HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanned Residential Development Standards - Small Lot Condom -76 t�
IN THE
Superior Court
OF THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
In and for the County of Orange
CITY OF H U N T I N G T O N BEACH PROOF OF PUBLICATION
PUBLIC HEARING— CODE AMENDMENT
81—9
State of California )
County of Orange )ss' NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
CODE AMENDMENT 81.9
I PLANNED RESIDENTIAL
L. ELLIOTT PMFsrANDARM
A.W. S HEREBY GIVEN that a
That I am and at all times herein mentioned was a citizen of public hearing will be held by the City
Council of the City of Huntington Beach,
the United States,over the age of twenty-one years,and that I in the Council Chamber of the Civic can-
am not a party to,nor interested in the above entitled matter; ter,Huntington Beach,at the hour of 7:30
that I am the principal clerk of the printer of the P.M.,or as soon thereafter a possible onMonday the 7th day of June,1982,for the
PPurpose of considering Code Amendment
No.81.9, initiated by the Development
H U N T I N G T O N BEACH I N D. REVIEW sae ces Do s2 ii9 en,amendsadding SS°ctitions
a newspaper of general circulation,published in the City of 9362.11.1,9362.11.2,9382.11.3,9362.12.1
and deleting Section 936213 of the
st pertaining
Hun t-
SEanp
HUNTINGTON BEACH dnd Residential Development
County of Orange and which newspaper is published for the All interested Persons are invited to
disemination of local news and intelligence of a general charac- attend said hearing end Codexpre
their
g g opinions for or aaBBaammsst said Code Amend-
ter, and which newspaper at all times herein mentioned had ment No.81-9.Ftiuther information may
and still has a bona fide subscription list of paying subscribers, be obtained from the Office of the City
Cler, 2000 Main Street, Huntington
and which newspaper has been established, printed and pub- Beach,CA 92648-(714)5M-5227.
lished at regular intervals in the said County of Orange for a DATED May 24,1982
period exceeding one year; that the notice, of which the CITY:A ICIAM. ENTWORTTON H
P g Y By:ALICIA M.wENTwORTH
annexed is a printed copy, has been published in the regular City Clerk
and entire issue of said newspaper,and not in any supplement Pub.May 27,1982
#io523
thereof,on the following dates,to wit: Hunt.Beach Ind.Rev. �--'
MAY 271 1982 .
i
I certify(or declare) under penalty of perjury that the forego-
ing is true and correct.
GARDEN GROVE
Datedat................................................
California,thi .2 8 t h day of .MAY 19.8 2...
E%ice..........
Signature
/i
X:Orrn No.CAF-81380
REQUES o FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
Date May 17, : 19 8 2
Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, City Administrat r , 1 l
Prepared by: James W. Palin, Director of Development Services J , L✓ ,
Subject: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 81-9
(A code amendment .amending sections in Article 936
— of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code) ezz)
Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: r'A
STATEMENT OF ISSUE:
Transmitted for the City Council ' s consideration is Code Amendment
No. 81-9 which amends, adds and deletes specific sections of Article
936 of the Ordinance Code. The purpose of the code amendment is
to incorporate new provisions and revise existing provisions in
Article 936 which will provide a better opportunity for development
of planned residential developments on small parcels of land.
RECOMMENDATION•
The Planning Commission and Planning staff recommend that the City
Council approve Code Amendment No. 81-9 and adopt the attached
ordinance.
ANALYSIS:
APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach
LOCATION: City-wide
REQUEST: A code amendment which amends specific sections
of Article 936 of the Ordinance Code pertaining
to development standards for planned residential -
developments.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION ON APRIL 20, 19.82:
ON MOTION BY MAHAFFEY AND SECOND BY LIVENGOOD CODE AMENDMENT NO.
81-9 WAS APPROVED FOR RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR
ADOPTION, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: Higgins, Livengood, Winchell, Porter, Mahaffey
NOES: None
ABSENT: Paone, Schumacher
ABSTAIN: None
P10 4/81
CA 81-9
May 17 , 1982
Page 2
DISCUSSION:
In 1981, the Planning staff, at the request of the Planning Commis-
sion, prepared several staff reports analyzing various aspects of
development standards contained in Article 936 of the Ordinance Code.
