Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Element Amendment 81-1 - Environmental Impact Repor u RESOLUTION NO. 5005 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ADOPTING LAND USE ELEMENT AMEND- MENT NO. 81-1 TO THE CITY_'S GENERAL PLAN WHEREAS,. the City Council ,of the City of Huntington Beach desires: to update and refine the .General Plan in keeping with changing community needs and objectives; and A public hearing on adoption of Land Use Element Amendment No. 81-1 ,to . the General Plan was held by the Planning Commission on May 19, 1981, and approved for recommendation to the City. Council; and Thereafter, the City Council, after giving notice as pre- scribed by Government Code section 65355, held at least one public hearing to .consider said Land Use Element Amendment No. 81-1; and At said hearing before the City Council -all persons desiring to be heard on said amendment were heard, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of. the City of Huntington Beach, pursuant to provisions of .Title 7, Chapter 3, Article 6 of the California Government -Code,, commencing with. section. 65350, that. Land Use Element Amendment -No.. 81-1 to the General Plan, consisting of the following changes is hereby adopted: 1. Redesignate 2. 50 acres , located north of Newman Avenue approximately 6. 30 feet east of Beach Boulevard, from .Medium Density- Residential District to High Density Residential District. 2. Redesignate 59.55 acres, located south of Adams Avenue and east of Beach Boulevard, from Resource Production, Commercial, and Low Density Residential District to Planned Community /ahb 6/1/81 1. �' 2.0 AREAS OF CONCERN This section addresses each request area designated in Figure 2-1. 2.1 ELLIS-BEACH AREA The first area of concern addressed by Land Use Element Amendment 81-1 is located on the south side of Ellis Avenue and east of Beach Boulevard (Figure 2-2). The amendment request being considered was filed by Housing Dynamic, Inc. on behalf of the property owner, the Reading Development Center of Orange County. 2.1.1 Background The applicant's request is to redesignate 1.89 acres of land located on the south side of Ellis Avenue, 400 feet east of Beach Boulevard from general commercial to high density residential. Alternative land uses under consideration in this amendment are medium and high density residential and office/professional. A retail commercial land use alternative is not practical because of lack of exposure to Beach Boulevard and because the property is isolated behind an existing shopping center. 3 � A w+ww »s wu� ®2.2 14 ww 2.1L I E �., 3.1 2.3 .o.w. wroi Areas of Concern o FEB. 81 O 4 huntington beach planning division Figure 2-1 TA'r LOR DR. LE CONTE DR. Ix v u LOW = DENSITY Vj° RESIDENTIAL a -- —� — a FORELLE DR. HIGH ;1�DB]iQ DEN. RES. e GENERALR CRO Z ' COMMERCIAL `" PALA"A AVE 3 _ Ll GENERAL COMMERCIAL MEDIUM ---- ' Z m — DENSITY J 'U _.._ RESIDENTIAL OFFICE " PROF ESS I ONA " v a ', n 2 Q J: u N W GRp�'Q DR. , 2 V - l o - -"�LAUREI.r00 P ,ELM OD •,r,: �nocN_wuoo ai. MODAL DR. >- Cn _MLKVIM 7C ;\NER TLew000 s CONSTANTINE DR. -- r— Area of Concern 2.1 0 0 0 - O FEB. 81 O huntington beach planning division 5 Figure 2-2 The northern half of the area of concern is presently vacant and the southern half is occupied by the Reading Development Center of Orange County; a private learning institution for children. Adjacent commercial uses include a six-acre, two story shopping center on Beach Boulevard directly to the west of the study area. Tenants in the center include offices, small shops, a delicatessen, restaurant, bar and nightclub. The shopping center, divided into two parts, faces Beach Boulevard with a 50-foot wide service alley and employee parking lot separating the buildings from the area of concern. A fast food take-out restaurant and liquor store occupy the northeast corner of Beach Boulevard and Ellis Avenue. Adjacent residential uses include a 10-acre, high density, fourplex development with 152 units directly to the east of the study area. This development is separated from the study area by a 20-foot wide alley with garages on the east side and a block wall along the property line. Approximately 140 feet south of the area of concern is a six-acre, 84 unit high density fourplex development. The area between this development and the study area is occupied by additional parking for the shopping center. Directly across Ellis Avenue are 20 low density single-family detached units on 3.4 acres of land. The General Plan designation for this area is medium density residential. 2.1.2 Analysis 1. Land Use The existing general commercial designation is implemented by C4 zoning (Figure 2-3) which allows office/professional uses as well as other retail uses. In reality, because of the isolated location of the property, retail commercial development of the study area would not likely occur, or it would be of a marginal nature. If offices were constructed, the site could probably accommodate a maximum of 44,600 square feet of building area. Such development would accommodate an estimated 130 daily employees. The applicant's request for a redesignation to R3 zoning and high density residential would result in a maximum of 25 units per acre, or 47 units, and would generate an estimated population of 104 persons. Medium density development would result in a maximum of 15 units per acre, or 27 units, and would generate an estimated population of 53 persons. Medium and high density residential designations of the study area would be compatible with the high density fourplexes located to the east and south of the property. Although occupied by single-family homes, the area across Ellis Avenue is designated medium density and would be compatible if recycling occurs. The predominantly office uses in the adjacent shopping center would also be generally compatible 6 TALBERT Soo RI RI I 3 _ RI TRAOEWSOC p I G`(� CF—E GLALeoTs AVE ' a (ORES. v:ZWSCNOC-L) R1 RI RI J I R1 N ?s.xrANA CR 07 I I Soo ED STERLING AVENUE RI R>PO j'U 2Pb RI RI RI ; 9 RI-PD *,. KINER AVEN KINER AVE mw!o.vt R1 R1 TATwW u uLE CONTE DR. ar5'y RI RI RI R2 RI-PD NCT .; RI .,-. R2.. - R3 R3 RI I w R3 L % .l ;C4 R R3 _ .... 33 o R2 _ R1 J i RI-PD`S W RI ' RI RI r�o 10 R2i'RI ) R3 3 R3 C4 Rz PDa 2 ♦ j .1 R3 R R3 R2 R2 'i R3 MH flR3 R3 R3 C4R2 R3--`rr» u�ooloR 50 trax�a:t oR o Ioa R3 R3, Ion. RI i SCALE CONS -„TEE DGTy. =S'YISOme ,i S- RI CR TANTI OR - RI R3 z R2 n W 14 R3 RI o U o R-1 W R2 Rz ¢ RI i RI ...� HI GARFIELD Area of Concern 2.1 O FEB. 81 O 7 Figure 2-3 with residential development. Exceptions would include the existing bar and nightclub in the shopping center which could have noise impacts on residential uses. Delivery trucks in the service alley could also similarly impact residential uses. Office/professional development of the study area would be compatible with both the adjacent residential and commercial uses. This use would also provide additional buffering to the adjacent residential uses to the east from noise and visual impacts of the existing shopping center and service alley. An important consideration in the long-term concerns the 1977 inclusion of the study area within an 80-acre node allowing multi-story development (Figure 2-4). Many existing uses in the general area were constructed in the -early and mid-sixties and consequently may be expected to recycle in the future. The age and marginal occupancy status of the shopping center adjacent to the study area indicates that it may fall within this category. If the shopping center were, to recycle to a multi-story use, the land use designation selected for the area of concern at this time becomes more critical. The existing residential uses on the perimeter of the study area, because of their garages, alleys and block walls, would be adequately buffered from future multi-story uses on the shopping center site. Residential development of the study area, however, would constitute an intrusion into the multi-story area without adequate buffering between residential and high rise uses. An office use on the study area would be buffered from multi-story uses and would actually provide additional buffering for the existing residential uses to the east of the site. 2. Economic Considerations The Planning staff, in cooperation with Ultrasystems, Inc., conducted a f iscal impact analysis of the three land use alternatives using the computerized methodology developed for the City. For purposes of analysis, the revenues and expenditures of each alternative were projected over a ten year period, 1981-1991. The results are detailed in Appendix A. 3. Housing In 1979, the City adopted a state-mandated revision to the Housing Element of the General Plan, which includes policy aimed at increasing housing opportunities for households with low and moderate incomes. The revised element includes provisions for consideration of an inclusionary zoning ordinance that could require a certain percentage of new residential developments to be affordable to lower income households. 8 - f IN THE Superior Court OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ,, In and for the County of Orange CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH+ CITY CLERK PROOF OF PUBLICATION Hearing Deleting Area 2.1 State of California ) County of Orange ) No9'Nt orpu1NdGI�JC1xMG APP8470 PI ANNINlGCGMNIWM Rita J. RichterMY"?RUMIL01mr 'pug. EAM GPiJrN tldtt a �y Coaacil of the CityofHwu �,to That I am and at all times herein mentioned was a citizen of °� how of 796 PUt, ra m4D on Mandy Ai ibth ,1881:for tlw s et to the United States,over the age of twenty-one years,and that I the 4", *bn of t!1¢d'1�'lamn'�'c.,amire om to Area q I frets )?�e®ent am not a party to,nor interested in the above entitled matter; Amedd t 81-I to the metal Plan;4 189 sores lec ilRd eout 4a"We A ems 4f10 few sett of He►c6 t that I am the principal clerk of the printer of the c�aLttiHigl+Deriity A kysl deaixiptipr�is oa Isle in the C�C:i Epxiro � ; ++��nn }} pp�� rry�, �pp end'israil r Crtyaer{rs a neAMA PA9111 CI 61]I'C 0.WhisR8 i{ 9'WCity of C►t ranted to, tend (714) dated 1Y 79 141$1. � P � Huntington Beach County of Orange and which newspaper is published for the disemination of local news and intelligence of a general charac- Puh 4 1981 ;'; CftyCk ter, and which newspaper at all times herein mentioned had FImt.,$each indv.i110108 and still has a bona fide subscription list of paying subscribers, and which newspaper has been established, printed and pub- lished at regular intervals in the said County of Orange for a period exceeding one year; that the notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been published in the regular and entire issue of said newspaper,and not in any supplement thereof,on the following dates,to wit: June 4, 1981 I certify(or declare) under penalty of perjury that the forego- ing is true and correct. Dated at...............Garden Grove...... ........................ C if is ,. 4th,day u 81 f.. .E'. ............ Signature i Form No.CAF-81380 _..._. - Publish 6/4/81 NOTICE OF. PUBLIC HEARING APPEAL TO PLANNING.COMMISSION DECISION DELETING AREA . 24 .FROM LAND.:;USE ELEMENTAMENDMENT 81,�j.1 TO THE- GENERAL PLAN NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN :that a public hearing will be held by the City Council of the City;:O, Huntington Beach, in the Council Chamber of the Civic Center, Huntington` Beach, at the hour of' ' .7:30 P.X i or as soon thereafter as possible, on;-'- MondaV.' the- 1'5th' day of June 1981 for "the purpose W.. considering an. appeal filed to the decision of the-Planning'. Comm ssion .to` delete Area 2.1 from Land. Use Element Amendment 81-1 to the General` Plan;- a' to,redesignate '1.89acres located south of-Ellis Avenue, approximately : . 400 feet: east- of Beach.-Boulevard' from.Commercial to High Density Residential . 1 , A legal description is on ;file in the Developmeht :SerVices-Office. Envi ronmental: Impact, Report.81-2 wi 11 be. heard' i n�;conj uncti on with .said .appeal and is available' for review',in. the City Clerk's. Office All . interested persons are invited to attend said .hearing and express 'their opinions for or- against said appeal Further information may be .obtained .from the Office of the City Clerk; 2000. Main Street, Huntington Beach; California. . 92648 - (714) 536=5227 DATED. , May 29, 1981 CITY OF HUNTINGTON -BEACH + . By: Alicia M. Wentworth •city .Clerk' . . Publish :r•.. . NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING APPEAL TO PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION DELETING AREA. tiFR01±1.LAND :USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT-8 't' $1 -� Z`:� • TO THE GENERAL PLAN NOTICEAS HEREBY:"GIVEN. that -a public hearing will .be held byethe City, Council of the `city, of Huntington Beach, in the' Council Chamber of the Civic Center, Huntington Beach, .at the hour of 7:30 P,M. ,. or as soon thereafter .as �9 Sf Monday .1 S -Aleefr possible on the ;. day of for the purpose of considering an appeal filed to the decision .of the. Planning . Commission:t0 delete Area - from .Land Use. Element �!endment-89.2 to the General. Plan -irks Ujam", tI n't<r+ 777 ,r,•'+ ..; . m.1lr, .. ife�efa.gna�te,} . +a�a 1 t ois EiLig Avenue, A y 0 sate ;fie '.` �'ll t ; w *Vi*4 F ►.i�oa+mer i�a1 .•to hi it Densy t f: Residential.:. JAV En'.i ronmental Impact Report 'wi l l be heard i n conjunction w.i th said appeal Ala,-..inteeested persons.,are incited to attend said hearing and express::their opinions: for 'or a. 'afhst said . appeal Further information msy-be obtained :from .the' Office of .the City. Clerk, 2000 Mai n Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648 : (714) 536. 5227 . GATED .�}t1I3178Q""- CITY OF HUNTINGTON,BEACN By: Alicie,M: .Wen;tworth City Clerk TA`r LOR. DR. LE CONTE DR. m a Z LOW - J - Q ¢ p w DENSITY m RESIDENTIAL cR_W z - J - -- - J u � 2 7 Q ' N FORELLE DR. HIGH DEN. :r R,E S. z J GENERAL R CR COMMERCIAL LA PALMA Ave o a w 3 LESN6:1,R rn a j a' .r.��A LLIS — .:v7:k:+.• Z _J GENERAL •::•::.,�: � �; � COMMERC IAL I J, MEDIUM -- �' _ --- DENSITY J "` OFFICE - -- RESIDENTIAL PROr=ESS I ONA o� ;- _ : .0 ' it - - -r-----:------------ � n • �o LLJ V' U _ a- H W I j 'w Z LL--jj Q WGR,Z `` -..... w V a. m -1 --- LAUREL.V00 P .tE LdDeNWuoo Dd. MODAL DR. --- ---- — TILPW00D,�.� �-----' . THORM�/000 990 ' -- . = CR SI�KWOOD CR. EETlFW000 R CONSTANTINE DR. - Area of Concert i 2.1 p FEB. 811 O huntington beach planning division 5 Figure 2-2 4 I , "kL<< 157 Y4?1 '0.1 157-471-1'4 ' 157 341 ].]. z , lt�c��itx�c H T�oob E. in �war�na: O i�ai�man 44 . Bixby 'Hill Rd Paul Ward 2018 S 604' Ashland Drivie. ' Hawaiian C,axt3ans. Calif 6441 :90716;.: Huntington Beach,; Calif 92648. 57--4�1-01 157-471=15. 15734'1 12 ,Guard Kohn H.E Zbbin J°s�ph M Apple i o441. B,ixk�y. Hill Rd Dolores L Mann 8.7. Egli ;Av�enus Long Reach, Calif. 1321 Apine .Lane Huntinyt�n;Beat , Calif �90815 Huntington Beach►. Calif'92648., 92646 �157 •471 03 157=471-16 . 157 343 14, Reading.Dev�elogent. Centex of _ H E Tobin.". - Charles Shepherd Orange Oounty Zaher F Khalaf 1844i Goodwin Lane ;,. Htmtugt�on Beach,' Calif 8102--Ell s Avenue 18212 Ne4goon Lame_ . HL kingtc n Beach" Calif .92646 Hunti-ton Reach, Calif 92648_ 92646 : i� !,' 471. 04 : 157-471-17 157 343 15` T C radon H E Zbbin Icy E Pierson 3rd C° 'O 18461 C�oocan Larne 9911 Anthony. Place Surinc�er K Bhatia:et al Huntirx3t�on:Beach. Calif 2 Beverly:.Hills, Calif 90210 �'iiunti.ngton Beach. .Calif " :92649-. 92646" yu7 471 06 157-341 06 157 343 16 `rhe Marshaks Qosette E Su�i,th James A Sianc�o ;.1858Z.'beach Blvd . ' Fbodmaker 4377•. Ash 8161 ue .Ami fi' t)h Beach, Calif P.O. Box ?83 , 'Calif Hun 9264W'._ San Diego, Calif 92112 . 92646. '157 471 07 157-341-07 157. 343-11 �.Farb HOwes .Builders, Inc Paulube C•Nk-Mu�rray.. F IAv' Baptist •Church 16168 t, -h Blvd Suite 160 l3031 L Elii Avenueof Hung roman Beach' ,Hunt:ington Beacri. Calit Huntington Reach, Calif; 8121 Ells 'Av�enu�e ;,92647 92646 Huntington Beach, Calif 92i;�l�. 157 471-.12 157-341-08 15fi 343-18 H.-.E Zbb n Pauline C McM�rray'et al `7tahn ,Craney Vince Lanni 8101 Ellis :Avenue ' 8031 Ellis Avenue Huntington:Beach, Calif Huntington ,, Calif 92647 92646 157 471=12 157-341-09 157 343--19 �`H E Tobin George E. Wright Earl Parker Le Shia Smith 8051 E-Ellis Avenue -8091 Ellis;Avenue _ 18661` Libra Circle Huntingtaon B�1, Calif Hunfiington Beach; Calif Huntinyton beach,..Calif 92646 92647 92646 157=471-13 '157-341-10 157 34140:'- Philip C. La Puma Willie R.Parker Joseph M.Apple „.5142 Warner Avenue 8061 E1Lis Avenue . 8071.E Ellis Avenue I .Huntington Beach. Calif.`92649 Huntington Beach Calif Hunti,ngtion.Beach, Calif 92647 .92646 T �` 7 34Jr. Land :Use Eleanetit 81 1 i 4 s, a' rzis i400aatz `• • 4, .1981Haadu].tzm ;. (. 1'0459 Placer Rnv+er:Circle Z.:t , y Pburitain Valley, 'Calif iitrrtit�gin He�i�cti, Calif �: .927Q8 : 92646 �. 157-343423 112-082-10. 