The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutConditional use permit 87-34 - Boureston Development - To pe Ilutno+g7tb13 10 Nbb-A Adverolso"rants of AN k"s 01csud•np PUNK Zt t C �.� a e�t: 1 w• 't notices try OOCIde of Inc Superior Court of otan9n aunty, #x1�•:, �� Caltiormo. Numoor A•6214. Catod 4-9 SoplAmber, MI. And A-24a3I. ditwid t t Jun•. 1963 �t,1l7Yft"E •.'f� ;'ptf3tt3Y� ' STATE OF CALIFCNNIA 'a ssw�che►1�+*'��'� County of Orange •�a.c �.e�ce+ •r..++►.p ts�«.o tF thrta . t►. Mw •mod•." •• w w r pw.l �:��'��: �'� �� aw do* qt � s cult,;Iris.j4i�j set At I am a Cituen of the United States and a resident of '� Mho" — Mard � r the County alcresatd. I am over the ages of eighteen, KtI years, and not a party to or interested in the below entitled master. I am a principal ci6rk Of fhe Orange GAK�r LL�tdttt t DAILY PILOT, with whtcn is Combined the Coss NEWS-PRESS. a newspaper of general circulation. 9 Q printed and published to the City of Costa Mesa, c.�sitae ,tKturf�e}sN!-. � '_; County of Orange. State of California. and that a rill, 621t, fiT. Notice of L CAtlofa� :aisri e . x ju 11 of 0.hrcrt copy attachtsd hereto is a true and complete Copy, vias printed and published in the Costa Mosa, xre'r1ff�ttana. ttrrc.; N17-h ao►1 Sench Numing on eeacn. Fountain `'alley, ast communities and Laguna Irvine. the 5n .tt �o g .od. Be,acn j5s-.,es of said nr_wspapef for one t ir. c consecutive w:eelts to Kit the +ssucjsf of ► t P-46 NLZOP7p tt Reti firii,�t w W* tr ► ' ft:aU" two ��#�►,�w�it taw� W dhr�rtln r+rl4�•lttk� � . � tl�lhrwllAltfl�'�1' ; _ Fi Y 11q t?it&%'9141 A• M"01 , 1 Ot2C1c-.1re, under pvizalty of perjury, that tho r,a foot torcgoing is true and correct. .i y r rI:a ur etk!f6,t�tli 0 TA 1,20108" OF PUMUCt4l tot AAAN, a.t Oil April 15, 1987, the 86ard of Zoning Adjustments approved Administrative Review No . 87-15 and Negative Declaration No. 07-9 by a vote of 5 to 0, And cpproved Conditional Exception vo. 87-24 by a vote of 4E�o I . Administrative Review No. 87-15 is a request by Boureston Oevelopmant in accordance with Section 9510 .01 of the Ordinance Code to permit a new 122, 424 square foot Industrial building on a 5 acre parcel currently owned by the City of Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency. Conditional Exception (Variance) No. 87-24 is a request to permit a 10-3/2 foot front yard setback from Redondo Circle. in lieu of the required 14-foot setback as required by Section 9.310 . 06 (b) (3) , and to permit a. truck well to be 50 feet in width in lieu of 20 feet in width as required by Section 9510 . 12(b) of the Ordinance Code. These requests, are cc,'vered by Negative Declaration No. 87-9. These actions were appealed by Triple "N" Properties (Willable Lumber) . After further analysis, . it was determined by staff that a use permit is also required to permit a new industrial use within 150 feet of residentially zoned property and to permit truck doors to face a public street (Sections 9510 . 18( A; (l) and 9510 . 12) . On May 27 , 1987 , the Board of Zoning Adjustments declined to act on. Use Perm'At i. No . 87-34 by a vote rV 3 to 0 in accordance with Section 9P15 . 3 of the Ordinance Code thereby referring the item to the Panning Commission, Therefore, Use Permit No. 87-34 was submitted in conjunction with the appeal . I The subject site its located within the boundaries )f a former special study area which resulted in the Taylor and Beach Specific j Plan . The Specific Plan designated the site for industrial use and identified Redondo Circ le and etovacs Circle intersecting in t'_;e subject site to form a loop street system through to Talbert Avenue. After careful review of this dockiment, staff has concluded that development in the area has been implemented in concurrence with the intent of the Specific Plan and as a planning tool it is no longer necessary for this area . Therefore, staff recommended to the Planning Commission that they repeal tho Taylor and Heach ,99ecific d Plan with Resolution No. 1382 -%nd adopt a new Preei.su- Plan of Street Alignment No. 8"-1 to show the termination of Kovacs Street and Redondo Circle with cul-de-sacs on the subject site. At the dune 16 , 1987 Planning Commission hearing, several Planning Commissioners and property owners on Fedordo Circle expressed concern ns to how the cul-de-sacs proposed for Redondo Circle and Kovacs Street would impact traffic flow. The Planning Currmission directed staff to examine design alternatives that would provide for % a connection of Redondo Circle through to Talbert Avenue and also provide the applicant with an acceptable building layout. J Staff met with the applicant And the appellant to discuss conceptual design alternatives which would pr.uvide a connection for Aedondo Circle around or through the site to Talbert Avenue. The -proposals analyzed were determined to be problematic due to restrictions imposed by the Uniform Building Code, Fire Department requirements, incompatibility with the adjacent senior residential development, increased cost and time, zoning code requirements and tbe ;,minimum design criteria required for the applicant ' s pvoposed `occupant. R�.:A - 7f20/87 -6- (8573d) , y f At the July 7, 1987 Planning Commission hearing, 'ooth the projer:t proponent Houreston Development) and the appellant (Triple "H" Properties/Re Iiable Lumber) presented alternatives that: would provide for a connecti,or of Redondo Circle with. Kovar. Street; . The alanninq Commission' s action reflects approval of a conceptual plan submittpcl by Triple OR" Properties (see attached) . The plan app-a;4rs to substL:°-•tially comply with fire anG building code requirements but .'say require addita.onal variances from the zoning code . The � conceptual plan also moves the industrial.. building approximately 30 feet closer to the adjacent senior residential property than the or; yinal plan. Since the July / , 1987 planning Cc:emission heari,rg, Boureston Development and Reliable Lumber/Triple "H" properties hgvG met in an attempt to resolve these problems . As a result of these meotings, a compromise agreement has been reached, in which Boureston Development will constrict their building in oc,cordance with the conceptual site plan submitted by Trifle "N" Properties, with Redondo Circle connecting through to Zovacs Street. Triple "H* properties will reicnbuvse Boureston Development for, a portion of C their increased co,rc s (see letter from Jerome Higmaii dated July 15, 1987) . . In light of this agreement, staff is recommend inq that the City Council approve the project based on the finding.s, and !�! conditions outlined by the Planning Com$aission and that tht City I = , Council repeal Specific Plan No . 73-1 and direct ntaff to grnpere a Precise Plan of Street Alignmer,t in accordance with the conceptual site plat. . EMYIHQ M VIAL STATU The proposed pxojoct it covered by Negative Declaration No. 87--9 . A. number of environmental concerns were raised by property owners on Redondo Circle and by other i;.terested parties , pcxticulary with regard to traffic, noise , sir quality and drainage. Staff maintains that these and other concerns will not have a significant adverse impact on the environraent, and that a mitigated Negative Declaration � may be issued . Thv lettern received and staff responses are attached L•o the staff report dated June 16 , 1987. j J�jiAINC SOUR: -�� Not applica'.. _. •a- AhTERNATM AAiMM: Vhe City Council may consider the follaw-A t; alternatives: �..1�0- 1 Apprr ve Precise Plan of Street Al.ignmetit No. 87-1 , nepeal Specific Plan' no . 13-1, and approve Administrative Review No.' 87715, Conditional 'Exception No . 87--24, Use Permit No . 87-34 and Negative Declaration , No . 87 9, based a.i - tha original site plan submitted by noureston Developmielnt, and based on the following :E=ndin s. and conditions of upProval : RCA 7./20I87 -�7- (8573d HDINGSFOR AP229YAh - CONDITI .SAL_ EXCE PION 14Q, 67-,2A; 1 . The site is located at the terminus of two industrial streets . Therefore, the reduced setback and truck well will not adversely impact surrounding residents , or impact the value of �. property and improvements in the vicinity. 2. Because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including size , shape, topography, location or surroundings , the strict application of the 4oning ordinance is found to deprive the subject: property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical -one classifications . The lot is an unusual shape, and access from two cul-de-sacs presents a unique circumstance . 3 . The granting of Conditional Exception No . 87-2.4 will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to property in the same zone classifications . Any potentially adverse impacts have been considered and 'ritigat:ed . 4 . The granting of the Conditional Exception will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. The project is in conformance with the Zoning and General Plan designation for the site. FIN121NO EOR 62 RO AL -__ ULZERMIT NO, __ 81--,U: 1 . The establishment , maintenance and operation of an industrial building will not be detrimental to: a . The general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity; b. Property and improvements in the vicinity of such use or building . 2 . Any potentially adverse impacts have been considered and ' mitigated. 3 . The granting of the use permit will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. The project is in conformance with the Ml.-A zone and General Plan designation of General Industrial for the site. 4 . The proposal is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City' s General Plan and Land Use Map. CQNU. T,.J_QIi$QF APPROVAL -- CON 1 . The site plan, floor plans , and elevations received and dated April 1, 1987, shall be the approved layout, with modifications as noted in Administrative Review No. 87-15 . 'a 2. All Conditions of Approval of Administrative Review . No . 871-1' ' shall be applicable. RCA - . 7/20/87 11 con 17..ONS OF BPP.1 =..USEPEELiZ', ,11O. 07-3A : 16 The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received 'and `dated April 1 , 1987, shall be the approved layout, with modifications as noted in Administrative Review No , 87- 15 . 1 . All Conditions of Approval of Administrative Review No . 87-15 shall be applicable. CONDI'I'YMQE A pRQV�lL - ADMU'L ST.RA2IM.$ 1 . The floor plans and elevations received -end dated April 1, 1987 , shall be the approved layout . 2 . The site plan dated April 1 , 1987 , shall be revised to depict the modifications described herein : a . Landscape planters which abut residentially zoned property shall be a minimum cl 6 feet clear width . Landscape CS planters adjacent to the building shall be reduced in width accordingly. b. Show additional 4 -1/2 Leek: of public right--of-way required on Redondo Circle and Kovacs Street . I 3 . Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit the following plans : a . Landscape and irrigation plan to the Department of Development Services and Public Works for review and approval. . b. Rooftop Mechanical Equipment Plan. Said plan shall indicate screening of all wooftop mechanical equipment And shall delineate the typo of material proposed to screen said equipment . 4 . Installation of required landscaping and irrigation systrns shall be completed prior to final inspection. 5 . Grading plans sha 1 be submitted to the Public Works Department along with plans for silt control for all storm runoff if determined to be necessary by . the Director of Public Works . k; 6 . If foil type insulation is to be used, a fire retardant type shall be installed as approved by the Building Department . 7 . An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be approved and installed pursuant to Fire Department regulations . 8 , 1�Qrvice roads and fire lands, as determined by the Fire Department, shall be posted and marked . 1+4 FICA W 7/20/87 9 . Fire access lends shall be maintained . It fire lane viola- Lions occur and the services of the Fire Dnpartment are required, the applicant will be liable for expenses incurred , 10 . All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material , shall be disposed of at,, an i off--site facility equipped to handle them. i 11 . The development shall comply with mitigation measures specified . for "Future Industrial Activity" in the Report prepared by J.J. Van Houten and Associates, Inc. , dated April 6 . 1983 ( attached) 12. Natural gas shall be stubbed in at the locations of water heaters and central heating units . 13 . Low-volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets . 14 . If lighting is included in the parklnd lot , high--pressure sodium vapor lamps shall be used for energy savings . All outside lighting shall be directed to prevent "spillage" onto adjacent properties . la . Prior to issuance of grading or building permits , Tract Map 11955 shall be approved by the City Council and recorded. 16 . All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid ,prior to issuance of building permits . 17 . The development shall comply with all applicable provision: of the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department . 18 . The applicant shall meet all applicable 14cal , State, and Federal Fire Codes , Ordinances , and standards . 19 . Landscaping shall comply with Article 960 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code . 20. Compact parking stalls shall be striped to a depth of 19 feet where possible, 21. This approval shall become effective upon approval of Precise Plan of Street Alignment- No . 87-»1 and repeal of Specific Plan No . 73-1 by the City Council . 2z. Prior to issuance of building permits , the: applicant shall obtain approval {ram the Design Review Hoard . 23 . The . Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke Administrative Review No . 87-15 if .any violation of these conditions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs , RG 7/20/67 -10- C 857 d) eJrM.lt tYMMYf:.I.It( ♦.Ir1i1`SrM H ' e I volume- heads r sh�alI,be,. used on all- spigot 1 . 13: ` . "Low= sx and s�ator. fai�cetss 14. Y f, hting `is.: included in: the :parking lot, high-pxessure ' ►� sodiu`rn ,vapor .lampa? shall ,be; ussd: for energy,,`aavingrc. , All 1 ` outside', lighting shall beAirected,'.to `'prevent ".5011l.age""onto add acent �prope rties; 15 . Prior o s r di k i s are a n r 6 ra' a u c E� 'o u er `T c K ildin trif 'a t 9 9 .. 9 Y .,P P 11955 -shall. be: b ��?��ved. by, the City Council and . recorded. 16 . All: applicable Public Works fees shall be' paid pii.or to issuance-16.f building permits. r 17 The development sia11 comply .with all a"plicable .provi'siohs of the Ordinance Code, Building : Divi.sion, and Fire Department, • naocal , State, and +. 18. The applicant : !shall meet all appl��cable Federal Fire Codes , Ordinances, and standards , Y 190 Landscaping `shall comply with Article 950 ,of 'the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code . , f 20. Compact parking stalls shall be s¢:riped , to & . depth of `19 feet where possible. 21. This- a proval ` shalnmentme effective upon approval ,of -Precise P an o Street Ali'g 8 !1 and repeal of Specific Plan M No . ' 73--1 by=the City Council . 1p 22 . Prior to ' isuuance of building . permits.. . the applicant shall obtain approval from the Oesign' Review Board. . . , 23 . The, Planning Commission -reserves the right,: to revoke Administrative Reiew conditions 'ofthevHuntington g Beach Ordinance violation,inanceCode '6=urse 1. Al M611M . Q E ACTTON: The Planning Connission may: 1 , overturn .the* Board .of 'Zoning `Adjustment ' s; approval and ' deny Administrative Review No. 87-,15 , Conditional Exception '(Variance) No 87--24 and Negative Declaration No. 37w9 based on findings;; and deny Nse Permit` No . 87--34 based on findings; or 2 . Uphold the Board Zoning Adjustment ' s approval o Administrative Review No. 87-15, ; Cvgditional ExGopt ,on s. arove Use 'Permit, No. 8 7--�34 based on a modi�f ic3d- sita9 and ' Variance) No. Y 87� 24 and Ne ative'. Declaration No. 8 PP t� plan �ri.L•h � firndings • and`:conditions of approval . The modified plbn shall include the -following conditions: &�,aff, neport �/7/A7. �5» �8511d� J nrodifiid aite� plan ,ahall� be: submitted �hAt' 312: 1 .';'ter:.^" 1• � 'r s r l •1 -arid', ., rt 1}. ;. a lw Talbert `Avenue, n®ctio►n 'betty®an 'Rondo': Circle rsd rovide a, atr®et co 2) Pro", a seingla `anduatrial building at least 120, 000 , square feet in area . ( .) Comply 'with ;Fire aepattment _requfrer e'nts Nand 'the Uniform Puilding, Code. (4) 'Cbma,'O'6yl With all. 'requirements' of title' KI-A (Restricted Manufactuzing) ° D landscaping, :�in ht and sound parking, buil ist-tint,- including set ghei g attenuation. 1 . Area Map. . 2. St~aff' Report date' d June 16, `_1967 MA:LP:kla ); fi 1 f Staff: Report it l; h ntinpton bscch cevilopMe"t services, dbpsrR nt TA r .. r Ep" A r . . r " RIT.- -- P. lanning 'commission , , FROri: Development;.Services ; 1 DATE :"June . 16, 1987 ,i SUBJECT: APPEAxa „ ADNIIiiSTRATIVE - REVIEW. N0. 67-=15 IN." CONJUNCTION WITH ` (,ONDITXONAL;.,EXCEPTION (VAKIA110E),;:.N0. .87-24 AND „f NEGATI?VE. DECLARATION NO. 87»9 ; USE PERMIT NO. • 87-�34 APPLICANT:' liourerston Development 2ATE_ACCEE : 3355 Asia. Lido, .'.Suite 205 April 24, '1987 Newport Beach, CA 92663 Amp.: Redevelopment Agency; DATs3SY PAQ� S5ING DATE: City of Huntington Beach June , 24 , 1987 APPELADIT. Richard p �Qt , . ; • \ d J. A rahamian:: M1-A (Reatrxeted Attorney for Triple "H Manufacturing ,District) Properties 18552 MacArthur Boulevard aMAL PIS: ,Irvine', CA 92715 General Industrial ?test of Beach ;Boulevard , NX11511K.USE: r vacant A and - south- of Talbert Avenue (between the east terminus of Redondo Circle BEM$: ,5 acres and the south terminus of Kovacs Circle -,.- UErg 9 ' �T: Appeal of the Board of ,,•Zonis . Ad3ustrnent,`s approval of • an ,Administrative Review request to permit a 121,424 square foot industrial building and a , Conditional Exception to permit. ra 10-112 foot tront' yard.,,setback: in lieu of a 14-foot front yard !setback on Redondo Circle and to permi.t ,.a truck well 50 'feet in Width in lieu of in width, along with a ;negative Declaration. 'z In' nddition to the appeal, a, Use: Permit is 'being a' requested to; permit an industrial building within 150 feet of residentially Loned property And toperm.it j truck doors to face a public street . • .i..a..Ct..,... SUGGESTEQ...AS�T.I�ti: .r Two actions are being requested: 1. Uphold the Board of Zoning. Adjustment' s approval of Administrative Ruview No.-•87-15, Conditional Exception -No. 87-'24 and Negative Declaration No . 87-9 and deny the appeal t on, the'` in based f dings and with conditions of approVal ' outlinod in- this report; 'Approve Use,=Permit No. � 8734 baaed '°vn: tha findings and with ' Condit lons`'Of . approval outlined 'in thia' report. .. ., 9 the .B• : a ' - On ,,Agri l 15 1 87, , i �_•: o rd-af Zon3ngAdjustmenta.report.- . approve Admt strative ;'Review No . 87' 15 and Negative.. Declaration `No: 87"9 ;by - v -vo of 4 t5. to 0 ':ana a roved Conditional 'Exception -No. 17--2'4, by.' a vote .'of to 1 .,., :Adtairiisp ^ '• � a'- P trative Review No:', 87-15 ` is �.a -request .by- � ,� 80 of t h'a •urestonDevelopment ' in accordance With;'Sections-95].4 . 01�' Ordinance Code to'; permit a n'ew 122 424 square foot,' industrial bdildi'fiq,`on I a,-5•� acre "parcel 'cur ;entl owned:- by 'the.. Ci ty of ; f edeelopment A' ency. .,Huntington. Beach: R g "Conditional -EYci�pti.�on - (Variance) ' No. 874-2A iss , a. ,request to permit is ' 10-112 foot:;Eront yard setback- from Redondo.:Circle in, lieu of ' the. required 14--foot setback as required by Sect`.ion 95I0 . 05(b)'(3) , and to permit_:a,., truck: well -to ' be 50 ' fe:et., in, width:';in ':lieu 'of 20 . feet In, width as -required. -by Section 9510".120) , of the 'Ordinance Code. These requests are Covered 'by- Negative ,Declaration ; Nop, �These actions were appealed by Triple "H" Properties, (Reliable .:Lumber) ,..,, After further :analysis ., 'it was . determined by -staff "that . a ;use- permit $ als0 required ' 'to,-' permit a..new .industrial use .within -:150 feet 'of residentially-zoned ; ra erti and to ` ace a F P 7r'; permit truc�C :doors � to. f public,;,street.: (Sections '951018(a) ( 1) and 9510 . 12)' On May.. 27, .1987, the';board "of Zoning Adjustments declined to, act ,'on ,Use: Permit No : ,87-39 by� a vote �of 5 ,to 0 ' in :�acco�rdance with 'fection':;9815 3 of the 'Ordinance�,Code thereby referring the item: to: the Plarjn'.i g Commission. Therefore, use Permit No. 87-3A 'hats been submitted in conjunction with the appeal. DE T Nor h_aa d West . of Sub-iQct Properh-i: GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: � , General zndustri,"a1 c ZONE. M1- A ,(Restricted Manufacturing LAND USE : Industrial GENERAL PLAN 'DESIGNATION: Nigh DefiaityReside 'ntiel ZONE : R4-SR (Multiple, Family Residence DiEtrict - Senior t Residential Development) LAND USE: Senior 'Condominiums 9_,.5� ENVIRONMENTAL ST&TUS.: The-, Department ofDevelo m©nt the, Dep . p Services originally :'advertisod'draft: . Negative Declaration 87-9 for a ten day public reviaN and .comment p omment.' period, 'three , that c period •conYnenc nq 'April 9 , �1 87. During t Stiff -Report -Z- (8356d) M litteis- opposing ..-negative,.Declaation� 67-9-..were ;received Erom Connie aw firm,bE Aprehami: an, and Duco�e ep c, . Ho - Trip, and the 1p t'ies= (Reliable ; Lui6ei r) ., On May 4 , re resenting Tri le "N':` Properties-,': ; 1987, a letter% of!.opposrtion to,1 Negative Declaration' was received • letter from Environmental Teleits`, : a consultin firm, leh"_-,, ed from the�,Iaw , Eirm of Weiser, .Kane; nillmer and .-Herklman, pp ' g m, � bo th .., ;. represent, '.Wholesale Lumber . On .May. ;24 negative M M ., claration987r9pw$a �re--advertised; fora ten, day.'p0b13C9rev1e4 and De � co mment• period: tu.,.respond, to •letters.F:that��,were received, ;.to afEoYd , • . t additional .time for , reviEsw,.and comments, a gave -no Planniintice that the g .Coranission would be considerin g thert egative� decLara•tfon on s appea 1 . ., ,.On . June .3 , 1987,; a second better `was . received from , EroiosndeHoureston�i`ro' � , t w s �rec �198y, .a ; letter supporting the On June 4, P P e , P lec a eived from '.Petroncella Friend 'on behalf ,of. the residents of Emerald "Cove. On June" S, 19871 , Negative Declaration was - advertised for the � third time, for: a � ten day. public reva.dw an d `comment, period to afford ; additional time .for review ,and to clari ' . Ey that the ' negative dec}.arationcovers 'Administrative P Revi'e�i 'No: ' o . 87--2�4 ;Use permit No: 87-15, Conditional Ezce tion N F• 87-34, iamendment to ` Precise Phan of Street 'Alignment 87-,l, amendment to, Specific �Plan No. 73-1 and the disposition and development. agreement :,between. the City and the developer. The.:correspondences are attached to this report along with staff ' s - response's -to environmental issues :raised inAhe letters . After , thorough .analys' is and review of the potential impacts ,from the proposed project, staff maintains that the proposed, mitigated negative declaration Review No . 87r15,1�Conditional :Exception No. 87sl,,project� Prior to any -24 and..Use.Permit la. p �. , .87_34 : it. is necessary . . . Tire � let�tera received-and and set on Negative Declaration No�h87P�anninq Commission to :xeVind staff responses are attarheb .to this staff report. f I 5 o RE120EL;OPME iT. T,A T_U : � The site. is a 5-acre parcel within the Talbert-Beach Redevelopment r area that was adopted ' in 1,982 . , i. 0 YSSUES A NALYSIS. 'The .pr nd atrial '. P . t o osed ro ect consists, of one. .122 ,424 s uare . foot l located on a currently vacant 5-acre parcel .,,, -An 1L year lease has • building. be to . bg©n` executed with, a single user for the completed project (Southwest Quilted .Products, a manufacturer "of bedspreads and draperies) . The.'project will. initially employ, 100 perso,ns, , up fto a maximum of 200 persons . :Approximately 22, 000 square feet of the building area will be used,. For offices, and there Will be one 50 foot loading dock to-accommodate ' 2 to 4 truck deliveries or pickups per day. The developer will provide parking and landscaping .in accordance with code requirements, as well as cul-de-sac improvements on Kovacs from Talbert Avenue to: the site. The proposed use will require no outside storage or use of hazardcous . materials . The subject site is located within the boundaries of a forcer special, study area which resulted in the Taylor and Beach` 13pecifi.c Plan. in the Specific Plan designated the site for industriul 'use Staff . Report 6/16187 . 3. (8356d) ; "y f , r d identified,, Redondo Ci rc'l.e and Xovaca Circle , inti+r�iactfng in the r Y . •^ �lvenuet site; to � form �a loop, street•.;s stern .through t�o. �'albert- , •. . . . After.,.caretul :review of 'this document, stiff._, has;.'corieluded,-- thit e' veloyment'An `the , area ..line , been 'implemented An,,concurrence' r: with. the =intent ; of., the,,Specific Plan and; as a planning�,tool!It3s no } longer, necessary, for. this :area . Therefore, staff .is,,•,recommndiing the repeal! of the Ta for and Beach'' Y . . Spec if fc .Plan with'-4tesolutiion No . , 1382 and� the adoption of a new Precise : Plan of btreet A13gnmtsnt No ., 87-l"`to show the-:te ccnination ox Xovacs Street, ;s d Redondo; Circle with -c it-de-sacs on.• the subject :site.:: These pioposals area Ianalyzed in' separate staff; reports . These 3 tams ahculd be re viewed and approved by the Planning Commission and. adopted by_ the City Council prior Co the ,, requested entitlement, becoming effective (sea Cohdition No . 21) . The following is a code section analysis of the proposal . S.ci o n Issue RQ9siIXpa 9510. 02(a) Lot Size 200000 S. F. mina 217 , 762 sq. :'ft. 9510. 02(b) Lot Frontage 100 ft. minimum 245 ft. and' 125 ft. 9510. 04 Building Height ht 40 ft. , 18 ft . 29,W ft. ' 'no portion it within �45 .ft. , wi : I . n �15 ft . of. of residential residential ;I 9510. 06(b) (3) .Front Setback. 14 ft. f t . and 14-112 'f t 9.510 .,07(a) Interior Sides 1r; ft . Minimum` 52 ft. Setback ? 9510 .08 'Rear Setback 15 ft. Minimum 60 ft. f 9510 .13 Landscaping 6 ft . buffer 6 .ft. . buffer '•,,(no variance granted by BZA) . y 9510 . 12 Loading facility 20 feat maximum ,_ *50 feet maximum . 9 Y , width 9.a10. 15 outside Storage Sp r ec:ial screening Na outside , required storage proposed. 9660.3 Parking Stall 8 . 5 ft. x 19 ft . 8 . 5 ft . x 19 ft. Dimension . (Standard) *variance Staff Report -- 6/16/87 M4- (8356d) ` ON, : s Rio. ti' Iza � �raYiaea a� Real End, 9600.E Compact Parking r a �pimenaion 8 'f#: oX" 15 ft B. Lt 15 ' • ft •` b) '�ocetion Distributed Dii' tribution through' pa�rkin9 " ePP.roved by. BZA area 0600: 12 {a� Pssirkingi Spss cress ; 206 218 Number Required 9600 . 18 -Landscape ,area 17,420 'sq: ft. 22, A83. " sq. Ft 9600 . 18 Front yard ld ft. aside PiA.ni►mum 10 Et. landscape planer, along wide Planter street sides along street sides *Variance The following is a, staff analysis of commentse' concerning t received sec the environmental documentation. noticed for ublic "heed Section 15105 of .the Califoe improperly T6 s ellant •,contends- that the sub e_t, s licati,ons' were nmental ualit Act dtates that a Negative Declaration P 9 ' bevadve'rtfsed �4o Y � ..9 Lion shall ,. ' " veeDec].arationsiin a£local�news, City 'a policy fs r a to . advertise Negati paper for 10 days.; Negative 'Declaration Rio,: 87-9 was; published on, April . a , 1987, 11 days prior to the Board of Zunfng d3ur�tmen Hearing . with regard to the Conditional Exception and Administrative Review regarding Notice of Hearin For the . Board of ' Zo �i .2 . ns, the Huntington. Beach Ordinance Code Section 9e1 regarding g n3nq Adjustments st,:�tes , "The Board shall give or causa to he given notice of the time,, place -and 'purpose of 'all public hearings by anailing notices at least five 5) working days prior to ..he date, of such , hearing to ,the Y ; addr©sss,,appearaoplicahtand �on the latest ll owners eavailable tax roll .* Noticessmwe es and were .' mailed on April *?, 1987, six workinq day' s3 prior to the hearing . , The appellant also contends that: the applications tiled listing Boureston Development as,-the applicant were improperly, fi led :because they weve not authori.r . � by the property _owner, the City bf , ' [untington Beach Redevelopment Agency. In fact, a letter -dated March 27, ,-1987, from Charles Thompson, City Admanisstrator , to noureston Development authorired Boureston Development 'to file for z entitlement--to-use on the subject site now owned by the City of Huntington reach" (see attached) . Staff Report — '6/16. 37 -5- . (8356d) • fff t ' , �.. - 1�. � Thy appellant,. � claims �that,' thN-;Botsrd of of.,, ,,,Zoning . . �onng�,�-'11d j ustchents ,,thout,"power ; to :act .;an the subjsct applic#tioR� because ,thesDoaru'�a approvail 6f. the,,.proposed 'cul 'de=saca at,-Redondo •Circle arid:'KQ;�racs y,� St"��eet` cd"1atituted a ,change fin' thacawaadan�eral ' Plan. ►lthoug�t ,,; a,te connection:=of ;'Redondo Nand Kov peed ass 'a Precise clan ; ©f;Street: Al`ignrnent;: in i974 ' approval, of'; the .prapos�ed,-;project 'by-,;the , Board'`"oE Zoning `Adjustments .,does not eonatitutu a- Generale Flan Aniendrment . Redondo Circle as, originally ,'shown in .'the , 1973 ,Taylc:r and Beach r 1 spe, ciitic Plan,, be. a point.. 600 fnet .; to the east of the railroad gan-=;at . S right-�-', -way and extended southwaird Errjn► Talbert Avoilue �660 .. feed,:;ro ` Y a 'cul-de-sac.; Precire lPinn of .' Stre6t_-Alignment No'i 74 3 was adopted ; ais:'Ordinance ' M., 1951 by the City 'Counci 1 on December 16, 1974 . This action'' ,noved Redonoo .'.Circle 31.0 Feet to the west,. of ,the original - alignment, ;e,mod .curved it eastward to the originnal cul-de--sac . location (see -attached diagram - . Precise Flan of ft're' et Alignment 74-3) . On February 210 1978-, ' the City Council' ` adopted . Re,aolution' 4S90 j amending .- the Taylor and Boach" Specific". Flan. This,.Ancorporated Preci'se : Pla,n;.of ; Street Alignment 74-3 into: the Specific : Peen, and extended,'kedondo Circle 330 feet ` Eo the east to int9rssect,.a ; proposed north/south street (Xovacs Str' eet) . (Sea attached kiendment to Taylor - Deach Specific Plea. ) .t On 'July , l , 1986, Tentative 'Tract 11955 was approved oy : the Pla, nning .-'. Com issivn, delineating': the' pe�rcel ` now `proposed t'fac development by Houreston , as,, well ,as the -'proposed nnw street alignment :,That proposal was covered by-. Negative Declaration, No . !83-l2 . ' Although it is ' staff is position that the street ilignment depicted by,�the previous mPrecise Plan ads Specf fiw .Plan .adoj�t J by the :.ity; ouncf 1 y recordation of this map, Precise Plan of Street Alignment:. No. 87-1 is also being 'prepared in order to reduce the likelihood of - this item. being raised` as a legal is�su' a :at a later 9 8 dato . The new precise ,plan .would depict the termination of Redondo Circle , and . Kovacs' Circles with r_ul-:de--sacs on the sub je'ct site, anti is :analyzed : in a separate ;.:gtaff. report, dated sure 16 , : '1587. A Proposed conditions of : approval for Adminie"trative. Revie,W 140. "A ` Conditional Excel Lion , No . 87--241 and Use Permit _No, 87 r34 . sie :that no building +or grading p�ermit,s shall be issued .until , the FIf" al 'flap for Tentative- Trcc't 119 55. is 'approved. by the ,, City, Crauncil,:and recorded- and the :efCective data of the implementing ordinance, for Precise Plan of Street Alignment No. 87-1. The appellant ''claims that the davelopar did not present juvtificati,on ' the requested exceptions, � '� -,requf red'; by 'Code fort he the granting of. a variance would nab `con�st3tute n ;I grantof ,special privilege. The appellant alsgo contends that: thcs developer "did not establish that the project would not be de' trimental to° the .public welfare or, surrounding property, especially` with regard to traffic. The Board of Zoning Adjus'tmentss , however,.' deter'mi.ned that both these findings can- be rude .i.n,: the. affirmative. The Board found that ' thP unusual shape and topography of 'the ' lot and unique access constituted a special rircumstaoce and Staff Repori - .6/1.6f 8T .6 (8356d) t, presen ad s haYdshfp,'.to ; the, d©veloper, : They: also' found that the lopmen't- g ;i.ncluding traffic generated, would. be ;;in accordance days_ with the ,planned ' chirac..er:., of the. area,,.,-.and would .not be injurious to . the surrounding property, ''TEstimated . traffic counts presented by staff ',,to the_, Board re case acenari"o, not the presented a,�xorst . traffic generated b this pirticulax:-projact . Even at . Worst. case Y . figures, the de sign capacities :of Redondo, . Kovacs " and Talbert are such . that the ;added .traffic. ' volume generated by this project ,can be adequaLely;'accommodata�i (Please refer to Section 4 . 0 of this report - = Environmental ' tStatus . ) { The appellant:ci✓tes ; several, sections, of the Huntington Beach _. e t ens are. included wife£` the �cdinance. C.�de`�.which; he believes� ;were violated by the ,action Board of Zoning -Adjustments . These_ s c i hin Article '951 (Restricted Manufacturing District) and are addressed below 1. Section -9510 12(a) refers to aminimu 5 f oot 's a setback req'Uired fcr , loading facilities . Boures t . n ev e p . p p In ' not 'in ;violation of this code section, as the truck loading doors are located 45 1/2 feet from the public. right-of-way. 2 . Section . 9510.;12(b) states. that loading e aca.iities shell 'fiat exceed 20 feet in width. However , a variance was the Board for• 50-foot Wide loading ; facilities proposed by the _ apIpUcant , based on, findings outlined in -this rep'61t . 3 . Section" 95I.0.12(d) stake s that < the ,Board of 2onfng Adjustmes3l�6 shall- "endeavor to achi 3ve, ; variations in the street. considering 'the location of loading facilities,. ' The Beard determined that the location of the subject loading , frcility would riot create an over- concentration of such facilities on any one street. 4 Section 9510. 141 ( f) stares that, ader!ua to area shall ,ba pravitled for the-.safe operation of trucks. Again , th© ,,Boare, , of . Zoning Adjustments, in their approval, determined that th©- loading f area was sufficient - to accommodate the ,safe-, operaition of t rucks due to its i.proposed width And relation - to surrounding streets and buildings Sept • n. 18 requires that. a ai$Q report shall specify g recomr�endecl4noise rnxti ation measures for -an:.industiriax . use to ensure .that-,noise) levels will. c of nform. with ,the Ci ty,•s :Noise; ; . : ordinance (Section 8. 40 of. t'he{.Municipal Code) . ,. The `- applicants is.tilized a 1983 Noise 6tud, ,°prep ared by J.J. � Van. Hou'63n and t y As socfates , 'Inc. for the ;adjacentz ,rosidentisl devel6Nm n* t-, (see attached) . Tha:repast ana,� edQveloimPntt�nd from: =oide»ceg 'Y ' from both ,etinting industrialp Tk�e: report pozed industrial dtvelopmsnt-ow the subject..site. -, port . . : contains several mihigat3an measures, and s�andaxds,.. for. ; anterior and exterLor noise levels' to be included as co: ditiona of a' praiial:' for ."Futura -Industrial .kctivity- As thee® 'standards Staff' Report 6/16/87 w7., d8�S6tlj C are d • , 9 _. �ta�sr, - esigned to, miti ate• Lhe: impacts. -of ind��strial son a resisent,ial . project, -they- are .m. more - thane, adeq uatroe vatol V,mf o,itri; g,�. t e an ,, ioise impacts - of the- aub ect; develo ment ..on surroundin' g inductii,al usec. A suggested Administrativ , Reviw 715. and , n 87� 24 a.- nd Use;.`Permit No. 87s:.34 . is.;that, `the deveaopment:,,shell corap;�'y with r , J.� or , "Foutre Induatrfal .AGt;ivity" mitigation measures :=zn. the Yeport p,repared�byfied for "Houten and: Associates , .Inc.`, dated; April;.6, ;,,1983 " Thus, . by s reference,' rnitigetion measures, includ3nq.', raaximuni sound: levels', an .additional ::acoutiaal , report detai.ling; methods byhwhich. ahe.. proapose.d building will;,"comply with the --spec f ed s .anda rd3 , ; and mach sm` for resolution,;,o£ . . . . • . ... . . .�, . _ ,. the , complaint&, are incorporated as' c nditions . of approval for proposed project .: : .; 5 refers to .nu tside storage uiie'ments. 6-. . � Section ; 9510. g q .The � applicant proposes no outside storage, therefore, this section is not applicable. 7 . The appellant _ contends that the development, in general , does not comply with Article 951 (Restricted Manufacturing District)_. however, the development ccmplios With the .Zoniny Code in;,;all respects except for a %3, 1/2 f t . encroachsmnt , into the front yard ,setback and the width of the truck well for which variances were granted by the Board of Zoning Adjustments . (Please see Matrix at the beginning 'of this section - Issues and Analysis) . The .appe'llant contends that the actions. of; the Board of Zoning. Adjustments are invalid pursuant to Government Code Section 65860 relating .' to zoning consistency with the,,General ,Plan The zoning on the subject site is M1-A (Restricted Manufacturing ) , . which ,is consistent with the site` s General Plan designation of General Industrial . The Hoard of Zoning Adjustmento --acted upon ;a proposal that is permitted within the' Ml-A district; subject. to such i -entitlement, -:and is consistent Kith the General Plan. The actions of the Board did not constitute a change in the General Plan of the City. The appellant cites additional. sections of the . ordinance, C d nee which he; believes were violated by the project ' s approval . Sections 9600 :3 and 9600 . 4 regarding parking stall, dimebsions and.' compact parking are addressed in the matrix ,at the beginning of this. analysis end reflects 'compliance with these sa sections of the. code . <• With regard to Fcction 9600 . 