The reports presented information and identified .problems regarding
the application of these development standards to condominium and
townhouse developments on small parcels of land. As indicated in the
attached reports, the existing planned development .ordinance adopted
in 1976 was structured to accommodate projects approximately 10 acres
or more in size. The rapid growth of the City during the 1960 ' s and
1970 ' s has substantially diminished the availability of large tracts
of land and, thus, opportunities for development of PRD' s on sites
greater than 10 acres in size are very limited in the City. The
present general trend of development in Huntington Beach involves
a substantial amount of infilling on small parcels of land. This
has created problems in applying the standards of the PD ordinance
to today' s typical PD development, particularly the open space
standards which were not originally devised to be proportional to
the size of the development proposed. Therefore, the Planning
Commission and Planning staff are proposing revisions to section of
Article 936 which would allow more flexibility in the application
of certain development standards.
The attached ordinance contains three amended sections: 9362.11,
Common Open Space, 9362. 12, Main Recreation Area Minimum Size,
and 9362 .15, Private Accessway Widths; adds four sections: 9362 .11. 1,
Open Space Projects More Than 4 Gross Acres, 9362. 11. 2, Open Space
Projects 2-4 Gross Acres, 9362:11. 3, Open Space Projects Less Than
2 Gross Acres, and 9362.12. 1, Main Recreation .Area Minimum Size
Projects Less Than 4 Gross Acres; and deletes one section: 9362 .13,
Private Open Space. The rationale for these amendments is contained
in the attached April 20, 1982 staff report.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS:
Pursuant to the provisions set forth in the California Environmental
Quality Act and State EIR Guidelines, Code Amendment No. 81-9 is
exempt from environmental review.
FUNDING SOURCE:
Not applicable.
AL`.T'ERNATIVE ACTION:
Revise or further amend Article 936 as deemed appropriate.
SUPPORTING "INFORMATION:
1, Planning Commission staff reports dated 4-20-82, 12-1-81,
7-21-_81 and 6-2-81.
2 . Ordinance
JWP:JRB: js
i
1
huntington beach development services department
STA F f
-REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Development Services
DATE: April 20, 1982
SUBJECT: CODE AMENDMENT NO. 81-9 (Revisions to Sections of Ar-
ticle 936 of the Ordinance Code/Planned Residential
Development)
1. 0 SUGGESTED ACTION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the
City. Council approval of .Code Amendment No. 81-9.
2.0 GENERAL INFORMATION:
Code Amendment No. 81-9 amends, adds and deletes specific sections
of Article 936 of the Ordinance Code, pursuant to the direction
given by the Planning Commission at the March 9, 1982 study
session. The purpose of the code amendment is to incorporate new
provisions and revise existing provisions in Article 936 which will
provide a better opportunity for development of planned residential
developments on small parcels of land.
3.0 SUMMARY OF ISSUES:
The major issue of concern regarding Code Amendment 81-9 is whether
it will .accomplish the Planning Commission' s goal of .rev.ising the
planned development standards so they are not unduly restrictive
for proposed PRD' s on small parcels of land.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS:
The proposal is exempt according to provisions of CEQA and the
State EIR Guidelines.
5. 0 ANALYSIS•
On June 2, July 21, and December 1, 1981, the attached staff re-
ports were presented to the Planning Commission suggesting amend-
ments to Article 936 of the Ordinance Code. The reports present
information and identify problems regarding the application of
present development standards contained in Article 936 to condomin-
ium and townhouse developments on small parcels of land. As in-
dicated in the June 2nd progress report, the existing planned
a"MX C' - 3
A-FM-23A
CA 81-9
April 20, 1982
Page 2
development ordinance adopted in 1976, was structured to accommodate
projects of approximately 10 acres or more in size. The rapid growth
of the City during the 1960 ' s and 1970 ' s has substantially diminished
the availability of large tracts of land, and thus, opportunities for
development of PRD' s on sites greater than 10 acres in size are very
limited in the City. The present general trend of development in
Huntington Beach involves a substantial amount of infilling on small
parcels of land. This has created problems in applying the standards
of the PD Ordinance to today' s typical PD development, particularly,
the open space standards which were not originally devised to be pro-
portional to the size of the development proposed.
