercial Loading and Unloading: All commercial loading and unloading shall be performed on the site. Loading platforms and areas shall be screened from view from adjacent streets,highways, adjacent Residential Planning Areas, and on-site residential uses. Truck loading, dock facilities, and the doors for such facilities shall not face a residential area or be located within twenty (20) feet of property zoned or general-planned for residential use. Adequate on-site truck maneuvering space shall be provided to minimize conflicts on adjacent streets. h. Trash and Storage Areas: All storage, including cartons, containers or trash, shall be located within a building or an area enclosed by a wall of not less than six(6) feet in height. An overhead enclosure shall be required if visible from a residential area. i. Parking: Parking shall comply with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Exception: Medical office uses within vertically integrated commercial/residential projects shall comply with General Office parking requirements. III-30 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT j. Screening and Landscaping: Screening and landscaping shall comply with the screening and landscaping provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. A landscape buffer adjacent to proposed and existing industrial land uses shall be provided as depicted on Exhibit 18. k. Covenants. Conditions and Restrictions: A recorded copy of covenants, conditions and restrictions shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to occupancy of any building. Approval for content shall be the responsibility of the Community Development Department and approval as to form by the City Attorney. j. Agent: A person or agent shall be designated as a permanent liaison to the City under the covenants, conditions and restrictions of any project for the purpose of processing occupancy requests, resolving land use enforcement problems, and any other matters in which the City and property owner are involved. 7. Commercial(C) a. Purpose The Commercial district is intended to provide retail, commercial and service uses in a neighborhood setting. Permitted uses, development standards, parking, landscaping and procedures will be regulated through the General Commercial District of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. b. Additional Permitted Uses Existing,oil and gas production facilities and consolidation of existing facilities, and drilling of new wells are permitted within commercial areas in accordance with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, subject to approval of a conditional use permit. c. Landscaping All setback areas visible from an adjacent public street and all common open space areas shall be landscaped and permanently maintained in an attractive manner with permanent automatic irrigation facilities provided. Trees shall be provided at a rate of one (1) 36-inch box tree per forty-five (45) feet of street frontage or fraction thereof. III-31 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 8. Industrial (I) a. Purpose The Industrial district is intended to allow general industrial uses. Such uses shall be sensitively designed in relation to each other and the surrounding area. Permitted uses, development standards, parking, landscaping and procedures will be regulated through the General Industrial District of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. b. Additional Permitted Uses Existing oil and gas production facilities, consolidation of existing facilities and drilling of new wells are permitted within Planning Units 11-8 and IV-5 in accordance with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, subject to approval of a conditional use permit. The drilling of new oil wells is prohibited within Planning Unit IV-3. c. Landscaping All setback areas visible from an adjacent public street and all common open space areas shall be landscaped and permanently maintained in an attractive manner with permanent automatic irrigation facilities provided. Trees shall be provided at a rate of one (1) 36-inch box tree per forty-five (45) feet of street frontage or fraction thereof. 9. Open Space (OS) a. Purpose The Open Space district is designated as areas to be provided as permanent public recreational open space. b. Permitted Uses Permitted uses and other regulations for this district are in accordance with the Recreational Open Space (ROS)provisions in of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. III-32 (hssp97) IV. ADMINISTRATION LEGISLATIVE DRAFT IV. ADMINISTRATION A. Development Phasing Plan The Holly-Seacliff study area is anticipated to be built out over a period of approximately 10 years, with a target completion date of 2001. Actual construction starts and occupancy will be dictated by market forces, the removal of oil operations and interim uses, and the requirements of individual property owners and developers. The Development Phasing Plan shown on Table 2 is a program of the relative timing of development within each of the individual planning areas. The Phasing Plan also provides a guideline for the construction of adequate community infrastructure within the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan area. B. Public Facilities Improvement Responsibilities In order to provide for public facilities improvements necessary to serve all future development within the Holly-Seacliff area, developers will have a fair-share responsibility for either(1) constructing the necessary improvements required as described in the Specific Plan concurrent with project development, or(2) funding such necessary improvements if constructed by other developers. The City will determine and administer the fair-share responsibility for the master public facilities improvements, including sewer, water, drainage, roads,traffic controls, fire and police capital facilities as described in the Specific Plan. If a developer provides the necessary facilities beyond his fair-share responsibility, thatdeveloper shall be reimbursed from funds collected from other developers. If a developer is required to pay fees,those fees will be based on the City's fair- share responsibility determination. This determination will be based on a development's proportional use of the master public facilities improvements necessary to serve the development utilizing assessment on a dwelling unit, acreage, building square footage or front footage basis. All development projects to be served by the master public facilities improvements shall be conditioned to construct facilities or pay fees per a Holly- Seacliff Public Facilities Fee Ordinance. Such construction or payment of fees shall be based on a fair-share responsibility program as administered by the City Public Works Department. Development Agreement No. 90-1 describes certain public facilities improvements to be constructed by Pacific Coast Homes and Garfield Partners. IV-1 (hssp97) Table 2 Development Phasing Plan PLANNING ACRES USE TOTAL EXISTING PHASE I PHASE II PHASE III DWELLING DWELLING AREA UNITS UNITS 1990-1993 1994-1997 1998-2001 1 48 RESIDENTIAL 160 20 90 50 16 OPEN SPACE II 159 RESIDENTIAL 1,535 300 985 250 32 INDUSTRIAL 111 175 RESIDENTIAL 1,450 150 750 550 7 COMMERCIAL 16 OPEN SPACE IV 24 RESIDENTIAL 750 65 150 300 235 53 MIXED USE 31 INDUSTRIAL 4 COMMERCIAL TOTAL 565 3,895 65 620 2,125 1,085 *INDICATES TIMING OF NON-RESIDENTIAL USES. LEGISLATIVE DRAFT C. Methods and Procedures The methods and procedures for implementation and administration of the Development Standards, as well as the policies, guidelines and other conditions of this Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan, are prescribed as follows: 1. Implementation The Specific Plan shall be implemented through the processing of site plans in conjunction with conditional use permits, tentative tract maps and tentative parcel maps. The site plans may be prepared concurrently in sufficient detail to determine conformance with the Specific Plan. 2. Tentative Tract Maps For projects requiring a tentative tract or parcel map(s), the provisions and procedures contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code shall apply. 3 .Vesting Tentative Maps For residential projects entailing a vesting tentative tract map,the provisions and procedures in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code shall apply. 4. Conditional Use Permits For projects, uses and operations requiring a conditional use permit pursuant to the provisions of this Specific Plan,the procedures specified in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code shall apply. 5. Special PermitsNariances For projects or operations requiring a variance or modification to the Development Standards contained herein, deviations up to ten percent (10%) may be approved via a special permit, except for height and parking. Deviations greater than ten percent(10%)may be approved via a conditional exception. 6. Specific Plan Amendments A Specific Plan amendment shall be required for the following: a) Changes to planning unit boundaries which exceed fifteen percent (15%)of the approved acreage on Table 1. b) Changes to the Development Standards in the Specific Plan. IV-2 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT c) Substantial variations from infrastructure plans, as determined by the Director of Public Works. Specific Plan Amendments shall be processed in accordance with either the zone change or code amendment procedures, as appropriate, contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 7. Coastal Development Permits The south western portion of the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Area falls within the coastal zone. All development projects proposed in this area require a Coastal Development Permit. D. Density Transfer Procedure The Land Use Element of the Holly-Seacliff General Plan Amendment allows dwelling units to be transferred from a Planning Unit or Units within the same Planning Area, so long as the maximum number of dwelling units allowed by the General Plan for each Planning Unit is not exceeded, and so long as the total number of dwelling units allocated for that Planning Area is not exceeded. As indicated on Table 1 of the Specific Plan, the "average gross density" of each Planning Unit is less than the General Plan maximum density. Since the General Plan and the Development Standards permit development up to the General Plan maximum density,the following procedures are necessary to allow and monitor density transfers within the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Area. 1. Transfers Within A Planning Unit Dwelling units may be transferred within a Planning Unit as long as the total number of units for the Planning Unit as shown on Table 1 remains the same. If a property owner submits an entitlement application for development of a portion of a Planning Unit for a density which is greater or less than the average gross density for the Planning Unit,then a transfer of density within a Planning Unit is involved, as long as the assigned total of units(as shown on Table 1)remains the same. The subject application must include: 1) a plan showing both the approved and proposed allocations of dwelling units within the Planning Unit, and 2) the written concurrence of all property owners affected by the proposed transfer. IV-3 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT Density may not be transferred from a completed project unless the transfer was approved at the time said project was approved. 2. Transfers Between Planning Units Dwelling units may be transferred between Planning Units within the same Planning Area. If a property owner submits an entitlement application for a Planning Unit for a density which is greater or less than the average gross density for the Planning Unit,then a transfer of density between Planning Units will be necessary. The subject application must include: 1) a plan showing both the existing and proposed allocation of dwelling units within all Planning Units affected by the transfer, and 2) the written concurrence of all property owners affected by the proposed transfer. Density may not be transferred from a completed project unless the transfer was approved at the time said project was approved. 3. Entitlement applications involving a density transfer will require the following: a. An Infrastructure Analysis documenting that the transfer does not exceed proposed infrastructure capacity. If capacity will be exceeded based on the required analysis, recommendations for additional infrastructure improvements must also be submitted. Required infrastructure modifications shall be the responsibility of the party requesting the transfer, and shall be placed as conditions of approval on the appropriate development entitlement. b. An Environmental Analysis in the form of the City's Initial Study documentation that the proposed density transfer of planning units will not affect the conclusions of the environmental analysis contained in the Certified EIR 89-1 for GPA 89-1. C. A policy analysis documenting that the density transfers within a planning unit or between planning unit are consistent with the goals, policies, and programs of the City of Huntington Beach General Plan and this Specific Plan. IV-4 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT E. AcreageBoundary Changes Acreage figures shown on the Land Use Table (Table 1) are indicated to the nearest acre based upon planimeter readings. Modifications, not to exceed fifteen percent(15%) of the acreage and boundaries shown, may result from more detailed planning and technical refinements in the tentative tract map or site plan processes, and shall not require an amendment to this Specific Plan. IV-5 (hssp97) V. LEGAL DESCRIPTION LEGISLATIVE DRAFT LEGAL DESCRIPTION V-1 (hssp97) HOLLY-SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARY REVISED PER ZONE CHANGE NO. 93-2 ORDINANCE NO. 3243 BEING PORTIONS OF SECTIONS 34 AND 35,TOWNSHIP-5 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST,SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, PARTLY IN THE RANCHO LAS BOLSAS AND PARTLY IN THE RANCHO LA BOLSA CHICA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 13 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS AND PORTIONS OF SECTIONS 2, 3 AND 4, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN IN THE RANCHO LAS BOLSAS, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 14 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF MAIN STREET AND YORKTOWN AVENUE (SHOWN AS MANSION AVENUE ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 95, PAGE 20 OF RECORD OF SURVEYS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY); THENCE NORTH 89041'42"WEST 1350.19 FEET ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID YORKTOWN AVENUE TO THE CENTERLINE OF GOLDENWEST STREET AS SHOWN ON SAID LAST MENTIONED MAP; THENCE NORTH 41°37'25" EAST 11.92 FEET ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID GOLDENWEST STREET TO AN ANGLE POINT THEREIN;THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF GOLDENWEST STREET, NORTH 00°16'53" EAST 1403.96 FEET TO ITS POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTHERLY LINE OF TRACT NO. 7656, AS SHOWN ON THE MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 295, PAGES 28 THROUGH 31 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, SAID POINT BEING THE BEGINNING OF A NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 800.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID CURVE BEARS NORTH 09°38'08" WEST; THENCE WESTERLY 181.28 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE AND SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF TRACT NO. 7656 THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 12059'00", TO THE BEGINNING OF A REVERSE CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 800.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID CURVE BEARS SOUTH 22037'08"EAST; THENCE CONTINUING WESTERLY 880.58 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE AND SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF TRACT NO. 7656 AND ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF TRACT NO. 7421, AS SHOWN ON THE MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 302, PAGES 20 THROUGH 23 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, TO THE BEGINNING OF A REVERSE CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 800.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID CURVE BEARS NORTH 40026'54" EAST; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY 249.63 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE AND SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF TRACT NO. 7421 THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 17052'42" TO THE EAST LINE OF LOT 6 OF TRACT NO. 14296, AS SHOWN ON THE MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 700 PAGES 39 AND 40 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EAST LINE kDEN & HOLLY-SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARY SOCIATES REVISED PER ZONE CHANGE NO. 93-2 ORDINANCE NO. 3243 CIVIL ENGINEERS-PLANNERS-LAND SURVEYORS W.O. NO. 0867-273-I X 12 Date 10/25 94 19012 COWAN,SUITE 210 • IRVINE, CA 92714 714/66"110 FAX:660-0418 g En r D.C. Chk. D.W. Sheet 1 of 5 NORTH 00022'36" EAST 24.68 FEET; THENCE NORTH 44022'22" WEST 78.12 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 48052'36" WEST 27.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88°04'15" WEST 243.99 FEET ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF LOTS 5 AND 6 OF SAID TRACT NO. 14296 TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 5; THENCE SOUTH 75°50'26" WEST 342.57 FEET TO THE WESTERLY TERMINUS OF THAT CERTAIN COURSE SHOWN AS "NORTH 80035'37" EAST 262.07 FEET" FOR A PORTION OF THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 90-198, AS SHOWN ON THE MAP FILED IN BOOK 266, PAGES 37 THROUGH 41 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE SOUTH 65033'53" WEST 135.10 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 38°28'53" WEST 157.67 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 42001'01" WEST 126.97 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 02037'39" WEST 321.88 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 14006'58" WEST 101.62 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 19*01114" WEST 69.70 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 21°33'20" WEST 125.71 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00054'26" EAST 66.46 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 20°53'20" EAST 70.89 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 12°40'17" EAST 96.32 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 50°43'23" EAST 99.49 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 33009'35" EAST 165.63 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 08014'20" EAST 81.14 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 520 14'13" EAST 87.04 FEET TO A POINT ON A PORTION OF THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 2 OF SAID P.M. 90-198, SAID POINT BEING ON THAT CERTAIN COURSE SHOWN AS "NORTH 27031'58" WEST 336.22 FEET" ON SAID PARCEL MAP; THENCE ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE SOUTH 27031'58" EAST 88.35 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE SOUTH 370 12'45" EAST 28.77 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY LINE SOUTH 17000'11"EAST 117.35 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 78054'15"EAST 35.22 FEET; THENCE NORTH 71°00'09"EAST 18.01 FEET TO THE WESTERLY TERMINUS OF THAT CERTAIN COURSE SHOWN AS"NORTH 570 19'50"EAST 67.67 FEET" ON SAID PARCEL MAP; THENCE ALONG SAID PARCEL BOUNDARY NORTH 57019'50" EAST 67.67 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID PARCEL BOUNDARY NORTH 57029'06" EAST 41.72 FEET; THENCE NORTH 63050'24" EAST 52.18 FEET; THENCE NORTH 87030'20" EAST 38.02 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 52049'54" EAST 127.43 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 39*08151" EAST 246.87 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 30004'22" EAST 57.81 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 02046'37" WEST 61.71 FEET TO A POINT ON A PORTION OF THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 2, SAID POINT BEING ON THAT CERTAIN COURSE SHOWN AS "NORTH 47037'07"EAST 178.23 FEET" ON SAID PARCEL MAP;THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERLY LINE SOUTH 47037'07"WEST 81.81 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERLY LINE SOUTH 56031'48" WEST 90.34 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 52026'55" WEST 109.64 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 53°34'35" WEST 199.31 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 53°21'07" WEST 144.84 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 53034'54" WEST 79.68 FEET; THENCE NORTH 78049'50" WEST 129.11 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY LINE NORTH 850 15'47" WEST 274.77 FEET; THENCE NORTH 85055'36" WEST 577.09 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 72057'43" WEST 441.38 FEET TO A POINT ON A PORTION OF THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 2, SAID POINT BEING ON THAT CERTAIN COURSE SHOWN AS "NORTH 78011'24" EAST 320.84 FEET" ON SAID PARCEL MAP; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE SOUTH 78011'24" WEST 172.19 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY LINE NORTH 63°26'38" WEST 21.32 FEET; THENCE NORTH 01024'25" EAST 183.23 FEET; THENCE NORTH 14036'11" VWDEN & HOLLY-SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARY SOCIATES REVISED PER ZONE CHANGE NO. 93-2 ORDINANCE NO. 3243 CIVIL ENGINEERS-PLANNERS-LAND SURVEYORS W.O. NO. 0867-273-1 X12 Date 10 25/94 18012 COWAN,SUITE 210 • IRVINE.CA 92714 714/660.0110 FAX:660-0418 Engr. D.C. Chk. D.W. Sheet 2 of 5 EAST 240.52 FEET; THENCE NORTH 21°24'46" EAST 69.42 FEET; THENCE NORTH 32030'36" EAST 137.22 FEET; THENCE NORTH 41°34'29" EAST 78.89 FEET; THENCE NORTH 27032'11" EAST 252.32 FEET TO A POINT ON A PORTION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 2, SAID POINT BEING ON THAT CERTAIN COURSE SHOWN AS "NORTH 35024'38" EAST 689.02 FEET" ON SAID PARCEL MAP; THENCE ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE NORTH 35024'38" EAST 270.28 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY LINE NORTH 24048'20" EAST 92.01 FEET; THENCE NORTH 29049'07" WEST 18.76 FEET; THENCE NORTH 59°05'04" WEST 25.88 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 880421071, WEST 28.50 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 62014'54" WEST 36.17 FEET; THENCE NORTH 64044'31" WEST 213.89 FEET; THENCE NORTH 16°08'41" WEST 72.00 FEET TO A POINT ON A PORTION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 2, SAID POINT BEING ON THAT CERTAIN COURSE SHOWN AS "NORTH 27004'42" EAST 108.69 FEET" ON SAID PARCEL MAP; THENCE ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE NORTH 27044'02" EAST 19.30 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY LINE NORTH 27044'02" EAST 112.13 FEET; THENCE NORTH 080 14'34"EAST 124.02 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY TERMINUS OF THAT CERTAIN COURSE SHOWN AS "NORTH 09047'41"EAST 224.74 FEET" ON SAID PARCEL MAP FOR A PORTION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 2; THENCE ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE NORTH 09047'41" EAST 224.74 FEET; THENCE NORTH 06041128" EAST 165.69 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY LINE NORTH 15024'02" EAST 171.58 FEET; THENCE NORTH 07009'24" WEST 50.17 FEET; THENCE NORTH 30028'22" WEST 47.91 FEET; THENCE NORTH 73051'01" WEST 48.59 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 33002'03" WEST 52.13 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 17039'41" WEST 109.05 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 24046'03" WEST 62.75 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 460 10'13" WEST 43.51 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 63027'49" WEST 53.76 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89054'22" WEST 47.11 FEET; THENCE NORTH 74°38'22" WEST 44.42 FEET; THENCE NORTH 52052'33" WEST 56.21 FEET;THENCE NORTH 34°16'36" WEST 36.37 FEET; THENCE NORTH 17051'05" WEST 52.49 FEET; THENCE NORTH 04006'38" WEST 50.91 FEET; THENCE NORTH 16025'25" EAST 41.95 FEET; THENCE NORTH 41°05'45" EAST 75.56 FEET; THENCE NORTH 18021'10" EAST 87.68 FEET; THENCE NORTH 17005'25" WEST 19.81 FEET; THENCE NORTH 44024'07" WEST 70.37 FEET; THENCE NORTH 34056'18" WEST 59.09 FEET; THENCE NORTH 49°06'20" WEST 432.22 FEET TO THE EASTERLY TERMINUS OF THAT CERTAIN COURSE SHOWN AS "NORTH 70042'04" WEST 751.89 FEET" FOR A PORTION OF THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 2; THENCE NORTH 66°38'53" WEST 257.23 FEET; THENCE NORTH 70006'01" WEST 485.61 FEET TO A POINT ON A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHEAST, HAVING A RADIUS OF 950.