Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Seacliff Phase IV - Appeals - W of Goldenwest St, N of Palm (41)
Nurmi.: 'ro cm..' tK 'ro s(;ju,mj1.F, PUBLIC lil'.ANIN(i �/ rrF:1; DDw a�0' t 77 2 TO: CITY (:IXRK 'S OFFICE' DATE: FR©M: 1 PLEASE SCIIF MI` A PUBLIC HE.Aimc: usuic 'I'i:l: NrTA(:11KD i.1:(;Al. N(1HCF: imH 'ruE _1)AY OF 1917. AP' s area attached AI'' -s will follow No AP' -; Initiated by: Planning CumAssion Plaetntnp, IlararLmuttt Petition * Appen I - Other Adoption of Cnvirnnmcntal Strttua (x) YES NO Refer tofa 4 �, 1'lannini, Department - Extenoinn for additiotte information. T' If appeal , please tram:mit (!xrtrt wording to he required in the U%L � �919 o�. 7.w+�,�./7�. e�'�• /lo 1006 7 , oa�8 , I004.9 CIF Zi4L /u9an,»=:� A 77-23 . ?ALa iAAa(5) tu4 eMd flu Lc,a 4ae.� a4e 64 &44op�,�.# 114 oenc. .k:t., _QC wut 9a GroPea.�.a..t st.;nP*t� 6 li-OL atj2P,� a,qzmk ed, Elu -t�aaCs)1�..�i ..:a. .A..aA �eownw,/��BIG' ..x- � Llil nPA[uuwrh 64�:rre�dwk..,. Qi,.. 7.A i ..ypaiyli eend�.ke,���yopi,v..( t/ruf w+.�z �y�,snQa{ wia h..�.n.6e.a� r� G , Y, � I, Ra4.(#4JI.At 0�1 5 '/3w (ekt+a ' -vw wit- /.vctL A97 :006$ ary} /aosY asl tlagopud f�a bAa, C/uti.� llu �s •(� "��' ".• `G�� ' �.zt+ut t& -4A t4 w4wk JU44 aol� ArA .41, ZAtslm,4 Aidl RR;A Alp �r��1 n�n�. .b �,;n e�uu�,� w�El. lie rwM.4wtj fnao�l � wnu y�a.Pa� .�i z4 3tyraP""� ..8ecawo- �eG (,�ie ee,�cG:tvnc,9F �yawnd t/uk ��Pgwu� I . i I I � - - - - - - - .. - - _ _ _ _ - - - - - - .. _ _y_ - _ .. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .. _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ - - �- "5tAbDa6rt. of PilaharidC� A J. Mall Ooap ' 8C /70- 477-23 i 3.50 Q Ava"m "m Viclrws stsvot ; IT 10067, 10me 1.OAi9 j"q ftaidl, Calif -en Od Muf I Oct, 24t 1573 WW ; low y211a ' ' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - . - . . . 23»2u-.i5 0 wlsr�r oantrrolao.rd 1110 ll"m s ; �a.==EL�t Curls ; "33 I, dLm Avenm SuLte 1 i ew.an, Calif � AmingtM,2�� w.�t'' ceu� utrnr.-.nc. Calif 92648 g uIrArIvu. Gaulty Sanitation - - - - � 23*21i-16 1!!ltl IrgtM DOMC'1 UMIWAMV District, �►ttxt 8 Mowzt1 ' Ux L%Lvi&ia m 6551 NwrLU q Tide Crive 10644 El I I a Avenar .125 Numb MUSK ' 14kwtLwUin its+ Calif , FamtA n Valley. Calif ::M FnrL-,. AMV CAL111 94120 i 92648 i Si27b� 23-231-09 , tl. L School ' JA I N A ri WO ' oisttict A-MI 00M Kluf f Cir--im rn - 17-th 9treat , f aattir rbM needle Ca U awtAzqtm Bejm*, Calif 92b46 _ _ 92648 _ 23-211.10 . . . . . . � H.S. I,N11m lligd: School calpt of tra W%XU-ta t,1►. ) LdAtrizt 120 Su. swing Street 1.402 17th street � ! L m Angalm, Calif 900052 U nt tnrpm Eaatc h 8re L f ' Attne Staff Aadiatmit - 0 92644 23 M-11 ; � 1.14-014-39 + H*Aft C Stvlat , Mama um Z 19tl4i1 O��rrn Muff Circle' P.U. 0=2828 , i junting trl,"• 1laat.h, CAli f 28 8 iV,VA14 em 92648 , L Q ;,:ieah, calif 90806 _ - - - - - - - - - .I r�1r�Ya.cv�3t,al- - - - - - - tom ? - - - - - - - - - - - - I jCy + 811 N bittaaaM+ty I '-N V 1Laa s' ISanta A-.a, Cali 92601 15i851 Oman bluff Circle Bob Eina I I r ljuntin"m bamYi, Caw ! 11b48 , 1J- 231-13 - - - - - - - - - ,Ami,ywdryt.01M-L2UA.a - - - - - - - � - - - • - - - - - - • - - • - - - - - - - i�ar�ry a Morrie ;imi Gwwtrwy LI~•w I 1>tunUMt�an Oftbah, Call t 92t49 1y841 Lksan bluff circle � slln� OWN--h, calif 13--231-14- - - . . _ . . . _ ,��-ot ►itawri 1trt�c� - - - - - . - - 1- - - - - - • - • - i815 (.at�ll.Lna Avamm 'iticwvre J Wan � de�� C�l.Lf , 19831 Gain ti31ulf Circica 00740 D"011 t:ilif , 1 1 , Noticps _5 �, WrIcl of IWAC salvo APPEALS ON SEACLIfF PHASE IV wricz I8 W"11T 41M tact a Public hearinG will be hold by the City Council Of the Cite of WAti4ton reach, in t1w Council Chenber of the Civic Canter, bmtL%ton leschs, at the h wr of 1.30 P.M. , or as soon thensf ter as pee able, on Tu�� the _ 2,,,,_jOZh day of _ February 19 9 oe for the purre or considering appeals o* the Planning Comissiort's approval on January 16, 1919 of Tentative Tracts iio. 10067, 10m, IM69 and Conditional Ilse Permit No. 77-23. These three (3) tracts and the conditional u3e permit are for the devalopwon; of a 531 unit Planned residentla) development on a 114 acre site iocatsd west of Goldernrest Street, north of Palm Avenue and south► Pst of the Soac);fr Golf Course. The applicant% appeal of the three (3) tracts is based on specific conditions of Approval pertaining to the required dedication and improvement of 38th Street, drainage design, required sewering system, and the requirement for the dedication of a park site on the north side of Palm Avenue. The specific conditions of approvrl that were appealed are Numbers 3. 6, A, 11 . 18 and 19. The Amigos de Boise Chic& appeal of Tentative Tracts No. 10068 and 10069 and Conditions' Use Permit Me. 71-23 is based on urban runoff into the Bolst Chic&, the approved aligrmosnt of 39th Street is too close to edge of the bluff, product area "C" is too close to the Bolsa Chica lowlands, And the approve) of this overall project s buld be delayed until after the cdopletion of the Local Coastal Program. These appeals will be heard in con'unction with an appeal of Tentative Parcel Map Fa. 18-38. This tentAtive parcel rM p is in conjunction with the above mentioned tracts and was appealed by the applicant because of the conditions of approval that required the dedication and Improvewn t of 38th Street. A legal description is on file In the 'Tanning Department Office. Ail Interested persons are invited to attend said hearing and express their opinions for or against said AWWS. further informtion my be obtained from the Office of the City Clerk. 2000 Main Str:tt, %nt1r4 tor. k4ch. Co. 92648. - (714) 536-5226 Dated: February S, 1979 CiTY OF WINTON BEACH ly: Alicia N. Wentworth City Clark RE0UE4b*T FOR CITY CCKJNCIL, kCT10N Submitted by _ James W. PaIin _ Department . Planning Date Prepared February 13, 11979 Backup Material Attached (Z Yes [] No Subject APPEALS -- TENTATIVE PART".L MAP NO. 78-37 ; TENTATIVE. TRACT MAPS 10067 , 10068 , AND 10069 ; CONDITIONAL USE: PERMIT NO. 77-23 . City Administrator's Comments Approve as recommended by staff. •'•.�.•�/....�.�... .�1�4.Y�r.�ar...r�rrra�..�. ��Yw - --- r Y.�r1..��� ��.�.� Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions; STATEMENT OF ISS'TE: 1 . An appeal filed by the Huntington Beach Company on behalf of the A. J . Hall Corporation appealing) the Planning Commission _ approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 78-37 , Conditions 1 , 7, and 8 and reouest.�ng clarification on Condition No. 5 . This appeal was previously before the Council at your January 15, 1979 meeting and was continued to be Beard concurrently with subsequent appeals relating to this roject. Appeal filed December 26 , 1978. 2. Appeal filed by A. J. Hall Corporation appealing the decision of the Planning Commission on Tentative Tracts 10067, 10068 , and 10069 , Conditions 3, 6, 8 , 11 , 18, and 19. Appeal dated January 31 , 1979. 3. Appeal filed by the Amigos de Bolsa Chica to the Planning Commission ' s approval of Conditional Use Permit W) . 77-23 and Tentative Tracts 10068 and 10069 . Appeal dated January 25 , 1979 . The above-referenced appeals are filed to the Planning Commission' s decision to approve Seacliff Phase TV, r►nich is located on property along the westerly leg of the Seacliff Golf Course . RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff Recommendations : Tentative Parcel Map No. 78-37 : Staff recommends that the City Council re3ect the appeal by the Huntington Beach Company and sustain the Planning Commission' s decision subject to the findings and conditions of approval as proposed by the Commission plus the added condition recommended by the Commission at its January 6 , 1979 meeting on the maintenance of 1 M0 a 1.00 Seacliff Appeals - I1CA0 to February 13 , 1.979 Page 2 landscaping alone Palm Avenue to be the obligation of the property owner. Tentative Tracts 10067 , 1.0068 , and 10069 : Staff recommends that the Council reject the appeal-filed by the A . 0 . Hall Corporation and sustain the Planning Commission decisions on these three tract maps . Conditional Use Permit No. 77-23; Tentative Tracts Iota s 10068 and 10069 : The staff " recommends that the City Council reject the appeal filed by the Amigos dL Bolsa Chica and sustain the Planning Commission decision on the conditional use permit and the tract maps . Planning Commission Recommendations : Tentative Parcel _Map No. 78-37 : At its December 12, 1978 meeting the Planning Commission r_onditionally approved TPM 78-37 as follows : ON MOTION BY PAONE AND SECOND BY RUSSELL TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 78--37 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS , BY THE FOLLOW— ING VOTE: FINDINGS : 1 . The proposed tentative parcel map is consistent with the City ' s General Plan, subject to final adoption of Zone Change 78-4 . 2 . The proposed parcel map is in compliance with standard plans and specifications on file with the City as well as in compliance with the State Map Act and supplementary City Subdivision Ordinance. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1 . The tentative parcel m received by the Planning Department on October 5 , 1978 , shall bu .he approved layout , subject to conditions cf approval and adjustment_ to reflect boundary line changes result- ing from the final adoption of Zone Change No. 78-4 . 2 . A parcel. map shall be filed with and approved by the Department of Public Works and recorded with the Orange County Recorder. 3. Copies of the recorded parcel map shall be filed with the Planning Department and with the Department of Public Works. 4 . Water supply and sewage disposal shall be through the systems of the City of Huntington Beach at the time of development . 5 . The boundaries of Parcels 1 and 3 shall be extended to include the full rights-of-way of 38th Street and Palm Avenue. The boundary of Parcel 2 shall be extended to include the total right--of-w;y of Palm Avenue . 6. Approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 78-37 shall be null and void if zone Change 78-4 does not become effective . Seac l.i f f Appeals - RCA February 13, 1979 Page 3 7 . The City will precine plan 38th Street within a period of one year. Said precise plan shall terminate at Pacific Coast Highway on the south and Garfield Avenue and Edwards Street on the north . Dedication of 38th Street to its full ultimate precise-planned width shall be made by the developer From Pacific Coast Highway to Garfield Avenue . Full street improvements shall be installed within the blue border of the subject map , and improvement of at least -two (2 ) 12- foot travel lanes shall be provided in 38th Street fromthe northerly boundary of the map to Garfield Avenue and from the southerly boundary of the map to Pacific Coast Highway . Said dedi- cation and improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any phase of the project to be con- structed upon subject site . 8. The applicant shall participate to 50 percent of the cost of any traffic signals which the Department of Public Works deems to be necessary at 36th and Pacific Coast Highway and at Garfield Avenue and 38th Street. AYES: Russell , Cohen, Baxil , Paone NOES: Stern ABSENT: Finley ABSTAIN : Higgins NOTE: Please see suggested added Condition No . 9 at the bottom of page 12 of this report. Tentative Tracts 100671 10068 , and 10069 : At its January 16, 1979 meet- ing the Planning Commission conditionally approved subject maps as follows : ON MOTIONS BY RUSSELL AND SECOND BY BAZIL TEN'T'ATTVE TRACT MAPS NOS. 10067, 10068 , AND 10069 WERE APPROVED WIT}i THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS , BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE : FINDINGS : 1. The .. ...,�;...�; proposed subdivision is consistent with the General and Epeci.fic Plana applicable to the property. 2. The design and improvement features of the proposed subdivision are in compliance with standard plan3 and specifications on file with the City as well as in compliance with the State Map Act and supplemen tary City Subdivision Ordinance. 3. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of the development proposal . 4 . The design of the subdivision and its improvements is unlikely to cruse substantial enuironmesntal damage or cause serious publIx health problems . Seacliff Appeals - RCA February 13, 1979 Page 4 5 . The design of the subdivision And its improvements does not conflict with public easements . CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL : 1 . A revised composite site plan incorporating all requirements of the Planninq Commission shall be submitted for review and approval prior to the recordation of any final map . said revised composite site plan shall then become the approved layout for development of Ten- tative Tracts 10067, 10068 , and 10069 . 2 . Prior to construction of the Seacliff Phase IV project , a traffic signal shall be installed at the intersection of Palm Avenue and Goldenwest Street. The costs of such installation shall be borne on a 50/50 ratio between the developer and the City of Huntin:,ton Beach. 3 . If the City precise plans 38�h Street between Pacific Coast Highway on the south and GarfieIJ Avenue/Edwards Street on the north within a period of one year after recordation of the first final map of this project, the developer shall dedicate 38th Street to its full precise-planned width from Pacific Coast Highway to Garfield Avenue . Full street improvements shall be installed within the blue border of the subject maps and , in the event that 38th Street is so pre- cise planned , the developer shall provide improvement of one (1) 12-foot travel lane in each direction on 38th Street from the north- erly boundary of the map to Garfield Avenue and from the southerly boundary of the map to Pacific Coast Highway . Said dedication and improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any phase of the projects to be constructed upon the subject site . 4 . Palm Avenue shall be dedicated and fully improved to its ultimate right-of-way width from its intersection with A Street within Tentative Tract 10069 southeasterly to its intersection with Golden- west Street. S. Revised tentative tract maps shall be submitted to reflect the change in the boundary of the total project as conditioned by the Planning Commission . Said revised maps shall be submitted prior to the recordation of any final map. 6 . Palm Avenue , A and B Streets, and 38th Street shall be dedicated and fully improved to ultimate right-of-way within the blue border of Tracts 10067, 10068 , and 10069 . 