The attached ordinance contains three amended sections: 9362. 11, Com-
mon Open Space, 9362. 12, Main Recreation Area -Minimum Size, and
9362. 15, Private Accessway Widths; adds four sections: 9362. 11. 1,
Open Space Projects More Than 4 Gross Acres, 9362.11 . 2, Open Space
Projects 2-4 Gross Acres, 9362. 11 .3, Open Space Projects ,Less Than
2 Gross Acres, and 9362. 12. 1, Main .Recreation Area Minimum Size Pro-
jects .Less Than 4 Gross Acres; and deletes .one section: 9362. 13,
Private Open Space. The following is a brief description of the ra-
tionale for the amendments, additions . and deletions proposed under
this code. amendment:
1 . 9362. 11 - Open Space. This section is revised to include open
space standards (both common and private) which would apply to
all planned residential developments. This section contains no
. new provisions; it combines the provisions presently contained
within two separate sections of the code.
2. 9362. 11. 1 - Open Space Projects More Than 4 Gross Acres. This
section is added to include standards in addition to the stan-
dards in Section 9362. 11, which apply only to projects over 4
gross acres in size. This section requires a minimum 20 foot
dimension for .calculation of common open space pursuant to the
existing PD standard.
3. . 9362. 11. 2 - Open Space Projects 2-4 Gross Acres. This section
is added to include standards in addition to standards in Sec-
tion 9362. 11, which apply to projects from 2-4 gross acres in
size. This section allows an amount of private open space to
be included in the total open space requirement. The amount of
private open space that can be counted cannot exceed 25% of the
total amount of open space required per unit. For example, in
an R2 development', the total amount of open space required per
unit, pursuant to Section 9362. 11, is 800 square feet. ' Required
private open space (e.g. patios) can be calculated as partially sa ti s-
CA 81-9
April 20, 1982
Page 3
fying the total open space requirement up to a maximum of 25%
of the total open space requirement (in this case, 200 square
feet) per unit. This section also allows for' common open space
areas with a minimum dimension of 10 feet to be calculated as the
total open space area, in contrast to the . 20 foot minimum dimen-
sion required for projects over 4 acres in size.
4. 9362. 11.3 - Open Space Projects Less Than 2 Gross Acres. This
section is added to provide the open space standards in addition
to the standards in Seciton 9362. 11, which apply only to projects
less than 2 gross acres in size. This section essentially con-
tains the same provisions as Section 9362. 11 .3, however, the cre-
dit for private open space is 50% rather than 25%.
5. 9362. 12 - Main Recreation Area Minimum Size Projects More Than
4 Gross Acres. This section is amended to provide minimum stan-
dards for the main recreation area in a project over 4 gross acres
in size. This section reflects the existing standards contained
in Article 936 for minimum size (10, 000 square feet) and minimum
dimensions (50 feet/average 100 feet) of the main recreation area
in a planned development. This section is amended to only require
clubhouse facilities for. projects with 50 units or more.
6. 9362. 12. 1 - Main Recreation Area Minimum Size Projects Less Than
4 Gross Acres. This section is added .to provide minimum standards
for the main recreation area in a project less than 4 gross acres
in size. This section requires that the minimum size of the main
recreation area for all projects less than 1 gross acre in size
be 2, 500 square feet. This section further requires that the mini-
mum size of the main recreation area for projects more than 1 acre
in size, but less than 4 acres in size, be proportional to the
size of the development up to 10, 000 square feet, provided that
the minimum is 2, 500 square feet.
7. 9362. 13 - Private Open Space. This section is deleted from the
code since the provisions contained therein are now contained in
Section 9362. 11 .
8. 9362. 15 - Private Accessway Widths. This section is amended to
provide that additional travel .lanes at the entrance of a planned
development only be required for projects which are greater than
2 gross acres in size.