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID CURVE BEARS NORTH 47024'49" WEST, SAID POINT BEING ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF SEAPOINT STREET, 100.00 FEET WIDE, AS SHOWN ON SAID PARCEL MAP; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY, 14.64 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 00052'58"; THENCE SOUTH 41°42'13" WEST 10.58 FEET TO THE WESTERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 2; THENCE SOUTH 41°42'13" WEST 243.13 FEET ALONG SAID PARCEL MAP BOUNDARY; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID PARCEL MAP BOUNDARY NORTH 48017'47" WEST 100.00 FEET;THENCE SOUTH.41°42'13" WEST 164.55 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE, VWDEN & HOLLY-SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARY SOCIATES REVISED PER ZONE CHANGE NO. 93-2 ORDINANCE NO. 3243 CIVIL ENGINEERS-PLANNERS-LAND SURVEYORS W.O. No. 0867-273-1 X 12 Date 10 25/94 18012 COWAN,SUITE 210 • IRVINE,CA 92714 714/66"110 FAX:660.0419 Engr. D.C. Chk. D.W. Sheet 3 of 5 CONCAVE NORTHWEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 750.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY, 259.51 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 19049'31"; THENCE NORTH 42°11'18" WEST 360.45 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF THE HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY LIMIT BOUNDARY, AS SHOWN ON THE MAP FILED IN BOOK 92, PAGES 19 THROUGH 28 OF RECORD OF SURVEYS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY;THENCE ALONG SAID BOUNDARY LINE THE FOLLOWING COURSES: SOUTH 89°37'14" EAST 91.97 FEET, NORTH 00015'23" EAST 328.98 FEET, SOUTH 89°43'03" EAST 660.16 FEET, NORTH 00019'15" EAST 328.84 FEET, NORTH 89°41'36" WEST 231.59 FEET, NORTH 26°49'24" EAST 1107.66 FEET AND SOUTH 89041'05"EAST 726.01 FEET;THENCE NORTH 000 17'53" EAST 1321.75 FEET ALONG SAID HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY LIMIT BOUNDARY TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF PARCEL 1 AS SHOWN ON THE MAP FILED IN BOOK 421 PAGE 25 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY; THENCE SOUTH 89032'59" EAST 988.61 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 1 AND ITS EASTERLY PROJECTION TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 34, SAID LINE BEING THE CENTERLINE OF EDWARDS STREET; THENCE SOUTH 00°16'06" WEST 2310.30 FEET ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF EDWARDS STREET TO THE CENTERLINE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF SAID EDWARDS STREET AND GARFIELD AVENUE AS SHOWN ON SAID AFOREMENTIONED MAP FILED IN BOOK 92, PAGES 19 THROUGH 28 OF RECORD OF SURVEYS OF SAID COUNTY SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 34; THENCE SOUTH 89042'05 EAST 2639.70 FEET ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 34 AND SAID CENTERLINE OF GARFIELD AVENUE TO THE CENTERLINE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF SAID GARFIELD AVENUE AND GOLDENWEST STREET, (SHOWN AS WESTMINSTER AVENUE ON THE MAP OF GARFIELD STREET ADDITION TO HUNTINGTON BEACH, FILED IN BOOK 7, PAGES 27 AND 28 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS OF SAID COUNTY), SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 34; THENCE NORTH 00°16'18" EAST 2639.61 FEET ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 34 AND THE CENTERLINE OF SAID GOLDENWEST STREET TO THE EAST QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 34, SAID CORNER BEING THE CENTERLINE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF GOLDENWEST STREET AND ELLIS AVENUE; THENCE SOUTH 89043'37" EAST 1982.30 FEET ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID ELLIS AVENUE, SAID CENTERLINE ALSO BEING THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 35 TO THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF GOTHARD STREET; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH 89043'37"EAST 33.82 FEET,MORE OR LESS,ALONG SAID NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1000.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY 339.26 FEET, MORE OR LESS, ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 19026'18"TO THE BEGINNING OF A REVERSE CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 1000.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID CURVE BEARS SOUTH 19042'41" WEST; THENCE EASTERLY 320.07 FEET, ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 18020'20" TO AN INTERSECTION WITH A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND EASTERLY 20.00 FEET FROM THE EAST LINE OF THE VWDEN & HOLLY-SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARY SOCIATES REVISED PER ZONE CHANGE NO. 93-2 ORDINANCE NO. 3243 CIVIL ENGINEERS—PLANNERS—LAND SURVEYORS W.O. NO. 0867-273-1 X 12 Date 10 25 94 19012 COWAN,SUITE 210 • IRVINE,CA 92714 714/66"110 FAX:660-oars Engr. D.C. Chk. D.W. Sheet 4 of 5 SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 35; THENCE SOUTH 00018'39" WEST 455.28 FEET, MORE OR LESS, ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY PROJECTION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF PARCEL 1 OF THE MAP FILED IN BOOK 132, PAGES 35 AND 36 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY; THENCE SOUTH 89044'06" EAST 639.65 FEET ALONG SAID WESTERLY PROJECTION AND SAID SOUTH LINE OF PARCEL 1 TO THE CENTERLINE OF HUNTINGTON STREET AS SHOWN ON PARCEL MAP NO. 81-575, FILED IN BOOK 172, PAGES 3 AND 4 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY; THENCE SOUTH 00°18'34" WEST 1326.13 FEET, MORE OR LESS, ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID HUNTINGTON STREET TO THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF MAIN STREET AND SAID HUNTINGTON STREET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID HUNTINGTON STREET SOUTH 00017'42" WEST 744.99 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF GARFIELD AVENUE AND SAID HUNTINGTON STREET, AS SHOWN ON SAID PARCEL MAP NO. 81-575, FILED IN BOOK 172, PAGES 3 AND 4 OF PARCEL MAPS RECORDS OF SAID HUNTINGTON BEACH, THENCE ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF GARFIELD AVENUE NORTH 89042'04" WEST 659.89 FEET TO THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 35; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF GARFIELD AVENUE, NORTH 89043'21" WEST 82.85 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF MAIN STREET AND SAID GARFIELD AVENUE AS SHOWN ON THE MAP OF TRACT NO. 10511 RECORDED IN BOOK 455, PAGES 13 THROUGH 17 INCLUSIVE OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY; THENCE SOUTH 450 17'24" WEST 774.32 FEET, MORE OR LESS, ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID MAIN STREET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY PROJECTION OF THE MOST WESTERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT NO. 10511 DESCRIBED ABOVE, SAID LINE ALSO BEING THE EAST LINE OF HOLLY STREET, 30.00 FEET IN WIDTH AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP OF TRACT NO. 10511; THENCE SOUTH 00°18'18"WEST 242.23 FEET ALONG SAID LINE TO AN ANGLE POINT TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT NO. 10511; THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT THE FOLLOWING COURSES: SOUTH 89°40'56" EAST 280.19 FEET, SOUTH 00°17'57" WEST 410.35 FEET, SOUTH 89°42'47" EAST 135.00 FEET AND SOUTH 00017'57" WEST 90.00 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF CLAY AVENUE, 30.00 FEET IN WIDTH, AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP OF TRACT NO. 10511; THENCE SOUTH 000 17'13" WEST 30.00 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF SAID CLAY AVENUE; THENCE NORTH 89°42'47" WEST 813.43 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF CLAY AVENUE AND MAIN STREET AS SHOWN ON THE MAP FILED IN BOOK 100, PAGES 46 AND 47 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY; THENCE ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF MAIN STREET SOUTH 190 14'02" WEST 829.19 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT IN SAME; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF MAIN STREET SOUTH 00018'10" WEST 545.95 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 565.20 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. VWDEN & HOLLY-SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARY SOCIATES REVISED PER ZONE CHANGE NO. 93-2 ORDINANCE NO. 3243 CIVIL ENGINEERS-PLANNERS-LAND SURVEYORS W.O. No. 0867-273-I X 12 Date 10/25/94 18012 COWAN,SUITE 210 • IRVINE.CA 92714 714166"110 FAX:6604418 Engr. D.C. Chk. D.W. Sheet 5 of 5 VI. MITIGATION MEASURES LEGISLATIVE DRAFT VI. MITIGATION MEASURES FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 89-1 These mitigation measures are required of the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan pursuant to Final Environmental Impact Report 89-1 and should be imposed on future projects in the Specific Plan area. Land Use On-Site Land Uses 1. Prior to issuance of building permits for individual tracts,the applicant should demonstrate that service vehicle access to all remaining operating oil wells on site is monitored through the existing or proposed residential tracts. 2. All potential buyers and renters of on-site residences should be notified of the affects resulting from on-site and off-site oil production activities. The notification should state the frequency and locations of maintenance and service operations. The notification should indicate that noise levels from oil activities may also significantly increase during these times. Air Quality 1. Because it only takes a small amount of material to generate odors, it is important to maintain a very clean operation. Therefore, any oil spilled on the ground should be quickly cleaned up. Well sumps should be pumped out after pulling a well and periodically in the interim. Maintenance of seals and gaskets on pumps and piping should be performed whenever leaks are evident. General clean-up of the site should result in significant improvements in the level of odor found in the area. 2. Appropriately designed, vapor recovery systems which pull the gas off the well casing should be employed, as well as vapor recovery systems for oil transport trucks. A similar system could be employed for any remaining storage facilities on site. VI-1 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT Noise 1. Noise levels generated by the oil operations should be mitigated to levels consistent with the Huntington Beach Noise Ordinance, by locating consolidation area(s)at least 300 feet from the nearest residential or other sensitive land uses (locating consolidation areas within industrial-use areas would be the most desirable from a noise standpoint). The oil wells could be located closer to sensitive land uses if a perimeter wall with a minimum height of 8 feet was utilized around the consolidation area(s). The following mitigation measures assume a 100 foot distance to the receptor and the mitigation affects of an 8 foot sound wall. Additional analysis of the consolidation area(s)will be necessary when phasing plans become available. Oil Well Drilling Operations 2. The results show that in order for the drilling operations to satisfy the Huntington Beach Noise Ordinance outdoor standards, electric motors with acoustic blankets must be used. Diesel motors even when shielded by acoustic blankets will not meet the nighttime Noise Ordinance standards at the on-site and off-site residences and will not meet the daytime Noise Ordinance standards at the on-site residences. If there are plans to conduct the drilling operations during the nighttime hours,then according to the Oil Code,the operations must be soundproofed. Acoustic blankets as well as an 8 foot high masonry wall along the site perimeter will likely reduce the noise levels to below the Noise Ordinance standards. Oil Well Pumping 3. The well pumps used in the consolidation area should be submerged. if other types of well pumps such as ground level electric or diesel pumps may be necessary. Specific mitigation measures should be presented in an additional noise study. Well Pulling,Redrilling and Service Drilling Operations 4. Well pulling and drilling operations are confined to daytime hours (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.)by the Oil Code. Any redrilling performed at night must provide soundproofing to comply with the Noise Ordinance. The Oil Code prohibits the pulling of wells during the nighttime hours(10:00 to 7:00 a.m.). Well maintenance activities should also be conducted between the hours or 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. only. Although high levels of noise may be generated by routine well maintenance operations,these activities would occur inside the noise barrier surrounding the consolidation area. VI-2 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 5. Service drilling for this project will be conducted during the daytime hours only. Data on service drilling operations indicate that with a dieselpowered service rig and an 8 foot high noise barrier, the noise level at 100 feet will likely be 55 dBA which corresponds to the City's daytime Noise Ordinance standard. All servicing of the wells must comply with the noise standards contained in the Huntington Beach code. Truck Operations 6. Truck operations should be limited to daytime hours only (7 a.m. to 10 p.m.) Helicopter Operations 7. A notice (and statement of acknowledgement)to prospective homeowners is required stating that the property is subject to overflight, sight and sound of helicopters associated with the police facility. Oil Facilities 1. Future Specific Plan(s) should include an area or areas for the consolidation of oil well facilities. 2. All new development proposals should be accompanied by: • A plan which addresses the requirements for abandoned wells. • The abandonment plans for existing wells. • The operational plans for any remaining wells and facilities. These plans must satisfy the requirements of the City of Huntington Beach and the Division of Oil and Gas. 3. The criteria for the approval of development plans within oil districts should include: (a) That enough open space has been reserved around the oil operation site to allow existing and future equipment which could reasonably be expected to be used on the site, including any setbacks from new development required by the Fire Chief. (b) That adequate access to all operation sites is provided for portable equipment and emergency vehicles. VI-3 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT (c) That reasonable expansion of the existing facilities, if permitted in the oil district, can be accomplished. (d) That any proposed development-includes all provisions for sound-proofing and fire protection required by the Fire Chief. (e) That screening of oil facilities from any new development is included in the plan. 4. As future development occurs, continued subsidence rate monitoring for the region of the subject site is necessary to determine if subsidence rates are declining with current water injection methods being used at operating oil production facilities. 5. The use of post-tensioned slabs should be considered in the foundation design in order to eliminate distress to structures and slabs from minor regional subsidence. Although this measure will provide for a more rigid slab, it will be no means eliminate distress to foundations resulting from the rapid subsidence of the land from continued oil and gas withdrawal. Cultural Resources Archaeology 1. It is suggested that the research design be prepared by the Principal Investigator selected to perform the work and that it be reviewed by a second consulting archaeologist. This step will help insure the completeness and viability of the research design prior to its implementation. The involvement of a second professional is viewed as an inexpensive means of insuring that no major elements are overlooked. 2. The archaeological deposits within the Holly-Seacliff study area should be subjected to a program of excavation designed to recover sufficient data to fully describe the sites. The following program is recommended: a. Analysis of the collections made by the Pacific Coast Archaeological Society, Long Beach State University and any community college which has such material. If the collections are properly provenienced and are accompanied by adequate documentation,they should be brought together during this phase and complete analysis performed. Of particular importance during this phase is the recovery of survey date to VI4 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT be used to determine the exact locations of previous excavation efforts. b. Prior to the beginning of any excavation effort, a burial strategy should be developed by the archaeologist retained to accomplish the excavation members of the Native American community and appropriate City Staff. The strategy should address details of the handling and processing of human remains encountered during excavation, as well as the ultimate disposition of such remains. C. Completion of test excavations should be made at each of the archaeological deposits. The information gained from the test excavation will guide the following data recovery excavation. The excavations should have two primary goals: • Definition of site boundaries and depth. • Determination of the significance of the site and its degree of preservation. d. A statistically valid sample of site material should be excavated. The data recovery excavation should be conducted under the provisions of a carefully developed research design. The research questions presented earlier in this report should be incorporated into the research design, other important research questions should be developed from the test excavation data included, and a statement of methodology to be observed must be included. e. A qualified observer appointed by the Principal Investigator/Archaeologist should monitor grading of the archaeological sites to recover important material which might appear. The monitor will be assigned by the Principal Investigator. This activity may require some minor delay or redirecting of grading while material is being recovered. The observer should be prepared to recover material as rapidly as is consistent with good archaeological practice. Monitoring should be on a full time basis when grading is taking place on or near an archaeological deposit. However,the grading should terminate when the cultural deposit has been entirely removed and clearly sterile deposits exposed. f. All excavation and ground disturbing observation projects should include a Native American Observer. Burials are known to exist at some of the sites, a circumstance which is extremely important to the Native American community. VI-S (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT g. A detailed professional report should be prepared which fully describes the site and its place in pre-history. Reports should receive sufficient distribution which includes the City,the County and the UCLA repository for archeology to insure their availability to future researchers. h. Arrangements should be made for proper curation of the collections. It is expected that large quantities of materials will be collected during the excavation. Curation should be at an institution which has the proper facilities for storage, display and use by interested scholars and the general public. 