7 . The borders of Tentative Tracts 10069 and 10068 shall, be expanded to include the full rights-of-way of Palm Avenue and 38th Street. The borders of Tentative Tract 10067 shall be expanded to include the full right-of-way of Palm Avenue. B. Final design of the drainage system, the retention basins , a►nd the channel improvemnts shall be subject to approval by the Director of public Mflrks , the California Departm+ant of Fish and Game, and r I Seacliff Appeals - RCA j February 13 , 1979 Page 5 the Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to recordation of any final map. These systems shall be designed to provide for siltation and erosion control both durinq and after con:itruction of the project. If for some reason the developer is unahle to co,st:ruct the drainage facilities as proposed in the information he has submitted to the Planning Commission for drainage into the RoIna Chica , the drainage system shall be redesigned and constructed to accommodate surface drainage from the project area to the ocean via 38th Street. 9 . Sewer , water , and fire hydrant systems Ghall be subject to City standard plans and specifications as adopted by the City Council . 10 . Except where private entry drives intersect with Palm Avenue , 38th Street, and A and B Streets , vehicular access rights to said streets shall be dedicated to the City of Huntington Beach. 11 . Reach 3 of the District 11 Sanitary Sewer trunk line facility pro- posed to he constructed from the project to Lake Street shall be constructed and in operation prior tc the occupancy of any dwelling unit within the Seacli.ff Phase TV projects. 12 . All main entryways from public streets shall have a minimum 30-foot curb radius; at locations as specified by the Department of Public Works pursuant to Public Works standards. 13. All inner-turning curb radii shall be a minimum of 17 feet and outer curb radii shall be 45 feet, except in Product B which shall have a minimum outside curb radius of 40 feet- . 14 . Median breaks and left turn lanes in both directions shall be pro- vided in Palm Avenue at locations and to the specifications of the Department of Public Works . 15. Prior to recordation of the final maps , the developer shall file with the City an kbrevocable letter of agreement to accept drainage from the pubic streets into the private drainage system. This agreement shall be recorded and a copy submitted to the City of the recorded document. 16 . Approval of Tentative Tracts 10067 , 10068, and 10069 shall become null and void if Zone Change No. 78-4 does not become effective. 17. Interior private streets in Tentative Tract 10067 shall provide two (2) minimum travel lanes of 12 feet from ciirb face to median curb face. 18 . The developer shall be required to dedicate to the City a park site of a minimum area of three (3) acres between the alignment of 38th Street as shown upon his maps and the City boundary along the bluff line northerly of the intersection of 38th Street and Palm Avenue. This dedication shall be completed prior to the recordation of the first final map . Seacliff Appeals - RCA February 13, 1979 Page 6 The area located on the northeasterly side of Palm Avenue between the oil operation island and the existing tennis court facility within the Seacliff Country Club complex shall be dedicated as a park site concurrently with the recordation of Final Map 10069. 18a . The wall design and landscaping treatment around the oil operation island located at the southeasterly corner of the intersection of A Street and Palm Avenue shall be submitted to the Planning Departmant for review and approval action . Wall and landscaping shall be installed by the developer , and the Homeowners ' Association shall be responsible for maintenance of the landscaping until such time as the oil opera- tions have terminated upon subject site and an alternate use has been established thereon . 19 . The blue border of Tentative Tract 10069 shall be relocated to incor- porate the area between the oil operation island and the existing tennis courts at the southeasterly intersection of Palm Avenue and A Street as a part of this subdivision . The border of the project shall also be relocated to incorporate thoRw areas 3oned R2-PD-O and to exclude those areas zoned ROS-O by the approval of Zone Change No. 78--4 . after final approval of said zone change . AYES : Russell , Stern , Finley, Bazil , Paone NOES: Cohen ABSENT: None ?BSTAIN : Higgins The Planning Commission re--ommends that the City Council deny the appeal filed by A. J. ball Corporation and sustain the Commission ' s approval of Tentative Tract Maps Nos . 10067 , 10068 , and 10069 with the findings and conditions as outlined above . Conditional Use Permit No. 77-23 Tentative Tracts 10068 and 10069 : At its January 16 , 1979 meeting the Planning Commission con itionally approved Conditional Use Permit as follows : ON MOTION BY RUSSELL AND SECOND BY f'•AONE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 77-23 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS , BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE : FINDINGS: 1. The proposed use of property is consistent with the General Plan. 2 . All design and improvement features are proposed in compliance with City ordinances , standards , and special permits granted by the Planning Commission. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1 . The revised composite site Flan reflecting those details and ameni- ties as required by the Planning Comission and those shown upopi supporting plans received on October 18 , 1978 shall be constructed Sr:aeliff Appeals - RCAO FEbruary 13 , 1979 Page 7 an indicated within tha developments , including but not limited to open space, water areas, textured pavement, fencing , schematic elevations, materials and colors, recreation facilities, pedestrian walkways , and oil well + reatmcnt. 2 . Prior to issuance of building permits , all exterior building eleva- tions shall be reviewed and approved by the Planninq Department. 3 . The CC&Rs and Association rules shall set forth provisions to pro- hibit the storage of recreational vehicles upon designated open parking spaces within the project:. 4 . Prior to the issuance of building permits , the developer shall sutrnit a firal landscape plan for review and approval by the Planning ant Public Works Departw nt.s . Native plant materials shall be utilized in landscaping programs within the project drainage facilities . The project sponsor shall coordinate with Lhe Depart- ment of fish and Game in the preparation and review of the3e land- scape plans . 5 . All garages within Product Area C and any other garages in the other: Product areas which are constructed having less than a 20 foot drive apron shall be equipped with automatic garage door openerx. 6 . If central air conditioning is installed in any units , the inzula- tior in ceilings and exterior walls shall be a minimum of R-19 and R-11 respectively . Arf no central air conditioning is provided, the insulation in ceilings and exterior walls shall be a minimum of R-13 and R-7 respectively. 7 . All building spoils such as unusable lumber, wire , pipe, and other surplus or unusable materials shall he hauled to an offsite disposal facility. S. All dwelling units shall be constructed in compliance tirith the State acoustical standards set forth for all those units that lie within the 60 CNEL contours of the property . 9 . Energy saving lighting, such as higtl-pressure sodium vapor lamps or equivalent energy saving types, shall be used in recreation areas . 10. Low-volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets within the dwelling units . 11 . Construction techniques recommended in the gootechnical report on fill! for they project shall be undertaken to the satisfaction of the Director of Building and Community Development: . 12 . Prior to the issuance of building permita , the developer shall submit to the Planning Department for review and approval a fully dimensioned site plan for all logs within the su %di.vision. Seacliff Appeals -- RCA* February 13, 1979 Page 4 13 . Prior to the i:3suance of building permits , detailed calculations on interior noise levels based on final building plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department and the Building Department for review and approval . The interior noise ievels of all structures shell not exceed the California noise insulatior standards of 45 dba CNEL. 14 . A'. I surfaced areas used for drives for vehicular access in , over , and through all rheas within the projects shall. be designated as fire access lanes and posted as such . The M&Ps for the homeowners ' Association shall contain a provision to require that the Association enforce parkins restriction in those fire lanes . 15 . Approval of. Conditional Use Permit No . 77-23 shall become null and void if Zone Charge No, 78-4 does not become effective. 16 . Prior to recordation cf any final map, the CC&Rs for the projects zhall be submitted to the Planning Department for revie•rt to assure `ompliance with all applicable conditions of approval and to the Attorney' s office for review as to legal form. 17 . Prior to final ;)uilding inspection , temporary fencing to consist of a five (5) foot high chain link construction shall be installed sin the northwest side of 38th Street adjacent to the project bound- ary to prohibit access to the surrounding cil operations , bluffs , and marsh are! unless the area subsequently becomes subject to the jurisdiction of a public agency. 19 . The revised plan for Product C received and dated January 16 , 1979 shall be the -.reproved Layout for the minimum parking regairements on Product C . Each parkina node shall reflect total circulation around and 'through such area and the design of such circulation shall be subject to the approval of the Fire Department . 19 . Prior to any improvements to the existing drainage channel , test level investigations shall be made by a qualified archaeologist approved by the Planning Department for ORA 293 and ORA 794 . A written report shall be submitted to thc Planning Department indicating the depositional character , the research potential , and potential miti- gating measures for each site. Mitigati.on measures necessary to preclude site impairment? as approved by the Planning Director, shall be complied with. 2.0. The CC&Rs and the Association rules shall contain a provision that the Homeowners ' Association shall be nbligated for maintenance and upkeep of the drainage system, sidewalks , irrigation system, and landscaping both within and outside of the public rights-of-way adjac- ent to the public street sections within the Seacliff Phase IV devel- opment, except that the Association shall not be obligated to maintain *ny landscaping, str*et paving , ,or drainage systems located withit+ then public rights-of-way frow back of curb to beck of curb. Seacliff Appeals - RCA* February 13 , 1979 Page 9 21 . Recreational facilities Shall be provided within the conveon open area of Product Area A. The revised plans received and dated January 16 , 1979 , shall be the approved layout for these facilitiets . 22 . Information submitted by the developer for consideration for inclusion in the Reel Estate Report for all three product areas shall contain a statement on the obligation of the Homeowners ' Association for the maintenance of private drainage systems and sidewalks . 23 . The land owner or his designee shall be responsible for the installa- tion and the maintenance of the berming , landscaping , and wall fr.r noise attenuation treatment along the southwesterly side of Palm Avenue between the existing tennis court facility and the intersection of Palm Avenue and 36th Street . 24 . All private drives a qed to provide ingress and egress for zlie oil ! operations shall be required to be constructed with a street section the same as those constructed for local streets . 25 . A raiser; median shall be constructed within A Street at the ?nter-- section W. th 38th Street , of a width and design to comply with the specifications of the Department of Public Works . 26 . If the City develops landscaping standard plans for the scenic routes within the City within one year of the first recordation of any final map within this project , the developer shall install the treatment along 38th Street in com;3iance with said Flans for the off island oil wells , screening walls , and landscaping areas along that route . 27 . Street rights-of-way dedication to the City for A and a Streets Shall include ±' 42 feet, plus area for public utilities easement back of curb to back of curb. All street landscaping and meandering sidewalks shall be owned and maintained by the Homeowners' Associa- tion . Public access shall be provided on perimeter walkways . 28 . Street right-of-way dedicated to the City for Palm Avenue shall be 100 feet wide . This right-of--way shall include an 8-foot offstreet bikeway on the southerly side in lieu of a sidewalk . A meandering sidewalk and intensified landsci ping shall be provided on the northerly side of the street . The sidewalk/landscaping on the pro- ject side of Palm Avenue shall be owned and maintained by the Home- owners ' Association. 29 . A meandering sidewalk and intensified street landscaping shall be provided on the east side of 38th Street and shall be owned and maintained by the Homeowners ' Association. Public access shall be provided on this perimeter sidewalk . 30. In Tentative Tract 10069 , landscape planters with parking on one side only shill be extended in a perpendicular fashion tm each vW to denote parking areas a• outlined in attached XxhLbLt Mo. 1. Seacl l f f Appeals -- RCA O February 13 , 1979 Page 10 31. Detailed plans for noise attenuation on the south side of Palm Avenue shall be approved by the Planning Department prior to issu- ance of building permits. 32 . Off island wells shall be converted to common open space under the ownership and maintenance of the Homeowners ' Association at such time as coil o-erations cease . The abandonment and clearing of the site of all oil operation equipment shall be the responsibility of the oil operator. The Homeowners ' Association shall be responsible for the installation and maintenance of all landscaping to convert the areas to common open space . In the alternative , the developer may , prior to the recordation of a final map , submit a revised site plan to incorpnrate these areas into additional lots and/or units within Products A and B. This pij.n shall be reviewed for approval action by the Planning Depart- ment and the CC&Rs for the project shall include provisions for the annexation of these areas. 33 . Three-foot (31 ) maintenance easements shall be provided in Tenta- tive Tracts 10067 and 10069 along all zero side yards unless the Homeowners ' Association will assume all exterior maintenance responsibility. 