In addition to the proposed code amendment, the staff is currently in
the process of analyzing the parking requirements contained in Article
936 as compared to standards applied to condominium and townhouse de-
velopments in other cities. At a future date, the staff will be pre-
pared to present information and possibly suggested changes to the
existing PD parking standards.
1
CA 81-9
April 20, 1982
Page 4
6.0 RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommends that the Planning Commission, recommend to the
City Council approval of Code Amendment No. 81-9.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Ordinance
2. December 1, 1981 staff report
3, July 21, 1981 progress report .
4. June 2, 1981 progress report
JRB:j lm_ $
r
i
huntington beach developm it services department
STAff
REPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Development Services
DATE: December 1 , 1981
SUBJECT: DRAFT AMENDMENTS. TO ARTICLE 936 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE
�t
I+`
On June 2 and July 21, 1981 , the staff presented the attached progress
reports to the Planning Commission, suggesting possible amendments
to Article 936 of the. Ordinance Code.. The reports presented informa-
tion and identified problems regarding the application of present
development standards contained in Article 936 to condominium and town-
house developments on small parcels of land.
In the. June 2, 1981 staff report it is recommended that three sections
of -the Ordinance Code be amended: 9362 . 11, Common Open Space; ' 9362 . 12 ,
Main Recreation Area; and 9362 . 15, Private Accessway Widths . In the
attached ordinance these sections have been amended, four additional
"sections have been added, and one section has been deleted from the
code._ The following is a brief description of the proposed amendments :
1. Section 9362 . 11, Open Space. (Projects more than four (4 ) gross
acres . ) This section has been amended to include the total open
space requirement _(both common and private) for projects over four
acres in size in the same section. The section reflects the cur-
rent common open space requirement and incorporates the provisions
set forth for private open space which are presently presented in
a subsequent section.
2 . Section 9362 . 11 . 1, Open Space. (Projects two (2) to four (4) gross
acres. ) This section is added to provide the open space require-
menu (both common and private) for- projects from 2 to 4 gross
acres in size. The section allows an amount of private open space
to be 'included in the total open space requirement. The amount
of private open space that can be counted cannot exceed 25 percent
of the total amount of open space required per unit. For example,
.in an R2 development the total amount of open space required per
unit is 800 square feet. Private open 'space (e.g. , patios) can be
calculated as partially satisfying this total open space require-
ment up to a maximum of 25 percent of the total open space re-
quirement (in this case, 200 square feet) per unit. This section
also allows for common open space areas with a minimum dimension
of 10 feet to be calculated as part of the total open space area
in contrast to the 20 foot minimum dimension required for projects
over four acres in size.
% <> A-FM-23A
'ia S'
f
Article 936
December 1, 1981
Page 2
. .3. . .Section 9362 . 11 . 2 , Open Space (Projects less than two (2). gross
acres. ) This section is added to provide the open space requirements
(both common and private) for projects less than 2 gross acres in
size. This section essentially contains the same provisions as
Section 9362 . 11 . 1; however, the credit for private open space is
50 percent rather than 25 percent.
4 . Section 9362 . 12 , Main Recreation Area. Minimum Size. (Projects
more than four (4 ) gross acres. ) This section is amended to pro-
vide minimum standards for the main recreation area in a project ,
over four gross acres in size. The section reflects the existing
standards for minimum size (10., 000 square feet) and minimum dimen-
sions (50 feet/average 100 feet) of .the main recreation area in a
planned development. The section only requires clubhouse facilities
for projects with 50 units or more.
5. Section 9362 . 12 . 1, Main Recreation Area. ' Minimum Size. (Projects
two (2) to four (4) gross acres . ) This section is added to provide
minimum standards for the main recreation area in a project from
2 to 4 gross acres in size. The section provides that the minimum
size of the main recreation area for a project from 2 to 4 gross
Acres shall be 5, 000 square feet with a minimum dimension of 50 feet.
The section also requires clubhouse facilities only for projects
with 50 units or more.