5, the appellant contends that . Public Iorks approval was_ note given For. design. and drainage of the .parking area . , However, , a urine, the land : use I entitlement- phase, of a"projoCt., the layout 'a`nd circulation, of the parking lot and the , plbcsment of drivewa!y�s , are.. among those factors considered bye the Hoard cf Zoning Adjustments in ,their decision. Per, standard dcvelopment procedure, a detailed rovi.ew' of drainage by the Public Works Department will- occur prior to issuance rofograding ..and - uiWing permits . .-,.The 'storm' drainage plan for the p of th all Public hivrhR Standards and Specifications, including compliance with the City Master plan o£- StormDrainage . Staff Report `-: .6/16/87 »it- (8356ct) The �,11 alleges`' that' thQ' Ci ty.-faf led talconduct ' An' . ppellant vironmentF�I' study, and that -,an Environment Impact Reportiniti.sl '�` eA eu of .a 1e • n, ', In •fact, an• be.:.prepared ln'1i • . gative 1 clazakio . environmental study: was -.conducted by �ctaff;' as requ3�red CEQ�►. and it tigated restive De�claiatfon cRel,-bei l if ust r , was - de'termined.,that ;a mie are an.-Enyirt�nruenkal Impact p Y Filed. Agenci its '•m 8I: .. environment .. , If the a pros ect may, have"i.a ' signiffcank effect on th o' ect can be ;modf;fied 4r conditioned; to eliminate'.si`9ni flcant acts a; rriitf gated ndgatiMe declaration ,may ,, bra, filed in the aubi ect imp ' • , Any pote:�tial° .impacts Erom Env �ionmental'`Ympa►ct,=l�epoit. . . ., itigaked . proposal; ouch `as; noise and"'storm watr�r runoffs`'�ervicea�, and `air Other issues' including 'traffic, ,4eolagy, publ ualit wereAet'ermined r not `to have' `a potential]-= signi'f scant q Y �. The inikial, study-,ani Negative on the environment . adverso i.rnpac� t Declaration were prepared in accordance Kith: C��QA 9uiCliriStafEdand f '' �►11 areas :oE concern identified by ,tY City:0rdinancesi.�-' b #arit'cen responses firm interested pasties weicc�' addxt�ssed bY,..statt Y p rior to the Hoard of Zoning Adjustments meeting of April 15, 1987 . taff recommends the PSanning � Commission'• uphold"the Board of` Zoning. 4. S and -deny �tha appeal - bm'ed on' the following ... spec : . fandinms and' onditiGns of approval ApP rcive- Use permit No, 87�34 9 based on the followi- 9 findings , and condi.kions of aPF�cowal . « "�` The site is located at, the terminus of; kWo industrial sheets 1 . Therefore, the reduced •setback and well t�thetvalue of adversely impact surroundingresidents , j property and improvements in the vicinity. Seca of. 'special circumstances applicable, to ',thr subject Because . 2. topographys .l��cation ort 1 roperty, ncludingsize, shape, p 1 ication of the .coning Oxoi.nance ; s Y surroundings kbe- strict aPP of` privilege eni�ayed by found to the $ubjectnitopand under - identictll zonc other properties in, the vici Y classifications . The lot �is an `'unusu6umstapce. and acceffis Etir�m two` cul�de-sacs presents a •.unique ci c 3 , The grar+ting, of `Conditional Exception No. 87�-24 14i 11, not..be the public we�lfaro, •- ox :frijurious' to materially detrimental to Any, •potentially ioperty in Otte same -zone clessifications. adverse impec,ts have been considered and mitigated . renting;Iof t ' gl � Excoption will `not adversQly nerageplaa�of ttie Citlr of. Huntington . Leach. : The 4 . .The 'g affect • tie �Ce '`is 'in ;conforas�nce with -the Zoning and Genaral Plan project: designation for he n'ite. t + ce356a). 9-, Staff Report - 6l16/87 1 FIND ISO-.,MR APPROVAL _USE pSRMLT I'D a % I. The establishment, maintenance and .operation of an .industrial bu:i'ldin'g 'wihl not be-detrimental to: a. 'the` general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity; ,' : Props' rovernenta in the' vit�in t , of , such .tsao or b. rty end irnp ity, building .26 Any potentially `"adverse impacts have be n considered:' and mitigated. 3 The : gianCing of the •use permit will not . adversely afEeCt,:;the General Plan of 1 the City,.of , Huntington, Beach. Tie project is - in c61f6rmiance with- the'-M1`-A zone and ,'General Plan designation of Genera` 'Industrial Ior the site . ) is consist©nt k,, i. th the goats and ob�ectives of the4 . The propose City' s General Plan and Land Use Map. Q pI`TIQRS Q E�' CEPTION m ` 1 . The ' site .p]an, floor plans , at►d elevations received and dated, April 1,, 1987, 'shall ' be the��approved I layout , with modificetians as noted in Administrative Review No. 87-15 . 2 All Conditions of Approval of Administrative Review No. a7• 15 shall be applicable . 1 . The site plan, floor planes , and el�vutions received and dated April 1, 1.987,• ,, shall be the appro •ed layout, with nodiEicekions as noted in Administrative Review No . 87-15. 2. All Conditions of Approval of Administrative Review No . 87--15 shall be .'applicable. -.:ARhilb6�TI� �� The floor plans�`� and elevations received , and dated April ] : I 19870 shall. be the app.roved layout. 2A The site 'plan dated. April 1 , 1.987, shall ' be revised to depict the modifications described herein: a. increase widish of landscape planter adjacent to South property baunda'ry to a minimum of six feet (reduce width of Landscape planter ad•jacent� to building ae4osdir,gly) . --10- (8355d) Staff Report 6/16/87 1 e.. a li;f:ant slha�ll I ' . 3 . Prior,; to issuance., of building permit31,• th PP submit the following planar a. ''Landscape ' and1 irrigation . plan to:the Dep:Artrnent, of , Development Services_ and Public storks fo`r, review and approval. ,', b. Rooftop, Mecha n, ical Equipment Plan. ; Said plan shall { indicate screening of all rooftop mechanical. equip:aent and shall `delineite the type o; material proposed to screen said,,-equipment . 4. Installation of required landscaping and irrigation systems e cam leted prior to final` inspection. -all b c sh all P 5. Grading plans shall be ;siebmitted to the Public Works Department ai'dhg with plans for - rift :control for all storm runoff if determined to be necesst�ry' by the Director of Public Works , 6 . If foil tyre , insulation is to. Le used, a fire retardant�n�ype shall be installed as approved by the Building Depart 7 . An automatic fire sprinkler system sha11 .be ' approved and , installed pursuant to Fire Departmentregulations . 9... 'Service -roads ,an fire lands, asp determined ay .the Fire F ..Department , shall be posted and marked. ' 9 . Fire access lands shall be maintained. If fire lane viola- tions occur and the services of the •Firs Department are , required, the applicant will be liable far-;expenaovincuut•es1. l0 . All building spoils , such .-as unusable , lumber, . wire, ,p�1pe,' and other surplus or unusable material, shall be disposed of, at an ' off-site facility equipped ` to handle `them. xl.. The development shall compl-X..,w3th,:mitigation measures sgeciEied t for "Future Industrial Activity" in the Report prepared by J,,J . Van Houten and Associates , Inc. , -dated April 6, 1983 (attached) ;. 12. Natural gas shall be stubbed in at the locations of water heaters and central heating units. 13 . Law-volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water. faucets . . ij 14 . If lighting is included in the , parking lot, high-pressure sodium vapor lamps shall be ' used for energy- . savings. , AIL, outside lighting shall be dirEcted to prevent "spiXl.as©' onto adjacent propilarties . 'r lS . gradii.ng or building permits, Tract Map -Prior to issuance of 1.195a s2�a11 be approved :by' the City Cotancil and recorded . (6356d) Staff Report -- ,6/16/87 -11 - .R is ,il A ,I 16. A11 applidible ;Public Works fees aha11 be lseid prior to' issuance 'of ' bui ldbig permitn . 7 . The-development 4haIlL comply with, all" appli cable. provisions of: the ordinance',C6des Bui lding�, Di,,Oiaion, .and, Fire nepar tnent . 18. The: applicant . shall :meet 8 pP '11- a lic�ble local, State..", and Federal Firep 'Codes, 'Ordinances,, and standards`. 19 . L4'ndscaping. shall comply' with 'Artic'le.'90 ` of the Huntington Beach 0rdinance -.Code. 20 . Cocnpact. parkin p to s ,dept g stalls sha1L� be striped h of .19 feet . .' '-where possible. 21 . This approyal shall: bec ome effective upon approval„''of Preoide Plan of Street Alignment 'No : 87--1 by the City Council . 22. The -Planning 'Commission reserves the ' ri.ght to revoke Administrative Review No. 87-•15 if _any, violation of these conditions o€ the Huntington Beach .Ordinance' Code occurs . ` 1014 Overturn the Board of Zoning Adjustment' s approval and deny Administrative Review No. 87-15, Conditional Exception too. , 87-24 and 9 Ne ative Declaration No . 87- 9 based on findings; Deny Use Permit. No . 87-34 based on findings . I . Area Map. 2 . :Site plan 3 Letter. of ''Appeal dated April 24j 3987 4 . Environmental Docuumentation: a. Letter dated April 13, 19874 :from Mrs ., Connit%Xandic, . .opposed to Negative Ddelaratin ' 87-9 . b. Letter dated . Apri 1 1.3 , 1987, from AP rahamian and rhicote, -opposed to Negative Declaration 87-9,. c. tetter dated April 13,, 19870, from Real Estate linvestment .{ Services, . Bob Bolen, opposed to ?negative Declaration - 87-90 d . Staff response to April113, 1937 tranamIttals e. Letter dated , May 4 , 1987, received 'f rom Wei ser ; Kane, 8ellmer and Berkrsan, supplemented by latter from 'Environmental Telesis, Mr. : Christopher Joseph. f . ny,.4 , 1987'.. transmittal , Staff response to M . g . Letter, from Environmental Telesis dated June 2, ; 1987 , ;opposed Co Negative Declaration 87•-9. h. Staff response to June 2, 1987 transmittal . i . , :;Declaration from City,,'"raffIc Engineer that no significant traffic impacLs' Will be ,generat+ed by .proposad, project. J . Letter dated June `2, 1987 from Petroncella ,Friend on behalf of Emerald Cove residents . Staff Raport — V16/871 r12 ATTACHMENTS (Contfnued) t 5. Letter , of ,Author'izrti n 6 Bbiid of honing: Minukes:,date�l; Aptf l '15, 1987 16, cise, plan of 8ticeet. Alignment 'UrI : 7. pre ndment to' the. Taylor and Beech s eCiffC Plain, , P 9 Tehtative ' T act` ' 11955 10. Excerpts Noise- Asses ' '... .. i smsnt, rep , A p ared by J.J. Vai Houren. and • Associates, : Inc. , 'dated April 6, 1983 . MA: LV:kla j, , 'r staff Repoxt 6/1087 ;.13-» its I CF R 2 ' C4 . r. Q 1 R2 3. ml a , l-Ca _ ,. .,} 'R2 R2 r 3�R '�t +1i t s i ml-CD TALWNT _' ' brrA +. 1 .pfl t ci R4-SR n , ! -- �. C 4 CF-R ML t , iMI4 - C2hit Rl Ix Z! R 3 •CD Ra At R! lip n.cs; 1 j• I. • .. �` . i i "%)MYWQYO" IWACN TLAMMM DIVISION c.. •' _ _ - - - _ •- - - - •*'��. r a .mow t• .- . - Ta>ut#T AIK/RR - f w. AIOnoj9p at 4•• a l a ; Li .....I► 1+IIQJECT._..z •.�+.. 111 • , 00, so "sow a/yam - *.*-.A srr _ Sol - _ ■w fairs low Ikeda"" - - ••. - awe .'� w�.•wM. ..f.r/ darer- _,'•riawsaw ffwalrrfas pool rT � �_ , „ - - . - _._ -_cam. •. r, By Missenger „ APRAHAMI/�•N 6t OUC • OTE ' ,• NICNAMpJ.AtNANAMtAN A rN(fed►KGdfAGM.?Q• ' ' , fi>,t►rCNL •' NAROIO 4.ONCOt9.jM. twM�tRs t }j 17! 7 PIS-SOOs • t<VttC !to '1 411198 M.a 6014UN SOULLV&40 —• � I� ! � l�+vlNw,c.:�ir«Nun•lsi�•lalo Q R R.; • ra, - u• + wuw� R ril 24 , 1987 6U1t.Rt " s .fit' -' ll C3 t P1anii n j'cbt-Mlss ion City of H'ntln'• ton Beach , California -CE�J. y' 9 Res Notice of Appea`l' of 'Dec Ision, of soard of 7.Onin9 Adj,ustmients Gentlemen: On 'behilf of our client, Triple "H' Properties, appeal is hereby made to the City Planning Com�mis5 on rotestin p .g and appea l f ng the dec i s f on of the' Hunt i ng Eton . Beactz z Board of zoni ng A justm � s• in approving •. Cond iti�ona l •', Exce Lion ! • d ent p —� No 87- 241 Administrative Review No. 87=I5, and Negative Declaration No. 87-9. Triple Ill* Properties, by its ,apoe alp herebyt ,. asks that he City Planning Commission,. .'over turn and, rev Iiv the decision of. the' Board . of Zoning ; Ac3 justmeA's , 'and asks that the A lications •, of . eoureston Deve?opment , `rnc . for Condit'fontsL Exception , No. 87 24 , Administrative Roviaw t to. 87•-15, and Negative Declaration 87-9,' be -disapproved and 'denied by 'the City Planning Commissi. , p w P General Triple H pro erties is . a California Partnership which 'owna a 14 acre parcel of � 1and in [flint i.ngtom e Beach . Ti`1 e' "EiOIS "pirapetrty is ad Jacent ,to' the Talbert-Beach: ' re' develo N•. psa nt ait whiche `1is the proper tYy the sAjei c t ref the , Board of zo�ti n 1►d Ids' deals ion appealed-here by. Tripla �T' q , "H" Propert ies " be 1-1 eves the - action of the Board of ZOh ing Ad3ustmenta was ill.e al -isa ro �r, and , if the , under'2 in 9 ► P F Y 9 development As allowed 'to proceed, the property . of Triple H. , Prt�c ; sties Will be severer damaged . The grounds for the appeal are -,as follows: + ' '(A) - IMPROPER 'NOTICE(S! and, IMPROPER APPLICATION ( 11 Fallure to , Provide Adequate- 110'kice of a.r.�rr w.rr. rw..�r�r irr r.r.rr++rr .w Hearing California. Cove rnmental Code Section No. b5, 905 . , ' requireq that apublic hearing , be held on all ,. applicationa for conditional exception, '.and., preaum - ably, for adolniatrati.ve review' . and negative declaration , when a negative 'declaration is . 'the basis , for a proceeding before a ..Board of Zoning Adjustment , :Government Code Section 65 ,'091 pre- ncribes a per.lod Of._ not Tess than 10 days for no,t (cC to be given by mail - to owners of' property within 3.00 feet , rn this cases the Board,- gave notice of such hearing on April 7, 1987 . A copy a: the. mailing list from the City's records , together with a notation as to the date of mailing is attached as Exhibit' ',"A" hereto, Thf s . in 2 dayB , short , of the period required by • Government Code Section 65, 081 , ; and, accordingly, , thin Board should -remand this r 2 r • . z 1 00 7,1 1 matter to the B6axd , of ' Zoning Ad juat:ients and+ r6le �t that. the . act ion tsy the Board of Zoning ;�1d justaaet�ta is `without etfect . 2 Al " lications b' Develo t-f� Were Tasproner Under Ord finance con"e 5e t1on 3. 1, "i f the , applicant £or a cdiional exception , ► � admfniateative r��i� w, and Approval of negative or. i Rot the boner of . the property declarati s ,f ' a. letter ' affected , by the applicatiocs� . from the property owner authorizing the agent to act, ' in his. behalf shall :accompany the ,applicat"ion": No such latter was attache: to the. App�ication of �t ,a Gt9 G f which is attached 1 o meR ve Y u est on De t P , e r , hereto as Uhibit , *81) An the property , owner , at least as of the, -date of applicAtion and hearing # .,gas and presumably is the Aedeveloprant Agency , of the City. of suntili ' t' beach, call forn'ia , and ' aA no letter frog the , Redevelo sent Agency of the city of P t Huntington Beach authorizing suCh appcatyion e t3tOf1 i 8'ou A 1 icatioli o . accompanied the . . , pp . veto, m ent the' poard of Zoning Ad julctments an'd . no power to act .on tbo appl Ica.ion of Daureston Developpgnt. ti 4 f ,t. , 1 • C Accordingly, as the application (s) acted o by the Board were ; mproper , and as inadequate public notice was given , it is rmquested , on procedural grounds , that this Commission, without khe need to consider the underlying technioal abuses pervasive in the application , reverse the decision of th? Board of Zoning Adjustments , and reject the above-referenced applications for conditional exception , administrative' review, and acceptance of negative declaration . (B) EXCEPTIONS REQUESTED ARE BtiYOND °PO',+TER OF HOARD � OF ADJUSTME NTS ZONING and Sets e o f 8ZA Power ( 1) Ap2licatlon is Bey ...._,. Under Article ,.gg ':of the Ordinance Code j of the City of Huntington' Beach, the Board of Zoning Adjustments may act` only when ` a minor or, variance of some other regulation or- ordinance is sought. rn this tnstance , approval of the 'application , by virtue "'of the dbando'nment o a precise plan of future street , constitutes a change in the general or Master Plan of the City. The Board of Zoning uskRient , ' is with6" t power to act '-,until the City ;. c.ou»cil had effectuated a chain' a ` in, tbm Plan , g Master and , , accordingly, ttie decfsi'on 'o f the , Board of a • w - , f! Zoning Adjustments should be overturned, with l _ d i .ect ions y the applicant ict�nt to reePP-Y if and when the master Plan of the City has beer, amended to allow latitude for Board of Zoning Adjustment A.tion . (2) Developer Failed to Present Justification for Exce2t ion r and Thus ,l BZA Is Without Power to Act t Under ordinance Code Section 9811 . 1. 1, any applicant/developer must aEE,tcrstively estab- dish : " (a) That the granting of a conditional io will not constitute n grant of exception special privilege Inconsistent , upon other properties in the vicinity and under an identical 2onf3 elasnification. of Conitional io will That notthe be granting materially detrizental, Exception to the public welfare or injurious 'to property in this mane cone elagsifications. " The applicant/devel6per in this, matter has not met his burden. indeed, the evidence be1fore e th Hoard of Zoning Adjus• tments establishes that, by virtue of the Flanr.ing Commission ' s own staff ceport . that appcoximAtely six ( 6) times the volume -of traffic projected . by ' the developer will, be thrown to Redondo 'Circle , and this alone will constitute • a 'taking of the . right . of access of the owners of adjacent propexkv , privilege for the applicant .a special- and uncompensat . - Thus , not Only is 4 approval by the Board of zoning Adjustgaents of the conditional exception ( s) a grant . oi' • spec ia1, privilege , its action is , also ' inj.urious to owners 'of adjacent property . (C) VIOLATIONS OF ZONING CODES The action of. the Board of Zoning Adjustments constttutea a violation of the appealed •from .•I following sections of the, city Ordinance Code regulating property* as with the subject site . in P y� � property zoned , as Restricted Manufacturing Dis- 1 • tr icts (MI-A) ( 1) 9510. 12(a) - Violation of minimum set- back requirements; Loading facilities shall < not be over 20 feet in width ; ( 3) 9510 . 12 (d) - Traffic shall not be regulated to concentrated 'on one ' street; 951D. 12 ( f) - The area for truck opera- tion is '.inadequate for the safe .ope'ration . of tritckst (5) � 9s1Q . 18 - Mandatory NoiseStudy has not n performed as re uirQ�: .b the Ordinance twee .. ._.....�. Y nanca 'Code. N�_ I ••i r" ( 6) 9510. 15 - Ocitside ' Storage there has by ��n no' compliance with outside s: eage require- ments . ( 7) Under 951 of the Ordinance Code , I packing , landscaping , set-bucks, and others building i requirements have not been observed , and other provisions of the zoning Ordinances of the City applicable to the size , shape , and landscaping required for buildings in the M1-A Zoning Classification in the city of. Huntington Beach. (D) VIOLATIONS OF GOVERNMENTAL CODES The actions of thi Board of Zoning -- Adjustments , as heretofore mentioned , constitutes a change in the Master Plan of the City , under California Governmental Code Sections 65, 350 and . 65 , 907. These changes arF: invalid under Governmental Code Section 65 , 866 as being out of conformity with the General Plan of the City of nuntington Reach . (E) ADDITIONAL . VIOLA.TIONS OF ,ORpINANCE CODES Triple "R" Properties believes , additionally, that the proposed development, if allowed to I` proceed , will be ill violation of the follcawing sections :of the Aontirigton Busch Ordinance bides. � 7 + r 7 �• �J�, ,..,.i-wa.amt:l: Z7' '::..,.4ti•.»ti.fir+........ .., ... t' •7. 1 ......�:..c�', . ...:VM*flWw� '_'.� Proscribing minimum packing s s1i dimensic:iNe (2) 9600. 4 - Requiring the distribution of compact car Npaces throughout the property ' and proposed development . ` ( 3) .9600. 5 - Desicn of , lota and drainage I Department of Public , Works approval. -daea not appear to have been given . p) FAILURE TO CONDUCT ENVIRONMENTAL' .STUDY The Public Resources Code of che, state of California , Sections 21000 et. se9• , requires that ducted prior to an environmental Study be con Ij the Cit approval of a 'Project of this type. by legislative body , or 'prior to the &-p9coval of cond i t canal exception , absent a valid "negative' decl3rati.on" . Where , a question +exists as to tea. approp.r i s teness o f the use of a negak f;ve declaration , - recent CAli�fornia case law reyuices ? that such study, be conducted . See F iends-of. Westwood wherein the requireraenta v. Los An eles - -� for environmental assessment .hre set fc�Xth . �o Apn+�al, Secorid Appell,*te i (California Court � ► `.`�:, • District) . ., i r, t The requirements of . .,Westwood, alone , seer I clearly applicable . as the burden of traffic whicis the proposed development promises to throw upon Redondo Circle is, in a word , tremendous . The applicant has estimated and represented •ghat the pro:oscid project Will generate 250 vehicular trips per day. However , this commission ' s own staff has estimated that in excess of 1500 vehicular trips per day wi .,l be made into the subject site from traffic related to the development. Not only does this { constitute a material misstatement of the data previously submitted to the City Councf.l, it also constitutes a clear basis to apply the Westwood rationale, and to require the Environmental Study, prior to the issue of any conditional, exception, or approval of any administrative review or negative declaration. (13) USE OF REDE'VkL'0PMZNT LAWS TO TAKE PROPERTY OFM O Under the Talbert--Beach Redevelopment Plan adopted by the City of Eluntington Beach , the City . t, and the Redevelopment ; Agency are ; mandated to - engage ,. eve lopment , proceas without+thout Injury. to.-, the 7. An : the red . . property -of - others, whether within or. without, the r development area . Triple "H" properties is c1carly such an owns• r , and 'Triple H15 property will be damaged , both by the elimination of a "precise" plan of future street, and by a deluge of traffic on an `already over-crowded and largely fmpassable street. Yet, without the barest sense ' of fair 'play or due process , and without the sl;.ghtest adherence to general plan or environmental concerns, the development appears destined to proceed, as if of its own volition. Triple "H' Can only speculate as to the motives which prompt the approval of such development by the -City, its administrative bodies , and its Redevelopment Agency , but those motives appear to be development at any speed . This Commission has the opportunEty to enforce , by upholding this appeal and overturning the ' ;.ward of Zoning Appeals action , tfie spirit and intent ' of the statutes and ordinances governing projects of this type. Triple "H" properties respectfully requests that this Co=ission do so enc4 uphold `its appeal . if �� this commission does not uphold this appeal, and does not reverse the dads lon ' of the ' Board of Zonln' gAppeslQ below, a . : written statement of , decision , after public h(�'&ri 10 c 0 4 hereon, 13 respectfully re, qua'stv'3, for purposes of future. Appeal. APRAHAMIAN D TE ftical D J .. APRAHAH t4v alkttor" ney for Trl�p a *H" Properties. I - 4 { If( i r 1 r 4 1 -jj � M• -87- 04 159-29146 Si�3 !r • t C I Y OF HUM ING'Ir.! BEAM FdMEV 7HW AGU Y VAN DER ILLS X K 11 ON.N. p 2000 MAIN ST 2000 Mal..i St., 18312 PAft)ME'W.Ul 1203 IiLNT::VGICN BEAL'ai, C1 92x. ,9 HLNrZw;WM 8c.%,--H, CA 92648 HMITIIJG'IQI SEAM tr. 4?a'43 S DEVt~LCPi Yr ADE.`�"Y OF 15. 291�il? 933-�87-105 . 2100 MA.N ST ST E-iG't .INGit'�J B }i BARMY4C h :i�N::►1GTM. SF. '}:. 17A 1648 2000 KAI:1 5T 16317 ?ApXV15.rv' Li i LOa f h-.NTIwiCN 3i;A/-"H, r"a 97 3 .L-r;TZ?j=tl P..Z 4:H, CA 920540 REDE`hZ'7TMl"NT r+GfyCY 159-291--08 t;00 w I2� SILO WINEWAM W.-'E CL?TXMINIL14 ol:kNTlWt.CN BEN:i, CA 92648 L9 GRF�RhTE PLAZA NEwt'C'•fU BEXH, CA 92600 EJcZ�r: 2a'1' AG�X.`Y 159-291-09 2000 MAIN ST hTI� CG'V1� OGh'D1INIl.'M ; HLlnl, GTCN BEAQi, CA 92648 L9 CbRPMTE PLAZA 14Eti+WRT BE .N, CA 92660 ►59-141-79 RE.;E<r'ifi,:P!�`1T ,�GF�r'Y 159-291-1.0 913-87wIp6 , V+I:1L'4r'ARD CIE CCNC1CIrII:J i Ctd WI Lt MNS ..,.r r R =0 !WIN SC 19 07RPOR.1.TE PLAZA LW2 s.�ur�x� in 4204 V,r -rlNlM l BUal, CA 92648 N TATORT, BF�, CA 92660 x�.yrrv�r;:r 3EACY, , to a?&ti'B 159-27L-26 ISLAS i t: E r G 159-291-15 91 -81-3D7 9350 CC I?PO RS'IE? AVE PFCL ECT 933-87 rAcuawIrr ,;zrirr A 1�:rIAIN 'aALLrc"Y, CA 9Z708 •a05 ...vGL�l.r� i Nvxrr.VGT1 I BCAC.N. CA 9&643 159-2 7'1 933-87-099 SMAGL'E Cr�LINE Y,�i WNSEE LD"S L 933- 87�108 7801 LORI DR 18 312 MRVz�l LAN 4101 ttE Eu,, IH2 9 92 PR�MXY1F'y' L.y #10I t i.'G'NTItiGtC.N MACH, CA 92648 HWr Ilk-,I' 4 BEAa, CA 92048 Ni;,VrrVGTON BEACH. Ca. 9.6a9 C 159"d?1,--28 933-87-100 M;T-15 .CPARLES D SHUI M RITA 97J-87-109 7795, IDRI DR, 183L2 PARI(VIDI IN Q20 L `tUNrx„ JON 1 HUNTINGPGN BEAM, Cat 92648 tAWIMIM MT-M CA 92648 MUWr TOII BMAIEW Lo to � Nu,YTr NGmDr: a�u�d, c� 0640 '. 159-271--29 933-87 401. 933--87:410 WAM NATALIE k CWMBdG PAUL G 1"ur MJt VATgrCrA, A 19+451, Sf'lIW BRME IAF 18312 PARKVL Eid LN '4102 ' la�z9� -�� 'vzE,► LY 02oZ ,. Ht;krNC;TCN BFAM, CA 92648 1AwrING-WV BF.AQi, CA 92648 xutwFfxGTCW 9aCN, G1 97648; L59-27142 933-87^-107 933-87-1I2 HUM 7�7L� BL INGWM V'p .. i , FL$�tr AOEI..,H: :; . . . �q2g?p�1RXYXLM l.Af� /.iO' �. 1. 14312 .PAS MLW,IN .9202 HU IMr'^� t BEJWG�3R CA 9264 Ht�T� "BFJ�{, C�1 9,a64fi xt>>V'!'hMGx�pw 4�iCa, CA,,, 933-87�x03 c 159 271�64 ,�; EX HIBIT'' ,V PIKE EM. !Q r TI�XNrCS XtRX-Lt L 27i7 � � f� P.i i �A0391648 . 18292 �J vliw lx 1 .'+ .. a..:rwr•' i..,,� �.,..,�a.d -"" - w.�...., .,,.r.r.+r+•..arrr+...+.w4w•a••tr,e'tt:.t..sJ A�kC . ��3 �'��Jr87..15T - .� 933-CT-1 bd r . URC.,Li. 'TNEL JJLVF.R TAPW$ O 30Ux.VL �1JVtaF.E C ,•♦ 18352 V-WVZEW W; :1208 18242 PARMEW t?V 0106 666 PAKLPX irn HtIurrsaTc.q aEACH,` CA 926 .t Ht?NT?NGTCN B.CACH, CA 9:1648 mr PzzA-,,A.vr,, SC 29464 90 7;14 7 DAvt D3C�N NCWAR." A 933-87-158 933-87-164 l y?4? ?ARX"i ZE'�� LN �l QI CORTG:Y XAgr4Y.V V'IfACA•V MCKAS J NJN:::YGTGN 9vcm, cA vti 9 18?-t: �'A.RIC�IE"w tt3 'y?06 18762 ?ARlfVt«•� Li 814,i t:U.YTIYhTCN BFA''N. .A 92Q4a HUFF-rNi .TC.V DUCK.. CA 9264.0 933-97, 'l48 DRAXLETr aAY 933-87-159 93:1•-87-1.0 WFENER JAXAZ5 E MAS•a.Y JAME'S .9 97i1 dCi.YC3 CA1V'ta.Y OR 18242 PAR VIEW' 1.Y 1107 1:'"�' PAX'✓fE�+ L•Y 82G, HV'VrI1•GTVN B£;CH, CA 92646 "' NU:NTrYGTOtl BEACV, CA 9Z648 �;YC7l7.ir' eed�h, :a 9264 93J-87-I49 Ousts Lr.YUS 6 9JI-37-160 911-97-171 I8?a7. .LRtVTE'�I LV �i20? MILLER BA,RBARA H WrzwRN wR7cN L Ul .iTlvc rcl: BEACH, CA 92648 18242 PARXVrCW LY •42%17 19262 PAFXVrL;I X.Y; 1105 HMlrrNG7y.V BEACH, CA 92648 9lV.VT7.V6-MV BZA H, CA 92648,, 9J3-87-150 , ' • 93 -9T-1i? DGXY.YGVF?. JelLLA 9J3-87-I f. 29.242 PAkk VI£W LV 4202 XARVFL DON C T'R WEBSP£R YRVZ. J .YCNTI�`'GTCN BEACH, CA 9?64g 18,742 PARAWEY LY 0208 16262 PAR?.'Vaa� N 4205 au.vTIYGiyw BEAcm, CA 92b48 hUNTr.YCTON BEACH, CA 92648 4 r •37-15Z �. ,'£R ROVERT !! 933-37-j � 9J3-d?�173 'P''4: PAJRKYr-W IN 0203 Cditworr. BERMADCr TS L KCXJB PbTff P ffVU7r.VG7rW BEACH, CA 41648 18242 ?'A321VrEN of .o7QB 16162 PARXI IfrW, 1-V I�R►t7o W,`ffTI.'bu"i'O.V rT AC.H, CA 92648 $lU.Vr:.VG all B£+1CH, CA 92643 y3J-d�-•i32 BAR�HEL ERXESr E 933-�87-163 9J3-87--174 18242 PARKVIEW LY 1203 WWL%.V MORRIS t 'LOUTDA NEWCOofn RTCKA" R ;iU;ITt.YGZ`CN BEACH, CA9:6,l8 18262 PARKVIEW LV 503 K PEN DR M NTIVGTCN BEAC•tt, CA 92648 PR£SCO2T, ' A? 86301 93J-8T-1�3 . NGNSE.Y LINDA J 931-87-164 933-87-175 18241_ PJtXfiVZ�E'ir 2.�Y /104 Tl.ETw BRUNO E'.Y�O NODQRd NW. T,INGZXW SUCH, CA 92648 1836Z PARxfIL�h► x.Y /?C3 le?6s' P�IItKVZB'�► Z1�i. �l1py KMTINGTO.Y MACH, CA 92648 RuNrXIYGTUN BEACH, CA 92648 933-87-154 I11,ttTXW A':E C 93J-$7•-I65 933-87-176 a,8242 FARICNfEW Zfi M701 ELSSOK JC�AN E . CLOUD ANN E AV NTWOOTON MACH, CA 9264818267 PAvvzr d Liv .18762 PARRY•t'AW LN 0207 , Fltl.VTlNIarCN MACH, CA 9264p HWUNVCIVS BEACH, CA 933-87-155 rR b+0WAZD a 93.3-dye-26b ;�. 93J-i97-177. �p7$ ST J00YU A"If '!lam ,- ',� TAYLQR Jo"! L I j aa6? 'FJ�ftXYl"! . TX /?,02 • 1 I xv3 �I4al d+'j 9 rx�cztiw t�cer, c� 2648 CA � • s lLldfsk" A"Mr- C I�IIr.L,?�VI[ 1 1txtLY`JL�SEPlZ, D , jJO? PAJtXYZl�4►°x.A7../;?'Q - , rtJ�Ifl `IiACy,''C,I1 ; ''l2.i�t ZO?i2'<� �D 1 ► �- �„ It`K?,,PA1t8►Y1t"M . iA ..-., 933-87-124 1` r -d7-135 933-87-113 • 933 LUFT J �C ARD bARlOAQ R GA.ZYSR JA,N PAUL 7161 1 ZhWCD DR 7951 50M. LAKE D`, 12 B 3 91 P.t£EpCL3'FF CR HtJ�►TZ,vG7r:N BEAM, CA9?G ,g iIU.YPLYGTr;,+ 8L'ACN, CA 9?6a7 Xil.vrj'nc UN 9EACM a CA .26,16 93J-87-114 933• E�7-!?5 - 93?-87-lJE .YEA1) E%V�•RA F . CSSCR.YE CA7`NERLYE 9 .2,5CFL 1?AVIA 18272 PAf1KVTEA' L'f 0106 :3 976 PAPKlEEd LY .1204 182�: PARKVtr•W LY 820J N!►AiI,1►'G1'Cis tic`ti::, CA 9TG�3 fs'�:r:3NC;'rN BEACH, CA ri64d JL:"r2':.YGTCN Bf.�C.f, CA 9.2„a�L 833-87r-115 933-97-126 933-87-137 L MSON ANTHOHY J S;: TH DONALD D ra-ro T at;",#*Rr Y 18272 PARK'Jm LY o?oi 18272 PAFWVIEW LY # 06 1a252 PARKVI'EW LY' 1104 RUNrth'G7CN SEAC::, CA 926!R HVNTI.YGIoN BE.ACJl, CA926 47 .571N:ING70X BEACH, CA 912643 833-37-l16 ?:,J-87-127 y33-BT-i38 PAR MY RM A T DE CR'OY CMARI E'S E id:C.YER5Na.Y JA.YE A183T 2 Piu7F.✓I£'d L`f 1107 ^ 15272 PARKY Yid LY /?01 18,75ay P1►ieYJ�.VZLV ICY 4?t 4 "..L:"lrx.vcTON BEAC4, CA 92648 NUNTr.YGTcx BEACH, CA n648 lfJ.yTING:b,? BEACH, CA 92648 a33-a;-1t7 9J3-87-i.'9 93J-87-139 IYASN££ ISAAC XARTIS S.i RY E FLCRENTTnO giiudenc.o b. .'r.P. 28Z22 JV V' 18272 PAkk*VTV LM ia'07 j$25? PARrlrrFf LV 1It�5 HU.V7TNGTON BEACH, CA 92648 KL'NTI:IGMY BEACH CA' 9:t»43, 4:.3F:Q.V VIM.10, CA 9.7692 '140 913-97-!29 9JJ-V-� Sre.`cw 4LADYS t� G..r irs7FF'r !i,!_4Y B CRCE DE.�la5, E TR . 2:: PAJAAZ.+: 8 LY aRJ3 13272 F.4iR.KVtEW LY 410d 19252 PA:4r,rrd VI 4205 0. 1?' ::L:12:':J .Y BSACN, 9264e HU.V*rZVG7CV BEACH, CA 92648 NU.Yri'.YGt' V YZAC.H, CA 9264 •;I 833-87-119 933--87-1.30 933-47-141 1 BRAC -rT'RODERr L RI1'LQP Worn J IYCIN7Y u XILTtkf P i9?7Z P�tR.,'YIFW LY �'103 •'402 AVIArrO&V BLVD rc 19611 SARD:NIA LN 132'72 PAON BEACH, iel 9:b.tB RZDgVDO BEACH. CA 9027E NtJNTI.YGTON MACH, CA 926d6: 833-87-.1c'D 93J-97-�?I 913-Bi-34T. MAY FRANX K .KAPaon grrald '8�7T PARKVL'EW LY 1203 10122 SYCNY9RRMK VR 2407 pr.AzA LA PrArA HUNTLYGTO�I BL'Ac"!t, CA 926Q6 HUTt�IarOM MACH, CA 92646 S,V CLSat�.Nrr, CA 92672 933-87-132 8J3-87-�121; 933-07-1 4 3 c:1�afi4NE BIfFL"XrJ1 C REAGAH XARGBRY .1 NrB.RLrM Arthur .1 18252 vA.RXV=? Ly #201 a,i T tX ; 1err: PARXYIE'i�► LJII r1.t04, 2a RO PLYOTON XWACUr Cal 92648 ' NtfN lfUN:IH�`m BEACHo CA 9264E 2".1'MG?Y3N BEACtf, CA9?646 933-e7-133.._ 93.3-07-241 wwtr Af oxxxv, o jr. fir. SGCZlf1t.R�t 1RlJVSG' S1A PAP"ZW.,';Z r 0,102 .i8?S? PAA , i;j7 2E?9i! PA7l�CYIE7iP 0►f MACJf,, CA ?� .1R`' !'.r�IKi`tt1M �E`.AG`30'r CA 92642 71Y'i'IaV�" K WA"� CA .�.i�++.+r r r rr � ..r.��.p...�...�_;;. .•...—+�.+=.+.. .......•..w ,.•....,r a�.r...wr+�+...�...�.�+r...r•.w.+.rrow�r-.w�.!r• .r - .. w IL 933-07-123 ;'', � 9.13=6y-23�• 923-07-145 ' At rl /xQ5 X� . SZn7?'! KV rB �� r2 � ��1M•�' rrNOTON � Cr.. CA 02646 - i - CA 02"0 .' � 4to . Stlyiot (ts.axtatteo O�ica 004, _ tr•parttNnt of persls�+wvit a<ttttcaa afb! testa Welt v�.ww.,r.a Ica Mantla tnw s.ats �� t.•111 � 17111 l�7t�lir.i . �t1at?lit Z6I1• 77 entral plan Oval tnatica All ►di our t ttt•• t+tv •v f tlnd "ona eCw t ondltloatlfC • t 't'r itQl/b ► GJ GWO&L t►FLICAt' OMt VIA /ltealnD t l•sl••t 1 • rtae W►n. a•jt la • •ere of 1021av Ad IS treat( w it • •n J v ,ilv 3POC141 tl n Istr t 7n- Tp—rTff-4mt of Authatl8#4 A4tat tt. nq ttt• atf ranwntol /tool t,wo r ectsrpt iID oil blrtrlri �x60 8 t �...... /ot•v•lay»•et y . • .Tp all 1 *.tart• scIR ats coastal �.i cat• wxart.a scawpR COP...�.._...�. �.. il'lttlfh�ii".1 t!c!•� Tioa►.ly Cv t Gl• atical RsclYsien }r+Xv �J.Oi�f f •. ' ne hq t•ts lQ+w�rNtlp Httt9eat!•w � � �� ' '; r �� ' ' /� .�f�tRar •R ast►trintla. • Fiat* - 'All'*As• R/a, Asatlticttla I:es�1iN,1sr: tl:h'a,to t t •p Ont •pIl R t �� d1 Y • r �., �,'�• Ire �1 1 f-t Y l Iw ra•Love Calve, y �• . L I *i Jct�iicSl i ,� �c�lFttY� C:1WZA tide T �i4'i'4�'�R.. • .As�'f' fYllslpt for .....r„ 1a t,.tw ofc `� � •,�,►,�1 1 LOCAttOR Qt • *see &ad dtstaart to nostest lntara•et!A1 ottxatt, . -�.� 'C . ' a . f , I Lts:at rtlt:Irrrim IfseN•r's #octal vumbsf ,d. 41.13 ,LeA.', L?...!..�' l'.y:. Acta499— r. .,:.t-�_1�;'':.► t~-2 /Jae. t� �...� l��1Zt (3 •�'�t) 1 R�: -" ~ ......_....r_ •::a•f toad sad ra4•cstVA 3P•ase Met four P400 all r "%to lnt:lsdteo the ttllsr ttvelt•"ats, t=l the,ro'racas ofM ft'this APHA� too. `I lot the ` prop fir wc•c o► arlNeSssN .1•ttt or the ts•bl•et /tev"'. ; .tin •.otr A.1,tiltr oR p•:Jtltr that t er•felbI staew+Met, faeta• VA maMM fit R N as t4tcaet. r t , • 4 • ' .• ' 333-87-1.Si0 � i59-70? •OT ; ` . ,. 'I:=' J )WR)XR rNGkAS W . UYGXAN .L�.tN,J rz C 65 S� S g A �tr£ NU6NTZ.VG7Y.W BEACH, 'CA 926. 7 18232 PAIZWrrW LN i:08 P 0 ao)c 545 hwurI.VG1'aV BEACH, CA 92646r RWZi^Z1D, CA 91770 Jim 933-97-191 PH r?.i•TPS :V G-AP_V T E 23232 7A;Z1rVIEW LV #201 CAPPS DORIS C qVNrrvci!Vff OSACH, CA 92 e 43 18232 PA kq/r*H LY 4107 HVNTING:O;i BrACK. CA 92643 Q3.J-•87-181 933- 87- 19: GIBBONS ROSE SMOCK Nlri+mu, A:33 P.Lq.",.rs L.V #102 18:31 PA.RXYYE'i LY 0207 ' HUYTLVGT V BEACH, CA 92648 uuNrr.VCrON BEACH, CA 92649 933-87-la2 933-87-193 BACA AXPCZ L HIGGL15 IREVr 1S232 PARK'flEtr tS :.4202 18232 PARXVZEW VI 4108 ; UN'V,,NGTC,V BEACH, CA 92648 HU.'�'rI.VGTGN 1:1rACN, CA 92648 933-87-193 8,�.�.y.ICh' ✓`OSEp.'1 8 933-87-:24 19232 P?L*J.VrE',l LV 4I03 SNZ.INrR JAC09 J 11!1NrI:1C;7OlJ BEACH, CA 9.:643 28.?37 tiARXL'Z1:N L,11 �d:OB mu.vrr.VGTt,'l BEACH, C,t 92648 37-264 139-301-01 NAn1 TA GRAC,r F G.I :03 LLAGHER PKDN.AS D TR �:3: x�� •r�•H Lv .dVNT.I v;TCN 3EAC.4, CA 9::64d •1371 WS PATCS AV SU.VTINGTCN DCACY, CA 92649 933-87-165 I59-301-02 mrL ER DOLGR£S E X.B.?.i? FdRKV1'a`N L•y i1l(i,S ,�LRCZ RXCHARA G r. C!ISRYL ifCINTI.Vt,T'CN F 'ACff, C A 92643 18062 REC IWO Cl REd7e.:i►W BEACH# 9264.1 L,t./I• 933-87-186 ZaBEL rlRsvLA 159-301-03 18232 PARKVSEW Ltd 0204 C4HBr5A N 5 BUDDY T14 NUN-rrNGTOK qEACH r CA 97648 9 CUL TA DR RANCHO NTRAGH, CA 92270 & 933.87-187 159-301-•04 � !, ALISS SOGBRITr X 10203 SiC1IT IRGALS Sr ORYCS.YAL ltLISICAL �I '•" F7♦YlNrAIIN VALLEY',, as 92708 1$108 Riw,NpO C.TR S31Ar'rTNGS%UV B9ACHr CA 920-48 .913-'87-188 Ir �oawas - t 1-? P RK,vs�ar ;xx;:•x05 DC U CM TA R>: ZNA L� IXCTr.W >3CACH,'•CA 926�i8, �- ye21'`GL AM- to ldwT � . -••.1w1�Mw• ♦A '.tip• .♦ ... FMtI•.-..w� � 1. �/M •. .• Y.rYM. •..I • . fir. � .•A ♦ ' 1 ,�?3-3�?M • ';,� ,' , :,4�' rc"l AWA Kto wt .�. staf!'rS, �Iri; :� > { r''i♦ , , ,'.iw ;s , '. . .. -- .•v..i-'� _�.. '`,.._..Jar_ ,w!�' _.:.• ... :1 aji �•. i.',.. � .1 ..,,',.'e,..0 l '+ M)„ . .. �„ter. - --y -,.,-r.«......,.. ......�aafiw.rwr�........•._ April 13 . 1987 1, tALBERT-BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT RE: ND 87-9 ii To Whim It May Concern : This letter is to serve as my written objection to the Houceston Development Project being approved on a ?negative Declaration. I €eel. an Environmental Impact Report should be required for several reasons. Redondo Circle is severely impacted by traffic, parking and related safety problems now. It appears to be serving in excess of its planned capacity at this time and cannot accoa»date an further. traffic related to the Boureston project as it is planned with th'a cul de sac . The elimination of the proposed extension of Redondo by the Boureston ` project places additional burden on existing businesses while praviding I no relief to the surrounding neighbors . In addition , not enough information is given on grading and fill in the ND to adequately address drainage in the area . I believe short re' rm goals have been considered to the detrir:t-nt of long term goals and risk to the city . Plus the sheer t ize of '.this building lends itself to problems not adequately addressed in an ND. Therefore, again, I request the the ND be denied and an EIR be required to be prepared . Respectfully, Connie Mandic 1112 K&in Street Huntington Beach , CA 92648 CM:dbd . 1 e. 1 , •1 i fl i, .Lti >.. •. 1 �. 7 —� _... _—_ � •ti...• ti. 1t ..,ror� .. ..., .1• 4 f, :'� ..� �� / a lr APRAHAM IAN & OUPCOTE w!CwAAO . 'AMNAMIAN •A.O/CIAIOMAi C0�►Or.nOb 16LLeNU�t wAAOLD a.a•JCOfC.Jw. L&WV LRl suit[ 810 A1lt ...R•At«uw �Ou�CIAw� . il �1 `ft•{Ati`; i�vtN[.C�► ►4wviA 91r15•12143 dyr I.tC �U+Atl April 13 , 1987 Hoard of Zoning Adjustments City of Huntin.3ton Beach , California Re ., Conditional Exception No . 371 44; Administrative Review 87-15 Negative Declaration 81-9 Hourston Development Mike Todd Gentlemen: We represent Triple 8 Properties ri pich is . -the owner of a 10 acre site adjacent to the 5 acre Talbert Beach Industrial Site , the aforementioned site being the subject of the above Requests for Conditional Exceptions . This project has proceeded , to date , on Negative Declaration 87-9 . However , on behalf of 'triple H Properties , we request that the Negative Declaration be withdrawn, and a i full environmental impact report be preparers to assess the , impact of the following aspects of the project : (a ) The projected increase in traffic which Redondo Circle will expt'rience will, if the project is allowed „ to proceed , be so large as to substantially interfere with and reduce access to my clients ' property. This will constitute an inverse condemnation of ray clients ' real estate . (b) Despite developer as&urances that noise ,will not be a factor , no assessment has-- been made of the impact of, noise caused by the potential development. (c) No drainage and store-water study has been undertaken. However , the spectre and potential damage of , the storm. water run-off into streets from a 125 ,000 square foot r building has nat been considered'. Accordingly,, the". ' envir-onmentaT. impact of such storm seater on sly clients,* estate , and those of others , should be considered . we rsss ectfall re``;° Accor�lingly, p y guest .14egative • _ No. 87-9 .:":be , declared , try _th is ; ., Board as .. an,Declaration , insufficient basis on which„ ko rocetd;.. a.nd tbar' this seater be r eferredr for the above resso a , to the .,P1anni64j ' D*'paxtn4nt ` 'S�I., I,. .. - r .:I7''•M 3 Y ' i � ,'!RI 1 I tr I `, ., YS',�1t1 Z`. 4 AprI1 13 , 1987 Page ,T o of the City of Huntington Beach for a full environmental study and report Very truly yours , ApRAHA."iIAN & DU OTE �i. C 1 Harold A. Cu o e , J HAD/PM cc : MC . Jerry Higman Mr . Dan Higman rid) i i REAL ESTA TE 1`NI ESTMENT SERVICES Mukar- 322 MaIn Street • Huntington Beach,CA 92640 (714)900.8541' April 13. 