34 . `A drainage system maintenance plan for percolation/retention ponds, culverts , channel improvements, and related facilities shall be developed to ensure facilities will maintain design capacities to assure continued effectiveness. This maintenance plan shall be approved by the Department of Public Works and the California Department of Fish and Game prior to construe'. �.on. Maintenance of the drainage system other than in the public street system shall be the responsibility of the Homeowners ' Association and/or the developer . Representatives of the Regional Water Quality Control Board and/or the Department of Fish and Game shall be allowed to periodically inspect the drainage system and make recommendationo to the Home- owners ' Association and/or the developer to take any action necessary to ensure that the drainage 'acilities are maintained in an effective condition . " Effective condition" shall be defined as that condition which maintains the water flow in terms of both quality and quantity to within 95 percent of : 1) the standards of the Water Quality Control Board , or 2 ) the existing present condition based upon measurements taken within 60 days subsequent to the approval date of the tenta- tive tract maps , whichever is the more restrictive. If for any renson the Homeowners' Association and/or the developer fails to take action to remedy a deficiency of the drainage system within 30 days of notification of such deficiency, the City may Seacliff Appeals - RCAO February 13, 1979 Page 11 then take action to maintain that drainage systesti to restore` it to effective condition and shall be reimbursed for all costs for such Maintenance by the Homeowners' Association and/or the developer. 35 . The revised plan for Tentative Tract 1U068 received and dated January 16 , 1979 , shall be the approved plan for minimum parking requirements as set forth in Section 9362 . 16 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code . . AYES : Russell , Bazil, Paone, Finley , Stern NOES: Cohen ABSENT: None ' ABSTAIN : Higgins For the action on Tentative Tracts 10066 and 10069 , please refer to actions set forth previously in this transmittal . The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council deny the appeal filed by the Amigos de Bolsa Chica and uphold the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 77-23 and the accompanying maps . ANALYSIS : The Seacliff Phase IV projects , Tentative Parcel Map 78-37 , Conditional Use Permit No. 77--23 , and Tentative Tract Maps 10067 , 10068 , and 10069 were reviewed by the r1anning Commission at a number of meetings. It would be impossible to set forth in this transmittal all of the issues discussed by the Planning Commission and its approach to resolving those issues through its review and approval action. Therefore , the staff has attached for your review the minutes of those Planning Com- mission meetings to give you some insight into the diRcussions and the subsequent approval actions . Following is an analy., a of the appeals filed , in the same order as previously followed in this transmittal . Tentative Parcel Map 78-37: The letter of appeal states that the proponent is opposed to Conditions 1 , 7 , and 8 and that he requests clarification by the City Council on Condition of Approval No. 5 . Condition No. 1 : This condition was necessary to require that the oun ary e a justed to reflect the ultimate decision on the zoning boundary as determined by the City Council on Zone Change 78-4 to make the proposed project and action consistent with general and specific plans of the City of Huntington Beach. Condition No . 7 : Requiring the dedication of 38th Street to its ultimate Q!Rh from Pacific Coast Highway to Garfield Avenue was conditioned by the planning Commission because after review of the environmental impact report it was felt that too much traffic would be directed to Goldenwest Street if theTe were no provision for a second entrance into Seacliff Appeals - RCA4* 41 February 13, 1979 Page 12 this development. The Platnninj Commission requested information on the number of trips anticipated to be generated from the proposed project per year over 38th Street to Garfield Avenue , and it was determined that approximately 467 , 200 trips per year would travel over 38th Street with an approximate savings of gasoline consumption of 35 , 818 gallons per - year if 38th Street were to be required to be installed concurrently with this project . Condition No. 8 : Requiring that the developer participate up to 50 percent n the construction costs of signals which the Department of Public Works deemed to be necessary at the intersections of 38th Street and Pacific Coast Highway and Garfield Avenue and 38th was imposed by the Planning Commission due to the impacts from additional traffic anticipated to travel those streets from the construction of this project. The developer in his letter of appeal also requested clarification of Condition No. 51 which requires that the blue border or boundary of Parcels 1 and 3 be extended to include the full rights-of-way of 38th Street and Palm Avenue and that the boundary of Parcel 2 be extended to include the full right-of-way on Palm Avenue . This condi- tion was added to allow the map to be consistent with specific plans of the City of Huntington Beach as well an to assure that there was adequate highway width within the boundary of the proposed project. Additional Information : It should be noted that the Planning Commission has subsequently held a public hearing on the Seacliff Phase IV on January 6, 1979 , at which time it was tentatively determined that the full width on Palm Avenue should be dedicated and improved from the project to Goldenwest Street as well . The Planning Commission at its January 16 , 1979 meet- ing imposed a conditio:i requiring such dedication and improvements as Condition No. 4 of the conditions of approval on Tentative Tract Maps 10067 , 10068 and 10069 . The Planning Commission in its review on January 6 , 1979 indicated its desire that the staff communicate to the City Council the concern on maintenance of landscaping to be installed by the developer along the southwesterly portion of project area along Palm Avenue as noise attenuation and aesthetic treatment to separate the Aminoil oil operation strip frcaA the proposed project. The Commission was informed that the requirement for such maintenance would be more appropriately conditioned on the Tentative Parcel Map, as none of the tentative tracts were proposed to encompass said property . The Planning Commission therefore recommends that the City Council add the fallowing condition to the conditions of approval for the tenta- tive parcel map: Suggested "The land owner or his designee shall be responsible Condition 9 : for the installation and maintenance of the berming, land- scaping , and wall for noise attenuation treatment along the southwesterly side of Palm Avenue be�:ween the existing tennis court facility and the inter' ection of Palm Avenue and loth 8trget . " Seacliff Appeals -- RCAO rebruary 13 , 1979 Page 1.3 It is noted that the applicant did concur with the imposition of this added condition at the January 6 , 1979 Planning ::ommissior. hearing . Minority Report: Planning Commission Stern has requested that the Depart- ment submit his minority recommendation for Condition No. 8 of the Conditions of Approval ]Imposed on Tentative Parcel Map 78-37 as follows : "The applicant shall be solely responsible for 100 percent of the cost of any traffic signals which the b-:partment of Public Works deems to be necessary at the intersections of 38th Street and Pacific Coast Highway and Garfield Avenue and 38th Street. " Tentative Tracts 10067 , 10068 , and 10069 (A. J. Hall Corporation Appeal) The applicant , A. J . Hall , in his letter of appeal dated January 31 , 1979, sets forth his reasons for appealing Conditions 3 , 6 , 81 11, 18 , and 19 . The appellant in his appeal letter stated that Conditions 3 and 6 are not necessary as they exceed normal Conditions of develop- ment and impose an unreasonable financial burden upon the applicant. The Planning Commission in its review of this project felt that it would be very undesirable to allow 500+ units to be constructed at the end of what they deemed was a two-mile cul-de-sac without having the additional escape routes which these conditions provide, as well as full street improvements within the boundary of the proposed. project. It would be impossible to predict when the adjacent properties would develop to achieve full width utreet improvements on those streets within the project ; therefore , the Planning Commission, based upon traffic counts from the project as well as anticipated need, required the above-referenced conditions . Condition 8 : Drainage. The appellant has requested a modification to this condition to pro- vide for future flexibility in alternative drainage designs. After much review by the Planning Commission , and as the proponent could not assure that authorization from Signal Landmark would be granted for the drainage into the Bolsa Chica or permission given to go onsite to make the necessary modifications for the proposed drainage , the Commission conditioned the development to provide drainage ianili- ties to the ocean via 38th Street if he were unsuccessful in obtaining drainage into, the Solsa Chica and/or if he were unable to meet the requirements of the Department of Fish and Game and the Regional Water Quality Control Board for water quality standards with the proposed system. Condition 11 : Sewers . The proponent has requested deletion of this condition in ;Favor of a normal Uondition of development imposed by the City which requires a seweri.ng system that is acceptable to the Department of Public Works and the Sanitation District at the time of development. The Planning Commission in its deliberation on this subject did not Seacliff Appeals - RCA FebruAry 13, 1979 Page 14 feel that it was inappropriate to require that Reach 3 of the District 11 sanitary sewer trunk facility be constructed and in operation prior to the occupancy of any dwelling unit within the Seacliff Phase IV project. It should be noted that this condition does not nece.3sarily require that the developer construct this facility; however, if he chooses to phase his project in prior to the phasing by the Sanitation District on the Pacific Coast highway trunk facility , then it would be his responsibility to construct this leq ( Reach 3) of the District' s trunk line . Conditions 18 and ).9 : Parks . The appellant has requested deletion of the conditions requiring the park site on the north side of Palm Avenue adjacent to the existing tennis courts within the Seacliff Country Club facility, as they do not feel the park at that location is suitable or necessary. In the Planning Commission ' s deliberation on the park site locations, it was felt that this othenvise unusable area was the only feasible property within the Seacliff TV development upon which to designate a neighborhood park site to serve both the prior Seacliff develop- ments as well as this project. The Planning Commission in its review prior to designating a park Bite to be located on subject property requested information from the developer on the anticipated use for this parcel because of its size, donfiguration, and restricted access to a local street. The developer could not indicate a future use for the area and the property could not be developed under its existing zoning designation because of its size ; therefore, the Planning Com- mission then decided to condition that the property be set aside for park purposes. Conditions 1 and 5 : The appellant in his January 31, 1979 letter has withdrawn his appeal to conditions 1 and 5 on the Tentative Parcel Map 78-37 , as he states they are no longer objectionable because of the City Council approval action on Zone Change 78-4 . He also asks that his objections to Conditions 7 and 8 regarding 38th Street be reviewed in context with his objections and letter of appeal on Conditions 3 and 6 of the tenta- tive tract maps , as both pertain t:j the same subject. Conditional Use Permit No. 77-23; Tentative Tract Maps 10068 and 10069 : Arms os de Bolsa Chica Appeal : The appellant has set forth in its January 25 , 1979 letter of appeal four issues that they feel should be reviewed and discussed on the Seacliff Phase IV projects : Issue No. 1: The appellant has stated the urban runoff is allowed to flow into the Bolsa Chica wetlands and thence to the State Ecological Reserve rather than being conveyed directly to the ocean. Eedcliff Appeals - RCP February 13, 1979 Page 15 In its deliberation , the Planning Commission spent much time discussing this issue and through their conditions of approval with the stipula- tions within Condition No . 8 on the tentative tracts as well as condi- tion of approval No. 34 on the conditional use permit , have essentially mitigated to their satisfaction the effects and alternative drainage systems for this project . Issue No. 2 : 38th Street is not precise planned and the alignment of that street as approved in these tracts places the street too close to the edge of the bluff in some places. In the design and reviews of the Seacliff Phase IV, a number of revisions took place prior to the projects being submitted to the Planning Commission at a public hearing . These prior revisions required that Product Area C be revised to afford a greater setback from the bluff edge. This setback on 38th was also submitted to the County for its review and recommendation , and they concurred that sufficient set- back had be.:n provided to afford for a lineal park as well as all nec- essary facilities or systems within such park . Is lue No. 3 : Product C is incorrectly sited in that it places a maximum density of Seacliff Phase IV closest to the environmentally sensitive eolsa Chica lowlands . The staff in its original staff report had also listed this as an issues however, in review of the General Plan and locational criteria for higher density residential developments , it was determined that this product area is properly sited . However, the height and bulk are not referenced in the General Plan for locational criteria and would be an issue to resolved through the coastal planning function. Issue No. 4 : Approval of the project should be deferred until the Local Coastal Program is completed. They also go on to state that if the project is approved it will negate current coastal planning for the area. The Planning Commission in its review also felt that the project would prejudice the preparation of the Local Coastal Plan; however, the City Attorney ' s office researched this aspect of the approval action and in- formed the Commission that they could not make a finding that the approval action would prejudice the preparation of the Local Coastal Plan as they were not the Coastal Development Permit issuing agency. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The Planning Commission has requested that we include their concerns on the approval of this Seacliff phase IV project, which outline why they voted the way they did as well as setting forth concerns that they had at the time of approval. Following is a summary of those concerns : Seacl i f f Appeals - RCAO February 13, 1979 Page 16 Corsmisaioner FinleY2 Commissioner Finley expressed her continuing con- cern about the Local Coastal Program, saying that approval of the project would. be a pre-judgment in this area . She noted that, although the Com- mission has been advised that the LCP is not within its purview, it should still be possible for the Commission to act in its advisory capacity to the City Council by pointing out the conflict with the pending Local Coastal Program and perhaps by asking the Council for a moratorium in the area until the LCP is completed. ?t is her intention to vote against the project to get these concerns in the record . Mrs . Finley changed her "no" vote on C.U. P . 77-2:3 to "aye" and voted the same on the tentative tract maps for the following reasons : 1) the maps must be acted on at this meeting or stand approved without conditions ; 2 ) The Commission has worked hard to place conditons addressing the many areas of concern , and the appeal to the City Council will enable the Council to determine the sufficiency of those conditions. Commissioner Cohen: Commissioner Cohen based his "no" vote on the proposals because the project will be prejudicial to the Local Coastal Program, no provision is made for affordable housing , there has been little or no trade off for the special permit requests that have been granted , and no weight has been given to the cost/revenue aspect of the project. Cummiss ioner Bazil : while voting in favor of. approval , Conunissioner Bazil requested that the record show that he is opposed to the requirement for the 3--acre park west of 38th Street because he feels that designation of park sites should be left to the Recreation and Parks Commission . Iie can , however , endorse the 1 . 5 acre park site at Palm and Goldenwest , as it uses up a problem piece of property, is easily accessible, and could be used by both .the existing Seacliff and the subject project. Mr . Bazil also asked that the gas and mileage information presented to the Commission in regard tr,. 38th Street be included in any transmittal to the Council. Another concern was making sera that Reach 3 of the trunk line was in and available to the project prior to occupancy of the L 11itS . Commissioner Stern : Commissioner Stern requested that a minority report be submitted in his name to the Council on the issue of low- and moderate- income housing within the higher density product , Product C . It was his suggestion that 10 units could be assigned to low-income buyers and 10 units to moderate-income buyers . The other Commissioners requested that a majority report be submitted pointing out that their reluctance to include such a condition on the project was not based on opposition to low-cost housing per se but only against the methods proposed to effect it. It was uointed out that the City presently has no provisions or expertise to enforce such a condition, and until a specific, detailed plan is worked out which would include numbers of units , price and income criteria, enforcing mechanisms , etc. , it would be better to leave the matter to the Coastal. Commission. Comi.ssioner Stern also expressed reservations in regard to the effect an the Local Coastal, Prograw. Seacliff Appeals - RCA February 13 , 1979 Paqe 17 ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS : Seacliff Phase IV has been reviewed for environmental impacts by EIR 77-6 , which was ayproved by the Planning Commission at its November 14 , 1978 meeting . Therefore , no additional action is necessary on environmental documentation for the appeals filed on this project . FUNDING SOURCE: Not applicable . ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS : Tentative Parcel Map No. 78-37: 1 . Overrule the decision of the Planning Commission and deny the request . 2 . Overrule the decision of the Planning Commission by deleting or modifying the conditions of approval . 3. Sustain the decision of the Planning Commission and add a condi- tion of approval regarding the maintenance of landscaping along Paim Avenue as outlined previously . Tentative Tract Maps 10067 , 10068 , and 10069 : 1. Overrule the decision of the Planning Commission and deny the tentative tract map applications . 2. Overrule the decision of the Planning Commission by deleting or modifying the conditions of approval. Conditional Use Permit No. 77-23 : 1 . Overrule the decision of the Planning Commission and deny the conditional use permit request . 2 . Overrule the decision of the Planning Commission by deleting or modifying the conditions of approval. SUPPORTING INFORMATION: 1 . Huntington Beach Co . letter of appeal (TPM 78-37 ) 2 . A. J. Nall letter of appeal (TT 10067 , 10068 , 10069 ) 3 . Amigos de Bolsa Chica letter of appeal (TT 10068 & 10069 , C .U .P. 77-23 4 . Area Map 5 . Original Staff Report (11-7-78) 6 . Amigos de Bolsa Chica letter dated 11-28•-713 7. Memo from J. Barnes (1-5-79 ,, S. Memo from J. Barnes (1-8-79 ) 9 . Memo from J. Gerspach (1-10-79) 10. Memo from M. L. Norby ( 11-7-78) 11 . Memo from M. Zambery ( 1-4-79) 12 . Fiscal Impact Analysis Seacliff Phase IV Appe, , -R- RCA 40 Rebruary 13 , 1979 Page 18 13. Outline of Concerns to be discussed at Planning Commission meeting Jan. 6 , 1979 14. Planning Commission minute:: : November 7 , 1978 November 14 , 1.978 November 28 , 1978 December 12 , 1978 January 6 , 1979 January 16 , 1979 January 23 , 1979 15 . EIR 77-6 16 . Ilydrology Report (as addendum to EIR 77-6) Respectfully submitted , James W. Palin Acting Planning Director JtiWP :df CFFiCE OF THE CITY CLERK 2000 main Street Huntinglon Beach, California 92643 r � 1 c� NOTICE OF PUBUC HEARING ZONE CASE NO. 78•19 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hmrrng will he held by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beech, in the Council Chamber of the Civic renter, Huntington Beach,at the"ur of 7:30 p.m.,or as won thereafter as poss►ble,on Tuesday the 20th day of Fabruery, 1979,for the "pose of considering a petition for a change,of Tone from C4 11-lighwey Commercial District) to R2.0 (Medium Density 11cradentlol/Gualified Classification District)on property generally looted on the north side of Pscific Coast Highway.approximately 200 test won of Anderson Street. A lagal detcriptian tt on file in the Planning Depsrtmarn tJ!fics. The City Council will step be considering Negative Decla►a• tan No. 70-IC9 in conjunction with done Cate No.79.1f1. rUl intansttad pow nt are invited to attend said hearing and exprcts their opinions for or against said Zone Case 70.19. Further Inforntaiion mey be obtained from the Office of the City Clerk.2000 hWin Serest.Huntington Beach. CA.226" 1714) 536.522C Dated: 215 Pi 9 CITY OF MUN1114GTON BEACH By: ALICIA M.VVENINVOR IN City Clai► Pub.2/En9 Hunt.B•+dr Ind. 71 r �r"� nn►► d - y�M crr'cr�K January 25, 1979 JAN Alicia Wentworth City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, Ca. 92648 Dear Ms . Wentwortht Amigos de Bolea Chica reauests to appeal to the City Council the Planning Commission 's approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 77-23 Seacliff Phase IV, Tentative Tract Dios. 10068 and 1006910 This appeal Is based on the following iseuess 1 . Urban runoff is allowed to flow onto the Bolea Chica wetlands and hence to the State Ecological Reserve rather than being conveyed directly to the ocean. 2 . 38th Street is not precierl planned and the allign- ment as approved places the street too close to the edge of the bluff in some places . 3 . Product "C " is incorrectly sited in that it places the me.ximum density of. Phase IV closest to tho environmentally sensitive Bolsa Chica lowlands. L}. Approval of the project should be deferred until the Local Coastal Program is completed, The project as currently presented does not comply with some aspects of the existing General plan, and if approved will negate current coastal planning for the area. Our c:-.eck fir $75 is attached to cover the cost of this appeal . Very truly yours, Herb and Melody Ghr�tterton Co-Presidents Anigoo dt Baler, Chica. atUchavent I � A.J. Hall Corpora tioin ple"is ` I/rsvv devtloping 830S Vickers Strttt,Suitt R P.O. Bux It 505 / / award-winning IN C 'San Diego,Caiiflinia 92111 communities III f 'A (714) 565.1 162 y{U1iT11iZ i J�K 11 �Q QiJA 11S January 31 , 1979 APPEAL - TENTATiVE TRACT MAP NOS. 1130671 10068 and 110„069 Huntington Peach City Council 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, ea. 51648 Attention: Ms. Alicia Wentworth City Clerk Honorable Mayor and Counc_1 '. Members: We hereby appeal the P1a.1ning Commission' s January 16, 1979 approval of Tentative Tract Map Nos. 10067, 10068 a.nd 10069, t:he subdivision of 114 acres of land into 190 lots , one lot , and 145 lots, respectively , all within the Seacl i ff Phase IV development area. Specifically , we are appealing conditions of approval Nos . 3, 6, 8, 11 , 18 and 19 relating to each Tentative Map for reasons including those listed below. We will elaborate further at the public hearing. Conditions No. 3 and 6 (relative to 38th Street) : We feel these conditions are not necessary or feasible for this project; they exceed normal conditions of development and po,e an unreasonabie financial burden upon the Applicant . Condition No. 8 (drainage) is too limiting and precludes future consideration of alternative drainage designs which may also be acceptable to the City. We,, therefore, request a modificatlrn to this condition to provide for such flexibility, Condition No. 11 (Sewers) : The method and tuning for adequate severing Is a function i,o be assessed by the City rind County Sanitation District as each phase of construction i!, comi ncad. We request •jeletion of this cimclition in favor of the rtarmal condition of development imposed by the City which requires a severing system that is acceptable to the Department of Public 4orks ani the County Sanitation District at the time of developmnt, A.J. Hall Corporation 8305 Vickers Street, Suite R developing P.O. Box 11505 ■ward-winning San Digo, Cali fornia 92111 communities (714) 565.11 G' January 31 , 1979 page 2 Conditions No. 18 and 19 (Parks) Impose the requirement for a park site along the North side of Palm Avenue. We request deletion of this condition because we feel that a park at this location is not suitable or necessary. Concerning our appeal on Tentative Parcel Map No. 78-37, we wish to clarify our letter of appeal submitted December 26 , 1978. Based on the City Councils action to approve Zone Change No. 78-4 we no longer object to Condition No. 1 and Condition No. 5. Conditions No. 7 and 8 (regarding 38th Street) : We request deletion of the conditions based upon the same objections as stated regarding Conditions No. 3 and 6 of Tentative Tracts 10067, 10068 and 10069. Your consideration of all of our petitions under appeal at the February 20, 1979 City Council meeting would be appreciated. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, A. J. HALL CORPORATION, Applicant by: /✓ Attachment : Check ($75.00) CITY OF HUNTI"O'roff MACH 41 INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION MATSK"MACH To CITY COUNCIL From CHIEF PICARD C/O BUD BELSITO FIRE DEPARTMENT CITY ADMINISTRATOR Subject PRECISE PLAN FOR 38th STREET Date FEBRUARY 14 , 1979 It has come to our attention that the developers of the Sea Cliff Phase IV project are contemplating an appeal to certain conditions of approval which have been placed on their project by the Planning Commission. This memo is an official request that the City Council uphold Condition #7 for tentative Tract #78-37 for the precise plan of the 38th Street alignment, the dedications and improvements . It is very important for good fire protection that there be adequate access and egress which will provide smooth uncongested traffic flow. The project will add approximately 531 additional units to an area with F•xisting units and a country club . Without 38th Street, Palm Avenue will be the only entry and exit to the area for Fire, Para-medic, Police and Ambulance Service. .also, in the event of an incident in the area that would require evacuation, one exit to the area would pose extreme problems for all emergency services and pose an extreme life threatening situation . As a matter of past policy, the Fire Department has asked for two Alter- nate routes at completion of 100 units, when 150 unite have been com- pleted, we have req-aired full flow public access which in the case of Sea Cliff is Palm Avenue and 38th Street from Edwards to P.C.H. "a TOo HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY COUNCIL FROMI .AMIGOS DE BOLSA CHICA Herb and Melody Chatterton, Co-Presidents SUBJECTS APP&%L - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 77.-23 SEACLIFF PHASE IV TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NOS . 10068 and 10069 This appeal is based on the fact that• as approved ')y the Planning Commission, portions of the Seacliff IV pro eet are, -aot in confor- mance with certain laws of the State of California, the General Plan of Huntington Beach, and certain ordinances of Huntington Beach. Issue A . Product C is of excessive density_. Discussions Product C is submitted under the medium density provisions of the City Ordinances and General Plan . reledium density allows up to fifteen ( 15 ) units per acre . The criteria to allow such density is to : • "1 . Locate in close proximity to commercial and other t business areas , educational and institutional facilities , cultural and other 'public facilities e. . transportation P ( g P routes) . 2 . Should serve as a buffer or transition area between low density or estate residential and more intense land uses, where possible . " (General Plan 3. 431.3 ) Since Product C meets neither criteria, its density should be no more than the minimum of seven (7 ) units per acre. Recommended actions Coouncil finds that TIT 10068 is inconsistent with General Plan Section 3. 4 . 3.1.3 , and for that reason approval of TT 10068 is denied. Issue B. Product C has excessive bulk. Discussions All units in TT 10068 are o.' two story construction and most structures have eight (8 ) units. The existing zu.ie t R2--PD) allows no more than 6 Luiitu per structure and re- quirea that at least one third (1/3) of the units, be of one story construction (S.9)12. 