6. Section 9362 . 12 . 3, Main Recreation Area. (Projects less than two
(2) gross acres . ) This section is added to provide minimum standards
for the main recreation area in a project which is less than two
gross acres in size. This section provides that the minimum size
of the main . recreation area for a project, less than two gross acres
shall be 2500 square feet with a minimum dimension of 50 feet.
Clubhouse facilities are not required in .this section.
7. Section 9362 . 13, Private Open Space. This section is deleted from
the code, since the provisions contained therein are now contained
in the preceding sections .
8 .. Section 9362 . 15, Private Accessway Widths. This section is amended
to provide that additional travel. lanes at the entrance of a
planned development only be required for projects which are larger
than two gross acres .
The staff will be prepared to answer questions regarding the proposed
code amendment at the Planning Commission meeting. If the Commission
concurs with the proposed amendments , the staff is. prepared to schedule
a public Nearing for consideration of the attached. ordinance at the
next available hearing date.
JRB:df
Jt:y
ATTACHMENTS:
1 . June 2 , 1981 Progress Report
2 ., July 21, 1981 Progress Report
3 . Draft Ordinance
�,ntington beach developmr services department
25-YA �
REPORIE
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Development Services
:!DATE: June 2, 1981
SUBJECT: PROGRESS REPORT - SMALL LOT CONDOMINIUM ORDINANCE
At the direction of the Planning Commission, the Development Services
Department staff is in the process of preparing a draft amendment
to the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code establishing development
standards for Medium/High Density Residential Condominium Projects
on small parcels of land. The existing PD Ordinance, which was
adopted in 1976, was structured to accommodate projects of approxi-
mately 10 acres or more. The rapid growth of. the City during the
1960 ' s and 1970 ' s has substantially diminished the availability of
large tracts of land and thus, opportunities for the development of
condominium projects under the. original PD concept are currently. very
limited in the City. The general trend of development in Huntington
Beach , today involves a substantial amount of urban infilling on
.'small parcels of land . This has created problems in applying the
.. standards of the PD Ordinance.
These problems became very evident through the process of review and
!'�!,ultimate approval of two recent condominium projects on small parcels
of about one acre in size. Neither project could realistically
comply with the open space requirements contained in the existing
PD Ordinance. Through the analysis of both projects, the question
was raised whether the type and. amount of open space required under
the present PD Ordinance is usable and functional on a small lot .
For instance, the ordinance requires a main recreation area, ,..with a
minimum of 10, 000 sq. ft. and a clubhouse,, regardless of the number
' of units being constructed . In the staff ' s view, it is questionable
whether a clubhouse appropriately meets the recreational need of a
10 to 15 unit development. Another problems identified during the
review of these projects was the maintenance costs of large. open
space areas within small developments .
After considerable deliberation on the part of the Planning Commission,
both projects were approved with a special permit granting certain
deviations from the code. It is the consensus of both the staff and
, the Planning Commission that if small condominium projects are to be
encouraged in the City, the proper mechanism f_or. accommodating such
developments is the adoption of a code amendment establishing uniform
standards rather than continually arguing merits of a request for
special permit .
The staff has thoroughly analyzed the existing PD Ordinance in com-
parison with PD Ordinances of other cities and has concluded that
A•f M-23A
I>,ige Two
the best approach for the development of reasonable standards to
accommodate small condominium projects is to amend the existing
PD Ordinance rather than developing an' entirely new ordinance.
This approach was decided upon after staff concluded that most of
the existing PD standards are appropriate for both types of develop-
ment (small and large lots) . It is the staff ' s reconiiendation that
dual standards proportional to the. scale of the development under
consideration should be incorporated into the following sections
of the existing PD ordinance:
SECTION 9372 , 11 . COMMON OPEN SPACE.