1987 Talbert-Beach Redevelopment Project Re: N.D. 87-9 Dear Planning Cowdssion: After maetirrl with property owners of f ect xi by the Wurestan Develof rQnt Project, I steadfastly object, to the approval of said project on a Nega- tive Declaration. I feel an Environmental Fact Report is definitely indicated here. Redondo circle is not only impacted by traffic, but the packing &rW safety, problems are worsenim3. 11be area is already being pushed beyond capacity auvd further traffic as -,-,0 ated to the project as planned with the cul cle sac Unr ld b intolerable. The elimination of the proposed extension of Radon do Circl . e by the project places a burden on existing businesses while failing to benefit: the surrounding neighbors. Also, there is not enough information regarding grading and fill in the h.D. to adecplately addrean possible drainage problem^ in the aiea. Apparently short term goals have taken preaide.nce ovrtr long term goals, posing a risk to the city. The site of this building lands itself to a whole realm of problems not discussed in the N.D. Again. I errozaticaily request that: the N.D. b&, denied and an Qnvirar=ntal Icrpact Report required in its place. i Sincerer Bob Bolen , i 1 as•d� r= CITY Off' HUli'�•t�ill�'t�tl�i � J� FH F INTER-DEPARTMENT 'COMP0UNICATION o Board of Zoning Adjustments From Catherine O'Hara Assistant Planner Suhiect NEGATIVE DECLARATION $7--� Rate April 15, 1987 ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW 87--15, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION 87-24 BOUP.STON DEVELOPMENT/MIKE TODD 1 have reviewers the letter from A rahamian and Ducote to the Board of Zoning Adjustments regarding the above project and have the following comments. I � 1. Environmental impact Report versus Mitigated Negative Declaration. The application of CEQA is a three-step evaluation process: a. determine that z proposal is in fact a "project" b. conduct on Initial study c. depending on initial study findings, require a [negative Declaration, a hiltigat�ed l I Negative Declaration or an Environmental Impact Report. Agencies mus: prepare an EIR only If a project "may have a significant effect on the j environment." Further, mitigated negative declarations may bt, filed In lieu of an £1R if the Project proponent can be convinced to modify the project so as to eliminate all significant impacts. (See attached guide'.lres) After reviewing the Initial study for the subject project, it was determined that a mitigated negative declaration would satisfy CEQA regulations. Any potential impacts such as noise and storm water runoff will be mitigated. Increased traff t.i is ret an issue. The zoning and general plan designation on the subject property will permit the proposed use and the project will comply with all applicable ordinances. 2. Traffic Per Daily Vehicle Trip Generation Rates from the Orange County Environment O Management Agency, the proposed 122,424 square foot Industrial building is expected to generate approximately 1591 trip ,ends per day. There will be approximately 100-200 employees and 3 to d truck deliveries per day. Traffic generation from the proposed project will not be significant. The existing, streets are designed for Industrial capacity per general plan.` New Industrial development built per general plan and zoning rode will not,over' • burden street capacity. A traffic study for the project Is riot warranted. . _ 4 The proposed project will have mininnal impact on Talbert Avenue'cnpacity. 1 Dourston Development/Mike Todd April 15, 1987 Page 2 ,....,, 3. Nolse Adequate noise mitigation measures have been developed by a certified acoustical engineer as conditions of approval for said project. (See Conditin-r of Approval). Mitigation measures focused on the project complying with re,�identlal noise Stan- dards. Consequently, standards for industrial areas will be eticeeded. The project Shall comply with Chapter 8.40 of ;he City's Municipal Code. 4. Dralaage Project storm drainage plan will comply with City Mester Plan of Storm Dcalnage. Per standard development procedure, storm drains will be extended to serve the proposed project. No slgnificant negative drainage impacts will be generated by said project. 1 The draft mitigated nee-.tive decl-Aration (87-9) prepared for this project adequately addresses and :mitigates any potential negative impacts from the proposed project. An Elf In this case is unwarranted. CMO:gbni R1.. Note: This memorandum was prepared and forwarded to the staff planner S/15/87 of the board of Zoning Adjustments for her information. Also, it should be noted that the Initial study that staff utilized to review the project for environmental impacts Includes the five (5) page Standard City Environmental Information Form. .E ' 1 V V J f 1f R• f , .. �1• 1C.•� ;Kw.A1) 1•btt` fv 't +tt: ,I Lo:& ANntLrh. c^Ltronsla, wJOOw ••t• cote .f.j. ••t•i[•. .r ..( Sl• •C [w�Cw1 A.► �.�C sp. •' 1IP•(Cf ►VOC iluo ..�.•..• +.wt, • 1;► OtOi t•ai•Gwo.w rt�b� .. � r•.CC i...»t• mow[♦ Coat 10.04 ' �•••cl+ :t ••tw...t c.... •t�trra+•c a7aot,r j :. :,. . am.•.•. Kay 4 , 1987 ..�. _• [ • •• t .•ACC• Sa t 't•Yt•• •w Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council- Members of the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency City o: Huntington Beach RE: Talbert-Beach Disposition and ;e�*elop-.e*t Agreement i Honcrable Mayor and Mer:be:, s c: the C .ty IC unCi .; tais represents Triple u jR•,:iab'_e - umber ( "Re :.onnection ::it h. the C. y I s cons iderat 4 on o; a proposed developre the 5-acre vacant property ;the "P.operty" ) wr.ich the Ta2ber,:- Leach Redevelopment Project Area Redevelopment PI. an ( t"c "s ede•••elopnent Plan.") shows to be bisected by Redondo Circle . ScecLO,ically , Reliable Lumber objects to thn approval of thej d �,position and development % reement before you tonight vhic'h Would pernit conveyance of the property ' to Bourertosr- Development- and per t the construction of a 122 , 000 sq. foot i.nd'astria3 facility (the. "Project") . Reliable Lumber further objects te , t:he use or approval of a negative declaration for the Project .,and , demands that an environmental impact report ( ",'IR" ) be prepared. Finally , the hearing on the DDX has not been properly noticed and the rec�ird before you lacks evidence to support required f indines as to the value of the property being sold. Approval r. : a n y development for the Property which precludes completion of Redondo Circe violates the General Plan of the City as - we-1 1 ` as the Redevelopment Plan and , hence , would be invalid . Furt:�erriore , there are a number of environmental concerns which have' not breed addressed or have been i,nadequateI addressed in the course of •out Y 2 environmental review for the Project . Finally, ,, the Citw 's procedures in performing, noticing -and presezting . the environmental review required by law are so flave'd as , make any-' approval of a negative declaration in any forts illegal and . invalid. ' , Honorable hayor and Members Flay 4 , 1987v,. Page 2 Genera ; Plan Incons�.stencY All actions of a redevelopment agency rust be consistent with that city ' s general plan and with the pertinent redevelopment plan. Cal: .crnia Health and Safety Code t 33331 . The pertinent aspect o the C ;: ty ' S General Plan for this Project is the Specific: Plan. That Specific Plan was amended. in 1979 specifically to provide that Redondo Circle would . be extended eastward through the five:-acre parcel and connect to the north--south street exten ing into the five-acre parcel , r..e.red to in recent City documents as Kovacs Street . The Spec if is Plan amendment was in direct response to traffic circulation problems with the industrial area , caused primarily by the businesses, Licluding Reliable Lu=ber, developing along Redondo Circle . Several industrial developments were built rind/or established along Redondo Circle in anticipation of the extension :if Redondo Circle . See letters from property owners and businesses irony Redondo Circle and petition signed by the saris attached --m—eto and Na-le a part of t!:e record here 4 n Ny t:: s :efc once . Ap--roval o ! :.he DnA before you wou!d be incmnsistent with t`n ram. Spec.. fic Plan and, hence , the General Plan, since Redondo C-; rc:e ' nc't be completed , as provided in the Spec f :c Plan . The Speci ` ic Plan amendment was in direct response to tra. .i tirculat : on problems with the industrial area , including Reliable , developing along Redondo Circle. Several industrial developments ::ere built and/cz established along Redondo circle in anticipation c: the extension of Redondo Ci;c;e . See letters -frog property awne_s and businesses along Redondo Circle and petition, signed by .;;e same attached hereto and made a part of the record herein by this reference. :ncons j s'eDcY• With�.}?,'deve onMent . P J an The Redevelopment Plan also provides that Redondo Circle will be extended eastward to meet with Talbert . (See map at page . ) :he DDk i , , therefore , inconsistent with the Redevelopment Plan and cannon be legally approved . Cal . fiealth and Safety Code . Section 33432 . :ncOnsis*SDr. with K �- fo.. r ID49,21r'iAL DCY212RMID12 The , City notified several developers competing with Sauresron Developnent that a noise study per Section 9510. 18 of the Municipmll Cade would have to be submitted. Yet L1g such noise study has, bee �"�,� ted in m records before you or s e a & Indicated y y f this Pxo j ct, and, much a shady is notably absent from mention in the Proposed Negative : Honorable Hayor and ;:embers May d , 1987 Page 3 Declaration, Without any use restrictions on the Project and absent such a noise study, the Project is inconsistent, with both the noise performance standards of the `!unicipal Code and the Noise Mlement itself . ;nconslstsnry k" t': Ci r Ccu.Int ion .L._'nen~ The city ' s Circulation Element provides that the City extend and otherwise improve arterial streets and further to provide adequate traffic facilities for industrial developments . Redondo circle is an access road to Talbert Avenue , an arterial street . • he impact of this Project on 'Talbert Avenue roust , therefore , be considered . As presently designed, development of the Project will thwart implementation of the policies of the Circulation Element , particularly where read in conjunction with the Specific Plan for ,:.he area . P:000sed Nez,, t ! ve Dec;rs,r, t :or. �+'a�„ Iz, ��,e� :� ►t:a` . cQ3 and - � •e se •./••Y d_ .o state ...a . , tl.,Ie ...t� fatled -.) .•.. .V C ..:`i.r: 1.!L r. .`. .. _ntended arrrc•,�a1 of the neyat '_ve decla.at on proposed .o bQ a^prcved in connezt : an with the action c€ approving the 0"' On npr: 1 4 , :.he City noticed life antic-- pated appro•:a I o: negative declaration in connection with two perr is/approLaIs :or the Project to be heard by the Hoard of Zoning Appeals ( "BZA" ) on npr : l 1 The notice referred to an initial study which Vas mat signed until April b (the "4/6 Initial Studs•") . -Therefore , appears notice failed to allow even the 10 days for review tt`.e notice itself allowed . The 4/6 Initial Study was apparently re-signed on April 30 by planning staff (the 114/30 initial Study") . 4;30 'Initial Study diffeiced from the 4/6 Initial Study in that several mitigatio.n reasures were imposed by the BZA on April 1 + and incorporated into t;•4e 4,/ 3 ;) Initial Study. There has been no public comment period With respect to the 4/30 Initial Study . In fact , there' has been no, Public comment period for any environmental rev iRw associated . w1:1 the ' action before you tonight -- the approval of the DDA. The City/Agency may not legally "piggyback" on the negative -declaration approved by the BZa. That negative . declaration was itself invalid, on . the basi'sQof fadequat�e pub 11c notice and , for tnt ie w ioraovar thR :Ca f�Cor;�ia, nvxronsoents}, ualit� ; Act• CE nth subse / Initial Stud is invalid as setaf o b l o >K 1 E Q +. � .� require „ , t�'ie ."decision-warm bod , a rove s rn set. itself PP t. auppartinq i,s action. 14 Cal. ss that � ions :�53�f and 1SO7�1 approve � the envire�n�msntal;, doew+et� . . , ,Adm. Code Sect . „ Honorable Mayor and Faembers Nay 41 1967 Page 4 "•- ' Ro"h the W and the_ 4i3o Tn tiaZ tudles Fajl�... o�o ider A31 Ec:`Rnt ii„b l Environnenta 1 Itpa,.c z,.5 The checklist erployed by the City in preparing the 4/6 and 4/10 Initial Studies is wholly inadequate and lacks the Spec iticit, required by CEQA. The 5 general questions on the form (which apparently is round only in the City of Huntington Beach) fall far f short of the specific inquiry which might reveal possible environmental impacts. In contrast the initial study checklist used by the City in determining whether or not to prepere an EIR :or the Talbert-Beach Redevelopment Project is seven pages long , containing some 65 specific questions . Many questions as' to whether there might be environmental impacts associated with development within the Project Area were answered in tie affirmative, indicating the need for environmental evaluation .egardina , for example : lb. Disruption, etc of soil ; lc . Change :n around surface relies : Exposure ofeo 3g • P r people to geologic hazards : "iA 3 . Change in rate 'or amount of water runoff .- 6. Increased noise impacts : 7 . Increased :tight and glare ; 13a . Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement' : 13b. Der-and effect on parking ; 13d . Alteration to circulation patterns; ' 14a- f . Effect upon numerous public services 16a . f . Impact upon utilities -- without agreeing or disagreeing with the initial study prepared for the Redevelopment Plan, the City should explain why reached the ,:onclusion that there are significant environmental effects from development of the Project Area , while simultaneously concluding there are absolutely no potential of fact frora construction of the single larnest industrial facility within the project area . We believe that that prior initial study 'pxoves the 4/6 and 4;30 lnitial Studies incorrect . �.Y ^' e Init la-1 Fall Ig JakV into -Ac;p alivg 1M.22SU* CEQA requires that cumulative impacts of ;,,past current and pra�anble future projects- be taken into account _when deciding . whether (approving , an EIR) . California . 'Prepare . whethez� :oz ,r►at ' to � t o ere an CIF 063 ; It Cal . .1►da�. „ Code. .Section ubl is , Resources Code SeCti�on 23 15065 (c) The 4/6 - and 4 f 30 Initial 'Studios colepletely fail to take ...! i .these.-, mAtcers into .account. (lost notably, . t.h* impacts ran tray f is vS.th 'th+e propoRed d - 9 Circle �toqatticsr from existin 3ndumtri&' 1 daveaepmsnt along Redondo.a, ev�elopment--has not_.been analyzed in any Honorable Mayor and Members may 4 , 1987 I, Page 6 impacts from the Project to be 3500 vpd. The EIR only anticipated 400 vpd from a proposed 100 , 000 square loot building on the same :ive=acre parcel . The analysis in the E1R is , therefore , naccurate and canaot logically be relied upon, even if it was legal to do so . 6) :[he Sum nary Rep��t do2M dot Prgv:de the P4b1 is wish. Zufficier,r. _. a, gr�na t i on California and Health and tafeCy Code Section 33433 requires that prior to sale of property by the Agency it shall ► ake available for public inspection no later than the time of pu:5I ic:ation of they first notice of, the heating on the approva ' of t:;e DOA. There is no record that the Surr,ar%- Report and 00h, which ::as subr.tted to the Ardency nerbers on April tea , 298'7 Wastaad�: a:'a :3ab'_e to the public ir: accordance with State law. Ycr .eover, Summary Report does not contain suf::cient in nnation to infer:. ;he public ss to =he est r:atad value of the pr dpe::.y conveyea at the highsest use permitted urfde r th' -jvtv� P.edevelcpnent PI a,► . No tacts whatsoever are subLat%od I-y AgencY .staff per anycne else in this regard . Respectfully s+zbmitted, Murray U, Kane , John W. Belshez ! konorable Mayor and Members Kay, 41 1987 Page 5 competent traffic study. Yet Staff admits there will be an impact c,f some 1500 vehicles per day from the Project drone . See Memo �o BZA from the C.MO, Assistant Planner dated 4/15j a7 , attached hereto and incorporated hereto b this reference . ;he:e are also numerous P. Y developments underlay or planned for tt,e near future which will impact t.af:ic . ff :rbe Zvideng Reetu i r-s- thot all.. EI8 rs - Ere mr d As set forth in the letter o: Chris Joseph, submitted herewith, evidence already in the record shows that tht* e 15 substantial evidence to support the conclusion that there may be a significant effect on the environment as a result of tho Project and that, thetiefore , anEIR must be prepared pr: or to thu P oject ' s approval . �'!Aac^' ..p „' �' U to )Ie y .' 1 [1 ; • 1 t t� Iiit: C�r�' Cl, w 4 v i 4 .��35 f� l] r/ tom f �k planning ytafs ' s sugcested --:tica. icn neasu.es refLto st.Ur ' ' s conclusion per the 41 6 an-4 :,30 : r, ;tial Studies that there are no possible adverse environmental e;:ect. : ram the project . (//J'' +. e �1. .a . � (� [�!' }•(!� (�«.n i R r • � 7 y .+ i 1 ' � r � ► � -�C.a..._x.L.i The DDA does not Limit the p•.:�tential uses of the structure to be built . The 4/6 and 4/30 Initial Studies are inZ!o:rectly done because :hey do not consider any use other than that by twhs _ proposed tenant . The Initial Studies must analyze the impacts fissociated with any use .allowed in the F.- 1 A zone . !1 lt)V p..Ir2'1ee4.t.11as 010134eS i ni f i-Santly SUr1QS_..tbQ- UR ...i or :1 EgJ. e've'. Qprent ,P1.012 Was A,pacgz(ad The Czty/Agency may not .rely upon the EIR certi. : sd by the City,, Agency in connection with the adoption of the Redeve !OPM-eent. Plan. That EIR specifically anticipates that environmental review would be :aduirwd for specific projects within the Redevelopment Plan area . See EIR at pages 1 and 2 . Furthert ore . the project cottisirle red in that EIR has changed - , nif�. ' g cantly by virtue of (1) the proposed elimination - of the extols ` ian and completion of Radondn Circler ( 2 ) Modification of the location of the . Senior- Citizens Center and (3) "Other physical , ::- .'changes ' in the location and intensity of development. Moreo'''a . ,. the he 'da a sreli�ed cn in the Eilt is admittedly wrong, according xc to p ' g .. taZV.S ovn nu.Abers. for example , staff estiwatcs; :,tratl j l , � � J fAj /*-S S�A' Al� _0 41 AW Al vbv-:S Lis • w ell .r -� r M � ' C ex- Ile !, "tea' ✓trr ` r� 1.,:4�•�j v' '�.i.+v.,,r �•�-v�,r •�/ /'•� r 04. / - r' �I? spy" .�:,., 0, Y;0" s Ir .• j ri • , � �f• de V i/ • / ,- - f l ,� i w y ..Ira 1..�v :Z •. •.• .��✓\.. , _ , fir. , LOA r ,�i .�w •''•• ,, + ;,1Lt' • ' ,`—�. �f G'{/�(-3 ?''r�.-! ! .�-.�.f •`ice✓..-"'� s l • w•. w •r.r• r r. .�.• • r"'• •.. ff p n $ - ��/��/r(� j�./��/.7�,��...•fir ��'{T- • e.-W 'F. Aft OXI • r 0 7loc--i �• <f f -00 5-7 f . , xi lo-r i ' Ir 1 • ,� i �� f,�+ W ,+tiy 4 /~�.r" / t Ia/ • « f l I • v-"r j 1►••� •1+• �•1 1 , �. 1w� �• ,� w r✓' �, a•.f F. ./ (y I .i oop Al • r 6.vj •` st • '� t; MM • .d ' • r oe- '.'.. ceo lo�cezleaw ..'�r t"�'"�� T !'`��' ' � ,.-sr •�..:��-�-=sit't��'�r'L. ,��.� � "' ' " "'•�,.1 ,,,. ,.,, ;;b et �',/'r 4►- .. ,�J . l f y ao.+ 1• v � f ,, ENVIRONMENTAL TELESIS ' -. EnVironnneniai, Land Momge bent, and Transportailan Plannln� r May 4, 1987 John Bel sher : t+e iser, l�aaie, Ba.11s�r '�c i5erlaean z� 354 South Spritg Street, SuAte 410 Los Angeles, California 988113 RE: Aral yai s of Novi rotat.al ibactctation on the TaLlYser t-Descfi Iurksistr isl Project. # Dear Mr. Eelsher: ' F - . ThIs letter report v.I11 serve as my analysis of the environrnental 'doc wntation regarding the Talbert-Beach industrial project. To assist in this analysis, the documents listed in Appendix A were reviewed , and an on- site inspection was made o'1 the project site during. the morning of May . 4 ?lease 'note that the Negative Declaration/Initial Study was not available Until ` Apt it 3e, onl four days ago. I do not believe that four days constitutes a sufficient time period for the public to respond to the f proposed Negative Declaration, as provided In Section iSA:3 of thc.� CEQA r�;i del ines. r also believe that the Negative Declaration circulate'J for public review does not adequately document the reasons to support the f indiml &..t the p,o ject will not have a significant impact , as mwsdated by Section " 5371 o: the CEQA Guidelines. In fact, the initial Study checklist for this project does not even state which significant inpacts are being mitigated. ' Notwithstanding the inadequacies of the proposod Negative Declaration and Iw: ial Study, my analysis indicates that were is emugh eyi6rce that the project may have a significant impact and, consequentlyt that an Envirommowtal Impact Report should be prezp3red. Essentially, I believe that { the City - staff has underestircated tte environmental impacts resulting ire , . this , project and from this proposal in conjuration with past , pzVSQntt and , . reasonably- anticipated future projects, all of which will produce cuaulatiwe impacts. Following Is the rationale for this assertion, which to 'discussed by environmental category: CI RCUWs, IOM. Al though City staff tAs correctly predicted` . that the. project will generate some, 1,591 .vehicle trips per day, no ' studias Wert, . } prepared concerning the . tratf fc•,: q*cta on the Ati and PM peak period3 at, the . intersections towing that project site and at Vwt tM jor intersections. •.. pro jsct locale,. An ; intrrsrctiQn ca+pac3.ty aulys,ii is generally oorairrerac4 .hy,.. ba th env i rorwres�tal toss trsL!is eo-rsul is r►tst kro be a keY caa�one t -in mosur inq a► ro act s c irca ,. in fact, such . lnfozmt tort was x tread b1► , isw+er ing Flac�r its far ; bock . OW`� July, 1.982. Tbi Yieipot►se tas thfs rev aet as -stated is _tom 11rwl III for the Way 4opsvlt'.Plaa;;+tee that, s i fie. ro icts x sid , --acsWt to • ectad:to'4wcthisr ' a. esvlracradnLal wxtcis. �hn�lra °`tpais_ araalysi�a;ata►it not ? '.oca�ucti�tltA r p�Ct to t?sir`12su0 ,and`should;-ZO ,axmi6w ;within, a rww exit. I �i i trr•. Y• i� July 17, 1987 Mayor Jack Kelly "s CIty of Huntington ©each 2400Slain Street Huntington Beach, Californ"a 92648 ' bear Mayor Kelly: SUBJECT: WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL OF PLANNING COMM ViSION ACTIONS OF JULY 7, 19E711 - BOURESTON DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION Please accept this letter as Boureston Develupment's withdrawal of their aV.peal of July 8, 1987, referencing the above items. Sincere Y / 110 Michael D. Todd, General Partner i3oureston Development MDTap } rI f11 •- r'j P7 wl� l.� W. ~ C2 t7 t Mtn r.l 4.1 21 +r M r, l• 1 • •00 ' KANE, DXLLMtER P3ERKMAN A LAM C'a117Q11AT10M 354 SOUTM SPRING STPECT, SUITE 490 LOS "OEL9S, CALIFOWNTA , V3013 Tt1.CPM004C 121.71 A'D•O�llp '.dU"gAt O, KI*It TELCGOpICA 12131 0324-0931 S&H alt00 drrICE ORUCC D. ISALLIAtO 701 116*1 STIOtCT•. SUITF. 1100 j&MCS DEIITE" CLApA RA.. DICOO. CAWrGAINIA 92101 Gtt► % r. WA515CRMAf. tL AP"O►.0 IAI{il "r-0104s M►An✓faR►t A. ra1t01.A.-40ca R. SRUCE TEPPeR, in. wwlpClls�ts nongar P. GCRMMAN July 20 , 1987 +CtrtCa JON►t v� QCL�1.tA Michael C. Adams Express Mail Principal Planner City of Huntington Beach Huntington Beach, California 92648 i Re: Talbert aea4h Industrial Site 1 Dear Mr. Adams: I have discussed wit;Y, Tom Clark the agenda items for the July 20, 1987 Redevelopment Aq.tncy meeting relating to the Bou.xeston Development Corporition proposal for the abovla--roferenced site. Should the appeal of the Planning Commission decision of July 7 , 1987 be withdrawn and the Redevelopment Agency ?ake action committing the Agency to require Boureston in oxtend ing Redondo Circle across the site as sat forth on the Conceptual Site Plan submitted to the` Planninq Commission by Triple H Properties and approved by the Planning Commission on July 7 , 1987 or if the Agreement between Boureston and the Agency For development of the site is terminated, Triple H Properties will. dismiss, with prejudice, , the amended complaint on file in Triple H Pro_earties v. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach, at al,. Case No. 51-95-7 7 . i r sincerely, HUNTINGTON 89N., ;•'d' D=VFi,i'' Xghn W. Belabor f Attorneys,- for Triple 11 P-roperties JWB s be P.O. �..� tau Hs njjfsjtan Beach. CA 91646 •t COt9 -01. - ADMINISTRATOR COMMONICAT!JN i YO Honorable Mayor and From Charles W. Thompson City Council tIMembers CSty Aeministrator Subject. BOURESTON DEVELOPMENT Date July'17, 1987 \ On your Agenda for Monday evening July 20, 1987 are three (3) separate items relating to BourestoO s development of the five (.) acre industrial parcel within the Talbert-Beach Redevelopment Project Area, ►:; Since the Planning Commission's Public Hearing on this Item, It is staffs understanding. that the applicant (Boureston Development, Inc.) and appellant (Triple "H" -Properties) have reached a compromise understanding with respect to the development Mat Is consistent with the Planning Commission's recommendation in terms of the project. The alternative design for the project will continue to provide for a single user, Southwest j Quilted Products, an existing Huntington Beach business And will also allow for the extension of Kovacs and Redondo. In view of the above sta.f would recommend the following actions regarding this matter: 1. Approve the ODA which is ;.,:+ng revised and tt:ose revisions will be provided to you on Monday. the revisions are as tolle.wc; A. Changes in the scope of development and schedule of performs:-.:e to accommodate the above referred alternative design. B. To provide for the acquisition of two (2) triangular parceis ilrrently- owned by third parties in order to accommodate the newly aligned Redondo Circle. 2. Based upon the attached letter from the applicant withdrawing their appeal of . the Planning Commission's action of July 7, 1987, it 13 recommended that staff be directed to prepare a precise plan of street alignrnrnt In accordance with the conceptual site plan. j 3. That Final Wi ap 10363 - A portion of TT 11953 be continued untll August 3, 1997. Please feel free to call either Doug La Belle or me if you have any fur;i+er qucttlans. Respectf submitted, " • , 'City Adrninlstrator CWT/DL8zar Attachments 3` Ly88r , REQUES*FOR CITY COUNCIL XTION Dete July 20, 1987 Submitt-Rdto: Honorable Mayor and City Council Submitted by: Chacles W. Thompson, City Administrator ��•� Prepared by: Aouzlas N. LaBelle, Director, Coirinunity Developrme Subject: APPEAL Oe r 7,X4W1V1C COXIIS310.1 ACTIONS - -- DOURESTUN DUVELOPMENT Consistent with Council Policy? Yes ( j New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: Transmitted for your consideration is an appeal by Boureston Development to the Conditions of Approval imposed by the Planning Commission in their approval. of Administrative Review No. 67-15, Use Permit No . 87-34 and negative Declaration No. 87-9 , a request to permit a 122, 424 square foot industrial building . Boureston Development is also appealing the Planning Commission' s denial of the Eollo-fling : Conditional Exception No . 87-24 to permit a 50 foot wide truck well in lieu of a 20 foot wide truck well and a 10-1l2 foot front yard setback on Redondo Circle in lieu of a 14 foot setback; Feecise Plan of Street Alignment No . 87-1 to terminate Redondo Circle and Kovacs Street with cul-de-sacs on the adjacent property; and the Repeat of Specific Plan No . 73-1 (Taylor and (leach Specific Plan) . 8C4MDAT.IS?N: Planning Commission action on July 7, 1987 : on motion by Schumacher and second by Leipzig, the Planning Commission approved Administrative Review No. 87-15, Use Permit No. 87-34 And Negative Declaration No . 87-9 with findings and revised conditions and based on a conceptual site plan submitted by the appellant (Triple *11" 2:operties) , by the following vote: AYES: Schumacher, Leipzig, Silva , Pierce, Summerell , Livengood NOES: None ABSENT: Higgins ABSTAIN : None On motion by Livengood and Second by Pierce, the Planning Commission denied Conditional Exception No. 87-24 with the finding that approval would be inconsistent with the previous action by the following vote. t no Ore+ AYES: Livengood, Pierce, Silva , Schumacher NOES: Leipzig., Summerell ABSENT: Higgins ABS'rA7..N: Note On motion by Schumacher and second by Livengood, the ,Planning Conunission reconsidered their previous denial of Conditional Exception No . 87-24 by the following vote. AYES: Schumacher, Livengood, Silva , Leipzig, Sumrerell ANbES: Pierce, Livergood ABSENT: Higgins 'ABSTAIN: None Can motion by Schumacher and second by Silva, the Planning Connaission considered denial of Conditional Exception No. 87-24 With additional findings , by the following vote: AYES: Schumacher, Oilva NOES: Pierre, Leipzig, Surmn:erell , Livengood ABSENT: Higgins ABSTAIN : None Motion to deny with P ditional findings fails . On motion by Livengood and second by Pierces, the Planning Commission denied Conditional Exception No. 87-24 with the finding that approval would be inconsistent with the previous action, by the following vote : AYES : Livengood , Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell , Schumacher , Silva ; I HOES: None ABSENT: N.iggf ns ABSTAIN: None On motion by Livengood and second by Schumacher, the planning Commission denied a request to Repeal or An-end Specie is Plan No. 73-1 by the fo116wing vote: AYES: Livengood, Schumacher, Silvat Pierce, Leipzig, Summerell NOES: None ABSENT: Higgins ABSTAIN : None On motion by Pierce and second by iivengood , the Planning Commission denied Precise Plan of Street Alignment No . 87-1 by the following vote: AYES: pio r^e, Livengood, Schumacher , Leipzig, Su:nmerelY NOES: None 'ABSENT: lliggins, Silva (out of the room) RCA �2- ,�jZAINGS FOR DENIAL - ,�QNDITIONAI. EACEPTIQN NO, 8 -_2A: 3 . ' The proposed, conditional exceptiop would be inconsistent with the Commission act+on on Use Pe -mit flo. 87-34 and Administrative Review No . 87-15 . FINi�Xt1G5 F4R. P�.QY - USF PEEMIT NO , UAA: ` 1. The establishment, -maintenance and operation of an industrial building will not be detrimental to: a- The general welfare of persons :.residing or working in the vicinity; b. Property and improvements in the vicinity of such use or bu i ld itig. 2 . Any potentialLy adverse impacts have bee considered and mitigated. 3. The granting of the use permit , will not adversely affect the General Phan, of the City of Huntington Beach. The project is In conformance with the M1-A zone and General Plan designation _ of General Industrial for the site. i . 40 The propos..�l is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City' s General Plan and Land Use Map. L'ONt)ITIQBLUE APP_..RUAL q: I . The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated � April 2, 1987 , shall be revised and resubm).tted; with modifications as noted in Administrative Review No . 87-15 . 2. All Conditions of Approval of Administrative Review No. 87-15 shall be applicable, C4NUYT G?�S 'OE AERBQV_A.L . 3L FEIiMiTi NQ: 87-34 : 1 . The site plan, floor plans , and elevations recoived and dated April 1 , 19$7, shall be revised and resubmitted, with modifications as noted in Administrative Review No. 87-3.5 . 2 . All Conditions of Approval of Administrative Review No. 87-15 shall be applicable. CONDITIC�N�O�Fw,A.�.'�$QYAIe_..:..�MINxFTRATIY�$��YI� �'fi.'a �r�15 : ' I. The site plans, floor plans and elevations- dated `AprAl 1, :1987, shall ;be revised and resubmitted to depict the modifications : described' herein: a. • Provide a •stree t connection between Redondo CixcIe nrd . Kovacs Street.- ,, , RCA _ 17/20/87 3 ,� (803d) o �, w w ff j ,'."..a.,..r...r.. •,jr{n. .. .;.a.... :. ...s^..wu+hw�o... ... rw.werrw.�..w.+-,. .,. .... .. -. ,- ... aw b. Comply -with uildi -with Fire Department 'requirements and the Unif'o'rm nq de. c. Comply with all requ3.�rements of the MI-h (Restric' cd Manufacturing) District , including setbacks , parking , landscaping , building height and sound attenuation. d. Any variances required by this site plan shall be heard by the Planning Commission. 2, Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit the following plans : a . Landscape and irrigation plan to the Department of s development Services ant Public works For review and approval . b. Rooftop Mechanical Equipment Plan. Said plan shall indicate screening of all rooftiap mechanical equipzznt and shall delineate the type of tnate,,f a l proposed to screen said equipment . 3 . Installation of required landscaping and irrigation systems shall be completed prior to final inspection. 4 . Grading plans shall be submitted to the Public Marks Department along with plans for silt control for all storm runoff .if i determined to be necessary by the nirector of Public Works . 5 . if foil type insulotion is to be used, a fire retardant type shall be installed ac approved by the building Department. 6. An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be approved and installed pursuant to Fire Department regulations . 7. Service roads and fire lands, as determined by the Fire Department , shall be posted and marked . 0 . Fire access lands shall be maintained. .'f fire lane viola- tions occur snd the services of the Fire Department are required, the applicant will be liable for expenses incurred, 9 . All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material , shall be disposed of at an � off- site facility- equipped to handle them. 10. The development shall comply with mitigation measur-3s specified for "Future Industri.&l Activity" In the Report prepared . by J.J . Van Houten ` and Astsociates., Inc. , elated April .6, 1983 (attached) . 11 . Natural -gas shall be stubbed in at this locations ,of water heaters and central heating units. 12 . Ldi4-volume 1heP.dk ;,shall, be used on al l spigots an3 'water: faucaxs.: ' r RCA , - 7/20/87. .:4.. (8573d) 13., If lighting is included in +:he parking lot, high-preSsu.re sodium vapor lamps shall used for energy savings. All outside lighting shall be directed to prLvent "spillage" onto ' edjacent properties . 14. Prior to issuance of grading or building permits, .Tract Map 11955 as ameaded by the site place to shc,L! khe precise plan :)f street alignment for Redondo and Kovacs be approved by the City Council and recorded. 15 . All applicabl4 Public Works fees shall be paid prior to issuance of building gernits. 16 . The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division, %.nd Fire Department. 17 . The applicant shall meet all* applicable local, State, and Federal Fire Codes , ' Ordinances. and standards . 18. Landscaping shall comply with Art?.cle 960 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 19. Compact parking stalls shall be striped to a depth of 19 febt vhera possiule . ti 20 . Prior to issuance o'A building permits, the applicant shall obtain approve1 from the Design Revie-o ' c7rd . 21 . The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke Administrative Review No . 87-15 if any violation of these conditions Cf the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code no-,curs . In light of recent developments, staff recommends that "the City Council approve Administr?tive Review No. 87-15, Use Portiitc 110 . 87-34 and Negative Declaration No . 87-9 based on a conceptual site plan submitted by Triple 'N" properties, and based on findings and conditions of approval outli:ied above. Dens Conditional Excoption No. 87-24 based on findings outlined above; direct staff to prepare a Precise Plan of Street Alignment In accordance with the conceptual site plan; repeal Specific Flan No., 73-1 . The proposed project consists of one 122 ,424 square foot . induntrial building , to be located on a currently vacant 5-acre parcel . An .11 ,ear lease. has been executed with a single user for the completed , project (Southwest Quilted Products., a manufacturer of bedspreads and draperies) . The project will initially employ . 100 persons, , up to a maximum of 200 perbons . Approximately 22,000 square' feet of the building area wi 2.L . n+a used for. `officea I and there will �be_ one 50 foot- loading dock'. to accommodat'e,:2 toA truck deliveries .9c' FiCx ups pest clay. ,:4he ,dev6lopssr Will. provide parking and landscaping i n 1 aceordance 'Kith code requirements, :as, well as3 col-de--sac x Improvements .ion Kovacs 'f rom Ta lbert Avenue ' to . the a i to'. The . proposed use will . require no . outaide 'storage or use , of harardou' a meter.. als . `'RCA -7/20/87 MS,� {, (6573d) i �. Deny Administrative Review No . 87--15 , Conditional Exception (Variance) No . 87--24, Use Permit No. 87-34 and Negative Declaration No . 87-9 fused on findings . Deny Precise Man of Street Alignment No . 87-1 and the Repeal of Specifics Plan No . 73-1. 1 . Letter of Appeal dated July A , 1987 f 2. Area map 3 . Site plan (orig;nal) 4 . Conceptual Site Plan approved by Planning Commirsion 5 . Planning Commission Staff Report dated July 7 , 1967 6. Planning Conunission Staff Report dateC June 16, 1987 r 7. Letter from Jerome M. Higman dated July 15 , 19"7 DNL :LP: kla i , l .;I i ce5a�� ate:l . .. a.... r r. .. ..: . _.+. '..:.Mon.RMWN•.Y .if.,.. .,....,.. . , !.r:.;l`l. ', _.............,.f,.-..s....�1 .l , Julv 8 , 1987 `' ' , �f� ��•, Mayor Jack Kelly City Oounci.l of liunt,i.rirtorl Beach •' 2000 Main St . Huntington Bauch, Cnlifornin � Re : Appeal of the following P lnnning Commits Tian actiasts or July 7 , 1987 : ( 1) lrpouIt ion cf cond- tiotin in con jtinetr:on t.ILY the approval of hdr.inistrativc, Rr�viu -t S7_la . � !i* Forr,it 87- 34 and Nerativo Ueclnrat,lor. 87..9 , (2) Donial o; Conditional exception 81 -24 , ( 3) P P � � ::�enia:i c1' Ole ru oas.3 xc; nor+i o, the Tutr and Batch S pa.c if is Plan ( ui,e=� i i'ic Plan #N'o. 73- 1) : 1 { �} P.onial as" the �yropos.!d :�;endront; to Precise Plan of j A � t 2 n h 3 Q tt Stree� n�i.F,ni"Yc'nv � r, n._ .,orc.r� ,cc. �.�it'r� .�ro��o: 3 Preci:�_ Plan of Street Alignment Ntip . 87-1.. I _ � Dear hot:orab' - Mayor : ''t t}= ; :l r3:i `keiit s `or nl. r►)q ii-.t Plenre ac"Cn. - } I appeal the above ra;i:rc:nccd action . We 1311dilr.-It" ht3i, appeal will be hiiar l at y omr Infix` rof-,ul' lrl.;• sel,zeduled mesat ing, . Thank you Cor your car►i;dorat'. ii . S i 4 d Y ' i r Sinr:oraly, c S , f • r C[ J d .M ehm"l G d Gonorah Part li©r 7 5— `s'�� _ c R C." Icy r..t 20 Cl ��jij__�([��M{1►.'