9) . Recommended Actions Council finds that ':T 10068 is inconsistent with ordinance S. 9312 .9 , and for that -eason approval of TT 10068 is denied. ?slue Co Product C is iml2ronerly. located. Discussions Tentative Tract 10068 (Pr. oduct C ) is the highest density development existing or. proposed between Geldenwest Street and the Aol_sa Chica lowlands . The location of TT 10068 ploeas this: highe::t density closest to tho environmentally sensitive lowlands. The incompatability between -the aen&ity Appeal on Seacl.if'f IV Wruary 20 , 1979 goo de Bolsa Chica Page 2 proposed for TT 10068 and the sensitive lowlands allows denial under the Subdivision Map Act S.66474 "(d) That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development. " Recommended Actiont Council finds that TT 10068 contains a density not suitable for the site due to the immediate adjacency to the Bolsa Chica lowlands and planned County Regional Park, and for that reason approval of TT 10068 is denied. true D. 38th Street is improperly aligned.. Discussions No specific plan for the alignment of 38th Street exists. Both the alignment of the existing road and the alignment in the City 's adopted General Plan are farther from tho bluff edge than the alignment contained-in.-TT 10068 and TT 10069. This narrowing of the strip between the street and the bluff edge leaves insufficient space in some places for the County ' s linear park. The proposed alignment also requires that a portion of 38th Street be constructed on a large new fill through a ravine leading to the Bolsa Chica lowlands. This proposed fill lies almost directly over the South Branch of the Newpart Inglewood Fault. The Subdivision Map Act requires denial if "the site is not physically suitable for the type of development" S. 66474C . Recommended Action: The Council finds that TT 10068 and TT 10069 are inconsistent with the City's General Plan regarding the alignment of 38th Street. The Council also finds that the site is not physically suitable for the construc- tion of 38th Street upon d fill. For those reasons approv- al of TT 10066 and 10069 is denied. Issue E. Product A includes some units to be 1placed on otentiall unstable fi . Discussiont Tentative Tract 10069 includes several housing units to be located on fill to be placed in the existing ravine . The ravine lies almost directly over the South Branch of the Newport; Inglewood Fault. The Subdiyisior. Alap Act requires denial if "the site is not physically suitable for the type of development. " S. 66474C. Recommended Actions Council finds TT 10069 includes housing units on potentially unstable fill and that the site ie not physically suitable for such development, and for that reason the approval of TT 10069 is denied. Appeal on Seacliff IV ruary 20, 1979 gos de Bolsa Chic& Page 3 I �ff II laces an un cce tabl lit and u it no water nto the Balsa Chica lowlands , pis*cussioni The proposed drainage mystem includes siltation basins which prevent low flows (light rains) from entering the lowlands and remove silt from. the . runoff. However, the system does not remove disolved chemicals and floating materials . Thus , the sensitive environment of the low- lands' including the State Ecological Reserve, will still get all the leLd compounds, oils, fertilisers, pesticides and floating trash, Also, during severe storms, the rate of flow will be higher than before development. The Subdivision I-lap Act requires denial if "the design of the :subdivision or the proposed improvements are likely to . cause substantial environmental damage or :substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. " S. 66474e. Recommended Actions Council finds that the proposed project would discharge surface runoff of degraded quality into an environmentally sensitive wetland and wildlife habitat area, and that such discharge would be likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife, and for those reasons approval of TT 10069 is denied. Issue G. Pre udicing. the Local Coastal Plan Discussions The City is in the process of dei►eloping a Local Coastal Plan as mandated by State law. The undeveloped areas in- cluding and surrounding the Bolsa Chica are the most sensitive to be addressed by an L.C .P. in Western Orange County. If Seacliff IV is approved prior to completion of the L.C .F. , the many planning options which should be considered for the Huntington Beach Mesa dis3a.Fpear. If approved , Seacliff IV will undoubtedly set the pattern for development for a majority of the mesa. The issue ass should we try to fit development into our plans, or should we fit the plans to the development? Recommended Actions hone . The opinion of the City Attorney that denial of a project for reason of prejudicing the Coastal Planning Process is the perogative of the Coastal Commission prevents Council action. Appeal on Seacliff IY ruary 20 , 1979 goo de Bolea Chica Page 4 SUnum-r-ya, Each of the issues A through F above are sufficient grounds for denial of the Tentative Tract Maps and Conditional Use Permit for Seacliff IV. Together, the six issues require denial of the project. Ddnv Tentative Trgs. t 10068 becausee a. Does not comp y with General Plan 3.4.34 3 (Issue A ) b. Does not comply with City Ordinance S.9312.9 (Issue B) c. The site is not physically suitable for the density of the development. (Issue C ) d. The alignment of 38th Street is inconsistent with the General Plan. (Issue D) e . The cite is not physically suitable for the type of development . FIssue D) f. The design of the subdivision and its improvements is likel to cause substantial environmental damage. (Issue FT Deny Tentative Tract 10060 becauses a. The alignment of 38th Street is inconsistent with the General Plan. (Issue D) b. The site is not physically suitable for the type of development . �Issue D) c . The design of the subdivision and its improvements are likely to cause substantial environmental damage . (Issue F) Deny Conditional Use Permit No 27-23 because : a. Does not comply with general- Plan 3 .4.V,3 (Issue A) b. Does not comply with City Ordinance 59312. 9 (issue B) c. The alignment of 38th Street is inconsistent with the General Plan. ( Issue D) oil i TO t HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY COUNCIL FRWJ I AMIGOS DE BOLSA CHICA Herb and ?Velody Chatterton. Co--Presidents SUWECT : APPEAL FILED BY-A .J . HALL CORPORATION Conditions 8 (Drainage ) and 18 and 19 (Parks) DATE February 20, 1979 The developer has apppealed certain conditions placed on the project by the Planning Comm,seion. We believe the developer's appeal should be denied on Conditions 8, 18, and 19 for the following reasonsr Condition No. 8 SDrsina e ) . The applicant feels that the option of aicharging his runoff either to the Bolea Chica lowlands or to the ocean is too restrictive. He requests modifica- tion to allow flexibility of design. We believe that the option of discharging surface runoff to the Bolsa Chica lowlands should not be allowed. The quality of runoff from the presently designed storm system will be harmful to the fish and wildlife, of the Bolea Chica lowlands, especially the Ecological Reserve, since the runoff will pass through the Res^rve on its way to Huntington Harbour. If the Council modifies Condition Number 8 the option for discharge into the Bol.sa Chica lowlands should be removed. If flexibility for future design changes is added, they should include the same public hearing process as the original project. Recommended_Action: Modify Condition No. 8 to reads The drainage system shall be redesigned and constructed to accommodate ourface drain age from the project area to the ocean via 38th Street. Final, design of the drainage system, the retention basins , and the channel improvements shall be subject to approval by the Director of Public Norks , the California Department of Fish and Game , and the Regional Water Quality Control Board, prior to recordation of any final map. These systems shall be designed to provide for siltation and erosion control both during and after construction of the project. Condition Nos. 18 and 1 Parks The applicant requests relocation of a three acre park site dedication from an area near Palm and A street to an unspecified lbcation. If Council agrees that the palm and A Street location is not necessary, we request that the three (3) aches be added to the other i A- 13 11 Appeal on Seaeliff IY Fab r 200 19?9 Amigos de Boles Chica Page 2 park dedication site westerly of 38th Street. In no case should the park dedication for this project be separated fromthe project by more thah 500 feet. /-C:YY Of&00 Joseph H. Loob A Inc Fiegionrii :��risc.1 � rr Mrr,c►►, C;ali}c. n , ':)�f,s7� P.+G�, Fro �r AMIN OIL USA February 20 , 19119 Huntington Beach City Council 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Attn. Ms . Alicia Wentworth City Clerk Subject: Appeals--Tentative Parcel Map No. 78-37 ; Tentative Tract Maps No. 10067 , 10068 acid 10069 ; Conditional Use Permit No. 77-23 Honorable Mayor and Council Members : Aminoil USA, Inc . is the operator of certain State offshore oil and gas leases from surface locations within the uplands adjacent to the proposed project . It also operates oil and gas leases within the Bolsa Chic:a area . Aminoil hereby registers its objections to subject Maps and Use Permit including, but not limited to, the following : 1 . Aminoil objects to the extension of 38th Street from the pro- posed development to Pacific Coast Highway. Such extension will pass through Aminoil ' s densely spaced oilfield facility operations adjacent to Pacific Coast Highway. This will create a traffic and safety hazard within this oilfield operation. 2 . Aminoil objects to a drainage system which will create drainage into the Bolsa Chica area . Such a drainage system would adversely affect Itminoil` s oilfield operations . Very truly yours , AMINOIL USA, INC . By el I Joe p oe cc : Huntington Beach Co . Tonal Counsel and 2110 Pain Street A eistant Secretary Huntinmton Beach, CA 92648 1N THIC Superior Court )LO OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA to and for the t:oimtry of Orange CIIY..OF..1�lTINNTON BEACH. + .CITY. CLFRK ...... .......................................... ....... . .......... ....I........................ PROOF OF PUBLICATION ftb j.ic.Hesr.in-78 4 . .78-3T..........•...... (ie1�Ily a aV )U. Rita J. Richter ?W I am end at all times herein mentkned was a citlaen of the UsWed States,over the ale of twenty-on years,and that 1 am not a party to,nor h4waNd in the above entitled matter; that 1 am the piacilai cWk of the pritrter of the Huntington Beach Independent Review a asw*sFeper of general cIrCulatian,pubUshed in the City of Hunt1rrtton beach O=Wy of Orw@e and which newspaper is published for the dia. sendedlen of local news and intelligence of a paval character, sal wpkh newspaper at all times herein memloaed had and still was a bou 66 subscription list of paying subocribam,and which aa�rpapar bra boon adalikshed,j ttatod snd pubNshad at rogulw Juten►�Yr In do slid Cambly of Orange for a pwioil exceeding ooe year;that the DWM.of wwh the arrre:ed is a printed copy,has been pub&*W In the regular and entire Wan of said newspaper. surd not is any supplenxM thereof,on the following date$,to wit: z: Jartuery 4+ IM 1 certify for declare I under ptnaity of perjury that the foregoing is true and eanect. t)Wadat ..................... GardRR.rroYa.......... ... C I....4thdar or,dan; r.M...7�... Suture caw,ar RWjW FOR CITY b&i,ib&X,,Or1ON su.)Mkw by 4tuaea M. P.alin � Planning Ilepertment .••�.._.r.r...W...n..N.r.... i Data PrqxwW J��nuar,�8 , 1g? gachup WMISl �>ttar►:hixi Y►� p No Subject „.�&e y Tt...�. .d1: CHANGE NO. 78-4 AND TF.NTJ4T71VE PARCEL MAP' N0. 78-37 ...._�._.�....`.R ...., City Administrator's Comments Approve the ?tanning Commission's and staff's recommeneationis, or after hearing testimony of applicant, sustain or modify recommendations. -.--•r�.-._�...�.�..�__I ..._....�..�... Str►tesmern of Issue, Rewrnmendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alliernative Actions: STATEMENT OF ISSUE : An appeal filed by the Huntington Beach Company on behalf of the A.J. Hall Corporation appealing the decisions and recommendations of the Planning Commission on Tentative Parcel Map No. 78-37 and zone Change No. 78-4 , respectively. Tentative Parcel Map No. 78-37 is a request to subdivide a 300 ± acre . parcel of land into four (4) parcels to facilitate tha development of the Seacli•ff phase IV planned residential pro► ec•t. gone Change No. 78-4 is a request to change the zoning on 1.48 acres of property presently zoned ROS-0 to R2-PD-0 and to chance the zoning of 1. 669 acres of land presently zoned R2-PD-0 and R3-0 to ROB-O. Seaclif•f Phase IV is located on property along the westerly leg rf the Se cliff Golf Course. RECOMMENDATIONS: STAPP RECOMMENDATION Tentative Parcel Map No. 78-37 : Staff recommends that the Ccunc:il re c:t thii-lippeal and sustain tae Planning Commission' s decial'on subject to the findings and conditions of approval as imposed by the Commission plus the added condition recommended by the Planning Com- mission at its January 6 , L979 meeting on the maintenance of the landscaping along Palm Avenue to be the obligation of the property owne r, I„�,�,88IOIt �t�DCQ1li8 in!fJAq 7-10 N t Tenta%tiM - Parotr]�: Ma Me. 78-37 : At its Deter lZ, 1978 Ming tne any,Ing" rs CM 004-1 iom,ally approved TPM 78-37 as followers ON NOTION 1bY PA ONE AND SECOND Sy RUSSSU TENTATIVE PAWRZ NhP MO& 7 8,4 3 7 14M APPRWED WITH THE lryDIUWX►r�, FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, BY THE rOLLOWING VCME : I FINDINGS: � 1. proposed The ro tentative p po parcel. crap is consistent with the City' s �.. General Plant subject to final adoption of Zone Change 76- 4. '••ry w •.._ . _ ter.+-.. - T.r ........r......._. ,. ....�..,..,... .w....o..1.r i,.. ..w.... .. .:..J J+. .........,...ti,..: .V.., '..w I Y...Mr Yr...tlMl.aa..)a..r...•-... r...r..r.....wN.........r...r.r'J..........•. r......✓...+..... ..,1.....' I" 2. The proposed parcel map is in compliance with standard plans and specifications on file with the City as well as in compliance with the State Map Act and supplementary City Subdivision Ordinance. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The tentative parcel map received by the Planning Department on October a, 1978 , shall be the approved layout, subject to condi- tions of approval and adjusit:ment to reflect boundary line changes resulting from the final adoption of Zone Change No. 78-4 . 2. A parcel map shall be filed with and approved by the Department of Public Works and recorded with the Orange County Recorder. 3. Copies of the recorded parcel map shall be filed with the Planning Department and with the Department of Public Works. 4 . Water supply and sewage disposal bhall be through the systems of the City of Huntington Beach at the time of development. 5. The boundaries of parcels 1 and 3 shall be extended to include the full rights-of-way of 38th Street and Palm Avenue. The boundary of Parcel 2 shall be extended to include the total right- of- way of Palm Avenue. 6. Approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 78-37 shall be null and void if Zone Change 78--4 does not become effective. 