This section requires that the minimum square footage of common open
space for recreation and leisure activities shall be from 400 to
800 sq. ft. per unit depending on the density of the project. This
amount of open space is difficult to attain on a small lot due to
subsection (b) which requires that recrea.ti.'on and leisure areas shall
have 'a minimum dimension of 20 ft. and shall not be located within
10 ft. of any ground floor dwelling unit wall having a door or
window. These standards inhibit design flexibility on a small lot
by requiring that open space be concentrated in one large area, usually
at the rear of the lot. It is the staff ' s recommendation that some
modification of these standards for parcels 2 acres and less to be
considered; the objective being an even distribution of common open
space areas throughout the development.
SECTIONS 9362 .11 (f) and 9362.12. MAIN RECREATION AREA.
These sections require that at least one. main recreation area be pro-
vided within the PD and that the minimum size of the main recreation
area shall not be less than 10, 000 sq . ft. with a minimum dimension.
:_ . of . 50 ft. and a minimum average dimension of 100 ft. Clubhouse
facilities are required in the main recreation area . These require-
ments have proven to be out of scale with the recreational needs of
a small condominium project in terms' of . size, and maintenance costs .,
It is the staff ' s recommendation that the required main recreation
area for parcels under 2 acres be reduced in scale, to a size which
is reasonable and in proportion to the recreational needs of the number
of inhabitants within the development. It is further recommended that
the requirement for a clubhouse facility be eliminated for parcels
less than 2 acres in size.
SECTION 9362.15 . PRIVATE ACCESSWAY WIDTHS.
This section requires that private ways serving as access to or within
a planned residential development shall be provided with a minimum
paved width equivalent to not less than two 12 ft . wide travel lanes
plus an additional 12 ft . wide travel lane for each direction of traffic
flow where an accessway intersects a ]vocal or arterial public street for
a distance of not less than 100 ft. from such intersection into the
development. It is the staff ' s feeling that this requirement is ex-
cessive for small lot condominium projects. The traffic volumes J
generated by these projects do not warrant two additional 12 ft .
travel lanes for stacking. Staff recommends that the requirement for
two additional travel lanes be eliminated for projects under 2 acres in
size.
Page Three
The staff views the above- suggested modifications to the PD Ordinance
as c-onceptual at this time . Thdse conceptual changes are being pre-
snntod to the Planninq Commission to generate discu.,;sion and gain the
necessary input needed by the staff to develop a code amendment which
conforms with. the Commission' s objectives. Staff will be prepared to
answer questions and further explain the general concepts recommended
in this report at the May 19, 1981 Planning Commission meeting.
JRB:9c
PLAN' RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STAND
Article 936 Article 932
Setbacks Planned Residential Apartment
front 20 ft.
side 10 ft. same
rear 10 ft.
Building front to front - 25 ft. front to rear - 20 ft.
": Separation rear to rear - 20 ft.. rear to side - 15 ft. 15 ft.
side to side - 10 ft, side to front - 15 ft.
Common Units/Acre S q. Ft./Unit Unit Type Sq.Ft./Unit
Open 8.01 - 15 800 Bachelor &
Space 15.01 - 25 600 Single. 150
25.01 - 35 400 One Bedroom 200
(calculable space must have a min, dimension Two Bedrooms 325
Three or more
of 20 ft. ) Bedrooms 400
(calculable space must have
a min. dimension of 20 ft, )
Private Unit Type Min. Area(Sq.Ft. )
Open Bachelor, Single
Space & one bedroom 200
Two bedrooms 250 No Provisions to
Three bedrooms 300
Four bedrooms 400
Main
Recreation Min. 10,000 sq. ft. No Provisions
Area
Site 16 units ac. - 5% 50%
Coverage 16 units/ac. - 50%
Building 35 ft. max. Same
Height
Building 1 . Units attached side by side shall be
Bulk composed of no more than six (6) units.
2. A four (4) ft, offset is required for No Provisions
every two (2) units.
3. One third (1/3 of all units shall be
one story)
Unit Type Min.Floor Area Sq. Ft.