112-�081�-15 `F Loy K Steams wojciecti xoarA w i Kat6d ,Kawai 8102 L.a._Palma 26392 Celle Ftbert,c 17787 Santa Fie' Circle. Huntingtion;Beach,. Calif San Juan Capistrano 'Calif Fbuntain.'Va11ey, Calif r.: 92646 : 92675 92708 it 11Z-.082"01 112-082-13. •' 112=081-17 Bnu Greer Donna G.P11a Enna Ksrles 21372.Srookhurst St #722 811 Delaware Street 10474 t Avenue Huntington . Beach Calif Huntington Beach, .Calif Fbuntai Valley. Calif 92646 9264V 92708 s ., 112-082-03 112-082-12 ]12=081-18 Joseph F Sawaya Richard•.D ho�renz R�ber`t L.Brand_on 312Z2�Via Sonora 8295 Manifests Circle 16781 Circle Byckey�e _ Sari Juan Capistrano, Calif Huntington"Beach, Calif Fountain Valley, :Calif 92b75 '92646 92708 ` 112-082-04 112-082-13 112-081-19 Ge7cala:H Sritith Doris L Mescher Siacipn Desobg - j 5135 S:Lindsey Av+�.nue 200ti Nautlis Lahe 9651 Rime Circle Pico Rivera. Calif Newport Beach. Calif bbuntain Valley, Calif 90660 = 92660 92708 ( 112-082-05 ]12-0814 112--081-2.0 V $ yea .. WUsona d C • . . 18551 Demion Way' 811 Delaware Street 16792 Bolero Lane Hunting ri Beach; Calif Huntington Beach, Calif Huptu�tnn';Beach, Calif 1 92646 92448 92649. 112-082-07 112-081-11 . A-483-09, Fdaard-Leonetti ' A Donald R'Clark Pauj 601 Aloot Avenue 8588 Trinity River:Circle ` : 162411 -Lane-'-. Plaaeritia, Calif Fountain Valley, Calif n Beach, Calif --92670 . 92708 9 I • 112-081-12 463--10 Yu-Wen Mang Gerald W Long Henry, rt 3013.6'Ave De C&ma 18151 L E"point Lame 8132• Rwvbo Palos Verdes, Calif Huntington Reach; :Ca lif. ton Beach, Calif 90274 92647 647 112-082-09 112-081-13 -483-11 R S Bunyak Kirk S Bcinan�•� Hugh: lift 18162 Puss Lane 951 Spring Hill Rd 16021 1 rive: ,„ i Huntington Beach, Calif Wayzata, NIN H Beach, Ca1ri 92648 55391 748 I _, •.�'•f.ear. f _,: F 1. - - .. .tl�w.+hty�rvr.+v _ +t � ..,...., ... Yt .-_,--.1.,,--..-�_.."-.-....I,.1.���..,''1,....�-,-.,.�1..-,...:.,..1'.,...`.�...-<I.,,......,'�.-i...!�,...,�V:,-.­4-_.,...,,,�...�.-...,-.,..1�....,..�'.1:..'......-e-.,".-..'-......�­,.,,'.,�-.,....a..':..,-:i-�I...,.�..%,�:m;...._�.-;!.�t.1,.-�.�—-.'.,...,....'.�.,.'.�:.-­.,..'.:.­......:.,:.:....­:.I�:­-..-.��,;..�-.--,I.,.,...:..L'.�.".1.-.�..,.,..,-..,...,:..�i......,.-.�...­:..,.....�-.....,;i:......%I-,.l.,,!.-.,..I...i":"-.....I1�.�1.I:,'�-1;�,..�:,;.1....,:I...—..,....�..l,....i�....',.`...-I..-..;..-.:-_:,-.-..-.,.A:!...l_.....'-......�!i:.`'..-..:I-..�..1!..,1.l,,:�.:_:.:...,,.1,�.�1..-.-..�-..*.".'"I,.-...'....—....;...I.­....�_...­:......:,-...�..I.,...:...'...I-%..,.,I...;..�.w I.�...�.I.',-.,1.II..I,.'-;..-...�.......�...-1,..1.-I....-.....I­.....�........i-.:...�..-t�1I.j..-�.",...,.�_....:.-_-.-�....,.�-.�..—.-."�:-:....-...:.-�.!.,....�'�.�.,-,..��,��-..m.....-:�--..........-..'.,.;...�......m�.,.-.."I:.�--:.k�,I-"........�:!-j 11..-II:.:,-...­1:.�..­,,�..,.,;�!�.�.I.,.�,-r­;-�-...m�...;�..,!..­..;..,_.......,f.?,,....,.?.,_.I.�.',�-.:,.i.�..�.,,t...,o-...-:�......�..,..I..,..-...m,.,.,r,.:,.1 eI..-_...w�m--.I.,..--,.--4�..,,,...;.--.,.,--.-�..�...�:.--,..'­...�....,,..1..I.:­,.,�--".�­�-�--'�',...:�.,,.�-:--.;-,,�....,.r,I��..�,..-:I�—.....--.���.-I.I��!..:.m.4..�-...�....,,.�.....;.-:..�.�..�:�...-:..,�.'.:-..4:.�.�....-,�.:..':.-­1'..-..��".-,�­._-..,.�....I_'� * # F I , A 81 1 7.a1ld tJ�os4'r # ;: a` , 1 t.. %,1-.."1.,..,..:.,*-A,A,..-.I,..�7."�.�.1k,.,.:.:.,,,.,.,.-1':.-;w 4 *� y� aa��t��.�,,; ''­"-.','."-�.�,'�.,;,,.v-..,...:-,.��l,-.-f.`..z;,i,'.—,.,i�.i_�.,.,.�l.'�'��.�;�._..'.,"--..�.-.-,";..,.,..;�-.�.�,:.:..,.-.-1&_,.�,:.--�.l,.'1.-:­J,�,_-1,.,..,-��:I".'-.''-,,..!. t r,c' .. ; 1 ,`i'fi�•.2.1 - - l �- .7 �# tt J'' i 2 _ i f} L 4 \ 45 u t 1 1 j i ,g t } .teC { I t { t Y f d Y.n r��-i :. # t_: _ S 17 ,r-: t` tt xt.tfl{k� k-,•`Ai j� C'Ff -t# / t r �'4 of_, -. x r # Beancfi CA 92646 Y ti _ , w��1���V� �/� IYF#- N } f 4 t ICtI, ... 9081S J J f t : r { A f .i rT _ y R t y �`C ��'[��t" r 5 fI - - f Y 1 Y \4t{ I. 11 p:... .01l�/ Place i. #i iy. Hi 71 s, Chi 90210 Y . r .. - -� s-i r- L 1 . 2-081-09,10 t*s, F 3 t � e a ,( - --( ,, m a� - - t "/- 5 _ t^ T 1 l 7 M• VLC:GL - t' e LA 21372 'P �ooJchumt 722 , f f :„ � Hint3a:gton 'each, CA 926a6 , , ,` .-.. •- : `t t 1�1Z-i--16; - tti; Q�� , " t t { j/� &j hl - - t �, t ji l .'S' 2 R r b i �FT47�- - y> ;.j t Y ]; 787 Santa Fe Circle J; -It 4� T �! #.tr ', F mta3n VA CA 92708 f ( [ Y r 4 ! aft ti v fr t �����y ti �Qf, 4, Via SigRIOY'a n g \ r J4�in Capistrano, CA 92675 ^, ," { �,+,, "* '- fF - { f t Y .-'— t �c, t - if - \ .� - - - a f FCC t- Y s; '_-,.r, - r{t t 4r J.K. i; t, ti -S ti - f {- '- r,. �l'fJ f,'�la.,..i4 tit - ti a�= A- --)- , 1 t -Y.. f , 1 ,, t< ro t t - i e. . .. i k tr y y ii {ti Pn }pF. tt�t ff f. rk' ` _ .. .} r t 1. A, .x t- 1 JL 11, @ -1 .. . 1 # ! { _ . - t # t { i ' - f i ,.. ( 1 - �1't 1 t+ Y - ' ,'I' I I. :5� t !r -�ti , �1Kj . - - - ,_ t _ - . .. rt . _ .-., _ . _., -.. 1. i _ :+•- t r� _ i wr. ,.,;. � . JJ -IN:; .rig-,....... roa"..x.... .._ . i, CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK June 22-, "1981 ' Housing' Dynamic. Inc. 4152 Katella .Avenue Los Alamitos, .CA 90720 Attn: Jeffrey M.:Eckert., Project -Manager. The' City Council of 'the City of Huntington Beach, at -its regular. meeting held Monday, June 15-' 1981 denied your appeal to the Planning Commission's. decision. deleting Area..2.1 from Land Use Element :Amendment 81-1 to the . General Plan. This is a.final decision..- 'You are hereby notified that pursuant to pro- visions of Section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the State of. Caiiforni.a, you: have ninety days from June 24, 1981 to apply to the courts for judicial review. Alicia M. Wentworth City. Clerk , AMW:CB:js cc: Jim Palin - Development Services Director Gail Hutton, :City Attorney ITtl1600 i:714GM227! . h;f +h•e . 'i .ti i�� i'rw73 ..-, ... . . 2• �l-... �i'fi!Ft "•R'Fr*"!��c�tZ...i -.i7"�'3'i•..��q.rr,};c" - c{<:...s.^w't••[.`nc..:v-,.. a'•..'. 'o.-,.. v... re•«. ..r,-k.:' -------------- NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT NO.81-1 TO THE GENERAL PLAN AND MR NO.91-2 NOTICE 1S HEREBY.GIVEN that a public hearing will be held by the City ' Council of the City of Huntington Beach,in the Council Chamber of the Civic Center, - - .Huntington Beach,at the hour of 7:30 P.M.,or as soon thereafter as possible on � Monday,the 15th day of Juce,1981,for the purpose of considering Land Uee Element i Amendment No.81.1 to the General Plan,requests to: j Area 2.1. -(Deleted) Area 2.2.Redesignate 2.50 acres located north of Newman Avenue,approxi- NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING mately 630 feet east of Beach Boulevard from Medium Density IN Resi- �&uncil APPEAL TO PLANNG COMMISSION DECISION DELETING AREA 2.1 dential to High Density Residential.FROM LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT 81-1 TO THE GENERAL PLAN Area 2.3.Redesignate 59M acres located south of Adams Avenue and east of NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held by the City Beach Boulevard;from Resource Production,Commercial,and Low of the City of Huntington Beach,in the Council Chamber of the Civic Center, Density Residential to Planned Community. 'Huntington Beach,at the hour of 7:30 P.M.,c�soon thereafter as possible on Area 3.1. Redesignate 116.1f"gyres of property between Twenty-Second Street, Monday the 15th day of June,1981,for the pu f considering an appeal filed'to Walnut Avenue( ;Avenue and Sixth Street from Low Density the decision of the Planning Commission to de` area 2.1 from Land Use Element Residential to Mi. Dentaity Residential. Amendment 81-1 to the General Plan;a request-to redesignate 1.89 acres located A legal description is on file ,!in-. Development Services Office.. 'south of Ellie Avenue,approximately 400 feet east of Beach Boulevard from Commer- Environmental Impact Report No.81-2 will be heard in conjunction with the cial Sq We'A Residential. Land Use Element Amendment No.81-1. :.ra,.,pevelopment Services Office.' Copies of the proposed Land Use Element Amendment and Environmental Environmental Impact Report 81-2 will he heard in conjuncti6ni3ith said appeal Impact Report are available for review in the City Clerk's Office. and is available for review in the City Clerk's Office.' All interested persona are invited to attend said hearing and express their All interested persona are invited to attend said hearing and express their ;ppi�nions for or against said Land Use Element Amendment No. 81.1-and EIR opinions for or against said appeal.Further inn~�tion may be obtained from the N0.81 .81.2.. IOffice of the City Clerk,2000 Main Street,It ton Beach,California 92648— Further information may'r1 load from the Office of the City Clerk,2000 (714)536.5227. J Main Street,Huntington Beach;` hnia 92649—(714)536-5227. 1 Dated:May 29,1981. DATED May 29,1981. CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH By:ALICIA M.WENTWORTH By.ALICIA M.WENTWORTH City Clerk ✓ City Clerk Pub.June 4,1981 Pub.June 4,1981 Hunt.Beach Ind.Rev.#10108 Hunt.Beach Ind.Rev.#10107 j NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING of Land Use Element Amendment No.81-1. AREA 3.1 OF LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT NO.91.1 ✓ Copies of the proposed Land Use Element Amendment and Environmental I' TO THE GENERAL PLAN AND EIR NO.81.2 Impact Report are available for review in the City Clerk's Office. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing,will be held by the City All interested persons are invited to attend said hearing and express their Council of the City of Huntington Beach,in the Council Chamber of the Civic Center, opinions for or against said Area 3.1 of Land Use Element Amendment No.81.1 and Huntington Beach,at the hour of 7:30 P.M.,or as soon thereafter as possible on EIR No.81-2. { Monday,the 15th day of,June,•1981,for the ppuurPcee of considering Area 3.1 of Land Further information maybe obtained from_the,Office-of Attie'City CI QW i Use Element Amendment No.'81-1 to the General Plan,a request to redesignate Main Street,Huntington Beach',California 92648—(114)536-5227. s ` 116.15 acres of property-between•Twenty-Second Street, Walnut Avenue, Palm DATED JUN51,.1981. a Avenue and Sixth Street-from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residen- CITY OF HUNTINGTON; tial(Area 3.1). By-..ALICIA M.WENTWO A legal description is on file in the Development Services Office. Pub.June 4;1981 City Clerk Environmental'Impect Report No.81'2 will be heard in conjunction with Area 3.1 Hunt.Beach Ind.Rev.#10106 fy1 aummz. Jl t Vt r U l_lt_1 l 1lJ uLl'l_t 1 J I_ p •/ .�' `\ RI 0- /I lb �'.j•• ti K*RI-O q,-0 R,1 Ron R I RC4Y //\J �.v% r�� \!♦ RI a ho fir+ ••..4,,�1',�' t�� RI ,RI :R I- "IRI_JItR2 I C4 7,11 I / f °` \ / ♦:•.,•- %..:. RI RI HR.. RI -RI oR2' - ,77 vl,.f _- I ` �` E 1 a ♦•' '91. 0 F E l R 1. R I .0 'i ,.: • C , ` R a • I \ bt:4T � >o \�\ 3.1. RI w«` p I PLAfl( .j 1_/C F R. 2 L_ 06 IR2 Jo r i A .r ► � I \RJ R2 A2 Rig,. � r�, ' 1,v_. i \\ •'' - CJ- Q.. aa? .V Y Iwo' R3 ,R3 l� �`•'Y' ,R,• i Ali ' - ;ON tom ' .�'-L 11 lo- ell � 1. .\\ � �, t � V I •-. to �` cJ e CJ D Iry Area: cf Concern 301 O FEB.81- 48 • - 2-rt1(�'s�E'�`.C»'fixlcltib ;L13,i�i�tx�' FIF!#��rr0'��'f�li�1�11IP.°�+ 91152 tir''�, a aOish 6/4/81 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING LAND' USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT NO 81-1 TO. THE GENERAL PLAN AND ~E1R NO. 81-2. NOTICE IS ;HEREBY GLVEN that'a .6ubli c hearing will be held by the City Council of the'City of Huntington'Beach, in'-the Council Chamber--of, the' Civic Center, Huntington Beach, at the:.hour of 7s30: P:M. , or as soon thereafter as' possible- ;on Rd the 15th. day of June 19: 81 for the purpose: Of cons�der�ng a Use .Element Amendment No. 81'1 to the General y A P1an.,4request to: Hi h es., a 5 acres.Aoca .e o th of ams venue and east of Beach ntial` n ty:.:. Rede,"s�gnate l .15 acres of. property between Twenty-Second..Street, Walnut : Avenue,: Palm .Avenue and Si:xth Street from. LOw Density Res i•dentla1 to : Medi um ,Density Res i:denti a A legal description is on 'file in the Development Services Office. Env 1ronmental U Wt.V_Report Ni 81 2 wi��_ be _heard` in conjunction with the Land. Use Element tit .�. ..a... .. n Copies of the proposed Land Use Element.Am i0ftlent and Environmental Impact Report r . are availableor� revir f.t► t#te C`i ty Clerk's pffice. ,{{t ;u,w,k,iu.�r' �ws r -..:ukd-. d4a.audY.e. ...1� lwxa•- - i� A,i-. A11 tnteresteti atdts i10 Ott ems safd hearing and: express tte�r opinions ,for or: against said Land .Use. Elementlmendment No 81-1 and EIR No. 81=2. . Further information Mai-be obtained from'the`Office of the City Clerk, 2000 Ma n Street, �Lunt�ngton Beach,v;Califorma 92.6.48 (714) 536-5227 DATED May,29, 198] ' CITY ,O.F HUNTINGTON BEACH By Alicia M Wentworth City`Clerk r RPO 'R I O..R• 'R�I-0 yrRI-0 RI _�R_I IVRR-I y 'C34 EIM SIE7 i r _-- oCa I -iN Pl.O / 4'�r 2L• •�1. / - LOMA AVE \. ✓✓✓// C' �' '�_,��� HHE RIH R2.yv ��� , 0 ,E° , Q�� �:;,�� F-E \\ uiHTEENTI. . OSn'rGO bq rwo� �a O RI L .1�Ja- -0 `< I y1P ( u:.:•-:.�: .: :�;;r::T R RI RI \ / ) 3.1 h� RI RI rwE`Ew _0 F rOLDTO RI RI \� ! CF_R PLAN( RI \/ EIE vENiM .n 1 < _ -1-111.11 RI RI i 02tk • ti / R2 RI a = y KNo.vr I.E Pb RI J,o Py a _ zr tiPIN A.yyfflLFI'y A i j / yy R2 CO _ `� _C�-,-- r� Fs� �ti� � //J a`�•LG� `1� i ,.)4�� '•�•_ 71 \\ .03_- 9. a Q PiAR�� ION o \\cam O�Pp •! ! G� J �T ' rl \/ c r. / I O DON G — - 9.O G �° y\� O_Cf i. Cd C' ATLANTA Area of Concern -3.1 0 0 o o FEB. 81 O 48 Figure 3-2 Publish 6/4/81 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AREA 3.1 OF LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 31-1 TO THE GENERAL PLAN AND EIR NO. 81-2 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held by the City :Council of the City of Huntington Beach, in the Council Chamber of the Civic Center, Huntington Beach, at the hour of 7:30 P..M.', or as soon thereafter as possible on Monday the 15th day of. June 19 81 . for the purpose of considering Area 3.1 of Land Use Element Amendment No. 81-1 to the General Plan, a request to redesignate 116.15 acres of property between Twenty-Second Street, Walnut Avenue, Palm Avenue and Sixth Street from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential (Area 3.1). A legal description is on file in the Development Services Office. Environmental -Impact Report No.. 81-2 will be heard in conjunction with Area 3.1 of Land Use Element Amendment No. 81-1 . Copies of the proposed Land Use Element Amendment and Environmental Impact Report are available for review in the City Clerk's Office. All interested persons are invited to attend said hearing and express their opinions for or against. said Area 3.1 of Land Use Element Amendment No: .81-1 and EIR No. 81-2. Further information may be obtained from the Office of the City Clerk, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California. 92648 - (714) 536-5227 DATED June 1 , 1981 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH By: Alicia M. Wentworth City Clerk 40 Al �`' Jl✓``//// / - _ �''' ------- v V U aR\I-0 ! _.-gMs. �.. "A"�..LI'�.�,e,i J`rs_.--6.2•�4°�•;.,,,_`.'R F TI.-0 �.. �R-I �R-I -IIR2 RI-0 RI R .,. Cz;4j RI R2 " % N I _ `P al.p . Loan_ nvc .���C/ ��� � �/ FnRI EE--e ERI Rol -0 CF-E <`I Rl II01 R RI RI i R I 1 1;:::•-r:; �: C� 'na: I-LEI �Ff 5T I : LU I ` \ � sr RI RI rZ .+ R2 PLAN(] 3.1 5 \/�Q E II II`mv 1 rw Lf -° .52] . I L�J I/ �R � r 5. R 2 �4cr it O c3 a R2 R2 RLzT ' . I -� O tir ) y R 3 .R3 P 3 o uY: r.r.vE.•n 03 Pas � of r' Ol C OE T a017 `` [ 3 (V A3 /l D CiALTlMO'E Q� O'S 00 Al'-A N:A C 3 M1. `G F area of Concern 3.1 FEB. 81 O . 48 , Figure 3-2 1 CITY OF HU"T1NGTO1*1 BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION IIIWIINGTON NLIC II 0 To Charles W: Thompson o James W. Palin, Director City Administrator P Development Services C Subject LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT D� e June 15 , 1981 NO. 81-1 At its May 1.9 , 1981 meeting,_ the Planning Commission approved Land Use Element Amendment No. 81-1 . Area 2 . 3 , Located south of Adams Avenue and east of Beach Boulevard, was redesignated to planned community. on the entire 59 . 55 acres. The planned community designation would_ provide additional design control . throughout the implementation process, with the requirement of the development of a specific plan after the amendment process. The Planning Commission' s approval of the planned community designation was intended to consider design concepts , densities, and other standards . later during the specific plan process . As a result, the Commission approved the land use designation but deleted from the amendment report staff policy recommendations for incorporation into the specific plan. Although deleted from the amendment report, staff still believes the original policies recommended should be considered by the City Council to guide development of the specific plan. The following policies are, therefore, transmitted for the City Council ' s information: t 1 . The area east of the. Orange County flood Control Channel adjacent to the existing single-family residential tracts be of a low density residential design with an adequate setback to buffer the two projects . 2 . The area east of and immediately adjacent to- the flood control channel be of a medium density residential design. 3 . All units east of the flood control channel be clustered to allow for a maximum amount of open space. Total units not to exceed 400 east of the channel . 