7 . The City will precise plan 38th Street within a period of one year . Said precise plan shall terminate at Pacific Coast Highway on the south and Garfield Avenue and Edwards Street on the north. Dedication of 38th Street to its full ultimate precise-planned width shall be made by the developer from Pacific: Coast Highway to Garfield Avenue. Full street improvements shall be installed within the blue border of the subject map, and improvement of at least two (2) 12-foot travel lanes shall be provided in 38th Street from the northerly boundary of the map to Garfield Avenue and from the: southerly boundary of the map to Pacific Coast Highway. Said dedication and improvements shall be compLated prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any phase of the pro- ject to be constructed upon subject site . -2- •. fhe applicant shall particippt• to 50 percont of the cost of any traffic r Ionals which .that .Department of Public Works deems to be necessary at 38th and Pacific Coast Highway and at Garfield Avenue and 38th Street . AYES : Russell, Cohan, Basil, Pacne WORS : Stern A38Mt •-Tinley A STAINt Higgins •_-_._..._..ti,_.... ... -1. .._. _ .•mow rr...._r_...._w.. ..r.MF^ _.._.. .�..�_. .._....._.. _..._._ r •._.. _.�...�_. ,- ............. ,. the Planning Commission recomends that the City Council uphold its approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. *18-37 with the findings and conditions outlined above and the additional condition requiring k.rsatment. along Palm Avenue as dell nee t ea an Page-4--el WL" - Report. .. ....._. r_._. r_/w.....�..+._...,..w.+.. .........._.._........._.-..r.,_.«*...w-.+�..wr..• ...r..w. r__..._w+....n �w ........whrr ww.weMrArN.gMIt.I/M/II�MM�4.r _. Zone Change No: 78-41 The Planning Comission offers the fall ing aI ern—tives for Fie City Council' s consideration and reca:awhn s the adoption of one of the attached ordinances : 1 . Approve Zone Change No. 78-4 insofar as it requests boundary changes of 1. 488 acres of ROS--O zoning to R2--PD-0 zoning and in no other respect, with the condition that a corresponding 1. 488 acres of land be dedicated by the applicant and allocated to park acreage in an area to be later determined. 2 . Approve Zone Change No. 78-4 as requested, with the condition that Parcel 4 (a change of zone from ROS-O to R2-PD-0 on 0. 362 acres of land) be deleted from the request. Further action and Comitission discussion on the zone change can found in the original Request for Council Action dated December 21, , 1978, attached herewith. ANALYSIS: - __ ,..... _.. ., .... ..;.. ..__ ._..__..__...r.._r. �.�._. - -- ,....,�.:.... ...r,..,... -Tentative "Parcel ti. '78'-37: The letter ofip_ peal states that the proponent is opposed to Uitions of Approval Nos. 1 , 7, and 8 and that he requests clarification by the City Council on Condition of Approval No. 5. Condition No. 1: This condition was necessary to require that the boundary be a Dusted to reflect the ultimate decision an the zoning boundary as determined by the City Council on Zone Change No. 78-4 to make the proposed project and action consistent with general and specific plans of the City of Huntington Beach. Condition No. 7: P.equiring the dedication on 38th Street to its ultimate Mth frrm Pacific Coast Highway to Garfield Avenue was con- ditioned by the Planning Commission because after review of the environmental impact report it was felt that too much traffic would be directed to Goldenweat Street if there were no provision for a second entrance into this development. The Planning Caa►ission re- -3— f - t�tested�'in ormat 'on� on the number of� trips+arit' c paterd o la+rTM +d rats from the proposed project per year over 38th Street to Garfield Avenue, and it was determined that approximately 467, 000 trips per { year would travel over 38th Street with an approxinatt savings of gas aline consumption of 118, 000 gallons per year if 36th Street were to be required to be installed concurrently with this project. -l..yy..,....-.. ..r<..:'..YfY.... fr•ti^-.... ..... ♦eR,., , .w.«,.....+......�.M MY•`YYM+•�M.'r.V .tF:..r�lw...wL.h. 1.�✓✓ti.iM Condition_. .,. ..w'1..,. . . ._.. ... ... ..{lan.y. ..-....._......l. ..,,l.f,+s,rw r.y,,,., w,..•w.rw.•.•.r ,.tee, u,.. No. 8 : Requiring that the &veloper participate up to � po rcent n the construction eoste of signals which the Department of Public Works deemed to be necessary at the intersections of 38th Si .,Mat and Pacific Coast Highway and Garfield Avenue and 38th was imposed by the Planning Commission due -to the impacts from additional traffic anticipated to travel those streets from the construction of this project. The developer in his letter of appeal also requested clarification of Condition No. 5, which requires that the blue border or boundary of Parcels 1 and 3 be extended to include the full rights-of-way of 38th Street and Palm Avenue and that the boundary of Marcel 2 be extended to include the full right-of-way on Palm Avenue. This condi- tion was added to allow the map to be consistent with specific plans of the City of Huntington Beach as well as to assure that there was adequate highway width within the boundary of the proposed project. Additional Information : It should be noted that the Planning Commission has subsequently held a public hearing on the Seacliff Phase IV on January 6, 1979 , at which time it was tentatively determined that the full width on Palm Avenue should be dedicated and improved from the project to Goldenwest Street as well. The Planning Commission has not yet made a final determination on this conditions, as the final action and conditions of approval are scheduled to be reviewed at the January 16 , 1979 , Planning Commission public hearing. The Planning Commission in its review on January 6 , 1979 indicated its desire that the staff communicat^ to the City Council the con- cern on maintenance of the landscaping to be required to be installed along the southwesterly portion of the development along Palm Avenue as noise attenuation and aesthetic treatment td separate the Aminoil oil operation strip from the proposed project. The Commission was informed that the requirement for such maintenance would be more appropriately conditioned on the Tentative Parcel Map, as none of the tentative tracts were proposed to encompass said property. The Planning Commission therefore recommends that the City Council add the following condition to the conditions of approval for the tenta- tive parcel map: "The land owner or his designee shall be responsible for the installation and maintenance of the berminq, land- scaping , and wall for noise attenuation treatment along the southwesterly side of Palm Avenue between the existing tennis court facility and the intersection of palm Avenue and 38th Street. " It in noted that the applicant did concur with the imposition of -thin added condition ct the January 6, 1979 Planning Commissior hearing. —4— Minority Ro ort: Planning Commissioner Stern has requested that the Spartment submit his minority recomwndation for Condition No. 8 of the Conditions of Approval for Tentative Parcel Map No. 76-37 as follows: "The applicant shall be solely responsible for 100 per- cent of the cost of any traffic signals which the Department of Public Works deems to be necessary at the intersections of 38th Street and Pacific Coast Highway and Garfield Avenue and 38th Street. " Sane Change No. 78-4 % The proponent filed his appeal to the ,Planning q n ou recamo r� ations on�onts.__Change No. 78�-4 , as it % Virg hf s uuiderstanding that .thane recrnanendat Rolls-' 6ulc'1"'pr c-rWd�4 i s irginaI requested rezoning from being heard by the Council. T 5,. however , _.. the staff In position based on the Pldinn ng C—ommiesioRfs Alternative 2 recommendation and the legal notice published for this request (which was originally scheduled to be reviewed by the Council at its January 2, 1979, meeting) , that the Planning Commission action would have allowed the City Council to act on the zoning as originally requested. The Council at its January 2, 1979 meeting continued this zone change request over to its January 15 meeting at the request of the developer to allow him to be present and participate in the discussion of these items. Detailed discussion on zone Change 78-4 can be reviewed in the attached original Request for Council Action dated 12-22-78. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS ; Seacliff Phase IV has been reviewed for environmental impacts by EIR 77-6, which was approved by the Planning Commission at its November 14 , 1978 meeting. Therefore, no additional action is necessary on environmental documentation for the appeal filed to Tentative Parcel Map No. 78-37. The environmental status for Zone Change No. 78-4 was assessed by Negative Declaration No. 78-►119 , which was posted for the prescribed length of time prior to review by the Planning Commission. The City Council is required to take action on the subject Negative Dec- laration 78-119 prior to any action on Zone Change No. 78-4 . FUNDING SOURCt: Not applicable. +" --__ _ -- �. .,......._.......�..�.. ............. ---�• ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS . ........_._ . . _ . .. ...._.... .._._..,.._. . ---.. .........�.._ ....�......_......_......�._...__._.__�......___.w..,.,,"I Tentative, Parcel Map 78-371 1. Overrule the decision of the planning Commission on Tentative Parcel Map No. 78-37 and deny the request, 2. Overrule the decision of the Planning Commission on Tentative Parcel Map No. 78-37 by deleting or modifying the conditions of approval. j � 3. Sustain the Decision of the planning Colminsiol: and add a► condi- tion of approval regarding the maintenance of la►:-lscaping along pals( Avenue an outlined previously. 4 . Continue the appeal until the Planning Commission has acted on Conditional Use Permit No. 77-23 and Tentative Tracts Nos. 10067 , 10068 , and 10069 . Zone Change No. 7 8-4 : 1. For alternative actions on Zane Change No. 78-4 please refer to the original Request for Council Action dated December 221, 1978 . SUPPORTING INFORMATXON: 1. Letters of Appeal 2. Request for Council Action (dated December 22, 1978) 3. Area Map for Seacliff Phase IV 4 . Copy of Tentative Parcel Map No. 78-37 5. Planning Commission Minutes of December 12 , 1978 6. Memo from J. Barnes dated January 5, 1979. Respectfully submitted, James W. Palin Acting Planning Director JWP :df Y�Y AtIngton' lWach Como* in MAAIM aTIIaNT,ONN'I"V"MIM'Il1�"UP"" �� 1 qrall► MNMTINAYON DFACK,CAI IF. %comber 26, 1978 DEC 2; 2 P l APPEAL-TENTATIVE PARCEL MA!' NO. „�8•� Huntington leach City Council 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, Ca. 92648 Attention: Ms. wl Icia Wentworth City Clark hotwrable Mayor and Council Members: Wa hereby appeal the Planning Commission's December 12, 1978 approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 78-37, a division of 300 acres of land into four (4) parcels. Specifically. we oppose conditions of approval Nos. 10 7 and 8. We are also asking for clarification from the City Council in regard to the specific meaning of condition of approval No. S. It is our understanding that this condition Is intended to include only that portion of 38th Streit adjacent to the proposed Phase IV development and not the full right of tray from Pacific Coast Highway to Garfield Avenue. We, therefore, request your approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 78-37 as applied for, subject to the Planning Commission's conditions (exiciuO ng those opposed) and with the understanding of condition No. 5 as expressed above. We respectfully request that this matter be considered concurrently with our appeal on Zone Change No. 78-4. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Ver my yo , _ J y� EA I E tilzoord i iia for on behalf of A. J. Hall Corporation DJE/h Attachment ($75 check) y; r tt ` 1070 ZOE. CIlw Na. 76-4 ; Kiwi Into" %*ON CIt y COMCI 1 ` SM nIn Stroot �t iaNtah Brach. C+e. 9��64i1 . Attaklons Ii. Allcia Wentworth City Clerk Nonerobto Mayor and Councl1 ftiibars We herd appsa 1 the P i ana i nS Ca*l ss I on's ilecoert . 12 6. 1978 app rs ' , 1 of-Zw o Change No. 78-4, an ad j uii tmnt of na'l nq: let►�r l os Wt+w v a 06r0cm of the PMse i v ,pro joct and the exi sti ng OiAt l agtan us', t 1 t Gcj f' Cwifae: We i�pp+ase the t 1 wN%i nN Cam i s s l on l i cow l t i ofhs; Of approval. whlth have be6n suyyrsted to be affixed to the wo1pe ch iq- and riqwst that the My Council 91 re favorable cons idrratlon ,to � • xww change request as filed. We are-Also reques t I ng a rant I nuance oO the x Oepga re"s t ,un t 1 the January 15► 1979 r"ul ati r C.i ty Counc i I r Awt i r@ I n order the i wt may present all rracessery informatlon for the benefit of the City Council 1n their deliberotlans, A check in the aoaunt of S7r to file the appeal Is attached. Thank You for your ettention to this matter. • r� Very truly-yo4rs p• J. f IE Ir crab i IV Cooed i nator on bfhalf of A. J. MI1 t►rporAtipr . DJE/h Attacl+ war r CITY AcnoN ttrd by Jasrre Mo P#lin to t Planni.nq 6 ftv. Resources We Pn*aovd December 22, , 11PL Erduep NOW1*1 Anm*W Q you Q Mo t umic cHAmX No. Ai,4 IG THE WESTERN 80toDARY OY SEACLI PY 0016F COURSE �o MY Adirtifliilnit0�r'��Of1111Mlflti 7*."Plannins Camission's action on Zone *Anle Numh�r 78-4 has been appealed by the applicant; therefore, i an rep: ding that this item be continued until the Council cam hear both the Zone tie tend Appoal caxurrently. Statemew of MUG, RsewrrWnerildmflon, AnalVxh, Funding S ace, AhsrnaW Actkm: §2AMRM OLI�! 'transmitted for consideration it Zone change No. 78-4 , a request by the applicant to change the toning on 1 .48 acres of property presently zoned MOS-0 to R2-PD-0 and to change 1.669 acres of land presently zoned R2-PD-0 and R3-0 to ROS-0. Subject property is located along the wenterly leq of Seacliff Golf Course. The Planning commission is offering the following alternative for the City Councilla consideration and recommends the adoption of one of the attached ordinances : I . Approve Zond Change No. 78-4 insofar as it requests boundary changes of 1 . 488 acres of R05-0 zoning to R2-PD-0 zoning and in no other respect, with the condition that a corresponding 1 . 488 acres of land be dedicated by the applicant and allocated to park acreage in an area to be later determined. 2. Approve Zone Change No. 78-4 as requested, with the condition that Parcel 4 (a change of zone from R05-0 to R2-PD-0 on 0. 362 acre n of land) be deleted from the request. ANAI.YSZS: Applicant: A. J. Hall Corp. 830S Vickers, Suite R San Diego, California 92111 Location: Abutting the westerly edge of that Seacl.if.f Golf Course_, north of Palm Avenue, approximately 3, 000 feet west bf r r'valdi,tmtst Street. do rriti arrt I�•tptw Reqwri t r A chongt of s+aniisq_'f tale'1l �-PU-0, Me�ai ww Demai tr, v i siowd Residential Development car i'ni ed rr Pr ductloa and A34. Medium High Density Resideentfll, casbined with oil production to *03--0"8 Recreational qmp Apate combined with- oil ppoduction, and ROS-0, Rwroa►tl+anal Open Space, rarebined with all production to R 2-PD-0, Midi um Density Planrard Realdential Development combined with oil production. ON MDTIOIi BY PAME AND SZCO►VD BY BAZIL, ZONE CHANGE NO. 76-.4 WAS 1 R E1) POR APPROVAL, SU&72CT TO ONE Of' THE Two FOLLOMING COURS2 OF ACTION WITH THE YOLWWIN0 FINDINGS AND BY T'NE FOLLOWING VOTE: 1. Approve Zone Change No. 78.