_.,,�_i,�jj__[[�r►�11••_1�� ! s •71S • � � 2� IK Ilml CD �"��r^j�. MFCD r ' ' r �� RASA CF R III-CG '61 �r- :•"' : �2] Rl C r-R � '�*•� Ott : €w - ftl r.� m 1 �t__.—...._.f._G R C 2 CF-C �I ,fin IF o,. r .. MI-CD yAll RI E f �i Ott MI a f at vs !,'L-Y+K ♦.;� _ `. may. wedd . . "U41 .TCP1 MAN •: - � '/ram w.✓�.... .. , 1 31f ' ��yi ��..+. 7"' f STATISTICAL SWAMARY t/`t 3 ...MY ft*8.11..'f♦ ;p r� --•� ♦ t7t'tR Il1sO sr. U Sao fI_ss fiQirrt •t � t 12.102 IF. cW% 1tS.G�g sc% In= let TOTAL. lrsaro St- A' t90 71t LAN( [AK AREA Us reaha90 rs2a sr Z1 �{• LA045CAT!! napv>RtD 77Os•El, ��,,,, � �-� .s..�• a� 1 rptgtt�tttw Tlr1'[ Y•+t!.�Au�aCi 1rn.Mrr 1 H r '_ +j - r asaaw ah►• �/ Ws" r tc*+0440 is o W vas root} all ' ti,T007t � � •A••! ` 7� ! - 11=. f .� ••3 ' Cy/CE 11107 f1. '- •'7 /� / ' - - t+arotlgA: 541J00 ! ,ISM •oa 1i?OQ( IPA - 1 r /Usy 1Qlq 114=s). ' -1�i ? ' I_lir.w.t..r tswa+r . •ot�sr.a.; a�x'0 as, �, ft w/ttr+l tC l: :?•o iTGr1�El!'vt2/!t) t `ter'. M•sa..n =Tt1Ttt inDm it trNc�Os► was rtw NK+ do 1 ae1.a tt 'Sri ota.s+aAmfo t eactraa:31. _ mil\`(T ' •�+ :J►.R71GAtt MCA=%P*%agC FA"tr.. Apr". 10.iou f r. »-OVAA sfrl'Ai1t _ -F ��, '.•� ti' _l �/�•• 'Fi'� r - i �.. PJIiY71'J9�lIi+ 1L%�:rsl. 9. ti 11Z�1971 poop<"=RAW 1s IVA ss. '`✓'��. 1 ,, ,'. . � :�/: .�' ' tYtT LMi 2460 s1_ «ram_ (11,2&2 a.l tt•rra �d s♦��I► - �' -I, tfir. w�.. �_�� .w w.w.,..�ruw w. ..�.y..o..�y.I•..N - - ,. -. Ca EPTUAL SATE DEVELOPME STUDY flat a" ►� .�. tlr.rwa,t. .•v.Tt+rasaIT st•c". cAkltoulcta , T� _ q.LtJh2� I ♦ . it E iPd'•• .7Yr.r�.�Y.rr Mlr�'q�•\� \y - 2 1 n 11'1l-111 ITTR 11T1 its A HUNTINGTON BEAC,' � � ,.•` ,��' r c c c \Y\I on ►/G.7W. CA 3rr/d #l� `1 � •i '� • j 'Yaf .r r t' M *oUTNw RQ Pftl 1IC �" t ,4 .wl•I t,\M�M\M�MI Mom.;.a.. ., ei`.. ..�x. r 5'' �t� t 1 1 dry,.»r+.\S,w.�,",.rryyt`.It''�R`('t •` n � r �';;`. ''. .,..,.�,.; ;.. . .•. ....r.....u..rr ��. t 'r••� 3 ' ! j�ii��Y�';�'�ft�2^` I 2. t 1 I ro ri ... , . �• -.1. S it 5 1 � l5 � �Y +.5. � Y� 4 .� �': 'VF -�• � r2 j r i a+t (! ! .,. �}r� (• 1:t:'4 ;� !;�• t � 1 f Y,:l'1�..cA SYA.�,bi::tC:j,s�'1':,i 2?;'f� �rA•.l�tr'.5 �.;t'..t� 7 I [r ., ��! :,., t }, Y t� t:l� t k Y A "C`-yfr,V k• r�� ,.:r'a�r1�:%...+W�.'y,,lZ.,i G;,r. .y.,\ ;N, t ! RELIABLE WHOLESALE LLJIIBERt IN'C. 7600 ACDON00 CIRCLE J n 0 004 311 r t4U?dti?JGT04 LICACN, CA4ir0I1NfA 020-146 TCl.Cp��t9�1['S. Irswi e,e•q�z? j �2,.�i r+r.a-n�n�i i I, Ju,1y 15 , 1987 i f ' f 14ichacl C_ Adarns , A. 1 . C . 31 . I� Deputy Director City Planner, Departn.ent of Cont►nunity Duvelopmc%nt 2000 Mein Street P .D . Box 130 Huntington Beach , Ca . 9s6.48 _ I I Dear Mike i As pe-r our conversat ior. of Jilly 13 .� nd 14 , 1987, thin letter will confirm Reliable Wholesale lhju7bt.r and ':'riple tt Prop ertiesI campromise c1t1170ement w.ittr Do tit: st:en Dcvc+lopment , Southwest, Qu.il.ting :and Joe Rol:ertson, Tho agreement. is that. Soil t.2:wt!:;t. Quilting will build theix Yuilcli.ng as per the alternate plan , with Redondo Circle to be continued to Talbert . Triple It Properties will reimburse Southwest. Qui ,: t:inc; for a portion of: their increased costs . Tri.4)le It I r,'cperties w:.11 cooperate with -ill parties to e-'rec" this 1.ompromise as quickly as possi-ble. Since,✓ 1.y , c .II1Z.E 1{ P f)F'LItTI :S i Jerorlo. M. tigman 3 , s j f ., 7PF5 i* huntington bdech development services department STA fF REPOROF TO: Planning Commission FROM: Community Development D&TE: July 7 , 1987 SUBJECT: PRECISE PLAN OF STREET ALIGNIO.ENT NO. 87-1 PTO REPLACE PRECIS; PLAN OF STREET A.r.,IC tiMENT NO. 74-3) ' USA NIL: City of Huntington Beach DATE ACC MPI: May 2.2 , 198; RMUM: To terminate Redondo Circle at its easterly terminus MA 1 E l't1�., M DATE with a cul-de-sac on the July 22, 1987 adjacent property and to terminate Kovacs Street at ZQNE : M1--A. (Restricted its southerly terminus ith s a cul-de-sac on the :d1U : General adjacent property, Industrial 011 : Between the easterly EXSTII;Q L'SE: Vacant terminus with a cul -de.-sac on the adjacent property and to terminate Kovacs Strcit at its southerly terminus with a cul-de-sac on the adjacent property. Approve Precise Plan of Street Alignment 'No . 87- 1 and recommend adoption by the City Council . Precise Plan of Street Alignment No . 87-1 is a request to amens: Precise Plan of Street Alignment Vo. 74-3 by realigning Redondo I Circle and Xovacs Street from a connecting loop street system to two separate cul-de-sacs . Precise Plan of Street Alignment No . 87-1 would terminate Kovacs Stteat at it, existing southerly rerminlas with a _cul-de-sac on the adjacent property and would tee minate Redondo Circle at its existing easterly terminus witn a cul-de-sac ' on the adjacent property- (see Figures 1 and 2 proposed and existing Plan of Street Alignment) . a .� ' This Item was continued from the' Planning Commission meeting of June 16o 1987 , in conjunction, with the Repeal of the Taylor and ©each Specific Plan (Specific Plan No . 73-1) . At that time, the Planning Commission expressed concern with regard to the impact of the proposed cul-de-sacs on property owners in the area . Several business operators on Redondo Circle have indicated their desire that Redondo Circle connect through to Talbert Avenue as sho.un `in the that . Precise Plan of Street Alignment . Since that meeting , staff has analyzed various conceptuxl street alignments that would allow for alternative connections between Redondo and Talbert to the existing Precise Plan, a, well as provide &n acceptable project layout for a major single user industrial project proposed to be located at the terminus of Redondo Circle and Kovacs Street . Staff has determined that the proposed street alignment terminating Redondo Circle and Kovacs Street with cul-de-sacs on the adjoining property is a feasible design which will. not adversely impact the environment or surrounding property owners . Precise Plan of Street Alignment No . 87-1 will serve to accommodate the needs of the existing industrial uses in the area and the remaining vacant land to be developed with new industrial uses . A detailed analysis of this proposal is contained in the E attached staff report dated June 16, 1987 . Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Precise Plan of Street Alignment No . 87-1 and recommend ad;)ptiori by the City Council , - Q ALWI14NTIVS A=;: The Planning Commission may: ( 1) Deny Precise Man of Street Alignment No. 87-1 ; or (2) Approve a modified Precise Plan of Street Alignment which would provide for an alternative connection of Redondo Circle through to Talbe:t Avenue. � ATTA FiI� E:�.T 1. Map of Precise Plan of Street Alignment No . 87-1 and 74-3 2. S aff Report dated June 18, 1987 HA:>; :kla staff Report "� fi/`Ilh7 -�- (a523d) r .I.A....,. , FROPOSM ,aF STET AU GN t t�T W-1 ON TALBERT AVE., c 1 JAL i 1 I OIM M 1M 11N EXI STING PLAN OF aTREET AUGNI t`'ENT -4-- 7q -- "�, � TALBERT AVE , a 4 .00 .. ' r � • � i i7 7 : .' J � 'r�r. . �,A v � �. � .. �.'°�r ♦.,y�• '�� k �� A ��+ \ if� i<I k r ~r..; ( ,,+ 1 r,-�� ..i$..♦» '.,'.' �:".�w C r 1�;..♦•r _ ��"Nl.. 1�•�.'*�. f.,a ,1,� 1.�.�f♦+ ;L w f.)�t�t ,'•�♦ , , r.a"'M '♦• � • ♦.'-� 1 `� �r«:, �;}} i� .��r •. � ��;�, �•�. ♦ �: ♦''�. ./�� •-•�.'i+i,'f1.��., iMt x_��• ry 1'�•'�..� •It, .� ♦�i.1.�?i�'k \Y�;�:+.�.,�.*'.f' �`��1, i. ulr�J� -��:� 6'.y. ¢,A � 'r. � �.� .. �'.. � '•: r Y ,'k r-1r•• i .. • r ,a t r..♦,n� irt< ar` ti.�.t+ {t' wA�� r J �,� r.r- ..,. +1 •'�� { ♦ n r. f '+� k�,a r.•. �•)\ j N J .♦ � •j♦ 1 -♦q 1 Gw,y • ♦` '�. f ?itrur ♦.« ., �,...wf...:. L�.:lwJ+�i.'r ....r . Sr1a,...te..'Yr +.�.� �a -r+ ,..� �� Si k � �� r t 11 ��'�1 i 1 ♦ ♦ h A �— .. .k '.1. .a1.l.n:.�.Iw.'w....• ,. __ _—.._._ _� _GI'r' __ •_ _ i - � _.. ,...i. sLY ...•, n..�.•.0 t. ... k., .. ..nuntirtgton Desch divalopm l serviGes dip rtrrr�nt f f t . EPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Development Services DATE: June lb, 1987 SUBJECT PRECISE FLAN OF STREET ALIGUMNT NO. 87-1 (TO AMEND PRECISE PLAN OF STREET ALIGMNT I 0. 74-3 ) APPLIC HT: City of Huntington 'Beach DATE Accr=R: May 22, 19811 � OUEST: To terminate Redondo Circle at its easterly terminus MANDAT ny -P S �G—DATE: with a cul-de-sac on the July 22 , 1987 adjacent property and to terminate Kovacs Street at ZONE: MI-A (Restricted its southerly te.mi.nus with a cul-de-sac on the MERAL ELAN: General adjacent property. Industrial W-CATIUN: Between the easterly �U5=fL_ME: Vacant terminus with a cul-de-sac on the adjacent property and to terminate Kovacs Street at its southerly terminus with a cul-de-sac: on the adjacent property . UG�, TEQ ACT xQ Approve Precise Plan of Street Alignment No . 87-1 and recor lend adoption by the City Council. Precise Psan of Street Alignment No . 87-1 is a request to amend Precise Plan of Street Alignment No. 74--3 by realigning Redondo Circle and Kovacs Street from a connecting loop street systera to two separate cul-de-sacs. Precise Plan of Street Alignment Wo. 87-1 riould terminate Kovacs Street at its existing sotithc�rly terminus with a Sul-de-sac on the adjacent property and would terminate I Redondo Circle at Its existing easterly terminus with a cul-de-sac on the adjacent property (see Figures l and 2 -= 'proposed and . existing Plan of Street Alignment) . .ti r , a i T,t k. i ..__. c../wagwsu..;rz....... .ram.,.,,.,.. ,. ,...,�r..+.•N.,...�:..,.r ..,,:.,•:,,,, ,_f. The subject proposal in 'covered by Negative Declaration No. 87-9 . '•� Pursuant to environmental regulations in effect at .this tires, :the draft . n6gative, declaration was 'posted for public.; review and cQeaaasnt for 10:4ayac . The subject negative declaration also covers Administrative Review No . 87-150 Conditional ExceptionUse Pe xmi t No . 87-34 for Bou reston Development. No. S?-14 ar►d . ' The primary anvironmen,tal concerns identified with relation to the precise plan of street alignment are traffic- circulation, air quality and cumulative impacts. Staff has conducted an snalymis .af . these issues and concluded thbt there will be no significant adverse Impact an the 'onvironment, and that a mitigated negative declaration may be issued. Extensive discussion and documentation regarding these conclusions is contained in Section 4. 0 Environmental Status of the staff report dated June 16 , 1987, for Use Permit. No. 87-34 and the Appeal of Administrative Review No. 87-15, Conditional Exception No . 87-24 and Negative Declaration No. 87-9. 4 . 0 I BSLMS AND IANAI1AYS IS The original alignment of Redondo Circle, as shown on the 1973 Taylor and Beach Specific Plan , began at a point 600 feet to the east of the railroad right--of-way , and extended southward from Tolbert Avenue 660 feet to a cul-de-sac. Precise Plan of Street Alignment No . 74-3 was adopted by the City Council (Ordinance 1951) on December 16 , 1974 . This action moved Redondo Circle 310 feet to the west of the original aliq=ent, and curved it eastward to the original cul-de-sac location. (see attached Precise Plan of Surest Alignment No . 74-3) . On February 21 , 1978 , the City Council : adopted Rasolution No . 4590 , emending the Taylor and Beach Specigic Plan and extending Redondo Circle 330 feet to the east to intersect e - proposed north/aouth street (Kovacs Street) . (See attached amendment to Taylor and Beach Specific Plnn . ) The purpose of the connecting loop system was to serve industrial pro�.arties that were then undeveloped. ' The proposed now street alignment will torminate Redondo and Kovacs with cul-de-sacs on an undeveloped 5 acre parcel currently owned by the City and proposed for development by Houreston Deve.lopr.mnt . This _alignment was first shown on Tentative Tract 11955 (without cul-de-sacs) , which was approved by the Planning Commission on July y . 6e 1986 . Staff has conducted n traffic c6pacity study basted on the proposed alignment, and determined that the designation of these streets as industrial collector cut-do-sera wY11 not -diminish the streets ' capacity to maintain an acceptable level of service, 1'hC Cit�Ywuldrnotib�sPad�t�rselng3.mtactedab �thermroeoRe�ldnowovacs 9 Street ' ' p y pp alignment, due to lass .nte rse development along the streot, and adequate properly utilized on-site parking facilities provided for development. Staff, Report - 6116/87 -2- , • •N.•t RedoW0 �frcle currently. experiences` heavy use of an--•tcaEcxt :parking, Which. sseults in .some trafflc con9e,rtl.on.;; This 'congest ion is, ,�rot `t Y a�us�d b*. excessive 'traffic on_ Redondo , but generally , by opropsr ukiliJgation -of the street for employee and customer, psrkinq Iy buiin sees on Redondo. Many on-site. parking areas -ore userd , for 4toraos of *6hioles and other materials ,and resulting st AAt ;parking causes ::slower,Araffia, movement . Proper 'utilisation of parking. areas would; reduce this problem. Tha maximum build out scenario for affic''. 96nerltion . on Redondo Circle ie weld within the capacity 'of thz� street ",Ito 'maintain acceptable service_levels . _The . proposad : , street . alignment'. will , not , adversely affect accessibility of existing properties.. on Redondo Circle, or, Kovacs Street becaus• access to Talbert' Avenue in available directly from each street ., Completion ;af the :proposed cul-de-lace will improve a situation that has existing for several years by providing an adequate turn--around area to City standards . Precise Plan of 8treat Alignment 'No . 87-1 will serve to accommodate the needs of the existing industrial uses in the areas and the remaining vacant land to be developed with industrial uses . Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Precise Plan r of Rtreet Alignment No . 87-1 and recommend adoption by the City Council . 1. rigurn 1 and 2 -• Existing and Proposed Plan of street Alignment 2. Precise Plan of Street Alignment No. 74-3 3 Amendment to Taylor and Beach Specific Plan Mh:LP: le i Steffy Repart - 6/16/197 , -3- (a38od1 :; s , , 1 I SFD TALBERT AVE - do do 40 ��'1HG PLAN UF STREET AUGNVEN T EX t 1 t , s , h lt1i1i1.1l111l�it1i111tl1 •tt}I1t$IIt .'atii1/1121111 tit1111�31f1:til�ftil�lli lO&I.M ttf11t111l1/11ifll lll�ti4iif#1M1l1i11Ltt;i� lltllti#ti�lr�ll1tl11it1 11110111111 tltitflll[1.! -;a► 111t1>i.1111ltl#IIIIf11!!f . _,. 1111j►iliilttil��i��.11,ilir • it't1i1�riMIS Mum Ii11milm1"i111mmun INS a Ilfliti�i!llti!l�itlfitl - 111t[1iil11i►iltMiltiltl � !11 i11�111li!l;1tf1�1�1! 1t111t1ltt[1IIR1tli1 1! ■ �� !1![iNl1[itl[1Eitl11Nl1 ■ •. !!1tli1s1tlilil11111t1 ilti##1i;11illliltjll1�1t1 - �� 11111111itllt[Iitlp[1tt �� llttlfllttll111111til111� �� !lilftiliKill#gt1!!lliti �� M■ ■t ,� OEM �0 n i � �!iriiilii f l�7ii�!'i ♦ i ._.o..,�_..� r err., 1 c"m�.... �qw r r rr 4m ` do Low M ME 0 �` irr. • 40 _ .... `► � MEN- Ilitllltiftlt�tlilt(It! • SS told 111011111 fill 1111111 Bull 40 j, �� l� ttt111�1ktlttt#!#!tl►ill tf flli�liiitliltlt�llr � ii iillttitttlit1t1t1if !t ; titlli 1t11111t.fttl � - It t711#tftttttt1 off lff ii t11111"(1411t1i Ito ll � 11 � itttll��#tllli111ttt ili • 111l111ilt1t 1111it WHO �rrrrrl � 111tfl111fJtt flit#t11f111tt1tifIMrlt � tftesltrur►s�slrt�ssttrr ! 1�tltllt#1tit;sr+r�lrttsr ►� t Itl � t111tFtt tt i itt sfltltt a �i 1f1 lltfltl t lal lttltt� r of ' � r , � i`.. '. try-' •}, , huntk t6n dovehopmont sty .05 -departme'n. I F., ��AEPORXI' TO: Planni'nq. Commission FROM: Community Development ' `DATE: July 7 , 1907 :> SUBJECT REPEAL OF THE TAYLOR AND BEACH SPECIFIC PLAN (SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 73--1) - `(CONTINUED FROM JUNE 16, - 1987 PLANNNrNG. COMMISSION MEETING) ' &PPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach REQUEST: To Repeal or amend the Taylor and Beach Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 73-1) . ]& ATIO, O s Specific Plan area bordered by Talbert. Avenue on the i" north, Beach Boulevard on the east, Taylor Driva on the south and the South©rn Pacific Railroad on the Kest: . �t) `BUGG�STED ACTXQS3; , Adopt Resolution 1382 and recommend that the City Council adopt n resolution to repeal the Taylor and Beach Specific Plan (Specific Plan Ito. 73-1) . The Taylor and Beach Specific Plan was adapted by Resolution No. 383.0 of the City Council on December 17, 1973 . The site is bounded by Beach Boulevards to the eaut , Taylor Drives to tho south, the Southern Pacific Railroad to the West and Talbert Avenue to the north. 'i•he Specific Plan wasdes3gn.ed to address fouz main i�seies (,a) the location of a school site., (b) non-compatibility of xor%ing and general plan designations in the area ; (c) the sire and locution of a perk site; and (d) the closure of Taylor Avenue. This item was continued from the Juno 16, 1987 Planning Commission .meeting in conjunction with Precise Plan of Street Alignment No. ' 87-1 (to amend Precise Plan of Street Aligrunent No. 74-,3) StaLf is � recommending repeal of the Specific Plan because it 'doer. not coictain development: regulations, does not relate to currently adopted zoning districts and General Plan land use' designations , snd is not a useful , guide for., future development of the study area. A ' detailed � aanilyals of the Specific Planes currecit, status . is contained in the r" ! ttached staff report: dated June 16 , 1987. : Aky •-f ON414 t .. er,•m:a'A•+ul* ,r.....Kr n,,,...,.• ..q,raw,ar+c... .,..,,:; ..»..7crF.: :.#w.. �------ r �. .� C4Nt�,AT�4N. • ': Staff ',recommends that the •.Planning Commis lon adopt Resolution no 1382' end, recornrend that the City `Council adopt -A resolution to thex Zor and Beech S ecffis Pla {6repeal peci f is Plan x6 i 1. R4solution ' 1382 ' 2.. Staff Report dated .7una 16 , 1987 w` MA;tp: kla 1. LI t . , , .r . : 1 n StetE Report 7//87 f / itl yi r r r RESOLUTION . NO. 1382 A' RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THF. CITY OF. HUNTINGTON BEACH RECOMMENDING REPEAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 73-1 .AND THE AMENDME14T THEAVIO MADE BY RESOLUTION NO. 1205 � I WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Huntington y Beach desires to repeal Taylor Beach Specific plan No, 73-1 , recommended by Resolution No.. 1127 and its amendment , Resolution . No. . 1205 ; A public hearing on repealing of said specific plan and the amendment_ thereto was held by the Planning Commission on June 15 , 1987 , in accordance with the provisions of the state government codes and The Planning Commission is repealing said specific plan as it is no longer needed for this area , NOW, THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED that Specific Plan No 73- 1 and ' j the amendment thereto is recommended for repeal by the City !. Council of the City of Huntington. Beach . PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Huntington Beach on the loth day of June, 1987t by the following ro:`l call vote : 'Ayes : Noes : Absent: Abstain: jChairman r, ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: : I S r e t d r y .r-. ...._.. t y A t f or n e ••�.,, � „�"u .i r k . r k� p� ;. untir�ta� i�sch diwl�a �nm� w�icts rtn�ent RA f XEPOR } J 1 .. '. TO: Planning, CaisaiSsion i lt; Development 8irvicom '., UATS f Junta li , 1987 SUVl XdT: REPFArs,'OF THE TAYLOR AND BEACH SPECIFIC PLAN . (SPECIFIC PIA NO. 73-1) APPLICANT: City of Huntington Beach RirQVEST: To Repeal. the Tabor and Beach Specific Plan (Specific Plan No . 73-1) . tr. ION: Specific Plan area bordered by Talbert Avenue on the north, Beach Boulevard on the east, Taylor Drive on the south and the Southern. Pacific Railroad on the west. 1.0 6URM rj1E t ACTIQ„ I Adopt Resolution 1382 and r"corumnd adoption to the Cite Council to repeal the Taylor and Beach Specific Plan (Specific Plan go . 73-1) . 2 .0 gam.. 1jjrQ1RMTLQjj: They Taylor and Beach Specific Plan was adopted by Resolution No. 3810 of the City Council on December 17 , 1973 . The site is bounded by peach 'toulevard ko the east, Taylor Drive to the south, the Southern Pacific Railroad to the great artd Talbert Avenue Ito the north. The Specific Plan was designed to address four main issues : (a) the location of a school site; (b) non--compatibility of zoning and .general plan designations in the area; (c) the size ar&4 location of a park site; and (d) the closure of Taylor Avenue. I£0SUES_AND AMY8113: The Taylor and Beach Specific Plan is presented in a dffferrant format from suabguerdi.nancefic andplans incoraar�st d-ted �ko�theizonl.nT�oa�ean ras not adopted ,f o P 9 (Division 9) ' ss is presently the procedure. . The plan does not contain 'developmnt sttndard as current specific plans dd. ' The plan studied and addreosed the, selected isa»es, and proposed., owndments in to the General Plan Land Vse Element order to bring ' about: j_. ,.. conformance with proposed zoning. The auggested zoning ws then implwwnted by Zone Change iia, .`73--21 . The Taylor arid" beach Speci f is Plan' seas like a special study report with recomnandlarionx for- Future. :development . N•rr u• a; _r Subsequent to the approval of the plan , and initial zone change, i number ,'of general plan amendmnts and zone changes were approved wi,th#n- tAa Specific Plan area, in conjunction with various "devslopOant projects. These, actions did not include fornal- nd atrement of the 8peciti,c Plan' because the Specific: Plan did not dictate by ordinance the zoning or development standards for any .site. In 1978 the Specific Plan was modified , by Resolution Xo. 4590 of the City Council to bring the plan into conformance with the previous zone changes and general plan amendments that occurred from 1973 to 1978 . 1t also modified the configuration of the park site &Ad incorporated a 'Precise Plan of Street Alig=ent (No. 74-3) into the Plan (see staff report for Precise Plan of Street Alignment No 87--1 dated June 16, 1987) . A ,number of additional zone changes and general plan amendments have occurred within the Specific Plan area sinca the 1978 update. Rather than further amending the plan to incorporate peat and future changes to the Gener;,l Plan Ladd Use Element, Zoning, and Street Alignments, stuff is rscoamending that the Taylor and Beach Specific Plan be repealed. The purposes for which the original studies were conducted and for which the plan was written have been fulfilled and therefore the document is no longer a useful planning tool. The school site shown in 1973 has been deleted, and the nice and location of the park site has been determined (see attached District Map) Taylor Drive was opened in accordance with Resolution No. . 5037, adopted by the City Council on Saptember 8, 1981, and there is no longer inconsistency between the Gonerel Plan Lane Use Element and Zoning in the area. The original concopt of maintaining the majority of the Specific Plan area as light indu3ttlal has been invalidated by the number of general, plan amendments , zone changen, environmental assessments, and subsequent raGirlential projects approved by the Planning Commission and City Council within the Specific Plan area . The repeal of the Specific Plan would not r impact future development because existing general plan land use designations and zoning would regain in place. Applicable development standards governing land uoe3 are contaiAVd in Division 9, not, In the Specific Plan. New projects can :be accommodated through appropriate review of general plan fsmendments, zone changes, precise plans of street alignment, etc:. , 012 a ceae-by-case basis as has occurred in the past several Y'ua`rs. g=,�,., RECO�NDATSCIH: s Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt and ' recommend to the. City Council adoption of Resolution No . 1382 to repeal the Taylor and Bosch Specific Plan (Specific Plan No. 73-1) . ; ; _ a {1_ Staff Report - 6/16/87 M2- 8358d) f' S L �•v L.,:.. � t +/ f; j' 'JA'•\ram` 1 : s laic aim, P Beach' 8 scitic Plan , 2 . kesolution:,No 4594 Ttiaolution Ito. 5037 ` i ;t . G�aneral plan `Aendments and Zane- Chsngum within �tp4clfi�c 'Plan Areay . KA&Lipikla r , ;I i .r t' 5 l I • 4 i1t�t. ��r.11l l tis r.: o �r;iy.`��! RESCWTIbN N+D. 4590 ';:A 'RESOLUTION OF: MHR ,CITY COUNCIL 07. THE CIxY OF V)HUNTINaTON BEACK ADAPTING NZOA.TIVE DECLA= RATION. 77-112 AND APPROVING AXLNDED SPECIFIC PLAN NO, 73-1 WHEREAS after notice duly given f3ur'Juant . to Qov+rrrment Code Section 65500, the Planning Co=ission of the City of Huntington Beach held a► public hearing on , Negative Declaration 77-112 and amendments to Specific Plan No. 73-1 ' 6 , •Jei pteuber 20 1977 which was continued to September 29, 1977 and Octo' ber• 40 4 1977 , and concluded on October 18, i977 ; and Such amendments to Specific Plan No. 73-1, yin addition to. closing Taylor Drive , would acco.tplish the following : (a) bring the land use of the specific plan into conformity v1th the General Plan; !,b) remove the burner zone on Taylor Drive from Delawire ' Street Past ; (a ) incorporate Precise .Plan of Street Alignment No. 74 -3 '(Redondo Circle ) whIch serves the existing duotrtal development at Talbert Avenue and the railroad; and extend Redondo Circle 330 ;Celt east to intersect a proposed unnamed ' north/Douth street to serve the industrial property ; and give oft February 21, 1978, after notice dulyin purauant ' to t auver=unt 'Code .Section 65507 , hearing was geld before this Council on Negative Declaration 77 112 and the proposed amend- saento to Specific Plan No . 73-,1, and the matter having been consideredi the Council finds that the proposed amendments would not have a significant anvironmental effect and that such amend mat to (a) vould bring the specific plan Into conformity with the Lane' Use Element of the aenera . Plan; (b) are necessary to the ordarly and a ficient flow of traffic; (c ) are neceszary ear the pros+ervation of -the health and safety of the inhabitants of the city; and (d ) are niucesvary for the orderly deverlopuetnt K {T:ahb rZ• J` of the, community NOW fitiU01iS, 53 T ' RUOLVID. by ,the Cit•r Caicnail ' eft. the City" of kuntington Beao�h rue follows : • y 1. TAat Heg�itive L1 o larotiotti +7]=312 let reb ► appro rd, ,: `2. That the a rt ants to Specific PUn ro. �3-1, on fil• , In 'o f, to of,'tbe City. , ,are hereby aAProytd. . Chat ` the ma designat '` p , ed Exhibit, "A," attached -hereto and made a part, hereof by reference j ie hereby "edopttd ass past • '`. of azaendsd sp eoific Plan No. 73-1. 4 . Resolution No. . 3810 and all' resolutions in conflict herewith`.are hereby, repealed. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the :City of :. H4ntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held the Lot, day of r . �.�rL.� - j 1978 . ATTEST: Ayp.cOVED. AS To ° FOR: • City MGFR 7H y ttorn or REVIEWED AND APPROVED: INITIATED AND OPIM 00 t Adminiatrator g` riator ` I 2- l , w w roe m.•ee ` .Oir�Iw ♦ • aa ' r T rww �"r fi a a� �' ��iu.�w��.�r.y.�i�i•� a � a a � r •■..; .ww�r w � Iw.ub an w w� k a 4w�.e m�r m.r ter.r u..�.w ewq�wvm""sow �w as ow ow imp Vmd"m ow 4M one oarmpaw a ►�aa � �+w.�r. orw a•�r ea�a: :��..::.__ • ,array .a.a -.-----,.---- � . ♦ �a �a+ _ � � A s�4t.rra+. ww�t w •� •I, a�� aa� i i��++a•..Mw.wr rri•w � w�ss�M • i a s �� ow �, • ' ��•�� a - �af�f��li�itleit�ltilt��►lii w tflt#ftl�.11tft!!!f'41t1t! !lull Bill,- as �l1;�ilitlli#fhi� �I�IfI �•• Ifrr�rrll��t��#r��`li�1l� 3 it tl1l1#4t4tt!ltiltill li iftlltl!!llff+Jis!!l � � '� 11 � f111##11#1ii1414111f � �� ' #i � tlltt11fa1rliiilllel 1i , i11�11111;It4i1#Iltl fr #1 ` •II#Illllllli4l#it111 tr� it •'llittll11141i1ii1l11 kN 1111niff- !tl111lf.tlllll�I 11t111#il ttit4lliiiit�i�r4�lt1�>I[ . N lf��ititltt�l��11111# � '�' 1111.1i1�lI��r►R�.iii� •it �l i tii . •1 I I lull I !il �illtlllt #i► Illtfil t i(� It! �i ADDENDUM , .t M du�oat to thr< ..Ta for anbel S ific Pl+un 7� 1, origina�tly aop 3.t 9: ,�. Pebiruary :22j , 1978 th* ,Ruatingtoh' Biaoh'.Cfty Coimdil, adoptod RWi►ohbtfon N6' . 4590�, which :i�orpor tea the follc�iri.aq a aeu ienti to,::ttie .Teylor .and brad% SPrcific : Plan: LAIR? USE 1) fgirdreii fines itidustria? 'and "co rcial l nd .ta 16w-' slat city residential' to achieve donformanca . Frith, th* C,*nssrAl ,.Plan Lind Use U laeunen t 2) Modifies configuration of park situ. 3) Re mo,vex buffer zone along . Taylor Drive east of Delaware Street. M . .CIRCUTATION Street kli nme:its 74-31' Redondo Circle 1) incorporates Precise Plan of St q 2) Ex tends Redondo Circles 330 feet East . to ihimrsact..Kith &.,.proposed unnaiaed .North/South str®at :that r�i.13. strrra industirial grape Y. leacated South of Taibert lwanve and` North of t. ie' nark site. 1--'� Resolution No. 4590 ar�d Exhibit A,.' Proposead .Amndaant tothe Taylor and Beach Specific Plain, are attached fox . ref erenc: , f CALIOU"iJ► . CI' `Or' UMTrf1E�t�lt VIA" ALICIA' K. bIMMMK' the illy allwttiil, gaaallfi►" Gity Clack of tbi City ate Ytuatto oar SaiNeti, aid as-otiicio Ciark o! Ow City ,Council of said .Citi der bttab r �cs iti drat the thole a�i of 4embera of the City Council of the City of ltuatinaton beach ia. setrta; that the !'orioiag rsolu'tios wee PiNed and adopted br the atfireratiw vote of awra, majority City thr►a� a of all-the mare of •aid Gou>Kit at a re thereof held i�+lar , matti°= ereo *n the 2 2rrd day' o f '.Fab ._ _, ,, 197,� , .,, _• 'e' clot follariaS vote: AYLS: Councilmen: Haettlett Wisdnr,' Cuen# Gibbet `Siebert, 5h�enkman. Pattineon � t�iS s Cavrac i loran: . - Mond � AaISt2R: Cou�c►ctleren: , .r 1 City Clark :ami exwoffic'i.o Clink • o f :the City Couacil oU tha City of Huat:ngton beach$ California `'' , a ..uva.•xye.. 5« i R1 NO . .. • �3 QN' 'Its:itHSOLtJ'fIQK�'al 'rNs CITY `C4iJNCIL or;`•#MS. C'Mr I�UNTINO:g1i H8J10N APPNOYINO 'AXZNDZD' SPIDCI?IC PLAN Noe, "Wl Y WIMFMA3, arte:r notice duly given pursuant to day„ rnment eotibn 65500 , '.the Planning, comais sion�, or- the City or Cod* tr ,• Huntington, Reach held a pubi ib hearing . on an eAcersdoirit to Specific Plus No. 73-1 on June 16, 1981 ; and JliNendnent to 3peaifio Plan No. 13�4 Is neaeeaarY to :Ln-- ' prove the circulation of trarfic due to olorura of I'tyloto Drive , im liaen' ted by adoption of Resolution No. 4550, un hebrmar 1g7a'; and Ora 'July 20, 1981 , after notice duly given pursuant to Goverrment Co . de saati.nn . 65507 , hearing was held;,�bsfors phis Council on' the pr�opo t to Specific Plan' � ned amendment 73-1 ' to' re-•„ . -Taylor Drive, � , move 'the barricade "on Tay an the natter having been , + considered , the Counoil Find& that such proposed amendseent "is - ( a) necessar to the orderly and efficient flow of y � traffic; ( b) necessary ror the preservation of the health and safety aC ' the inhabitants of the city; and (c) neaerrnary for `the orderly deve26prnent or the cortsunity , NOW, THEREPOR E s BE IT RESOLVED, by the Gity� Cqunail of the _ ' City or Huntington Beach as follows: 1 . That amendment to Specifio Plan No. 73-1 ; on file In the aftice or -the City Clerk, Is hereby approved . 2 . Zhat the map , de&ignated Exhibit A , attaahad hereto and made A part horeot" by rarerenco , .ia hereby adopt&I as part ' or amended Specific, Plan No. 73-:. 3. 6xo on tlict herewith are hereby repealed. .t 3/7/81 •- . '.. . ,.,, .:. '..r 1 • ,'.l.:. .. . . � .I . !. '/'. /•rr1•�•r' rr. r;::w♦r+•1.M.I� VwhM.d►r.y.• r '.w.,'1'1 i PASSED AND.':ADOPTED ay the City ,Council of the City, of , of Wntinjg :ort teach aC a ul r kttLit'tig thereof hold 'an"',` he80 dsy of upt4wfr Mayor s A7"EST: AP PROVED As TO ?ORM100,0010 • �, � , wf III ty C I a rk city A tatter , RRviarm AND A"k)V= s INI' UTID AND APPROM: ,. ; •� i . - 1 - tX Adm •Crat re�cta�r o Devo opment 3c ry is ss • 2. � •..• /.r . ♦• • ... •�.r•rr-. . •••M•- . 1 . • . N•• ♦u�•.,w►•a.• .,.►. w�•�.,,rww •.•.+�.►.w.•w/ l• i, 's { ♦ rlZ ,liTA'tR'S Ov.'cALIv M1k7-- CITY.1*01PARMUMM '31 i ALICI N. i sir � �e: . `lfw ct r i Clork Of tbo City of ilwetLasts bsa h, s+ri , ff it'.f4,ClerMi 4t tlWe 1 City"CouOeil o! Baia City, `do 1eeMljr cOrti'Y tlwit tae dM14r �ri�s of r sous of tvia"City, camcil, of tAa Ci`tjr of afttl eater DGash t1 s4"',Mi ' that the f to "'I rti , . .rso � re' oo . a; �. .� �' .�►e.a ti� � �s1ri�.Wci.Or vista of ion" tlwt s ma jOcitr Of`"411 tMs' rmbec• of "Id City +Camcit lit s carslit ,; _, ; ,,,.,;_ swOti , tborsOai ,liil� an tba ,,,' ' Of f 1� the gOj1llO'L "Otst . AYI1: Coyoellso • r P ti F' Ww's. Still Conic i In": r AIW=f i CMIOC 1�L i City C14'14k mad• ex-officto-Ctrrk ' of tb4 city" cowbill Q, tba CiI.- af Muwt1w1kdft`Uiwk, 'C tit`otais S rlre frir !!�. 1!tttn�+t+:l is ttkr�st IMoft11e{t�nt ti o� frk �R this oflrtr.' .' 101y i rk bad FA.Oflkl* Ckik'ac. pity `mot unniFol t1� MY of diti*" ftkh, l • i M1•R IKE MAN low folios go his •/ 41a/ i/�'►err Von wina =11m lm it �r�s sts I ogs .r 40" sw, gem r s r r f /ar /+n W ang :0 ss e® sopswas , comom • 1• r, still !� t M 11iT1Il��iuTit �141 a• i.. . t� Kim ttl�wf�•gMt a- t1Mtf tAAL ` i �y� ` n��i=r•'•�=s�r.. �..•�•r�.S.1'1��..'�" ter- �� 114 5. ' y �«..-wir•..-_t� S.S.?'.► r I ACRE PARK 317E 7l / ' 1 ' ► 1 1 f ' 1 1' t�l At ��lulsttlt•till►�tss1•Ntrcf/�si,�iu.``��.gsrt+�rft1� '��- �G�1:•,i .�rT•• - atltltlNftl 1i1111Nft1Jl11 11tJtlittt31h1ItQ l = itsStslt ��tfs� _+a--r+ qLr IN1 111t1t/. 1 /.� •�H •N • 11f IUUiu•ya11+ t� -_•y+< .�, ii�� •ram - - - _ - .. ji i i•i w�lw-,Tirw�--a••-r•r• •� � �_ � - It ki ti Y 1 I t t ! t 1 . • ! t 1 r *}•-- ----- -- i• jam- �r. 1 � ' t��i i . �a AA/Z.irsT�� a• • AA �{, l ,•l.,A� r r a► r r L r r r. � �_.�. yy .» �C;> :•�t,��' � •`. antauliatilig'Mill Ban Mfs� ��ar�iasa��aa�oie�t�'K.o� � / t tme MP �l�ts`' .. 't Bill/ ♦•. �� 'a' � T� = • r r+ rr-�r•w r•r ii.� 1 1 It . 1 .iF CF c MI—A 1 RA �� . G ' C2 �I will c2 1-41-A C4 ! ' ~ M1.A s aaa f �; C4 R! j~ 19 . . 1100 ' M77 7 ., . Q)RI- �A {, C4 . C ARl s: CA 1 R � e F- c2 CF-R .,,,._ r,, . C2 ix WA WA 1 RI _ � NCI-A , '�•-s+t R�i'c` _ <it - CF- � RI- - �dA UALI H I do untirtan =be rn divsian • V � - TAYLOR-AND �BEAG7t� , SPECIFIC PLAN a. August 1975 , " As Adapted by the Paann3.ng Commission OrtotPr 2,, 2973 4 .s Prepared by HuntIngton. ,Beach Planning Department , a , c7W 1. , f t , 1 i �tl iti i t r 1j. Contents Page .: section One: Introduction l ` 1 . 1 Purpose '1 1 : 2 Sped efc- Plan Area l BRckground Siary 1 1 :4 Suisana ry :of :RecoiUi'e` da t ions 5 Section Two: Existing Physical Conditions 7 2. 1 Existing Lard Use 7' -; 2 . 2 •Zoning . 2 : Master Plan 7 2 . 4 Circulation S • io Three ; � Problim Assessment 12 3 : 1 ' ?he �Eiistih' •.School 'Site 1 .'3 . 2 Non 'Compatibility !Between tha Mist e- r. Plan '12 and Zoning', 3 . 3 The Existing Park Site 12 . 3.4 Taylor Drive 13 n -actions ltSectio oitr Speciffc Plan � n 4 . l Land' Use ;Chsngos ,4 4 . 2 Zoning Changes 14 ` ; 4 . 3 Street Alignment 1I 4 . 4 Buffer Zone 17 I , t Su,amary Table 22 ; 5ettion Five: Implementation 23 f '5 .1 °Specific: Plan. Adop%ion 23 :5 . 2 Nark Sits Acquisition Z3 5 3 Taylor. Drive Closure 23 5 . 4 New Street Alighxent Acquisition 24 5 . S Suffer Zone —, , t 24 x5 C 6 Phasini g Progress Appendix t ',• f T t r , �r �1�LIST Of` t '�;� IF�ES 1 Specific Plan krea Vlcinity Aiip 2 °'Z Speoific Plan, A'r lea -Boundaries S Ezis t ing Land Use ;. Exlstirig Zoning g 5 Exist'ing Master, Plan 10 6 Land [1se Changes ,1 S 7 Zoning Changes 16 8 'Taylor Drive Closure : Phase '18 .s 460 r 9 Taylor Drive Closure: Phiise '2 19 10 General Design' Concept of Buffer Zonr 21 , L1 Phasing Program Chart i JJ, i �iMl ilk _ RESOLUTION* - .. N0. 1 1 A RESOLUTION OF .THE „PLANNING COMISSION O1: 111E CITY- OF HUNTINGTON REACH, . CALIFORNIA RECM)ENDMG APPROVAL OF 'SPECI 1'I C PLAN K0. :73=1:• WHEREAS, . the i'l anii iiid Coned ss ion' 'of the City of, tauntington' 'Beach desires to adopt Specific Plan' No. 73. 1 amending the exissting 4laster Plan of Land .Use for the purpose of approving all specific recoixendationai as outlined and/orillustrated within the context of the Taylor and Beach Specific Plan Document pertaining to the area bounded by Talbert Avenue on the north, Beach Boulevard on the east, Taylor ,Drive on ' the south and the Southern Pacific Railroad on ' the west; and WHEREAS a public hearingon adoption of said specific' Pplan was }'field b the PlanningCommission on `October . 1973 Y , . , r / in accordance with p,.-ovi,sions 'of the State Government Codc; and WHEREAS , the Planning Commission of the City of Huntington Beach is adopting said specific' plan , in order to : Y . Promote the health, safety , welfare and con venience of the general public; x . Serve as a general guide for the development of ., public gnd private lands ; 3 . Provide an authentic source of information for residents and investors of the c! ty; ,. 4 . To obviate the menace to public safety and property values resulting from inadequate coordination and planning . NOW, THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of Huntington Beach hereby .adopts, � .. said Specific Plan No, 73. 1 of the City of Huntington Beach ; HE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that. the Specific Plan No. 73- 1 is recommended for adoption by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach as nn official Specific Plan of said city. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Coma lssicn of the City of Hu' nti ngton Beach , Cali fornia on the 7.nd 'day of { October , 1973 by the following roll, call vote : AYES: Geiger , Brazil , Higgins, Kerins , Wallin Ao le NOES Porter ' Y ABSENT : !lore ABSTAIN: None i`i ELM—.(.�:a.•iUV—.�. . "'uLA�l:�:l.++ti�tuM-...�...,.....�.....•+ev t+r.t r-- a�.... .....+...`-•+.� t` r j S r �• a 1! .ti - r `'r r JJrIIf � .y., rV ,1.. 4 ' •�: _ Wei r cr Se ir�nnn Secretary, , . . r. �ChA3 w ) • 1 • �i I� , i Z, r •;�yr WSd;,�Y f,�> w e i r f - r. r t .'4 f t,. �,Cd rr 'i ,} r•.i: •.,a! YS ^.♦ is ,, , 3 / ` w INTRQ6I1CTION 1 , 1 Pur ose '•'. ."The rimar ,,,� P y purpose a�f this document is to. develo a in .4pc�cific -pian af; the; Area defined Sirb-section 1 . 2 • h*rr*tofore ie'feirred- to' as the 'ISpecifi.c. ',Pxan Arex" . l. a ;Sgecific Plan Area The area refexred to as the, Specific Plan,Area .is located within , the central vicinit Of Huntington , Beach . See -rricinity map Figure 1 The Specific Plan Area encompasses approximately ,80 acres and is bordere'd by Talbert Avenue -on the north;'-Beach. Boulevard on the east, Taylor Drive on tho south and the Souther* Pacific Railroad,- on the crest . (See Specifit.,PLan area map Figure 2) I3 Summa y Background On March ;6, 1973 the Planning Cot+uaissibn approved Precise Plan `(of Street Allinment No . 