4 . The area west of the flood control channel be of a high density residential design. This concept should take advantage of the natural topography for development and simultaneously preserve the ponding area in a natural state . 5 . Residential units. be clustered throughout the project area which would also accommodate the continuation of resource production activities . Total units for the overall project not to exceed 800 . JWP:CC:df REQUEP FOR CITY COUNCP ACTION Date June 5, 1981 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, City Administratorw ' . s Prepared by: James W. Palin, Director Development Services -� Subject: LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 81-1 -V* Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions, Attachments4cj STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Land Use Element Amendment No. 81-1 constitutes the first amendment to the Land Use Element .of the General Plan for 1981. The amendment includes three requests from -private applicants and one administrative item from Council for changes in General Plan land use designations. A public hearing on Land Use Element' Amendment No. 81-1 was held before the Planning Commission on May 19, 1981, at which time the Commission approved recommendations for the various areas of concern. The Planning Commission deleted the Ellis/Beach area (Area of Concern 2. 1) from the amendment, a request to redesignate 1. 89 acres located south of Ellis Avenue. approximately 400 feet east of Beach Boulevard from commercial to high density residential. The area of concern . presently acts as a buffer between the general commercial and resi- dential areas. A more appropriate use for this site would be additional office space (an eligible activity under the general commercial designation).. The Planning Commission recommended that the 1. 89 acre area retain the existing general commercial land use designation. This area has been appealed to the City Council for reconsideration and is included in the amendment report. Draft minutes from the Planning Commission' s public hearing are contained in Attachment 4. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The Planning Commission approved Environmental Impact Report No. 81-2 and recommended City Council approval by the following vote: MOTION BY ;WINCHELL., SECOND BY BANNISTER: AYES: Winchell, Porter, Schumacher, 'Bannister, Paone NOES Kenefick ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None PIO 4/81 RCA: LUE 81-1 • • May 21, 1981 Page 2 The Planning Commission approved Resolution No. . 1273 recommending City Council action of. Land Use Element Amendment No. 81-1 by the following vote: MOTION BY: WINCHELL, SECOND BY: Kenefick AYES: Winchell, Porter, Schumacher, Bannister, Kenefick, Paone NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None RECOMMENDATION: 1. Approve Environmental Impact Report No. 81-2. 2. Approve the recommendations of the Planning Commission , and adopt by resolution Land Use Element Amendment No. 81-1. 3. Overturn appeal on area of concern 2.1 and approve staff land .use recommendations as indicated in Attachment 1, Summary of Requests. ANALYSIS: The amendment requests for the areas of concern addressed in Land Use Element Amendment No. 81-1 are summarized in Attachment 1. The amendment includes three requests from private applicants and one administrative item from Council for changes in General Plan land use .designations. The Planning Commission approved .land uses for three of the amendment areas. The Commission deleted the Ellis-Beach area (area of .concern 2.1) from the amendment. This area has been appealed to the City Council for reconsideration. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Environmental documentation for the amendment requests may be ,_ found in the amendment report which also serves as Environmental Impact Report No.. 81-2.. . EIR 81-2 .was posted fora 45-day period ending May 15, 1981. Public comments and staff reponses constitute the Final EIR, and are incorporated in the appendix of the report. i LUE 81-1 May 21, 1981 Page 3 ALTERNATIVES: The. City Council may adopt the requested changes as recommended, modify them as desired, or retain the existing designations in the Land Use Element. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Summary of Requests Chart 2. Land Use Element Amendment No. 81-1 I. Resolution 4 . Draft Minutes from public hearing before the Planning Com- mission- on Land Use Element Amendment No. 81-1. 5. Letter of Appeal on Area of Concern 2.1 1:MA:df o A SUMMARY OF REQUESTS ATTACHMENT 1 PLANNING AREA OF ENVIRON. STAFF COMMISSION CONCERN LCX'ATION ACREAGE ' APPLICANT REQUEST INFO. RECOMENDATION DESIGNATION 2.1 South of Ellis Ave. , 1.89 Housing Commercial to EIR 81-2 Retain Came. Retain Commercial. approx. 400' east of Dynamic, High Density Designation Designation Beach Blvd. Inc. Residential 2.2 North of Newman Ave., 2.50 R & R Medium Density EIR 81-2 Redesignate fran Redesignate from approx. 630' east of Invest- Residential to Medium Density Medium Density Beach Blvd. ment Co. High Density Residential to Residential to i Residential High Density High Density Residential :.Residential 2.3 South:of-Adams,.Ave., 59.55 Mola Fran Resource EIR 81-2 Redesignate fron Redesignate from east of Beach Blvd. Develop- Production, Can- Resource Prod. Resource Prod. , ment Corp. mercial, and Low Ccnnercial and Ccn nercial and Low Density Resi- Low Density Res. Density Residential dential to Plan- to Planned Can- to Planned ned Community munity Cammunity 3.1 Townlot Specific 116.15 City Plan, Area 'A' Council Low Density EIR 81-2 Redesignate fran Redesignate frcn Residential Low Density Res. Low Density Res. to Medium to Medium Density to Medium Density Density Residential Residential Residential • ATTACHMENT 4. TDRAFT MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION - Council Chambers - Civic Center .2000 Main Street Huntington. Beach, California TUESDAY, MAY 19 , 1981 7 : 00 PM COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Paone, Schumacher COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None CONSENT CALENDAR: ON MOTION BY PAONE :AND SECOND BY KENEFICK THE CONSENT CALENDAR, CONSISTING OF . THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF MAY 5, 1981, WAS APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell,_ Paone, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: Porter ABSTAIN: None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS: LAND USE ELEMENT 81-1/GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 81-2 Applicant.: Initiated by Department of Development Services and Housing Dynamic, R & R Investment Company, .and the Mola Development Corporation Land Use Element 81-1/General Plan Amendment requests for changes in land use designations as shown on the .General Plan for four areas of concern within the City. Mike Adams of the Planning staff presented a brief overview of the proposed land use amendments, outlining the locations and re- quested changes for each area of concern. It was the_ determination of the Commission to open the public hearings and take public testimony on each area separately, taking a straw vote on each before progressing to the next portion of the amendment. Minutes, H.B. PlannieCornmission • May 19 ; 19 8-1 Page 2 AREA OF CONCERN 2 ..1 Applicant: Housing Dynamic, Inc. A Request for a change of general plan designation from general com- mercial to high density residential for a 1 . 89 acre parcel of land located south of Ellis Avenue approximately 400 feet east of Beach Boulevard. Mike Adams informed the Commission that the request is made for the purpose of constructing a 27-unit condominium project on the subject parcel; this would be consistent with the medium density residential developments to the east and south, but might not be compatible with the existing commercial to the west. Staff is recommending denial of the request and retention of the general commercial classification on the property. The Commission discussed the compatibility of the proposal with the existing uses in the area, the. feasibility of future highrise con- struction on the properties, and the access easement between the _ sub- ject property and the existing commercial development to the west. Traffic problems. which might result from a residential project on the property exiting onto Ellis Avenue were also reviewed. The public hearing on. Area of Concern. 2. 1 v7as opened. Jeff Echert, representing .Housing Dynamics, addressed the Commission to urge approval of the request. He informed them that the 40-foot easement separating. the Town and Country shopping center from the proposed project site is on the subject property and is not an alley- way. Negotiations with the owners can reduce it anywhere from its present width to zero and there is no requirement imposed by the City _. for the use of that easement as access to the shopping center. He also noted that a commercial development on this property could not_ access directly from Beach Boulevard as there is no public access through the shopping center; therefore, a commercial as well as a resi- dential development would .have to access off .Ellis Avenue. It was Mr. Echert' s. opinion that the traffic count from a commercial devel- opment would be higher than that which could be expected from the residential project, and the two-story condominiums would have less impact upon the neighboring uses. than would a three- or four-story commercial project. Charles Sheppard, resident of the area, addressed the Commission to ask how the excess traffic could be handled on an already over-burdened street. Gerald Kohn, : operator of a school presently occupying the subject property, spoke to the Commission to urge approval of the redesigna- tion, saying that it would provide needed .low-cost housing for young .families. Gene Lassers, real estate broker spoke to. the Commission to describe the attempts made first to develop the- property as office professional and then to obtain the requested residential designation. -2- 5-19-81 - P.C. Minutes; H.B. Planning Commission May 19, 1981 Page 3 The public. hearing on Area of Concern 2. 1 was closed. The Commission again discussed the proposal, considering the recycling possibilities on the Town and Country site. Commis- sioner Paone questioned whether or not that site would be adequate alone to accommodate highrise in the future, and was told that staff felt .it would support such development without the property to the east. The aspect of the subject property' s availability for buffering such a future development from the existing residential was also considered. Commissioner Kenefick expressed .her opposition to the redesignation citing the City' s prior experiences resulting from placing residential and commercial properties in such close proximity, which had resulted in noise, traffic., and intrusion of privacy problems. A MOTION WAS MADE FOR A STRAW VOTE DENYING THE REQUESTED CHANGE IN GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION FOR AREA OF . CONCERN 2 . 1 AND DELETING IT FROM. RESOLUTION NO.. 127.3 . MOTION CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Kenef.ick, Winchell, Porter, Paone, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None .AREA OF CONCERN 2 . 2 Applicant: R & R Investment Company Request for a change of 'general plan designation from medium density residential to high density residential on a 2. 5 acre parcel of land located north of Newman Avenue approximately 630 feet east of. Beach Boulevard. Mike Adams outlined the applicant' s intention to build 54 units on the property if the designation and zoning are changed to allow it. Staff is recommending approval because of the generally high density character of the neighborhood, the indication from the traffic analysis that the streets are adequate, and because the proposal provides an opportunity to add to the housing stock of the community .in a fashion which will be compatible with the surrounding area. The Commission discussed access via Newman Avenue and the possibility of installation of a traffic_ signal at Newman and Beach. Bruce Gilmer of .Public Works reported that all they .have from CalTrans on that intersection is an indication that the signal is being con- sidered, but no date for installation. The signal, however, is about fifth on the City' s priority list. The public hearing on Area of Concern 2. 2 was opened. -3- 5-19-81 - P.C. H B Planni Commission • Minutes, May 19, 1981 Page 6 Dick Schwartz, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission, to concur with staff ' s recommendations. He informed the Commission that easement rights have been obtained across the adjoining prop- erty .to Michael Drive for sewer and .storm drain installation. Dr. Steven Goldberger spoke on the increased traffic counts which would result from the redesignation and ultimate project, saying that the minimum number of units should be approved and a signal actively pursued for the intersection of Beach and Newman. . There were no other persons to speak for or against the proposed land use designation, and the public hearing was closed. The Commission and staff - reviewed the anticipated vehicle trips per ..day- from the ultimate project; Bruce Gilmer explained how Pub- lic Works had arrived at its conclusion that the street network in the area is sufficient .for the increase in traffic such a project will entail . In response to questioning from the Commission regarding the effect of a possible affordable housing bonus request, staff reviewed the applicable State law. ` It was pointed out that, although the present City code forbids any project from .exceeding the density allowdd under the General Plan, State law .has mandated that .if a density bonus cannot be granted an applicant. is entitled to his choice of two other alternative write-downs .for the provision of low cost housing within his development; these alternatives might prove costly to the City. However, there is some leeway in the zoning category and the low end of the High Density designation could be applied to provide the City some protection if this portion of the Element is approved. The Commission reviewed the desirability of leaving the area medium den- sity to allow .flexibility for the density bonus, and the suggestion was made that the Commission again consider a code amendment to remove the constraints in working with the State law in this regard. A MOTION WAS MADE BY SCHUMACHER AND SECONDED BY WINCHELL FOR A STRAW VOTE TO DENY THE REQUEST FOR REDESIGNATION OF AREA OF CONCERN NO. 2 . 2 . MOTION FAILED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Winchell., Schumacher NOES: Bannister, Kenefick, Porter, Paone ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Savoy Bellavia informed the Commission that the zone change which is being processed concurrently with the General Plan Amendment has been advertised as R3-22 , which is less than the 25 units allowed by the normal R3 designation. A MOTION WAS MADE BY PAONE AND SECONDED BY KENEFICK FOR A STRAW VOTE APPROVING THE REQUEST FOR REDESIGNATION OF AREA OF CONCERN NO. 2 . 2 . MOTION CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: -6- Minutes, H.B. PlWing Commission May 19, 1981 Page 7 AYES: Bannister, . Kenefick, Porter, Paone NOES : Winchell, Schumacher ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None AREA .OF CONCERN 2 . 3 Applicant: Mola Development Corporation To permit redesignation of a 59 . 55 acre parcel of land located on the southeast corner of Beach Boulevard and Adams Avenue. from Resource Production, Commercial., and Low Density Residential to Planned Community. Mike Adams described the area and the surrounding uses . He noted that approval . of the redesignation request will then require that a. Specific Plan be . processed for any ultimate development of the site. The public hearing on Area of Concern 2. 3 was opened. Frank Mola applicant, addressed the Commission .in support of his request, describing the constraints on the property and the efforts he has made to mitigate them in his conceptual plans. Street layouts and design of the units will be "directly influenced by the need to buffer the existing residential developments to the east and south, with the higher density development taking place on the west side of the flood control channel abutting Beach Boulevard. Commissioner Paone cautioned the audience that the Commission is not addressing the plans shown by the applicant, but only whether or not Mr. Mola is to be given the opportunity to present a Specific Plan for a planned development project, and that comments to the Commission should not concentrate on the conceptual plan before them. The following persons spoke against the proposed redesignation: Michael MacDonald, 20072 Cape Cottage Lane;, Dorothy Gruleck; Ed Kuhlmann, 8232 Munster .Drive; Jim Lees, Summerfield Homes; D. Lolla; Mike Moler, 20332 Lighthouse Lane; and John Cogorne, 20302 Sea Circle. The speakers cited- increased crime rates, in- creased traffic and noise impacts, earthquake hazard in the area, the possibility that speculators would purchase the dwellings and turn the project into rental units, the impact on school and City services, and the general incompatibility of the high density with the existing residential in the vicinity. Of particular con- cern was the traffic circulation for the project, with the general opinion being that there should be no circulation between the proposed acreage and the existing neighborhoods. " Also emphasized was the cumulative impact on the intersection.