-4 insofar as it requests boundary changes of 1 . 488 acres of ROS-0 zoning `o R2-Pb-0 zoning and in no other respects, with the findings that a corresponding 1. 48E acres of land be dedicated by the applicant and allocated to park acreage in an area to be later determined; or 2. Approve Zone Change No. 78-4 as requested, with the consideration that Parcel 4 is change of zone from SOS-0 to R2-PD-0 on 0 .362 acres of land? be deleted from the request. 1 . The Planned Residential Development zoning exchange for the ROS-0 zoning in mom areas and the corresponding exchanges . of ROS.-0 to 92PD-0 in other areas is consistent with the City' s General Plan. 2. The proposed uses permitted by the R2-PD-0 zoning will be com- patible with surrounding land uses. AYES: Russell , Cohen, Bazil, Paone NOES : Stern ABSENT: Finely ABSTAIN: Higgins p7,�r�SSY Zone Change No. 76-4 is a- request to alter the existing westerly boundury of the Seacliff Golf Course in order to accommodate ai portion of a 533 unit planned residential developm nt. This proposed boundary change of the Seacliff Golf Courso consists of approximately 3.55 acres of land which includes approximately l. S acres of property presently . son td ROS-0 to bt resonee►d to R2- PD-0 in order to accomkodate a poetion of the proposed Seacliff Phae:e IV and in turn apptoximet,ely 1 . 7 acres of property presently zoned R2-PD-0 and R3-0 to be resoned to ROS=O. After lengthy discussion by the Planning Commission and several motions that failed because of lack of affirmative votes, the Planning Commission agrs*d on recaomwnding to they Council that one of the above mentioned alternatives be considered in order to approve Song Chnange go. 79-4. Th& Planning Commission 's ifirst alternative mould be to hattm the Council approve only the property Pager "Wree that is presently zoned ROS to R2-Pp-0 which will accommodate those portions - of ihe Seacliff Phase IV project that encroaches into the westerly boundary of the Seaol if f clol f Course and 'requi re of the developer that an equal amount of land, 1 .488 acres, be dedicated to the City for park development. This additional. 1 ,468 acres of land would be in addition to the rack requirements required by ordinance for this project. Alternative two would be to approve Zones Change 78-4 as requested with the deletion of parcel 4 as depicted on the attached plat map. This would allow for and accomt modate of the pr weed project to encroach into the exis ting 9o1 E course except for one area consisting of 0. 362 acres that fallswithin .one of the existing , fairways . The Council ' s third alternative would be to approve Zone Change No. 78-4 in. total as requested by the appli- cant. The Planning Commission feels that this alternative is- tyre least desirable insofar as the property that is changing from R2-PD- 0 and R3-0 to ROS-0 is not the most desirable for open space uses . ENVIRQHMENTAL STATUS : Seacliff Phase IV project bass been reviewed for environmental impacts by Environmental Impact Report No. 77-6. This EIR has been posted for the prescribed amount of time and pursuant to all provisions of the California Environmental. Quality Act all cotments, either in wr. itinq or oral have been incorporated into the final draft EIR. This final draft EIR was approved by the Planninq Commission on November 14 , 1978. Zone Change No. 78-4 has been assessed for. environmental effects by Negative Declaration No. 78-119. This � negative declaration has been posted for the prescribed length of time and no comments either oral or in writing, have been received by 'the Planning Department as of this date. The City Council is required to adopt Negative Declaration No. 78-119 prior to a final decision for Zone Change No. 78--4 . Attached is a copy of the initial study prepared for Negative Declaration No. 78--119 . This initial study form has been included for tho Council ' s review and consideration. FUNDING_SOURCE: Not applicable. ALTERN&JIVE ACTIONS- In addition to the previously mentioned alternative.-, the City Council may deny Zone Change No. 78-4. which would require the applicant: of Seacliff, Phase IV to redesign the boundaries of thc• proposed :subdi vi sJ ois in order to develop only those areas that are presen' ly zoned fur development. 3UPMR1I _INFORMATION: 1 . Area Map for Seacliff Phase Iv Z . Plat to accommodate legal description for Zone Change dated November, 1978- 3 . Staff Report for Seacliff phase IV dated November 7, .1978 4 . Alternative Ordinances _ espertfu ubsmitteed, . asnss Pa i n llcting Planninq Director ' V R3-0 1 1 •. ! R3-0 ROS-0 ------R4-M' .. .-ROB-0'1. '�•— \\ - pl Ar RY Plan. ' _ .� _C1-0 IE - N `+ s-_8 ; C1-0 0 1 1Ac R3-0 .` -Planning Area all` --- Tr 10067 jCi-0 R" PC-Ol - --- -4- R4••0 M2-02 M2-02 r Kwt IOatfll[ TENTATIVE TRACT 10067 MUTATIVE TRACT TRACT 10068 TENTA?IVE TRACT 10069 C*W!TIO.,AI USE PER'-;IT . 77-2? zone R2-PD-01 RiilTpIOW AEA" RLAMMW OERT. '�"" bool' q'A *§"6 ANffMWpAbpMY Tol Planning Commission FROM: Planning Department DATE; November 7, 1978 SUi1J^CT ;-4 rACLI FF PIL ASE� IV ZQ.NL'...gtiANGE NO . 78-41 C Np1: 3�0 L U Fr#"'_tii 'I�NQ. 77-.23,. TEt3. ', 'A tVE PARCEL, NCB._28- 37. TENThLalyr., TRAgIr No. 10067 . Z. Nm IUME TRACT !JQ. ,lQ068,�4 EN ATIVE 7'BA= W. 10,Ob9, ENVIRONMENT MPACj BEPO&T W 2 77-6 A TLICANT: A . J . Hall Carp. WNE: U -PD-U, R2-fit,-01, 9305 Vickers , Suite "R" .San Diego, California 92111 P.OS-0. R3-0 ENGINCEB (;CNE1j& f,�N;: Walden and associates, Inc . Planned Community E. maker Street, Suite 125 Costa riesa , Calif. 92626 EX1$TING USE: LQCATI(�N: West of Goldenwest, north of Vacant and Oil Production Palm 'ZONE CHANGE Rk 1UEti1: 7 DATE ACCR::i'TED: Jar,. 16 , 197 Chancie of none from R05-0 !•1nVDATORY PROCESSING 1�: to K2-PU-0 Continued by Consent AC tEAGE:: 2 . 8 ar_res COND ITIONA' USE PERMIT R E)QUST: DATE ACCEP1'U; Nov. 11 , 197 ' 5 3 3 s i nrt 1 e family and MANDATORY PROCESSING DATE: townhouse residential units Continued _by ConsenL- AAgREACE: 114 acres CENTA'I'IVE PARCEL_ M V REQUE;S,I•: UT1'I_i: ACc'EP'."ED: a.-U 5, 1978 4 1aU; MANDATOI<Y 1'{ C,l:Ci+ING ll/>'' L: P 0vcmbe r 2 4 , 1978 ACHEACE: 300 acres ��,rrt.► ��•�r �,r'•'• '�:..,� �Nr,w,r gar 10 ' �- e rr wow, -. . .rrAVAP w M. #r l� 9 i•�rN arn': Ibli . war-�'tr•w ,air•.. •-�r�r'M�r rrrr• #Aowv!r'r max• /•Orm17 ft.4v/0?Pf,f irrK��tw ��• N !fir rt�l� •N/A'IV 'e�y �X 4110, ��•w'�,w .a, ,recE� f •,�ora PNO ee e G• ,!7•l�dr/xd�� ,v�v�'fnd ix�s•. ,w,.�.7rr �►�or• "lie #4f'AF'oW7P sr.iv'.: •..•,Vtt•tf•�rw i�a�r• AU MMI EL -• Aalla N�II"Yw•IV M�t/d�.. NPorAPr'w MAY wit /OAW L`•OWAW am f.x/AN,$ ,dIAWAVO Nl)wl4w 00y: M Aawo"Iw /A 07 Am Jr. A"a# �,� � Page Threa, 0 This proposed parcel map would divide two existing 300 acre parcels into :3 parcels and a residual parcel to allow for further subdivision as a planned development. These tentative tracts constitute and subdivide the three product areas of the planned development. 3.0 SUHWX OF 3 UU&S As a result of extensive staff, Commission and public review, the following significant issues have surfaced regarding this project . 1 . Impact of the proposed development on the Local Coastal Plan . 2. Feasibility and acceptability of proposed drainage system. 3. Availability of adequate sewerage capacity. 4 . Acceptability of proposed circulation system including 38th Street alignment, interior access, and parking . 5. Park requirement implementation. 6. Treatment of scenic highway and special street landscaping. 7. Location of Product C 8 . Applicant' s request for special permit to deviate from certain code requirements. 4 .0 ,fNVIRnNME TTAL STATUS: Environmental impact Report 77-6 was prepared by the consulting :ism of Ultrasystems, Inc, in conjunction with the Planning Departme.,.t. A draft EIR was distributed to governmental agencies and inter-sled members of the public during u 45-day review period from December 1, 1977, to January 16, 1978, to solicit comments regarding the project . The public review period was extended for an additional 137 days at the request of the applicant so that discussions could be hold with agencies objecting to certain aspects of the: project. During the course of the review period, project design modifications were made by the applicant- to mitigate impacts identified through the EIR. Major areas of probable impact that were identified in the EIR include consistency with the Local Coastal Plan, project drainage and its effect on the Balsa Chica, traffic impacts from a projected 5, 130 additional vehicle trips per day, sewage system capacity, archaeological resources, and compatibility with the County linear park and the Bolsa Chica wildlife area . Comments were received from public agencies and private individuals on all of these areas of concern. Page Two "I ENTATLYN '1' CI, N( _1QO67 U�j'ht; Ac'c:'l�l�TE kw. 11, 1977 190 lets one lettered lot MANI)J1t HY 11HO K"SS DATE: ATE: (Product H) CunLinurd by Consent. AC E: 41 gross acres .TEN I'A'ri yE TRACT NO. IU68 DATE ACCEPTED: Nov. 11, 1977 one lot (Product C) MANUATQRY PRR g§SINQ_ pAJ�: ACREAGE: 19 . 4 gross acres Continued by Consent TENTATIVE 'I'FI CT NO. 10069 LWE ACCk;p'I'ED: Nov. 11, 1977 147 lots , one lettered lot MAR12NtoRY 1!OCESU D ; (Product A) Continued by Consent: ACH t_11GE: 53 . 6 gross acres 1 . 0 SUGGESTED ACTION : If tl:e Planning Commission finds that the project is not prejudicial to the Local Coastal Plan, staff recommends approval of the subject ap-- plicat+ionswith findings and conditions as suggested. Staff further recommends approval of Resolution of Intent No. 1237, initiating a precise plan of street alignment for 38th Street from Palm to Garfield. 2 . 0 QENERA.L INFORMATION: The subject applications were processed in conjunction at the request of staff so that all issues could be discussed at one time . Specifically the proposals are as follows : 2 . 1 ZONE CHANGE 78-4 This is a request to rezone 2 . 8 acres along the westc?rn edgc of Seacl i rr Golf Course from ROS-0 to R2-PD-0 thereby adjusting the boundary beLwecn the course and the proposed development . 2 . 2 CONDIMNAL ME PERW_T 77-23 This is a request for a three-part planned development consisting of 533 single family and townhouse units on 114 gross acres of land at an overall density of 4 . 67 units per gross acre . Page Five 6 . 8 Parking : product A product B gr2du= C Provided: 825 575 437 Required: 478 618 490 An individual statistical summary for each Product Area is included with project plans submitted to the Planning Commission. 7 & SUBpIVI.§hON_QoM�lM1 E : The Subdivision Committee met three times on the project . At the first session on December 9, 1977, Commissioners Finley, Newman, and Slates listened as staff representatives reviewed street layouts, serer capacity, and special landscape treatnMent. Generall, the Committee concluded more information was necessary. on January 20, 1978, the Committee including Commissioners Finley and Newman reviewed proposed revisions to the 38th Street alignment and parking provisions in Product Areas A rind B. The Subdivision Committee, consisting of Commissioners Finley, Baxil , and Stern, met again on August 18, 197E to consider revised plans . At that time, major issues discussed included the proposed drainage system and its effect on Bolsa Chica and existing and proposed sewer capacities . The Committee asked that involved agencies be contacted again for updated information on these projects . The Committee directed staff to find a suitable way to insure that special landscape treatments and meandering sidewalks are incorporated into the project. The Committee discussed generally the issues outlined in Section 3. 0 and concluded that further review of the project be conducted by the Commission as a whole. A Planning Commission Study Session was scheduled to review Phase IV. As a result of its discussion and the presentation by the applicant, the Commission concluded that a Resolution of Intention defining a ' Precise Plan of Street Alignment for 38th Street be adopted in conjunction with any project approval . The Commission reviewed the applicant' s request for special permit . In general, no opposition was voiced to reduction of minimum side yards and elimination of trash enclosures in Products A, and B or reduction of building separation requirement and waiver of building bulk provisions in Product C. Commissioners were concerned, however, about parking shortages in Products B and C, and elimination of recreation area requirements in Products A and B. The Planning Comrnissfon met again on September 12, 1978, to discuss this Project . In joint session with the Recreation and Parks Coommisasion, the Commissioners concluded that action on Phase TV cannot be postponed for development of a comprehensive parks plan, that determination of 38th Street alignment could be a major City contribution to progress on the linear bluff park, and that the linear park can assist in filling neighborhood park needs but not replace individual neighborhood parks. Meeting independently, the Commissioners suggested that full dedication and improvement: of 38th Street be required and voted to in. vestigate means of securing additional bluff top properties to contribute to the linear park. Page Four The Final SLR is composed of the Draft SIR as it was circulated for --eview, the comsents and project changes received during the review �.,;,•lriod, and the City' s response to the Comments. This document was transmitted to the Planning Commission on .August 24 , 1978, for final consideration. A aupplementary study of the feasibility of the proposed drainage system was conducted subsequently. That study, Geoloair. and ftagggeoloaic Asseas- IDr.p&I by Geotechnieal Consultants is proposed as amendment to the EIR. Appropriate mitigation measures suggested by the EIR are incorporated as conditions of approval . 5 .0 PSFSANT LIN2 U99. NING,_M2 GENERAL ,rL.AN„�,_X ONs The 114 acre project area is Currently vacant or in oil production. It is zoned R2-PD-0 , R2•-PD-01, R3-0, and ROS-0 and General Planned as Planned Community. To the north and northwest, the area is General Planned as Planned Community and Planning Reserve in un- incorporated territory. The zoning of this mixed vacant and oil production area is R3--0. To the went and south, the area is General Planned Planned Community and Resource Production. Existing zoning is R2-Pn-.0, R4--0, R4-01, M2-020 R.3-0 , R3-01 , and Cl-0; and existing use is vacant and oil production. To the east, the area is General Planned Open Space, Planned Community, and Low Density Residential . It is zoned ROS-0, R4-0101 R4--0, Rl, and RI -0; and i : is utilized for a golf course, oil production, and atingle .4famil • development. at portion of the area is also vacant. ).0 5'LATISTrC __X. F%&TION: 6. 