73=1 A ternate 1-C. (See ,, appendix) Present rat ' the meet Ong , were -representatives of the Five Points Homeoxne' rs' Atsociat ion'. ,. Due to an earlier, directive by the Planning Commmission to • investigate the ,possibi laity of relocating the 'Taylor Drive park . and school sites , .members of the, 41om►eowners ' Association were under-the impression that -the Commission 's Precise Plan action was foT site relocation purpose . ., The Five Points Homeowners ' Association presented a petition o the Planning Commission and R e eatiou and Parks Commission. On the premise that the. development of the park site appears to be a reality the following requests were Made as stated , in he petition : 1. No further delay interfere. with timely c.ompleti.on of this long overdue ratter. 2 . The park be constructed on the prosent site without further consideration to adjoining properties 3. Work begin immediatelyto allow comnaencament of ` a contract by July I, 1973 . " The park was tentativelyy scheduled for design �,by (July 19 3 . .. However, since the Taylor Drive park site us Bart of .a; package�'af parks scheduled for bids , the idding' could not occur until, approval of a portilt by 1th�' :Cattatal. Cost7�i�cSAI� . ' .. )Z OWAGE CWff �WXXOOWA 1 �.� � tom► 1 � . 111 SPECi FTC . PLAY` AREA , F MAIMS 'Si Pi Re ' Re FIGURE IFICPLAN V 1%wo HTY M R# 6. • kw 2. -i,:?J A'. �..:.�:i4: ef. � v.. ,.'..:,� ..''Z.hS.?6SEkwwr�stir�lJA.r .:-.:' �`., ...�MIrIfMT.N�+.♦w. _ ..�,.. - � �• - t a AMLow , 14 CF M, e . AJO- ' 1 • 1 i • • .fir.+ • � •' • , � A .0 s• .. �-•—.- ` ` 1 r QAfrt\d F t GURE SAM&MC I FIC PLAN AW � ,: • ' I 3 "IffC bicidi AM S �-.In'- Apr &:1,;1973,n thg co astal; �Commiss'ink 'iss+aed, a permir ` to the "M.ty. of Wint-inNton Desch approving the parks and thus the City could pursue bids -for park- develapinent. 5 6u,e t.0 'the "uncertainty of whether . the nyI , , Arlti�e school 11' , • site Kould_ be constructod::ahe , park site,` i 's:.' a was tempo- > ` raYxly; hal-teed . < . .: ndBT u U { ' � ri'�`iiicti;on �of the `Ocean .Yiew Sc-.Schoo.l ,; Dis irct , , the schorict 's ' staff p-rocced6d in attempt�ng' 'to iresolve the disc of site issue . I T�he� �schaol� district contacted: the State about deleting ,,t,1e :norther y . f i..ve acTc . portio`n of the ' school site , but the. 5t:ate, indicated that: they., would not .be 1h; Eavor of r such an action _and suggested that the; school district , retain al1-.1,5 acres The =distract then inwes t i a ted acqui ri ng parcels,.`io . the east of the present site, but found- them too .expeasi ve . After_ informal 'discussions between the staff- of 0 e ' school:. distr1,ct, and city ah:out the possi.bilityr of, the city ;acquiring' portions of the school ,si to in exchange for. portions of the prt�rk site ,' the school district 's staff agreed not ` to `pursue the swap issue until some indication ,from the city was received.. On March 9, 1973 . the Planning sraff . developas n series of alternate plans for the area. .►1lternattve. 1 Phis wottld retain the status q'uo . The Quxat modified through the cooperation f t ' � �ctinfi �l par couon , oe developed as is g p on b�etwee'n' "the school district all city. f ternative 2 The park could be develo ed to p kir ;Al i all . or part o aylor.,Drive frontage between the railroad tracks and the school site . Alternative . 3 - . This ,would . involve:., x_ land swap between the sc ool iistrict and a private property► `owner. The _ district would trade the north five acres of their site for,; five ,acres of property to the west . The .park s i to . , could 'then be developed as is or in some ' other configura'- tion through .'cooperation between `the school district, and the city. On . March 13,, 1973 the Planning Commission approved Alternative 1 'as the referred Configuration. ' .The , . .Commission directed 't a stnf.. to pursue the matler�' with . .Commission School District Board and . to investigate, acquisition of a ' parcel or parcels to the eaat of the park site . An'n :It nc YA , 1973', 'the scno d3s`ol trIzt Beni' a .notice �,tv tltic C i ty 's . l acrbation :and Parks Department; -of fcrin the. ' entire schoo site fo rurchas 1 The Rccrcntion and fatrks .Department recommend t tin was , to acquire. `2 . 5 s o t schoolsx xp�r cir s he to to' a �d "the Taylor .Dirt ve park s'i t-e 'to` five.-acres. � On Jurie 19 , 1973 'the Planning Commi'ssi.on ai-irectod the .: stiff_ topursue a ione change of the,,a.park' site " to. l�il in conjunction with the school site,``zone change. On 'duly. 109 1973. the " Planning staff submitted : three alternative plans of land use for thi' Taylor. and Beach ' area . Each plan was . basea on disliosrt. of 'the school _ite . After evaluating .the three alternatives'; ,'the, s t.oinmission favored Alternate: 2. ". (Refer-Ao Figure 11 �i'n the Appendix) The Commission. then directed the staff-to prepare a ' spccifir. plan that . wou]d coordinate all ; changes Y into one package . In addition , other reco3niendatidns were to be included. Thus , the Planning staff, has. progressively 'pursued 'the",� Commission ' s directive and does hereby submit the spec i fic plan docurient for adoption. t It should be pointed oust at this time , that the. Kunt.ington �:. Beach Recreation and Parks Commission has r' cent ly recom- ��-',' mende'd that a new park site be obtained . Basically, the Recreation and Parks Commiis' ion -reconmends that "a five acre park site f-ronti,ng on "the :. south side ; of Ellis between Huntington and Delaware Streets be pursued ' . _ as first priority for the: five points neighbo`rhoody . with the five acre site previously .recommended, fronting on. they north side of Taylor Street ,- be the ' second pr iari tyl% The reasons given _ for the reeo 8 ihn y' �, ' mmrndccl , than r of the local of the park site is outlined t.n a rmemorandum seat to , th+e w Planning Commission of rlug'ust 1 .1 , 1973. (Memorandum is included in the Appendix) 1 . 4 Summary of - Recommendat ions 1 Redesignate the deleted Taylor Drive school sitc'`�for M industrial use . 2 . Designate the ensteri??• section between Talbert dnd Taylor, n { anent. to tic commercially -zoned area alang Beach Eoulevaru , for industrial use . �. 7�•1T�41�STr•M••r 4a,+►� wllu�Wliti�,.w.k++e. % W•'*. •L1w1GYaN.i�..n �ilM r'�%'SYili!� - . 3. lista i`s i ° s buffer zon'e'• .betwe�it nd``ustr a� �rontuge I along Ta lor( Urive'• any -r .%dariti:al.,arCiis south af , I•-1' ', � �_' '-;+ '� `'� �} �. - t I .•�.• � _ • ,<. :' •• , :'.. .':,•. I r kip ' s o encompass a rectangularpark � acres. t j fywjT try' }•, -Approvq a 'new 10 ,foot' street designs t}fin ;An'', no"rtti °� 1 W eas te'r1jr �se'ction of the .spec ea. e .sa h oxi oa el'b Ta l bn�3 feet w stc�of Beach Boulevard. , • , 1 l , • �f • , t t1 •- r r I, ) y • ;4f • "' .' • - _ >, fit.. , ' 1 , Section 2 0: SUMMARY OF EXISTING PHYSICAL CONDITIONS 2 :1 Exi s t ing Land Use t ` With the exception of land uses along Beach Boulevard and t->,o residential sites , all of the parcels wlrhin the Specific Plan area are vacant . (Refer to Figure a for existing Land use) A total of thirteen single family dwelling units are presently located within the above defined area . Eight (8) are located in the �- northeast section of the area facing Talbert Avenue . Five (5) are located in the: southeast section of the area facing Taylor. Drive . Based on a windshield survey , four out of the thirteen dwelling units are in relatively good to excellent -- condition . The remainder are in poor to fair condition needing minor or major improvements . The easterly section of the area is presently occupied by some commercial facilities and one single fanily j dwelling unit . South of Taylor Drive is an established residential neighborhood . A new residential development is in the process of completion in the southwt.�t section of the Specific Plan Area . •� 2 . 2 Existinj. Zoning 1 The Specific Plan area is presently zoned into six different categories . Ar. inventory of zoning categories withinthe above defined area is provided in Table I. Table 1 1 Existing Existing Zoning Acres MZ 23. 07 RA 15 . 74 CFE 15 .06 C4 12 . 41 C2 3. 99 CFR Z . so (See Figure 4 for existing zoning) 2 . 3 Master Plan Within the Spe�:i fic, Plan area, the existing', Mis ter Plan 'has designated the following acreage allocati'onx" br Muster Plhn category: n 1 1 f, OF I CEtT J i VACANT � VACANT ;. i .-'r CF - E I � VACANT VACANT � CF•R ' VACANT GROTH Q CHEVROLET SINGLE FAMILYWILSON REVEL� �q '_ s � � FORDmcmr. OR i H I I I I 1 -u SINGLE FAMILY WOMES Aa FIGURE EXISTING LAND USE • r,.P sp" fK } i ard�a t6y6 & beech 1t1!#I!1 1plti N1��rlill:atlut } • ISSIMMKIII - itlllfiilllll mittlt lttyyllglttlt � Iltttlllt�I1ltt�! � . Milli ltYl1N1111t 1! f 1iH11111i 11 t"1111111 l 1!!��11NuttiillN . ��, , • • IiitlltliK . oils Nltl�l IIr111lit .. son Sa�irC � 9 r _imn . S� MIM answer •� �� w Z - a"ps �s ' Wi =� 2 a�irrtir�w�is.�r�+i •� I - women NOW wsw• r�M��Ulri h, urrarw� • t� Ono Now Room woolso 004mok a=@am �}rttlt�fMm �� an 1lMItRt�IA+TlItli !llftiilf�'�!liltitr _ '* ffilillr�}.�11 111 #�� A�t .. Hl:rt1lr11�itA11t111�1 rr Nltrnt;tr tnrlrl�rt� �� sltltrtftt 1flrlrirn� �ftt �tr�1r 1r�run� itii It 111(0 It? 11 I),111li it fill�1 „ sills { * • _ U111" felt"! lllrilffr�;UEiI�Us!'t� �. . 111" !111111"Itt' ' t!M t r twfnt``�i ■ ittli rwi iiis�i�►�s+..• .a ,a TabXe 2 Exlls�ting Master Plan Lanit (Ise Categories Category !Acres Industry 23. 0, Commercial 16 . 0 Public Uses School Site 15 . 0 Park Site 1 . 5 Undesignated 16 . 0 (Refer to Figure 5 for existing Master Plai-i of the area) 2 . 4 Circulation Bordering the Specific Plan area on the east is Beach Boulevard , a major north-south highway . Access to Beach Boulevard is through 'Talbert Avenue , Taylor Drive arse3 Ellis Avenue . Main Street, a major arterial , als© connects to Beach Boulevard at the intersection between Ellis Avenuo , Beach Boulevard and Main Street . i Talbert Avenue presently provides east -west access to Goldenwest Street and Beach Boulevard . f: 11 is Avenue , westbound from Beach RouleVard , antis approximately where Huntington Street intersects with Ellis . However , Ellis Avenue is sefteduleel for ex ensi a to link with Gothard Street eastbound from -Goldenve t Street , Currently , Taylor Drive 'lso provides access to Beach Boulevard . Upon completion of the r-esidential dcv�lo ment located at the southwest section of the Specific Plan Area , Taylor Driv.- will connect with Carnaby Lane .- i� 1 Y i } Section 3. 0 : PROBLEM ASSESSMENT There are , four major problems in the Soiacific Plan Area . 3. 1 'fhe Existing School Site As mentioned in the ha_kground summary .section of this document, the Ocean View School District has declared the Taylor Drive school site as surplus . M The Planning staff feels that the school site surplus could add an additional. 15 acres of prime industrial land . Furthermore , location of the surplus land is such that by designating it for industrial use , the concentration of surplus lard with adjacent i'ndustr ia11y zoned parcels will enhance the opportunities for future development . 3 . 2 Non-Compatibility Between the blaster Plan and ZLaing The northeast section of the Specific Plan. Area that , is under ignated in the Master Plan should be designated. for industrial development . This specific section is presently zoned RA (Resi3ential Agricultural) but is undesignated in the ISaster Plan. 3. 3 Park Site !� There still exists some uncertainty regarding the size L and location of the proposed Taylor Drive park site . � t As mentioned in the background section , of this document , I the ' Recreation and Parks Commission recommends, that a., new five acre park site be obtained . The site recommended is located on the south side of Ellis avenue between Huntington and Belay, -e Streets . The Recreation and x Parks Commission feels its recommendation is justified for the following reasons : F 111) The topography of the new site would make a better park development and several existing , mature , eucalyptus trees could he retained to add 3misiediate Leauty to the developed site. 2) The central location would better serve both the single family residents and the residents of the existing and future apartnents or planned units to . the south of Ellis . 3) by moving the park `coa . sndustriil •anaq( p ro er y i;� to residentially zoned property the fq �'pC4�414t ion. will be dec.,eased ar,d the , industrial Ac e. crinrged . 12, `j; ,t The ezi s t ing location of the proposed Taylor Drive park ' site is the second priority area that the Park Commission ' recommends „ - However, it 's .,recommendation of this site jAP includes the 'Gommiss ions' earlier request that the park encompass a tote;. . of.,S acres . The Nanning Commission favors the existing, location ,oC '•-=tote proposed park site, encompassing a total or 2 . 5 nacres . 3 . 4 Taylor Drive The Planning staff has rec:ocm anded to the Planning Commission that Taylor Drive be permanently closed to through traffic . This recommendation is based on two k major factors : 1 ) The heavy traffic generatcd as a result of T,zylor Drive access to and from Beach Boulevard ki 1 l be eliminated by closing Taylor Drive . 2) The degree of traffic t,axnrds will be alleviated f., by the closing of Taylor Drive , In lieu of the fact that there presently exists a dwelling that requires access to Taylor Drive at a point where closure is proposed , some interim program Bust be developed . The staff has recommended a plan for both temporary and permanent closure of Taylor Drive in the implementation section of this document. I i • •. .... ..vow, {44^ Section 4 . 0 : SP1iCIFIC,:'PL.1N R"tC0M'tFNDK 1055 . 4 . 1 Land Use Chartge�' ►' The Planning Staff recommends . the following 1 an.l use changes as part of the Specific Plan . 4 . 1 . l That the section wit ! in the Speci fic Plan Jlre.i tit-it is undesitnated in the existing, ;Master Plan and presently zoned RA be designated for light iroiastrial use . 4 . 1 . 26 That the proposed school site referred to ns the Taylor Drive school site be de,l,c:ted from the Master Plan . 4 . . a That the remaining portions of ire school site , other than the portion required as part of the cecdnfigutstion . of the park siti� , be redesignated for light industrial Use . '4 . 1 . 4 That the proposed park site be arranged in a rectangular configuration encompassing a total of . t acres . 4. 1 . 5 That the remaining northern portion of the previously proposed park site that would he lost due to reconfigura - ti.oit be redesignated for ; fight industriao, use 4 . 1 . 6 That al l of the stated reconnende�d land use changes in this scr. tion of the Specific flan be in compliance with , the gra�:;lic designations as illustrated in Fi gut`r G . 4 . 2 Zone Changes The Planning staff recommends the following zone changes ,. as part of the Specific. flan . 4 . 2 . 1 That all presently zoned M1 "Lingt Industrial 1listricts located within the Specific Plan are: be rezoned to ail -A "Restricted Manufacturing District . " ,. 41 . 2 . 2 That the sections of land presently zoned NA " Resi.dent i-ll Agricultural District" within the Specific Plan area be rezoned to MI -A. 4 . 2 . 3 That upon completed negotiations with the school district the portion of land acquired from the school district, as part of the newly conf. i gu,eated park site be .rezoned from CF- E "Community Faicil it ices Educational ni trict" to CF- R "Cor.r.unity Facilities Recreational District , " 4 . 2.4 That the remaining northern portion of the existir g undeveloped, sl 'lo ped Park site presently xaned CF-h be zoned to 14:' . t r t ' ... •.�. 1 j t .r •• ••• •. 1 •.•.r ►.•...►�•.i .�� Y.rww// � .. ....ems. •.�. 0.6•.••. t •.�► '�-• � t►..•.�.li •r r. ,.'.»�. t , � TALBERT INDUSTRIAL j I ND. INDL r ' r f4' • ! �t "� �` ♦ . . •--• aW ..� .. • t-. �C INDUSTRIAL I NO o � .. .� INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL � 5. 0 ACRE PARK SITE GROTH DUFFER BUFFERCHEVROLET ON- acWA UM OR WI LSON T� �c FORD W ") EaEc OR "FIG+t RE �. . I PROPOSED LAND USE h int"tof'1 at1rli�i ,C ''ffr1 *f1f specific p an area. fay�or & 6e0ch r 1 S . L r t 1 ss j♦ r TON L � JL ► +mil * • • o n !, I +A MI _A mi_A -� yi I • a2 CL t r.. CF-R t BUFFER BUFFER rwnl h7177 ~ � to .a ... t I 40 OD DA I ` W( FIGURE 7 AM PROROSED ZONING 9wo if spec c p c h 'araa. aylt r backh �6 That the deleted school site presently zoned CF-E- be re oac,' to MI -A. ` a . Z ;o A minimum .setback oU 45 feet from the prop-trty lip iof all industrial sitov' fronting Taylor Drive shall be set . 4 . 87 . 7 That all of tNe stated recommended zone changes in this secti'vn of Vie Specific Plan document be in compliance with the graphic designation as illustrated in Figure 7 . .1 . 3 'Street Ali&nments Tha Planning staff recommends the fallowing street align- -ient s as part of the Sp ecifi c Plan. 4 . 3 . 1 That a new street be adopted to run approximately 655 feet south from the centerline of Talbert Avenuc ,approx- imately 700 feet west of the centerline of Bead, Boulevard . Thmt the newly adopted street bave a minimun. width of 60 feet . 4 . 3 . 2 That Taylor Drive he cla!�ea -to through tra.ff c approx- imately 660 feet west of the centerline of Beach Boulevard . 4 . 3. 3 That the stated street conditions called for as Dart of the Specific Plan be in compliance with the gran,ie designation as illustrated in Figures 8 and 9 . ..✓` 4. 4 Buffer Zone The Planning staff recor m ends the folluwim- buffer zone I conditions as pa^t of the Specific, Plan. 4. 4 . 1 That a buffer zone be ebtablished 'W'tween the MI -A ' industrial sites fronting Titiylor Avenue and residential � tracts south of Taylor Drive. { 4 . 4 . 2 That the buffer zone run parallel to Taylor ' Arivc and -ma.ntain a minimum ,width, of no less than 15 foot fraim the curb line fruntiny. Taylor Drive . 4 . 4 . 3 That the physical design of the buffer tone be compatible to the proposed park site and the general criteria include lane: forms such -is berms and slopes , landscaping and vegetation and any additional aesthetically pleasing elements that meet approval through , Administrative, Review before the Board of Zoning hd justnents . 4 . 4'. 4 That in any design of the buffer zono , the safetyy , health and welfare of resident and park users must not be dndangcred . . 17 J BLOCK 14ALL *WALK T AYL(if? D R . i raiitat u� � , i •c ti L It •�....•.R....,..-�l Yt Y! it �4 ! , � 1:� t, Ft`GUpE ' •� it '; ..: - CLOSU r"I RE', T)FAM TAYLIN. s it�s be+ash I - BUFFER ?ONE {j `r BLOCK WALL --"2 ,�..--�-•--'� LANDSCAP I NG j -�---_ -----�--- ,PEDESTRIAN WALK TAYLOR DR , BLOCK WALL --L 4Z- SIDEWALK' I T4lN[�1 4/Q t ' CF -E _ •, -iUA�lls-i6lt�-�l�1.��!'� � �I ` LL 4 FIGUREAM)k 9 TAYLOR DRIVECREzPHA%-Lw'ov 2 Fwntingtrr c + t sp cii!i, pwn ,r , . ..wr-,, ,...: .,.. ... .: ...e r, t. ,n♦, d;.!1°.,ear!a'H 1�+.:J 'f-f -ll r7 4 . 4 5 That the desig�l and development of ' the 'buffer zone be the full responsibility of the developer and/or owner(s and that it be so stated as a condition for development of MI - A industrially zoned districts within the •`Speciric �. Plan area 4 . 4 . (1 That ail of the stated buffer zone candit ions in this . . section of the Specific Plan document are applicable, to • the "General" area designated :is the buffer tone in all , of the graphic illustrations presented in this document. A general design concept is illustrated in Figure 10 4 . 4 . 7 That the maintenance of the buffer zone be the full responsibility of the City of Huntington Beach . f , i 'r I a PARKWAY S / BE.DG POS . _ S1BLE . PAnxING I S T .� ,. TAYL0;; URA A, '.�1 I "ELLING i B FER ZONE 5, 10' 45 SETBACK PROPERTY LINE CURB L I NE IPA rr�r+t�� in t CF-E FIGURE 10 CKr'%.o; SECTION OF o"UrFER2CNE +� + � TP IC PI.A�is Alt:A 'I 'LQn?,l"ii1 �:�:istin Proposed ...�.�ni _ 1{�re.� 7 niri r � ____. ,. �, !d1-'al 51 . 37 2;� u7 BA r r y Cf. J p h rr • mo t. �• y y, —R ,. 12; ��•_� . . � ail t •` 12. 1�1 4 � C:? .,� . 'i'c� kal t�' . •rl Pota1 i? , 75 !castor PlerA EXis *1 ng propoaf:(j �as.t - hlm - 51 . 34, � 2j.fr' :r�ci :�, . r,� InI'stry ib 38 comaze rc ial Zo .i:s c0ir.{:.t rs: {a l 1 Public :1303 l • s Pr:b1IC L�54e 5 .0 .. Total 73 . 7S ' I s r, _ 11 t 1 r Section give: IMPLEMENTATION The purpose of this section is to outline stops required to :implement the Specific Plan. S. 1 Specific Plan Adoption The authorization for the adoption of a Specific Plan is given by the State of California under State Planning and Zoning laws , Title 7 , Chapter 3 , Article S . The procedure for adoption of a Specific Plan is outlined in Article 8 and is included in the appendix of this document . S . 2 park Site Acquisition Based on the reconfiguration of the park site, the city will have to acquire a portion of Xand wes 4 of the existing undeveloped park site . Thcrc are two alternatives that the city mzsy negotiate with the Ocean View School Districtt in acquiring the portion of land . The city may proceed in purchasing the land or it may investigate the possibility of swapping land . - �. If the school district agrees to swap the land , the city could offer the northern portion of the existing undeveloped park; si t o in exchange for the portion of school land fronting Taylor Drive . Hawever , if the school district insists that the city purchase the portion of land , the city would still have. the northern portion of the pnrk site to sell in the future . During negotiations with the .Ocean View School nistrlct in acquiring the additional park land , the phasing in of the park site can begin. The design of the Taylor Drive park s1xe can begin as soon as the specific plan is approved . The development of the park should be Able to Commence in the sprung of. 1974 , as this site is in the 1973. 74 budget . 5 . 3 Taylor Drive Closure The staff recommends that the closing of Taylor Drive as a through street to Beach Boulevard should take a two phase, procedure . tt . '1 KIT V'M They 1' ir!.t phase would involve cIosinr. Taylor Drive hue M. in ,aining street ,feces:; for r(`.;+ ts presentty tocatod on the northeast and southeast frontage along Tnylur Drive . The closure could be done by either installing temporary street, barricades or preferably , ending Taylor Drive westbound from Beach Bouievard as a cut -de- sac street . (Seca Figure g) w The second phase would involve permanently closing Taylor Drive from the connecting point between Taylor Drive and fanny Lane . This step would only occur when dwelling units northeast of Taylor Drive would cease to exist as industrial, development would occur . (Refer to s: - Figure 9) In order to avoid an unequal distribution of vehicular traffic , Phase I should not occur until Huntington nrive and Ellis Avenue are fully constructed. To avoid any undue construction traffic on the local streets within the single fani.ly area , Phase 1 should not occur until the park site is fully developed . The present construction of Huntington Drive to Ellis and the near future street improvement of Ellis eastbound to Delaware will provide another means of access to and -- from the immediate residential area to Beach Boulevard. Thus , relieving the otherwise total reliance of vehicular access along Delaware Street. i 5 . 4 New Street Alignment Acgv-isition The staff recommends that the ci ty eater into agrec rients with all, affected parties pertaining to street alignments and dedications . i With re.spect to the precise plan of street alignment No . 73 - 1 , the Planning staff recommends that the city promptly negotiate with the Ocean View School District in obtaining the portion of land needed for right =of-way. Upon completion of negotiations with the affected! )arti.es the Planning, staff recommends that the city should immediately develop a program to provide for street ,. improvements . S, 5 Buffer Zone Tho development of the buffer zone will coincide with � the development of industrial pTopitrties The industrial i properties to the west will probably develop 'first as ; will the western portion of the buffer . Industrial r+ properties to the east and buffer will b'o the Iast.. to ` 24 deveIdi► , It . iti Aifficult to estimate glow rapiJIY it will take for this development to occur . ' Thy ijithi:: tr'tal land absorption rate has been about 40 ncrbs/year for .. the last several years . This year 60 4 acres have peen developed with a potential of 80 acres—by the end of the year . The Specific Plan has provided the basic , ingredients . for making; this area attrnetive for industrial development . The more v.iOrously the City provides for industry in this area the more rapidly it will dn-velap . S . 6 Phasing Program I Fivre 1.0 - A iiWic_stes in sequential and general time frame , development of the Specific Pan area per the recommendations of this doeuncn t . 1 . Specific fir Plan ►'l proved - Adoption of the plan is expected by the end of October 1973 . 2 , Negotiations with School District - Upon adopt0n ! of —the� Sperci t�iz 115 , tTle city can begin negotiationsi with the Ocean View ,School District to acquire the pavk site. 3. Park Site Develo2ment - upon adoption of the Specific ian f des ! n of the park site caii begin and cons t ruc - t: on underway by Suring of 1974 , d . ,New Street Pro gram - (11pan adort .ion of the 13pecif is Man , the Cite should take the necessar), S:ePs to insure street access for any industrial properties that would dcvelcp. .. S . Iiunt inS2on Stree - Ilunt ing;ton Street is tinder construction to provide ncc.e:�s through to Ellis and should be complete within six months . 6. Ellis Avenue - Improvements have begun on Ellis Avenue , Complete improvements between. Delnware -- and Gothard St:gets should be in by the and of 1574 . 7 . Phasin I - Closing Taylor DriveUpon completion of the par - site , huntingtnT-Ktreet. and Ellis Avenue , Taylor Drive can he closed as inxiicatrci .. in Phase I (See fig . 8 , Pg . 18) . S . New Street Construction - As industrial properties evc lop and access is requi red , the streets from Ta lbort Avenue will have to be developed. • sl • i 9 . Industrisll Development Western Section - With improved - access , suTi crtnt al industrial development opment should occtsr in the w:;stern portion. 10 . '3uf Cc Zone Western Section 11evelopment of the lit t1'fer would occur s imu taneous ly uith ' i ndus trial deve lopmont 11 Industrial Development , Eastern Section - By ' 1978 develop - ment o L e •astern Section -sliould begin, Within a short period after , 801 of the industrial land in the Specific Plan could be absorbed. As mentioned previously, City policy could significantly affect industrial development in this area . 12 . Buffer Zone• Eastern SecA- ion - As industrial properties develop , the buffer zone cast at the park site would develop simultaneously . 13 . Phase 11 - Closing _Taylor Drive - Upon total development of tte industrial Yam--and completion of the buffer zone ,- Taylor Drive court be closed as indicated in Phase 11 (refer to Fig . :1 , Pg . 19) This would complete develop- ment, of the Specific Plan area as recommended in this - document . i 6 7 , 2 , ` Enter I.-,L., A Gene or Fi aneiy! [wwurce both Streets TAYLOR AVENUE SPECIFIC PLANS --_-.f PHASING PROGRAMS New le mos. 8 flew � I 4 Street ..__ Street Program Constructive --. F ieurc 1 1 t"Otfations =. Z with School District ; 1 7 9 iZ 13 Specific Park Closing Industrial WI Partial Closing~ Plan . .. . Yr. Site 5 •�:!or l yt. Devel. L..` frs� or total Taylor .'pprove d Level. = Drive itan�c 5Qct3on Ind. Develop. Drive P2tasC I Phhaza;e ZZ II 1976 1978 I � 5 5 10 12 Buffer Buffer Hufttingtor f Ellis ?ire ?rune St- at Rite. Weatrrn Dastarn Sectsan section :.97t► 1978 _ i , A P76INDIX f 1,, M t u. t i � 4�• � ; 1 r i +. • � t a r r r._ L. •`tt Id. da• .1 •�•'.'. i � r .,:..�r,r .� <. 1.1; � ,�li t �, rf :t. t 4�is `t' t � �.•„ ,u,ta t i• � � � i � tl::j Aia L_, •••Ny• •�.•1 . •• ♦• 1•••i S •. 1 �t •+ TAl • I1tT AYE ••y -44 t r L.. : . . .• .-A ;.. • . • • , Wt. I f IT+ U F r !J(S iLF fl MW l.�l..�..��-•- IRt L.,+S w ul ONTAA10 ► , _ 9%IESLC on . It••ret�lrrl�e.11rs1>ztrr•I�.wwntneaa . PRECISE PLAN 73--1 • ADOPTED BY' PLANNING CQMMI S I0N MtNTINQM.DEACM MANNIN GE" FIGURE 1 . 29• 1 i i• to • f 1��}� nil II i . . . f • �.. ... s IT r • : CF - E �► \+Vii'ii ~' MD. INDI -UFFEP. L �Uf z S CF_R ter»Ta. FI-R ` Q�1 ._ ...� , —OVE DEC Y . A LTERNTE 2 , jULY 1973 z , : , a zf CITYk,� HUWn1 i' el " INTE R-DEPAR TMEN7 COMMUAJICQTION. Iph •4lf�MM.h - - pX,1nnir.g Coamission From Reorehtion S Parks Comma unlon aubjle � Taylor street Park Site Cate June` 231 1973 I At. their last regular meeting, the Recreation and Farks Commission recommended that funds allocated for purchase. of a neighborhood park adjacent to Robinwood School in 1973�?�a budge* be used to purchase an additional 2 . 5 acres of land ro the O Yi v School. District 's Taylor cite and to �' m fe Ocean � Y improve 0 through trade and sale, the park orientation to the existing site . The •Cammission also recommended that w enter into a joint-powers agreement with the Ocean V 1ew School . District to develop and maintain a 2-acre neigLbor hood park on Robinwood School . See attached .rap layouts of the proposed sites . Respectfully submitted , Nora Wort secre* ry Recreatiun & Park Co=lssian t.i W: a Fttachmen.:s CC ' Five Points Homeawaijers Assn. City Administrator Recreation and Parks Co.".mission 10MUSLACH IMTER•DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION Ott is H. B. Planning Commission From H . B. _Recreation Parks Car-nAnsion Subject Taylor Street Park Site Date Jul; 20, 1973 Mr. Ed Selich , Chief or Advanced Planning, made a prenentution to the recreation and Parka Conmission at their last regular meeting of .Tuly 11 , relating to the action taken by your honorable body in regard to the Taylor Street neighborhood park realignment . The Recrea- tion and Parks Commission moved their original recomamend- ation to the Planning Commission re uestinS u acre nei h- borhood 2ark be ne otiated or traded with the ycean!! ear School Distrii with the configuration hoMi4ontal to the adjacent tract be brought to the attention of the City Administrator and the City Council for the following rea- sons : 1 ) With the removal of the school site , -`he poten- tial recreational area Is reduced by 10 acrea . 2) The service area of the park includes 10 acres of undeveloped R-2 and 2 acres of undeveloped R-3 south, of Ellis wh1uh � in the future will generate a greater need for the park that: now exists. 3) In order to include into the design of the park open turf areas suitable for running '. eam games such ns softball , football and hockey without the benefit of school play area3 will require a. 5 Acre site. 4 ) The 5 acre park will provide a better buffer zone than ` 112 acres between the residential and Industrial unes . 5) The Ocean Vle'4 School. District is receptive t.o a Joint-powers agreement to develop a neighborhood park at Pabinwood which would free allocated funds for Robinwood acquisit:on in the 1973- 74 budget to apply at the 'raylew site . Respectfully submitted , G��zL C`i Norm. Idorthy , Secr tary H. 13. Recreation nd Parks NW:ac Commission cc : City Council Mr. Dave Rc,wlands , City Administrator Recreation and Parks CoaLmis s ion R. tit. Russell, President , Five Points Homeowners Assn* N 32. ` ,JER•DEPAFiY VENT Ct3MMUNiCA mac, :. :' r, : Corv�nxssian Prorn Recreal;.i 1ann1. un i Parks Cozr.tni3wicru 'Su L;=ct Taylor Street Park Site August 13, 1973 .iter :urther investigation , study ,, and analysis of your recommendation and the Recreation & Parks Commission "I recommendation concerning the neighborhood park fronting the north side of Taylor Drive:, the Recreation -and Parks Commission is now recommending a new park site be obtained which they feel would better serve the Five Points. neigh borhood . At their last regular meeting upon motion by Mr. Jim Curran the Recreation and Parks Commisslon unanimously recormnended to the Planning Commission tnat a rive acre park sito front- ing on the south side of Ellis between Huntington and Dela- ware Streets be pursued as fir nt priority for the Five Points neighborhood with the five acre site previously re- commended , fronting on the north aide of Taylor Street , be the second priority . li- reasons riven for the recommended change in location o: the park site were as follows : 1 ) The topography of the new site would make a better par-k development and :several existing, nature , eucalyptus trees could be retained i to add in.mediate beauty to the developed site. 2 ) They can- Lral Location would better serve both the single family re f dents and the residents or the existing and ru+ture apart- a meets or planned units to the south of F1113 . 3 ) BY nlovi,'ng the park iron industrial Zoned property to residentially zoned property the future popu,la oion, will be decreased and the industrial acreage enlarged . Covington Brothers Development Co. to in the process of designing a Planned Unit Devf.loprnen` on the la acre parcel rthich the Commission :could 1!k` to have a 5 acre nevighbor honed park . They are prepared to discuss the poesibility of r p ri: on their property on Friday,, August- l `f, with the sub- division connittee NW: ac cc : t1r. David Rowlands, City A&.ilnlstrator Recreation an ! Parks Cc..misslon Five Points Homeowners. Assn. nEciv E0 ' AUG t973 33. . : 4� INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION , To Planning Commission From' Recreation - 4 'Parks Commission .: Subject Taylor A"Street Park Site Date September 179 1973 At the regular meeting of the Recreation F Parks Commission held on September 1Z , 1973 , the Commission discussed the pros and cons of their August 8 recommendation (attached) to the Planning Commission concerning , the re.location of our neighborhood park in the area bounded by TaibeTt , Main , Gothard , mnd Beach Blvd. r 14r.., James Shepard moved the Recreation la Parks Co=k5sion stand on their August S recommendation to the planning Co=1-csion. Seconded by Mr. Kent McClish . Ayes 4 , Noes d , Motion failed . RECOMMENDATION Rr. Jim Curran moved the Recreation & Parks Commission recommend to the Planning Commission their priority be changed to first pursue a S acre park site fronting on Taylor Street and secondly to pursue a S acre site south and adjacent to Ellis Street between Hunting ton and Dola- , t1'�'• -ware. Seconded by Mr. Coaper . Motion carried unaniuously. 01 Respectfully submitted W4 77 � t i orm Wort y , Secret4 y Recreation a os�is Parks C � ion t NW : ac cr : Recreation $ Parks Commission Mr. Russell , Fibre Points Homeowners Assn. Mr . Rowlands , City Administrator f Mr . Berg, Ocean View School District ... Attachment REC.-LIVECG i ; F.Nlgat zii97� , f 1 34 • r State of California t . Li: u Related to Conservation and Plana ng - .. Article fl, authority For and Scope of Specltic 111jinj 6U50. Tht planning agency may, or if to direct..41 bir the 1+ryislt. titre body sba►ll, prepare specific pleas based on the geuerat plan and drafts nt such regulations, programs, east legislation as ally its ataa judgment be required for the svxteraatic ezecution of the general plat; and the planning agency may recommend such plans and measures to the lctrislative body for adopllon: 6WL Such spe:c.itle plane may Include .. (a) lit ulations limiting the location of buildings and other improve. � meats with reaped to existing or pla.ataed rights-of-way. W) Regulationx of the use of land and buildings. the height and bulk of buildirgs, and the open :parrs about buildings. (a) Regulations of the u%# of open space land. d) Street and highway naming and nutabering plans ill ord" to establish the official names of sirreta and highway-s, to rtmove conflicts, duplication and uncertaiuty among such names, and to provide an orderlt orstem for the naarabt-ing of baildinp and properties- (e) Such other matters which will accowpliA the purjxv*s of this chapter, Including procedures for the administration of such regulatiorus. (1) Such other meaaures *a may he required to Inause the cxecutiva of the general plea, (Am#,z4#d Sir Acat4 ISM Ci, 19M.► Article 9. Procedure for Adoption of Specific Plans and Regulations � G550 Belort+ rrcomm-miling to the le;islatice budr that it Adopt a apreido plan or regulatiun or any ntmendn:ent to n +pr*iie plan or regulation, the pplanning commission shall bold at ),Fait one (1) public hearing. hTetict of the time and hence of said hearinst &hill be! Riven at least 10 calendsr days before the hearing in the follwring ,.n manner t (as) If the mea,r Is Wore a cmittty plaunic- cc-msnisiaa, the notice sball be published at !eats. onto in a newoil yper Ut general circulation published end circulatrd in the county, ur it th-re it node, it thall be posted is at least three public planet in the cutsnty. (b) it the matter is before A city planning eornmlss'son, the notice+ shall be pubtuhed at least once in a newspartr of gcwral circulation puhl6hed and circuiate►d in the city, or if there is none. it Rlsttt'be posted in at leant three public pled-: in the. city. In addition to totice by publication, a county or, cit.t n�a1 giac notice of the hearing is such other manner au it tuay derat it.-cruarr or de*irable. Any hearing may he continued fmin title to Uwc, 65501. The recnaamendation of any specifie main or r-•yulntlon, ore of any amendment to a spetito luau or rrgnlation. shAl be bar resolution of the planning commission carrItu" by the, aillrrnative votes of not lent than a majority of its total noting membeem 655dJ, A copy of any specille plan, regulation, or t aeuataeat recommended ptarsunt to INN article shall he submitted to the legirla• tive Wy and thall be aceompauled by as stattanent of the planning co=ftslon's reAwas for such recomwtndstioa. 