-of Adams Avenue and Coldwater Drive, with the suggestion made that signalization of that intersection should occur, with or without the high -7- 5-19-81 - P.C. Minutes H.B. Plannin Commission • May 19 , 1981 Page 8 density designation.. It was- the unanimous conclusion .of those who addressed the Commission that the construction of a planned develop- ment on the subject property would place high density, high rise struvtures in too close proximity to their homes and would be totally incompatible with their neighborhoods. Andrew Suziki and Will Haynes, who will be employed by Mola Corpora tion in the design and construction of the proposed development, - spoke to the Commission to answer some of the concerns of the -neigh- boring residents. They pointed out that in .their opinion low density would bring in more people than the higher .density proposed, as the. units in the planned development would be designed for one or two per- .son occupancy. The also said that single-family construction would result in higher traffic counts and might lead to traffic circulation through adjacent tracts; that no school impacts would result from the planned development designation; and . that increased crime as feared by the neighboring residents is not necessarily a question of pure .density, but more accurately a function of demographics. There were no other persons to speak to the Commission on this area of concern, and the public hearing was closed. Commission .discussion ensued. Staff was. asked to respond to the alleged. earthquake hazard which had been addressed in the public comments. Secretary Palin noted that the informtion submitted in support of the allegation is dated, and the Special Study Zone has been moved back to the bluffline in the Bolsa Chica; the other known earthquake fault zones underlying the City show no surface traces and there is no re- quirement under the Alquist-Priolo Act that surface structures must be set back. a specific distance from those fault lines. He also ex- plained the building requirements .(such as shear panels, connections, and bearings) which are .required in the design of structures to ensure that such structures can withstand identified g-factors. A lengthy discussion on the densities proposed was held. It was em- phasized by staff that although the staff report does contain some references to density these references were intended to be used in the processing of the Specific Plan for the area if one is submitted, I nd it is the Specific Plan itself which will set the density on the parcel . At this point . in the process, the planned development desig- nation could mean any number of units per acre., and could provide the City more flexibility in .obtaining an overall quality project, . what ever the density .which is ultimately placed on the property. A MOTION WAS MADE BY PAONE AND SECONDED BY KENEFICK FOR A STRAW VOTE TO APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR REDESIGNATION- OF AREA OF CONCERN NO. 2 . 3. Further discussion followed on the inclusion in the Land Use Element 81-1 of any reference to - the number of units er nature of the' future Specific Plan.. Discussion. also took place .on the contents of the transmittal to the City Council aid the notification procedures for the ultimate project on the property. -8- 5-19-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Planning Commission . May 19, 1981 Page 9 A MOTION WAS MADE BY BANNISTER AND SECONDED BY PORTER TO AMEND THE ORIGINAL MOTION, SAID AMENDMENT TO DELETE THE LAST LINE OF PAGE 42 OF .THE LAND' USE ELEMENT AND ITEMS 1 THROUGH 5 ON PAGE 43 OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT REFERRING TO DENSITIES AND LOCATIONS OF UNITS WITHIN A FUTURE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON AREA OF CONCERN NO. 2. 3 . MOTION TO AMEND CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Winchell, Porter, Schumacher NOES: Kenefick, Paone ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None THE ORIGINAL MOTION FOR THE STRAW VOTE TO APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR AREA OF .CONCERN NO. 2 . 3, AS AMENDED ABOVE, CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Kenefick Winche.11, . Porter,. Paone, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None The Commission recessed at 9 : 50 _ p.m. and reconvened at 10: 05 p.m. AREA OF CONCERN -NO. 3 . 1 Applicant: Initiated by the City Council A proposal to redesignate 116 .15 acres of land in the Townlot Specific Plan, Area "A" from low density residential to medium density residential. The public hearing on Area of Concern No . 3 . 1 was opened and closed when no one was present to address the Commission either for or against the proposal. Staff reported that approval of this proposal will bring the land use designation and the zoning for the area into consistency. Brief Commission discussion took place. A MOTION WAS MADE. BY PAONE AND SECONDED BY BANNISTER FOR A STRAW VOTE TO. APPROVE THE .REQUESTED REDESIGNATION FOR AREA OF CONCERN NO. 3. 1. MOTION CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Paone, Schumacher NOES: None ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None ON MOTION BY WINCHELL AND SECOND BY BANNISTER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 81-2 WAS ADOPTED AS AMENDED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE AYES: Bannister, Winchell, Porter, Paone, Schumacher NOES: Kenefick ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None -9- 5-19-81 - P.C. Minutes, H.B. Plan.ni*Commission • May 19 ; 1981 Page 10 ON MOTION BY WINCHELL AND SECOND BY KENEFICK THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 81-1 FOR RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY CnL7;:TCIL FOR ADOPTION, THROUGH THE ADOPTION OF AMENDED RESOLUTION NO. 1273, SAID RESOLUTION AMENDED TO DELETE AREA OF CONCERN 2 . 1, TO MODIFY AREA OF CONCERN 2. 3 AS REFLECTED BY THE AMENDED STRAW VOTE ON THAT ITEM, AND TO INCLUDE THE FULL COMMISSION ROLL CALL VOTE ON EACH . OF THE STRAW VOTES. TAKEN ON EACH AREA OF CONCERN. MOTION CARRIED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Paone, Schumacher NOES: . None ABSENT:- None ABSTAIN• None ZONE CHANGE NO_. 81-7 . Ap ,licant: R. R. Investment Cqm an A request to change the zonin. from R2 (Medium Density Residential) to R3-22 ('�ed'um-High Density R idential. allowing 22 units per gross acre) on\\?� acres of proper y located on the north side of Newman Ave- nue approxi tely 850 feet ast of Beach Boulevard. Staff. pointed t- that thi,/is a new approach in processing a zone change concurre•n ly -with e requested General Plan redeisgnation (this request ha been adressed as Area of Concern 2 . 2 in the Land Use Element amendm t).. Ths public hearing wa pened. Dan Salceda, represent.' the applicant, spoke in support of the zone change. In resp � se�to the Commission' s concern about the den- sity bonus when the G nera Plan had been discussed, Mr. Salceda indicated that they ould no ask later for ' the density bonus, as . it is their intention o build on 54' units on the site. This type of development, he , aid, would b the most compatible with the sur- rounding residenti/1 areas. There were no oth r. persons to speak for or against the proposed change of zone, the public hearin was closed. The .Commission rriefly discussed how ac ss would be taken to. the ultimate devel -ment on the site. ON MOTION BY. NEFICK AND SECOND BY BANNIS ZONE CHANGE NO. 81-7 WAS APPROVED FOR RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY O NCIL FOR ADOPTION, WITH THE FOL OWING FINDING, BY THE FOLLOWING 0 FINDING: . The applica t '.s request for. Zone Change No. 81-8 il . be consistent with the Ge- eral Plan only after .approval of Land\Use lement Amendment Nol . 81-1. �! =10- 5-19-81 - P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 1211 f' I A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH RECOMMENDING '! ADOPTION OF LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN NO. 81-1 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Huntington Beach, California, desires to update and refine the General _Plan . in keeping with changing community needs and objectives; and WHEREAS , amendments to the Land Use .Element are necessary to accomplish refinement of the General Plan; and . WHEREAS, the Planning Commission -recommends the following . amendments to the Land Use .Element: 1 . That 2 . 5 acres located on the north side of Newman Avenue, 630 feet east of Beach Boulevard be redesignated from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residen- tial. (AREA OF CONCERN 2 . 2) STRAW VOTE FOR APPROVAL: MOTION BY PAONE, SECOND BY KENEFICK AYES: Bannister, Keriefick, Porter,. P_aone. NOES: Winchell, Schumacher ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None 2 . That 59 . 55 acres located south of Adams Avenue and east of Beach Boulevard be redesignated from Resource Production, Commercial , and .Low Density Residential- to Planned Community. (AREA OF CONCERN 2 . 3) STRAW .VOTE FOR APPROVAL: MOTION BY PAONE, SECOND BY KENEFICK AYES : Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter-, Paone, Schumacher NOES : None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None 3 . That 116 .15 acres located within Townlot Specific Plan "A" (bounded by Palm Avenue, Sixth Street, Walnut Avenue, Twelfth. Street, Pecan Avenue and the Alley between Sisteenth and Seventeenth Streets) be redesignated from Low Density Residential to Medium . Density Residential . (AREA. OF CONCERN 3 . 1) 6 ' STRAW VOTE FOR APPROVAL: MOTION TO APPROVE BY PAONE, SECOND BY BANNISTER: RESOLUTION NO. 127310 • Page 2 i AYES : Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter , Paone, Schumacher NOES : None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None WHEREAS, a public hearing on adoption of Land Use Element Amendment to the. General Plan No. 81-.1 was held by the City Planning Commission on May 19 , 1981, in accordance with provisions of the State Government Code; NOW, THEREFORE, . BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Huntington Beach, California, hereby approves said amend- ment to the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach.. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that said amendment to the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach is recommended for adoption by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Huntington Beach, California , on _the 19th day of May , 1981, by the following roll call vote; AYES : Bannister, Kenefick, Winchell, Porter, Paone, Schumacher NOES : None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN:. None. ATTEST: ames. W. Palin, Secretary Marcus M. Porter, man P 'j /y r•.b + CJ• T �E' F HOUSING DYNAMIC, INC. G/May 20 , 1.98.1 City of Huntington Beach. P.0. . Box '19 0 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Attention: Ms . Alicia Wentworth, City Clerk Reference : . Land Use Element Amendment 81 -1, Area of Concern 2 . 1 Dear Ms. Wentworth: Please consider this a notice that Housing Dynamic, Inc . , hereby appeals the action taken by the Planning Commission at the public hearing, May 19 , 1981 . It is our feeling that both the Commission . and the City Staff are incorrect in their assessment that the proposed residential use of the site would be incompatible with the neighboring commercial center to the west . We hereby request that we be allowed a reasonable length of time at the next - City -Council hearing , tentatively scheduled for June 15th, in order to present our opposing viewpoint . Sincerely, HOUSING. DYNAMIC , . INC. Syr C 6� Je I:f_rey M. Eckert Project Manager JME . ct DEPT. MAY 29 1981 P. 0. Box 190 lHurtington Beach, CA 92648..:. ATTACHMENT 5 4152 KATELLA AVENUE • LOS ALAMITOSi CALIFORNIA 90720 • (213)594.9601 (714)761.2604 i9i ssa AF HOUSING DYNAMIC, INC. .4y�� clyBF `� May 20 , 1981 City of Huntington Beach P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Attention: Ms . Alicia Wentworth, City Clerk Reference : Land Use Element Amendment 81-1 , Area of Concern 2 . 1 Dear Ms . Wentworth: Please consider this a, notice that Housing Dynamic, Inc. , hereby appeals the action taken by the Planning Commission at the public hearing, May 19 , 1981 . It is our feeling that both the Commission and the City Staff are incorrect in their assessment that the proposed residential use of the site would be incompatible with the neighboring commercial center to the west . We hereby request that we be allowed a reasonable length of time at the next City Council hearing, tentatively scheduled for June 15th, in order to present our opposing viewpoint . Sincerely, HOUSING DYNAMIC, INC . Jeffrey M. Eckert Project Manager JME : ct 4152 KATELLA AVENUE • LOS ALAMITOS,CALIFORNIA 90720 • (213)594.9601 (714)761.2604 .._:--.'r AMA 1 . •��. - 1-. • I S�yg i sh 6/4/81' of*.. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ;LAND.USE..ELEMENT::AMENDMENT' NO 81-1 TO •THE-GENERAL PLAN AND EIR-_NO 81:-2. . . NOTICE- IS' HEREBY" GIVEN that a:public hearing ,wi1.1 .be held by the City Council of the City of llunti ngton Beach i w..the`,Counti l Chamber"of the Civic _Center, " Huntington Beach, at. the hour :of 7:30 P.M or. as soon thereafter "as• ,Y possible on nday the 15th:: day of •June:: ]9 .81 • r. ,. li for.the purpose:of considering Land. Use' Element Amendment No: 8]=.1 to'the General P1an`, requests to Area. 2.1 (Deleted) Area -2.2. Redesignate 2.50 acres• located north of _Newman Avenue, approximately ;" 630 feet east of Beach Boulevard from Medium Density Residential to : . High •Densi�ty -Resider dial.: -. Area 2.3. " Redesignate 59.55;:acres .located south of Adams Avenue and east of Beach i Boulevard ;from Resource Production;: Commercial, and Low Density Residential ! t 1 to Plarmed Community, ti Area 3.1 . Redesignate 116.15, acres `of property between-:Twenty-Second Street,. Walnut . Avenue, ,:Pam,Avenue:- a ' Sixth Street from Low .Density Residential to:j .Medium Density::Residential. A legal description is on fi]e .in the Development, Services Office: 1. Environmental Impact,Beport No. 81 :2, w111: be heard in con34nction wftla the Land Use Elementmed+c `+`* ••�� i QJP7 1 6.{L :pri Y-- .1 11 /11}?nnt}1( Y' ij•`t \. Copies of: the. proposed Land Use Element-Amendment and Environmental Impact Report*i n - :�.• 1 S - 5. -are aVAifable fors nevi rr in the Ctf , Clerk's Office. i 3-- +, -u.-a q 1. .., •as,._ •w. bu q+wl.. .1 a � { A11 interested Pe acre invited ftp attend said.-hearing and express t#►eir t { opinions for or against said. Land Use Element Amendment: No. 81-1 and- EIR No 81-2 R Further` information may be. obtained from. the.,Office .of the City: Clerk 2000 Main Street, Huntington each California 92648 : (7l4") 536-5227 DATED May 29, _1.981 CITY OF:.HUNTINGTON :BEACH By: Alicia M en.tworth ` + City Clerk ;r Publ.i sh NOT•ICE OF; PUBLIC HEARING '! LAND;USE• ELEMENT AMENDMENT N0. .•8 -TU THE GENERAL PLAN N. EIR N0. 3" NOT ICE I S THEREBY`Gi VEN that a=:.public.fneari ng wi.1 V be hel d by the C ity Count i l.. of the` CityrofY Nuntin�jtgn Beach:, in the ;Council Chamber of •the Civic Center, Huntington Beach, at the hour Qf 7 30 " P M::, or,.as soon, thereafter as , possible on Mond the -}4 }r: day' .'.of Sevemtirer �89-V :, -I. for the purpose :of, cons,idering` Land .Use Element.l4mendment No. BA-S-.to the General, Plan, "°.reques s to• t Lf,•�ip) � . ;r pip ti:.I W. I - t ae� 7M�7 t 1 -�e t }, i� �b�w �, now �:� .t�t+�wrMe►n . Ayenuoe, : ap�_roX'icnately •. .63A:,' Lei' tiff ;tea `Bou�tttatd, i�rtrm 'M6.di um,'D.ensty Residentia`1 to :High: Den,'s'.Residenti'al. • :.. Redesignate 59 55 acres located .south of Adams Avenue and east of •Beach. Boulevard ':from Resource Production; Commercial, and Low. . Y. Residential to P1"tinned Community Redesignate ,116 1.5 acres :o.f property between Twenty-Second Street, ` Walnut Avg a, ,r $ W ue a �1 Sixth Street. from 'Low Density Res idet3iw .�t '$ ' t,' �� $ c3e} r, a,t u t, } T17. pit ,- l:nvi ronmental Iri act:,.Report '6e 11-eard i'f conjunctioh with the Land Use. Element Amen dmentNo - Copies of the proposed Land Use`:Element "Amendment and Environmental Impact Report :are a i lable: for review;% the City, .Clerk's Office: , :A� interested::persons are.-invited to attend said- hear.ing-and. express their. opinions far or. agafinst said Land Use Element Amendment. No: 486-1? andEIR -.Further information may be.obtai,ned..from.; the Office of the City C1erk,:::2000 Main ms Street, Huntington,:Beach, California: 92648 .-. (7]4) 5364227 DATED CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ' 'By . Alicia M_. Wentworth I .:`City Clerki , , t, M WmO,S1N05...CYt, Z cc J w w a CF-E Cr Y _.AKE Vir-"Al 0L) N SLATE AVE (n MEDIUM J DENSITY RESIDENTIAL z OPAL CR. ---- GENERAL __ COMMERCIAL '--I� - HIGH- DEN MICHAEL � DR. ROSANNA DR. X RES- I i r w L .1 MED , J DEfJ � J�BENJAMIN DR RES � z 1 -: !