1 Number of Units 533 6. 2 Area of Project JL14 g�L . ac. B net ac . 6 . 3 Density 4 . 67 du/gac; . . 3 a/nac 6. 4 Unit Type 2 Bedrooms 145 un. 3 Bedrooms 224 un. 4 Bedrooms 138 un. 5 Bedrooms 26 un. Bedrooms per gross ,sere 14 .42 bedrooms 6 . 5 Site Coverage (allowable 45%) 20% 6 .6 Common Open Sriaee Provided 1,050, 474 square feet Required 561, 200 squares feet , 6. 7 Private Open Space Provided 1, 062, 864 square feet Required 170, G50 square feet maximum �p �a I age Six 8 .0 AN j1LY`,� Prior to action on the various applications constituting 5eacliff Phase IV, the following areas of concern must be thoroughly addressed: 8 . 1 np3LS .-the Local Ca ,, plan The proposed development is generally compatible with the general Plan and existing zoning. However, because the project site lies entirely within the Coastal Zone, it will be affected by the local coastal planning efforts underway at the directioi. of the Coastal Act of 1976. Upon certification by the Coastal Commission, the Local Coastal Plan will supercede all previous plans for this area . Though work on the Local Coastal Plan is underway, a coastal element to the General Plan is not anticipated prior to April, 1979. Several coastal issues are being investigated as part of the LCP for this areal protection of new potentials , potential for low- and moderate-income dousing, impact on adjacent senssitive' areas , potential for visitor serving facilities including parking, and potential for oil/gas facilities expansion. 4ghe development proposal is not necessarily inconsistent with the olicies of the Coastal Act. Considerable provision has been made for aesthetics , open space, bluff setback, and scenic highway treatment; and residential use is not ger a prohibited. Because the ultimate coastal plan is not complete, however, a key issue becomes the Impact of decisionmaking now on future planning options. The commitment of 114 acres to a particular use at this time may preclude planning decisions (when the results of coastal research is known) and, therefore, prejudice Lhe LCP. While literally any decision could be said to in some way limit future planning options, certain specific facts are important in this case : 1 . The size of the project area. 2 . Its Location adjacent to a sensitive area whose ultimate utilization has not yet been determined, and 3 . The uncertainty of future needs for this area for natural resource production and/or processing . On the other hand, this project guarantees continued options for bluff park planning, does not restrict public access to any waterway or public resource areas, and provides a desirable aesthetic environment in an area planned for etaidential use for some time . Prior to determination on the project itself, the Commission should conclude whether the project is prejudicial to the preparation of the LCP. 8 s 2 �_ Drain ae Considerable discussion hiss taken place regarding the feasibility and desirability of the proposed drainage system for the project. The main ssues are immediate and long-term capacity, impacts on water quality, nd impacty on the Solsa Chica. The final drainage proposal arrived at by the applicant in conjunction with tint nepaLtment of Public Works, Water Quality Control District, and California Department of Fish and Game involves utilization of the natural drainage courst enhanced by three • �V OL Page Seven 0 ponds, new culverts at 38th Street, improvement retention/percolate, n p of the channel from the culvert to the Bolsa Chica, creation of a drop structure to slow water velocities, and reconstruction of the road below the bluffs. A special geologic and hydrogeologic assess- ment of the proposed system was conducted by Geotechnical Consultants, Inc. This study found the proposal technically feasible and the Public Works Department has concluded that it is adequate for the proposed development and can be expanded in the future: to accommodate additional projects in the area. The Regional Water Quality Control Board has granted clearance of the proposal, and the State Department of Fish and Game has concluded that the revised proposal adequately addresses its concerns regarding impact on the Bolsa Chica provided adequate maintenance of the system is insured . 8. 3 Sewgr CAceacity Two alternative sewering proposals .;gave been considered for this project : either incorporation of reaches 3 (portion) , 4 and 5 (portion) of the Sanitation District Master Plan umkir reimbursawnt with the District or con- struction of parallel lines to the existing City system. For overall economy, the Sanitation District recommends participation in the Master Plan facilities . In either instance, adequate sewering depends on approval and completion of Reaches 1 and 2 of the PCH trunk line now pending on appeal before the State Coastal Commission . Because the nsture of the development and its sewerage options are consistent with the Sanitation District Master Plan, the District is not recommending any delay in project approval . Consistent with previous Planning Commission actions on similar projects, the sewer issue is addressed as arecommended condition of approval , prohibiting recordation of final maps until the coast trunk sewer or acceptable alternative is approved . 8 . 4 38th StStreet Alignment The proposed alignment of 38th Street through the project areas repre- sents the culmination of negotiations among City .Staff, Coastal Com- mission Staff , and the County Environmental Management Agency . According to county and city staff analysis, the alignment is a minimum of 100 to 200 feet to the east of top of bluff as defined by EMA, and the County staff has concluded that the alignment is sufficiently set back from bluff 's edge to not interfere with the proposed linear park . Analysis of the alignment by Planning and Public Works Departments as well as Planning Commission Study Session concluded that it does not preclude future street options either north or south of the project area . As requested by the Planning Commission, Resolution of Intention No. 1237 is included for adoption to initiate a Precise Plan of Street Alignments fcr 38th Street from Palm Avenue north to t3arfie2d . 8. 5 Irlterigr Circulation In the EIR and throughout staff analysis considerable attention has been focussed at street widths, turning radii, entry drives , and emergency access. The proposed plans constitute revisions to original proposals designed to address the Impacts identified and are acceptable to staff . Product A 'incorporates 32 foot wide streets with parking permitL•ed on one side only. All turning radii will be designed to Fire Department 1 Page Mi.r►e $._. 9 Street La LAG The applicant is proposing intensified landscape treatment including meandering sidewalks along all public streets. Though staff recognized the aesthetic attributes of the proposal , the Public Works Department rejected the idea in view of maintenance costs involved. The Sub- division Committee directed staff to pursue the special treatment# however, and the applicant has agreed to assume all landscape. maintenance if the City will accept dedication, maintenance, and liability for the meandering sidewalk. The City Attorney ' s Office han determined that such an arrangement is possible, though cumbersome, and perhaps unnecessary since the City can leave both sidwalk and landscaping in private ownership and require public eccess to the sidewalk without liability or maintenance responsibility. This is staff recommendation through conditions of approval on the tentative tracts. 8 . 1Q .gition -gg Psoduct C Some concern has been raised about locating the higher density product close to the linear park and the Solo& Cbica. This issue, bowevesr, involves conflicting principles . on the one hand, the proposed location conforms to General Plan locational criteria in terms of arterial access and recreational facilities. It also overlaps the R3-0 zoning area originally intended for even higher density use. On the other hand, it conflicts with General Plan criteria calling for lower density buffers near sensitive areas and proximity to business and institutional uses. In an area where urban uses could y be made inconspicuous, this product offers the greatest building bulk and highest density of the thrr s product types. A decision to relocate this product area could necessitate major overhaul of the entire project . Some impacts can be mitigated by the suggested condition to fence the west side of 38th Street to restrict access to the sensitive areas . 8. 11 - R__e_neat_ fpr_ Suecial -Permit City Planning Department standards contain provisions for deviation from code requirements in order to promote better living environ- ments , facilitate innovative design and site planning, and create an aesthetic environment. The applicant has forwarded a request for seven special permit items which he feels are necessary to ,achieve his design concept. In summary, staff recommends the following action on those items : 1 . Approve reduction of minimum side yard from 15 to 10 feet in Products A and B because the zero side yard concept is used and adequate average separation between units is provided. 2 . Approve elimination of trash enclosures in Products A and N because each single family unit can adequately be served individually. i� . Page Eight standards, entry drives have been expanded to allow additional stacking, rand all driveways will be a minimum of 20 feet to relieve on ,street parking pressures. To improve circulation and access, Product B interior streets were revised to include median planters to discourage illegal parking in areas where parking bays did not exist. Entry drives along Palm Avenue were lengthened and widened to expand holding capacity and facilitate turning movements. Interior circulation in Product C was revised to incorporate minimum and exterior turning radii and added exits and emergency access . With theme changes, all Product areas meet minimum street width and tur:iing radius standards . However, the Fire Department is still concerned with emergency access to the project and is recommending (by memo of Sept. 11 , 1978 attached) that its concern for reduced response times be noted in the Final Public Report on the project . 8 .6 P_arAina Products B and C do not meet minimum parking requirements . Product B is technically 43 spaces short though all driveways are at least 20 feet to accommodate parking needs not usually possible in planned developments . On the other hand , availability of guest parking is restricted by the street configuration and cluster nature of the development. Product C is approximately 53 spaces below code requirement. The applicant designed the project in this manner to comply with Coastal Commission staff direction . Because of the greater density of this project , its typical PD design, ...,end the minimum access provided, parking for this Product may be a critical issue . Despite the apparent differences in coastal staff and City parking standards, the Coastal Commission has not officially required any parking reduction in projects approved to date. The applicant has requested a special permit to vary parking requirements for these two product areas. 8 . 7 Park Requirement) The Phase IV project will generate approximately 8 acres of park dedication. Because no park is currently planned within or adjacent to the project, the land dedication will be taken at a later date to be used as designated by the City Council . The Planning Commission and Recreation and Parks Commission have opened discussions regarding parks in the Seacliff area . 8. 8 Scenic JkghwaXs 38th Street alring the northwestern edge of the project appears in the Scenic Highways Element as an extension of Edwards Avenue and is designated as a local scenic route. Though a specific implementation plan for the scenic route proposal has not been prepared, the intent of the Program is to beautify certain streets with intensified landscaping, medians, increased building setbacks, height requirements, etc. The Seacliff IV proposal along 38th Street incorporates these features to great degree : landscape buffers are provided, landscaped berms instead of perimeter walls are proposed, building setback is considerable, parking areas are adequately screened, 38th is being designed to include landscape medians, street landscaping is intensified. Page Eleven within the development, including but not limited to open space and water areas, textured pavements , fencing, schematic elevations, materials and colors, recreation facilities, pedestrian walkways , oil island treatments , etc. 3. Prior to issuance of building permits, all exterior building elevations shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. 4 . The CtfiR' s and association rules shall set forth provisions for restriction on the storage of recreational vehicles in open parking spaces. S . Prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer shall submit a final landscape plan for review and approval by the Planning and Public Works Departments. 6 . Prior to start of con3truction, the developer shall install a traffic signal at the intersection of Palm Avenue and Goldenwest Street in accordance with the specifications of the Director of Public Works . 7. Prior to issuance of certificate of occuoancv, a oaved, Lem"rary emergency access such as that existing now, _ aball ba available in a manner satisfactory to the Fire Chief from tbp termination of Stith Street improvements norti to Garfield Street. S . All garages within Product C shall be equipped with automatic garage door openers. 9 . If the developer proposes to provide air conditioning, the insulation in ceilings and exterior walls shall be a minimum of R-19 and R-11 respectively. If no air conditioning is to be provided, the insulation in ceilings and exterior walls shall be a minimum of R-13 and R-7, respectively . 10. All building spoils such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable :materials shall be disposed of at an offsite facility equipped to handle them. 11 . A chemical analysis as well as tests for physical properties of the soil on the subject property shall be submitted to the City for review prior to the issuance of building permits. 12. The structures on the suhject property, whether attached or detached-, shall be constructed in compliance with the State Acoustical Standards set forth for all units that lies within the 60 CNEL contours of the property. 13. Energy saving lighting, such as high-pressure sodium vapor lamps , shall be used in recreation areas. 14 . Low-volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets . y ��