3. The shell and lithic scatters should be subjected to test excavation to determine if they are or are not in situ archaeological deposits. If any of the scatters prove to be in situ archaeological material, a site record should be prepared and submitted to the Archaeological Survey,University of California, Los Angeles, and the site should be treated as in mitigation number one. If the sites are shown to be not archaeological in nature or not in situ, then no further action should be taken. 4. Ground disturbing activity within the study area should be monitored by a qualified observer assigned by the Principle Investigator/Archaeologist to determine if significant historic deposits, (e.g. foundations,trash deposits, privy pits and similar features)have been exposed. The monitoring should be on a full-time basis, but can be terminated when clearly undisturbed geologic formations are exposed. If such exposures occur, appropriate collections should be made, followed by analysis and report preparation. Historic material may be encountered anywhere within the Holly-Seacliff property, but the area around the old Holly sugar Refinery is probably more sensitive than the balance of the project area. Historical material recovered at the archaeological sites should be treated with those deposits. 5. The plaque commemorating oil well Huntington A-1 should be preserved. As development in the area continues, it may be desirable to upgrade this feature. Paleontology 6. A qualified paleontologist should be retained to periodically monitor the site during grading or extensive trenching activities that cut into the San Pedro Sand or the Quaternary marine terrace units. 7. In areas where fossils are abundant, full-time monitoring and salvage effort will be necessary ( 8 hours per day during grading or trenching activities). In areas where no fossils are being uncovered,the monitoring time can be less than eight hours per day. VI-6 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT 8. The paleontologist should be allowed to temporarily divert or direct grading operations to facilitate assessment and salvaging of exposed fossils. 9. Collection and processing of matrix samples through fine screens will be necessary to salvage any microvertebrate remains. If a deposit of microvertebrates is discovered, matrix material can be moved off to one side of the grading area to allow for further screening without delaying the developmental work. 10. All fossils and their contextual stratigraphic data should go to an institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the Orange County Natural History Foundation. Human Health and Safety Surface Oil Contamination 1. Prior to grading and development, a site reconnaissance should be performed including a phased Environmental Site Assessment to evaluate areas where contamination of the surficial soils may have taken place. The environmental assessment should evaluate existing available information pertinent to the site and also undertake a limited investigation of possible on-site contamination. Phase I should include: a. Review of available documents pertinent to the subject site to evaluate current and previous uses. b. Site reconnaissance to evaluate areas where contamination of surficial solid may have taken place. C. Excavation and testing of oil samples to determine presence of near surface contamination of soil. d. Subsurface exploration to determine presence of sumps on-site. Testing of possible drilling fluids for heavy metals. e. Completion of soil gas vapor detection excavations located adjacent to the existing on-site wells. f. Testing of air samples for gas vapor,methane gas and sulfur compounds. 2. The actual site characterization and remedial action plan would be developed as part of a later phase. Upon completion of the Environmental Assessment, a Remedial Action Plan can be developed. This plan should address the following items: VI-7 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT a. Treatment of possible crude oil contaminated soils. A possible solution to this condition would be aeration of the contaminated soils to release the volatile gases and then incorporation of the treated solid into the roadway fills (subgrade). b. Treatment of possible drilling sumps by either on-site disposal of non-contaminated drilling fluids or off-site disposal of contaminated fluids. C. Treatment of the possibility of the accumulation of methane gas. Methane Gas 3. Prior to development, a thorough site study for the presence of surface and shallow subsurface methane gas should be performed. Any abnormal findings would require a Remedial Action Plan and further studies to assure sufficient mitigation of the hazardous areas prior to building construction. All structures should have a gas and vapor barrier installed underneath the slabs and foundations. Gas collection and ventilation systems should be installed over abandoned wells which are underneath or within ten (10) feet of any structure, and over wells which show evidence of surface emissions of methane gas. Additionally, following construction of structures, an organic vapor analysis should be conducted and the results evaluated to assure that acceptable air quality is maintained within buildings and residences. 4. The presence of methane gas on-site should be the subject of future studies that include the following tasks: a. Drilling of test wells to monitor for subsurface methane deposits and confirm or deny the presence of biogenic methane bearing strata near area. b. Shallow excavation and sampling in areas either known or assumed to be potential drilling mud sumps; C. Vapor monitoring of shallow vapor probes placed at strategic location on the site and collection of soil vapor samples; d. Vapor survey areas adjacent to known abandoned oil wells; C. Laboratory analysis of selected soil samples for metals and soil vapor samples for gases. V I-8 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT Other Oil Production Related Hazards 5. Oil wells scheduled for abandonment should be completed in accordance with the standards and specifications of the City of Huntington Beach and the California Division of Oil and Gas. Wells which have previously been abandoned must be reabandoned to the most current requirements of the City of Huntington Beach and the Division of Oil and Gas. 6. Existing oil production lines are located throughout the site. Treatment of these lines will depend on proposed land use and development. Utility lines should be relocated and or removed with the trench being filled with compacted fill. Hazardous Materials 1. The use, storage and disposal of hazardous materials should be enforced by City of Huntington Beach to provide the greatest possible protection to the public from accidental occurrences. 2. Active wells remaining on-site should be secured and screened as required by the City of Huntington Beach. 3. Prior to development, a review of available public health records should be performed to evaluate possible public health risk sites in the vicinity of the subject site. 4. An inventory of all hazardous materials used and stored by industries locating within the project area should be maintained and recorded for use by the City Fire Department. This inventory should include the location at which each hazardous material is used. Aesthetics 1. Landscaping of future projects should be designed to minimize visual impacts on adjacent parcels. Special consideration should be given to orientation of the project's residences (i.e. windows and deck) so as to respect the privacy of adjacent and nearby homes. 2. Wherever feasible, oil production facilities on-site should be eliminated or consolidated to reduce their total number. Facilities remaining on-site should be painted, camouflaged, or otherwise screened by perimeter walls, plantings or like treatments to reduce their unsightliness to future residents. VI-9 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT Land-Use Policies Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the Department of Fish and Game should be notified of grading activities on-site that are scheduled to commence in the swales, in order to preclude the possible elimination of wetland areas under the jurisdiction of the Department of Fish and Game, as further specified in the Biological Resources section of this EIR. Biological 1. Following construction of necessary infrastructure in the main drainage swale, i.e., utility lies, sewers, etc.,this swale should remain as open space. Mitigation for the loss of cattail marsh habitat(0.5 acres) and willow habitat(0.5 acres) which are depicted on Exhibit 20, will take place such that a minimum of 1.0 acre of riparian vegetation is established in this drainage swale. The plants utilized in the revegetated area will enclosed from the recommended plant palette indicated on page VI-11. 2. Through adoption of future Specific Plans large trees suitable for use by raptors such as the red-shouldered hawk, should preserved or replaced in accordance with the tree species identified in the plant palette contained on page V1-11. 3. Any grading or filling in the brackish wetlands in the western portion of the project site sill be mitigated by restoration of an equal area of coastal wetland at a nearby location in the open space area. 4. Effects upon on-site wetlands within the jurisdiction of the California Department of Fish and Game will require mitigation defined by 1603 permits. VI-10 (hssp97) _ LEGEND r PeT i DEV DEVELOPED AREA E._...__P n _ NNW NON-NATIVE WOODLAND NNW rb RAG DEV ruvc � RAG RUDERAL ANNUAL GRASSLAND DEV ►CDs rOPT Q /�Crb �j�_ ; PsDS PALUSTRINE,SHRUB,DECID000S,SALIX ,law, DEv/ o-hOs ribs-of�wos --}-f NNW �POPT �V L•-1 �. pb PALUSTRINE, UNCONSOLIDATED BOTTOM DEV I RAG RAG Dfv-.Im I P@PD PALUSTRINE, EMERGENT, PERSISTENT, DISTICHLIS • �Ir lrRrs-� DEV Peps SALICORNEIAEMERGENT, PERSISTENT, rRrD RAG DEV :I; Dtv' •'� .,- DEv PALUSTRINE, EMERGENT, PERSISTENT, TYPHA PePT DI PALUSTRINE, UNCONSOLIDATED SHORE (� y- V ,DEV" ;:•• PU / DI n RAc •.;; ',� PuVC PALUSTRINE, UNCONSOLIDATED SHORE, USN VVV'' VEGETATED.CONYZA ® .. � NNW I � {i C. � DfV, O-r'Ds RAG DIV NNW DEVMO,.. i},r NN NNW' 4r .,i!j RAGr.J 41, NNW CITY OF EXHIBIT 20 HUNTINGTON BEACH BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES HOLLY-SMUFFQJ I A I I_ I ��tnM MEM LENT O`HF D PLM LSA ASSOCIATE;NC la LEGISLATIVE DRAFT PLANT PALETTE Scientific Name Common Name Trees { Alnus rhombifolia White Alder Juglans californica California Walnut Platanus racemosa Sycamore Quercus agrifolia Coast Live Oak S. laevigata Red Willow p S. lasiandra Golden Willow S. hindsiana Sandbar Willow Salix lasiolepis Arroyo Willow Umbellylaria californica California Bay Tall Shrubs Baccharis pilularis var. consanquinea Coyote Brush Heteromeles arbutifolia Toyon R. ovata Sugarbush Rhus laurina Laurel sumac Sambucus mexicana Elderberry Low Shrubs and Vines Diplacus longiflorus Bush Monkeyflower R. viburnifolium Catalina Currant R. aureum Golden Currant Ribes speciosum Fuschia-flowered Gooseberry Rosa californica California Rose Rubus ursinus California Blackberry Toxicodendron diversilobum Poison Oak Vitis californica California Grape Herbaceous Plants and Grasses Artemisia douglasiana Mugwort Elymus condensatus Giant Wild Rye Scirpus spp. Tule Typha spp. Cattail VI-11 (hssp97) LEGISLATIVE DRAFT Public Services and Utilities Schools 1. The General Plan Amendment 89-1 designates a site for a new elementary school to serve students generated by residential development within the project area. 2. The school district and major landowner should enter into an agreement for acquisition or lease of the site as part of implementation of this General Plan Amendment. 3. Developers should pay school impact fees to finance construction of necessary school facilities. 4. The Huntington Beach Union High School District should coordinate its expansion plans with phasing of development within the project area and surrounding areas. VI-12 (hssp97) ATTACHMENT 5 CODE AMENDMENT NO.96-3 AMENDMENT TOT-HE HOLLY-SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN(HSSP) CITY COUNCIL MARCH 17, 1997 HSSP CODE CODE CURRENT PROPOSED CURRENT ZONING SECTION ISSUE HSSP HSSP ORDINANCE III.D.1 Low Density Residential (RL-1) No Change RL(closest equivalent) min. lot size 7,000 sq. ft. min. lot size 6,000 sq.ft. .b Permitted Uses Detached single family units No Change Single family units .g Min. Front Yard Setback . Dwelling 15 ft. No Change 15 ft. . Garage, Front Entry 20 ft. No Change 20 ft. . Garage, Side Entry 10 ft. No Change 10 ft. . Balconies, Bay Windows, Eaves and Not Addressed 12 ft., except 8 ft. on side 12 ft. - Balcony/Eaves Fireplaces entry garage 12.5 ft. - Bay Window/Fire lace .h.1 Min. Interior Side Yard Setback . Dwelling/Garage 5 ft. No Change 5 ft. . Patio Covers Not Addressed 5 ft. 5 ft. . Eaves 18 inches 2.5 ft. 2.5 ft. . Fireplaces 2.5 ft. No Change 2.5 ft. . Bay Windows, Balconies, 3 ft. No Change 2.5 ft. - Bay Window !n Architectural features 3 ft. -Balcony .h.2 Min. Exterior Side Yard Setback . Dwelling/Garage 10 ft. No Change 10 ft. . Eaves 18 inches 7 ft. 7 ft. . Fireplaces 7.5 ft. No Change 7.5 ft. . Bay Windows, Balconies, 8 ft. 7.5 ft. 7.5 ft. - Bay Window Architectural features 7 ft. -Balcony . Unenclosed patio covers Not Addressed 5 ft. 5 ft. J Min. Rear Yard Setback . Dwelling 20 ft. No Change 10 ft. . Bay Windows, Balconies, Not Addressed 15 ft. 7.5 ft. - Bay Window Architectural features 7 ft. - Balcony . Unenclosed patio covers Not Addressed 5 ft. 5 ft. 1 of 5 CODE AMENDMENT NO.96-3 AMENDMENT TO THE HOLLY SEACLIFP SPECIFIC PLAN (HSSP) CITY COUNCIL MARCH 17 W HSSP CODE CODE CURRENT PROPOSED CURRENT ZONING SECTION ISSUE HSSP HSSP ORDINANCE III.D.2 Low Density Residential (RL-2) No Change RL min. lot size 5,000/6,000 s . ft. min. lot size 6,000 sq.ft. .b Permitted Uses Detached single family units, incl. Also allow for"Z" lot homes Single family units, incl. zero lot zero lot line and patio homes line .g Min. Front Yard Setback . Dwelling 15 ft. No Change 15 ft. . Garage, Front Entry 20 ft. No Change 20 ft. • Garage, Side Entry 10 ft. No Change 10 ft. . Balconies, Bay windows, Eaves and Not Addressed 12 ft., except 8 ft. on side 12 ft. - Balcony/Eaves Fireplaces entry garage 12.5 ft. - Bay Window/Fireplace .h.1 Min, interior Side Yard Setback . Dwelling/Garage 5 ft. No Change 5 ft. . Patio Covers Not Addressed 5 ft. 5 ft. • Eaves 18 inches 2.5 ft. 2.5 ft. . Fireplaces 2.5 ft. No Change 2.5 ft. . Bay Windows, Balconies, 3 ft. No Change 2.5 ft. -Bay Window Architectural features 3 ft. - Balcony .h.2 Min. Exterior Side Yard Setback • Dwelling/Garage 10 ft. No Change 10 ft. . Eaves 18 inches 7 ft. 7 ft. . Fireplaces 7.5 ft. No Change 7.5 ft. • Bay Windows, Balconies, 8 ft. 7.5 ft. 7.5 ft. - Bay Window Architectural features 7 ft. - Balcony • Unenclosed patio covers Not Addressed 5 ft. 5 ft. .i Min. Rear Yard Setback . Dwelling 20 ft. No Change 10 ft. . Bay Windows, Balconies, Not Addressed 15 ft. 7.5 ft. - Bay Window Architectural features 7 ft. -Balcony . Unenclosed patio covers Not Addressed 5 ft. 5 ft. .m 1 Min. Building Separation on same lot 6 ft. 10 ft. 10 ft. 2 of 5 CODE AMENDMENT NO. 6.3 AMENDMENT TO THE HOLLY SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN(HSSP) CITY COUNCIL MARCH 17, 1997 HSSP CODE CODE CURRENT PROPOSED SECTION ISSUE HSSP HSSP III.D.3 Low Density Residential (RL-3) No Change min. lot size 3,300 sq. ft. .b Permitted Uses Detached or attached single family Also allow for"Z" lot units, incl. zero lot line/patio homes homes .f Max. Site Coverage 60 % 50 % (if open space provision not adopted) 55% (if open space provision adopted) See item h.2.k. for open space. ,g Min. Front Yard Setback • Dwelling 15 ft. No Change • Garage, Front Entry 18 ft. No Change • Garage, Side Entry 10 ft. No Change • Balconies, Eaves and Fireplaces 6 ft. 12 ft., except 10 ft. on side entry garage • Baywindows Not Addressed 12 ft., except 10 ft. on side entry garage .h.1 Min. Interior Side Yard Setback • Dwelling, Patio Covers, Garage 3 ft. Aggregate of 20 % of lot frontage at any point, min. of 3 ft/max. of 5 ft. per side. • Eaves 18 inches 2.5 ft. • Fireplaces 2.5 ft. No Change • Bay Windows, Balconies, 3 ft. No Change Architectural Features 3 of 5 CODE AMENDMENT NO.96-3 AMENDMENT TO THE HOLLY SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN (HSSP) CITY COUNCIL MARCH 17, 1997 HSSP CODE CODE CURRENT PROPOSED SECTION ISSUE HSSP THSSP III.D.3 (cont.) Low Density Residential RL-3 (cont.) .h.2 Exterior Side Yard Setback . Dwelling, Patio Covers, Garage 6 ft. Aggregate of 20 % of lot frontage at any point, min. of 6 ft/max. of 8 ft. . Eaves 18 inches 3.5 ft. . Bay Windows, Balconies, 4 ft. 3.5 ft. Architectural features . Fireplaces 3.5 ft. No Change . Patio covers Not Addressed 3 ft. .i Rear Yard Setback . Dwelling 15 ft. No Change . Bay Windows, Balconies, Not Addressed 12 ft. Architectural features . Unenclosed patio covers Not Addressed 5 ft. A Open Space Shall be provided by the required For projects with 20 units min. setback areas or more if RL-3 dev. is constructed on property designated for RM and RMH dev.then: 100 sq. ft. per lot for lots with 40 ft. or more of frontage and 150 sq. ft. per lot for lots with less than 40 ft. of frontage. Min. of 3,000 sq. ft., min. dimension 50 ft. For projects with less than 20 units, 600 sq.ft. per unit in common or private open s ace. 4of5 CODE AMENDMENT NO. 96-3 AMENDMENT TO THE MOLLY SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN(HSSP) CITY COUNCIL MARCH 17, 1997 HSSP CODE CODE CURRENT PROPOSED SECTION ISSUE HSSP HSSP III.D.4 Medium Density Residential (RM) No Change 15 units/ac. .a Purpose Allows for attached single family, Add detached single condos, townhomes and multi- family** family developments .b Permitted Uses Allows for attached single family, Add detached single condos, townhomes and multi- family in accordance family developments with Development Standards of RL-3 District** III.D.5 Medium High Density Residential (RMH) No Change 25 units/ac. ,a Purpose Allows for attached single family, Add detached single condos, townhomes and multi- family** family developments .b Permitted Uses Allows for attached single family, Add detached single condos, townhomes and multi- family in accordance family developments with Development Standards of RL-3 District** ** Proposed change requested by the applicant. 5 of 5 ATTACHMENT 6 A a ' • "Ic�go a`� G ff 's ,1r Il J tin 351 • • ,� ,All p�,� g • ur_a: :. ' I lllllllli / 1• y�Ij 'dff081tR11�A8��y x�p � l� eluimiil. illl>�IN ••ro nnmmuuu► �� �=- 8 il; ■� nluunl�,nlnmm� ►aa,�1����� s � t `. IIIIIIIIIh111111111111 nnmi $� ■■■' • CD nwum puunuil um ul. � e,oj�iaa nnuu.:.uuuu milli uiu. ' iunnm uuulluu ulllplliltllp �� «gym I,■... .0 nnauu uunnnu nununmiu •F� • uunllluu nnnummu IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIflllt / M■■■� umwuwum�mloomom!om miuonnuaouill?�� ' � �I�I�.. �� �. • Oil .oollol II'nmly Ilmul.ammo ► � • �.. IIIEiEiflf�ll�M •E ! ■■r ■■■■�� 1 muu umum 11111 l aolmu poI 11� �•.p7 e� I�Ei�`=■, .? muu lomol ammo;outuo.u1�'II,IUm ��\ , ,,.;�■■■■�. , ouu Inwm;omnu amdn , Iiru 1 .-„ .~ =_ mm,lnenaumuuammm "■ Minn �■� 1► Inl'■■■�[, \ d �� %�j��-` , ��mnmunmllumlm--11f I �� I�I I pl • : /� NONNI�m -iunnnnm uilnllllna Ili�l�ll�0 IIII�I�UI�II" ' �,�� p11111111 1111111111111111= �IIIIIillll ii11nN� Ir .� / IIL IIII■--_ iiNilnl liniuniinuui-:mllllllltlunn UII III �! `r'•r._ ' ill5x ��■®ice �, ■ a Iilllo n ■I■■ IIIII�Illill 11111111 ?``'' ', -■■■■■■■■■� • 'a:3�i�C1�'I' '1 �g=9_IIpJI,i,�i■ii■■„",1=cn �0\. 0 �■■NEON ATTACHMENT 7 L EG- EN LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL I F- LOW W DENSITY RESIDENTIAL I AC LOW D EHSITY RESIDENTIAL 3 Mimi? a? aum MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL E E UM-HIOH DENSITY 1 RL-1 RESIDENTIAL] . •'I'N'•��.'`•:. ..::•.:: RL-3 EF-1 COMMERCIAL 1.2 ELLIS-GOLOENWEST RL-1 SPECIFIC PLAN INDUSTRIAL AREA :j-'*'.* -.-1—.-PAC, PLANNING AREA 1-4 Os PLANNING UNIT 1-3 114 RL- H E NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS J 111111 1 m I fT[I AUR Rh 11 111-4 RIAH C -1 V— vCC RL-2 Ckre Aveme IV-4 APProved Projects mo RM and RV Areas affected COAS111,1 7 by Applicant's request m own venom i EXHIBIT 3 • CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH GENERAL DEVELOPMENI PLAN fldfl)(� - -3 IkWVA �,AA C r, A ri'�I':`/A E C H F 0 C pl, NN[F A r Q�OAF F, SP U ATTACHMENT 8 SUMMARY OF HSSP AREAS DESIGNATED FOR RM AND RMH DEVELOPMENT Planning Land Use Gross Maximum Approved/ Approved/ No. of Units on No. of Units on Unit Category Acres No. of Units Submitted Submitted Remaining Property if Remaining Property Project Units Developed as RMIRMH if Developed as RL-3 II.2 RM 40 4411 Parkside 19 ac. 150 291 277 II-3 RM 302 4411 Portofino 15.8 ac. 156 213 187 O° II-4 RMH 9 1501 The Cove 150 II.5 RMH 4 75 No 75 52 II.6 RMH 4 75 No 75 52 II.7 RMH 6 100 Cannes Pointe 29 III-1 RM 19 2851 Breakers 73 III.3 RM 11 1651 No 165 145 III-4 RMH 10 2501 No 250 132 III-5 RM 18 2701 No 270 237 IV-1 RM 16 155 No 155 155 IV-2 RM 8 120 Holly St. 1.3 ac. 20 100 88 Total 175 2,527 na 578 1,594 1,325 Number of Units Under Current HSSP 2,1723 Number of Units Under Proposed HSSP if all remaining property developed as RL-3 1,9033 f 'Reflects density transfers previously approved by the Planning Commission. 