Floor Bachelor & Single 450
One bedroom 650
Area Two bedrooms 900 Same
Three bedrooms 1100
. .Four. .bedrooms 1300
1 bedroom - one covered and one open 1 bedroom - one covered
Parking 2 bedrooms - one covered and 1 .5 open and .5 open
3 bedrooms - one covered and 1 .5 open 2 bedrooms - one covered
and one open
3 bedrooms - one covered
and 1 .5 onen
CONDOMINIUM ORDINANCE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
OTHEn 'iU.ISDICTIONS
CITY SETBACKS OPEN SITE RUTLDING LOT
SPACE COVERAGE BULK SIZE
BUENA PARK. rout--15 ' 4'0% of lot 60% build . separation min .
side-5 ' 200 sc7, ft. of lot -10 ' 12 , 000 sq .
rear-10 ' per unit windows on one ft.
usable area build .-20 '
private-8 ' on both-30 ' 1.7i.dth-100
min. dim, deoth-12'�
balcon.7-5 'x8 '
COSTA MESA front-20 ' 40° of net whatever separation-10 ' not min '
side75 ' area density allows more than 6 units 6 , 000 sq.
with sE!tbacks side by side. ft.
rear-15 ' privaterl0 'min 4 ' offset every
dim. 2 .units .
FOUNTAIN front-20 ' 40% 40% - min.
VALLEY side-5 ' of lot of lot 7 , 200 sq .
corner lot- ft.
10 ,
rear-25 '
r. ,'DEN GROVE front-15 ' 1000 sq. ft. 50% front to front- J mill.
side-7 . 5 ' min. of lot 25 ' + 5 ' for each 15 ' 000 sg
cor. l.ot-10 ' 50 sq. ft. per story above 1 ft.
rear-7 , 5 ' unit, story
private-200 side to side-10 '
sq. ft. 12 'di , + 2 . 5 ' for each
balcony-10 ' story above one.
min. dim.
LONG BEACH front-10 ' 150 sq. . ft/ 60% building min.
side-4 ' unit of lot separation-8 ' 3 , 000 sq.
rear-10 ' ft .
private-40 sq.
ft. 5 ' min.
dim.
VEWPORT BEACHfront-20 ' - 40% building min.
side-3 ' -4 ' of lot separation-8 ' 5000 sq . fl
rear-10 ' 50 ' width
cor, lot-
min, 6000
sq. ft .
60 ' width
f'NVGE front-15 ' 40% 60% building min
side-5 ' of lot of lot separation-10 ' 7000 sq. ft
cor. lot-1 0' 70 ' width
rear-10 '
i
a
CONDOMINIUM ORDINANCE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
OTIiER JURISDICTIONS
CITY, SETBACKS OPEN SITE BUILDING LOT
SPACE COVERAGE BULK SIZE
PLACENTIA front-25 ' 40% a 60% — —
side-5' of lot of lot
REDONDO front-20 ' - - min .
.BEACH side-5 ' 5 , 000 sq .
rear-15 ' private-150 ft.
sq, ft, 7 ' min
dim.
SANTA MONICA front-20 ' - 60%.• - min.
side-5 ' of lot 4 , 000 sq.
rear-15 ' ft.
nuntington beach developnoic services department
SrAff
EPORT
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Development Services
DATE: July 21, 1981
SUBJECT: FOLLOW-UP PROGRESS REPORT/SMALL LOT CONDOMINIUM ORDINANCE
On June 2, 1981 the staff presented the attached report to the
Planning Commission suggesting several possible amendments to
Article 936 of the' Ordinance Code. The report, which identified the
problems with applying the present Planned Development standards to
small lot condominium projects, was prepared for the purpose of
gaining the necessary input needed by staff to develop a code amend-
ment which conforms with the Planning Commission' s directives .
The Commission reviewed the report and requested the following addi-
tional information:.
1. A table comparing the development standards in Article 932
(Apartment Standards) with Article 936 (Planned Development
Standards) .
2. Information on whether it is feasible to include a requirement for
the provision of affordable housing the the PD ordinance as a
"trade-off" for the reduction of PD standards in small lot devel-
opment.
A table comparing the apartment standards with the planned development
standards is attached.
In regard to the affordable housing incentive as a trade-off for
reduced standards in PD ' s, it is the staff ' s feeling that it would be
more consistent with. the goals and policies of the City ' s Housing
Element to address the affordable housing issue through the adoption
of a separate ordinance which would be applied unilaterally to all
multi-family situations.