65W3. Upon, Melpt of as copy of any proposed specifle plan or recalat.on or amendment of such plan or regulation` the le;;lataRire body cztay by ordinance or resolution adopt the plan or. recula;iott. Aelore adopting the propowd specific plan cr "gulation the lrglsla titre body shall hold at laatnt one (1) public hearing. Notice of the.time r and place of said bearing :shall be given in the time and w t rear pm aided for the giving of notice of the hearingb the la:anin commis► `. moss as specified Section 65500. P . In addition to notice by , iention, a t:nunty or city n�ny;dvo notice of he br.iring is such tq•. . manner as it way dean nertmarr or desitable. Any besting may be tail luued from time to.time. Such plan or repletion, ax adopted, shall be designated ae at spa- c1de pihn or regulution. 65504. The legislative body shall not roake any cbanga or addi-f� lion to any proposed s ecifle plan, regulatiou, or atuendatcnt tberri�a rr -; recommended by the ptaaniug commi►�tlou until the propowcd ehar►�h or addition ban been rsferrtd to the planning commission for a rem and a copy of the report hsa been tiled with the legislative body. Y6ilurs of the platininq comminlon to report withia.forty (40) days after the reference, or such longer period as may be daignsted by the legislative body,shall be deemed to be approval of the propmd change or addition. It shall not be nee miry for the planning commission to bold a public bearing on suet proposed change or addition. 65505. If the Cie doeR not have a planning commission, the only proetdural steps required for the adoption of ax apreitle plan or rcg• ulation or any amendment to a specific plan or regulation shall be those provided is this article for action by the legislative body. 65506. Nothing in this article applies to the adoption or amend. ment of any ordinance by the legislative body, ahetlicr or not it may relate to the subjects mentioned in Article 8 of this chapter, except ordinances exprewly adopting or amending a specific ptan Initiated pursuant to thin eh4pter. (Atnr%Ar1 by ttlpt&„ 1070, Cb, 15$0-) 655M. When.it deems it to be for the public interest, the legislative body may initiate and ad-. rt an ordinance or rewtutioa tatablisbing a specific plan or an amendment thereto. The legialatite body shall best reftr such propogai to e-Atebl6h such or--65c ploin or amendment thereto la the planning commi sinu for A report. Deforr making a report, the planning commimion shall hold at leu%t one public hearing. The plan- ning conaniaion shall rtliort within 40 dasa after the refctener, or within such longer period ay tray he rlenignated by the tepulathe body. Before adopting the proporecl plan or amendment the legislative body shall hold at lemt one public henring. Nader of this time and plttct! of r; bearings held punrubnt to this •eclion Kha11 be girrn in the liras and�'j�r�� manner provided for the giving of notice of hearings by the planning eamtmimion as apecifled in Section 655.50 1A,hW t+f $etts. 1970. Ch. M.) Article 10. Adrninistntlion of Bpeciflc FIZ~s and lfegulationi 65550. The ltgisltttilre body tray dttermint, and ntablith admin• iatrotive rules cud procedures for the Application and enforecu:ent of specific plans and trgulations, and may assign rr delegate, tmclt admits. ist. ativo functiras, parent, and duties to the planning or other agency su, may be necenan- or desirable_ la. 65551. Tbtr legitrlative body ruay create administrative agencicr, bt"do of review, appeal, and adjustment, and pros-ide for other t)M cUla, and for farads for the compensattun of such ofcere, employeer, amd agcneies and for the support of their work. 6655t No street snail be improved and no saxes or cc+natctious or other Itnprovsmeats shah to raid or authorized In any street within an tertory for which the let lalaive body has adopted a quiCk alreet '- or bigbway plans noW the matter has been referretd to the planning agency for a report as to conformity -with such SIMMwc strtct or b- xuT plan and a. ropy of the import bas bttn Bled with the k�latire body uniew one of Me t"ollowing tondidona appttost (a) The atrmt boa beta accepts.):, opened, cw has otktr iwe re• etfred the legal statua of a pubUe etrwt prior to the adoption of the phtrs -' b) It eurrapadv with streets abown on tbs pint, f e) It tormponds with Amu tbown ou a wabdfviwiatttt leap or "c. ord of survey approved by the l4stative sly. (d) It ao0-4 oronda with atzr ets show m on a nbdiviaioo map pre. enrolls` y approved t~y the plttmninlg caassWon. Buch report #hall be aubmitted to the IMisiativs body within forty (40) days after the matter was referred to the planning agency, 36'. "wets at caoeiee� 4555 , , Nositreet eheil be Impr no � . : other imvroremetit& shall be laid or k building or works iuladf� rotiool butidtn catu►tructed��iti�in an -��,� � �,tercitoc� tar wkit'k'th� lattrs body hu adapted a sped!! piao:rejtlatift tke',in of O 6Vft+ laud until the metier boa beea r0trre�d to the,pliaoiug aemyi for A report w to conformity with *Ufbs�Uk pl+ao; a *W ""rt k" b"S dltd with the �istall" and a Wl" as& br tho„ legislative body that the propceed im =114113", or oosstructiaa ie is tarrietir Kula the spe+clAC such report sW be submitted to the legisixtive body witkin':tott� ;( })' 'deyn often the taatter Ym referred totht plants# apmy. The iigilre=,66. of this seotIou &belt not appiy in the tsa of a atr*et -Oith wad ae�+epl�td, opened, or bad otherw4a rectirtd the ltgal sutua of &,'pvbli+e street prior to AS adoption of the &p"W plan, (AOAW it OUlt t!1M Cis. 13 tt,) ' t 37 u f a y r y r 1 RESOLUTION 110. i310 A 'RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COu''t n OF THE CITY OF .`HUNTIIIQ ON BEACH .APPROVING SPECIFIC PLAN 110 �3--1 WHERFIAS, pursuant to the Planning and Zoning Law , ; the Planning Commission of the City of Huntington Beach, sifter notice duly given, held a public hearing an Austist 21 , 1973, which was continued to and concluded at its meeting of October ?, 19731 relative to .Specific Plan No. 73-1 to Pro- vide a new street , 60 feet in width, to run approximately 655 feet: south from the center line of Talbert Avenue , approxi- mately 700 feet west of the center lire of Reach Boulevard, and to close Taylor Drive to through traffic app;oxinately fiFO feet west .of the center line of Beach Boulevard ; ani On November 5, 1973s after notice duly given puritivant ' to law, hearing was held before thi S Council on the pr�spo�=cat specific plan, and the matter having been considered , the 00 Council finds that the proposed new street and proposed r closure of Taylor Drive is reasonably neces.nary to the! orderly a --ind efficient flow of traffic, for the preservatlon of the T health and safety of the inhabitants of the elt;; , and fca;• a the orderly development of the comnunit;y , r . Mul, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington r Bench does hereby resolve as foilowa : a 1. That Specific Plan No. 73-1, an amended and on rile* in the office of tic City Clerk, Ls hereby approved . 2. That the map, designated Exhibit: "A" t hereto attached etc , . and nade a part: hereo!' by reference , is hereby adopted as part ti. ..; r sp,ec ; f1c Plan 'lo . 73-1. PASSED AID ADOPTED by the City Council �of' ,w,tae . City of f t a r': r , • t Hu, tat,tngton Beach at a regular meeting 'thy:reor held on the r 17th day ,of December, 1973. , i Mayor 'ATTEST": APPROVED AS W "ORM: i� j e r y Att nay •. i i ti , t ,; r r t` tf TA1.8ERr DW INDUSTRIAL i 1 IND, ING, - 4�'►iNlAi~..... .r I NDUSYRIAL. INa� AtNDUSTi"tIAl. COtllviER'CIAL 5.0 ACRE PARK SITE GROTH ISUFFcR K . CIIEVROLET � su. FEa ..w a"warms.�araa ,J ONTARIO OR WI IL,•301i = FORD W -14111] J jir j ;F f FIGURE b EPROPOSED LAND USE hwtirn ton beoch planning d Fpartment cif lomorem ea spa specific P yfor & b►each . . ' - lr 5 -'yt a�1,.:•aa.:.;}ate .....::... ,..,. _ _ . CALIFORNIA, STATE OF CALIFORNI ) 'COUNTY OF `ORAWE ' C 1TY 9F 11M I N�.'"TON BFACI{ Is ALICIA M. WEN WORTH, the duly appointed, qualified City s Clerk of the Clay of Huntington -Beach, and ex-offirio Clerk of the City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole rimer ,of � members of the Ciey Council of the City of Huntington Reach is seven; that the foregoing revolution vaa passed and adopted by the affirm.9tive vote of more than a majority of all the members of said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 17th day of December , 19 73 by the following vote: AYES: Councilmen: Shipley, Bartlett, 11reen, Coen. Duke NOES: Councilmen: xatney ENT: Counc i imen:S Gibbs • �'t'�'...�.... City Clark and cox-officio Cleric ' of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, Caliiars4i&` i x , ` r , , t;+�t' j � i a ��... 'ors .,. .. •t�ae't+llvrl.ai..��lfFt ,, .. , 3 471 IC ng p hunts toy beach deveio _mant serr+icoa dwpa.rtmsrtt STD f f .REPORT TO:: Planning' Cocmraission MM: Development Services BATE,$ July 7, 1987 StJBJECT: APPEAL - AUMZNISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 87•-15 iN C0N.7UVCTI6N WITH CONDITIONAL EXC ?i:i0tt (VARIANCE) NO. 87-:4 AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 87•-9 ; USE PER141T NO. 47--34 (CONTINUED FROM JUNE 16 , 1987 PLANtt I NG CQbS.'qI SSON MEETING APPLICANT: Boureston Development QATE. kCCBEM: 3355 Via Lido, Suite 205 Ap:i? 24 , 1987 Newport Beach, CA 92663 WI : Redevelopment Agency tj RI.. P a9-fl, City of Huntington Beach Waived by applicant ARRELLANT: Richard J. Aprahaniian Z_QV&: MI--A (Restricted f Attorney for Triple "M" Manufacturing District) Properties 18552 MacArthur Boulevard Irvine, CA 92715 General Industrial � West of Beach Boulevard F, =LQ 1 : vacant and south of Talbert Avenue (between the east terminus of Redondo Circle &.0 r- ': 5 acres and the south terminus of Kovacs Circle BZQ T: Appeal of the Board of Zoning Adjustment ' s approval of an Administrative Review request to permit A 122o424 square foot industrial building and a Conditional Exception to permit a 10-1/2 foot front yard setback in 3.1eu of a la-foot front yard setback on Redondo Cjr%.la = and to permit o truck well So feet in width in lijdu of 20 feet in width# along with ,a ,flag?niece 'Declaration.- in addition to the appeal, a Use Parm.it . is being . requested to permit are industrial tauildfng within ,150 feet of residentially zoned property and •to._;permst txi:ck 'doo.rs to face a. public;- stront. 42 0 •w& t' • M • • „ 1 JSGGQ, ACTION: Two act ions' nre being requested: 1, Uphold the Board of Zoning AdjustRm approval;s a . . . p val;`of , Administrative Review ,No . 87--15 , Conditional Exception vo. ; 87- 4 and e a - • 2 N g five Dcsclaration No . R7 9 and. deny,!the appeal; based "on the findings and with conditions of approval outlined. in this report; 2 . Approve Use Permit No . 87-34 based on the findings and with conditions -of-approval outlined in this report. .2 . o r, HE L JN ORMA:TION The proposed project consists of one 1220424 square foot industrial building , to be located on a currently vacant 5-acre parcel . An 11 year lease hag been executed with a ' single user for the completed project (Southwest Quilted Products, a manufacturer of. 'redspreads and draperies) . The project will initially employ 1("; - persons, up '. to a maximum of 200 persons. Approximately 22, 000 square: feet "of the building .ares will be used for offices , and there will be one 50 foot loading dock to accommodate 2 to 4 truck_deliveries or pick ups per day. The developer will. provide Parking and landscaping in accordance with code requirements , as well as Cul-de-sac improvements on Kovacs from Talbert Avenue to the site . The proposed use will require no outside storage or use of hazardous - materials . JP On April 15, 1987 , the Board of Zoning Adjustments approved Administrative Review No . 67-15 and .Negative Declaration No. 87--9 by ` 3 a vote of 5 to 0 , and approved Conditional Exception No. 87-24 ,by a vote of 4 to 1 . Administrative Review No. 87-15 is. a request by Boureston Development in accordance with Section 9510.01 of the Ordinance Code to permit a now 122,424 square foot industrial building on a 5 acre Parcel currently owned by the City of Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency . Conditional Exception _ (Variance) m Redondo Circle in lieu of .the re uired14-foot set Yap:d 87--24 is a request to permit a 10-1 /2 foot front Setback from R � e 4 q BACK ' as required by Section ' 9510. 06(b) (3) , and to permit a truck well to t be 50 feet in width. in lieu of 20 feet in width as required by Section 9510 . 12(b) `of the Ordinance Cede. These requests are covered by Wagative Declaration No . 87-9 . These .actions were r: appealed 'by Triple K" Properties (Reliable Lumber) . After further analysis , it was determined by staff that a . use permit is Also required to 'permit a new industrial use within 150 feet of residentially coned property and to permit truck doors to face a public street (Sections 9510 . 18 (a) (1) and 9510 . 12) On 14ay . 7, 1987, the Board of Zoning Adjustments declined to act on Use Permit "No . 87--34 by a. vote of 5 to 0 in accordance with Section 9815 . 3 of ;, the "Ordinance Code thereby referring the item to the Planning C&&%ission. Therefore, Use permit No. 07-34 has been submitted In cdtl junction with the appeal . staff Report' 7/7/87 . 8.511d) • 1.,. . itgmi wet© continued from the Planning; Commisaiion ; hasri g, of 1 �une 16 1987, in order, to allow, the!,applicant! ards.'tha ,'-�, to' ` �, Sf+N rr off in' osamining":alternative designs:': : #. . ropased project. At earing, several, P1inn"'i Commissioners and property owners on Redondo.,cirole .;odzpressed �. e. Jund 16, 198? h concern as, to how. -the ,cul�d6-saes .proposed for Redondo,:Circle ;aau Kov'aics Sti e- et'i`would 1 impact: .traffic: ;flow. The Planning. Comm ission directed staff. toy eximine.'design 'alternatives that would provide for ''• a b&n'nectfon of Redondo Circle through to Talbert h'enue .and also ' provide the applicant with an acceptable building layout. Since that time, staff has met with the applicant* arid'. the appellant` to 'di scuss conceptual design alternatives which would., provide a connect Redondo Circle around or through the s'i,to ,to Talbert Avenue .,,,. The various proposals analyzed were determi'ned . to 'b inadequate or unworkable , due to restrictions imposed by the Uniform Building; Code, Fire Department requirements , incompatibiliiy - a4ith the adjacent senior residential development, increased cost and tinme, zoning code requirements and . the minimum design Cxitsrio required for the applicant ' s proposed occupant. -Staff that th e original layout for the project".`as- proposed by Dourestor:, Development project will not have ,an adverse impact on traffic, noise, air quality, or other development in the &kea . A deEailed analysis 'of -the proposal is contained in the attached staff. ,.� report`'dated Juno 16, 1987 . - Staff recommends 'that the PlaGni.ng _Commission uphold `tho Board of Zoning Adjustment ' s approval of, Administrative' Review No. 87-1510 Conditional., Exception (Variance) No . 87�-24 end Negative Declaration 87-9 and dcany . the appeal, and approve Usa , permit No. 8 7�-3A, 'based, on findings and conditions of approval contained in the attached st:af f `.! report. EIVDIN95pVAL QQHEXC�P'T IQN 1 . The site is located; at the ;terminus ok:.two industrial streets ., Therefo.e, the reduced,'setback' and truck well will ,not: adversely impact surrounding re'sidentis, or impact the value 'af property and improvements in .the vicinity. 2. Because of: epeciaY circumstancesap plicabl.e to " the subject. property, incl idi"tg .size, ,shape, topography, local ion or foundtodeprive the�rsubject�propert:yaof pri.vileges�enj6Y'bd ' , , - surroundings, d �by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classifications . The lot is an unusual shape, and aiccess.; f rom two. cu.i--de—sacs presents a unique circumstance. staff Report 7!7d87 3' (9511d) 3 . The 'grant:inq of Conditional Exception_ No; 87-24 wlI not be` to. thw, public ,welfare, .• or.•in urfous raateri•all detrit�ert:el� ., propEerty in -•th' 'adverse` •im acts`' have �:�eee Considere3tanda.;:,' `hny;'pot®nti.al ly,: P n mitigated y 'b � , The rantin of the Conditional -Exception' ' 'will not adverscet ' 9 9 , y , affect' the General :Pxan of 'the 'City of�. Huntington Bt�4ch, The ' ,pro 'ect iS;?in "conformance .with the Zoning and General Plsn designation' for' the site. ' 7 . : ' 1. establi'nhment, maintenence and 'o r , al The- di'n will not' be detr bu�.l perakion of sn ia�lustri. g ,imental ' ko: 1 welfare of persons residing or working a . The ,general nq in the vicinity; ' y p r y . '' r.. 6. Propert and im rovem_,nts in the vi�ci.ni t of such use O bui ldiiig . Any .pot:antia11.t adverse 'impacts have been considered and I` mitigated, - .1 ene9ranting `of` the' use perriit Will, not ; adve.sel} affect;-.;the ral Plan of - the City :of Huntington Beach. The ,proje;ct is in conformance`: ith the M11,.A zone and General clan deaisination of General ' Industrial for . the site. 1 . ,bje - • ,•P 4 The ropeas 1 isconsistent 'with the goals and octi "e of the City's 'General Plan and . Land Use Map, r cotmiTio ..APEROYA L - iC4tYQ1TTONA"&rFF'TIQN 'NO. `07-29 : 1. The site plant floor plans , and elevations receive'd and -�detet! t April 1, 19871 shall be the approved layout, with modifications as noted in' Administrative , Review No. 87r-15 . 2. All Conditions of 'Approval of Ad:ainistrative Review No . 87-15 i shall be applicable. �QNd B QF__ �$.40L� vu- tx x..ti0. T-3 A ; 1, The site �P4a7 $ •floor -shal;l, booths andraved�laons oukrgwithsmodi.Eid and aated atio�ns � April 1, 1. 8 pp Y c as , noted in 'Administrative Review No. 87-15. 2 . All Conditions of, Approval of Administrative Review No. 87--15 shall be applicable. r�l 1 . The j'.00r Flans and elevations received and dated April "11 19871 shall be the approved layout . Staff '-Report - 7/7l87 . , I r 2 : ��The eite` plan; detect , �lp�rf 1 .1', �1987, .ahall� be ,�revf sect.: t�' dspfct ' the"�Modifications described 'herein: i,r ,• •I. t a Landsce • e planteis ,whfa P h abut Viesiden'tia'lly Toned property shill''be a ,minimum 'of 6 feet '.clear :width: L' ndacape i planters adjacent to ' the building 4hali be.,.r'educed,,An 'widtA accordingly. b. Show., addliiionalz '4_1l2 feet' of-public right--of-;way required on Redondo Circle and Xovaca 'Street . 3 . Prior to issuance of"b' uilding permits , :the applicant- sh'; it submit the following plans : a ' Landscape and irrigation .plan Eo•`'the Depa rtmen Development Services =snd Pub1i•c Works for review and- approval . b. Rooftop Mechanical Eguipinenti Plan. Said `plan shall ndicate. screening of all r rooftop mechanical . equipment and_. shall delineate the type of tuateris'l proposed :to screen , said equipment . '4 . Installation of required landscaping,• and irrigation`:systems shall ''be completed prior to final inspectlon. 5. Grading 'plans shall�'be sub s . De submitted, to the pub3ic� Work paztm+ant : : along with plans for silt, con+rv1 for all storm_runoff- if determined - to be sa�r ece n s y by the Director of public 'Works. 6. If foal- type insulation is to. be used, , r y a firs retardant type shall be installed as approved by the - uAldin9 Deportment . . . P 7. An automatic fi re ! sprinkler - Sys shall ba ,,a � P } ppraYsd and , installed pursuant to Fire Deportment regulations . 8 . Service roads and fire lands,, -as determined 'by the Fire Department , shall be posted and mark6d. 9 lands shall access Fire. �• 11 be maintai ned.� If ,f3re,- Ia►ne viola- tions occur and the services of : the Fire Departm©'nt are required , , the applicant will be i liable ' For., expenses. incuired; . 0 .' All building spoils , such as unusable dumber, wiro, ' pipe, . 'and other suipl.u„ or unusable material, shall be disposed Of apt an off' site facilityequipped 9 ui peed to handle them. r dFtituremIndu P fled 11. The shall comply with mitligation, measuyres . s eci f st�rial ;Activity in' the Report prepused .'hy •J fo n Houten and Associates , Inc. , dnte�l April 6, 198� .'(atfached) : 12. Natural gas .shall be stubbed in at. the locations 'of. water heatfers and central Beating units. 5taff' nepor4 ; V7l87` --5• ��5,lld� , .w+- ..•v w,.X,, v�.,iPys.uvJr:^xF`['t 4R.P.vr .. .... ........,.. _'..:•.,f .' -+ ` ...iti._ .•,'*'i..•.1'i.4 TN"Jr-M1w«ww. �• - _ - - __ _ t r Mr. John' Bel she ' 1Uy ,4,- 1987 Pa l a Two The proposed Negative 'Declaration and Initial Study for the project a]so fails to address the project's access and parking impacts on the . already overburdened Redondo Circle. Without the completion of the extension roadway between Redondo ` Circle and Kovacs Street (as provided for in the Taylor � Beach Specific Plan) it can be expected that the poor operating conditions, inadequate aw Y turning - - park iryg I ^cess s star, and turn i radii, and deficient on-street on Redondo Circle will be further exacerbated If the industt ial -project is I approved as proposed. A detailed analysis of these imparts should ' be { analyzed within an Envizontrental it%pact Report. AIR ouAGTY'7. The City Staff: has failed to analyze the Air quality j impacts associated with project-generated vehicular traffic, which 1 believe are significant and require mitigation. In 'fact , not only will large a-ro►snts of pollutants be aaitted, but the level of pollutants generated will far exceed threshold levels of sion3 f icance establ islxd by the South Coas. Air Quality Manaoerent District . SCACtC' s Cal ifcrnia Env ironan►entaI Oh;al ity Act (CEQM) Icpl�:,entation Gui ce! lnesl suggests a non-bear of criteria in determining thresho,ds of sign;f icanee for air qual i ty impat-ts. One such criterion states that a sign:f ea.1t air quality irract wo::1d occur when a project would: "Result in a net emission, increase, before on,Ite offsets , equivalent to the current New Source Review sivnsficance levels as i defined in SCAQM Regulation X111 , unless modeling der.�onstraItes that the ' source will not cause an existing exceedance, or make measura>aly ++orse an existing e'xeeeddnce, of any state or fedral ambient air quality stan6ard." 't This measure of signif icon applies to both stationary sources (a saurce of pollutants which is imobile) and projects such as the Talbert-Leach industrial- project' whore primacy source is the generation of new traffic 4 (pollutants emitted by .automobiles traveling to and from the pro joct; site) .2 'the Oisirict' s New Source Review (NSR) Rule threshold levels are compared. to the project' s expected 'mobile emission profile in the table le. tah `of .16.0 miles•-travels at 25 miles t hour,, x)d rfl ect-occ h 1 � • ncy in- , below. Assume ro ect enerated : traf f,ic at 1,591 daily t>i avE-" Assuming, P j 5 Y .Fs. . 1988, the -project would exceed daily thz-pet levels of carbon .M oxide, which ,'aoold constitute a significant iwWtupon alr "lity. < Accordingly, r _ ,e�c3ged within an Environn�entAl :, ' this Impact si ni.icacxx should be ; acknr�l th �� g 1 % R rt and 'ta zopriat* -wttigation Mures should be .iyplawt+ed to e o PP ; . Ca orniri Y viro en rwtr3 Qwlttr .Ys ntnt on pu dial Cfes Sou th 'Cott '.ir ' s1 it ''Krr e�ez�t;,Dsotr ii�t. >Xibc di 1987410 ;• • 2 ' ftr. Arian 1. -. harms, .-.Herd, &*rqY and Env1rtnw t S*ct ion of'' trot t �rotitla ;Coast 1►ir lity: MaroptIMEPOwt 'DiietzIct0 Match 1$ ' 5 e, ti. ' John Bel she[ tray 4, 1487 page Three . , �t ��1*r�•w�w��l�f�fw�w�wYr�Mrtw�*riww�rrw�r��+��rr �r•►Iww�l�s/rww�rw�r��w ' POLLUr uR' HSR LBIM61 PRt WTI SICAN ICAW lM1tiC1"t ` Carbon Monoxide 550 569 yes Total Hydrocarbons 75 53 No Hitrogen ' aioxide 100 61 Na Sulfer Dioxide 150 B No Particulates 150 12 No Y Pounds per day. � - w� rr• r•v►s.wwr •w+rrrwMrwwwr4wrrr+wr♦ rrarwe0*9viwwr wwrtawwrrwwwrw• reduce such impac-ts to acceptable levels. ENten wit-4 the regi ;nal air qual ity impacts classified as s'ioni icant, an � :ira:•manta;; analysis should also be prepared are :3* ;.z'ejrrt' s near-field i:psi} of feces , pzrti :ulnrly in 1 ight of the !act that circulation problems .--''oa Redondo Circle will worsen with the project and withoi;t :.`x-. Redo rvjo/Kov acs extension, causing aLzowbiles and trucks ✓rule idling time, resulting In larger amounts of pollutants mi.tcd. Near-field impacts or, the senior cir irens cone. should be evaluated . t Finally, ro me-ration war r:+ade in exist -.'ram project doct�ntation regnrdirig whether or no: the project will emit any stationary -ounce ( factury) emissions . If so, omission calculations should be prepa.ed as�3-•tesulting impacts anal}zed. NOISE. Chapter p5, Section 931e. 18 of the Municipal Code requires the preparation of a • i se anall•six for this prcj��ra unless, as:009 other item, provisions are a,- !or adequate noise mitigation m►surest. Although the Negative Decla: .tit_ foes contain mitigation measures, their adequacy . for this 'Project s!: sld be evaluated within the context of a detailed noise study Which ermines the -)ject'g noise generating operations, including its r.+achinErY, c: pre: s, trunk loading opPx�►;ions, wA pro j•:ct-generatee) tra"Of ic. Alt 3at2 the City staff should extend the time period for rev iew of the ni i� -dy so that the 1983 noise 'study can be analyttid to detietmine : the adequa► the proposed mitigation mess'Utes. ,ht a minim", the ,City, staff shot:_ indicate in the Initial SWdy Vhh tm. alt19atiori _rlleasure8 are required. �. t ZIR CflMt?LJIT: . / . I V=.. x1�1�C�'S» 11cca rd i rag to 'Section ,�R •:5 to) o.R t� , :idol hits ._ »' axa is rsgvixad ert�en the: p+rnject has ssible }+envirrxatal ,n cueu atively considerable, I btlievo it is: tea►acana�t3R ;tm s T u>aa tr, ! i of 'past$ curavnt and probat?le- fyture prow :its :tha c e «aeui tlws2 a4s�siderabls,� whirt Is_above the ttizeshold .Mt Ai e , ou. hocale, aQa1 cw►r! 4n '. COn ju ton with this proj�t, mould. be sir k ''.• Y a ati�nifiwant - LoW an the,enV!rarU' ant. !'or aT pia;. _, ki: rJoha"Belshec m&YA 1987 Page:'Fotir that' cumulative circulation impacts from .recent industrial de.- oft along Redorv$o Circle should.. be. ex -mined in conjunction with this pto3.tct. On this basis.' alone, an Environmental Impact Report should be prepared for this project. Should hou have any questions or concerns regarding the above, ' please contact`,me as soon as possible. Sincerely, . , EM �1S Chs topher P. Jo mph P�incipai i i 1 , t 1. . Initial study. Negative Declaration, Environw�ental Clearance Repott, and i MQation'Kcasvres ior; the project, dated April 30, 1981. Ta lox a►nd Beach Plan 73- 1 -aided,on February 22, 197►8.7. y Specific 3. Final Focused Environmental lm ct ;' Re ort ' for the Talbert Beach • Pa P ` Redevelopment Project., April, 1982. 4 Redevelopment Plan for the Talbert-Beach Redevelopment project . September, ` 1982. ,' S. Huntington Beach Municipal Code, Article 951 , K1-A District. 6. Mewrandt,ns frog "CMO, Assistant Planner" to BZ&, dated April 15, 1987. 7. Miscellaneous BZA letters rega:dl,nc� Conditional Exception No. P,7_24 , Achinistrative Revie►.i No. 81-15, and Negative Declaration No. 87-9, S. Cansnent lettets fro- existing bus finesses on Feiondo Circle. 4. 11aise F.ssessment , P-cposed Senior Ctt:«en Res d��+t a? Develo;ent, ?refare( by van Ho.:ten b ASSWIZt". ;zr'il, 19E3. , 1 RESPONSE TO MR. CHRISTOPH ER A. JOSEPH'S LETTER y TO MR. 1011N BELSHER DATED MAY 4, 1987 1. Negative Declaration 87-9 and its accompanying documentation was available for , public comment and review commencing April 4, 1987. Environmental documentation for the negative declaration includes Environmental Information Form completed by the project proponent, area maps, photographs, and staff recommended mitigation measures. A notice stating that the documents were available for review and comment was pasted in City Hall on the bulletin board for public notices and vras also advertised in the Orange County Daily Pilot on May a. 1987. Mr. Joseph's allegation that the file was not available for review until May 30, 1987 is incorrect. A visit to the City Clerk or planning office after May 4, 1987 would have afforded hire the opportunity to review the documents. It should be noted that the legal notice that was posted and advertised was not intended to serve as the actual negative declaration, but rather to aoliU the general public that a negative declaration may be filed for the project if adopted by the decision-making body. The noiiee stated that the negative declaration request was on file at the City and could be reviewed at City Hall. 2. Circulation Staff conducted a baseline traffic capacity study whereby maximum traffic generation from a "buildout" scenario of Redondo Circle was analyzed (See Appendix A) in summary, it was conclude.-d that if Redondo Circle were built out and full occupied y (including the development of the subject 5.0 acre site Pr,esently owned by the City) the total Average Daily Trip Generation (ADT) from the projects fronting, and taking access off of Redondo Circle would be, at worst case scenario, between 2567 and 3085 ADT. According to the United States Department of Transportation. highway Capacity Manual, the average capacity for an industrial collector cul-de-sac operating at Level of Service C, is approximately 8,000 Annual Average Daily Trips (ADT). Given the facts that Redondo Circle is not level ter;ain, has curb cuts,has some curvature, and includes some on-street parking, the City's traffic cngineering staff indicated that maximum capacity limits may be less than 8,000, possibly closer to 6,000 AADT on Redondo Circle. Even so. the maximum build out scenario for traffic generation on Redondo Circle is far below the capacity for the street to maintain at) acceptable level of service. 6,000 - 8,00 AADT Capacity for LOS C (Source: Highway Capacity Manual. USDOT) 2,567 3,805 ADT Worst Case Scenario of Average Daily Trip Generation for Buildout of Redondo Circle (Source: Sight analysis and Orange County ff Environmental Agency) Staffs baseline study indicates that there will nat be aS.Zjff"j impact on traffic from the proposed project. Consequently, further traffic analyses is not deemed � warranted. ; With regard to the specific proposed project, the 'project proMnents have Indicated that'due Ito the nature of the business,'truck deliveries will be limited to approximately three per day, and that'the projected 100-100 employees will be encouraged to carpool :, Y y t>tiior rideshare. Based on the Rropozetf use and the limited truck deliveries and auto.=oriented traffic, it can be reasonably concluded that the project:'Will not create significant traffic'impacts: The "deficient" dn-,street parking that Mr. Joseph referred to is due mainly to the fact that the existing light industrial developments located on Redondo Circle are riot properly utilizing their required or--site parkirIg facilities. During a site visit to thy: project-area, staff observed that some of the businesses are utilizing their on-s �e parking facilities for storage,of materials or vehicles related to the business as . r.4)posed to custorner and employee parking. As a result, business customers and. , employees are required to park on the street thus creating undue circulation impacts and congestion. Enforcement of ors--site parking requirements for the busine-slies located on Redondo Circle would alle%late most of the circulation burdens re',`that street. It should be noted that the proposed project will be providing 219 parking spaces on-site; twelve more than the City's Zoning Code requires. 3. Parking; -The City of Huntington Beach Ordinance Code requirF,.c that 206 on site parking spaces "be provided for the project. The project proponents have exceeded this. requirement; 218'parking spaces will be provided. Employee parking. as well as intermittent guest parking wvill be adequately accommodated on site so as not to impact traffic circulation on Redondo Circle. 4, Air Quality Staff utilized the "URBEMIS"l computer model designed by the CL lifornia Air Resources Board to determine the air quality Impacts of mt industriabli ht esa q Y F € manufactuTing land use with a 122,424 square foot building. The model utilized the following asscmptions: 1) A trip generation rate of 13 vehicle trips per )000 square feet; 2) Average trip lengths varying front three to seven miles (depending on the trip ' type); 3) Average speeds of thirty miles pe; hour; 4) A cold start temperature of 55 degrees farenheit; 5) A buildout year of 1957, and (i) The project will be developed in the Southern California Association of Govemments region. The results are listed in Appendix B and are summarized below along with the South Coast Air Qu,,,iity Management District's New Source Review (NSR) Thre,hold levels: Carbon Monoxide 550 383 Hydrocarbons 75 44 Nitrogen Oxides 100 27 Sulfer,Dioxide )so NIA `I Particulates 150 N/A * California Air Resources lloard URBEMIS Model +1; 1 Use of this model Is endorsed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District YY, (SCAQNiD). (Telephone conversation with Mr. Brian W. Farriu, Head, Energy and : Environment Section of the SCAQMD, June 8,' 1997. . . f _ i • .. ., . w•',l.a.tr..i7.[MRrw. -_ — _—..w�+r.w.►.. .... ..r+wR7ay.vew.. - .. ., . ..... r light ,, n6 a l22 424_square foot•buildin o As'indicated above. a li t trxits, strial use uttllzi ion the P OJect a d n e Crate enough.traffic so as to exceed the Sowth Coast Alr Quality Matra 8 I rict s NewSource Revle* (NSR) threshold levels. Weed, the air quality Impacts from the'praject generated vehicular traffic vrouid be tjcl .x l y ; the IV�R thresht�ld Levels. While, it is correct,to as�cumz.that an vehicular.'traffic , , astn's ambient air ua it , utilizing state-mandated frttpacton t1K south coast air generated by,the pmpv ,eel`project wI]1 have a q Y B standards, it,is clear:that the proposed project. will not have a sgnificant"impacton the area's air'quality, cumulative or otherwise. Due to the nature Iof the r proposed project (mnnufacture`of drapes and bedspreads), no significant stationary or."point" source emissions are. expected. ,There. will be rib ssh, smoke, fumes, dust or odors generated by the proposed use. Consequently, an Impact analysis of such "potential" emission is not warranted. f ; i S. Noise A condition of approval for Administrative Review 87-13 is that the development shall'cotnply with mitigation measures specified for 'Future Irt<' "Ttrial Activity' in the report prepared by J.J. Van Houten and Associates,' Inc., data,,,April 6, )991" By reference, several mitigation measures and standards for Interior and exterior noise " levels were made conditions of approval for the proposed Rioject. Included in those mitigatior, measures is the requirement that an acoustical engineering report be submitted as part of the application for o building permit.. The acoustical report will Indicate means by which the owner proposes to comply with the noise standards recommended by the J.J. Van Houv:mn and Associates Study. It will include noise measurement data, analyses, drawings, etc. sufficient to Identify the'sowrces of noise and methods of mitigation used to reduce the,level of the noise to the standards specified in the ;study referenced above. Conditions noted above will ensure that the proposed project complies with City noise standards and regulations. h. Cumulative Impacts Cumulative impacts of this project were considered. In this case, they were not deemed to be "significant." Per Daily Vehicle Trip Generation Rates from :he Orange County Environmental Management Agency (Ault 1982), a standard Industrial )AW use is'projected, as a worst case scenario.. to produce between 176 trip ends per'day ptr acre and 13 trip ends, per day, per 1000 square feet of building area. In 014 case, the proposed 12.2, 424 square foot project is projected to generate, as a worst.case scenario, between 880 and 1591 vehicle trips per day. ' In the memorandum dated April 15, '987 from Catherine M. O'Hara to BZA, the 1591 trip generation number was sited to indicate worst use scenario for the proposed project. In actuality, the proposed use w111 most likely generate far less traffic than even the lower 880 trips per day . figure. The project proponents have indicated : hat doe to the nature of the business, truck'deliveries will be limited to approximately three per day. and tha's the projected 100.200 Employees will be encouraged to carp.-al and/or ride-share. Based on the nature of the proposed use and the limited truck deliveries and auto-traffic, staff concluded that the project would not create significant traffic Impacts nor would it create significant air quality impacts. APPENDLK A RESPONSE TO MR. CHRISTOPHER & ]OSEP'r" r LF-TrER DATED MAY . 19a7 Source: ,Addreis Files Mlcrafische A.P. Files C of one's A:P. Books Approximate square footage facing and taking direct access off of Redondo Circle ,Light l.ndintrial/lndustrUl Park Build Out uCEMA 'Trip Genet-ation Pr6jections Add' 5�, ft. Bldg Acr!t 13 TE&-;E 176..311AS� 18061 21,939 1.0 285 171 18081I091 24,960 1.0 325 176 181 01 21,660 1.1 291 194 18108 12,120 .78 157 137 18092 170004 .75 221 132, 18062 r 19,500 1 .0 253 176 7600 19,238 9.4 250 1,654 Subtotal 136,421 15.03 1,772 2645 Proposed Boureston 122,424 5.0 795.5 1I,2 on 440..-V2 on Kovacs Kovacs ' I Total 258,84S 2003 2,5575' 3.085 , As defined by the United States Department of Trainspor tatlun's 111ghway Capacity Model, the maxinimum callacity for an industrial collector cul-de-sac street, assuming a level of service (LOS) C, is 8,000 Annual Average D] Ily Trips (AADT). Due to the facts that Redondo Circle has changes, in grade, some curies, on'-street parkink and curb cuts,' City traffic .engineering staff estimates that the AADT'on Redando Circle for,LOS C is clazer to 6,000 AADT as opposed to'8,000 AADT. ` . 1 (OJ45d) 4 � �` • CL EM a f�ir7} I�{J�I ,i-��` l s jt •,r 'r ` y r r. s PROJECTION :YEAR DATE i 06/.02/E7 r '� • cow.-:, -TYPE-�•OP. UNIT , SIZE I�ANiiFACtUR I NG .222424 /SO" F )( , , NONHOME' BASED TRIPS VMT NdNWdRK ` •i 59 BbC� WOkti 1432 11613 TOTAL 1591 124e0 HOHIE BASED ;`sil PS VMT NAME WORK 0 e a HOME-SHOP D p 'kOME�-OTHER 0 i3 TOO AL fl 0 NONHOME, SASE:D EMISSIONS .CARBON 8 MONOXIDE : (T/Y) - 70 = 3lb, � HYDROCARBONS' (T/Y) a 6 45.5 1b NITROGEWOXIDES (T/Y ) = 4 ,.UEL CONSUMPT70W (GAL/YEAR) ,+ F 1�437,°., HOME EASED EMISSIONS i ..CAkSON' MONOXIDE , RT/Y i D , HYDROCARDONS' (T/.Y) 0 'NITROGEN-.bXIDES (T/Ylm 0 •f i; FUEL CONSUMPTION (GAL/YEAR)w ' '0 ASSUMES TEMPERATURE ce APPENDIX B i,• f Respo a y) re�ardinj, tts to lett.a� r .