2Does not include four acres for a neighborhood park. 3Assumes that Approved/Submitted projects are built as planned. ii .rs. 0 t ro Page 1 of 1 3 ATTACHMENT 9 Huntington.beach Department of Community Development STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director BY: Mary Beth Broeren, Associate Planner"�' ' DATE: January 28, 1997 SUBJECT: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 96-2/LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO. 96-3 (CONTINUED FROM THE JANUARY 14, 1997 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING) (Holly Seacliff Specific Plan) LOCATION: The Holly Seacliff Specific Plan area is located south of Ellis Avenue and north of Palm Avenue, west of Main Street and east of the City's western boundary. STATEMENT OF ISSUE: PLC Land Co requests an amendment to the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan(HSSP)to allow RL-3 development in RM (Residential-Medium Density) and RMH(Residential-Medium High Density) districts and to include Z-lot development in the list of permitted uses in the districts This would basically allow for small lot, detached single family units in the RM and RMH areas where they are presently not permitted. As a result of this request, staff recommends modifications to the development standards for residential development in areas designated for RL-1, RL-2 and RL-3 development. The modifications address balconies,bay windows and other architectural features in the rear and front yards, patio covers in the side and rear yards, eaves setbacks in the side yards and three other changes for the RL-3 district pertaining to site coverage, open space and side yard setbacks. These changes are recommended because they relate to small lot development and are integral to the applicant's request. This item was continued from the January 14, 1997 Planning Commission meeting at the request of the applicant. PLC wanted to determine if a proposed change for side yard setbacks was consistent with one of their projects that is in the planning stages. The applicant has indicated that they have not been able to complete this step. The applicant is in agreement with the other changes proposed. Staff recommends the Planning Commission hear public testimony,take straw votes on those portions of the proposed code amendment pertaining to RL-1 and RL-2 development and continue action on items pertaining to RL-3 development to the next scheduled Planning Commission meeting of February 11, 1997. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission defer action on items related to RL-3 development as staff s support for the applicant's request is contingent upon agreement with staffs proposed changes. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: A. "Take straw votes on Sections III.D.1 (RL-1) and III D.2 (RL-2) of the Legislative Draft (Attachment No. 9)"and; B. "Continue the Public Hearing on Code Amendment No. 96-2 and Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 96-3 to the next scheduled Planning Commission meeting of February 11, 1997." GENERAL INFORMATION: APPLICANT: PLC Land Company, 23 Corporate Plaza, Ste. 250,Newport Beach, CA 92660 PROPERTY OWNER: Various, See Attachment No. 12 REQUEST: To amend the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan to allow RL-3 development in areas designated for RM and RMH projects and to modify the development standards for residential development regarding architectural features, open space and setbacks. DATE ACCEPTED: September 6, 1996 SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS: LOCATION GENERAL PLAN ZONING LAND USE Subject Property: Residential Low Density, Holly Seacliff Specific vacant Residential Medium Plan(RL-1, RL-2, RL-3, Density and Residential RM and RMH land use Medium High Density categories) North, East and Residential Low Density, RMH,RL, Ellis- residential West of Subject Residential Medium High Goldenwest Specific Plan Property Density, Open Space- Park South of Subject Residential Low Density, RL,Holly Specific Plan residential, industrial, Property: Residential Medium (Ind., MD, Comm), OS- golf course Density, Mixed Use CR Horizontal, Open Space- Commercial Recreation Staff Report- 1/28/97 2 (97SR04) I PROJECT PROPOSAL* Code Amendment No. 96-3 represents a request by PLC Land Co. to amend the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan(HSSP)to allow RL-3 development in RM(Residential-Medium Density) and RMH(Residential- Medium High Density) districts and to include Z-lot development in the list of permitted uses in the districts pursuant to Section IV.C.6.b. of the HSSP. The development standards for the RM and RMH areas of the HSSP allow for attached single family units, condominiums,townhomes and multi-family projects. The development standards for RL-3 areas specify small lot, detached or attached single family units. The applicant proposes that RL-3 projects be allowed in areas that are designated for RM and RMH land uses so that, if desired,they can build small lot, detached single family units in these areas. (The applicant is not requesting to lower the allowable densities of the RM and RMH areas but to allow a different product type.) The applicant has indicated that the request is necessary to provide greater flexibility in project development and to respond to the higher demand for small lot,detached single family units. PLC also requests that the list of permitted uses in the RM and RMH district be expanded to include Z-lot homes. Z-lot homes are similar to zero lot line developments which are currently permitted in the HSSP. They differ from zero lot line units in their orientation to side property lines. The applicant requests the addition of Z-lot homes to the permitted uses because this type of development allows for larger usable yard areas than the traditional zero lot line development(Attachment No. 2). As a result of PLC's request, staff is recommending modifications to some of the development standards for residential development in areas designated for RL-I, RL-2 and RL-3 development(Attachment No. 3). The HSSP currently does not have development standards for balconies, bay windows and other architectural features in the rear and front yards, nor does it address patio covers in the side or rear yards. The proposed changes by staff would specify required setbacks for these items. These structural improvements are frequently requested by property owners;therefore, it is important that the HSSP identify what the development standards are for them. Another recommended change pertains to side yard setbacks for eaves;the allowances in the HSSP are inconsistent with the Uniform Building Code. Staff also proposes three other changes for the RL-3 district: 1)that site coverage be reduced from 60 to 55 percent,2)that a certain amount of open space be provided in RL-3 projects that are developed in RM and RMH land use areas, and 3)that the calculation for side yard setbacks be modified. These changes are in response to PLC's request to build small lot projects in the RM and RMH areas. Pursuant to PLC's request,staff also recommends that a definition of a Z-lot be incorporated in the HSSP. ISSUES: General Plan Conformance: The proposed project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan and the following goals and objectives of the Land Use Element: Staff Report- 1/28/97 3 (97SR04) LU 4.1 Promote the development of residential, commercial, industrial, and public buildings and sites that convey a high quality visual image and character. LU 9.1.2 Require that single family residential units be designed to convey a high level of quality and character considering the following guidelines: a) modulate and articulate building elevation, facades and masses, d) encourage innovative and creative design concepts. LU 9.3.2 Require that the design of new residential subdivisions consider the following: b)integrate public squares,mini-parks, or other landscape elements, d) establish a common"gathering"or activity center within a reasonable walking distance of residential neighborhoods. Environmental Status: The City Council approved Final Environmental Impact Report No. 89-1 for the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan in January 1990. The proposed changes to the HSSP will not increase allowable densities in the Specific Plan area or change the nature of the development that was anticipated in the EIR. Pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 4501, Class 20 which supplements the California Environmental Quality Act, minor amendments to zoning ordinances are exempt from further environmental review. Coastal Status: Code Amendment No. 96-3 will result in an amendment to the City's certified Local Coastal Program because a portion of the HSSP is located in the Coastal Zone. Any change in the development standards of the HSSP is subject to final approval by the California Coastal Commission. Redevelopment Status: Not applicable. Design Review Board: Not applicable. Subdivision Committee: Not applicable. Other Departments Concerns: The Building Division has reviewed the request and found staff s recommendations for setbacks to be consistent with the provisions of the Uniform Building Code(UBC). Moreover,the proposed changes to eaves setbacks in the side yard is necessary in order to comply with UBC requirements. There were no concerns from other Departments or Divisions. Staff Report- 1/28/97 4 (97SR04) Public Not{cation: Legal notice was published in the Huntington Beach/Fountain Valley Independent on January 2, 1997, and approximately 165 notices were sent to property owners of record within the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan area and to nearby homeowners associations and other interested parties. A copy of the legislative draft of the proposed changes was available for review at the Community Development Department as of December 30, 1996. ANALYSIS: History The Holly Seacliff Specific Plan was adopted in April 1992. One of the stated goals of the HSSP is to provide a diversity of housing types. The residential areas were planned to provide a range of densities, including large detached single family homes (RL-1), small lot detached single family homes (RL-3) and various types of multi-family dwellings(RM and RMH). There is also an RL-2 category which is analogous to RL development in the rest of the city. In preparing the HSSP, considerable attention was given to the amount of open space that would be provided. In exchange for not providing as many neighborhood parks as would normally be required,the developer at that time was allowed to dedicate approximately 40 acres of land for use as the Harriett M. Wieder Regional Park. In addition,the HSSP calls for three neighborhood parks. The developer will also create an open space/wetlands area south of Ellis Avenue. The HSSP requires that RM and RMH projects provide common open space within their projects. The Specific Plan notes that these private recreational facilities will augment the public recreational opportunities in the area. The analysis presented below discusses how the applicant's request to allow small lot detached single family homes in the RM and RMH areas would affect the overall development concept of the HSSP. Staff's recommendations are largely in response to the applicant's request and are proposed to ensure that the resulting development is compatible with the intent of the HSSP. C 's Abili to Modify the HSSP Development Standards The Code Amendment consists of two components: changes requested by the applicant and changes recommended by staff. These changes would affect residential property within the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan area. Most of this property is also governed by the Holly Seacliff Development Agreement No. 90-1. The Development Agreement(DA)specifies that changes to the land use regulations (the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan)must be mutually agreed upon by the developer and the City as they apply to properties governed by the (DA). In other words,the City may adopt changes to the HSSP but these changes would not apply to DA properties unless the developer agreed to the changes. Staff has received an opinion from the City Attorney to confirm this. It should be noted that the developer does not have the right to selectively choose what changes they agree to. They must agree to all or none of the changes of the proposed code amendment. Staff Report- 1/28/97 5 (97SR04) In an effort to present mutually agreed upon recommendations to the Planning Commission, staff has met with the applicant and other builders in the HSSP area in the last several months. The proposed changes reflect compromise on the part of staff and the builders where it benefits the city and its future development. While some of the builders would prefer to see more lenient standards, it is staffs understanding that the builders are generally in agreement with the proposed changes. The applicant, however,remains uncertain about one of staff s recommendations pertaining to the RL-3 development standards (Attachment No. 4). Should the City and the applicant not come to agreement on all aspects of the request, staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny the code amendment request. As described below, staff believes that its recommendations pertaining to RL-3 development are necessary and directly related to the applicant's request to allow RL-3 development in RM and RMH areas. In general,the applicant is supportive of staff s recommendations, and it is anticipated that an agreement will be reached by the February 11, 1997 Planning Commission meeting. Applicant's Request to Allow RL-3 Development in RM or RMH areas Within the HSSP there are 12 areas designated for RM or RMH development which permits densities of 15 and 25 units to the acre, respectively. These areas represent 175 gross acres and, if developed with the maximum number of units allowed by the HSSP, could accommodate 2,360 units. To date,there are four approved projects in the RM and RMH areas with a unit total of 476. Only one of the projects has been completed. There is currently one area of the HSSP that is designated for RL-3 development. This area is located between Goldenwest and Gothard Streets and is south of Ellis Avenue. The applicant has an approved project(formerly known as Sherwood/Annandale) at this site for 234 small lot, detached single family homes which will begin construction in 1997. RL-3 projects require a minimum lot size of 3,300 square feet which is equivalent to 13.2 units per acre. Assuming some of the RM and RMH areas are developed consistent with the applicant's request,the maximum number of units that would be built in the HSSP area would decrease. Alternatively,the RM and RMH areas could be developed at their original intended densities. Attachment No. 5 depicts the residential districts of the HSSP; Attachment No. 6 summarizes the development potential of the RM and RMH areas. It shows that if all remaining RM and RMH property were developed at maximum densities there would be 2,172 units; if these same properties were developed with RL-3 projects there would be 1,903 units. Thus, in the extreme case there would be 12.4 percent(269) fewer units. The applicant's request would probably result in a decrease in density in the HSSP area, although the RL- 3 development at 13.2 units per acre is comparable to RM development at 15 units per acre. It would likely increase the number of detached single family homes and decrease the number of apartments, condominiums, duplexes and townhomes. The change in product type would also result in a slight decrease in vehicle trips generated,based on remaining land and average densities. Staff Report- 1/28/97 6 (97SR04) Staff supports the applicant's request to construct small lot, detached single family units per the RL-3 standards in the RM and RMH areas. By providing more opportunities for small lot single family subdivisions,there will be greater product differentiation within the HSSP area. Staff does not believe it likely that all of the remaining RM and RMH areas will be developed with the detached single family product and expects that a variety of condominiums,townhomes and apartments will be constructed as originally envisioned when the HSSP was created. The proposed text changes to the HSSP requested by the applicant are presented in the Legislative Draft in Sections III.D.4 and III.D.5 (Attachment No. 9). In response to the applicant's request, staff recommends that a common open space element be required of RL-3 projects developed in the RM and RMH areas. This feature is currently required in RM and RMH projects. Staffs recommendation is discussed in detail below. PLC's request also includes amending the list of permitted uses in the RM and RMH districts to include Z-lot homes. A definition of a Z-lot home is proposed by staff and is presented in Attachment No. 9, Section III.B.4. Z-lot developments have become an increasingly attractive alternative to the traditional zero lot line development because they provide larger usable yard areas and result in less building bulk close to the front property line. An excerpt from a 1988 Urban Land article provides additional background information on the Z-lot concept(Attachment No. 7). Staff supports the applicant's request to include Z-lot development in the list of permitted uses finding that it is comparable to other permitted uses in the district. StQX-1 Reauest to Modi&Development Standards-far RL-1,RL-2 and RL-3 The proposed changes to the residential development standards may be grouped into three categories: 1) items not currently addressed in the HSSP, 2) items in conflict with the Uniform Building Code, and 3) items that staff recommends changing based on site plan reviews and previously approved projects. The legislative draft of the HSSP is presented as Attachment No. 9. Items Not Currently Addressed in the HSSP Balconies and Bay Windows The HSSP does not have setback requirements for balconies and bay windows within the front and rear yards. These items are commonly requested by property owners and should be included within the HSSP. The minimum front yard setback for a dwelling in all three residential districts is 15 feet. The proposed minimum front setback for balconies and bay windows would be 12 feet(i.e. a three foot projection), except on a side entry garage the setback for these features would be eight feet in the RL-1 and RL-2 districts and 10 feet in the RL-3 district. The greater setback is recommended in the RL-3 district to minimize massing on these typically narrower lots. Fireplace front yard setbacks in the RL-1 and RL-2 districts are also not addressed and are recommended to have the same setback as the balconies and bay windows. Staff Report- 1/28/97 7 (97SR04) The minimum rear yard setback for a dwelling in the RL-1 and RL-2 districts is 20 feet; the minimum in the RL-3 district is 15 feet. [For comparison purposes,the minimum requirement in the City's Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance(ZSO) is 10 feet.] Staff recommends that in the RL-1 and RL-2 districts a 15 foot setback(five foot projection)be allowed for balconies, bay windows and architectural features and that a 12 foot setback(three foot projection)be allowed in the RL-3 district. Allowing for building projections increases the articulation in building elevations and creates more variation in the street scene. The setbacks recommended by staff are generally consistent with the ZSO. They are supported by the applicant and by the new builders who will be constructing homes in the Peninsula II and Sherwood areas. Some of the builders have indicated that they would prefer greater allowances for balconies in the rear yard-a ten foot rear setback, for example- due to the fact that most balconies on premier homes are six to eight feet deep. The builders also note that, in the Peninsula area, many of the homes abut the golf course and greater balcony allowances would not impact other residences. Staff believes that a five foot projection(15 foot setback)is appropriate given the intent of the HSSP which requires a relatively large 20 foot setback for the dwelling. One of the Peninsula II builders, Lennar Homes,has requested that the HSSP be modified to allow roofed balconies (Attachment No. 10). The current HSSP specifies unroofed balconies -probably because an unroofed balcony would be more difficult to enclose. Staff supports this request because other City codes do not require unroofed balconies and site coverage would not be affected. Patio Covers The HSSP is also silent regarding patio covers in the side and rear yards. These are very frequently requested by homeowners and it is desirable to specify what will be allowed in the HSSP area. Staff recommends that patio covers have the same minimum interior side yard setback as the dwelling, i.e.,that the patio covers not encroach into the interior side yard. For exterior side yards and rear yards, staff believes that some patio cover projection will not be detrimental to adjacent property owners or impede access to the rear yard. Staff recommends a five foot setback for patio covers for the exterior side and the rear yards for all three residential districts, except that a three foot exterior side setback would be allowed for the RL-3 district. These projection allowances are consistent with the ZSO and the Ellis-Goldenwest Specific Plan which allows a five foot rear setback for patio covers. The applicant has indicated support for this proposed change. Items in Conflict with the Uniform Building Code Eaves In its current form, the HSSP only requires an 18 inch side yard setback for eaves. This is inconsistent with the Uniform Building Code which requires a 30 inch(2.5 feet) setback. Staff recommends that for all three residential districts the minimum interior side yard setback for eaves be 2.5 feet. Staff recommends a seven foot exterior side yard setback in the RL-1 and RL-2 districts and a 3.5 foot exterior setback for the RL-3 district. The exterior side yard setbacks are greater than those for the interior because the minimum setback for the dwelling is greater. The applicant is in agreement with these changes. Staff Report- 1/28/97 8 (97SR04) Items Staff Recommends Changing based on Site Plan Reviews and Approved Projects RL-I and RL-2 Districts The HSSP requires a minimum eight foot exterior side yard setback for bay windows, balconies and architectural features in the RL-1 and RL-2 districts. Staff recommends that this be reduced to 7.5 feet, consistent with what is allowed for fireplaces. In the RL-2 district the minimum required building separation on the same lot is 10 feet(Section III.D.2 j.). This conflicts with Section III.D.2.m. which requires a six foot