_ L a ' NOBLE CR03 '- •�>ir• � I LOW . EL ARROYO a DENSITY w DR. I • _ � �frr:fr: . � � I RESIDENTIAL -- -- - i . 1 . j;"•r: L.. �I MO_REH_EA_D_ DR' 1 l-- OFFICE. TENTIQ viLo" ' PROFESSIONAL- . 1, - INSTITUTIONAL' rn r...i iI_f'I is='rii. ?v...t.... , DR z Q J. w 3 m z I -TALBERT - Area of Concern 2.2 FEB. 81 O 16 huntington beach planning division Figure . 2-5 WF� DR. W I GENERAL ° 0 _ COMMERCIAL W V)o -[W CLARKDA6 - ADAMS t' 4.' Z :I J z P N RT RT a 0 H 0 F z Z jii J DR.. RESOURCE::: : OD z P R U CTI O U 2: - r - ' m - Y U a m MEDIUM D UM .'D ENSITY NSITY Z J I RE SIDENTIAL AL 4- . 3 �1 Z y a ILL E"• n' I 1•: LL cr- ' I't 1- f— W I ? Q '-._. •. Ct - CDs I _ 1 I N a p : 1 Low W i 1- Q L 1 I.. Y 3 F C DENSITY W S a I N W 1 RESIDENTIAL CAPE E W a a I T P C F R OU 0 T S N R:1 • OR. _.1 I i I . f �1 I 'I� �ti•i I� '1 y i 1,1 I 1. - U rt I - I Y � 1 U IJ Z S.. f sl I O y.. a_ O '_r I w a I` N m tr+• - a II• I• SE APORT P ORT AVE w T w LOW GENERAL MONSTER 9 DENSITY COMMERCIAL I , o RESDENTIA W . { _O AVE. lu i w -- A --- MALLOY z ; m' i Laiz I WrTTT7 [1 O ] O Y 11.ON SAVE INDIANAPOLIS ��il)I,N.SI1'Y �' --- �--. - - -- RESIDENTIAL Area of Concern 23 FEB. 81 24 huntington beach planning division Figure 2-7 u u _ RI-0 ,��.. u".'•o a" '•y_RI-0 --81 -- -- Q. Ap��.' .y R r+ 5? '4,.a. ',N RI-0 RI R-I.N R-I R-1 R2 ry-/ �e�RI-0.•� RFO' .�. c`• \` Ob; R I I .4a+ RI R2 N C4. ❑ `RI'Or � "RIO �' 4'F ,%.. '.... LOMA AVE o RTO LD:.I •r RI -0. � Q'o �P�4. <•C�-'•o ''ti,e RI RI RI RI aRI R2 O - C 9ti �'� � �' C � THIRTEENTH. T. OSWEG A . / ,pq E N Q`` ,''e C F_G RI RI rc O R 1 *0 NASHVILLE_p� q�Y '� 'lP� R RI RI se R I . t of ST L "� / 3■� y'c RI RI rwELEtN -0 R2 PLAN(. NMEMPHIS ELEVENTH ST. weo\ R I J G q RI .. .c• °j 5 RI RI 1 RI R2 TENTH rca r.w R2 RI s ¢ KNOXVILI_E RI I^� 3 Oi - = W A ' (A Via". -_ �?4r A �; c3 O 1t -i R3 R2 R2 R�ZT eR3 4. ORD- \ C GENEVA \, O c3 O rR�RCL • GO A. - qLf, I \ a� \/ ElM'RA a N =oo aTO M c�4ti- \\ =C3,-, Q• L P G U " U >Z> 1 DET�I - M CHIL'.AGO� /^• O A.. C, qL t�2 C, .P2, SALT'MOPE i `• / 2'P 'S Q l -' C - t� ,>7 f t t�P S V �� 11 IIII---•�III SCALE IN FEET ATLANTA Area of Concern . .3.1 0 0 0 0 O FEB. 81 O . 48 Figure 3-2 i ..; , l { ­.;..,..,..;.."1...--.....,...­'-...,'.-...;:..:.:...:.,­;.....,--.III:!.,��..",..-.,.';,;.,.::.....-...:.:I:,.!.,-�...-..�-:"­.,�-.,,-.-!..�.'-.I-......:..:I...�%.,...�...�....'�:....:...:.-:.­:­1'.-.,:."...I..:.:.1.........-.'.1:.....�...:.�';.....",I..�.-..�.,�'--�-..--.:1.-:.;.I...-,.(:I:;-,:.�a...-......,..t.1,..I-,�..:...I....fm....,...-..�-..-..—'.,!-�.'.I;�,.�i....L.�:..�.�...'-.,'...*.......,.�..:-..a....,..,,:'...C,........:�.:......;......--..�...,1..-.-.'.,,..,.�..,..:-...1,.i�...-.o...',:­,-,�......"-..-.:......­.I.m..�..:a.-.�.,� 1yasr 4 r , I. `uE 8� t. i A L I. . I. . I. . . a11-cam I s. } - -os� I. A Q x r�,.j efs r7�.,,.a fie,. 9 I 1 c 8�- 4.r - z "` w s1�CL��f fr-}ii Y •r _L r yy��'y�j +�—-p' �j� y 1r 9Z706 � ' € .. ixt 281-08:. Zfi144-63 . . 0�8ttx�e , b ,tv Flood Oo�ttvl Jca�n R-Saiido l Y ' ' -. YS> I�s'hsict P:O. Soac-19T8 1515 I;akeside:Latye @ . 2D�'�.ti'e SaritA'`A[�ai :Calif M Beactz� Cr�l:I; i. calif . 92702 92648 .' 9264Q w ' . Y , 4_ 151.--502.48;; 44-67 + �sl� 25-1 Y '.Storydai�d-Pacific Cb � ,Q1*akee i�c Ii�c L Z65 W MIa►cArthur.Blvd. 1207 W. St Avae ' �% Dft%ie •. f , Wsta M®sa; Calif ' Arange. Calif f 4 _ , ,f. 92626 92667 ti 9 8. ,ti a. 1+ .�. it 1517 .38 25-144-68 G j` Jr i -i -.�.t�w}data 1503 Lake,9i8a''I.arx� j, 4 'y r } . P.O. 6620 Htuitingtn Beach, dllf L Ill. 6 6 92648 l: •t r .II 293-40. ��2�.5.-,��iy4,.4..- 9� . 4 ivee: a�ctiwxehip 150]. Laloeside a,ana,�;��� s tr .2790 L71L _ t 1 i A p . f1 S 310. `` 92648 ; f Oaa sa, 25-145401 1 ,, t i µ._ '* . L' d t i 9 6 �;r �� . t `� r . tE-;, .. .- f , �t 'rk' G r :: I1- : 1 .. - .. -. t t 5 cr -1 'tiz• s a-11 , ' - ', �,' _ k y 1 art - - .. . , s : , , r 777 "t.r ?5-. 3-01 25'1'45 0 0i `4 ; $ <y� , r I I - /�{�](. . p ; ICY <.}p fK '#y``'yyS;,(t '[� �4� 19+ 1.j; t ___i. A- ;�`.5 tS1L. ,l -- s 3?7�.J' .1 .'?yd{ s'qa �Rt-I--r-1 c L f} I $08 Adams Ayentie - 15T4.�Lalo.�eysida.I,e�ne�4 � ; rF�� h ., t..tt : ill/ - - H1u1tiTlgCG�n , C -,:.y1 y ,. :. y'l° ,f f;S, } - Jk 92��48 9264�i ,, x ,' �,,,F,u,f ' ��` '.,�� " 1 1 1 - t< - qJ '( J . - 1 25-153'-a8 25. 145-02 �II - ` - r 3 E } t- 1 ( �Mbpher C Stat>m: Siam:A ii" i7ir ' .3923' Lewis-Avenue 1512 I.aI - I Lea .' tN-i, io m BdaLdhr Calif Huntingbon Beach Cif t.`.0-: .II - _ - - y ; r - 1 fii _ 90s07: .92648 I1 A y r- 75 153-12 ?.5'-145-04 }�x,:i , ' r `� ; 5heiwiri Spira Wi]iiam Jo�ep11 Aefce > . 1313 Lakeside bane : 20491.,Ali a_L ;. Huntington Bead, Calif Himtingtan Beach, (;a].if F 92648' 92646 -- - r . . F 4 S V% h . 1."N�k - _.-,x, `. II'T I.:.:...­­1.�—17..�. 4:....I.-­.......,.­.-.I.,��:.: -.-. . -. ..-.-, ; .o ..".....i ..:, ....,...1..�,t�I.t�............w..I��....`.....I..:.­-,.­�.I-..��:',­..,..-...­.:.1..—.�I.%-1.*.­-I-.-­.,:..,,:.,.%......-..­��.Z�,,, " „ r _ ' { d 1 4;t d y :.5: - -.. .. .. . � - — ';,. , .01 . . .... . ;: .. . ,�%:. _ .: p .. -" il ',.�,­:.­..:.�­-;,--C.�-.!��j. ': `.�� .�,�,,;,�,I.."i._.:.1,�'...'�.".....,.."-.-..""-l-,I,�` , � ., .. . �.. .. , � 01�' _ ­­�:�'m; .. . _ ;, . �a ti a k e . �+k k A - -,l i - y �r r r y ',.'.,.I'�.-.!_-�"1�',',..�.,-.--�-%0--1--��-�.� } j �!r�, W` �1 - - rA ` 4 ± I r{- ...Ali- ,QY :i S _ . 1 - Z . 1i1 Street • ♦ $0 tJfi) � �, 'Calif 92b48ielchr.C%alif; 92646 i ti� t _ _ _ , 3 v� ,�#a' b - - - ,!r ;} rev' )•rl' 151-281-0 Y " i `, to .. . - ✓..ppw�'�'�s� ,., , .� or- . Stireet. 210 ,Yiator3ia Olive p ����..yy 4 i •t f .�,t - II S smta ArA .. R.. t 9f iC •l__ 1�� A � 92706 � `, t{," a♦ is �' :Cif 92646.: . .Calif 92648 I. / / .. - - . -_ 1 ).4J k Y Yj.'A k�{ .,t G it k _ 3..P• I.: q'y. _ 'f 1 P F1 1 3`-+��Lkljr[_ Daly_+ �; - _ 1G A s _ f- . �i ..4�1�2J� -.c�r,R ,�3.,.,,/$ a`{"77 sf f !< ♦ 1 rj {� /� Ft -h.., -t - . .kS "r MSG/�Y4 i;� _ s ,1j ir' � t ` �t Wes/ Qt y G s, tv t 4'N"� rh�i. 5 ,�. '8 , 4i h i - ; - .abti , - L r. . f ` i�uptjtn B�tlhy, Cxilii' 4' �r ��p� ge8�r' .. Calif 92646 . l - ° - t,k F r } t-1 ,'I N, yi rt'`4y..'4 4�r rl`4h,,. ' i r i/�i13 - _ eS�. Ls „w�nr S a 4}�•'+1'kS "'11tiYJ - . j +on U S A 7t�C' ' ,t-F ," . a 'Z'#VBt Cb./ or k , .� j 4- „iF a - y - - 1- _ F _ ���[ • PY I�ari�e 84 i�rive PP. Hoot -x 5 Calif 92646 . 'iI S ,soo, .Calif 9412© z, , �g wt irrjk r !f1�x_ �nr+�� ( ;�,11 ( i, ,.r ti { j -n' 1"fr7i"WiS� ' ,,� 'di"y�..:Y�^- '�wrYtayji. } rt r -. jy� - �•. _ �,?$-170-04 tYYi i�Llw L/ d Elr tsja'Il Y t t V�i�/ ��F djyp�.k r J f; R yy,k r'}js}/ d (( -Y� ir�tj�� ,L♦.wewi;. .. •s JAG1 V- •,�, s,5 1 S y ' 1 ,�F4t.tY���] ,Y,s- {t�J''yt S..y,. 1 , L -.w - - - r �.r.vo�rr f Ml Mom '--to itA� - t --I - - - �� �• _ tis�gt Bead,1Ca3.tf,~# 6 , C81af 9264E3 ctti5� Yej r ���te SS�C f� i �+a��}r t �t i `" 5. 2914 �p �}�w y} } gi(y� { js"1 L51291-04 t -.# M1'FaM1t&tfd 5•N j-` ts�1. ty.. f ," aVjF. j rt'. i '`l i�- t 'i1 1 t{i 3.x. # rqf ,+ ii� _�A yy__ ++fi�t.. { Py7 h Ct 7} t, 3 a? t ��.i� Y. 1 1�7� K jij" iiW & ?�), 'KI s kxr r-A .. ."� .fi . �� or {� P j' Y r`i'�.i -L -�CSC A 'y/y '�r�iI� A Iioa�►ld `a r I � 8151 Maw r .ti. Calif _ 1t� C y�,,,�A� �, �Y �j y' 91016: 1.9(.v1*i,�r..: i a' - <sttt - ` xi`�41! nv�i:`r- y - �, p -.r�.tw {� '_a/� /{- /[♦�� 1��r{hr a{ /► _ f '_Y9L r y f �f• �l��Y�I- t �/.��� VM ' �' (r �l. J i pl��}e F illy i��- 4 c4�, h { {- tl '. i 41"WAntft htr' 'iSr�.- r'. . VI .'IycuBt �., O. , l. i � () 111 M(X *''Ft x "-' f I..fi. f:•; i 4tltj{il g y� ^! r r, Calif x . F ,' ,� s , C 3tf 42646 It'9 3 fi _ ) ,r ,1 7' � J; t I: a 3# ... t I i _ - 1 4Nv '0,4r 7 _ - -10 151291-06 f + Y, "krl� t% 25- �r.j 6i`ii�gM 4- �1�'"4rl 5 S vg f:II,. z 0/ !! Y Y'i If,' Yp q,3 1 . M i... a:i a F„H Z' {�'r4yt*M)- q t s•- 13 .. g181-•JfYaO V�+.-- r +, •$ik r ,x'4y err_ L •o- r ,,91iG00 t 9202baitssx�t Benaft r2�6"2 j 15I 281-03 :151 291-07 ( F �•2908 '' Q00.]Ilty F1COC� OOdltlbl Title:I118 & t:QD/a� ' � i OPT/ ar r aix7e ,.% t tTv p ', District - P.O.. x 1078 . . ' 8191 l�aistsr... i._ t A♦`thy, : �� � ye, H.B. 92646 Calif 9270 •' :k ax _ '1 �� � :X Santa Ana, 2 . ; 5; A 7 >t ,s , r'� L T P { - - - art . f�'�..r �'tj-J 1 ~` i��}IV."!. I i�i" -- .. i rf n 2M �M't. 33Ss.'.t�,.''t sty>�'-s� f,Y yh,��,;.1�.�..'�.,�� :"- ."�t..,:1�..I- --- - i. --­­­-`_..`,V_­. ' :N.".�_ l,,,'.� : .!% I,"-,,-.'.! ;._ ., .J_. ..P.,..-. �''..� .:.....�:.... ­.-.,I.:..I... ...,'..i...­�..-. -...I A . ­.�..-..m ."..­."".­.�J.,.-A.�...,,�..-�--'4 i.�..1..: .;_.:,;:'.',,, s,­".A: ,.,­� Jn1i.V.�, +. .",.".�. .�F., 4.i' w', i.j_"_'�.:..,.-c�._,'. ,-..v..:.,;,-,I;4 !,I,,... t .. s 4..'_ : -�:-',_C� 7Y-.�,­..-1­-,,­F,,.-�.&.';;.jZ,j�L,&''.:,.�, .%_i, a-T.,S��.rn,1 �.... --","�-..---�_ k , .-t.., .1,. �-!u..,:­-,�.­,-.:­!­.,.-,i;`-.i,.,,; z j .�i �, ­. L­ ­ "�.!.--�.­;:.�,,-c`l1-, :'..-,� .."'. ;', ..,1",� I .. .._-,. �- 'r �, ,.... ,�-­�J �­f� .i �1--1..:t .";; .. v­- �4 u'..,�,"'-� _..�... , P1e,,. %, ., ,I,,­-,,",; ..1...;� .- i..i..­;`.' ';.. "..i. -,- . , �..�.v ..-,.........'' .�.""..d. � .;.i .. ft. . - .: 1 ....�.... ,� ' - -.1 . - .-... i..� . l..m t!;o- !: , -.. .-.....­ .::... .. �. :. ;..I".. ..-�. � .�-....._.., ...t, ...q_ 1.­ . :..-. . , ... � ......', _.�... � .-.... ., ,.,..., ...., _- ....� .:,.,.-.. I1..' .- :,.t.. P..�..-.. .:..1 : '...!0. . ..... " .. .; -. I-.:.......:..,:... ._ .I , , .,. .,'...,-. .I. .'...:. i. ).: ,.�.... ...... ..'.I, . .-- ... ..�..1r..... .­ ..�% .1.. ...­... ."�....! . . . J b PS4 I I, . I '. kii I _ i 54S J i ; , ; f A'�" I.. . .., .�...... .. ...­.... - I�I ..- � .I. �...- �..-� ...- .:..... ...� .. I .....- . ...... . � I,.*. .. ." .. ..�. �.. ... I ...- .., , .. .... . : . .. ..�.. ..:....... . .. .!.....�i... -V ,"6 1MI ..& Trdot.A b i N � Z , 1 � "' K .� s - 1.2 i7W. .�b6iZl Blvd � ' 103 Cif x 4 -Ieach Califi 2647 92683 YIfw � i�" , ­ ' " I-0 ­07- 151 5 1-20 i .� _ . YO Young DWib"'.ALl� O t" -.i*Aind-kitibs . �d� { 411 sev§h seab. ": V 20291 Bei6 . irche 2 lI Bearh tiijf _ _ , "1 WLft" gUm BemWh dal. "�,t1i, _ ­§164 4A46 . .Calif 1264.. I.. .' � .- .. ....:..1 ` ' �.. .. .." ... ;.. .'.�:... .-I., ..6 ;" . A13 ,;N IvU 1293-0 j ;�����. � 1,!�C,W, . . I ;. .�.. . ....;.. ,. I.. I.­ _I .. �. ... �j k1.71.a�' T �. , d" i � tvI.k" 4).'Jr0�j J. t ,R* . q . ,"I� .v P �i I' A1 _oi eve n S s i k I 1 . ! ;Q1-,'4U1Zi! ;` i1 -T 14"" B�� � r�� IF ;­ i I: Calif 0664 _1MXU- $_,,"" ;92646 ,9264 6 92646 I j ! i J ,;­ )j , -­I� % 6bi 5- , i- ""� ,!��A A �302 , � ­ �. .� .. .';. ..I. ,'...- :. -..I11.... ... ..� - - .I. .; .,...'... � 1...-. . ... .. ..I .. -.... i ,.&�'U , � ' 1a ' ,Abxpd, t l o�Jfti _ , xk;1" vg'! �ft ;ti �4 ;I 0r 1'24W 9" Cottag Lane o9. , tA. � , �E , . � -.Be3�_ y.4 " � , , dfi6 ; n Beach/ dalaf 9264(I ­ �,­5 .A ;. , �1jP�41), ­ ;­­,;­ , i� WsQ2 -j aIOl � !. , ; , . i '0�,*� !6-i - ',1` T i W2�47. A 457*4 4 . ; aid �. V Z C..��it,0& ?Ja ;f!,-",�. g- _� i ,i6e, j oti " Lana,­, � 40 � ,,Jitw I.,�Ow�P#� Lat Ai;W"4 i.BA Britain�` . ""g#%�,�;�F ii,11i _ftb4�Apo oI : i �wj, x V , ' B , Calif .. 92646, 92646 , 4i �, & . t 1 151 SOZ 4 9" WiiI, _ i f.w . ..153-5744*U1 j .98 ,.�, 1,:i �� ,,! i ", , x 1 j .� ;W1$161: "�&�_ , -Kq.I t3ioxl11` 2001�: N New bi tain Libb 199 U W 6; 4�_" x,' , , , (stage Lam r 40 -0040 - -t ,% . - A:,vO" 92646. 64 1 t - Ij,� , ?%t1A.,, 92t ", - ,-i ,�" i�5,-���4,­- ;( , " . 1 ��,,,,� l� . j��,, I`15D­ 2 41 i 45D 241401 6 I ,,m �41"MiN i�,*6K*I-A �jjj -­ a�""N_ ,.ie. � 'i �-kq' N Tk NewBri&i lim M $* 4�dilk m. 4z , Q I : " , - -.A t B1r- IH.* r!�I Iti! - "-� K41 0s1 .T,;z,1._­ 1. .. ... 1 ..... .. .. � -... , %. 3 ­�­­ w IVg V(" - . I Mkir 1 ! "110 .. �mj% ��$: ', � jM1 P-, "," aY —v 9"4 26 6 ' - "-S4 q4 'il,-� , .�r � I_ R 151�513-04 r 151 292406 1 �I k1."!­ �s. WK - 4L " . � W _... nW_S '. I - Jaies- � owt 48x8CjeL;maj� n! fa"4.'V ­w4 ,SWthp' r d 12­ L"m� ter jj _ 1 QVY t" ,��,,R�i 9 I, r T an.s .. M ' �,?Ni ­ " . 'I * , gt-oi 'Beadh Calif _ � tB uiltin t po*� � ,I . U 92646 92646 W k ; _ :L�! - W�I U%-fi p"� y �N �",,�.. s� „ 151 511 16 25� 41� 1 % ;; 1 DaNdA- Fx erw iI A ,51344Chpo pi ! 20332,Soa Cimle. I : � - } -names; - .L___ .:1207_W ;� � Amj�I A Htipizgt on Bm . . F: Calif o : I Calif_%13 .. 8292 .6p portDr 92646 ", J, " A" ­�r I�, ,. V ;P­4-k11 VAr dh Beach, GA ­ , - - , , ;.,, ..',....;I_.T,�11_. �.� , I�..,I- ;L1-1..,-.*";­. ;. 11 �' I '.­.. .;.�.. o � : � ! r , ...l; n;�).- � _,rk" _N _. .,-..'.,.I�.. .." ..., ,. I: .- I .�.: , , �t> .kid, t '• _ I �r -( . ` f _ bs 1.51-514-02 � r R FtiQc haI]d Ube Eleigrtt H ! Dom' Ake. 80=2 '8272 se�apos^t Diriw 830a Sauttipa ive Area 2t2 :Beach, Calif # ntingtron Beach; Calif July is, 1980 (JH) 92646 ' (92646 �151 513-15 I51-514-03 f 151 5�:3--06 �. . 1 L Ballarisg x.Smith. darvey H Chw�g 8312 SoutFiport Drrive. 20312.'Sea Circle 8282 Seaport.Drive Huntington ,Beech, Calif �initingGoon Beach, Calif r I:HuntitxJtaz;Beach, Calif 92646 .` 92646 l51 513".09 151-513--16 151-514-04. Dept. of Vets Affairs of State W�laiaati:D H�elzer of Calif t 8302 Seaport Drive ( John R. C�caodell. H tingt on Beach, Calif ;20321 'Sea Circle 92646 `Bxlntix�gtan Beach, Calif 151-514-05 . 92646• t Randall L May . 8312 Seaport Drive Beach, Calif Huntington Beach, Calif 46 92646 151 513 10 '151 513--1? ,, 151.514-06 Jatm R 7.+o�a; Daniel T Sun �Sbephen,La .Bongs -20321 Hen CirCie 83Z2.8eaport Dtiv�e 20311' Sea:Circle Huntington Beach; Calif HLmtinyto� Beach, Ca].�f Fhuitjxxt3oa�i Beach, 'Calif . :'92646' 92646 ' 92646_ ` 151 513 11 151 513-18 1.53091 10 Joeeplh A Ruiz Gill .rt Ramirez . . W T Now, Estate 20301. Sea Circle 2031). Beau Circle - Signs] I,arnark Prop. Iric Aint ngton Beach, calif Fbm�tirrgb4n Beach,' Calif 1 890 , Park:Blvd 92646 92646 Irvine ;Calif 92714 �: l 153;566 02 . �151 12 .ems x Chroa�ert w T,.NewlBr�d Estate ;26291 cle 20301.Ream .Circle` Y Adolph`P Wei,leir et al ` ;t�,� 42 ����le D iv�e I'a1Ws , Calif --. - Huntington Beach, 83 --. 92 . .C�lit 92646_ Bk�nt3ngtiQn l51 513-13 X5 3-20 �le�tl�o d to 153-56 Donald.S Brown W T; Es to :20392 Sea Circle 202} Circle S'Bet 'Hunt zxjtpn Beach, 'Calif ,' Calif 19561•$ aeood Lane 92646 46 Hunk Beach, Calif i 153-566.-04. 151-513-14 151-514-01 ;'John R Cogorno H T Yang: W T'Ne nand Estate 20302 Sea Circle 8262 Dc ald, C Peterson ' Drive 19951 � Lane Huntington Beach,- Calif Huntington Beach,;Calif ' 92646 .92646 BGlmtlingt .Beach, Calif 9264 ;t, r ..'S;dtikdir flv. uj �..aa4C f�lelslFs',.'.MS`Zh17, 'M1'-� i. �,sS✓!dry1.P:q.4'u-w:Abe r N..'ar+ -rt -. x t t �- v 4 _ 2 Area 20 - Calif 92646 s� 3�5�14-15 153 574 23 A sT A1eo►lat�d'Estate W T Newland Instate ;motes Ni�cYnhes irbeller 942 Wbgrhs Lane 19981 Cate Circle Beach, Calif 92646 j Esta Nswlai�d t Zelda : Thompson -'R frock 210,5 Victorka Dr.1Ve a �99t inns harbe ta An San a; Calif'` r . Beach, Calif 42646 9 2 7.0 6 v ,1 17 1151=504 05 ' +lMilalld Estate- - Donald G Har.`.per 'niaaas;J Coffey 829.1 Northport DriVeR` u 19912 ins Lane Huntington �3each', Calif Beach; Calif 92646t9264.6 } 1 t 1 151.=504 •'.06 ; to Irra C Coles 1 Jr` 828:1 -Nort'hpo.rt Drive Him tarigt on. Beach;, Ca1�f Calif 92646 9 2 6 4 6 " tr '' ` 53!,4574-19 '.T Newland Estate Mold DeVe1opment Corp 808':'A' 'MS Avenue Hunt ington Be , CA 9Z648 , K'. Y 9�3, Cabo Circle ,' ach Beach, -Calif 92646 ' - - �- - t 1• •, 'd'ref 11 �fat 1 T N�wlaz�d Estate Chevron': USA,,; P O sbx 606 i M N�alcin La Habra, CA 90631 �� ,rH •. � ..941 Cato J1 3 e. �� r Attn Vic BVers 3`, ` r ' tin9t�oai Beach, -Calif 92646 f 153^-574--21 —..Chevron':• U S.-'A.',;.�Inc:' ii1 T Ntand Estate P.O. Box 60k5 r �" Heck La Habra, Ca 90631, 1�951 Cato�Cauc�cle iutingtm Beach, Calif 92646 Attn: W. U. Edman 1!53-574=22 W T Newland Estate I 't A Daniel i9722-Ditmar Lane itinyton Beach, Calif 92646 <t x:F2f. - - - - �il H yii .�! a 1[y�.p�2 f, { _ •.�" .l ..�4ir - , , 4 3A .. _ttti. .F i/O{.�lVG' Y Wy TAAd Y - ,-7 1 t 'i 199 C.ao Circle , Calif 92646 Aiwa 22 (JH) Beach, 9264 153-'567 i. -03 , t We' James' W Raut2.en WET,Idled Estst�. : p E , I �9b1 19941 :Rathart I,�1i7® � � Htnitingto�a:Beach; Calif 19912 Catxo Circle ;: Calif 92646 ;92646 r Stiaitir�gt3aat Beach,. Calif 064 04 , ,. 56fi-0 ;4 -574-0 j �,�.�„.,.�,.� : wb= r C. y r " • N�tland Estate l . r esASr . . YID/✓ - .. ix 4 tingtaai'Beach, 2646 tfngf�on 6`,,' , µ '+me Beach Calif 9264 h��, 1 514 08 W T Newland Estate' Bc td E I?il.1.OhE; 3ni W T Newland' EStabB1 f , Lk. VYAWIAnd Estate Clerk'K C �' + B Oo�c et al 442 Imthert Iane:=, 19961 Bottysrt y ,1dt�6'iTr9�st� 1,a>ne Bea�,h, Calif:"92646 lim n g, ,. Calif {f Hearh;Yf w s _ tic�n Beach 9264. R `293�566-11 11 :'y06 y # ,74' W; WAii i Estate Y J >`1 W T s tE'! R :, r,a ` r1 NeD`wl and (Estate Ift'Volk , `� R Ruiz- 19952 Rotteirt 1998 1` Zap i9�951 Weans Lane FluCrrt M! E�each,. Calif�92646 Call 92696 HLtptisbgtoai Beach, Calif 92E� I53-5 .12 fi ' W T': 153 567-07 r 574 10 W T Newland Estate ,; L: NaWld:Estate I � R(9, Lawreope W Ksbat et aL1. _ E 31ser. 2 Lane I 19982 ;Oath Ci�1C1ie Calif,`92646 f 1 Fhmtf. gtoh iBeachi. }. ;9 �6, f beidh', Calif 92t: , i uj 4 SYS - 566-13 ,z;a 3 -4574�-11 W T NsWland Estate ; . �.� 19982 '�thert Mane James .M Holhon t t '. 1�#bU�.4 °E Hernandez '+ 19962.;Cates n ;I FluIlArbe id'U#ron Beach, Calif- 92646 Calif` 46 9todi Hea�ch. Calif J2�f u�, , Ida . , - lt 3 967-01 r I 253-567-09.- �253-574 IZ K.i W T`Ne ]:and Estate W T Newland Estate Y yW T Igland;Estate `M Grigsby. 