�nvironmcntal concerns onl %ur*sten project froia' Wetser, Kane,` Ballmer' sm Bas train dated May 4, 1987. _ 'k D.�X.Z1.QS�IIIgi1.i3 A carxittion of..approval for minis trative Rtview 87-1 S is that "the.dev'r-.!ent shall comply .with mitigation _measures specified for 'Future `Industrial Activity' "in, the report prepared ;by JJ. Van Houten' and Associates, Inc., dated April 60 1983." By reference, several.mitigation measures and standards for interior and exterior noise, levels were' made conditions pf approval for the proposed project. Included ln'.those`mitigation -measures is the requirement that ,-an acousticta engineering report be submltted as part of the application for, a beSildan com lyt�wthe-the�noise standards �re'comrnended-b the I,JJ Van. Houton 'and r e, the means b which`'the owcie P p tical .r ri wil tndicat y . Associates Study. It will include noise measurement�dsta, analyses, drawings, etc, sufficie'nt to .identify''the sources of:noise and ,methods of mitigation used to. reduce the level of .the noise to the'standards specified in the, study, referenced above. Conditions' noted above will ei sure that the'proposed project complies with City noise standards and regulations. The Processed Neeat ve.,12C.clara ion W21 JMRrQJ2CrJY 12gli and .fie=SJ The .DDA was'eovercd by Negative Declaration 874 which was approved and adopted by the Board of Zoning Adjurtrnents on April 15, 1997. Staff received',the Environmental information,Form for the Boureston Development project on 'April 1, �1987. Staff reviewed the information form and other documentation on Agri) 1, 1997 and April 2, . 1987 and determined that in accordance with CEQA, Article 6 Section 15070, a mitigated negative declaration could be filed for said project. A'public notice was advertised on Saturday, April 4, announcing' that the request for 'the negative 'declaration had been reviewed and was available for public review and comment for ten (10) days. Contra to .W K"e's and Mr. Belsher s allegations, .-,. .. the ub]' tc notice., mach, sw'mention of r3' p an initial study. On Monday, April 6. forms. including 'the City,$ initial study form, ;were typed In fiscal form to be attached to the negative 'declaration file. It sthould be noted that all :eview and milyses were completed prior to April 4, 1987. 1t should also be noted that public 'comments' were accepted up until April 15, 3..997, twelve (12) days after the April 4 advertisement. The "April 30 Initt',1 Study" referred to In Mr. 'i~ane s and Mr. 13elsher.s letter 1z a misnomer. On April 30, 1981, another staff member requested an "original" copy of...the initial study for. Negative Declaration 97--9 to include In the RCA to Council for. the.'DDA. A new,form ivhich contained the exact information as the April 6, 1987 form was niled_out and signed. , In effect, the initial study referred to as the "April 30 Initial-Study",is actually the saine w; the "April 6, Initial Study." Perhaps It would have been snore appropriate to have xeroxed the "April `6 Initial Study" to include in the RCA, or to have backdated 'the "April 30 'Initial Study" to read "April 6, 1987"." Staff regrets the confusion �tha, was u caused. Again, there is onl Qac (1) initial study for Negative DecIrration 87 49 an'.l that study was completed prior to the April 15 BZA hearing. , Iiiii"the i Imam As noted ibove, the "Apri11'30 Insti l Study"; Is a 'misnomer. Further, the 'Checklist/Initia l study. iot-nt ;that ;was used:in revievring' the potential impacts of;the Boutexton pra3ect is- r ` or over five years. Until snow, no chalten6+�s have tsren form 'that has been used by the:City f made re' Min use of ahe�. arm. lt'should also be noted �that'ervfronritrntsl review Is riot K$ 6� Y.. , � .ed limited to simply filling out; r.e checkllct: Indeed,"site vials and $nalyses acre cWuct ,to deterruine w hether significant geologic, flood, traffic, noise or other en4nronmental impacts ' may occur, du e :to`. the 'reject or ,that may deter affect the Nraject itself, to this case, it was „mined that,' the impacts that may occur could be adequately mitigated .and that a mitigated negative declaration could be filed for the project. TkIaitial..S%WlexEall to Take int4_A QMUI Impacts . Cumulative impacts o" „ . " P D itf.this project Y c1 ere considered. In`this case,-they were not deemed to ` w bey; signIfica nt. a , a y Vehicle Trip Generation Rates from the Change County Envi- ronmental Management Agency (August 1992), a standard industrial land use is projected.-as a worst case,scennrio,'.to-produce between,176 trip'ends'per day per, acre and 13 trip tnds, per, day, per. 1000,square "feet of building area. In this ease, the promised 122,424 square foot project •is projected; to generate, as a worst case scenario, between $90 andQI591 vehicle trips per. day. In the ,memorandum dated April 150 1997 1 from Catherine M. O'Hara ` p worst case scenario for the proposed project. In actuality, the proposed use will most likely generate .far less traffic to BZA, the lS9l trip generation number was sited to indicate than even the ;lower _890 `trips per day figlure. The project proponents have indicated that ;. due to the nature of the business, truck deliveries will be limited to approximately three per, , day, and that the"�'projected 100-200 employees will be encouraged to carpool and/or ride— share. the nature of the proposed use and,:the limit'k. ,truck deliveries and auto 1 tra �ffic, , staff concluded that the project would not ;create significant traffic Impacu nor would it'create, significant air quality impacts. cumulative or otherwise. Qshnr�nmaLcon Mitigated Negative Declaration 87 9 covers the ' project in ' Excr tton 87 24 and Administrative Review 97-15, The :,c conjunction h s th Conditional � ,-P — � j P� as agreed to comply ,with all conditions of approval. Consequently, no. significant .environ— mental effects will occur from the proposed project. In view of :his, in EIR Is unwarranted. I f . s , (8117d) t ENVIRONM7E IS- Envko'nmental, Land Managemont,' and Tr'onsporiation 'PlanningJune 2, 1987 tH��uc�l�nt N1Gcr©r� ar�^�ta HC EVELUPMEN SER% I- S DO,�irtMeit of Devciopoent Service's t ; .� Env,irorn�nental zesource's '•sec�ian city' of Nunt:irxjton Peach h P.U.'..ux• �SJ ,' P.O. Box` 290 Nuntinblon Beath, CA 92648 HUntingtor, &;nth, Cal:;f4znia 92648 ; • nmentr l Re+ icw Documents f ' RE. Coa�ents r:1 En�izo ' - . c;r . Initiel . Study .and;, S k;cgative Declaration E7--9. ;£ Clear S:z. o: t•:aca.T: ' � p t �'1.��.►L Il�'Rtl .Qb14, Lt'�-.!, w „ji� MV IilC�r�lo:1 W.. ,. • b 1 Z ni�. f i ran rr ze�nrs � �' h t.�e V consi era• Lln ,o a proposed MlustrAal developmer:: for the. 5.4cre `,vzuanx pro.r�:Ly at the site ccm►ionly referred to the Talbert-Mach p:op►artv.* "his ' 1eLLcz :Qport will, serve its my analysis GJ; the en.V'ita 1 t a I 6-:::Meiitatio7 ri:garding the is:`.aezz -F)each lnde,strial project. Wc.all, there , are a n;x-ti`aer r:F •;wiron.^,c•:,ta3�' c:cr�cex s w`�irh ruve no- been addressed or rare `btea i^adD;uatAiy ac:iressed ir. the ,course of your :e,�vi:onm atal rev_ew of- the prod •t. Therefo,- , Lase or. t'�.e `laaSeq,;acy. o- ::ne. existing do=aentatioh' and the probability t ,at tine rrojint r:-ly have a sir:aificant 'ir4nct rwn !the env:xolz,ent tas, de�lncl by Ca liforrsia Er.viro~cntal Qual,11 ' ;xtt; 3t is .�,e ou ,belief that , tnc. t.e a!:i v e M-claration should mt I be'- approved a-.A that''an Enviror.;,ental impact, Fteporf. should Ix prepaztci for tha prcjevt. Fallowing i:; the rationale for this assert•ian: Pexthous LIvIr,QNM XTAL D. -TATIn►1. 71no -R prepared far th•. Rcdevelopmen- Paa7 'for Lh� ralbe:t SpVcifis Plan, adopted in 1981,envisicned tY-I: there would be a n .EIR i.Gr this E?articulat develop.:-ent. Sin e 'his erav ro:Tkntal �� ..�:►<�:Lat iar. ':#�:lrc i;uri t1v3L an MR would have :o:'be prcparod, ` I Lhc sarr,�► .lacing mac t�wcos:sari ly be nK,ae kith res *rt to the , lar5est, �• industrial. project env is lone by 0c, F.edevelopment it:an.,'- wh 16 is 'now rro;xn:rhd . with over 2A,,000 pore square feet of space than that - originally,. con;idezed in :hC Plats. Mt)reover,' the data specif it'd in - this EIR is >' a►iz. ittedly ur.ong , acc;urLing to t'hc Cl.znning 'staff' s 'own ntr;,trrs. For c�x�.r•;,�lf, Ux- i:h predic:i:��: . nly «iSt� vc►:: eou trips p<:r day :rein 100,000 square ;cat lne.=Lrial lx:i ldin5, white over , 1,5N, trips Fvr d4y a.0 prE-dict.e3 from Cik' pro .,sed prujvc�. The .znalysi 3 in tl i. t:.R 1;, Lher<:€ore. iri,yci�:ratc ate • l��i i v kMy 1 rel 3e3 4frcn, and should I supplf�sut.•n;e��, 35 � c a n.17 t: k.' d bs bolo:_- 151G., any 5:03 of CF.p.1, with u w.►' cnvironwr►tA impact' report-.'. C.. �. '.;:t•�� i. C'it•� sta_`i t :; 'c�.�rrc�ct: f,r��aicted that 4hc ro:.cat 1� .:.�IAci- h. 5 1' p so;:v 1 ,55; Vt�nirlc trips po&r akf, no se.-.-moles a,rre , preparri ` c;�once:n ing 'the 6 3f f i.: impcts, on the AM and PM peak periods a_' the e, ,� . ,..•. IQ1S serving thi' pro-Je"`t site and at the ru.0or irs-e-4 tl:`i.iR: pxoyact I.:csle. An intersc-•coon capacity analysis 3s re:ic�:.'Wily, ccnsidrxc3 b•� .. L-011% envi:oru znta, and .;.u: is ct+t »ltn:�..s to b� a kcy w.-=pooent iri mea ux irg 8�4 R� a�I�a AvenUe, At"eira, all�c�t ' s ,# '-� nits 9 i 33 18 $) 78 •J 4•Y S ,..'. ♦ VRWf::R... .. . 'J -'J:r11 -wi'D,?,.1f4`�..R7A'�►r.r J r' - i .1 , t7epa:tment 'of 'C�evelopmit Sezvices } June .2 1987:, Page'Tw`O b y j { -.a 'pr'oject;ls cir^ulatiori iat�pacts. An fact, such'.,'inforration:'Wss zegt:es:rd Plat�ne-r as far back as''�ul.". 1982; The respo r � bythe Cit;} s .EnS'in�erirg Y� - •ns e' W , ' this request as 'stated .in the Final �iR for the Redevelostit Plan ems' that • l Led to further cpcif it 'pro�ectt propescxl pursuant to rkt 'Plan would be,.sub; ec. •.:,.y :.._ •fi enviirontcntal analysis., '. Clearly, this analysis has - not tress eooduut6d with respect: to this Issue and should be Examined within a tx w CIR. ;he proposed Ne tive' Declaration and , Initial Stud} �'for ` the project also fails to address' the, project's access ` ati3 parking irwpacts can the already overburde red `Rrdonr]u Citcle. %lithout the corpletion of thr4 extension' roadway batwi.-en . Rednndo Circle- and t:ovacs Street Os provided for i: the 'Tay16r 4 t 3r_ach "Specific Plats) it c.-in be expec ted that the, post~ operating con�l:kions; ir�adequ�z:a arces sl,•stc�n at3d turning radi i t a:td a4f icient an street- faxkicg on f:edo'do ` Cit:cl will Ex: furthnr, exacerbated i .` he indtstrlal h_oje_t is } approved-,as p. ,sed. pacts sboOld be f j anal ait:hi:s an En . i ontrer..al I . act Re t i. t:sese impacts,oix� . X. raelailPd ,�rsal}s�>; �•f analyzed •� y ►..r�✓ ~ ipo f 'i'i �, recently 1preP r "Lpcidtir3 Trttf.:ic` Counts" sl• , ittod by the CiC.� ixl t;a1 , accls.��*lot+, by the City's ,Traffic Emineer = confiict;ng, ` mocvleLe, and, sorglv': inadequate, rrd do 'not ' Address :tie traff is . brod rirct"Latioz issues t WSich ':eve outlined a'bwc. For , exarple, tie Nty Twaff ic; 'Estiyineer failed .' a to, ad3z:css traffic a9O ci.cu.a.:ors iipaots � on Bed ndu.` C:rele` from the proposed project, as well- as the cumulative circulatioh implications . moreover, City st.,if: calculr�tod impacts bated on average daily' trip, wnicb j Wit rap.-It oned is not: relevant. The sta" analysis still does nAr ad3resa the p af: per:io►3 trawf ic, :priding, oral moss in-pact. en nedond) Circle an3 ::)e : intersections in tt•,e project: locale -%i rich serve the projwt site. Similarly,, as aesc:sty fua?.der balo>~�, tr.� C. t} 5 �e�� aC.0 Gt to �aty.ess cs,.•�L�ar ivy. traffic ir►>t• cLs still does not i-td.:xess islan.-cc3 ueve:.o�za�-rst :`tt��lated pro;pectst in = ,u:rounding Iocaie a: ..%-.s nc: me �' rti h� _ ,, ,� � �n..an tewny �:xistit� gt:op�_t.es such yi h , ` t:.8�� iC >~C„2 e.v 1Ce,.` � . in the , � , t0 zhe; r, �.S ttS� c'slt:d, � t�'� 1 t:' .c..�Ox7Ca r . eMs. F'.int11}', tba reConx-ieT Lion .'for Via . tr.a►nspo?tt i to'n' sEste=� Lotion , n: nages;►er:c, ;�'�N7:am s:as: the p.cjc-ct f"car pealing and/or rile spar hg"j "is . XaudiLle, t;U; ;:Wic�rous. in that tlx- projected e'sloyee pulatio.i' s*Uld riot l ikoi te . arge 'enough for sucks an eifort' withoat ' the support of surrout�fng . businesses. `AIR 03ALITY. The C"ity Staff has fai«e:l to a:,r.;Y2.e t ;* a::, q- a2lty, L'spsct.� aS:�oC:a;i, with pro�tict- enctatc�:! : �a�hic::lar traffic. , �-thicn ' I believe art significant: zif..w .:1 t:at W•!.y • il..1, 11argn, am. un.s o. i pa;.lua, is W 'n-t.itta-J, but the` level o� x;..>ataats ge;�er3ttd will .�r' excec� tot esbald le-i4jls of siyrif.icatice csta:-," ic:ned by the ,aL:t:s coast hi: Quality c ;ag c�:.cnt Districts . ::• scilO`SD's •' .ca iforni'A I:avi.a:zs: tal :ity hci { mot.) Irrplasi a::aLiaa , - ` t?epartment: -of bevelopm ot. Services f Junc 2, 1997 page Three Cai del inesa sb'':' is , a nunbar, of. criteria in .determining . �tb esholds of sior ri r. icance ' 'for, air -quAl ity ` inp•icts. . such cr i ter ion statea th"It a sign 'would occsr wten a project would: g Z t a i t quality irnixsc t ,t:esuI in a neL emiss" '- ion t r�cxease, •bef a:a onsi t c• a.:ae ts, . equivalent to the current N;-, Souse Review significance` levels as . de^Iined in S+.�+W c,egulation Xlll, unless mdelin : des�onsttates that ''the source will ' note cause an existing exceedance, or . r.�ke neasu r abl: woy• se an exist'ing . ..aI ' Qxeee�anL�, o.s� any.. state, or, fe3:� - - i arbient: air c•.ral i ty sta,n6ard. i 'c.iis cr�..as,..e of si• �•- ons f:cance allies to both stationary sources- (a Source o: _ potiutarts w ich is Ammon: ae) ` and projects ,such as `the i a2LA_,rt-&each zrdust-JAI a1 _ru��1: 'w';bsv :ir. r source :is t;�e aen ration of •'n«�.+ traa:is F` a . Y (Nc Mutants er:tt:e�d 'by at:tornt�.ies travel irg to an3 iron the pro;ec: sate) •2. Ik Di_Sr:ict-Is.''Now S-ourca Ze:iew _Rule threshz4d Ic,:ela are cot;.-;:eJ. to e prcjc t`s er. tes3 r��b �, wassina proMe in .t:Se ,table below.. Assuming pro ect--cenerated traffic at 1,591 daily tr:p5, avc-Nga trip 1 ern th of le.0 4 'M lies,, try:o-in aL 25 ' miles per z, and Cv :n , '.th'a �1:0jc- '"Ii.a exceed daily, t.re' b:old levels of ;cdL1 c,-. tt .%n:)xide, M't .ch wov-11-d constitute a sicsci:icant ir..p��ct: , u�xrt air civalik}•. .�=oidinsly, this i:nFsct s1gnific�a:scc shxuld be acl:no+��led ed within an E��virG�rc;ttal Irnpa►cz Report a� � a,npropriace mitiya::ion rle3sures' sh=ld be i�zpIca ntca to r+;%duce such'�itt;&m.ts to acceptable levels. xrY*s*frt+Ms ►+►t• ♦fwr rawr�+lrt�r�ie�rtir�wrrww• •��►f�t� vvf�rrf �wrlrr*� �iw*r1 �*vvrr , I PC}�.GU'Cnti"f' M_SR Lt:T�.� PRQ7t" ;Tl 5TGsv22'ItJ�hi' iruAC'^? czn-bonM.Dnat; tdt 550 5�9 Total Hyd:oca:borls 75 53 Nitrogen Dioxide 100 61, Nc- : Sul,er Womide 15e 9 No Particulates 150 12 No ., 1 Pour6s. per. d""lo. •*srtt*x1f�►rlM. r ► itlr+ 0*! !r*09Rra0rffo0a22406AA,Id aIk0990 ♦ /•x*M t;.c W�; , the rc :ails, a it cuff` :: impacts cll smsi c. a si.gni f scant, a::' c�nv ronnc:,trAI anall-sis ;,h3uld al::o be `prepared on the proje t:'s rcur iaid 4 1 "Calitornia, Enviz.*-rick-nt.: . Oaal:t:y Act irplemoente::ion Gu1&1 .nvaj Ou1.ti Ccta:;t: .A;it: Quni ity Yasiaqcr.•enl District~. February G, 1547.. 2 . rir. of iah 11, rn6 rig, ti:sad, rscr9y a:`4 Environment !kCtion 'of . ttht- C�.a Di srr ict;'. ►uarch• 10 1987. _ I, . :.4•.•TWI.I,Ih'.,h,wMr..ViR1vw. -... ! —- _— .....,..,....,.w�!♦ ... :•-.',7+HN ti•-M.♦ ,.N-f-. rj,;.��y .. '.R IG Iti•.'Y`a K' r , ;i 1t Department ,cif Development Services June 2, 1g87 Page Four .a {locals a fecta, 'pat'ticularly in lfg t .,of ;,the fact that circulation pzoblems', on Redondo Circle will worsen wlrh the project and wittout the RedoPAo/hwacs extension,,, `causin autorrrabiles and trucks more idling, larger amounts 'of pollutants •'Om teed. Hear-field i ts�onxt resulting in g F� � he senior x citizens complex should be evaluated. Finally, no merit.ion vas trade in existing, praject do:^umentatio. regarding whether or not t1he project wilt emit any stationary cso,urce. ( factory) emissions. . If so, emission calculations should be prepared and resulting impacts analyzed. NOISE. Chapter 95, on, 951A.18 of the Huntington loch Municipal •Code Sec i g.• F� requires the preparation of a noise analysis for this project unless,, at: nq , other items, provisions are made for adequate noise mitigation masures. Although the Negative Declaration does contain mit:.gation measures, their adequacy :or this project should be evaluated within the context of a detailed noise study which examines the projects. noise generating operations, including its machinery, compressors, truck, loading operations, and pro ject--generated traffic. The City Staff has xequestcad that an an acoustical• engineering zeport be wilmittpd as- part_ of the application faz a building permit for this project. Such. a study should be prepared as part of a comprehensive environmental analr3Js for this project, and should` logically (and lega:1Y Y be prepared before City approval of the project. Zi3KZAT1VE IMPACTS. According to Section 1SP65 Cc) d_ the tEC-h GWdcl inns, on Sin is required when One pro- ect has possible env iro:mental effects which , a-re c nulstzvely tonsiderable. I tx;lieve it is reasonable to assuiw .that , the, impacts of pAst, cor:c:tit, and probable future 'projects in the surrounding locale analyzed in conjunction with c is project could be considered "cumulatively considerable," which is above the Lareshold at •'which such .� impacts may have a signi f icant irrgct cn the enviromwnt. For example, the, c=ula ive circulation im,-jacts from recent industrial develop::ent along r: Roondo Circle should be exarnined in conjunction with this pzoject, As mentioned, the, 'City , has considered only limited existing c9Evelop-1&nt an redondo Circle in (.-hair ` inaccurate a.al}sis of `mmilative traffic Impactsw An EiR should be prepared which examines the cmulat:tit impacts from all luotentiaily significant en:•iror.mmtal issues, amid should consider the impacts of all past, cur.rrent, a.-4 probable future projects, as required by the , Cal i forma F..nviro»mental Quality Act, i Thank you for the opportunity to cocrzent. sincerely, W1 AL S Christopf, A. Joseph pal Nrinci . RESPONSE TUMR. cxRYSTortER ►. r JSEPH'S LETTER! w, MlittONMENTAL T MMtS TO C17Y DATED JUNE 2. 1"7 prvious tnviron`mental Documentation• The focused,Environmental ftmp:icC Report prepared for,the Talbert'Deach Redevelopment Area which was adopted�hn 19$3 did riot "envision" additional, ,E1R: would be'prepares! .,,� .. r that an forldevelopment of th'es;141ectt property.';.Rather, the EIR.recommended further environ- ,. .review for subsequent o ects. environmental , review would determine whether an EIR i a mitigated nega� rnentat the. initial mlti6ntlon:measures should be a ared.,'The focused.011, re aced tive declaration or a ne . . , F�. P P Pared in declaration rriith no 1983,In"no way intended tolmpose the'reixulrement that a full EIR be prepared for any; speclflc`project. Indeed, for'pw"poses of flexibility, the'tanguage was intentioraily vague. The environmental review conduct.�d for the propasesi Boures.on project is new and original. Information from the 1983 E1R was not'utillzi+d due to the fact that it is outdated and Is not project specific. Consequently, the trip q y p generation numbers quoted in the 1983 ElR are moo: at"this point. Mr .rose h's-allegation'that the 1983 Elk is an Inadequate tool to be used for environmental review of,the proposed project is entirely correct. Indeed, that is why staff,has not re'llPd as a data source, Staff' c6bd nrnental analysis of the speciflc upo the dacurnent �cted.en�iro �� ali e. circulation, and noise im cts th� . .:. r � concluded that . p ed p j, ct based on the best available data. . Results,af,,the anal is co the ai'r' qu, ty pa at may be"generated by the proposed .�.. ` roject, and which the a- aken issie with, (in addition to other pgtensial p ppcllant has t impacts) are either lnslgnificaiii,(based on Stale and Federal Standards) or will be mitigated. In view of this, staff prepared a draft negative declaration to be filed for the project and the City's Board of Zoning Adjustments approved/rertified the negative declaration on April 15, 1987, o,Ct mliS1i"t See attached'staff response to Mr. Joseph's M.ay letter. , Mr. Joseph's June 2, 1987 letter baslcally reiterates the same issues raised in hit May 4, 1987 letter. It should be noted, howe�•er,.that while Mr. Joseph finds ridesharing and caipaaling to be "Iaudible but ludicrous".mitigation measures for.reducing traffic and air quality impacts, the United States Department of Transportation, the South Coast Air Quality Management District and the Southern California Association of Governmenis find them to be valid, useful and acceptable`mitigation measures. Air'Quality As,1nd1c' a,te-d in taa � Mr. Joseph's q, 987 letter (attached), according'to the URBEt4IS arqulitym�1 designed by the Ste Air • Resources Board and endorsed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District, the'proposed project will not'generate any SigniLjka= air quaiity impacts. According to the URBEMIS•tnodel, vehicle generated pollutants caused by the proposed project are projected'to be =L1 bo1Q.g the South Ccrost Air Quality Management District's New Source Review MR) threshold levels. r 3 odel . t1ro , tex t att it o v uti, nt:�t Kt jkxm) indis ehlcleIg6oirsted pol � the•pr'opos 'Zhr rd}Pt: rill;exceed the NSReihold level of'carbat coon ck by 19 Oxro is ccjec day•: Baseci`on this'informition .'Jog has ri4i ested that:anE1R p�c'epared for the kA" � Bert. While: the m tuerdl ne:cessa �'he.'�Ci utilizes;thie State`hir. Resoter�techniques'can artt�ad, ix 3s ...,hardly', �• . . . ty Board model becaiist,it �`: r recom*Pded and endorsed by the SCAQI►�D: The City finding that the pcopa�d prajerct will'not generate signlflcant MM-point source �ntr quaility impacu weir based tx� 'tht RBEMIS rnodet results. Due to'the::nattue oE` the proposed tnanuf;ctuHng'use. point aocsrcz emtssions,are riot an i ue with'reaaird to air'4pality'impacts. (See project de�.scriptlon and'stsff's.response to Mr. Joseph's May, �4, 1987 latter.) Becaiuse the.prajectedn�c+i -paint source: air quality trnpacta"are ive11 tielo�v the: SCAi�MD's. of a full Environmental Imp ct Report (as defined by the�Calif tan avir ; the preparation NSR.threshold levels- and point source�air' ua�ll Im acts are no ornlu Environmental Quality ' Act)`is unwarr$nted. ' response Jose h's'May 4..19R7 letter. It should be noted that'It"is See staff s re nse to Mr. reaso6ible,and'custo' wary for a-decision-making body oi' the City of Huntington Beach to t3onall�► approve a development project. in-this case, an scoustical engineering report a building perm b�the'project proponent and subrnitted,to the City► to the Issuance of ' n or.developinent-can take: place,unttl the y PP'�'ov City reviewed and 'a ed an scous3ical en ineerinR re•p4rt for the-project. Given '.. of er w �'no'const�ructio imposed mitigation measures for potential noise Im cts, further environmental review In the form—of an Environmental Impact ,Re�:port Is unwarranted. emulative Impacts '. . Sou 1�lza _. t the eircWa ; In view of the fact ta�a lion, ate and noise'Impact-Issues raised hY_ the appellant ve be F d�c sled with conditions of approval or are considered ax des fined by State an ha ral threshold levels, and also considering the factthst with the development of the proposed project, the Redondo Circle Industrial area will be close to being built-out,; It is reasonable,to assume that future and cumulative impacts from the proposed project w1il s also be Insignificant. , - - 1 w.,. .+'1 ._C' Iry Aw,..,.,�i -. • i..N,3�f19 �77}MESA .:r, •a 6J1 Y•--.tiiGlrt3N'M..wsrv,. .r+n+.,. •..w.• IM..r.Y +.rIM h..a !',! � ��. 1 +'(1.'�r.�t..' 1 f),"! � , 'f ,' ,1 >•`. f 7 1 ',.�,, • ��,. ' •1iJ'ly 1 y s J7 it,�`,��j i J, �ti C ,•, •i, , f + _ ''1 '1� J .ate .H.i►•.1 d.f. R N ►VOTTO ;.Clt i 1lttdcnt F r,.... Y: Y 7 �,:/ lltt+arneY,,�lar tea. 37372 >, ' '-w LL,T1U1 � SR xi •#t 7� , ' .•A O R ?� il; z z 7 • �r C t x t Ktltgl ` ` �, EdM�1RD;'J'. :1t�TTYK11,`,'D�putY Citj�` 'XktbrntY } � ��'�4,i'�t �f ` :3 :t000 fain :street fiuntf`ngtort ne'ach' Ca 'i�orr�ia ' 926�7 •' 136= 3r5 . 7 ,y Yl • � "R r..R r '..f , J :➢ "1 7 .7•i •'1 Attor F in,dacnta 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF .C�1GI[�OR"iI1� 9 COUNTY • OF ORANGE 10 11'' �.TRrne N . PROPERTIES, K C�:SE :40 . 51=-95 77 !j Genera�I Partnership ) ' D ECLA?ATxON. 1AP..uRUCL 12 4 ?iain� Csr..KERt1 ;SUP4Rfi; .^P' `3 MOTION .O* EKPUNCE_ .LZS ; vS ) PEh'nENS CCP '5�449. 1 7 ` REDcVELCiP:lE:JT AG'.:SCY F Tt;c' DATE : , June., ®,s",'98 7 T` C1'IY :F--,` t1��i FNGTOtt,'REJ�CH', �'3..'iE: 9 .3t1 "al.M. • 'I " 1 CALIFORNXA 'CITY CQUNCIL �.�tD � DEPT: 2'1 �fi 'CITY'. OF >HUNTINGTGN=` DEA CALl.FORmrA: BOURESTON. f)EVELOP- . ? 17 MZNT'' llic: v SOU HWEST `QUILTED � PRCOUCTS INC ; JOE . E . g . ROBERTSCtt; 'JACK K€LLY$ JCHY ERSKrNE::,. WES. BANNISTER; ; RUTH y • , !r t• ;. i lo. MILEYi PET£R .GREEN; , TOM ': YS; t GRACE w1NCllEGG; . CHARLES N. TH014PSON: and DOES a through 20 g_. 21 Defends C . ) , • 22 s ., .. j. r DE � CLARAJ*tCt: Rv 9RpCE GILME'R t) , ^il Y, SRUCF- GILMER, declare •aa fo11oV8 : I. T an the TtaFfic Lngtneer for l`Lhe ' CxTY Or HUIITtNGTON 7 SEX`CN J► , a . x'`bave 'begin em 10• ed b t:0:t 2, P r ,the cxx or ttJNT'xNG";4N 18EACJ3 �nr , 28 �ha past, f-Urkeeta (14) yeaxs� ; , a ♦ � • + ' '. •'•1♦ .S� :. � :, . � 1 : �{�:.'.. ►♦ • ' r i.• '•fir z , ' l 3 . T iw familiar 41th thi tca�fis f,V aitui'atich 'art 2 Talbext Avenge ss ii pces�ntl,y `exists, r 3 4 : At , the, preser�G :,tine the tratCiC as Talbert Avenue Is 4 far ,less than 'the capaety the street can accorrr�cda►te . 'familiar wit the project planned . for tip:► sitbJeck fi property .and , the ,t'ra�fic:,thak the , 'roject, hill, erate. C, h ffic, ge e rateda rom-1 t pro ' c oo's;. rd ; groect will p is 9 'have .Innr.. mpact on the 'traffic ,flow on ;Talbert Avenue is t r I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is 10 tt rue . and ' correct. 11 DATED': ;" :'al 15, 1987 . .. _ Huntington Beach , California 12 13 14 ARUCE GiI►ME 15 Traffic rngheer " 7 20 21 22 23 ( t 24 26 27 t r (�". ` """"'.+"+.w`n"r+.wr+nr.tr...•.•.►.i• H ...••.wyvio!+v.... ♦: ti s' Ov l .•I mil" S r • • • .,. , June 2, 1937 f It,, Kent, Pierce (:airman--Planning' 'Cbmis ion ' CE ty,of ',Hm tingto'` Beach ; 2000'Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Dear .Mr . Pierce: On behalf of. the :re:idents of'. Uave;' please ,tie: advis 3 we have et held � • g i3cus3. the Aedondo 'Circle aite, ',and w-; overwhei lmlhgly_ 'support :the concept of the 2acreston Development/Southwest milted prodwts proposal . wee ravor the.8sureston proposal for the following reasons: 14, Peace' grid quiet»-they; location ©f, the truck loading acid the solia'wall y' facirig:our 'development grill r insure csr privacy. Less traffic-:-rle believe there xi11 bet trter'Cant.�o3 atitl,,p liltlmatelyj less'`traffic' on the site. 3. Good neighbor--we have met with the Pre.Qidert of SDuthwcSit Wilted Products and we approve of his a'rganixation. r, rt. Cood use--ire believe SuuthWeat Wined Products is an a�pprapc'iate _ light mnufaeturing use for this locat ion. We woul.d ho that our feeling s will have a Positive inpaat; upon the C ty' s � pe g decision in this r.�att.r. Sincerely, j • ..ter v .w, r .., .. •`--'�.,i.•-�•�'.�.:.+rat l• t� � . � �. ,..,r- 1.. c: - , i _. ,:S' , 11 , ":Y ...5. .•11, S ,ji , (' l c ,S: . _. ` x t. .Of 1 _B"`un t x n Onc a�.r►. w�r�/Y.yam fi/Vp �� , • .. .^ CALI FORNIA SMI ~' OFFICE°OF THE' CITY AO% Ott:'RATOR Mardh 27, `t 937 - ,titr. Mkhael'D. 'Dodd BoUreston Development, Inc. 3333 Vla'Lido, Suite 203 New port Beach, California .92661 SU83ECT: m AUTHORITY,TOtLE.f�C1R ENTIYLEM ` ENYS ^ :TALbERT-BEACH INDUSTRIAL, PARCEL Dear Mir, Todd: Pursuant to the pending Disposition and Development Agreement between the Zedrvelopnient Agency and your, firm Cppu�eston Qevetopme:nt, Inc and the action of the Redevdlopmen t AS'ency on March 1 b, !9R?, you .arr hereby a.uttwrized to file '. for 0 entitlements=to-usc on the su►.Ject site novc owned by the City of Huntington' Beach. This s letter of authority will provide you' ,the opportunity to file for ; the Board .of zoning Acljustn:ents and any other review pro�ced�res which may be required by'the Gity',s Boards and.Commissions. . As alu ays, i-appreciate your coopera tion and assistance g... nee in-this rr ard. lt, you should have any questions or require additienal,intormation, ple.3se do not hesitate to contact us. " Very trul rs, w , C . ex �'. ompson Ciry CWT/SVKssar xc" Douglas N. La Belle, Deputy City Administrator/Re'develupment Stephen V. Kohler, Principal Redevelopment Specia►llst - r � 3�b TekpAone ("1.81 .5202 4 Mfriutea, H. `B. 'Board oU Zoning AdJustments April - 15 , 1986 ,�. page 1 b. Rnoftop Mechanical Equ3pisent Plan. Sii'd plan - ahal`1 i�ndIcate,' screen#rig 'o'�E a�2 too�top rriechan1CAi equipmer:t1-, i shall`"deli neatc''th6 `tl►pe ,of %material 'proposed' to ucr+se " aid equipment. 1 I+ 4 . api�nq sn r • 4 . Install i`on;of , required land sc d .irarfgatian stems a stall��be m leked prior 'to : fin�p al . inapaction. is . 5. The two and 'je half foot (2--1/Z ' ) • �Y er d of ion shiAl. ;,'be made to the Ci to 'satisfact;Qn of . the Puri c- Works Dirp4rtMent . .i; 6 All, bui' f1 1 9 xpoi such as:' unuaablo 1 e�c, .wire, ,pipe�� and .. , k 1. . ather''aur lus �os, e d o handl ' , hem ' •. it an p un able ' materiail', s S be disposed `oE pe t , e_ ,-site" facility'. qu; ., •. of f 7 . Natural .*gas shall be. Btu ed 'Am the 16citioria. ,of cookin4 faililities water , heite`rC "and ' entral. heating un:i,ts. 8 Low-Volume 'heade aha 1]. be on a]'I ;,apf goes � and water faucets. 9 . A1I.'.applicable' Public W rks fee shall ,be paid -prior, to issuance of building rmitS. 1. The develpmen Shall comply with all a l'ieable provisions of Department. : the 4rdin'anc hods, Building Division, 'v t� on, an Fire , 2 . The, appli' nt shell meet all applicable lock , State, and ',` Federal : ire ' Codes, Ordinances., and. -standerds , 3 . Ladd aping shall comply with Article ' 91.3 of th Huntington Bea Ord irbance Code. r. AiES: GodEray, k' :ejGi , Smith WOES Luang , Poi AD ' N'T: None ONDITiONAL EXCEPTION NO. $7-24 ADMINISTRATIVE , REVIEW No 87-•15 NERATI'+lE DECLARATIQN No, 97-9 uC. odd. I CE r6QjJXST: To oarmit . 1) a thrive and one-half foot (3�1/2` } : encroachment into required fourteen foot 14 ' ) f rout yard sekback on Redondo` Circle, 2) a. truck well fifty► feet;'�1 (504 ) in width in lieu of twenty feet (201 ) o , and 3),, a three Took (3 0 ) , wide landscape buffer in lia+u of required six foot (61 ) _4- 4/'15/87, - 32A , a Minute a, H. S. Board of Zonin , q Ad justmonts April 15, .19aE Page 5 b$ T:`;. .;To permit an hundred.. tuenty-two : thousands our hundred tweet --four 122*424,) Square industrial building.Foot Y � r . Sulu e, t , ro ect is located West o 3 p P Y f Beach Boulevardrand South of Talbert Avenues (between th6 East terminus of Redondo Circle and South terminus of Kovacs Ci 'dI's This request is covered by Negative Declaration No. 87-9 Ns,. ',',Phillips reported tnei xequeits' were for constiruction of an' industrial :building with .variances . Staff recommended increasing the ' landscape planter on the south side by decreasing,' the planter on the''Ndith side of the driveway , if the ?ire Department had no objections. Staff further mentioned letters had ,been received statfiig an Environmental Impact Report be filfsd rather',:than pro_casaing,, a Negative Declaration for . the prolact; ' ho"ver, _ the E Environmental Staff member feels mitigations placed "'on the Negative Declaration. will .be sufficient for the project. Sta'ff'; enumerated_ the. 'conditions and restrictions being' `placed` on con'struction of the building . Stall recommended approval of the three requests . ' The Public Nearing was opened and Michao: U. ;'Todd was present to speak . Eor Boureston Developmant. . Others present to represent the 1P applicant were Lee Wieder, Lary Pierson, Joe E. . Robortson,":and Robert Goodman. Mr. Todd" stated he concurred with Staff ' a recommendations. Daniel G. Higman stated he was owner of, Relf able :Lumber Company which was located . on the ,sect .street with the proposed : project. Mr. Higman indicated his opposition to the `conatruction because of street had not bfle�np � ltruck' tdeliv®ries , and the fact the,. additional. traffic -problems,,",, continued through as promised. Mr. Higman asked that the goard deny the variances . Harold Ducate stated he was an attorney representing ,Reliable, lumber Company and introduced the subject of ownership of the property.► ' He ' stated it 'was his understanding the property was owned by''the':'Clty, of Huntington Beach and his client had not received prior' noti,ce' of hearings geld by' the City. Mr . Ducats ftiixther stated that, in hi$ opinion, an Environmental Impact Report was required and indicated the application- was improperly before the Board. Another Redondo Circle tenant, Bob silver, spoke in opposition 'to the project because of the increaaed 'traffic and the fact the street had not been extended through as 'origi na l ly planned . Leeieder said it was his undestandi the hearing was ) ' _ w r ng g properly , advertised and the appropriate patties were notified . Mr. Wieder further stated there had been previous public hearings regarding the ' project, and he thanked Staff members for their assistance in p'lwg-- 4/15/87 -» 'BZA a H . B . board of Zoning' Adjustments . April 15; 19�6 page 6 xr. Ducate inform©d Mr. Wieder there, had processing.' the `�regu,st . , . . been -other` hearings but this was the first time adiscent property owners ,had boon notified., Mr": 'Todd stated .truck ':del iveries :would !be,. limited .to three .;pei ' ,da'y sCkP wr yoi fe � f new rasterialHe furtheraddeid ;nose p obleaz ould ' -- not :bey grattly . increaaed,.by operation of this fanility. .Mr. Hi9man que' ttoned . who would be monitoring, �deli.veries and Mr. Robertson stated they would •control the truck traffic. , . ,Connie Msndic reminded , the Hoard. they,.were s'pprov3nq a , buildi rig, which would be there for many years and might be occupied by 'other , tenants at a later time . There :was no one else present to speak for 'or igainsit the yroject so the Public Hearing wee Closed. Daryl Smith asked Steven Kohler ..for on explanation concerning '.the ownership of the . parcel . Mr. Kohler indicated the RedeVelopMent Agency, of the .City- still owned title to the land and a` .letter Indicating! the, ,property . owner ' a, approval had bte+n ;placed, in the file . Mr . ',Kohler further stated the City Council hid selected the applicant which was before the Board on this date . upon questioning by Daryl Smith, Ms. Phis repeated ,tha information she had give; concerning trafficstudy f gu es 'weed in calculations for this project, as well as other industrial . buildings . Les Evans initiated the subject of Tentative Parcel Trap requirements for the project. Daryl. . Smith indicated he would move for approval of all three requests . - the Negative Declaration, Conditional Exception and ,Administrative Review. Lies Evans requested that the motions be made separately. i MOTION 8Y SMITH AND SECOND BY GODFRIEY ' UPON MU , NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO . 87-24 WAS APPROVED BY TtiF IrOLLowrn vcrrE: AXES: Evans , Godfrey, Krejci , Poe, Smith NOES: None AB66T: Bone UPON MOTXON: BY SMITH AND SECOND BY GODFREY, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 37 -24 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLowING FINDINGS AND CONDITrONS, BY THE FOLLOWING' 'VOTE 41 xi»uten H. H. .Board of •toninq Adjustments April 15, 1996 Page 7 I F� rAF !'Q4 APPgQMt. _"�pD_�.ZQ.�..��.�IC�2(�,�,,,Q��.l: 1 . file• siti • 8 ,located at""_ the termi-nui of-. .two i.r uukrial streets adve heree ,thee eduoed 'astbick and truck we'11 WiII, now. Therefore, , , d s, . , ply, . �p t, surrounding residents of it+ pact the "i�ai.�aa of property and, impiovwUnt:s in the wicainity. h4,,:siS$j eCt. propie t includin rise, shag e, ;;t:o o �a n ,< .I, 2. 3ecaUse cf spicial. circumstances applicable to t sur'roundin s ' the . strict a ` , lication •of. the Zoni1 g 0r „oc . . q , �+.. pp -Zoning 4rdiiisnce _I . found to 'deprive the : iubject property 'of 'privi leges enjoyad by othir fiaaiti'anat . vicinity and "Under identical zone prop,"sties, in , the c1 , i 3 . The granting of Conditional Exception No. 87-�24 will not be mate ri'a11• p .detrimaenta1 �'to the public welfare, or injurious, to 11 property in the inm© zone classifications. 4 . The "gra<nha tie acal .Pian 'at the City otion Kill..,nat adversely: tins of , the Conditional EXCe if.. Ct t n a y f Huntington Reach* anou N •� ,tQ �Q ., '. •.- ,f:... ,: r r ..1.. •' _,. r, it 1 . The cite ,plan, f].00r:'plans,,, and eiAvutions received and dated April 1 ,. •1987, shall be -the approved layout, with %aodifkitions t as noted in Administrative Review No. 87-,15 . Z. hll Conditions of,lApproval of `Adrainie't:rative Review No. 37-15 shall bu' applicable. , AYES: ,Godfrer, Kre ci Pos Smith NOES: : Evans t ABBOT: pone WON 3�TIt�►1d; BY: SMITH ,A11fl SECONDBY. GODFR,LrY, ;ADMINISTRATIVE REVI� ' ifo. -_87--15 WAS APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING ` coxDITI0NS, BY• THE t FOLLOWING; VOTE: �:jn►L COEDIT :..�..�► illl�►.�T !�0 87-1S 1. The f laor• plans and„elevations rec+aived' and dated 'Apr, l 1, 1.957,t shall,.' be the appro�rod , layout. 