separation between buildings. Staff recommends that the latter section be changed to 10 feet. This separation requirement is consistent with that in the RL-1 district and the ZSO. The applicant is in agreement with both recommendations. RL 3 District Staff recommends three other changes, in addition to those discussed above,to the RL-3 development standards. The changes are to: 1)site coverage,2) side yard setbacks for the dwelling and garage, and 3) open space. The current site coverage requirement for RL-3 development is 60 percent. All other development in the - HSSP is limited to 50 percent site coverage. This standard is consistent with the requirements of the ZSO. Exceptions are made in the zoning code for 55 percent site coverage for lots which abut parks, water, flood control channels, etc. Staff recommends that the RL-3 standard be changed to 55 percent, provided that a certain amount of common open space is required, as discussed below. If the common open space requirement is not approved, staff recommends that the site coverage requirement be 50 percent. Staff is recommending this change because 60 percent is too high and could create excessive massing and bulk on the RL-3 lots which are intended to be small lots. Coupled with the common open space requirement,the 55 percent site coverage would yield sufficient yard area and minimize massing and bulk. The applicant is in agreement with this change. Side yard setbacks for RL-3 development are currently a minimum of three feet on the interior and a minimum of five feet on the exterior. Staff is recommending a new standard that recognizes that as a lot increases in width so too should its setback from property lines (and other buildings)because a larger lot typically results in a larger unit. The proposed standard would require the equivalent of 20 percent of the lot width be provided in side yard setback areas with a cap on the maximum that is needed. Specifically, staff recommends a minimum of three feet and a maximum requirement of five feet on the interior side yard and a minimum of six feet,maximum of eight feet on the exterior side yard. The minimums are consistent with the current standards in the HSSP, and the maximums are consistent with standard size residential lot setbacks. The 20 percent calculation method is also used in the Downtown Specific Plan. The Legislative Draft,page III-18, (Attachment No. 9)contains a diagram depicting the setback requirement. This calculation for side yard setbacks will give more flexibility for project design and allow for better building articulation. The applicant supports this recommendation. Staff Report- 1/28/97 9 (97SR04) The RL-3 development standards do not currently contain requirements for common open space. (This is because the original RL-3 area includes approximately 17 acres of open space, including a four acre neighborhood park.) In response to the request by PLC to allow RL-3 development in RM and RMH areas, staff believes that such a requirement is necessary. When the HSSP General Development Plan was created it was assumed that the RM and RMH areas would be developed as such and provide the requisite amount of common open space. Combined with the other open space and neighborhood parks envisioned in the HSSP area,this open space would ensure adequate recreation area for residents. Staff believes that the overall balance of open space could be potentially hampered by the applicant's request unless a certain amount of open space is required for the type of development proposed by the applicant. Staff recommends that 150 square feet of common open space be provided for each unit with less than 40 feet of lot frontage and that 100 square feet per unit be provided for lots with 40 feet or more of lot frontage,with no less than 3,000 square feet and a minimum dimension of 50 feet. This recognizes that larger lots will generally have more private yard area for residents to use. PLC has indicated that they are not opposed to an open space requirement but requests relief from the 3,000 square foot minimum open space requirement for developments that are on sites less than three acres in size (Attachment No. 4). Staff s recommendation would yield an approximate minimum of 600 square feet of open space per unit (common and private) for a RL-3 project developed in a RM or RMH area and would also result in more open space on a per unit basis than the RM and RMH projects. The table below illustrates the amount of open space that could be provided with an RL-3 project and compares it with open space for RM and RMH development and with that required in the ZSO for detached single family homes. Private Common Total Development Lot Width Open Space Open Space Open Space Category (ft.) in Rear Yard per Unit per Unit per Unit (sq. ft.) (sq. ft.) Holly Seacliff Specific Plan RL-3 50 750 sq. ft. 100 850 development in (15 ft. x 50 ft.) RM or RMH 40 600 sq. ft. 100 700 Areas (proposed) (15 ft. x 40 ft.) 30 450 sq. ft. 150 600 (15 ft.x 30 ft.) RM or RMH not 75 sq. ft. 350 425 applicable (may be a balcony) (three bedroom unit) Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance RL 60 600 none required 600 (10 ft.x 60 ft.) Huntington Beach Ordinance Code R2 (RM) not 300 sq. ft. 500 800 applicable (three bedroom unit) R3 (RMH) not 300 sq. ft. 300 600 applicable (three bedroom unit) Staff Report- 1/28/97 10 (97SR04) For additional comparison,the table below summarizes two recently approved small lot detached projects and the common open space areas provided in them. Staffs recommendation would require more open space per unit than has recently been required of other projects. However, as stated above, the HSSP assumed that the RM and RMH areas would provide a certain amount of common open space. Without the requirement for common open space,the area will not serve future residents and the community adequately. Total Amounfof Open.Space 'Project', No. off Min.Lot Size Common Open Per Unit `Unifs�. and Width Space(sq. ft.) (sq. ft.) TTM No. 15033 69 3,139 sq. ft. 6,364 92.23 (Greystone) 43 ft. TTM No. 14135 53 4,850 sq. ft. 4,400 83.02 (Oceancrest) 50 ft. School District Mitigation The Huntington Beach Union High School District has submitted a letter stating that they are opposed to the code amendment unless a mitigation agreement is reached between the District and PLC (Attachment No. 11). Staff recommends that the two parties resolve this matter prior to City Council consideration of the proposed code amendment. The applicant is in agreement with this course of action. SUMMARY: The proposed code amendment would modify the development standards of the HSSP and permit detached single family development in areas designated for attached residential units. Many of the changes recommended by staff address setback issues that are currently not addressed in the HSSP or conflict with the Uniform Building Code. The more controversial of the changes pertain to RL-3 development and staff s recommendations for less site coverage,potentially greater side yard setbacks and common open space. The proposed changes are reasonable and related to the applicant's request to allow RL-3 development in the RM and RMH areas. Staff believes that the applicant's request can be supported contingent upon approval of the other changes proposed. Staff recommends the Planning Commission take straw votes on those portions of the proposed code amendment pertaining to RL-1 and RL-2 development and continue action on items pertaining to RL-3 development to the next scheduled Planning Commission meeting of February 11, 1997 based on the applicant's request. Staff Report- 1/28/97 11 (97SR04) ALTERNATIVE ACTIONfS): The Planning Commission may take alternative actions such as: A. Deny Code Amendment No. 96-2/Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 96-3 with findings for denial. B. Approve Code Amendment No. 96-2/Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 96-3 with findings for approval. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Findings for Approval 2. Narrative 3. Summary Matrix of Proposed Changes 4. Letter from PLC, dated January 8, 1997 5. Map of RM, RMH and RL-3 areas 6. Summary of Development Potential in RM and RMH areas of HSSP area 7. Discussion of Z-lot development, excerpt from Urban Land 8. Draft Ordinance 9. Legislative Draft 10. Letter from Lennar Homes, dated January 9, 1997 11. Letter from Huntington Beach Union High School District, dated January 17, 1997 12. Property owners 13. Planning Commission staff report dated January 14, 1997 SH:MBB:kjl Staff Report- 1/28/97 12 (97SR04) ATTACHMENT NO. 1 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL CODE AMENDMENT NO, 96-3 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL- CODE AMENDMENT NO, 96-3: 1. Code Amendment No. 96-3 to allow RL-3 type projects in areas designated for RM and RMH development and to modify the development standards for RL-1, RL-2 and RL-3 projects is consistent with the objectives,policies, general land uses and programs specified in the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The proposed changes encourage innovative design and articulated building elevations and open space areas within subdivisions. The changes also ensure a range of product types. 2. In the case of a general land use provision, the changes are compatible with the uses authorized in, and the standards prescribed for, the zoning district for which it is proposed. The proposed changes would affect the properties designated for residential development in the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan area. The changes modify and clarify the development standards for residential projects. 3. A community need is demonstrated for the change proposed. The Housing Element of the General Plan calls for a mix of housing types to be provided in the community. The proposed change to allow RL-3 development in areas for RM and RMH projects furthers that goal. The modifications to the other development standards are in response to observations of projects and input from residents and developers in order to create standards that reflect current development practice, industry standards and the City's desire for balanced,quality and attractive development. 4. Its adoption will be in conformity with public convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice. The code amendment will provide increase housing opportunities, while ensuring development standards that reflect the goals and objectives of the City. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL- PROJECTS EXEMPT FROM CEQA• The Planning Commission finds that the project will not have any significant effect on the environment and is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 4501, Class 20 which supplements the CEQA because minor amendments to zoning ordinances are exempt from further environmental review. Attachment- 1/14/97 (97SR04-13) Pic NARRATIVE Tentative Tract Map No. 15355 Conditional Use Permit No. Coastal Development Permit No. Specific Plan Text Amendment No. Local Coastal Plan Amendment No. September 6, 1996 PLC Land Company is requesting approval of the above entitlements for the Breakers residential project, located on 15.5 acres bounded by Garfield Avenue on the north, Seapoint Street on the west, Summit Drive on the south and proposed Peninsula Lane (Edwards Street) on the east. The project is located within Planning Unit III-1 of the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan and is also covered by Development Agreement No. 90-1. A total of 73 detached single family homes are proposed within a private, gated neighborhood, accessed from Summit Drive. The development plan features homes ranging from 2,100 to 2,700 square feet plotted on "Z" lots, in which sideyard lot lines are offset near the center of the lot to allow for larger usable yard areas on both sides of the home. Three floor plans are proposed on lots ranging from 4,120 to 8,270 square feet(average of 5,460 sq. ft.). PLC is requesting Tentative Tract Map approval for subdivision of the parcel into 73 residential plus 22 open space, and private street lots. All landscaping and interior streets will be privately owned and maintained by a homeowner's association. All proposed retaining walls are depicted on the tentative tract map. PLC is requesting Conditional Use Permit approval of the floor plans and elevations as depicted on the enclosed conceptual plans. Planning Unit III-1 is designated RM, Residential Medium Density, with an approved allocation of 285 units and a maximum permitted density of 15 units per gross acre. The proposed 73 unit subdivision is 4.7 units per gross acre. The project is designed to conform with the RL-3 development standards of the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan. A Specific Plan text amendment has been requested to permit the construction of detached single family homes in the RM and RMH districts of the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan, in accordance with the standards of the RL-3 district. Copies of pages with the suggested language changes are attached. , 4. Medium Density Residential(RM) a. Purpose The Medium Density Residential district is intended to provide for single family attached and detached,condominiums,townhomes and multi-family residential developments at medium densities. b. Permitted Uses 1) Single-family attached condominiums,townhouses,stacked flats and multi- family dwelling units(including apartments),and customary accessory uses and structures permanently located on a parcel,subject to approval of a conditional use permit and a tentative parcel map or tentative tract map. 2) Single-family detached dwelling units (including zero lot line, "Z" lot and patio homes) and their associated accessory buildings are permitted in accordance with the development standards contained in the RL-3 District on pages III-15 through III-18, subject to approval of a conditional use permit and tentative tract map. c. Maximum Density/Intensity The maximum density shall not exceed fifteen(15)units/gross acre. d. Maximum Building Height Maximum building height shall be: Dwellings: Forty(40)feet and a maximum of three(3)stories. Accessory Buildings: Thirty-five(35)feet. Vertical identification elements for non-habitable common area structures may be twenty-five(25)feet higher than the maximum building height. e. Maximum Site Coverage • Maximum site coverage shall be fifty(50)percent. The maximum site coverage shall be fifty-five(55)percent for all lots abutting a park, recreation area or public utility right-of-way which is a minimum of 100- feet in clear width. III-18 i. Open Space A minimum of 75 square feet per dwelling unit shall be provided in private open space. In addition,the following minimum common open space per dwelling unit shall be provided: 250 square feet(1 bedroom unit); 300 square feet(2 bedroom unit);350 square feet(3 bedroom unit). j. Parkin Parking shall comply with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. k. Miscellaneous Requirements 1) Building Offset: Structures having dwellings attached side-by-side shall be composed of not more that six(6)dwelling units unless such structures provide an offset on the front of the building a minimum of two(2)feet for every two dwelling units in the structure. 2) Landscauing: All setback areas visible from an adjacent public street and all common open space areas shall be landscaped and permanently maintained in an attractive manner with permanent automatic irrigation facilities provided. Trees shall be provided at a rate of one(1)36-inch box tree per sixty(60)feet of street frontage or fraction thereof. 3) A transportation corridor in Planning Area II shall be set aside and maintained in accordance with Development Agreement 90-1 and as illustrated in Exhibit 19. Habitable floor area shall be set back a minimum of ten(10)feet from the southerly five hundred(500)feet on both sides of the corridor. The corridor shall also be landscaped to the extent legal access is available to the developer. 5. Medium-High Density Residential(RNgn a. Purpose The Medium-High Density Residential district is intended to provide for single family attached and detached,condominiums,townhomes and multi- family residential developments at medium-high densities. b. Permitted Uses 1) Single-family attached condominiums,townhouses, stacked flats and multi-family dwelling units(including apartments),and customary accessory uses and structures. III-20 2) Plan Review: Conditional Use Permit. 3) Single-family detached dwelling units (including zero lot line, "Z" lot and patio homes) and their associated accessory buildings are permitted in accordance with the development standards contained in the RL-3 District on pages III-15 through III-18, subject to approval of a conditional use permit and tentative tract map. c. Maximum Density/Intensity The maximum density shall not exceed twenty-five(25)units/gross acres. d. Maximum Building Height Maximum building height shall be: Dwellings: Forty-five(45)feet and three(3)stories. Accessory Buildings: Thirty-five(35)feet. Vertical identification elements for non-habitable common area structures may be twenty-five(25)feet higher than the maximum building height. e. Maximum Site Coverase Maximum site coverage shall be fifty(50)percent. The maximum site coverage shall be fifty-five(55)percent for all lots abutting a park, recreation area or public utility right-of-way which is a minimum of 100- feet in clear width. f. Setback(Front Yard) The minimum setback from the front property lines for all structures,except stairways,exceeding forty-two(42)inches in height shall be as follows: Dwellings: fifteen(15)feet Front entry garages or carports: Twenty(20)foot minimum,or five (5)foot minimum without driveway parking. Side entry garages: Ten(10)feet. Eaves,fireplaces,open/unroofed building stairways and balconies: Five(5)feet. Accessory buildings: Ten(10)feet. III-21 Pic January 8, 1997 JAN 61997 DEPAATMEN, ur Ms. Melanie Fallon, Director COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENI City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Subject: Code Amendment No. 96-3, Holly Seacliff Specific Plan Dear Melanie: I have reviewed the December 12, 1996 Legislative Draft of the above-referenced Code Amendment, and have a number of comments. I would like to preface these comments with the following points: 1. On September 6, 1996, PLC filed an application for a code amendment, the sole purpose of which was to add detached single family homes as a permitted use within the RM and RMH districts of the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan, subject to compliance with the existing adopted RL-3 development standards. 2. This application was filed concurrently with applications for Tentative Tract Map No. 15355, Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit for a 73-unit development(the Breakers),which was designed to conform with the existing adopted RL-3 development standards of the Specific Plan. 3. The majority of the changes to development standards presented in the Legislative Draft of the Code Amendment are being proposed by staff. These should be clearly identified as such when the item is presented to the Planning Commission. 4. The majority of the changes proposed by staff are more restrictive than the existing adopted standards, and if adopted,may require the redesign of the Breakers development as submitted. In order to clarify points of agreement and disagreement with staffs recommendations,please consider the following comments, organized by section and page of the Legislative Draft: Definitions, page III-2: PLC agrees with the definition of a Z-lot. RL-1 Development Standards, pages III-I I & 12- PLC agrees to staff-recommended changes. PLC Land Company 23 Corporate Plaza,Suite= irg.rn.9iri rVXPnUnc ---_---- Newport Beach,Califomia 92660 714.729. 1214 Facsimile Pic January 8, 1997 Ms.Melanie Fallon Page Two RL-2 Development Standards,pages III-13-15: PLC agrees to staff-recommended changes. RL-3 Development Standards, pages III-17-19: b. Permitted Uses PLC agrees to staff-recommended changes. f. Site Coverage PLC agrees to staff-recommended change. g. Setback(Front Yard) PLC agrees to staff-recommended changes. h. Setback(Side Yards) We believe this is acceptable for conventional lot 1)& 2) subdivisions, but may be problematic when utilizing a Z-lot configuration. We would like the opportunity to evaluate our site plan for proposed TTM 15355 to see if this method of calculating side yards is acceptable. 3)Exception for Zero Lot Line PLC agrees to staff-recommended change. i. Setback(Rear Yard) PLC agrees to staff-recommended change. k. Open Space PLC agrees to staff-recommended change, however, some relief from the 3,000 square foot minimum may be appropriate for small developments on parcels less than three acres in size. RM Development Standards, page III-20: PLC agrees to staff-recommended changes. RMH Development Standards, page III-23: PLC agrees to staff-recommended changes. I believe we are in agreement with staff on all but one issue,and appreciate your continued assistance and cooperation in reaching a mutually-acceptable solution to this issue. Very Truly Yours, William D. Holman Forward Planning& Government Relations cc: Howard Zelefsky Scott Hess Mary Beth Broeren dz 01 95-SO-11 En •antes are invisible. In many experimentin with other strat- placed next to the:garage:. I'rop- tcr lot-line devclopments, egies for densit that also offer er landscaping of this yard can fran doors arc located down more appealing s eetscapes, distract attention front the ga- the n. raw side yard in a wall more welcoming en ie.s, more in- rage Boars facing the street and lx rpet icular to the street,and tenor spaciousness a light,and- thus help create a more pleasant thus ca of he easily seen from more private and usab outdoor strectsc:ape. Only in '!.