19911 Rather Tarie Paul.H Jackie ' , t _R Tritz .; 6702.-Lawn Havi6�:Drive: a.9982 �1 tiffs' Lame 1�lntir tOii Beach, Calif" 92646 Hun tingtoai Beat Calif 92646 tington VBeach,. Calif' 9ZC 153-567-02 ;. � 153-567 10' 153-574-12 I i W T Newlaixl Estate. W T Newland Estate::: W.'T;NiMio d'Estate i ReimetYi H Keller David H Puls 1K!ctl G Fagan 19931 Rothert Lane. 19942 Cato_ Circle 1'9962;Wertens Iat1e f�. I Fbmt ngton Beach, Calif 92646 Humtingt on:Ba / �,4Z846 Hhintington Beach, Calif 91 �.. h }V . t t 7a ` fj1i s a r , d t +'' U(,1, T x i k__ r _ _ - x ' R" }-Z ti Ar r1- , tt V p - 1 Ham'" T v1 A 1 4 -.t . l 4V ; A w L i ; 4yC ( . . 1 1Jtt.�'J _ rs. s r r i-_- ra a. +. T {I, -{;r r ,."`+?'+ � 7{ s } I. t T t > b , lr�p a -x } s. } ,+� { ^ 4 1y. {- , -L,r _'1:� �.r�v jl -a, 1 �`i-f'j1id�,,,��s Sb 1a1.Y°. k 11, 11M6 ja 15,1980 :(JH� - ' I. I. I. M�+ Zt4 x -- 3 _ 4 l `_L l T , + 1{4�r tjr - i r s �r!} r 9tt) Yrr1 1 _ • ' h )f r 1,7P 1 t h' 1 :- _ _ �_ • A y8 tIP 8x'�.T Ist1e 0061 •N Nit ezi.a.. hatys h .! I lfr +I �T eeeah, Olaf s 2B�6 ' cr , _ r� s'r <. qua_l - Y 5t 37 C^ —wC ) , - r - ���.7K2 'O. 1 -`_. ! r_ s 1 s _,,,sit uY. ti`s era L vy '�L-t J ! � o g . ,Kit schke y,7 '" ,fi - ZQ "x v Aritidn'Lam v A !20071 N New Britain cane 202Z1 N* �r9,ta"' r 1 { ; /�� S 1. i Cali ���� ' � y _.s x L . 1 f ,, HeaCh, Calif' ' 9264b. T ;f ;,.w 92646 y: r - F ` ( r �s)J h rY' i 7-:� ty ` ;151�502 36- _ •'T + �.in/W� 6r4s r --�'. r !, w 'sr 4,4 Al iv yy` .dl..•l y-•+ F�'�{ ' '. A D M h r 17-`h rl ti 7<k E + Q�ttage Lane ��ioos N•New Britain Lane 2oa31 s rie to .t ,y , ) t w u�M .`.BeactiOP Calif Beach. Cstlif : 9264 H@a Calif' ` ,682646 ; 92646 `, + , k 'fit, 7 J T,d.. - - - T - �•.y --L 4 n, "'�";ti( 1 } Y_rJl� '1 F.�; =502 39- ,l5i`.:lYi'�7 7 li + r'�1 ,� s ,-._,�r furs ilti `l�1 --; •.s r may. }p } � � -11 ,IC 3 ' .: YL i. �{p��w�`!'�`�"�'��'-.T f�K►ir�.M► t 'rtyr t��}}�{�_ x r 'kT F 1 _- - l:iQ�l I� �b� yYYI t-a�rgt��S V?�t�n' _ r � + •Y _ �,20151'S New Britain Jae r f ,. Calif !` CB� ,, k - tip+fti�t ` -VA h< 'R��w+r Hwittngbon.Beach; Calf f 0�8ta . Y < 9 +4,, '. 92646. 92626 f - ,+ Y � ` xr r n , s - S -- - 3 sr ,{ b 15 ,"*J02-40 _ 157."'S0�-02 { '`� ,^ i. F ) 1 � .: ,[[[ H With:. wY� rh 1�dVe ! 20161 S New' Btit#in Lane ;;'8331 Nbtti]�aact 4,;,,t r:., xp j ,F� ,... , . ih �i Calif - ' H ! v'ttl-r T L`�-i 1 ttt � � I I.. 4 1 sx ! s r ti. -,L+. vie s'{ 1 tiFt1y i,- rl s M 1 ) r�spy `9ZH 92646 :LF f+i e- `s • V pj, .Y >+ r Y�"�� _y .Gl =L { 151-5 3 54 --- `Q s i,. - --8311 '� -'.TSt l r " .M1^ i'+` k - -. t �.,,�{� 4 , !': ,, - Calif --._, r�3 } v' ��s,.�,L Lr1 7,,,a 1 r__t�a � 1 A W F4 $ Calif �j A r brl 92646 F . )4 ,;aP, ,�� x t ,� s Ir rr„" X fvi�' a T}.s s�Ytl n �. ,r-irf f, #kA, - b' -i313- - i:l51 502 42 151-504-ti4 x �iobii � Bara a namnitz Y;, t, 20181 3 NBht BrJ. , Lane 8341 � fi;r�' � ., v +'! Fitu1 Heaech, Calif Hku tington Heady _�� ;�x ''1 ,1, • (mil if + �i 32f46 r L 92646 92646 NT ,' ), „ a , ' 151-502 43 151, 511=01 ' 1 R - W• I s' , f .�' i .James H Holl and Glen -. G�I'A 4, L ,- 20191 S •New.sritain Lane 20241 S New Britain i . 1 r ; h amtingt,an Beach, Calif ' AW i "�I 4s If i r li '92646 92646 ��i ,, ��ftk . ya '' - - - +} s. s� �^ £ - !1, x �. z r 1r4.. - - ♦- R kx - P.+'+J d 20I'✓ ' k Ian$ Use MaWat Am At Cottage Lem fib. 84-A2 At" 2..2 Haitiv r tin Beach, Ca11 f July 15, 1960 (JR) � Leine 92646 MOO �se�' Calif I5-302-09 151-542w17 ltl heel J Pagers Ismael Q=1101n lin � � Beach 13901 Ws�,labd l�a�+arwe C Cl►ttere Zane 92646 Sy7meur, CaeW 91342 8eseb, Calif IU 502-10 cozy B awass 151- 20222 S New Britetn T"ie H�rtin- , Beach, Calif 20131 , *46a"-Lein 92646 cbIllI' Calif 9 A KA= A Lad es 20202 South New Britain Lane 20 �, .. �, W XW Britain Lane amtingtm Beach, C&W � Beach, Calif 92646 * 4�6 Dmarls S Sjaarda am c �4 � * l�yl�► 20193 S New Britain Lane 20�.01 ( Hmting6on Beach, Calif Riceitingt�on Best, , 92646 92646 151-502-13 151, ►2 . X Anthony S Di Dio St IlydOy l j 20182 S New Britain Lame 20091 C9r cOttap ►Lain Lane Mmtitx tw.Be&ch, Calif Calif e r Y 92646 9264 * 4 151-502-14 151-•502-22 tt2: Qeo�'ge T Coot 20172 S New Britain Lane 20081 Cape ` '$tairi Lane H�tingtaoci Beach, Wif vik , "Head, Calif 92646 92646 151-502-15 151-502-2333 Arnold Blumenthal Kamm" B BWM Awnta Kositarut 20071 Cape titan Iane 20162 S New Britain Lane RRterrt f►tx tcxl Beach, C+s13.t Huh, Calif R�tingtcn Beach, Calif 92646 92646 ' 46 j 151-502-16 151-502-24 Robert J Kramer Agee B Scivwkider 20152 S New Britain Iatye 20061 Cape Cotter Ipae h � fain Iarie Heath, Calif Calif 92646 92646 d' __, M�. 1.�I.rl_i­.­­���I, �6%qv,:. -V. , 'W ... � ,.,- .--,�,;�_ , ,-, �,�,I .... . , i.,� . & ,. "�­ _ ,� _ ..,I-", -i.!.-­-&­ ,$,Q'i;� �'.1.�,;�,,�.t.���-..,,%...!;,-:�.�,�.,,.����..,,;,�,.�.��..�.,,.-..,.i.� ,�,N " ',,4,�... a ... , j..1, i,;," .; ,WMAI.��G.W,,a-�M . A-V , ,-,u-,AL.'CA-;- ,I -Zma�& Z�9" N., , Mg -. . , it)"I,� ;�,t6l W, .%. .. .. � .. I. . . . . ., . I . g�� . -M 0-,`k��.-�'P;��.k'-,-�o, - IIFI�0.1 - ,. . .. . � . ... ::.I .. .: .. . �.1. :,� . ... . .� . . .- W,�41 .. . - : . �� .-� , _. : .� .. .. . � . . ­. . . . . . ... . 1,41.., 'Tlvl��-,.­ : I I,. ... . . '. :� - . - " . , ...� . . .. '.. . % w .�. 1 .., �, .1, _: � � �, :. ..::. . ..I . .. _ ;., . ,. . . , .1,1- .1.. . " , ., I . . .�. .. -.,,.,.. -.- ;.,.,.; - , ,'... . . ......-�' , m . . . . .. . . . . .... � . . I .. - .. : , $.� 1 .­.�,, . . . .. '. . . . .... I . .., " .. . . :' � -� ":'�.�,,� i"t, - .,. ,`.'-I v, .Q.... .il�. .�. . .:. . .; ��-:,-" c i.:.'_::::`r --,�.!*, -,,�:� .-..%g ," - , , , , . . _ � .0�,.,O,, - , ��-111 .. : �.�. -; .. _. ..;� . . . we,."-,�,� � ,, t ,,�,� .. 7,;_1 � . -.-:.g . ,_ . " .. .. ...!. .. - . ': �: _'_,, -i `o�, 't . . . - ,N? :. ;m � . t:.- . ­.. Ona , ': ­ ,­;�,­1 '. �;�-",�'..-,-,,.�.".i:,."�'...�- . ,$ . . ,� . • .", ,�'.."t..v' ;;A . .. ; - -�­ , , .:�..­�;. . __ ,z.%.� . .,.' . .'. ,.�' ._ , i .. ., . . ,I",.'.,'. :.,tt, .: .,4" -Z,.. -.. I ., 11 , - .1. I. . : .. . .-,,,�� .::. . ,�...,"..- ��. ..-�"­�--,:`,,...11 .. -; . .. . I -. ,, .: ... � ;-, -,- I ,!:",11_�..,_-` `"I ',-.�.:-� . .'.--,....-,'.�!,. 4-.t 1 1 1 .", ,:,, .,,'. - ,,".,.�: -v-.'. -�,-.-;,� . . . � . " . pq E-�!. 7 . .c .. . , 1� c . -: , !r�'Iil, . V... . I 1.`,0,ts"1.,,,,..' .� ; , t .. . �:, , .'..',:11,­. , : . ,...�k - . . . . - - ,� . . - ,,:.- .. ­ �. . M;.., .: . ...... . . ..,.� -1.4 . . . .' ..... ,_. . .. .., .. � -.,;";:. t , " .,, ,:.. .p1-,,',�:..t-.,,q1 ., ..'.. _ . . . .1.1 . . . . . *�" .­.��.':'_�_ . .. ­ . ;- .. ­.ff; _!�"; i �­ , m . . . .. -m. � .. .. . 11 ,.�"", -..�.. .. ­.. .. I . I ..- . .. � .. .... , `.-: �- "..,­­ . ,� -,�;!�.,;, w . " I.. ., ., .. ­ ... .: " . , . - . . .. . .. . , � --,, , , - - �.��3, � , �% . ._�;4 ­ .....t . , . ". . '.' 'j. . - '. ­;­'.,'i.-i., 'i ..j� ,­_- .� T. I". ..:1'. � .. . ..... 7�. - . - , - - . . - . . Z. I- . -� , ....''.- , ".".t -N..." ,�;.�J'._�:i'_,,. _..,v-i,-,i:1 ,---.�_- -�,!�"I , - , . , ,. "''­ I _.. . . -, . . I . I. . .­t& - ,-� . . .-;- � ., , * I , . ''..,.:... '�.-.!.,,,� , . '.",, , . ;�.',� :*. ..... - . , ` , , ; :�� �IQ .� i -,:,!.�11.1� �( ,I: �.- 1...". I .'o.;d. ... �6..._......�...."m;.-'..,... 1 .. .,- . `.­- - �1 .q,-"lI",;I"�;''4 in-..�. !L-� ­ -. 1­,.. �v �, .. . ....,��. �. ...I,,. .�..% ! �, � ,­ ,.?�*.�...i. ., p � & Tru ft.06!k ,)_ , od � �-� k­­ a ii ; I Om­ .!7 .-.­ -.'. ..I .. :r- ,I ,- -.- .' I,..;. I .,...,....t��;�...-j--" o­ ­ ,..... -­ . l, .4 1 .,. -1 '-� ,..'...I.....":..; ­ -..._..�.,."....., '1 .!.. . ....:.0-.,..:'.,.....,..-,. , -. .. . � :...,-J.., � .,.:,. ...,. ­ .-.-..%: .' .."­ .,--:,...'...% .. .­ , , .- -.-.r ., ......:...'.. - ....:,-.'. .I . .�� ,-...t.. .I- W 4o" 1ii . " n � � b iI6 4 - 1 , "D ki, awhi 6 1i 0646 iu y' 5i 4 � _ (Xl� V�� khv C l 4- i- ... - ­..... 1. .m -I9 .. .i,.... ­. ... .. .-.. �.I... .. I..-... . . .%.:. ..., ..._ � . 2 .�.....I.-., . .. .,... ...� ...,. -.... 6. .. , " �......� .. -..' 1... .. .... ...' 4 ...... ... ... , . .....,. 6 R M ; A ( , �P � " "tr�f4� v) V" � " ! , Nq � l ; '!'.'1'A.4.F, A A �`� isi-46i-6i 5.i v­ , } i`i IA 4,V!r V . .. ... . �.... ..' ..I .... ..,I .. :.. -.. .. �.. .. :. ... : .... � - .,. :..�I. , .... .. .�. .. .II..-.- ." ,-: I. .. , ,. ...� .. . r; t.. T Lt.le­Iiii & ­ M � r� L,� - ; e; ­�VAw &,i;Mdif w, / or ,I I J,G4 �-4 Lul1 b. UrIV8 9 �ft ft.. W,= 'A _ b. , 1 bil f 9264 k "It m 411606 j�� LP.4t , l p.Zalif 92646' % " ;- ,s : " i f�' , ,%A$�, i­Ije- j� ",1, . . 4%v; I�4� - , , 4*�- . " I i4 WA . u_� 1 ; 1­­ . .. .. I.. .. .1.I ..�. � - ..... I .. � .:....,,J1; F ., �_ & wet _ }, ;­�, F N Iq)J t � .v ' ­ V' r � t6 " � �i 1 " 6 . ' Xj � '� -MA-,-LI"� . > .. , .I . . . i = , 2 � � Ur r li 9 646 Mw'Li 1��'0 2. ' �, ,� Rw1 % .l y Z�s .6.04 . ."30 QS i' x� ��i��i� tj J,, . Z k P bil.lrte m e � , I:& ,�� 4, zl,U) "l 1'� Wj,j'�?4 I- W. . q a 4k - 'L." gi"A ,. 4. .1 . IJ . DriVe Tj �_ �1 I� x N "0 0 aOtt&96 lan . 9212 %a j � si CAI '92646 11 � "­lf .- .g_ _ i,a' ' � ,�p, A ­Sjk-L "j J,? ,." - . I I� ;1 6-h? Cal WP N _tw . 1 .05 ( — - I"-, � , � "'. �� ,"",i­ � �1104, ..j",""? : 1� 1 .�hip .t., c o 0 6 , 302 � � i­T I1 .�g�;� , ` ," � i . m l o/ , , t 1,&, , � ; AwS'i�,- cT _ I "p,w I ,1 R 1 )rsw'.q al , T" M�z", �L.Ik: �UO4�i. "$ �6!jc OJTJ ; % "; i . � ' �_meter Drive 82921A ibk I 42�46 BW ", Vi .. Calif \ 06 ­,. i , ;Fi .1- � , . s . i� G" .i A=-"V "��_ o_wtl ­ Rv d� 4_1, w 300tt- "Ab W­Vj11 .. la, 1xw 0 is; -1 f­ �; y VVj� , I Aoda"'Anot&,I&ivM . - X, " ­ k,I N -... ,Q i �? 4 , g j " I-U fP � 9�64e, , a uiF ,Z4yjrh. 0 1 ­ 'Yj ­�,- I uru `U 41- `­ W,"­ iiiifP, I � -i- - if�_ 824M Malloy 4% ., -v% �� � i;!, .— o .,I,9 - yc ,6", O . . I51i302-01 �1 30 :'.,"OT 1U_ 51 � 5 1 ",N. SY , RI 1 I tpr ­ .. , I . ,�,. 1RA w?vm 1 ,,, , I 1�Yw1 , M 8232'.A.m6tir mrive k ,0 igC Califnf . --44ji t Beac Calif. 92646 i41Z.v Vtt� . .N t .,. m, 4 4�i ;� i 5"; ;­ ZIf J" ­ h,- * ­r '4, % § ',­W1 V*;­� `��; ­ W, I .1514302"02 1516462 30 j� , , ,V. , jTitla:im & Trw t cb.1�Or wili,m u?At1 a ky ,L �l wwae C .0mide 19161� ix4d, , 824 4 .� 9 t ' 12 terre x . i , 1 W", � ��t ��_­,j I11 i, im f. "... � .I �X�,�,T,N , I t,�?.V,"g .I f i L I iCalif 9 46 N1s,_ . . .. "I , 3 `1 ..:: , - I - may, l$;�.:..'-.41.:�" ' �V��,,j.,4:,,"-.k��i�*,­'''..;.�E V,tf��..-�_ k-�I. "I11 I--. k .V 4,.�, 't�­,. � ! 1 X1 , OAA. M� , � ,g 111 j ; " _ :� L� ; � -:,.� ,j 1.Y3 ,?_ - , % I e�1 1 7 . .. j. " ' L .11 ,4_ . � ­�o�%­�- : 1O ­ .. ..t. .. .I...... . . ­.1Zi1.1.I. �. ..:.. � V . _ � * f ; j ­j� . 2 .�- , , A , , �i , ._ - &i] . _ .__ - _- � . __. r�- ;- I . 1. 1Si I / f ati 1 1 �..,'I-.t-�..,".5.',�,,.:,..,4t-,,M...,...-,Z,—-..-,,1�,,.---.-.-1--..-:"�,,.;.5,-......,,.:e��.."-�.:,-.�m I-.,,.'.f�.,..;;'_.,�.�,.�,;:.,..�1.-l.,��--�.-".Lt!.z..,�.-,,�.:,,.-.".L�:.�.,,,.��.:�-�,,..,-.,�.���­z�..,...:. ti CSC J' -,,,.....;I,,.r.,.IL:v-I0,,..gm, I - ..�I.....:..!..�..�--.-�.........,�_--'I-,I-...-.4-...� 1.i)1 r J / t 4,. , I. i. 4•F'- + Y- ,fir " m. n, .t ry- _ + { ` r t ai t n �'3_i -y`r 5 t - N- +- • Ma. ram` - { r y, z .r �:tt -,, �y,���� - ...i Y-- S 1 t� 1 -*� 'Ai�' ri:_.• ! } er��5'- j ':: -il�t�i6. / .or - '.J�ly.-,1�� 1980 ! t •, 1. a`I i1 ' .. t N }- r,- J44 Calif 92b47 here 7i>r d r f; �l t glI Haaoh, Calif 926 s l 92--10 151 7 ,, ?. ?1 ' ii�wNM i/lO Q :iL NOi. W./ Qr - 4W- -Q:. ' --- }i�._. + { r t. Y,, F' P 06 Qr' )a� John J Moaowieth L. vent E .1141 Malloy give ;f ,, ,t s Lane Beach, Calif 92646 i. BE�arCti, :Ca lif .9264 Cf,,I r247 ro ,3 i t f ktlA Ins 6 Tt13st..CD./ Or 151 293-08 f ;`r Y ` J;�1.-293-?2 C?ifuc3es L`l tphl `Jy. Titre Imo' 6 '1' CeaE' Cb./ � ki4;i i�t a, 1 B _B t Co./ or 8361 Ma3.lAy :Dariv�e l ,g . ' :f�ky {, ti 4. Itin9t�oan Heerch, Calif 92646 pq 1 r f k d. r if�l]suB SgV�3I Bess Dane ' ' r 't' 3�. "S�rl�e�cvf 21® Lane . 151 292 11 . .;ice 9� Ae h,'4`alif � 0� Beach', Calif 9264i h , 1 i ' l '] , i 4 !! T 2r~6,i a'ti SiY It, - 44./- .' M YaW �7�• i �.�{� w1/CITE (� ,f� 4� Ay, �y.usy j1.�L { 1 l '�♦Rr Melody R Htmt �, R Iee 8171 Malloy Dative. { J `^'N ��icinexViLLe t�r1@ �� B�nti�gton , .Calif 92646 x S a� ,. _ , ,< xn ; Beech, Calif 926 . II;7]a-292-13 ,. - r `t4 F, , k .. I - .- - - , Y J r. /1��({ QA T�Q p [y,�\ /�� L 5 �a93■�M�-{1QQ /�,�-- -r ,, 1,n { , 24 I 4, ..1.14 _,,.Imi 6 , ,W. ...M� t _ MGM !� i Wes. �j� i�--, }p. 3,� '� ±"'�ty _ ,�yw /�I � @ ?4¢ T UBt M S. Or p� ate,7 d i S Q�.�,��� ` -8151 i 1Loy Drive•, - 'Qtll�stiw r -try pk i.-,+�r y£.,}�-!, jl,J`_ * /�; iI1wMry�.�p _*�.�.� , r�tingtioo . Calif . .. Beach, ;Cal' !:' $ ' �ka�fngt�cn Wiz, C.el if'9264i I I 1 F t i�f+{,Nk , flit-` ad + 751 292-14 151 293-11 "` 8 .-t .:In Trust:oa./'.or I I. b {cxa ,� 4„ a Yj'' ,e ., 1 �+►yla A Minx r ,& Ttt18t do./ or 8 Y r,z• {� I y3�fu1 r J Mal. 8 6141 nrive Zo3�1 i .: .� 4I �F LBtie Htingfi HeachCa3if. 9264fi g �;,� ° + cti,;Calif 926Ji lsi 292-15 y I� 7' , 131�293-12 y Y d i 1.- 5 '1 i��a. :k Title Ins & 7ivst Cb./ ace T1 S 6 �47vr� 't �' '. t�.` -�T j �M,�y�.Y /� ��/may/ .} r 4l &4ili k C L"iM/f�i - Y may,..-.. _ � 'i, S k t''t„+!�{''-�3.� - x / .. ' i/ S W�iB _ _ _ I 8131 Malloy Driv® 20361 Seven �f` yi;Y . ,h 4, :, b207 i Hkntirop�� ,` _Calif 92646 5��I� ,yy L" 60666 151 292-z6 .. ,-,ZI 5,'n ` ''tztW� - 5 t�s; �, ' t 151 293=-13 r ° , r �10 I Title� YrfS & T�$t'Da./ ! d Moorehead I ' a z. j a r r V; y ���..��,j r iiLiri3,,-Y S{wLiiRia - y _y t�r,T., k - GiCiL Ddiip 2040 'Seuie�i Seed. � Blvd rr 1 ty1 ! i Y ,. A k f t51 , ' I• ; ' - Hmtin taxi B�ach'.:'`i i �rrfr� �t_ — �s.J, s '_ y . t trjY ,AYH 151-292-16. 151 293 14 r�-� ;a ., ,?a u}- � Calif 11tle Ins & Z�vst OD./.at-. Tit1s' Ios & ' .'W./:_-c� x. r . � ` Zbrbjorn K Pedersen IV + 8121 Malloy Drive G Farley ... :. .._ ___ 20422 SoOi ''Seas Laage J H1intit�gbon Beach, Calif92646 ` - 3 , Q t, . _ 7 't.lhft.Ftw l V, 1, t t rs, ?. - _. Mi - ! .: t nisi`;, J _ . t . -r u q r I. .j , ' s, a4 ',� + a r s a r r _ .. v 43,L.' pA 01-1 TAM IIee 11400"t Area 2.3 May 6, 1901 P., l df, 25-153-02/16 "D1a Development 906 Adams Avenue Huntintton Reach, CA 92648 025-no-50 Oil Ckarporation of Calif. i Wfttan Taut Region 1720 S. Bellaire Street 1 , tD 80222 025-200-51. C. Benno 147S Midway Dr. #142 Emmxrdi,do, CA 92027 L53-91-11/15 W.T. Newland Estate S#;nal Uv*mrk Properties Inc. 17890 Sky Park Boulevard Irvine, CA 92714 151--281•-07 - I Z U I. Thomson i 2105 Victoria Drive f Santa Ana, CA 92706 151-293-19 Orange County Flood Control 8istrict P.O. Box 1078 Santa Ana, CA 92702 151-293-39 1 , j Franchise Paaalty Interstate ; Corp. P.O. Box 66207 i' Chicago, Ill 60666 151-502-34 Terry H. Krupp 20031 N. New Britain Lane R Huntingt m Beach, CA 9 264 6 151-502-49/56 Standard-Pacific Corp. 1565 W. MacArthur Boulevard Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Yam.: c r i i r ` t • LAND V.Srti ELEMENT YBl-.1 ` �� f2�.2t 'r W, 1 I r s -777 0`28 qc 167-482-29 y0♦;67,•4(7t 1�04 gc xFK- !t. loepping Max: 8. chreibery ,� 38 University 3t. 166:82 Al4onquin -eta lfl n ?Oa'�. r iie St. erdtthiinster, .:Calif. Huntington Beach, Ca', 92649 Nalsta Aria, Cs.. :92704 ' .. 92683 7T471=05 gc 167-471_06 q „ '16?�4 ]►• 07 gc.. ,chard .R:. Tapia Henry E Kilzer Camarox�-Associates 4949 McKendric St. 1808 Ca 'awera 9t. 9'� 2 ;Holea Av®. Scifc Palisades,. Ca. Fullerton, Ga. 92633WeStianster, :.Ca. 92683 �< 90272 67.•4'�1w08 . gc 167-471-09 gc K l`87. VL7 10 '•. gc ` ll8m C, lgoodman ': Daniel Duda ,FCoert'D+t Cooley . 932 .Church Cir. 16775 Wo odridge :Cir. , z Y :9d�� '1A Linda' Ave. unt ngton Beach, Ca: _ Founta,"in a.Va11ey, - C 92708 Fountain Valley; Ca.. 9270, r 92648 67 471-11 = gc 167=471=12 gc 16r7-►471-13 gc uilders Equity Prop. Ching Maiterprise® IYiQ• C , tgj Haiterprises, In 3038,_MC View.Dr 1.786 Oriole;Dr. 786. Oriole TA" Habra,. Cahif. `92651 Costa Mesa, :::Calif. •:92626 Costa Mesa, Ca `9:2626 1:67-471-14 gc 167:-471�15 tC Y `A ild7--471-18,19 gc ansvu P=opert#'s. Ind., Roger D Slat®a i811ste 'Enterprises kibba, .Michael J 1701 Main $a2 Heaeh . lvd; '#24.3 $`.O. ..Box .8537 Huntington Beach, Ca 92649 Auntirigton Heach,. Ca. fluntain Valley, Ca.92708. 9.2647: r v 167-41 20. gc 16.7 .601 07,�6,17c 167-601OQ3 gc ' Arnold A. Angel ci Huntington , ntercoanniipity 11ti tirigton :Associates 21902: 5tarfire:' Lane = 1's ital, Inc. `P.O. Bvx i438 a, Huntington Beach,: Ca. P:O;. Hox 1438 r= ` Louisviilfe, .Ky. 40201 92646 Louisvlle, Rp, 4020.p�. ,167 601 .08 gc 187.-601 14,15 '187�483 09 Roman; Ca.thomic Bishop of Humana. :Inc., 1pau� J Miysalsi '';Orange 2049 'Century Park E�aet. 16241;Anglar Lane . 440 S: Batavia; St,_ Suite 2290' ` �t „' }Ht�nti. on Beach, Calif Orange,_ Ca. 92668 Los Angeles,' Ce . 9004�7 r „ 9264T N. 167 4z$3 10 Henry K Talbert 8132 K(�,rcle Huts 1' �w_n' Beach Calif -J— ` 92641' ttr , zl Kum abempod 16021- Ballinyton Drive �; Huntiiigtoi •`Beach, Calif ��. I I J �1•" - w.a�h�pp�'.'iYFw9 .�.U'JT3�1� f -IriR��w.+wM. r` r { r L i ? y;7 z r ! 7t �' - --t _ i, _. 5j ( .. . .� �,_Ri,."!.- -I._ - _. .-v , ,': _��.-I,-',,-'....,t-:�_:, - 0 . ... �. ..:, , r w .� .. , �,:4 I �. i-a . i \ '�F .y t r+ X l . G - - 1 (�v"r( y T a. ! - 4 � •ir i♦♦b �.L�i , s - � t I rr ty '�' ML_Schait xat {�.+Qe . -6W -AY�fi1. .. -V ' 'r✓ } r x' ..4a r �,s t H�ipttirutnn eeeict/ Calif ' '� 2 T` 8 ,;Calif . y L -.,I - a - .. . 1. v �.• 92647 i I N.Ytit 6 440313 :167�A83-21. 4 r X , p(2 , Dead A B�c�dy , ._ . IX ! ; � A 17631;Ven Bursa StI. v�►. A a. r c t Y,� HUilttlllg. O .