In the previous report to the Planning Commission it was recommended-
that changes be made in the open space standards to accomplish more
design flexibility on small lot projects . The existing uniform open
space standards, particularly the requirement for a 10, 000 square
foot main recreation area, have been found to be out of proportion
with recently approved condominium projects on small lots.
AIM&
A- M-23A
. , l
Small Lot Condo Report Update
July 21, 1981
Page 2 n
As part of the staff ' s study of this issue, PD ordinances from several
other cities were reviewed (see attached table) . Of the ten cities
surveyed, five (5) require that 40 percent of the net lot area be open
space. There is no separate requirement for private open space in any
of the ordinances reviewed. Two of the cities surveyed require a mini-
mum dimension on. the calculable area of open space, one being 10 feet
and the other 5 feet. The other three cities have no minimum dimension
required. Five of the cities surveyed either had no open space re
quirement or calculate the amount of open space on a square footage
Per unit basis varying between 50 to 200 square feet per unit. None
of the. cities surveyed require a main recreation area.
Based on the review of these other ordinances, it is the staff ' s con-
clusion that open space as well as the other development standards
contained in Article 936 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code are
significantly more stringent than the standards of the cities surveyed.
Staff is in. the process of preparing a draft ordinance which we antici-
pate will be before the Commission in August.
' •JWP:JRB:df
Attachments
Sgg
Publish May 27, 1982
NOTICt OF PUBLIC HEARING
CODE AMENDMENT.81-9
PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held by the City Council
of the City of Huntington Beach, in the Council Chamber of the Civic Center,
Huntington Beach, at the hour of 7:30 P.M. , or as soon thereafter as
possible on Monday the 7th day of -June 1982 -
1 of hA+tD by 14,a- ue0i;WAJ'r
for the purpose of considering Code Amendment No. 81-jkmending Sections 9362.11 ,
9362.12, 9362.15, adding Sections• 9362.11 .1 , .9362.11 .2, 9362.11 .3, 9362.12.1 and
deleting Section 9362.13 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code pertaining to
Planned Residential- ;.Development Standards.
i
lit
i
All interested persons are invited, to attend said hearing and express their
opinions for or against said Code Amendment No. 81-9
Further information may be obtained from the Office of the City Clerk, 2000 Main
Street, Huntington Beach, California. 92648 - (714) 536-5227
DATED May 24 `. 1982 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
By: Alicia M. Wentworth
City Clerk
NOTICE TO CLERK TO SCHEDULE PUBLIC HEARING
ITEM
TO: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE DATE:
PLEASE SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING USING THE ATTACHED LEGAL NOTICE FOR THE
_DAY OF
f'
AP's are attached
AP's will follow
Initiated by:
Planning Commission
anning Department
Petition
* Appeal
Other
Adoption of Environmental Status (x)
YES NO
Refer to 11A �� N�S Planning Department - Extension #
for additional information.
* If appeal, please transmit exact wording to be required in the legal.
• PUBLISHED. IN .H. -INDEPENDENT NEWS
April 8, 1982
LEGAL NOTICE
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
CODE AMENDMENT NO. 87-9
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held
by the City Planning Commission of the City of Huntington Beach
California, for the purpose of considering Code Amendment No. �l-9
amending Sections 9362. 11, 9362..12, 9362, 15, adding Section 9362. 11. 1,
9362. 11. 2, 9362. 11. 3, 9362. 12. i and deleting Section 9362.13 of the
Huntington Beach Ordinance Code pertaining to Planned Residential
Development Standards.
Said hearing will be held at the hour of 7: 00 P.M. , on
April 20 , 1982 , in the Council Chambers Building of the
Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington 'Beach, California.
All interested persons are invited to attend said hearing and
express their opinions for or against the proposed Code Amendment
No 81-9
Further information may be obtained from the City Planning
Department.
Telephone No. (714) 536-5271
DATED this 8th day of April, 1982
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
James W. Plain
. By Secretary