-lot devel- the strce . space. opments can the front dour be •'the long indowless side wall at located at the end of the entry the proper y line poses interior e yard,clearly visible from the design pro ems. Almost invari- Lot Approach street and in balance with the III ly the fro t door opens into a Perhaps the most promising ap- garage portion of the facade. dark interior -pace. it is difficult proach is the '!.-tot, where the Also, '!.-lot designers can :tr- to p into rovide vis s io other House is laid out on the diagonal range the entrance yards on al- rooms and the arc1, to provide between its front and back yards, ternating sides or the houses, any visual dram . Ro Oms lo- forming with these two yards a Z. thereby varying the strcetscattW. catcd along the indowless wall This concept comfortably permits • Yard space is more usable.-fhe lack direct outcic light, unless seven to eight units per acre. Al- Mot house's side yard is on the brought in by exp nsive and though a typical zem-lot-line de- side of the house opposite the problem-prone atrt tms, velopmerit can fit slightly more entry. In most proiccts this yard • A ccro-lot-line hou3•'s long, units per acre,the Z-lot develop- "borrows"space from the adj:t- narrow, bowling alle or L- ment makes up for loss of density cent lot through in easement .shaped yard general is limited with improvements in neighbor- and thus becomes wider and in usability and acsthe 'c appeal. hood aesthetics and house design more usable than the conven- Tlu usability and appe of that benefit the developer in tional Ion and narrow V.I.yards is further reduced if the terms of higher achievable sales house's sick yard. house on the next lot lin is two prices. • The floor plan, unconstrained stories,casting deep shad ws Mot development allows much by a long windowless wall can be and presenting an inumid- ing more desiggn flexibility than does much more flexible and fut►c- expanse of blank wall. ZLL development: tional in layout.The front d(x)r The long blank side wall of e a It is easier to dress up and vary entrance offets long diagonal traditional zero-lot-line concep the streetscape and emphasize views through the rooms and limits design flexibility. Unhapl the entrances. Both ZLL and Z- out to the landscaped yard.The with this tradeoff for density,ar- lot developments allow entrance living room,dining roots,and chitects and developers have beet yards at least 10 feet wide to be master suite can feature private 1 IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONSDEVELOPING SMALL-LOTrHOUSING •The site must lit tilt-concept. Narrow or%lots do not • Drainage requirements Hurst Im carefully studied.Swales war k well on ktilkidc site+with slahcs of more than 3 or 4 can inhihit the usability of narrow side yat th. lrrrccnt.CAnivertely,the concept must lit the site; forced :The Major roosts must Ix:oriented toward outdoor patio solutlans arc seldomsticcessful. areas to give each unit the appearanceof spae�ausrtess. •The small-lot concept is incompatible with scattered-lut slreetscape should be varied,with side and front ch- ar multiple-builder land sales piograms. trances wherever possible. Any fences or walls visible •Und planning and plotting Individual lots must he done from the street must be designed to enhance the street. concurrently and integrated with unit floor plan design. scapc.Developers must landscape fully the front yards Floor plans must be sppecifically designed for the chascn and strcetscapcs. lot configuration:scklom can existing single-family or ♦Any unusual approach may work only in selected target townhouse plans he modified to maximum advantage for markets. For example,the diagonal!-lot concept or Ion- a W.concept. cepts involving use easements MAY aplreal only to solthis- •Careful planning among the architeetlplanncr,civil engi. ticated buyers. nccr,and landscape architect is essential. •The complicated use casements needed for some lot ron. •Sight lines into neighboring houses should Inc avoided. figurations m4y be It gaily infeasible in many,jurisdic- Second-floor window orientatiotis should not compro- lions. tr arise yard privacy. a- nI - A I ^t At Westpark Promenade,in Irvine,California,the Mot plait allows each house to have a genernus entrance courtyard.Gated archways leading into Ihrse courlyardv play down the houses'double garage doors. "ltanelcp"M1,,t,onslttpof IIOubeI,,o„Arincd with _ mcaningfut jogs In Moor plain,allows ptimary Use easement line ottcntatiun to usable yards, l>nstutly line An PP� fs• � p. 'maxx � ~ I}i•��'t,'�'•• tfw: ^�r " + "wi.>'„'>• vt tA' � �"�,."i a 'i': L •r * , 7t'� rf "7."jogs in lot bncs(or - eascments)give eath house 7, to-robot usable.trip of adjacent hit. tfaragc a shi({r,1 live Icct, a� Adding an rxtra five feat to ha{sea finis elevation. x Westpark Promenade's slot plan creates more usable yard space and privacy than does a typical ZLL development. el e%• Ili.d! lftlll.►lIY1lIt)/ relit tuuy RN 17 i9Z 01 96-50-11 patios that link indoor and out- Asked by the,J.M. l'cters Corn- of the house and a portion of its door space. Windows can be pany to plan at least 170 houses side wall are both visible from Lite placed on all sides of the house, on a 22.5-acre site---Promenade— street, snaking the residence seem providing all roams with natural in its Westpark development iri 1r- larger and wider. Moreover, the light and views. vine. Richardson Nagy Martin driveway can approarh the side:of 'Che net result is a house that cattle up with a Mot plan that the house, m.tking it lxinible to feels larger than it is and seems achieved a density of 7.75 units put the garage deior on the side. more like a traditional detached per acre.The Z-lot plan is well With flexibility of garage:door house than dues a ZLL house. suited to Protncnade's 42-by 90- placement, architects ran avoid The feeling ol'apaciousness and fcxit lots, because it enables each the ittonotnnous repo-Litiott of detachedness is enhanced because house to have a generous en- driveways and garage doors typ- views are oriented toward art am- trance courtyard, a pleasing view ieal of zero-lot-lime pro�cds, and pie yard. The following projects from the entrance through the liv- thus give variety and visual inter- excinplify Z.-lot development: ing roost► and dining area into the est to the streetscape. Casa del Cielo. Casa del Cielo, rear yard, plenty of light,and con- The angled L-lot has a particu- a 150-unit project(with 5.5 unit,-. siderable privacy in the outdoor lair problem with Lite image it pre- per acre)completed in 1985 in areas. Buyen were particularly scats to passersby nit the street. If Scottsdale, Ariiocta, was built by taken by Promeniule's street used on very narrow lots,say 35 Meister Development Group of layout, which is curving rather to 40 feet wide, the houses give Phoenix and desigite:d by Richard- than rectangular, and by the the impression of being attached .,on Nagy tviartin. It was Scotts- gated archways leading into the; rather than detached, because the dale's first'!.-lot project, and it entry courts, which diminish the small side yards are not highly vis- sold well. Buyers appreciated its prominence of the double garage iblc when sce;n from art angle. advantages over competing zero- doors and add a touch or drama lot line projects, particularly its to each unit's entrance.. ne Wide-Shallow Variation pleasant streetscape, enticing ar- chitecturc inspired by the Arizona The Angled Z-Lot Variation In a wide-shallow development desert, light and airy interiors, lot widths are not reduced, but, to and:unple outdoor space. A recent refinement in site keep the unit laurel costs aff'ord- Westpark Promenade.The he Z- planning, rather than unit design, able, the.depth of Lite lots is di- lot concept is also popular in Or- the angled%-tat plan--which Casa rninished, By making lots'a tradi- ange County, California, where del Cielo also exemplifies--lays tional width, typically 55 to 70 residential land in middle-class out the lot and house at an angle feet, but only 55 to 70 feet deer,a rommunilics like Irvine costs to the street rather than perpen- developer can lit about seven $400,000 to$500.000 an acre, dicular to it. Asa result,the front houses per acre. A wide-shallow ! COMMON PITFALLS IN DEVELOPING SMALL-LOTRHOUSING • balling to vonduet vatly investigation or building and • Making lot%tear nai sow or too shallow. miring(tales, p.0 tic ul.0 ly with respect to fire ratings, • bailing to consider tonf ridge!citation anti(filet lion in Overhangs. projectium into side yards,fireplaces,sky- relation to side yards and.ttriums whrn designing rwii:s. lights,and so forth, 1t should lx-noted that in most so- • Including atrimus,which arc expensive,<:ausc wairr called ceru-lot-line projects being built today.structures problems,and are unattractive when,idiacent to high .are not literally being placed on the lot lines.They are roofs. living located conventionally On the lots and the"eero" + Designing monotonous streetscalM of ganige doors that eflcct is cre.ttcd through the granting of tise easements make Lite project's units appear attached rat cr than on the side yards to the adjacent property owners.This detached. approach avoids many huilding or zoning code restric- • Providing Imsementa: rinsing floor levels creates un- tions on the ncarncss to the property line of roof over- welcome views into neighboring hotown and inhibits use hangs,glass, firewalls,and so forth. of narrow side yarrk. • Placing two-story houses on noall lots,thus blocking sun- •Failing to consider walls,easements,overhanging gut- light and litniting privacy. tcrs.and so forth when designing lot drainage. • Designing floor plans that are out of proportion to lot • Not providing sufficient parking areas in narrow-lot shape,width,iuid depth sittiply to maximize usable out- projects without full driveway aprons. dour spaces. tn:a v ii o n/Vaw - -- _ - - - ednaf January 08, 1997 v D PLANNING COMMISSION Planning Department City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 �n�fhur!'i Dear Commissioner: Lennar Homes respectfully requests your review of Low Density Residential (RL-2) Item i of the Specific Plan Amendment for the Holly Seacliff Project, scheduled for Public Hearing, January 14, 1997. We propose that the Planning Commission allows ROOFED balconies versus unroofed balconies stated in the Legislative Draft. Lennar Homes has designed an upperscaled home with many distinctive architectural features. We have tied in the roof lines of our balcony feature to carry through with the elevations. Enclosed are the renderings for your review. The roof transition allows for continuation of siding elements, roof pitches, facia treatment and stucco details. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call (714) 488-8850. Sincerely, LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC. John Jessup Division President Trainee JJ/ss 27432 Calle Arroyo, San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 - (714) 488-gacu,. .� wi�ww�ww�www' winwii�s► � riwwwwwE= Comw Iww��. �wwwww�wtwnwwwwwNr� �w�i rww► �w I�nwwlwwr��wwrr � �ww�w � w1�IMlwlw���,rwl 1 r - �Iwwl�www�'Iwwwi %0 � f5-MMORIMM IR lba .� / _F���Q •��� oV41.11/� ff �1 if ' 1 ii i f� �'' ni �, ,�� .ice-. .�;_.�� -.�..��._ , � /-- A AA A/A �IIA •► r /� AAA r A AAA, ������������/���/f � �IIIIIIIIIIIIII �llllllllllll ICI � . � � ■• �I I I �, � : ��� SANTABARBARA PLAN I I Q I I � 1 1 SANTA BARBARA' PLAN 2 I IT I 2111 11! ! 1 I u • ill ' L i . i ili� � ! II I I I I ' CALIFORNIA COSTAL PLAN-2 I I � i � I II FRENCH COUNTRY PLAN 2 tl I i I FRENCH COUNTRY PLAN 3 cur/_/i !/��S !� ' ���G�uwt�l■�_��i._�•� /����/I/n%I/�n7///.%/.%/!Ii/.%II G►o• udiiiiii ii iiiiii� , (� ii���isr ..we r �� .�"�'//'///.i%✓//O'�!G%/'(L//.�(rrl/�E�fiiiiiit�Div_ ��j/%/r,�,/J/.11ijiiiiiiiiJ.�' �"-j�� � G��i��, lul■wwlr,■�1■w�� pop, �� i llll■ /, Ywlrw■YIY�I�1wY 1 /Yi�i� /,� I, ! MEnummumommmmsm 1 �1Mr.ww1111 11001011001■1111 &Ww � �1■�.�� � ' `��5 %IIIIII,�I��1 i�wl/,/,� ��I�I�Irrii�li111r�WYYllli��//�Y�.���!,+�wlii ii D!■� ME ol / s �/ ■� r��/ ���������' iii_iJJiiiiliiiJlii531�iiiiiii���% / ��% Lim/.' I � I :�i I-II■ L i m/"gm, I iiZIA • • 1 rt Q M . 'l�t�'F�����-�i� /�•- -=j/=L.:�j;_-��,..!?_ �. //1�i�r�i`'i�i�i�li�(I��i /I� PEA I1iii I `�iiilili� , . ,iris. ��..:, :,��.-- !��iiii� r♦ �� �%\�I I � \� / ��I% � Ale 'a� ///✓ %/�i••�11UU1U1111u111�11WW11111Ugltlll I IIIIWill I i I IIIII IIIOIIIIiC,. , .;. y, ::;0 i 0 -.... ■ iirii.�� ■_✓���i/.�j� i% �,�� -J/ //•��/i////ice l• ■■ ■ og �O///GI■■�t//////ate/���'��II .�.�..i�.: — �7� 00 � �k.�iw�r w��•a tfiiljt�•.••��•tit•��1��•. • /� %%j% C� 11011 AA No ////� % mill Poll PER , � ������s��A�r�iii�irr.�■� � ���■■�� ,, IIIIIIAU1�111111111W11111111�11111_IIII�II_ �i� I / i �%�.. / ��rMrrr� - I a-� r��rurr�r:rrrr _, r�� (C) 1994 TRW REDI Property Data No. NewPg Owner Name Address Date APN Number Use 1 857-E3 SIGNAL COMPAN 07/74 110-015-55 430 2 857-H4 S & C OIL CO 18742 GOLDEN W 09/77 111-120-01 100 3 857-H5 THOMAS LINDA 12/70 111-120-06 344 4 857-H5 THOMAS LINDA 05/72 111-120-07 344 5 857-H5 THOMAS LINDA 11/7S 111-120-08 344 6 857-H4. THOMAS JOHN A 18906 GOLDEN W 03/85 111-120-09 344 7 857-H5 LINGLE HAROLD 04/95 111-120-11 344 8 857-H5 LINGLE HAROLD 04/95 111-120-12 344 9 857-H5 THOMAS JOHN A 04/76 111-120-13 344 10 857-HS THOMAS JOHN A 07/76 111-120-14 344 11 857-H5 THOMAS JOHN A 07/76 111-120-15 344 12 857-H5 THOMAS JOHN O1/95 111-120-16 344 13 857-HS THOMAS JOHN A 06/76 111-120-17 344 14 857-H4 THOMAS JOHN A 7132 GARFIELD OS/83 111-120-18 344 15 857-H5 THOMAS JOHN A 06/93 111-120-19 344 16 857-H4 THOMAS JOHN A 18971 STEWART 06/93 111-120-20 200 17 857-H5 THOMAS LINDA 06/73 111-120-22 133 18 857-H5 THOMAS LINDA 02/74 111-120-23 440 19 857-H4 THOMAS JOHN A 18851 STEWART 05/64 111-120-24 300 20 857-H5 THOMAS JOHN A 11/75 111-120-25 133 21 857-H4 GOETSCH AUDRE 18801 STEWART 11/90 111-120-26 336 22 857-HS MITCHELL TRAV 10/90 111-120-27 336 23 857-H4 WEIR OIL CO I 18782 GOLDENWE O1/77 111-120-28 336 24 857-H5 MUNIZ JOE 12/88 111-120-29 133 25 857-H5 THOMAS JOHN A 08/80 111-120-30 344 26 857-H5 WEIR OIL CO I 04/87 111-130-01 465 27 857-H5 WEIR OIL CO 05/84 111-130-02 465 28 857-H4 ASHBY RICHARD 7072 GARFIELD O1/87 111-130-05 244 29 857-H5 PETERSEN HELE 12/94 111-130-06 100 30 857-HS LINGLE HAROLD 04/95 111-130-07 465 31 857-H5 LINGLE HAROLD 04/95 111-130-08 100 32 857-H5 WILLIAMS BOBB 09/89 111-130-09 465 33 857-HS MS VICKERS II 05/96 111-130-10 100 34 857-H5 CITY OF HUNTI 07/95 111-130-11 465 35 857-H5 CITY OF HUNTI 07/95 111-130-12 100 36 857-H5 WILLIAMS BOBB 11/91 111-130-14 465 37 857-H5 RENNER WILVIA 05/85 111-130-15 465 38 857-H5 MS VICKERS II 05/96 111-130-16 460 39 857-H5 SHEA VICKERS 08/96 111-130-17 465 40 857-H5 SHEA VICKERS 08/96 111-130-18 100 41 857-H5 SHEA VICKERS 19211 STEWART 08/96 111-130-19 100 42 857-H5 SHEA VICKERS + 08/96 111-130-20 460 43 857-H5 PACIFIC COAST 10/90 111-130-21 465 44 857-H5 PACIFIC COAST 10/90 111-130-22 465 45 857-H5 MS VICKERS II 05/96 111-130-23 100 46 857-H5 WEIR OIL CO I 19061 STEWART O1/77 111-130-24 344 47 857-HS WEIR DONALD A 19061 STEWART 07/90 111-130-25 324 48 857-H5 WEIR OIL CO 02/83 111-130-26 465 49 857-H5 WEIR OIL CO I 09/88 111-130-27 999 50 857-HS CITY OF HUNTI 03/64 111-130-28 999 (C) 1994 TRW REDI Property Data No. NewPg Owner Name Address Date APN Number Use 51 CITY OF HUNTI 11/94 111-140-01 100 52 857-H5 WEIR DONALD A 07/90 111-140-02 465 53 857-H5 THOMAS JOHN A 02/96 111-140-04 100 54 857-H5 THOMAS JOHN A 02/96 111-140-05 465 55 857-H4 THOMAS JOHN A 7111 GARFIELD 02/96 111-140-06 344 56 857-H5 LINGLE HAROLD 04/95 111-140-07 465 57 857-H5 THOMAS JOHN A 02/96 111-140-08 226 58 857-H5 LOMA LINDA UN 06/64 111-140-09 100 59 857-H5 CITY OF HUNTI 03/64 111-140-10 800 60 857-H5 THOMAS JOHN A 19172 STEWART 02/96 111-140-14 440 61 857-H5 ALBERT WILMA 19192 STEWART 05/79 111-140-15 420 62 857-H5 DABNEY WALTER O1/87 111-140-16 465 63 857-H5 JONES DAGMAR 10/91 111-140-18 465 64 857-H5 GUSTAFSON JOH 19161 CRYSTAL 07/91 111-140-19 226 65 857-HS THOMAS JOHN A 02/96 111-140-20 465 66 857-H5 THOMAS JOHN A 02/96 111-140-21 100 67 857-H5 THOMAS JOHN A 02/96 111-140-22 100 68 857-H5 THOMAS JOHN A 02/96 111-140-23 465 69 857-J4 NUSSBAUM ELIE 7352 GARFIELD 10/90 111-150-01 151 70 857-J4 NGUYEN KIMBER 7342 GARFIELD 07/94 111-150-02 151 71 857-J4 CHIN CHAUK PA 7332 GARFIELD 04/84 111-150-03 151 72 857-J4 DEASON JAMES 7322 GARFIELD 03/84 111-150-04 151 73 857-J4 SILVERMAN CLI 7312 GARFIELD 07/92 111-150-05 151 74 857-J4 CRUZAT CHARLE 7302 GARFIELD 03/86 111-150-06 151 75 857-H5 CITY OF HUNTI 04/95 111-150-13 465 76 857-H5 GOWDY ROBERT 09/95 111-150-15 344 77 857-H5 GOWDY ROBERT 19082 CRYSTAL 09/95 111-150-16 344 78 858-H5 SCOTT ORA BET 2978 COUNTRY C 05/96 111-150-17 133 79 857-H5 PLC OS/96 111-150-18 100 80 857-H5 ROBRECHT ARLI 19142 CRYSTAL 06/88 111-150-19 465 81 857-H5 ROBRECHT ARLI 19156 CRYSTAL 06/88 111-150-20 100 82 857-HS PLC 05/96 111-150-21 465 83 857-H5 PLC 06/91 111-150-22 465 84 857-H5 PLC 06/91 111-150-23 465 85 857-HS ELLIOTT WILLI 10/75 111-150-24 163 86 857-H5 RANSFORD JANE 11/89 111-150-25 452 87 857-H5 PLC 05/96 111-150-26 465 88 857-H5 PLC 05/96 111-150-27 452 89 857-H5 PLC 05/96 111-150-28 452 90 857-H5 PLC 05/96 111-150-29 452 91 857-H5 SANTIAGO JACK 111/91 111-150-30 452 92 857-H5 KELLER MELVIN 106/91 111-150-31 452 93 857-H5 KELLER MELVIN M6/91 111-150-32 452 94 857-H5 PACIFIC COAST 19061 CRYSTAL i06/91 111-150-33 358 95 857-HS KELLER MELVIN t01/76 111-150-34 452 96 857-H5 BROWN JAMES M �00/88 111-150-36 465 97 857-H5 KELLER MELVIN 111-150-37 465 98 857-H5 SFREDDO R L 19248 23 STREE 07/94 111-150-38 465 99 857-H5 WEIR OIL CO I 19248 23 STREE O1/77 111-150-39 106 100 857-H5 PLC 05/96 111-150-40 452 (C) 1994 TRW REDI Property Data NewPg Owner Name Address Date APN Number Use 1 857-H5 MACLEOD DAVID 10/96 111-150-44 465 2 857-J5 KANTOR GARY 19051 HOLLY ST 12/85 111-150-45 106 3 857-J5 KANTOR GARY 19071 HOLLY ST 11/85 111-150-46 106 4 857-H4 MS VICKERS II 7262 GARFIELD 05/96 111-150-47 725 5 857-J4 WICK EDWARD 7292 GARFIELD 05/93 111-150-48 151 6 857-H5 MS VICKERS II 05/96 159-281-01 420 ,7 857-H5 MS VICKERS II 05/96 159-281-02 452 )8 857-J4 HASSETT GLORI 19002 HOLLY ST 05/86 159-281-03 226 )9 857-H5 CITY OF HUNTI 03/64 159-281-04 452 _0 857-H5 MS VICKERS II 05/96 159-281-05 452 :1 857-H5 MOLA DEVELOPM 07/79 159-282-05 460 L2 857-H5 MOLA DEVELOPM 07/79 159-282-06 100 L3 857-H5 MOLA DEVELOPM 07/79 159-282-07 465 14 BROWN WILLIAM 04/94 159-282-08 15 857-J5 SCOTT WILLIAM 19212 HOLLY ST 06/72 159-282-11 460 16 857-H5 HUNTINGTON BE 03/80 159-282-12 344 17 857-H5 PROJECT 937-4 00/90 159-282-13 18 857-H5 HUNTINGTON BE 12/81 159-282-14 435 19 00/93 159-282-16 20 ESPITIA ALBER 18761 HUNTINGT 159-471-13 200 21 OLSON RICHARD 18811 HUNTINGT 04/89 159-471-14 200 .22 ESPITIA ALBER 18791 HUNTINGT 08/67 159-471-15 420 .23 BRUNO JOE 05/81 159-471-16 420 _24 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 06/91 937-40-207 112 _25 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 11/93 937-40-208 112 L26 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 08/95 937-40-209 112 _27 857-J4 HUFKER HELEN 18900 DELAWARE 04/94 937-40-210 112 L28 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 06/91 937-40-211 112 L29 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 06/91 937-40-212 112 130 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 06/91 937-40-213 112 131 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 12/93 937-40-214 112 132 857-J4 DINNEN JOSEPH 18900 DELAWARE 07/95 937-40-215 112 133 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 11/92 937-40-216 112 134 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 06/91 937-40-217 112 135 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 06/91 937-40-218 112 136 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 10/93 937-40-219 112 137 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 06/91 937-40-220 112 138 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 06/91 937-40-221 112 139 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 05/93 937-40-222 112 140 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 06/91 937-40-223 112 141 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE .10/95 937-40-224 112 ' 142 857-J4 WIGLE JACQUEL 18900 DELAWARE 04/94 937-40-225 112 143 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 06/91 937-40-226 112 144 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 06/91 937-40-227 112 145 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 07/92 937-40-228 112 1146 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 06/91 937-40-229 112 j147 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 06/91 937-40-230 112 148 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 04/96 937-40-231 112 149 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 06/91 937-40-232 112 1150 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 12/95 937-40-233 112 (C) 1994 TRW REDI Property Data No. NewPg Owner Name Address Date APN Number Use 151 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 05/95 937-40-234 112 152 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 06/91 937-40-235 112 153 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 06/91 937-40-236 112 154 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 06/91 937-40-237 112 155 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 07/94 937-40-238 112 156 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 02/92 937-40-239 112 157 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 07/93 937-40-240 112 158 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 02/93 937-40-241 112 159 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 03/95 937-40-242 112 160 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 08/95 937-40-243 112 161 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 06/91 937-40-244 112 162 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 06/91 937-40-245 112 163 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 02/95 937-40-246 112 164 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 06/91 937-40-247 112 165 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 09/92 937-40-248 112 166 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 06/91 937-40-249 112 167 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 06/91 937-40-250 112 168 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 06/91 937-40-251 112 169 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE O1/92 937-40-252 112 170 857-J4 JOHNSON LACEN 18900 DELAWARE 12/92 937-40-253 112 171 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 05/92 937-40-254 112 172 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 10/94 937-40-255 112 173 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 06/94 937-40-256 112 174 857-J4 COLCLASER FLO 18900 DELAWARE 10/95 937-40-257 112 175 857-J4 JETTIE BERNAR 18900 DELAWARE 02/92 937-40-258 112 176 857-J4 BUSHONG TRUST 18900 DELAWARE 11/96 937-40-259 112 177 857-J4 MULVANIA RICH 18800 DELAWARE 06/84 937-40-265 112 178 857-J4 ZINNGRABE ROB 18800 DELAWARE O1/95 937-40-266 112 179 857-J4 ZINNGRABE ROB 18800 DELAWARE 12/95 937-40-267 112 180 857-J4 ZINNGRABE ROB 18800 DELAWARE 12/95 937-40-268 112 181 857-J4 DELMA CORP 18800 DELAWARE 12/95 937-40-269 112 182 857-J4 DELMA CORP 18800 DELAWARE 12/95 937-40-270 112 183 857-J4 DELMA CORP 18800 DELAWARE 12/95 937-40-271 112 184 857-J4 ZINNGRABE ROB 18800 DELAWARE 11/95 937-40-273 112 185 857-J4 ZINNGRABE ROB 18800 DELAWARE 12/95 937-40-274 112 186 857-J5 FELGER SHAREL 19142 HOLLY ST 02/94 937-40-277 112 187 857-J5 PERKS RONALD 19142 HOLLY ST 10/93 937-40-278 112 188 857-J5 DUNWORTH ELLE 19142 HOLLY ST 08/93 937-40-279 112 189 857-J5 KING JOHN C 19142 HOLLY ST 03/96 937-40-280 112 190 857-J5 MARTIN CONNIE 19152 HOLLY ST 08/96 937-40-281 112 191 857-J5 PURCELL JOHN 19152 HOLLY ST O1/94 937-40-282 112 192 857-J5 ROONEY PATRIC 19152 HOLLY ST 10/94 937-40-283 112 193 857-J5 BRADFORD CRAI 19152 HOLLY ST . 