__... . C9�1�. > 1/ :`Calif a1. 1. 92�47d .. "92647 . 1674 483-13 167 483--- 1 i ' 48'. U fl i.y t1,1 -)(i� IBL,', Yi�YYO} 'S t f, ry t'�_ \ {, 5. .a - 4 r I 8171 A'Michael D V� 17 . :1 �n .t�aaet ' .r r ,4 ^M n 1 } ' , t N r 4, 1, Huntin�ytio� ee�cti;' Calif °Hun, 4ton ..h. C41ig ,f, .. Bpi/:Calif Y r "T 7 92W. ; 92649 t _ 7 j ( t rr y tt 6 +p 1 S ti, ., . I 1,6. '.I -14 167 483-23; } t a, K� '' 1�r7�482-. . t - - - , - a ,r \r,. x - 1 'son A lobe a O�fe � � - , " t rf�,,` t: ?,. r : 7 Gar,h z 4tsi �' i - - 30Q6 S}Artesaia $Trtreet {8�3�51�Oa�tj��mc�nt P '�e ' •� G���(r��yj�f] �{/�y� I 1 'i -Y��t .�{�/ dalif �7{�{� i � y h tt l '{S Y'i am., ij __. �� ..� - , ' Seech 'Calif; 926, 92704 90521: r � ,� ac s 4 t �I "161646 '-15 167, 483-24. .. "` 16 r,it I Reif# tiR Snider Q r-Rtt ;Lia;�, ,�� 1;� �, ' :� , 4 . K w f y.t �� I ;; F.O. Bo�c $312 17?14,00 'ti �#t,}f 1 y ,��V � i� 4y raja , pt t: a 4 ,1 , �H'ti i > �P� 4 -to"A i BtL vat].®y calif Roo�rlsr�ot L is a.�ca �`�L,,�,,��i� n - } ,` , 92708 91s748 , ; tif0631 N I 7 _ - - t 1 , if - 167-4046 °167-�483,35 i t xaf;t xr" ��; r;�f,`, UX B -17 ; i a I. •, f : r ti y;:.- 9t? 'a- + .,y to l�tlryw t ,S -P�l�7BL"90n vMY/" 1. ) t i L t 1 - ' "I.Its - ' ` ! I 19691 :Qu6et Hay. Lane 8$88 Laur eai Li . 8 4. ,3 `f;;Z" t;, VJ9�tei 'S.e a'L1�ive T�- beach' Calif E,, tangbo- Bestly► '� Calif -a , 4 i�r ' •.I k 9•,Y, Ap t - '� , .�. v ti' 4"�i a i kr t� 't,yPit. , M1'i ij-r'14 i Y F 3� L� }ttrt,�k#i -. k hr +'V15 �r ^_ ,, t �*16��7�4���8.3�-1�,(',���� 1�6, �4�83-�26: ,-. '�tX A;Y; ,k h CIO` JtG i1«JiOG• - L.iiL.LL7' f A i'63 {"yikiki i� 4f's . 3124:B�+eake Drive B 851 d.) .V i, � i s "'A 4zeY r�' : : � $ e®e : �, > .�+ t S\ - - :- - - - �h �}t- ,-_-r t,, 1� j._s r',}k- >nrJ"�:-.rj ,sr ` r 1 QDI+0�1� Del A9ax,,'..Ca],�.f: Paslt, > fi a,. c i r Cali. 1 u ai ,Y�q ?-' FA t 92625 90621 > , x=s ,I� 1V "th` ` H t - - x .,.'�,a r 167 4$3-19 .'167-483-2' � ,;� ��1 3 x`� 't r t �ti V'lt;a +r Ntia1 F Haelpay.. Jame.A a JAL 4,, qi i >a0201 iapex3 l..00Ye Iat7B. 6556," stet°'�W fY,Nh Y ,?P t y . tv'" 2ri :Heach� Calif ...' �,:•.Calif t# ;z,, ;1r� Y, /' Calif 9a646 Mil ,,, :'i ,at•h l - t .. 1,67-4y8�3�,2�0�. y.�.�R <167 483v-18, v s``* w� 16 ��yy`` xt .Clay\iJLL�- 1 rit4►i41 � � A � - r�� '44ti p.{y i"2 , � 'Y9 � -. i. t t p 1 - -.t.W. - - )i, . 10742 066anaiwe:Circle .� 17701. Van' 'St a " Drive . . cat+f i�itin#m , �} � { �� I .Calif 1 92648 92647 k4 K 92646 . i t'� L4j �t`g-slc Y f r i {Rs to v�}Yl ( ' 1' } , n � rrs t �> ti, - . i, b.:'P? r . ... TMI �. }:� . _ I ""tl-15,;_,r'l..w!-= x - Rt- -n,:: „a - ;'.4tu�.uir- -5k.1 I :rF- .1�.a c+` - en+l., '+wY�Y �"s �"H 'tk.:..,­..!..­.i­is.,.�,�,;�`.,:I.'�,- ­ lYa.'u..... xirts.n--',V.. 4."« I. i 1.­];,I,�..,,,I 4;.".�1.�.:,1`r.,1'.;.--...I­�M L-,.....,. .,..i''.I.........:":.�.�..,...1-�.,�..,.-. .�tj�\...,I,,I.---.,.�i.-":i.....':."-.-...."�I..-...I m.,..-."....,-...:'.I:.t,.'�,i..�:..,,�.",�.­.!t........-....-�a.....&,..,-,.......--''.�-..........;.,,.'..��.,.�...��..r-.-j.z..:...-.........,-,a..%...!,!-...I.;;.1..�..�.�._i.....,-.-�._..:I�.,..,.:i,.�o-....1�-".I,.-.�..-.I...i,I".:-.�..I-1,:,....1.."..."���...5::-..-..Z.:�-i."_.1.,.-.:,...,-....,­...,.-.�..-."...,..,....:,�1-�;..`,.­..,:"��I-....-.:-,I.:::.,�-.—.._--.i j:-:...��.4.�...�.�,.....:..��..�:.�,m.�_..,...'1..,,.!.-.I..;.,;.-�­.,,.;..�.:'�....­�._'.:_.,."-........I..�,.�.,:-._1­. ...-_',.-,!—...f.­:.-,.,,::I.-_"r.-.'..,-.:...",I,��;.k,:1�-,I,:K,,_-�,�,..I.;..:.," I. 1. } ' .'.r­.:.�,,.,....­�.t.,-C'."�-:�,?�...I;'�:�--,�z.,.I,,�_-._,1!eo,.,:-�..-'­m',­­..'.;'....:-iI_,,! 1 1 sd - x n r- 3,1 f ti y r, k t.e-..,,h I { +,f Area82.2 Iehd $ dl!Lcrr��;; `! , ' `; '�' - , Tvro ' �' r~ R � r d 1 i 1 4 t i , 1 I { t , { t t fvp . ) { <+ r i ff C k k r 1 A _f y o a 7403,. I ..i.- _r _ r -a , , t ra t_l) ,A{,a RI�i-- i -}J f .. .. - [I f t^y 7 J W ' f- 5 Yv[t 5 ',''Y{T if{t+Y ''�rE+.+Y'''.h, - ea? - .�s f 14 - �� f t s:i $ r ;4 $ P s� _ I r . E. Brow ' areaie rs Di: Apt.:B t y J tc I Lw� . liyy i +- r l Y r l y;. 1�4i - _ - c -1 It ) { **r-•. r t ' tree. CA 92683 i „ , r._:y i .1 i 4 -r 1 c 4 . , .1 3-33 4 - 8 31 'Newnam'Avern�e i Be idh •.CA 92`4T F r CtJ < f I 1 t 't iVL q•s r" a } ; X i . t y --i 'f -' 4 J {e- r } I r n.j, - - . a -H ri [ n 3 . I Vj ! d i{ 1TTagA > c I C A A l I - �' r ty$' M` y R i}F 11'r { p 9,i ci t a I -, r ..>'4,1f dA I� v u zY r�.II ,. i t i -- 7�. r III. TJ i ; -.r .- . - r 1 d - -I _ I 45 I _;_ a. ,r ,,} Ihi t -ti.w lYt3 j_ r 54 �, n,1 5 L I. e i 1`ram'- � 9,- Y - . 4 R ` rl Jj c - f - S �� aid o- 4.tj 5 &a '� Gy� �' r i-t t- - _ _ , t -SSfxiy r_Y,I.*5{­ly,�,�+rr}1�ti 34J St-0 �'f a'I -I - I' t Y - 445 ¢ ; .q'd_M,-L'r{y��'f *�5'#'{ YFi4/ `�yyc {7 - V`14 _ * r "} t 1 ! I � r 1 5'iC,F F ;5�.47'� .-, Y} 11 r t 4 „---4 a11, Yrtc1 9l 9 t i.--r' rc- tSil l- t -) l 1}�4yyyX `, bpi i� �I,S y Ij-%� . -_ . .+ k ',:,�Sl�{t,}`i,Lyr,''r{- Yi 'a'rI rL},11.,fl 4 YM V. Fitl t,;, JIk.�J, {* l} r'°'- r - , t ,.S : A",. 9 {I a .c �' +C , . - .. ? -i Ij .' 1 . A I : J u} I Fl. t . 3 1 k t- {1 iifi t,i3 fi�i - - _.I,� -r-- _--., ta.. -:-,..?t. Y.,+-,a,4' 1 _ : �`)'" '7`- aid; .'Yk� -J.: 4�_ e i sh 6/4/81 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT NO 81-1 TO THE GENERAL PLAN AND EIR NO. 81-2 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, in the Council Chamber of the Civic Center, Huntington Beach, at the hour of 7:30 P.M. , or as soon thereafter as possible on Monday the 15th day of June 19 81 . for the purpose of considering Land Use Element Amendment No. 81-1 to the General Plan, requests to: Area 2.1 - (Deleted) Area 2.2. Redesignate 2.50 acres located north of Newman Avenue, approximately .630 feet east of Beach. Boulevard from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential . Area-2.3. _ Redesignate 59.55 acres located south of Adams Avenue and east of Beach Boulevard from Resource Production, Commercial , and Low Density Residential to Planned Community. Area 3.1 . Redesignate 116.15 acres of property between Twenty-Second Street, Walnut Avenue, Palm Avenue and Sixth Street from Low Density Residential to -Medium Density Residential . A legal description is on file in the Development Services Office. Environmental `Impact Report No. 81-2 will be heard in conjunction with the Land Use Element- Amendment No. 81-1 . Copies of the proposed Land Use Element Amendment and Environmental Impact Report are available for review in the City Clerk's Office. All interested persons are invited to attend said hearing and express their opinions for or against said Land Use Element Amendment No. 81-1 and EIR No. 81-2.. Further information may be obtained from the Office- of the City Clerk, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California. 92648 - (714) 536-5227 DATED May 29, 1981 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH By: Alicia M. Wentworth City Clerk 0U3t;rLet. 3. Redesignate 116. 15 acres of property, between Twenty second Street, Walnut Avenue, Palm Avenue and Sixth Street, from uow Density Residential District to Medium Density Residential OtstrLct. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Hurittngton Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 15th day of� June . 1981. Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: -r4l, City Clerk. ity Attorney REVIEWED AND APPROVED : INITIATED AND APPROVED: City Adminiatrato irector of Development Services 2. .. . ....,t4;t}7L 3X2:+'^Y•'r'en..3�iJBR'eA9CiF'ePYRTd�tP�#9F�KnP'pr"!:-'a7rt?6F+lnM;.!`�y,:,,wr>..:pw.a_....w.••r..;•r:.cn..... -.. ... .......— ..,w -. .,...-...--..-....n --�. � �es. No. 5005 STNI'E OF CALIFORNIA ) COUM OF ORANGE ) se: CITY OF HUNUNGTON BEACH ) I, ALICIA M. WENTWORTH, the duly elected, qualifie4 City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of. said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing resolution was passed And .adopted by the .affirmative _ vote of more than A majority of all the members of said City-Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 15th day of June , 19 81 by the following .vote: AYES: Councilmen: MacAllister, Pattinson, Finley,. Bailey, Mandic, Kelly NOES: Councilmen: Thomas ABSENT: Councilmen: Nnne J. City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California - - ci...nee-ee4wE+7`-:�'R4Y"_'y^x.o.goy..,.s�;,w+Nasw.,ufs--r;r!eoa.,7.a^iw..-...+-T.. - - -- -- _'r.+. ... ---. ._.......�....... . Y...-«..-p...:.-.•.•_._�..., _ .-. LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT 81 1 Environmental Impact Report 81 - 2. CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Office of the City Clerk P. 0. Box 190 Huntington Beach,.Calif. 9264.8 huntington beach department of development services LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT $1 - 1 Environmental Impact Report 81 - 2 huntington beach department of development services TABLE.OF CONTENTS SECTION: PAGE 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Methodology 1 2.0 AREAS OF CONCERN 3 2.1 Ellis - Beach" Area 3 2.2 Newman - Beach Area 15 2.3 Adams - Beach Area 25 2.4 Environmental Changes 43 3.0 ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS 47 3.1 Townlot Specific Plan Area "A" 47 4.0 AMENDMENT SUMMARY 51 4.1 Summary of Proposed Land Use Element Amendment 81-1 51 APPENDICES 0 53 AMENDMENTS Land Use Categories PLANNING COMM. CITY COUNCIL DATE RESOLUTION DATE RESOLUTION 11-6-76 1187 12-6-76 4368 RESIDENTIAL 6-7-77 1196 8-1-77 4484 9-29-77 1202 11-7-77 4551 Estate <2 un/gaC 12-1-77 1206 8-21-78 4572 Estate 5 4 un/gaC 8I-78 1236 8-6-78 4696 ® EEO LOW Density <_7Un/gaC 10-17-78 1232 II 6 78 4696 .f II-21-7 6-79 1239 0 oil 12-19-78 4708 Medium Density <_15 un/gaC 3 1242 3-19-79 4728 c�o Fgvar 3-18-80 1261 4-7-80 4865 ^ vw ✓ �9 - ® High Density >15 un/gac ,\ . 01 ............ COMMERCIAL ®General a`\ Office Professional . Development Mixed ....... I O \ \ INDUSTRIAL Genera PUBLIC USE ::::::::..::. Institutiona l Public, -public, open .. i •:::::::::::::::::::::::....................................... .. PLANNING UNITS e 1a Planning PI n :..... : ::.. ............. Y .......................:• . . .,, ,. ..............V\ � � ',\ Planned Community OTHER'USES Resource Production A':.ai .......... }Jr W. / 1 , fl..Yip•' '. AO4e�t x N ST <.i• OA F 1 C 1 -:•r_': cry t�•,. A'o P ' ,.:?": .' '':. ..,, .:. ry, rf L✓,,�'Gc�' 'i';^.✓J 1YG:k".�.• _:•..�G;" o-F1'�;H,� �- r{,,.,.' -eslsL" of / JI 'uH=Ss%?.:•-k rl�i y.i ] 2 I r ....no u f ,i..-� hi J-,'� r'�.,, � �sas bb�Y' �'s1�5--t r F"r,'e. '„J�•``+• i�,';S+ — =� PACIRC I �N -___:'s;, v:�', �4'.•�o�a��:s`�=��s l�►�r�:� S,� ... _ --f PIJ HUNnNGTON Bfi4CH, O9LIFORNIA GENERAL' PLAN PONNING DEPARTMENT LAND USE DIAGRAM Adopted December 1976 Revised APRIL 1980 J i 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report concerns Amendment 81-1 to the Land Use Element of the Huntington Beach General Plan. The Land Use Element was adopted as a mandated element of the General Plan in December, 1973; this is the sixteenth amendment to the element. Planned land uses throughout the City are depicted in the Land Use Diagram shown in Figure 1-1. 1.1 Methodology This Amendment to the Land Use Element considers requests by private property owners to change the land use designations in three areas of the City (Section 2.0): The first site is located on the south side of Ellis Avenue 400 feet east of Beach Boulevard; the second site is located on the north side' of Newman, 850 feet east of Beach Boulevard; and the third .site is on the southeast corner of.Beach Boulevard and Adams Avenue. Also included in this amendment is a request by the City Council to consider amending Area A of the Townlot_Specific Plan (Section 3.0). The four land use amendment requests will be analyzed in terms of the existing conditions on the site, anticipated impact on surrounding areas; major land use and environmental issues; and consistency with adopted City goals and policies. 4=1 1; Section 15148 of the State EIR Guidelines states that "The requirements for an EIR on a local general plan element or amendment thereof will be satisfied by the general plan or element document and no separate EIR will be required if: 1) the general plan addresses all the points required to be in an EIR by Article 9 of the State EIR Guidelines, and 2) the document contains a special section or a cover sheet identifying where the general plan document addresses each of the points required." In conformance with State guidelines, this document will constitute the EIR for Land Use Element Amendment 81-1. The environmental setting and significant' impacts associated with the issue areas identified in the initial study are addressed under each area of concern (Sections 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3). Alternative land use designations and feasible mitigation measures to minimize significant effects are also discussed in these sections. Section 2.4 addresses miscellaneous environmental impacts and overall environmental changes related to the following considerations: 1) the relationship between local short-term uses of man's environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity; 2) irreversible or unavoidable environmental changes; and 3) growth inducing impacts. 2 4 � • .... „ra..wa«mxu..<......v.,.y:,......vv..v....v..,w. A............... ............p..• ,.L�.l.A ®l109t .- ... ............<............... .� .......... ....... ................ ......... .............� HER .—A WARMER�. . < I ' I l • l j �. d8 ... .... .................. ................ ........ ...... ....... SLATER i .-. �. ..,... - iii .� � ,!t ........t BLS AMENDMENTS :. .....w.owv.poo...o.Mw.s .m+.v.. ... OAYfIFSO PLANNING COMM '. -:• _.-... _ .. . DATE RESOLUTION •::!1: :•:•:•: ........... ... ._. .._ ..... _... YOYRfOWN 4-4-77 1189 10-21-80 1268 ADAMS CITY COUNCIL . ' a,y DATE RESOLUTION �...\ ' ... ..... ......... { INDIANAFOIIf 11-7-77 4551 0�`<. 12-15-80 4936 ,..'.:`.<?�;qsa�:✓ q .............................i........, y .. ATLANTA �... ••..1.•.�\.. ............ . NAMOON oEXISTING I PRIMARY AREA •r.- j SECONDARY AREA .. FURTHER STUDY MULTI - STORY LOCATION MAP 0 0 0 C3 . O FEB. 81 O huntington beach planning division 9 Figure 2-4 A redesignation to medium or high density residential would expand the existing stock of vacant land at these densities as well as the City's potential to provide affordable housing. If the study area is changed to medium or high density residential, approximatey 28 units and 47 units respectively could be added to the City's housing stock at ultimate development. Adoption of an inclusionary zoning ordinance could potentially require that between three and seven units be affordable under medium density, and from five to 12 units be affordable under high density. 4. Public Services and Utilities a. Sewers The area of concern is served by an 8-inch sewer line located in Ellis Avenue that runs into a 10-inch sewer line in Beach Boulevard. This line connects to a 42-inch County trunk line in Slater Avenue. The Department of Public Works and Orange County Sanitation District have indicated that existing sewer capacity in City and County facilities is adequate to accommodate all of the land use alternatives by connecting into the existing eight-inch Ellis Avenue line. b. Water The area of concern is presently served by a six-.inch water line which connects to an eight-inch line in Ellis Avenue. Another six-inch line currently exists in Libra Circle, 140 feet south of the study area. The Department of Public. Works has indicated that construction of an additional six-inch line connecting the south portion of the study area to the line in Libra Circle may be desirable regardless of the land use alternative selected. Otherwise, existing water facilities would adequately service each alternative. C. Storm Drains The northern-most quarter of the area of concern presently drains to Ellis Avenue in the form of surface flow. The south portion of the area drains east through an existing alley into a nine-foot catch basin at the south end of Demion Lane. The catch basin connects to a storm drain which runs east down Modale Drive. The Department of Public Works has indicated that existing drainage facilities are adequate for each alternative, but that holes should be drilled in the block wall along the alley to facilitate drainage to Demion Lane. Both residential alternatives would result in reduced drainage flow as compared to the office/professional alternative. 