2. The site plan dated, Apri.1 , 1 , 1987, shall 'be' revised to depict the modifications described horein: a . Increasaa width"'of 1&ndscape planter adjacent; to ,South property boundary , (Reduce width of landscape planter- adjacent ` to building sccordingly) . �. _7"- 4/15,j87 BZA Minutes H. 8. ,fio rd of ton -Ag Adjuatrnentsa April 15, 1986' Page 8 3 . pri'o= to ;isxseuance- of buf lding peesa+itss , the ap,pliceint shai -: . ?; sunbmit -the "folloKing, plans: a . Landis ape and ir�cigit3flrs pain to the 'Do art�iicent .of, Deyelopnent Services and Public Works -for ioylew and . approval . :a b. Ro'oFtop Mechanical Equipment ' Plan. Said-, plan shall indicate,: sscreeni,ng of .all r* ooftop mechani,�cel, equipment and isaidll de'line� 'ate the: ..type of material 'proposers ::to.. screen quipment. 4 . 1iis 811atio"i ' of"required ' landscaping and , irriggticn systems , small Abe coreple' ted prior ' to Einal inspection. 5 . railing plans -shall b' submitted to the,: Public„ Works'..Department g p trod for; nll storm .YunoEf if . determined to be necessary by the Director of Public Wo7 fks. 6. if foil type insulation is to bo used, a. fire, retardant type shall be installed as approved by the eui lding Ixeparttae»t. � 7 'An autmati rinkler system hQ approved afire s shall nd , installed pursuant to Fire Department: regulations. : so Service roads and Eire lanes, as determined by the Fire . ', Department, shall be posted and marked 9 . Fire access lanes shell. be maintained . If : fire: lane violations occv'r '-and the services of the Fire. Department.,- are required", the applicant will be liablQ for expenses incurres ,. 10 . A,11 bui,3.ding epois, such as unusable lumber , wire, pipe, andp other surplus or . unusable material, shall be disposed 'of .at an off-site fkility equipped to handle them. 11 . The develo'ma nt:, shill comply with mitigation measures 'specl f ie8 for '"Future industrial Activity" in the Report, ptepared;'by J. J. van Houton, and - Associates,, Inc. , - dated April_ f, 1933 (attached) 12. , 'Natural gas shall be ;stubbed in at . the locations o • f water : heaters and central' heating unitsg. 13 . Lowwalune .herds chill be used on all. spigots , ear"- 'vatex i~aiscets . 14 . if lighting is, irnCludecd. in. the` paArking . iot , -hjgh--pressure sodium'vapor. lamps , shall ' be used for - energy""savings . All � outside lighting shall bey 'd irected to ' prevrnt,,: "spi l lagee` .onto ad acentIprope'rties. �,�_ ✓t;'/87 8xA xi'nut*a, M. .8 eoard,- of .ton ng'.Adjustmentac , 1�pri 1 15, 19a6 p«qe` 9 1S .".. ITior:- to:isauance .of.; buil ding : perrai t s.,. �sPPli.cant,;Shall, fi1e a parcel m&p to .'delineata!:.-the , alignmant:`of_�Rodd'ndo. Circle . and Kovacs. Circle: '.1'Said ,reap shall be ;racoxdid prtoir tofinal i;nspectio-r and`.a `copy submitted to the Department of • Development Services. �• ` Jai{ '; V 1: :', fi. . . /i :• ,.'' t .,, ., ', _. 16 . ''�1i1�aRp�plicablii = t�ublic' 'Morks . fees shall be. paid prior.''to ' •ieeuance of huildirq `p+arn►itai. ;, 4 { ' .�� 1 j`\�.i'' r• a ..JAi:4 •.i, I,:..�. C,. r "t 1�. f; e y.h!G;: j,: . . `��l�B�'!►Tii�. i?X_i�F�i�'hC �� •.:�. �a�ti�r„I� iy$: �.gyrgw , le The devaloprr�nt ' shall` comply: with ell ' applicable, ans of the Ordinance"Code, Building Division, and Yire' 'Department. 2,. Th0' applicant•" shall z�e►ot:. all , applicable :local, Srait®, and t Fedszal-- Fire °Codes , , Ordinances, and standards . , 3 . � Landscaping ;�shi ll , cornplys with Article . 960 bf theIiuntington i 'Beadh Ordlhince, Code. 4 : xhs' Board •of� `Zoning Adjustments 'ieserves, the right: to,`, ' oke <1�►dminiatrative Review, any. violetion of- •th'esQ c ondition ; of the' ,-Huntington Beach ordinance, Coda' o ccura.' AYES: Evans,, Godfrey, Kre j ci , ,Poe, Smith li0E6 s � pone _ . ABSENT: pane U PERMIT 110. 87 -18 iAtl- � atE A�,;,r' eques o „parmi't a one (1) day charity;:bazaar, i ashoppx g center `_park lot on May;-- 2; 198?. . Subiject' 'Pr ty is .,located ' at 16699 ,Algonquin �reet +(Walt: aside. of A1g� n *ff St , at bettweea . Davenport Drive an oardwalk Drive) . re nest is' icovere'd st 9 egor, 1 l..�emption; C1asn cal•i�ornia''Lzvir�onmental'- Quad. ct, 1986.; staff,.. informed, the: eoerd . t appli i s representative' :could .na t be p,rdsent, and . had ' reque8t a cont£nuanc p' Apri 1:. 22, .- 19e7, -.in the event;'the 'Board' ospeSrk to • alter : am of . conditions' placed 'on o �litimna•��im o the, zevious � ea s : and. the , om_ Winded the, requost in paaV'yaitrs Hor+evnr , , StatE r c • n p P Y Ba d. chiosa to hea�ir th Win. Go rey:; asked- V.any negative reports h,a'd been, red I ve�d..in prev rK years. roga�rding the bazaar, and,.Staff 'replied` itte `had to ived no negative cocas ents .from the Pali,ce''Dop' artmant . g.. 4/15r67 UZX self �i1►�►��. � �tee. �Ilt ®m scat VON 1!t#iitlll#Itfl1i1I1Hlf! + 1"11911111111111!#11111 -� �111!!l1t111q!litilt,lll lttftittfilftlt#t!#tilt �• ®�� !lHltltlft111t11t#it##i It111it1ttl#ilfllfittwi 11 Hill if1l11ti11 i1ltill!lli101111ttlllillllltll IF t11f11i11f1!#t!!#Nt#!11 IU1tl1ll.i�lttililf tilt !i!lEti l3itL1!#1 r�� U1l1li�HitQ'1!I!Y . 3111it1!#tiE111fftiitf## iilfit#�tt�itt +st#t�� t111li1#i111tt1t! iEtf111 . �!e#u�t�tftiftt#trlt�tll ,� 111i1li#1#1tli11#1ti1l11i ` IR###ftflstif11i1Ftit#f! , , i#11�1;1r3letet�atflt!!� � iilt[1tt�t1iF1ttt111tItIt � it#;ittltlffsillt#�ttlt�� !iNl1ltt1f1�11li#!#t11# ANN - } ffmcm re"rrs w • r ii. _ � swY.. wrwwarar•raaMG, raw.. ten: 1pW IN NOUN ,._..�.. .........aaa*No +was .n • rrxwara�a.a+ua�ras•a. WSW so ii�' m..wwa. a UNION so �� . !I#Iltlll.!!11#Ar1111l111 �� ,� .. ` . ii ' 11t1111411flltlrl�lll`ilif �� 1�� fftt1t11#IiE1i1111►f1fltl liliilll,lllill[tlifilf[if ' � All !1 , tE111t1ti111t11r1111 li tE1Elllllf###1#fllrl of 9If11111t##rf#Ililies It #411 till 111111ttlUi 1� �� _ It • titltillllll�iirtl{! liltlitlliltr�illt�t111111 rfrrrrll�l�fll��trr�rlr�r lots Ift11111f1U11)11 M �[tit11i11��«11�u��tlt� •••••••,•• art �iiettstl * r 141 • 11#11l#1 +a R► � f ts1 II11111 t _ ` # lto At ii! 1111111. 1 11f t► � . gin tool All +1 �. � _ �•. _ - � `' � ems'. �, ' � ��f�ur =ti - oo - ■ ii �� 's ' j lot ce 41 /3 ■e �Ei�tl� �!! t - .. •. `. .:.ice ♦ ,.. L., � �•� .-• r�� ` �� ■� �� -. • • - .^ 1 - • - � ..+ram } � l t �t�t�-•, �� 1 - • 0 ` _ • • 7 • , t 4 + 7 • �I•�Yam, .. � _ - .. - _ - _ _ - - � - . .. ......,...r w.-......+,..r ,. ..,.....•ti•e-�..rnf '..:• N: '�'Mti rw.r.Vs�/FRf'•iWirr II()U1'F.N h ASSOf:IATES, Inca 171K W. LINCOLN AVL'NVB SUITL D.hNANISIN. CALIFORI414 4009 (114) "S 9S13 :t JOHN J. VhN HOUTZN. PB (-tw"ulfiew Enfinftt M Ac ntks "L:ES April 6 , 1983 !J0. C:x i10 Project File No. 1233.-83 Ht!n#in�!�n EJy_Ch CA 9?540" CITY OF HUNTINGTON REACH � ~ c000 'Main Street �— Huntington Beach, California 92648 Attentioh : Mr. Glen K . Godfrey ' Subject ; Noise Assessment, Propoaed Senior Citizen Res!dentlal, Development, City ,f Huntington Beach Reference: 1 . "City of Huntington Beach Central Park Traffic ,S Study", prepared by Kunzman Associates • 2.' Site plans prepared by Hales-Langston Architects, March 3 , 1983 Gentlemen: r • Figure 1, identifies, the study g,rea and site plan for. the proposed t Senior Citizen ' Residential Development within .the City :pf Hunt - 4ngtbon Beach. Measurements'•hav'e .been obtained and an analy3ls, x has , been ` performed to de' tercaine the existing and projected noise i 1evelc ,wlthin the study area ' of . this propo3ed d,evelopment. � 7,n add itfon ' Lo arterial traffic,,ethe 113pact of oilier source3' of noise . associated with the existing and; future fnduatrial ,activity ied . where:: considered necessary ,, mlttgat•1on have. •t�aen id ..nt1_f , methods are indicated es ',needed to reduce the nolae to 'staaditrd3 Speicifled ,,by the City. The following provides the resu: is of the �iO�IS,E:,;,.EV„ALULrI011• MURI1 >i The Noi3e` glemrrtit 61 the General Plan for` •the c c'y of Ksintingt'on Search ••. n' dicstea that the ' 666' munity,. i n*13t e4tAl alent,,,1tvel;-:(CXEL) 3ha1 .1" '" ot • :exceed 60 . dB within• .the _ ex ter ar�. 1 ivi.ng 3 aces,-:p1' risIdenti;al locations and : 3hal l riot • exceed 45 ::dB " ri,tthir he Ref to APP �ydi x, i lnter,i oir.t aps�c:s R e for an exp14natiotn Qf' the Ate► e.' S ed* mesture of noise level and :the CHZL ,nesaure .oi', noxa�e exposure. ,t i. CITY OF HUNTINGTON .BEACH PROJECT FILE NO. 1233"83 In addition to the noise element atandarda, the noise ordin&nct for ::he City of Huntington Beach specifies noise levels Which shall not be exceeded at locations within the residential devel- opment when exposed to the noise generated by the neighboring industrial activities. The exterior noise standards specified in the ordinance Are as follows: i.aed UaeL�stc�3► .Ise•- eriod Residential 55 dB( A) 7 am 10 pm 50 dB(A) 1i1 pm - 7 an In the event the intruding industrial noise 0:on313ts entirely pf Impact noise, simple tone noise , speech, ausia, or any combina- tion of these sources, each of the above noise levels is reduced by 5 dB( A ). These standards are further altered to account for and permit higher noise levels for various durations each hour. The ma21mum noise level which may be generated by the industrial park and experienced within a residential location is 75 WA) during the daytime and 7u dB(A) during the nighttime. EXIST3Wra- A 12-FRoJECIE • M121S - LEVELS Three sources of noise, have been examined for this study: 1 ) traffic. on the arterials within the study area, 2) activity at the ex1pting industrial park,, and 3) activity wit-bin the future industrial park Which is to be located, directly adjacent to the proposed development. Ira.tf1r. -.4.II.:�.&he- Arterill - .51sttm ! H013e measut ments were obtained at five positians In the study area. These positions are . _Identified In Figure 2. The data obtained is provided in Appendix II and is summarized- in. Table a . It 13 noted that the primary traffic noise is produced along Talbert Avenue. She noise of traffic from vehicles on Beach Boulevard is buffered by the ex93ting buildings ' snd by the dis- tance to the nearest proposed residential locations. rn ,; addition to the noise meaauremen ts , an a na l yai a has :: been performers using the date of the refereni eed trinffic study , to determine the CNEL generated on the arterials within . the ' project site. ,The results of this analyS13j� 1nor6ding ' the distance from the arterials to the, CHEL contour 1 ines , (60 , 65 , and 70 dB), for . the existing ( 1981 ) and 'fyture ( 1995) traffic volues art pro- vi dad in Table 210 2 1. �. VAN HOUTE k ,AS,SOCrAIM!E lnc. OF HUNTINGTON BEACH PROJECT FILE PO . 1233•'Z3 EXISTINSt IMPUSTRI-s' ACT.IV1131 The most predominate source of noise affecting the more westerly portion of the. project site Involves the existing lumber mill and yard operations ' at the northerly end of Redondo Lane, The „ noise generated by the will aativity is clearly experienced throughout - the site of the �„oposed "senior condos". At locations nearest to the Westerly boundary of the "senior condos" the existing sound levels generated by the sill exceed the City of Huntington Beach's noise ordinwhee standards. That i,s , the average sound level mearjured' during a .m16-morning pertod was 59 WAY,, The daytime standard set by -the City is 55 dS(A) . When fork l ifLs within the mill yard operate near the e&3terly boundary of the mill , the short term Sound levels approach 74 to 75 dB(A). MUSE LQUIAT1995 To some extent, the future industrial park structures will serve to bur fer a portion of the lumber mill noise from the proposed "senior rentals". For the various Restricted Manufacturing , this- . trict uses which are permitted, those invol vine mQch i ne shop or metal working shops ..and some assembly operations: could produces noise which causes annoyance within the proposed senior, citizen residential development. 'These operations ,- with entry doors opened , could produce Ievels of noise which exceed time City 's noise ordinance standards. In addition, truck loading docy.s , If placed where there is a Line»of-si.ght to the residential, l oca- tion3,, will cause annoyance and will exceed the My's standards. The Impact and mitigation.,of this potential annoyance and that associated , with arterial traffic on Talbert Avenue are addres3ed 1 in the next sections. The impact of noise in relation to the Clt.y or Huntington Beach noise ordinance and Noise Element has been` asse'ssed for each of the three sources of noise within the. stu<y .area: 1 ) trai Eric on the arterlals, Z) activity at the existing lumber will and: indvs�- trial park, and 3) the potentlal iepazt of thefuture Industrial park. The impact . aaaoeiated with each of these sources are discussed below along with nothods Of ■itigpting the significant impacts0 f j. ). yAN;� HaLFT'E?d is ASS'JChl►M ins. CITY OF HUNTING70M BEACH PROJECT FILE NO . 1233-83 ®r Traffle- 213 TAl !grt- nye And ,Beech Bdbllyfird Trafric ..on Talbert Avenue is expezted to generate a CNEL of about 65 dB when experiesiced , at the nearest proposed units to the arterial . For conventional residential 'conntruc.ion, with win- dow-, c1 (4ed , the reduction 6i the traffic noise is at least 20 dB. Hence, the interior CNEL will not exceed 415. dS as .speclfle'd in the. City's Noise Elenent. The noise Of trarfic on Reich Boulevard is adequately buffered by the existing buildings and distance from the nearest proposed residential units. Hence, this will , assure that the interior and exterior living spaces or the development comply with the City's Noise Element policy 'for, the noise associated with Beach Boulevard. Ln_bet Kil.I; and- x1aJ S.- ItLdgatrial- Park As prey iously noted, the lumber ■Ill produces sigWicant levels of noise which now propagate to locations throughout the proposed *senior condo" development site. If not adequately reduced, this noise wIll cause annoyance and a significant adverse Impact at the proposed residential units. Mitigation of this Noise ray be accomplished by the following methods: 1 . Plading a wall or earth fill and wal x combination betwet:n the proposed "senior condos" and the lumber mill . The precise 1 wall or wall/berm height will depend on its location relativs to the proposed residential units and the various mill activ- i t i es (i.e., fork lift operation, truck to vtmen ts, sawi ng acid willing operationa , dust collector, etc.). A barrier height of about 10 to 12 feet is likely to be needed 1n 'order to reduce the er,teri car sound levels to' the City 's not se ordin- ance atagndards. 2. Sound rated windows should be placed at second floor loca- tions of the proposed senior condos nearest to- tSi will and the existing industrial activity. Again , the specific ; loca- tion of windoWs and the adjacent industrial sources needs to be 'doh31dered as part of the final engineering or the pro- ject. In `en+eral , the noise may be adequately reduced by placing crystal strength Glass in wel I - fitted and' .semled fraaoes at second floor levels. The second flour units di- rectly with at least two to three i t„ a double wi rid ow -rect 1 adjacent to the sill , wi 11 require ches between the glazed sections or the windows. VAN Ht3UTEN & h&Sr -1ATES, I CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH PIDJECT FILE NO'. 1233-83 �utfu"S. .l.l1d��S.Iid3 Pero '� As a condition of approval for all new industrial operati603 in the, vicinity of the proposed projzct, the City 'S sound control requirements as specified in the Noisy Ordinarsoe should be stated as a requirement. The specific standards of concern and aug gPsted wor'oage for a conditioned approval for such pro ject s' are indicated in Appendix III. In general , these requirements my'oe wet by applying the following design aeaiures: 1 . Truck loading docks should be placed on an elevation ' or the new buildlnr�s) which does not face the resi-dential .unit3or 31aitable w119 walls and/ or noise barrier walls shouldrbe Positioned to eliminate the line-of'-sight to the residential units . 2 . All entry doors into the new industrial o'pera�tions should be Well . fitted units which seal the entry When closed and remain .: Closed when not in use. Large entries into shop or assembly areas should be positioned to eliminate the line-of-sight to the proposed residences. 3 . Compressors and/or other suppnrting equipment used in the nev industrial operations should, be hoU3ed wl'thi,n the build,i,ng ,. structure. All exhausts and/or t ntakea needed ! for the opera- tion of such equipment should n2 Muffled as !�.eeded to� comp y with the C,ity's nighttime ,noise standard whr,*- ` experienced at the proposed residential un,lts. 14 . Roof mounted air conditioning and/ or vent!,lation equipment should be completely enclosed and/or deaig'.Woa to assure that the City'a nighttime noise standard is act at the nearest residential units. ADDITIONAL I Pam.,ICTTS Sources of ndi se more di.rect3:y, a3mociated 'with ` future ' commerclal and industrial uses within 'the study area, other Lhan ', that of traffic on the roadways and .existing lumber mill and industrlal park d13c'u33ed above, include: I . Construction act,ivity ' during: ditveloOment '.he Oropertyf 2. Trash pick'. tip and compadting, and 3 Truck movements into and �ouZ '.of aery ice area. 5 r; E J. J. VAN NatTftN &' XXSSC IATES, Inc. CITY of HUNTINGTON BEACH PROJECT FILE NO. 123343 The level of noise, potentlal impact) tine. °, methods of mitigating each of these source, if needed, are discussed in the following; Noise , generated by consf ruction scti v i ty, as the project, is de- veloped will be experienced in the vicinity o: the , existing and proposed residential tracts; The predominate sourer of noise will be truck movements on and off- the ` property. Figure 3 identifies the range of noise levels which may be expected. �r�h,:.��.�fl�,aed• C om o a s t1 n� pick Tr83h u re also a cause -of coo- - "• a and co4pacting .vehicles a. plaints " near, commercial/ industrial operations. These vehicles use hydraulic equlpmont to, raise and lower the petal trash bins and to compact their contents. Typical noise levels range ?rom 80 to. 85 dB( A) at 50 feet during the. raisin`o lowering , and compa ting 'operations. Atypical trash pick up akea appro�c - imately .,;thr'ee m1nute3 with the higher noise levels occurring au'ring about one-half of the ope'ratioaa. The control of refuse collection noise should be considered for those manufscturAng parcels nearest to residential locations. §tr111-1C2DerUU The noise produced by trucks deliverlog and picking up -_goods at commercial/industrial areas could be a potential source, of sn noyance. Noise levels within 50 feet of the zervice areas , if these vehicles are unprotected, may approach L10 values of Crom 75 to 80 dB(A). When experienced at residential locations near es t to the service area,s ,, truck noise will be reduced by 10 to 20 dB depending on the distance and shielding betwten • the homes 'and service areas. In order , to mitigate the noioe that may, be generated by future commercial. or industrial actf v ibex within the study area, it: 1 recommended: that the condltl6ps of approval outlined ' in appendix r1l :be applied, to all new cojkmercI81/1ndua,trial projecti,v%. : Thea.e require the ,d'aialoper. to deif Lan ;the.;proJect . .in such . a",way , that ' recognized• nols4 standards wil1_ reduce the ' isipact of commerclil induatr :al noise,: pnd f,,il l ai43ure 'that, the projett will comply wIt;h.: Uhe requirements of of Appendix III: y. j: VAN HOUTEN &,ASSMIAM, Iat: CITY OE HUNTINGION BEACH Pi64JECT FILE NO 1233-83 1 . Construction activity should be limited to the hours of 700 a"m,. to 6 :0 t} p.n. on weekdays.- There should be too' construc •, . tion work on weekends. 2. The slope of service .a®pa should bt as gradual 'as pR,ssiblc to minimize the ;power rsqulred for trucks to zccelerate from loading areas in proxim1ty to residential locations. 3 . Truck drivers sh ould be . iaatrucl:ed to minimize acceleration _ when leaving a ramp area in proximity to residential leca- tionb . 4 . A po 1 Ley should be ird lea ted to shut,, dawn engines, air con- ditioning , _ and refrigeration equipment on trucks '.then they are in loading �'arees In pro::lmity to residential areas. gCIDA ` "easureaents have ; been obtained and .an analysis has been 'p'er formed ta, determine the ez i s ting, an.d pro3 e�cte4, nol se levels within the study area for the proposed senl ar citizen rC31 den ti al developnent. It is ' found that a slgnifirant impact due ' to 'traf fie 4111 exlst at the location of units to be constructednearest to Talbert Avenue, However, mitlgatLon of this impact may be achieved with minimal alteration in a conventional dealg n. The predominate source of. noise within the study area ii,�valves the ` existing lumber ai11 oprratlon. geducZi'on of the ' notse may be achleveO .by the construction or a sultaably positioned yell or earth berm .and wall combina tlon located -between the mill and ' the proposed ..atisidential units. The height of .his, naisc, barrier 7,hould be-=about , ten to twelve feet.. The precise height will �epenr� on , the locatlan and conf igurstlon of the barrier. ' It 3h0Pl'd be :designed as part of the detailed engineering of the project. In addition to the nolse barriers the proposed :realden- tial units wile require sound rated windows for those unite near the Iumber yard and . the existing tndu3trlal park. Noise control ;.should be co nsidered ;,in the design of al L new Induitrmen't.' In pi rtic'ularl consideratieratiOn3 which are on should beacent. to tgiven to ,' deatelop- t }i.ii!!,. l Oc a- tivn oP .,.4a'dinE docks , : 1a.rge entry wars into the build,ing3, support equipment: such na ,c ning . unl-.ts.ospres,aors, vent 'lation and/;or: ,heating air. ,conditio�ndtlo'ns ' oh�ould be u edI'�, addi; �.ion� al `new •:industri`el , y. operarait e as a candition of, aPl�rovsY , to comp.1y w1th the provisions of ,the City's Moire Control Ordinanca. VAN H�OU TEN be ASSOCIATES, Tnr CITY 'OF HUNTINGTON BEACH PROJECT FILE $0 . 123 3-83 ., Piea3e, contact the'`uiidewaigned at (714) 635-9, 520 if you addltioaal lnformition or clarifits-l-ion of the asaeas•ent and recommencatlona cantalnod herein, YR,,y . truly your►, J . J „ VAN 14OUTEN A ASSOCrATES s INC. . . t ESsm ' G h , J . Vap uten, P". E. : , Na. 16233 onaultin nbin*er in Acoustics am ,Attechments/notes OF CA I PIT � r i t t 1 i - , • 4' `l, -. , `. r .. ` .. - •1 .fir 1 w YAN %' MEN k'A CIATES, lac. !!. A ... ..,. .. ..-1, .r;'Y . S ... °f ,•:f , � r i .. 1 . .,I:r' �,� - .fir .. ____'f, �__ -__ .,.. __ ,. I APPENDIY ITI CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, FUTURE INr• :-#-TRIAL ACTIVITY CITY OF HUNTINGTO N BEACH, CALIFORNIA CONDITION 1 - NOISE INTRUSION INTO RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY FROM FUTURE INDUSTRIAL. PARK WE RATIONS ADJACENT- TO THE PROPOSED SENIOR CITIZEN RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT A. T,re : industrial park activity shall. not . produce noise when experienced, on residential property .:in . the ge'nors'_ vldinitr • of the Induxtriaa park that exceeds the 'follnwing standards: 7: 00 ' a.m. . 10 :00 P.M. 55 dB(A) 10: 00 p.m. 7 : 00 a.m. 50, dB(A) B . In , cons ideration of , these exterior noise standard., the owner(s) of the industrial psrk, operations shall. not of low the creation of any noise, on property owned , leased, oc- cupied , or .otherwise. controlled by the property owner( s) r when the foregoing causes the noise level , when mess'ared on any residential property In , the general vicinity of the proposed industrial park, to exceed: 1 . The noise standard for a cumulative period of more than thirty (30) minutes in any hour, or 2 . The noise standard plus fi vi; (5) dB( A) for a cumulative period of wore than fifteen ( 15) minutes in any hour, oi- 3 . The noise standard plus ten ( 10) dB( A) for a cum'ulatiwe period of more than five (5) minutes in any hour, or k .t The noise ' standard piva fifteen (15) dB(A) for a cumnla- tive period of more than one (1) minute in any hour, or 5 . The noise standard plus twenty (20) dB(A) for any pericra of time. , -In e r i e'n t that the ambient nol se level on', the , re.31 ' ti al C. In � the den P- p Y x ia�,i t ci�t-t exceeds an o`i' the first four . not ae Pp t,o th's eat-� e gorse'; above the cuaulati've p+exiad ; a licable, rtg©ry ,saa. l be iner�ased ' to :refl�eat the,, ambient,'no13 , eval. In the ' event Lhat the aablent noise level exceeds, the fifth `ch3.ca 1alt,.c tegory, the.,maximum allowable noiie:.level : under t t y ,. of legit.. th.e'�eaki�rya Us- e ; bient noise level . ll be increased to r r' �.�j,-VAN HOUT EN &•ASSOCIATES. Inc . .... .,ass•.w ., ...r twrrr. .... ..-... ...�w�......... ,. ..+ -s..r ... 0. ' 'Each of .,the noise 1 imi'�s spec i f led , above shall be veduced by f1l ve 15 dB(A) for Impacti,, or predocinate tone r.ei:e or for,' ', noise; consisting of speech suchas would be generated br-�• pagingr , system. E. Yhe , induatrial park activ sty. shal 1 no . produce nolae when experienced ulthin'a re31denae in the general vicinity of the Industrial -park tha% exceeds the fol t owing standards: _7 :00 r.o. - 10.00 •P' o . 55 dB(A) 10:00 p.m. w 7:00 a . bk. 45 dB( A) F. In consideration of these interior n013e 3,tandarda, - the owner(3). _of the industrial park shall not allow the . creation of any noise on property owned , leastfi , . occupied, or other vise oontr o' l led by, the owner(s) when the foregoing caase's -thO , noise level when aeaswred within any residence in the general viclnl'y of the Industrial park to exceed: �. 1 .. The interior noise Standard for a cumulative period ; of more than five (5) minutes in any 'hour, or 2. Thy: interior noise standard plus five (5) dB( A) '`gar. a cv-:dative period of more than ooe ( 1 ) minute in ao,y hoU r, or 3 . 76e interior noise Ata"'W, ard plus c n ( 10) dB( A) for any period of time. G. In the event that the ambient noise level exceeds either of the first two noise llMit categories ;above, the cumulative period applicable to the category shall be increased to reflect the ambient noise level . In the, event the ambient naiae leYel exceeds the third noise lImit category, the maximum allowable noise level under the category shall be -� Increased to reflect the maximum ambient noise bevel . ,1 N. Each of the noise limits specified above shall be reduced by five (5) dB(A) for Impact or predominant tone n013c31 ar ; for noises conslsting of speech, such as would be generated 'by a paging system. CONDITION 2 - ACOUSTICAL ENGINEERING REPORT The ,own er( s) of the ,,proposed Industrial. park .opera t# on ,. a shy ' -1 suaeit as ,cart: of the ' apollcation ,for a ' building ' permit an: ''acous tical ' englneering__r4port The individual 'qualified :,•in prepared • y a b n Ind i v •� e' field of :acoustfnal engineerIng. port• shall - iridicate the means by! iehich MS-a' , owner praposea to comply, with a::'a proyi- . _3Ions : of Condition " 1 above.. It shall � inclu dr nols*' was�sureaent. - , VAN HOUTEN �r ASSOCIAM Inc. 1 •1 t i , ,' } �,•/f, +` 1.G 1, t •..1\ data , analysis , drawings, etc,, sufficient to identify t"nc sourcrs of ,noise and methods Of mitigation Used to reduce the 1 evel of th't. noise to the standards 3ps^1 f ied in Condition " 'I , above . CONDITION 3` FLELD TESTS Where a complaint as to nv6=cocnplianc4 with Conditicrn i requires a field .test to r�'sol ve the complaint, the complainant shal l post a bond `or ade'qua t,e runds , ps determined by . the City , in eucrow ` for the cost of, said ttsting: Such costs shall be chargeable ' to the compl a fnan t ` when such f i e '.d tests show that cvmpl iance with the Condition is present. If such te31.3 shay noh-.complialic-41 then such 1 ':o:t13 shal 1 be borne by the industrial park owher( a). CONDITION i4 - VIOLATION OF THE STAND ARDS DXrDS � • .' X�, th CC a br- .of r eld3tesn of of Conditionest. a�rdsto� ConditiCh lnduatr.iAl'�I c 13 ork , determi n d y thei k 3, h p owners) shall be required to altatr the industrial ' park,'ac.nfigur- at1an and/or activity as needed to comply' with the Conditlan. A determination of a violation of theae standsrds shall or.'I,y -be made by the City ipf Huntington beach based upon acoustical trdg;- neerine field stud).es. CONDITION 5 - RESPONSIBILITI OF OWNER(S) Compliance -with Conditions as stated above shall be the respr•nai- ? bility of the industrial park owt%er( s ) and/ or ,any 3ub3equent ' owner(3) of the property occupied by the industrial park. , 4 , .... •.ice j. j, VAN HOUTEN h ASSOCIATES, Inca `: i aISWOR RENTALS FU'? UNE INDUSTRIAL PARK �.. • s �;LL CFr-R ; M 93 t ,.,/� 1r•VVI.N' j ..., MI-CD l �i1 Z ml t MI-CDR a2 c+�� x ,. SPA �et•tn � � � 1 to I C 4 r } 1 ... ..CF-R ill CD � M1- ate` ! MI-CD Rim` RQ_Q. p s �,A ,,,.�,,. C 2 ; Ott or."l 3R CONDOS SOURCE OF MAP : Existing Zoning , LVIE 83-2, Huntington Beech Planning Division Figure 1 . Site. Plan and Locstiivt; "of"'th* Proposed 'Stnior Citizen E Do alo u*nt. Cit_ of K�sr '.amr ton beach, c lifornii ' P .. . .ram... ,..... ..._, .' APPEAL BY SOURESTON DLVELQPMENT TO PLANNING COMMISSION 'S DECISION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington teach City Council will- hold a public hearing in the Ccuncil. Chamber at the Huntington Beach Civic Center, 2000 Main Street , Huntington Beach, California , on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persons Who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. Monday , July 20 , 1987, 7* 00 PM A 7CANT,IAPULLA_N?: aourestnn Development A Ptl LZCA;:1ON NUM?3ER Jkopeal - Administrative Review No . 87-15, Use Peri-,it No . 87-34 , Negative Declaration 87--9 , Conditional Exception (Variance) No . 87-24 , Precise Plan of Street Alignment No . 87-1 , Repeal of Specific Plan No , 73-1 . .J&CA'S' N: West of Beach Boulevard and south of Talbert Avenue (betot en the easterly term,,"nus of Redondo Circle and the southerly terminus of. Kovacs Street) ; Specific Plan area bordered by Talbert Avenue to the north, Beach Boulevard to the east , Taylor Drive to the south and the Southern Pacific Railroad to the west . i ,J 'R l'..U,=sL : Appeal of the conditior;s of approval imposed by Planning � Commission in their approval of Administrative Review No. 87-15 , Use Permit No . 87-34 and Negatives Declaration 87-9 'Co permit a 122 , 424 square foot industrial building ; Appeal of the Planning Corr;nission' s denial of the following : Conditional Exception (Variance) Ego . 87-24 to permit a 10-1/2 foot front yard setback in lieu of a 14 foot setback on Redondo Circle and to permit a truck well 50 feet in width in lieu of 20 feet in width, Precise Plan of Street Alignment No . 87- 1 to terminate Redondo Circle and Kovacs Street with cul-de-sacs on the adjacent property and the Repeal of Specific Plan No . 73-1 (Taylor and beach Specific Plan) . This proposal is covered by Negative Declaration 87-9 . I� FIDE: A. copy of the proposed appeal is on file at the Department of Community Development, 20DO Main Street, Huntington Beach , California 92648 . ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit evidence for or against the application as outlined above. All applications , exhibits, and descriptions of this proposal are on file with the Office of the City Clar.k, -2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California for inspection by , the public. NUNTINGTOH BEACH CITY COUNCIL By: Alicia M. Wentworth _City Clank Phonfs - (7a4) 536-5405 Dainlel Lorc:.i Robert McClain De La Cuedka Reglnatd "'782.1 Conni+t Drive U2 Hurswellpriva 011 Glencoe Asia. �►1 Huntingtor-[reach, CA 9., ,48 ( :-.�ntington Beach, CP 2648 tin 'ton heinhj, CA 92i47• Hsu: tlaueh Yung Michael Spencer Hiquan Anne H. , 7915 Connie Drive 7816 Connie nrive F.O. Box 545 Huntington Beach , CA 92G49 liUntington Beach, CA 92648 Ronemead, CA 91770 David Crane Geraldine Imfeld Jim R. Cork 18176 Alice lane 7822 Connie Drive 18175 Alice Ln. 11Untington 5each,, CA 92648 tlUntington Beech, CA 91446 Huntington Beach* CA 92647 Zan Hang-Kit Amy Resident Alan W. Dollar 16942 !Agate Circle 18201 Alice Ln. .18162 Alice Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Jeff Swanson Hine'. River Trading Company Ten Berge Theodorus 18156 Alice lane 7962 10th Street, Ste 200 18205 Alice Ln. Huntington Beach, CA 92648 W,,rntminster, CA 32683 Huntington Deach, CA 9260 i Sino Kartsonak.is Laszlo tisu Mon Son 7022 Lori Drive 4645 R. Pac .: Coast Hwy 11313 E. R£dgngate Dr. ,. fiUntington Beach, CA 92648 Long Beach, C.11 90804 Whittier, CA 90601 Windward Cove Condominium Paul Weatherly Karl Seat L9 Corporate Plaza 7622 Talbert Avenue Q581 L.Hrthorn Drive Newport beach, CA 92660 lit)ntington Bench, MCA 97.648 Huntington Bench, CA 9264+ Thomas Gallagher • , !! Richard Pajkov,ta 4921 Los Patos Ave . 7821 Lori Drive Huntington ©e*ch, CA Huntington [Beach, CA 9264 9264 Resident original AusIcal Tntttrume Despena Prudakin 7792 Connie Drive 1810E Redondo Cir. • Huntington (leach, CA 92640 Huntington peach, CA 92648 Free Meadows, Street 9 Fresh Nk�adows, NY 11365 Catherine Lim Robert Islas 7802 Connie Hrive 9350 Grimm River Ave. Huntington Beach, CA, 92646 Fountain Valley, CA 92708 'matt P'aealey Assi,gal. Johann � 7SoG Connie !Drive .16530 Daisy Ave. Huntington Beach, CA 9260 rountnin valley, CA 92701. - _ •.��ral ine Sprague ! 441 P.dward ili ► l i u ami� t 9 M+� on Z. lCinaaid t �J6 Sharon .*,.sne HU01 Lt3ri vrive' .,„�� I;ax ZS5 { ' tington acach, CA 9e6�8 Huntington Dr,-jcsh, CA a&.a48 D+�nison, z'x 75020 Natalie Hearn David L. Campbell Robert life - 19451 Suanner Breeze Lane 18172 Sharon Lane 9 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach,' CA 92648 6881 Melbourne Drive Huntington !leach, CA 92647 Lee Kuen Chen James 1. Johnson 4 Carver 16162 Sharon Lane Evelyn Shabo Irvine, CA 92714 HuntingtrN- Doaeh CA 92648 231 1/2 S. Gale Beverly Hillar 9021L R Fred Gruenbaum Mark G. nargatta Jo Scott X9171 Alice Lane 181.46 Sharon Lane 0 Sc ©each Blvd. , litintington Beach, CA 92648 !luntington Beach, CA 92648 • Westtainnter, CA 92663 Steven Ekstedt Barbara Skinner George Knapp 7836 Connie Drive 7865 Lori Drive 650 Cordova Ant 12 Huntington Beach, CA 92640 Huntington Beach , CA 92648 Pnoadena, CA 911.01 Paul Albert Conic ttrlve Stanley Jay Co11;ns�-Zwelbe1 7642 Conic 7861 Lori Drive 23.1 1/2 S. Gale Drive tluntingtan Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Rea4h, CA 92648 Beverly !tills, CA 90211 Oscar J . Rosales 'Thomas MaXti I on� 9 I��v i d !lasfmQan a 7846 Connie Drive 7855 Lori Drive nuntLngton Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 1l1241 Sharon lava 9 tlunti.ngton beach, CA 926418 ..Robert Stellrecht Ted Noland P.O. Box 1786 7851 Lori Drive David Sing Huntington Beach, CA 92641 Huntington beach, CA 92648 18205 .,baron Ln 9 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Rae Park Young Song Kwan Onek !Huntington Village t0tate 118212 Sharon Lane 7845 Lori Drive 17171 Beach Blvd. . Huntington Beach, CA Nuntingtcin DeachR CA 92648 Huntington Beach. CA 92647 92648 Leslie Haynes Nino Oscar Thomas king 18202 Sharon Lane 7841. Lori Drive � Huntington Beach, CA '92648 Huntington !leach, CA 92648 Maly rn. PA 193 Gr. . � 9 Malvern. ' PA 1935., Resident Maolovio Arandu � ].a186 ' L"heron' Lane 7l162 Tel isort Ave. Bank of' ,.A+r�riaa RUnti�gton Bea CA 92b4B Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Z.us An e1eR, CA 90051 • i.ersideRt Gerald Carbone 7829 Lori Drive 5111 Stallion Circle Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Huntington Deach, CA 92649 Jaasp-a Sommars Muddy it F ComLeut 7832 Uori` Drive Rancho Los Parlmnp C C 'Huntington 941,ach, CA 9264B Rancho 14i rage, CA 92270 Boureston Oev. Myles C'Re.111y 3355 Via Lido 7846- Lori. Drive Suite 205 HUntington aeach, CA 92647 Newport Beach, CA 92663 Max Benward .15175 Sharon Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Jack L. Grimes 18185 Sharon T.anc Huntington Beach, CA i 92648 t ' Michael Tedesco 18191 Sharon Lane s Huntington Beach. CA 92645 r s . t ` E • i Cl- APPEAL BY BOURESYON DEVELOPMENT TO PLA10MIG CN41 SS I ON 'S OEC I S I011 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that this Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chamber at the Huntington Beach Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, on the ' date and at he m ' t time indicated below to receive n consider the o and onsid statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. DATEZI ME: Monday, July 20 , 1987 , 7 : 00 PM UPLLIOART[APPALM: Boureston Development ApPiT ATLQN HOUR : Appeal - Administrative Review No. 87-15, Use Permit Na . 87-340 Negative Declaration 87r-9, Conditional Exception (Variance) No . 87-24 , Precise Plan of 'Itrest Alignment No . 87-1, Repeal of Specific Plan No . 73--1. LQQTION: West of Beach Boulevard and south of. Talbert Avenue (between the easterly terminus of Redondo Circle and the southerly terminus of Kovacs Street) : Specific Plan area bordered by Talbert Avenue to the north, Beach Boulevard to the east, Taylor Drive to the south and the Southern Pacific Railroad to the west . P?0EQBAL: Appeal of the conditions of approval imposed by Planning Commission in their approval of Administrative Review No. 87-15 , Use Permit No., 87-34 and Negative Declaration 87-9 to permit a 122, 424 square foot industrial building ; Appeal of the Planning Commission ' s denial of the following : Conditional Exception (Variance) No . 87-24 to permit a 10-1/2 foot front: yard setback in lieu of a 14 foot setback on Redondo Circle and to permit a truck well 50 feet in width in lieu of 20 feet in width, Precise Plan of Street. hlignment No . 87--1 to terminate Redondo Circle and Kovacs Street with cul-de-sacs on the adjacent property and the Repeal of Specific Plan No. 73--1 (Taylor and Beach Specific Plan) . EHVIRONMENTAL_ STATUS: This proposal is covered by Negative Declaration 67-9 . t)„ FILE: A copy of the proposed appeal is on file at the Department of Community Development, 2000 Main Street , Huntington Beach, California 92648 . ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit evidence for or against the application as outlined above. All applications, exhibits, and descriptions of this proposal are on file with the Office of the City Clerk, 2000 Plain Street, Huntington Beach , California for inspection by the public . HUNTIlmaToN BEACH CITY COUNCIL By: Alicia ' M. Wentworth City Clark Pbobe (714) 535-5405 Legal Notice City o Huntington"ch Otfic a of the City Clock P.U. Box 194 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 leaFIRST CLASS MAIL I�i