08/93 937-40-284 112 194 857-J5 DI CAMBIO MIC 19162 HOLLY ST 08/93 937-40-285 112 195 857-J5 BARCLAY JAMES 19162 HOLLY ST 04/94 937-40-286 112 196 857-J5 FINDLAY MARIL 19162 HOLLY ST 09/94 937-40-287 112 197 857-J5 ANDERSON NORA 19162 HOLLY ST 03/94 937-40-288 112 198 857-J5 SFREDDO ROBER 19172 HOLLY ST 07/94 937-40-289 112 199 857-J5 DELPRATO DAVI 19172-C HOLLY 04/94 937-40-290 112 200 857-J5 KNOT'g PATRICI 19172 HOLLY ST 10/93 937-40-291 112 Shea Homes Lennar Homes of California,Inc. Taylor Woodrow Homes Ltd. Ronald C.Metzler,Vice President Jonathan M. Jaffe;Vice President Tom Redwitz, Senior Dev. Mgr. 655 Brea Canyon Road 23333 Avenida La Caza 24461 Ridge Route Drive Walnut, CA 91788-0487 Coto de Caza, CA 92679 Laguna Hills, CA.92653-1686 Polygon Communities Polygon Communities - Greg Petersen;V.P.Finance &Adm. Steve Shepard 15751 Rockfield Avenue, Suite 120 15751 Rockfield Avenue, Suite 120 Irvine, CA 92718 Irvine, CA 92718 Southridge Companies Ken Kelter 18281 Gothard Street,4201 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Lennar. Homes John Jessup 27432 Calle Arroyo San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 (C) 1994 TRW REDI Property Data No. NewPg Owner Name Address Date APN Number Use 201 857-J5 DINU MITCH 19172 HOLLY ST 12/95 937-40-292 112 202 857-J5 MAURO ANDREA 19182-D HOLLY 06/94 937-40-293 112 203 857-J5 NAKASONE LIAN 19182 HOLLY ST 05/94 937-40-294 112 204 8S7-J5 BROWN WILLIAM 19182 HOLLY ST 04/94 937-40-295 112 205 857-JS KURD-MISTO SA 19182 HOLLY ST 12/93 937-40-296 112 ------------------------------------------------------------ Huntington Bead.Department of Community Development STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director� BY: Mary Beth Broeren, Associate Plann DATE: January 14, 1997 SUBJECT: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 96-2/LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO. 96-3 (Holly Seacliff Specific Plan) LOCATION: The Holly Seacliff Specific Plan area is located south of Ellis Avenue and north of Palm Avenue, west of Main Street and east of the City's western boundary. STATEMENT OF ISSUE: PLC Land Co. requests an amendment to the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan (HSSP) to allow RL-3 development in RM (Residential-Medium Density) and RMH (Residential-Medium High Density) districts and to include Z-lot development in the list of permitted uses in the districts. This would basically allow for small lot, detached single family units in the RIA and RMH areas where they are presently not permitted. As a result of this request, staff recommends modifications to the development standards for residential development in areas designated for RL-1, RL-2 and RL-3 development. The modifications address balconies,bay windows and other architectural features in the rear and front yards, patio covers in the side and rear yards, eaves setbacks in the side yards and three other changes for the RL-3 district pertaining to site coverage, open space and side yard setbacks. These changes are recommended because they relate to small lot development and are integral to the applicant's request. The applicant has requested a continuance to allow time to further analyze staff s recommendations. Staff recommends the Planning Commission continue the request. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: "Continue Code Amendment No. 96-2 and Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 96-3 to January 28, 1997." ATTACHMENT 10 Huntington Beach.Department of Community Development STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Howard Zelefsky, Planning Director BY: Mary Beth Broeren, Associate Plann rr DATE: February 11, 1997 SUBJECT: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 96-2/LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO. 96-3 (CONTINUED FROM THE JANUARY 28, 1997 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING WITH PUBLIC HEARING OPEN) (Holly Seacliff Specific Plan) LOCATION: The Holly Seacliff Specific Plan area is located south of Ellis Avenue and north of Palm Avenue, west of Main Street and east of the City's western boundary. STATEMENT OF ISSUE: PLC Land Co. requests an amendment to the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan (HSSP)to allow RL-3 development in RM (Residential-Medium Density) and RMH (Residential-Medium High Density) districts and to include Z-lot development in the list of permitted uses in the districts. This would basically allow for small lot, detached single family units in the RM and RMH areas where they are presently not permitted. As a result of this request, staff recommends modifications to the development standards for residential development in areas designated for RL-1, RL-2 and RL-3 development. The modifications address balconies, bay windows and other architectural features in the rear and front yards,patio covers in the side and rear yards, eaves setbacks in the side yards and three other changes for the RL-3 district pertaining to site coverage, open space and side yard setbacks. These changes are recommended because they relate to small lot development and are integral to the applicant's request. On January 28, 1997 the Planning Commission took straw votes to approve the changes to the RL-1 and RL-2 development standards and continued the public hearing and action on the RL-3 standards. The continuance was recommended by staff to allow additional time to reach agreement with the applicant on proposed changes to open space and side yard setbacks. Staff has met with the applicant and has reached agreement on all aspects of the proposed code amendment, including the side yard setbacks and a proposed change to common open space for smaller projects. Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve Code Amendment No. 96-2 as proposed by staff. RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: "Approve Code Amendment No. 96-2 and Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 96-3 with findings for approval and forward to the City Council." ANALYSIS: Applicant Issues Staff requested that the Planning Commission continue action on the RL-3 standards to allow additional time for staff and the applicant to reach agreement on proposed changes to open space and side yard setbacks. The applicant requested some relief from the common open space proposal for projects on parcels less than three acres in size and wanted to further review how the proposed side yard setback calculation would affect one of their projects. The applicant has completed the review of the side yard setback proposal and is in agreement with staff s recommendation. Staff has analyzed the request regarding common open space and proposes a modification to the standards for projects with less than 20 units. Staff recommends that projects with less than 20 units provide a minimum of 600 square feet of open space per unit in either private or common open space. If some of the open space is provided as common, a minimum dimension of 10 feet would be required. This dimension is sensitive to the smaller size of the projects and the option of common or private open space provides flexibility to these smaller size projects. Attachment No. 2 provides the revised page to the Legislative Draft of the HSSP. Planning Commission Issues At the January 28, 1997 Planning Commission, straw votes were taken to approve the changes to the RL-1 and RL-2 development standards. Action was continued on the RL-3 standards which allow for small lot, detached single family housing, however, two Planning Commissioners raised issues regarding the RL-3 standards. Commissioners Kerins and Biddle expressed disagreement with the existing RL-3 standards that allow a 15 foot rear yard setback for the dwelling and an 18 foot front yard setback for the garage. Additionally, Commissioner Kerins stated that the 50 foot minimum common open space dimension recommended by staff was too small; Commissioner Biddle indicated that he thought sufficient common open space should be required. In response to the setback concerns, staff does not recommend that the existing RL-3 standards for rear yards and garages be changed based on several considerations. The Holly Seacliff Specific Plan (HSSP) calls for a diversity of housing types. As originally approved, this includes the five residential districts tabulated below. In addition there is a Mixed Development District which allows for attached residential development(RM/RMH). Residential District Lot size/density Front Garage Setback/ Rear Setback RL-1 Min. 7,000 sq. ft. 20 ft./ 20 ft. RL-2 Min. 5,000 sq. ft. (50 %); Min 6,000 sq. ft. (50 %) 20 ft./ 20 ft. RL-3 Min. 3,300 sq. ft. 18 ft./ 15 ft RM 15 units/acre 5 ft. or 20 ft./5 ft. RMH 25 units/acre 5 ft. or 20 ft./5 ft. Staff Report-2/11/97 2 (97SR04C2) The HSSP area is generally surrounded by detached single family and condominium/townhome development. There are the existing Huntington Seacliff homes which have standard lot sizes of approximately 6,000 square feet, the Ellis Goldenwest Specific Plan (EGSP) area which requires a minimum 8,000 square feet per lot and the recently approved Oceancrest project with 5,000 square foot lots. Attached projects include the Surfcrest townhouses and Seacliff on the Greens. Thus, most of the development that is adjacent to the HSSP area is either attached or regular/large lot detached development. The detached projects have rear yard requirements from 10 to 25 feet (25 feet is required of the 8,000 sq. ft. lots in EGSP, and 10 feet is required elsewhere in the city). Garage setbacks are 20 feet. Staff believes that if the RL-3 setbacks are increased there will be a disincentive to construct the RL-3 product. The size of home that could be built would be reduced sufficiently that it may not be marketable to buyers when the cost of land and recent buyer preferences for larger homes are considered. This would reduce the variety of housing offered in the city and limit home ownership opportunities for certain segments of the population that may not be able to afford the type of product that is being built on the 6,000 and 8,000 square foot lots in the immediate area. The existing setbacks are also commensurate with the small lot size of 3,300 sq. ft. On June 11, 1996 a Study Session presentation was made to the Planning Commission on small lot single family residential development. Three developers discussed the current trend to build small lot projects. They indicated that rear yards of 15 to 20 feet were appropriate and that buyer surveys indicated that the street scene was more important than the size of the rear yard. They also indicated that a full driveway was important but defined it as having 18 feet. These industry"standards" are consistent with the existing RL-3 standards. Finally, the RL-3 setbacks are consistent with or exceed the City's requirements for other areas of the city for comparable or larger size lots. The RL-3 minimum rear yard setback of 15 ft. exceeds the 10 ft. requirement for standard 6,000 sq. ft. lots. It therefore provides better rear to rear separation between units although the amount of RL-3 rear yard area would typically be less because the lots are narrower. It is also important to remember that setbacks work in tandem with site coverage limitations. A home constructed on a standard 6,000 sq. ft. lot may have 10 foot separation from the dwelling to the rear property line but is limited to 50 percent site coverage. For example, if the home were "L" shaped, this will result in large area of usable open space to the side of the home instead of to the rear. This gives a designer more flexibility in locating a unit on a lot but ensures a certain amount of private open space. On the RL-3 lot, the recommended site coverage of 55 percent (staff does not recommend 50 percent because of the common open space recommendation) coupled with the 15 foot rear yard setback area will provide sufficient private open space area as well and significantly more than is provided on the 2,500 sq. ft. lots in the downtown area that have a 7.5 fbot rear yard setback. The garage setback of 18 feet is not typical of the rest of the City but is consistent with the industry "standard" for small lot projects. Moreover, in the small lots of the cty's downtown area(2,500 sq. ft. lots) the garage setback off of the alley is five feet. In response to the open space concerns, staff believes that the recommended 50 foot minimum dimension is adequate, especially when viewed in the context of a minimum 3,000 sq. ft. of total area. The Zoning and Subdivision does not have a minimum requirement - each projects is evaluated individually. While each project in the HSSP area will also be examined on its own merits, the 50 foot minimum provides some guidance for the developer. If a larger minimum dimension is required, the resulting minimum total of common open space may become larger than what should reasonably be required of a smaller project. Staff Report-2/11/97 3 (97SR04C2) ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S): The Planning Commission may take alternative actions such as: A. Deny Code Amendment No. 96-2/Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 96-3 with findings for denial. B. Continue Code Amendment No. 96-2/Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 96-3. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Findings for Approval 2. Revised Page III-19 of Legislative Draft of Holly Seacliff Specific Plan 3. Planning Commission Staff Report dated January 28, 1997 SH:MBB:kjl Staff Report-2/11/97 4 (97SR04C2) ATTACHMENT NO. 1 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL CODE AMENDMENT NO. 96-3 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CODE AMENDMENT NO. 96-3: 1. Code Amendment No. 96-3 to allow RL-3 type projects in areas designated for RM and RMH development and to modify the development standards for RL-1, RL-2 and RL-3 projects is consistent with the objectives,policies, general land uses and programs specified in the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The proposed changes encourage innovative design and articulated building elevations and open space areas within subdivisions. The changes also ensure a range of product types. 2. In the case of a general land use provision, the changes are compatible with the uses authorized in, and the standards prescribed for,the zoning district for which it is proposed. The proposed changes would affect the properties designated for residential development in the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan area. The changes modify and clarify the development standards for residential projects. 3. A community need is demonstrated for the change proposed. The Housing Element of the General Plan calls for a mix of housing types to be provided in the community. The proposed change to allow RL-3 development in areas for RM and RMH projects furthers that goal. The modifications to the other development standards are in response to observations of projects and input from residents and developers in order to create standards that reflect current development practice, industry standards and the City's desire for balanced, quality and attractive development. 4. Its adoption will be in conformity with public convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice. The code amendment will provide increase housing opportunities, while ensuring development standards that reflect the goals and objectives of the City. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - PROJECTS EXEMPT FROM CEQA: The Planning Commission finds that the project will not have any significant effect on the environment and is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 4501, Class 20 which supplements the CEQA because minor amendments to zoning ordinances are exempt from further environmental review. LEGISLATIVE DRAFT i. Setback(Rear Yard) The minimum setback from the rear property lines shall be as follows: Dwellings: Fifteen(15) feet. Garages or accessory buildings: Five (5) feet. Balconies, Bay windows, open stairways and architectural features: Twelve (12) feet. Unenclosed patio covers: Five (5) feet. j. Building Separation The minimum building separation between buildings on the same lot shall be six (6) feet. k. Open Space Open space shall be provided on the lot by the required minimum setback areas, except where an RL-3 development is constructed on property designated for RM and RMH development projects with 20 or more units shall provide common open space (recreation area) as follows: 150 square feet per lot for lots with less than 40 feet of lot frontage, and 100 square feet per lot for lots with 40 feet or more of lot frontage. In no case shall the common open space area be less than 3,000 square feet. The minimum dimension of the common open space area shall be 50 feet. The total common open space area required may be provided in one or more areas as long as each area is a minimum of 3,000 square feet and has a minimum dimension of 50 feet. For projects with less than 20 units, a minimum 600 square feet of open space (private or commons shall be provided per unit Private open space excludes side and frontArd setback areas If a portion is provided as common open space that area shall have a minimum dimension of 10 feet. III-19 THE JANUARY 28, 1997 PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT IS AVAILABLE AT THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, 2000 MAIN STREET, HUNTINGTON BEACH. I1 - 20-06 111-120-07 111-12 -08 - Linda omas i L. Thomas Linda Tho �741 Pimlico 6741 Pim Cir 6741 Pimlico ,Huntington Bh CA 48 Huntington Bh 92648 Huntington Bh CA 9 I11-120-09 1-120-11 11 -120-12 homas Haro le * Ha_ rol - le w741 Pimlic. 'r. P.O. Box 17 P.O. Box 175 untington Bh CA 48 Long Beach CA 90 Long Beach CA 908 Ill-120-13 111-120-14 111-120-15 Thomas Jo ' homas . J . Thomas �74Pimli 'r 6741 Pimlic ' r 6741 Pim Cir untington Bh CA 648 Huntington Bh CA Huntington Bh' 264 111-120-16 111-120-17 111- 20-18 John Thomas John omas John A. mas P.O. Box 640 6741 Pimlico 6741 Pimlico ' /untington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 8 Huntington Bh CA 4 111-120-19 1 - 20-20 111-120-22 A. Thomas John A. mas Linda L. Thomas 741 Cir 6741 Pimlico 6741 Pimlico Cir untington Bh 648 Huntington Bh CA 9 Huntington Bh CA 92642 111-120-23 111-120-24 11 -120-25 'nda L. Thomas n A. Thomas John Thomas 74 o Cir 6741 'co Cir 6741 Pimli it untington Bh 2648 Huntington 92648 Huntington Bh C 64 111-120-26 111-120-27 111-120-28 4udre M.•Goetsch Travis B. Mitchell Wei Co Inc /788 Orlen Lane 355 Bristol St. No. A 401 20Th -Templeton CA 93465 Costa Mesa CA 92626 Huntington Bh 264 1.11-120-29 1 1-120-30 111-130-01 ,Joe Muniz John homas Weir it Co Inc_ _ _ _ /.807 Tamager Dr. 6741 Pimlic 'r 401 20Th - dosta Mesa CA 92626 Huntington Bh CA 648 Huntington Bh 264 k11-130-02 111-130-.05 111-130-06 '1 Co Richard K. Ashby Helen V. Petersen -.01 20T - -- - 7072 Garfield=Ave.- -- - 8755 Kings Hill Dr. ' iuntington Bh • 648 Huntington--Bh CA_92648 Salt Lake Cty UT 8412 �11-130-07 111-130-08 111-130-09 Aarold A. Lingre Harms ol-d-�. Lingle _ Bobbie G. Williams P.Q.O. Box 17520 - P.O. Box 0 2676 Orange Ave. Long Beach CA 90807 _ Long Beach CA 07 - Signal Hill CA 90806 ` � -13 -10 111-130-11 11 0-12 rs II Llc Elizabeth Jane Mills Elizabet e Mills j� Ave nu The Stars 3260 Farmington Dr. Se 3260 Farmingto Se cos Angeles CA 7 Atlanta GA 30339 Atlanta GA 30339 -130-14 111-130-15 111-130=16 � fxbbie Williams Wilvian J.- Renner MS Vic II. Llc d2F76 Orange 807 .Frankfort .Ave. 1999 Avenue o e Sta xial Hill CA 90 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Los Angeles CA 900 [11 -130-17 111-130-18 111-130-19 rs Dev Llc Shea Vies s Dev Llc Shea Vic s Dev Llc Shea Br on Rd. 655 Brea on Rd. 655 Brea on d. nut CA 917 Walnut CA 917 Walnut CA 9178 I1 � -130=20 111-130-21 111-130-22 Vikers Dev Llc Shea Paci Coast Homes Pac ' 'c Coast Homes 6�5 Brea Canyon Rd. P.O. Box 2 P.O. Box Ccklnut CA 91789 Houston TX 77001 Houston TX 770 (11.-130-23 111-130-24 111-130-25 'ckers II Llc We Co Inc D ld A. Weir )9 A of The Stars 401 20Th S 401 20 No. �26 Angeles C 067 Huntington Bh 648 Huntington 13, _ 8 I l l_-130-26 11 -130-27. 111-130-28 it Co Weir Co Inc City of Huntington Bea 20 401 20Th St. City Ha itington 2648 Huntington Bh CA g�6418 Huntingtn Bch 92648 11'--140-01 111-140-02 111-140-04 Huntington Beach Donald A. Weir John .. Thomas 401 20Th St. No. A 6741 Pim Cir Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh 264E IIL-140-05 111-140-06. .111-140-07 A. Thomas . Jo Thomas Harold A.. Tr #A Lingle C6I11 ico Cir -- 6741 Pim Cir P.O.�Bea�chCA 20 ztington 92648 Huntington Bh 92648 Long 07 Il1-140=08 r — 111-140-09 111-140-10 A. Thomas Linda University Loma Cit f Huntington Bee VX lico Cir ---- - - -- -Foundation Adm _ : -- City Ha _ __ -- _-.- ._-- . ntington CA 92648- . Loma Linda Ca CA 92350 Huntingtn Bch 264> 111-140-14 111-140-15 111-140-16 hn A. Thomas __ _ Wilma M. Albert A105 Walter Nichols_ Dabney to ico Cir 24425 Sky View Ridge Dr. 19731 Coastline Lane ntin 92648 - Murrieta CA 92562 Huntington Bh- ,CA-,92648 ell ��- a 111-150-01 50-02 111-150-03 Eliezer Nussbaum Ki erly,,Nquyen Chauk Pan Chin 7931 Professional Cir 7342 Garfie ve. P.O. Box 8796 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh C 2648 Fountain Vly CA 92728 111-150-04 111-150-05 111-156-06 James A. Deason. -Clinton E. Silverman Charles Cruzat: 4597 Fir Ave. .8272 Le Conte- Dt. 4949 Warner Ave. Seal Beach CA 90740 Huntington- Ph CA 92646 'Huntington Bh CA 9264! 111-150-13 111-150-15 ;obert 0-16 - Ci Huntington Beach Robert Gordon Gowdy n Gowdy 2000 Main 80 Mira Adelante 80 Mira Adela Huntington Bh 648 San Clemente CA 92673 San Clemente CA 9 3 111-150-17 ©go- 5uA4/ 111-150-18 111-150-19 William J. Scott Arline Joan Robrecht 2982 Country Club Dr. 3991 Ma�Beach92�660 No. 2262 Avenida San AnteYc Costa Mesa CA 92626 Newport Camarillo CA 93010 1 0-20 1 1-150-21 111-150-22 Arline Robrecht P c Paci Coast Homes 2262 Avenida Antero 3991_ MacAr Blvd. No. P.O. Box . Camarillo CA 93010 Newport Beach . 2660 Houston TX 770 111-150-23 111-150-24 111-150-25 Pacific Coast Homes Willis M. Elliott Bomann Barbara Est Of P. 85 19411 Worchester Lane P.O. Box 50455 Houston TX 7 Huntington Bh CA 92646,.' Oxnard CA 93031 1 -150-26 1 1-150-27 111-150-28 Plc Plc Plc 3991 MacArthu vd.' No 2 3991 MacAr r Blvd. No. 3991 Mac ur Blvd. eo Newport Beach CA 9 0 Newport Beach 2660 Newport Beach 9266c 111-150-29 111-150-30 11 -150-31 Jack Santiago Melvin Keller_ . 3991 a .hur Blvd. No. 2- 310 14th St. 225 Se. 44th Newport Beac 926610 Huntington Bh'CA 92648 Portland OR 9721 111-150-32 111-150-33 Ill-150-34 Melvin F. Keller Pac_ ' Coast Homes Melvi Keller 225 Se -44th Ave. - _- -- P.O. Box -- - 225 Se 44 Ave. - - - Portland OR 97215_ Houston TX 77 Portland OR 9-7,25 111-150-36 111-150-37 0-38 James M. Brown M vin F... Keller IFREDD L 221 Middlefield Dr. 225 Se Ave. - - San Francisco CA 94132 Portland OR 5 04 6 � 1It- � - 21 � tt (Sf� iS ►► t- 1150-- 25 ( (e&C) 6kCbi_q-Z Ne�woov+ Aa-cl., (A gq_QCPO ( I.l -140-18 111-140-19 111-140-20 ' near Killingsworth Jor-s John A. Gustafson John A. Thomas 1 1 Linden Ave. 19161 Crystal St. 6741 Pimlico Cir 1,jn.g Beach CA 90807 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 c .-140-21 1 40-22 11 4'0-2�- Ln omas John A. omas John A. - mas :1 Pimlico 6741 Pimlico 'r 6741 Pimlico 'r .tington' Bh CA 48 Huntington Bh -CA 648 Huntington Bh CA 64 1�1 v l i.l-.��'•�jk'n �'' 31�rn�,•c�h�,LA ci Z3 t Lo 937-40-273 93 - 0-274 937-40-277 _ New Life Trust L /Co Robert inngrabe Sharel Felger 18800 Delaware St. 18800 Delawa St . No. 19142 Holly St. No. A Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 937-40-278 937-40-279 937-40-2.80 Ronald M. Perks Ellen Jean Dunworth . John C. KingJMa 9 &x,,f->v- - 19142 Holly St. No. B 19142 Holly St. No. C 19142 Holly St. No. D Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 937-40-281 937-40-282 937-40-283 Connie Martini John F. Purcell Patrick J. Rooney 19152 Holly St. No. A 19152 Holly St . No. B 19152 Holly St. No. C Huntington Beach CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 937-40-284 937-40-285 937-40-286 Craig M. Bradford Michael Di Cambio James Barclay 19152 Holly St. No. D 19162 Holly St. No. A 19162 Holly St. No. B Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 937-40-287 937-40-288 937-40-289 Marilyn B Findlay Nora Ann Anderson SFREDDO Robert S 19162 Holly St . No. C 19162 Holly St. No. D 19172 Holly St. No. D Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 937-40-290 937-40-291 937-40-292 David R. Delprato Patricia A. Knott Mitch Dinu . 19172 Holly St. No. C 19172 Holly St. No. B 19172 Holly St. No. A Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 937-40-293 937-40-294 937-40-295 Andrea J. Mauro Liane Nakasone William Sammy Brown 19182 Holly St . No. D 19182 Holly St. No. C 19182 Holly St. No. B Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 9 3 7-4 0-2 9 6 ------ ---- �'j 3-�-.y 02 Samer Kurd-Misto � 19182 Holly St. No. A CI c_. ton Bh CA 92648 c(o � o Huntington D.i g q 3�-o � �► �: �- P1. 93"l-'-loz•tb d►�St-`-�a2 31 y3'I-�-t oz.-�-(2 Pc11ae�-6;"%�i _ ._- C/o l,-)�'14a1�v' .C.{ �►`� ,2S c/o �c,r t�c> l.�n v� 20'-1 r1(�Xi r-� c,�. 1ac�s 1�6a100 �elc-�•-'o-�t' _/ i����, Gp� a►z�i-i 1�..,,��,..�1-ter -}J �,.��'� Li 0 q 31-y o 2 - 1 S c/o C a &Cc.�, ��� C �-40-207 937-40-208/a3�{ h(gard A. Jettie Bernard A. Jettie 39-0 S. Olive St. 9161 Mediterranean Dr. -a Ana CA 92707 Huntington Bh CA 92646 C�0�ob f t�e�h La S C/O -7?z nnC 5 9,3�-40-210 937-40-211 937-40-212 A Ker Helen C Trust j+ toy Bernard A. Jettie Bernard A. Jettie /99900 Delaware St . P.O. Box 5651 21001 Kausch Cir' fftgAngton Bh CA- 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92615 Huntington Bh CA 92646 19,37-40-213 937-40-214 �o r(ard A. Jettie Bernard A. Jettie !t ,ZD/ N. Colorado St . 18900 Delaware St . -NEh. -M Afj4eim CA 92801 Huntington Bh CA 92648 C10 937-40-217 937-40-218 Bernard A. Jettie Bernard A. Jettie 18800 Delaware St . t�a. t7 18900 Delaware St. No,. l;R Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 y� De.�r►�o�- � (-�•. --- - -- C/o Vf n cQXr Y(11%c a x\.o--- q_V 40-219 937-40-220 937-40-221 -Ze,-/76.rd A. Jettie LL 1 13 Bernard A. Jettie Bernard A. Jettie /ep0 Delaware St. h5a. IMZ 20502 Cohasset Lane 18900 Delaware St . . Aur ington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92646 Huntington Bh CA 92648 '�;97- 40-222 937-40-223 937-40-224 t"66rd A. Jettie Zic, Bernard A. Jettie Bernard A. Jettie /8'fo:0 Delaware St. W=_ _2M 8359 Dunbarton Ave. 318 Cameron Ave. 4u41ington Bh CA 92648 Los Angeles CA 90045 Pomona CA 91767 Cap 7�I a- �O yr+n v« - c/� tV cs�• �2ir�Y� t ---- -- ck> Z i c'4 va priSvo--e 93;t:40-225 937-40-22 937-40-227 ,l2e , eline'Wigle Bernard A ett e Bernard A. Jettie o?9/60 Rue De La Sharmie 19151 A. ar ane 949 lOTh St. t CA 92544 Huntin on h CA 92646 Huntington Bh CA 92648 _ _ - c% tom'••� �-- 'B-i 197-40-228------- --- `- 937-40-229 937-40-230 -------- �&t,44vrd A. Jettie 1:1-- zzz Bernard A. • Jettie A 223 Bernard A. Jettie /000 Delaware St. -N3. 18900 Delaware St. -ft-, *.Z` 6416 Friars Rd. No. 202 -/fmiington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 San Diego CA 92108- c�U Nc.�rn-� rJe�tso.ti __ C/o �6 c(v Fier Ca� 937-40-232 937-40-233 .Bernard A. Jettie 1986 Drake Trust :x P.O.- Box 724 -- 19081 Colchester Lane W Hyannisprt MA 02672 Huntington Bh CA 92646 937-40-235 NO'' " ^ ^'^ Bernard A. Jettie Sze) 18900 Delaware St. tjza-. Huntington Bh CA 92648 _C-(a Q) L-tfl aaCO t� 1 S 1 Ln1 9 1' c.�r E M T 937-40-238/--)-q -A 937-4£ -239 " x Bernard A. Jettie Bernard A. Jettie k-LZ-1,0 1035 Westholme Ave. 18900 Delaware St . Los Angeles CA 90024 Huntington Bh CA 92648 q37 4 0-2 4 0 937-40-241 &n-ard A. Jettie k-L 23y Bernard A. Jettie f-4 -33S' &?a0 Delaware. St . Nkpr� 18900 Delaware St . Aweington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 *' �0 i-1 r.-�'b2.✓-I- Pa�la.r G/O M aS 0.-0 'Ta,r�-1r2� � 7-40-243 9 0-244 937-40-245 /t-ard A. Jettie Bernar Jettie Bernard A. Jettie �2 3 Hawthorne Blvd. 1035 Westho Ave. 18809 Club Lane ,<oMo Pls Vrd CA 90275 Los Angeles CA 4 Huntington Bh CA 92648 W7-40-246 937-40-247 937-4 - 48 gW-ard A. Jettie ��3yd Bernard A. Jettie Bernar A. ettie 78900 Delaware St . ice. `18900 Delaware St. No. Ngv 1942 W dla ds Lane , A,tington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntin ton h CA 92648 C/. u.r- g37-40-249 937-40-250 937-40-251 W/Lard A. Jettie Bernard A. Jettie Bernard A. Jettie OA-mantes 18900 Delaware St. No.A40 18900 Delaware St . No34 4M4:ho Santa Margarita 9 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 . rm a-'r,t r v c-/o o4exbac.(< Cla by vo 177-40-252 937-40-253 537-40-254 gerq and A. Jettie 3`�(a Lacene Johnson A 3y-z Bernard A. Jettie 1gaO Delaware St. Sim- 18900 .Delaware St. k -* 18900 Delaware St . No 3`($ hb4tington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 937-40-255 937-40-256 937-40-257 &vn-ard A: Jettie foo Bernard A. Jettie A-3,0 Bernard A. Jettie /98;2 Beach Blvd. . 18900 Delaware St. -*D 6854 Briarwood Dr. 4k4irington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Carlsbad CA 92009 7'� ��m-�^►5___ lam_ w�e.v�c� __c% ,�o.�c�t Sv c tfa Ja.r�e s 6. COI cta.sz� 9P-40-258 937-40-259 937-40-265 -13W A. Jettie Bushong Trust Richard L. Mulvania /93 Hummingbird Dr. 318 Cameron Ave. 18800 Delaware St . -No`, C:05ta Mesa CA 92626 Pomona CA 91767 Huntington Bh CA 92648 — 7-40-266 937-40-267 37-40-268 G,hdrt J. Zinngrabe , PMT Asset Group LP -Alamo P sset Group LP 1VQO Delaware St . t - I� - 18800 Delaware St. � 18800 ware St.- No. //07tington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington CA 92648 -40-269 9 3 7-4 0-2 7 0 /a3-2 %37-40-271 rp Delma Corp orp 30 De a St . 18800 Delaware St. lao� 18800 De. a St. =ington- Bh 2648 Huntington Bh CA 92648 Huntington Bh 92648 IgL4zcS � OA. -1 ti5 Shea Homes Lennar Homes of California,Inc. Taylor Woodrow Homes Ltd. Ronald C.Metzler,Vice President Jonathan M. Jaffe,Vice President Tom Redwitz, Senior Dev. Mgr. 655 Brea Canyon Road 23333 Avenida La Caza 24461 Ridge Route Drive Walnut, CA 91788-0487 Coto de Caza, CA 92679 Laguna Hills, CA 92653-1686 Polygon Communities Polygon Communities William Lyon Homes Greg Petersen;V.P.Finance &Adm. Steve Shepard Tom Mitchell 15751 Rockfield Avenue, Suite 120 15751 Rockfield Avenue, Suite 120 4490 Von Karman Avenue Irvine,CA 92718 Irvine, CA 92718 Newport Beach, CA 92660-2000 Sea Country Homes Rielly Horn .- Southridge Companies Buck Bennett,Principal Tom Rielly,P Ken Kelter 95 Argonaut, Suite 210 23332 Millc eek v , uite 35 18281 Gothard Street,#201 Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 Laguna Hills, CA 53 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Scot D. Campbell Lennar. Homes 710 Main Street John Jessup Huntington Beach, CA 92648 27432 Calle Arroyo San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 ��-ieJtl� ��rn2s qS lJe wP`4 (-A I2 o PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION CHECKLIST- B" MAILING LABELS-4/3/95 Planning Di or 23 James Jones 30 OC Co ty Harbors,Beach 35 City of Beach Ocean View Elementary and Par Dept. 211 ht St. School district P. O.Bo_ 4048 S Beach,CA 90740 17200 Pinehurst Lane Santa ,'CA 92702-4048 Huntington Beach CA 92647 CA Coastal Commission 24 Ron Frazier 31 Cheryle owning 36 Theresa Henry Westminster School District Meadowl rk Area 245 W.Broadway,Ste 380 14121 Cedarwood Avenue 16771 R sevelt Lane Long Bch,CA 90802 Nestminster CA 92683 Huntingt Beach,CA 92649 Calif, rni Coastal Commission 24 Patricia Koch 32 Sally Gra m 36 South Di 'ct Office HB Union High School Disrict Meadowl k Area 245 W.Ifoadway No. 380 10251 Yorktown Avenue 5161 Gel g Circle Long Bea h,CA 92802-4458 Huntington Beach,CA 92646 Huntingt Beach,CA 92649 Robert seph 25 David Hagen 32 Caltra District 12 HB Union High School district Koll Company 'S 7 2501 llman St. 10251 Yorktown 7711 Center Avenue,#215 Santa a,CA 92705 Huntington Beach,CA 92646 Huntington Beach,CA 92647 Direct 26 Huntingt n Beach Mall 33 Local S d Waste Enf.Agy. Attn.Pat gers-Laade O.C.He lth Care Agency 7777 er Ave.#300 P.O.Bo 55 Huntingto Beach CA 92647 Santa An ,CA 92702 New Gro h Coordinator 27 CSA 33 Huntingt Beach Post Office 730 El Camino Way#200 6771 W er Ave. Tustin,CA 9680 Huntingto ,Beach,CA 92647 Marc Ecker 28 Golden st College 34 Fountain Valley Attn: ire Owens Elementary School District 15744 G denwest St. 17210 Oak Street Huntingt Beach CA 92647 Fountain Valley CA 92708 Dr.Duane Dshno 29 Country View Estates HOA 35 HB City Elementary School Dist. Carrie Thomas PO Box 71 6 64 2 Trotter Drive Huntington Beach,CA 92626 Huntington Beach CA 92648 Jerry Buchanan 29 Country View Estates HOA 35 HB City Elementary School Dist. Gerry Chapman 20451 Craimer Lane 6742 Shire Circle Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Huntington Beach CA 92648 - gIables\phnlbls _ � 4 _ PL- ,IC HEARING NOTIFICATION CHECKLIS. MAILING LABELS -4/3/95 President I Hunt\Bh Harbor POA 10 Edna Littlebury 17 H.B. Chamber of Commerce P.O. 1Golden St.Mob.Hm.Owners Leag. 2210 Main Street,Suite 200 Suns ,CA 90742 11021 Magnolia Blvd. Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Garden'Grove,CA 92642 Judy Legan 2 Pacific Co t Archaeological 18 H.B./F.V.Board of Realtors Society,In 8101 Slater Ave. P.O.Box 1 926 Huntington Beach,CA 92647 Costa Mes ,CA 92627 Attn:Jane othold Pr ' ent 3 William D.Holman 11 County of range/EMA 19 Amig De Bolsa Chica PLC Michael .Ruane,Dir. P.O.Box 3748 23 Corporate Plaza,Suite 250 P.O.Box 48 Huntington Beach,CA 92605 Newport Beach CA 92660-7912 Santa An CA 92702-4048 Mr.Tom Zanic 12 Planning epartment 19 New Urban West Orange C my EMA 520 Broadway Ste. 100 P.O.Box 48 Santa Monica,CA 90401 Santa Ana, A 92702-4048 President 5 Pres.,H.B.Hist.Society 13 County of range/EMA 19 Huntington Beach Tomorrow C/O Newland House Museum Thomas thews 411 6th St. 19820 Beach Blvd. P. O.Box 048 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Santa Ana CA 92702-4048 Julie Vandermost 6 Chairperson 14 County of range/EMA • 19 BIA-OC Historical Resources Bd. Bob Fisher Dir. 9 Executive Circle#100 Comm.Services Dept. P.O.Box 4 48 Irvine Ca 92714-6734 2000 Main St. Santa Ana, A 92702-4048 1. Huntington Beach,CA 92648 d Spicer 7 Coun ' on Aging 15 Planning ir. - -- 20 SCA 1706 OTVge Ave. City of Co Mesa 818NA 7th, 12th Floor Huntingto each,CA 92648 P.O.Box 200 Los Angeles,CA 90017 Costa Mes ,CA 92628-1200 E.T.I.Corral 100 8 Dominick Tomaino 16 Planning ' . 21 Mary Bell Seacliff Homeowners Assoc. City of Fo ntain.Valley 20292 Eastwood Cir. 6812 Scenic Bay Lane 10200 Sl er Ave. Huntington Beach,CA 92 64 6 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Fountain alley,CA 92708 Allen Macens1d, 9 Seacliff HOA 16 . Plannin Director 22 Environmental Board Chairman Jeff Metzel ' City of estminster 20021 Lawson Lane 19391 Shady Harbor Circle 8200 W ster Blvd. Huntington Beach,CA,92646 Huntington Beach CA 92648 Westmin ter,CA 92683 gaables\phnlbls 111--150-39 111- -40 111-150-44 Weir Oil Co- Inc Plc David L. MacLeod 401 20Th St . 3991 MacArthur vd. No. 858 San Nicolas Cir Huntington Bh CA 92648 Newport Beach CA 9 0 Huntington Beach CA 92 111-150-45 111-150-46 111-150-47 Gary Kantor A Zoo Gary for MS Vickers II Llc - 1750 E: Desert Inn Rd. 1750 E. De Inn Rd. 19.99 Avenue of The Stprs Las Vegas NV 89109 Las Vegas NV 89 Los Angeles CA 90067 111-150-48 -281-01 159-281-02 Edward Wick MS Vic II Llc MSS' kers II Llc 7292 Garfield Ave. No. 1 1999 Avenue The Stars 1999 Aven of The Stz Huntington Bh CA 92648 Los Angeles CA 9 7 Los Angeles CA 067 159-281-03 159-281-04 59-281-05 Gloria Bradeson Hassett Cit Huntington Beach MS i s II Llc 121 Via Mentone City Hal 1999 Avenue The Stc Newport Beach CA 92663 Huntingtn Bch 92648 Los Angeles CA 9 .7 J 159-282- 5 159-282-06 15 -282-07 Mola De opmen Corp Mola Development Corp Mola opment Corp 8072 A ams e. 5200 Warner Ave. No. 209 5200 Warner e. No. Hunti gto B A 92646 Huntington Bh CA 92649 Huntington Bh C 264-1 159-282-08 159-282-11 1 82-12 William S. Brown William J. Scott Hun tin n Beach Co 1182 B Holly St . 2982 Country Club Dr. P.O. Box 2 Huntington Beach CA 92648 Costa Mesa CA 92626 Houston TX 770 1 9-282-13 159-282-14 1 -282-16 - - H ington Beach Co P.O. 85 Houston TX 1 3�----------- Signal Companies Inctnrt�a,rl� 4343 Von Karman Ave. 2 of Newport Beach CA 92660 P� �X F5o'74 � 'I`62$ l 6�-I-►-�'� � , 1--��,-.�►�j-�,,•, ��cl�►�Clk �►2(�IS l-kv�-�,,.�-k�,-��ec�r�h; LAg2uug 111-120-01 ~` 150-`-4012(,0 -- -- S & C Oil Co Inc C, co Ch►'i �� 5 2676 Orange Ave �L f5 Signal Hill CA 90806 }}n:Ch<i Gi bb r'101 C--- DE!,�o� Co_ $c>'7 Z AJ ass fire . Connie Brockway,City Clerk � - City of Huntington Beach Office of the Ci tY Clerk J/ P.O.Box 190 r r Huntington Beach, CA 92648 AIM i .3 �o.aaco � - 9` � Q ©LINTY LEGAL NOTICE- PUBLIC HEARING �Lt���/G:~r�r, IIlIli!!I!�!�(t!llllfl��lfitlili!lltli�l��}t!!t ii p !( + �11!!N t�ttlti! Connie Brockway,City Clerk City of Huntington Beach (? Office of the City Clerk P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 O a a LCL iv--- 1 I N G c"c�, �1 a Z is POBA 1Fo L1 Q 2Cj. �FB i7 1909•�-� \�O C' N TY P� LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING i j j i i # i i j 7-1r) IldIfI?11hIll!?i!?11111??11?11111?!!1!111!!!?I?I!t!?IllIMI Connie Brockway, City Clerk `- City of Huntington Beach Office of the City Clerk lP.O. Box 190J . Huntington Beach, CA 92648 111-150-0__ n ��1411NGTp ` Eliezer Nussbaum (� O �fi\NC�RVOR4,F0 dF 7931 Professional Cis 4. ;- Huntinalt-on Bh CA 92648 'PA, o ' <- N T Y LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC HEARING j r{ ll!l!f?1111111111111t11111 tt tl il11jj 1.11:1-...11..It....t I.I!-I Connie Brockway,City Clerk City of Huntington Beach Office of the City Clerk 5° •(� P.O.Box 190 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 L' 1W�v rA` J q37-Y07-16 q o -LOLA rtCr.Yi+�-v`c�- ��pHT I NG v ALBE2O4 926063014 IN 05/11/97 RETURN TO SENDER p �j►^.�r^r. Q .n' '�"^`a--..--.w�.�;sr.:z n-r..swic^rr.�:..ra,-!9 _ i�r :' NO FORWARD ORDER ON i 1 , � UNABLE TO FORWAR�`�p` ��F�PI R. RFTI IGAI -rn C UN T Y {�' LEGAL NOTICEL-i-POLIC HEARING, II:;,I=IIlili�:==.;:;il=: illifli?lllli�illif!llii!li�l=l:li:Il m..: 4% Connie Brockway,City Cf-.e, City of Huntington Beach Office of the City Clerk P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 i - - �NTINGTp Q� NtOPt00�1 V )/9w fiCl Cl tternpt�U darrey �.� .. �No SuGry NU n����� Q cFcpUNTY cP`�� LEGAL NOTICE - PUBLIC I�.ML��i �,G f .��•11Lf1 � {!11!!I�?I?�IEf?�!!1!��!Sf?��1�??�??FI?1!�FI?�S I?I!?�if?��??i �r q? L ez') �� e0dlt' - ATTACHMENT I I 1 Board of Trustees: <oN a HUNTINGTON BEACH UNION Bonnie Bruce �a� 9 Bonnie Castrey HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT Barbara Johnson Curt Jones 10251 Yorktown Avenue • Huntington Beach, California 92646-2999 Michael Simons (714)964-3339 FAX(714) 963-7684 Ronald G.Bennett,Ed.D.,Superintendent of Schools N sCH00 January 17, 1997 Mr. Howard Zelefsky RECEIVED Planning Director City of Huntington Beach j p% 21107 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Dear Mr. Zelefsky: The Huntington Beach Union High School District is pursuing negotiations with PLC Land Company on their development projects in the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan area. We believe that PLC's request to amend the Specific Plan should be considered in light of the impact on the schools that will serve the development. To this end I wrote to Mr. William Holman last September suggesting we meet to discuss school facilities concerns. We met to discuss the district's issues on October 3, 1996. In December, Mr. Holman sent me some additional information on project square footage. Although I have seen Mr. Holman occasionally in the interim,there has been no response from PLC regarding the district's interest in discussing school mitigation. The district will continue to seek opportunities to discuss mitigation with PLC consistent with the language of the updated General Plan that the City will "ensure that development shall not occur without providing for adequate school facilities", as well as the district's commitment in other mitigation agreements to pursue support for school facilities in an equitable manner from all developers within the district. In the absence of an agreement,the district is opposed to the code amendment to permit PLC to allow small lots. Sincerely, „�— ` Patricia Reid Koch, Ph.D. Assistant Superintendent, Business Services c: Mr. William D. Holman, PLC Land Company The mission of the HBUHSD, responsive to our diverse community expectations, is to educate all students by ensuring a relevant and focused educational program which develops responsible,productive and creative individuals with a capacity for leadership. ATTACHMENT 12 Council/Agency Meeting Held:21? 497 Deferred/Continued to:_ yz7f97 yso,3o 0 Approved ❑ Conditionally Approved ❑ Denied City Clerk's Si nature Council Meeting Date: March 17, 1997 Department ID Number: CD 97-17 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS SUBMITTED BY: MICHAEL T. UBERUAGA, City Administrator /( - PREPARED BY: MELANIE S. FALLON, Community Development Director SUBJECT: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 96-2/LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO. 96-3 (HOLLY SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN) Statement of Issue,Funding Source,Recommended Action,Alternative Action(s),Analysis,Environmental Status, Attachment(s) Statement of Issue: PLC Land Company requests to amend the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan (HSSP) to allow RL-3 (small lot detached housing) development in RM and RMH (Residential Medium and Medium High Density) districts and to include Z-lot development in the list of permitted uses in the districts. As a result of this request staff recommends modifications to the standards for residential development in areas designated for RL-1, RL-2 and RL-3 development. The changes to the RL-1 and RL-2 standards are minor and allow for increased building articulation. Similar changes are proposed for the RL-3 district. In addition, staff recommends a common open space requirement, a modification to side yard setback calculations and a decrease in site coverage for the RL-3 district. Staff requests a continuance of this item to April 7, 1997. Funding Source: Not applicable. , Recommended Action: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: �• � + —a it Motion to: r "Continue Code Amendment No. 96-2 and Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 96-3 to April 7, 1997" :3 J