10 i d. Parks The area of concern is located northwest of 2.3 acre Helm neighborhood park which is presently under construction. The 1977 Parks Analysis indicates that park capacities within the quarter section in which the study area is located is presently being exceeded. Redesignation of the amendment area from commercial to residential would increase park demand in the area. Even with the development of Helm Park neighborhood park, capacity would continue to be exceeded within the general area. However, the area of concern is located one mile from Central Park which could be considered adequate to serve recreation and park needs generated by residential development within the study area. e. Police and Fire Protection Police service for the area of concern is provided by the City of Huntington Beach; which operates from one central facility located at Main Street and Yorktown Avenue. The present authorized level of manning is 1.15 officers per 1,000 persons. None of the alternatives considered would significantly increase the level of staffing needed to adequately serve the area of concern. Fire protection for the area of concern is provided by the City of Huntington Beach from the Gothard Station located north of Ellis Avenue on the west side of Gothard Street. The area of concern lies within the five minute response area of the station and. can be adequately serviced regardless of the selected alternative. f. Schools The area of concern is served by Perry Elementary School, Dwyer Middle School and Huntington Beach Union High School. Students generated by the alternative land uses being considered are estimated. as follows: Huntington Perry Dwyer Beach Union Medium Density Residential 5 7 6 High Density Residential 1 1 3 The alternative medium density residential designation would have the greater impact on schools, although the districts indicated. that the schools involved can easily accommodate these slight increases in students. Leaving the area designated as general commercial would eliminate. these impacts on the school districts. 11 g. Gas and Electrical Utilities Natural gas service and electrical service are provided by the Southern California Gas Company and the Edison Company respectively. A six-inch steel main gas supply line is located in Ellis Avenue, extending east and west. A two-inch feeder line runs down the west property line of the study area to serve the existing shopping center. Additionally, another two-inch line extends from Beach Boulevard to the study area and serves the shopping center as well as the Reading Development Center. An overhead 12 KV electrical line runs along the north side of Ellis Avenue, while another 12 KV line runs south from Ellis along the alley behind the shopping center serving both the shopping center and the Reading Development Center. Gas service is generally provided as a normal extension of existing facilities. However, the availability of natural gas service is based upon present conditions of gas supply and regulatory policies. As a public utility, the Southern California Gas Company is under the jurisdiction of the California Public Utilities Commission. Federal regulatory agencies can also affect gas supply. Should these agencies take any action which affects gas supply or the conditions under which service is available, gas service will be provided according to the revised conditions. The Southern California Edison Company has indicated that electrical load requirements can be met provided that electrical demand does not exceed estimates and there are no unexpected outages to major sources of electrical supply. The total electrical system demand is expected to continue to increase annually. If plans to proceed with future construction of new generating facilities are delayed, Edison's capability to serve all customer loads during peak demand periods could become marginal by 1984. h. Solid Waste Disposal The Rainbow Disposal Company provides solid waste collection to the City of Huntington Beach. No local service constraints are expected under any of the alternative land use designations. 5. Traffic Circulation Access to the area of concern is taken via Ellis Avenue which is designated as a secondary arterial. The nearest major intersection on Ellis Avenue is Beach Boulevard to the west, a designated major arterial. Present traffic volumes for these arterials in the vicinity of the study 12 • I area are 16,700 daily trips on Ellis Avenue and 47,000 daily trips on Beach Boulevard. The maximum design capacities for these streets are 20,000 and 45,000 vehicle trips per day respectively. Using factors contained in the February 1980 Huntington Beach Transportation Demand Model .report, it is estimated that office development of the study.area will result in 1,169 vehicle trips per day with 178 trips predicted for medium density residential and 333 trips for high density. While Beach Boulvard is currently operating slightly above nominal capacity, Ellis Avenue. is well below capacity. The projected traffic volumes for the three alternatives are expected to produce no significant impact when added to the existing traffic volume on Beach Boulevard. Additionally, none of the alternatives should cause Ellis Avenue to exceed capacity. Because of undedicated roadway abutting the older residential, development on the north side of Ellis, .however, the street currently narrows directly in front of the study area. The projected traffic volumes for each alternative may have an impact on this section of Ellis Avenue, .causing congestion and difficult access to the study area. The Department of Public Works has indicated that a painted median allowing two-way left turns will be added to Ellis Avenue to facilitate access to the area . of concern. This strategy would be implemented regardless of the land use alternative selected. Additionally, the developer is pursuing the possibility of utilizing the alley currently used by the fourplexes on Demion Lane to provide access to.the back portion of the site, if a residential use is permitted. If the commercial designation is retained reciprocal access for offices could be taken from the existing shopping center alley. Additional space for a bus stop or a bus turnout may be necessary under a high density residential designation. 6. Environmental Issues a. No ise The majority of the study area will be subjected to Ellis Avenue traffic noise levels between Ldn 60 and 65. Mitigation measures such as unit modification, building placement and barrier construction may be necessary to .reduce noise to an acceptable level of 60 Ldn exterior and 45 Ldn interior. b. Air Quality All three land use alternatives would adversely affect air _quality within the South Coast region. A medium density residential use would generate less pollutants than the proposed high density designation which in turn would generate fewer pollutants than an office/professional use. Daily emissions would total .04 tons AtSbL 13 for medium density, .07 tons for high density and .16 tons for office/professional. The primary air emissions generated include carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides, particulates and sulfur oxides from mobile and stationary sources. Automobile and traffic produce most of the pollutants with a small portion attributable to local heating. The following table summarizes the air emissions generated by the three land use alternatives: PROJECTED DAILY EMISSIONS OFFICE PROFESSIONAL EMISSION SOURCE TONS OF EMISSIONS/DAY Mobile .16 Stationary Neg1.. TOTAL .16 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL Mob ile .04 Stationary Negl. TOTAL .04 HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL Mobile .07 Stationary Neg1. TOTAL .07 2.1.3 Staff Recommendation The amendment request is to redesignate the area of concern from general commerical to high density residential. While the applicant's request for a high density residential designation would be compatible with the adjacent residential uses to the east of the project site. The proposal may not be compatible with the existing or future uses in the adjacent general commercial area west of the project site. The existing uses in the commercial area include night clubs and restaurants as well as general office and commercial uses. Access to the commercial area is primarily from Beach Boulevard. However, access can also be taken off of Ellis Avenue over the same easement the applicant proposes to use for access to the proposed residential project. The applicant further proposes to narrow the existing easement to slightly enlarge the project. I I 14 • I The area of concern presently acts as a buffer between the general commercial and residential areas. A more appropriate use for this site would be additional office space (an eligible activity under the general commercial designation). A new office structure would serve as a buffer for not only the existing commercial uses, but also future development which may occur within this designated multi-story node. Staff recommends. denial of the applicant's request for a redesignation of this area to high density residential and the retention of the existing general commercial classification on the site. 2.1.4 Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission recommends that the 1.89 acre area located on the south side of Ellis Avenue 400 feet east of Beach Boulevard retain the existing general commercial land use designation as shown in Figure 2 2. 2.2 NEWMAN - BEACH AREA The second area of concern addressed by Land Use Element Amendment 81-1 is located on the north side of Newman Avenue and east of Beach Boulevard (Figure 2-5). The amendment request was filed by R. R. Investment Company on behalf of the property owner, Gregory B. Wood. 2.2.1 Background The applicant's request is to redesignate 2.5 acres of land located on the north side of Newman Avenue, 630 feet east of Beach Boulevard from medium density residential to high density residential. Medium and high density residential are the alternative land uses considered in this-amendment. An office alternative was not considered because of the residential character of the area. The area of concern is presently vacant with the exception of one older single family. unit located on the southern end of the property fronting on Newman Avenue. The site is currently designated medium density residential and zoned R2 (Figure 2-6). Adjacent residential uses include a two-acre, high density fourplex development with 36 units fronting on Van Buren Street directly to the east. A duplex and triplex lie directly on the northwest corner of Newman and Van Buren. Property to the west is occupied by a mixed development of apartment units with densitles ranging from medium to high. Directly north of the study area is a six acre, medium density duplex development. Adjacent commercial uses include a medical building fronting on Newman Avenue, 60 feet west of the area of concern. The property on the south side of Newman Avenue Is 'designated office professional and is occupied by Huntington Intercommunity Hospital and other medical facilities. Much of this property fronting on Newman Avenue Is currently vacant or developed as parking lots. 15 toy Gs - z w x w CF-E w w w � � C (LAKE V:E-AlSf-HOC4.) N SLA E AVEmm N MEDIUM z J DENSITY RESIDENTIAL w OPAL CR. z a z GENERAL - -- _ COMMERCIAL ! w w _ . U' Z DEN MICHA L DR. RosaNNa DR.X w 0 RES L-Lr' L - i MED . W,' DR _ DEN J BENJAMIN DR RES $ _17 Q NOBLE CR '- LOW W L ARROYO DR. DENSITY SL - RESIDENTIAL U_ NEWM N MOREf1E I -- - - -- OFFICE ; ; TmTX PROFESSIONAL STYMIE INSTITUTIONAL .,CID � . Q w m �TALBERT Area of Concern 2.2 O O o 0 FEB. 81 O 16 huntington beach planning division Figure 2-5 A - 2.2.2 . Ana ly sis 1. Land Use The applicant's request for redesignation to high density residential could result in approximately 25 units per acre, or 62 units and would generate an estimated population of 160 persons. . Medium density development would result in a maximum of 15 units per acre, or 37 units and would generate an estimated population of 73 persons. The applicant's request is for the development of 54 units. The area of concern is centrally located in an area in which existing densities range from medium to high. The fourplex development on Van Buren Street to the east of the study area, while general planned for medium density is actually developed at high density (17 units per acre). Regardless of the density eventually selected for the study area, the adjacent fourplex development should remain in a medium density general plan designation to ensure compatibility over the long term with lower density uses further to the east. This would not preclude h.igher density development of the study area, however, because of the existing high density development to the west as well as along Van Buren. Given these conditions, medium or high density development of the study area could be considered equally compatible. The adjacent medical/professional uses, because of their predominantly day time rather than night time activity would also pose no compatibility constraints on medium or high density development. 2. Economic Considerations The planning staff, in cooperation with Ultrasystems, Inc. conducted a fiscal impact analysis of the two land use alternatives using the computerized methodology developed for the City. For purposes of analysis, the revenues and expenditures of • each alternative were projected over a ten year period, 1981-1991. The results are detailed in Appendix A. 3. Housing In 1979, the City adopted a state-mandated revision to the Housing Element of the General Plan, which includes policy aimed at increasing housing opportunities for households with low and moderate incomes. The revised element includes provisions for consideration of an inclusionary zoning ordinance that could require. a certain percentage of new residential developments to be affordable to lower income households. 17 i WARNER RI RI l CITY > a AMSTERDAM DR ° ;_ j RI Cp m �4 :R2 R2 R2 W R2 Y g n EDAM CR O oW. RI W RI 5 Q L DR. RI RI RI REMBRANDT DR i j RI RI m[ O RI S MARSEILLE DR o RI W z POLDER CR 1 C4ry U RI j VALENCIA DR5 61 I R I FRIESLAND DR. RI RI9°� IC R3 GUILDERS z z z i RI CF-E o HOLLAND DR _ a :_AKF VIEW RI RI r 4eav R1 PD ; C4 Y1369: RI RI RI Id R5 a s 0 ---ISLATER 51S 2fi H J Fw `� �2 PR2R2 ORALCR 11 N.LINE OF TRACT .652 iA2.2 Iry YCIUEL R I DR ROSANNA OR.Q RI `w R1 19995 u C4 2996fi 40 1 I s DR —F J Y BEHJAMIN DR. R2 NDBLE I 1 w'WRI Q 0� , 99D-( R2 � ? R5 i SP-1 I N.LINE S 1/2 S 1/2 SM'1/4 - 3EC.25-5-11 p 1000 SC.L2 i �+ R2-PD-02) W I C P- 1 "�° 'A OR. qj m -(Q)RA Ri - + TALBERT Area of Concern 2.2 FEB. 81 0 18 Figure 2-6 A designation of medium or high density residental would expand the City's potential to provide affordable housing. If the study area retains the medium density designation or is changed to high density residential, approximately 37 units and 62 units respectively could be added to the City's housing stock at ultimate development. Adoption of an inclusionary zoning ordinance could potentially require that between four and nine units be affordable under medium density, and from six to 16 units be affordable under high density. 4. Public Services and Facilities a. Sewers Sewer lines in the vicinity of the study area include eight-inch lines in Newman Avenue to the South, Van Buren Street to the east and Michael Circle to the north. These lines all eventually connect to a 42-inch County Trunk in Slater Avenue. The Department of Public Works has indicated that any of the eight-inch lines in the vicinity of the subject property could adequately service either .the medium or high density development. Because of the northern slope of the subject property, however, the eight-inch line. in Michael Circle is the only line which could be used for this project unless an on-site pumping station were constructed. Connection to that line would require that an easement through the adjacent property to the north be acquired regardless of whether the study area is developed medium or high density residential. The developer is aware of the need to acquire an easement from the adjacent property owners and is currently working with the Department of Public Works and those owners toward that end. b. Water Water lines in the vicinity of the study area include an eight-inch line in Newman Avenue, .and six-inch lines in Van Buren Street and Michael Circle. The Department of Public Works has indicated that the eight-inch line in Newman Avenue could adequately service medium and high density development on the subject property. 19 C. Storm Drains There is presently a 36-inch storm drain in Michael Circle to the north of the study area which runs east to Van Buren Street and then north to a 48-inch pipe in Slater Avenue. Because of the north slope of the subject property, an easement must be acquired to drain to the Michael Circle pipe. This would require construction of a private catch-basin and storm drain on the subject property which would then connect to the Michael Circle line. If this were done, the Department of Public Works has indicated there would be no drainage problems to the site under medium or high density residential. The applicant is working with the Department of Public Works and adjacent owners to secure the necessary easement. d. Parks There are no parks presently existing or planned in the immediate vicinity of the study area. The nearest park is Lake View School and Park on the north side of Slater Avenue. Huntington Central Park is located approximately one mile from the study area, but access is limited by the necessity of crossing Beach Boulevard. The 1977 Parks Analysis indicates that park demand in the district in which the study area is located is presently exceeding park supply and will continue to do so in the future. e. Police and Fire Protection Police service for the area of concern is provided by the City of Huntington Beach, which operates from one central facility located at Main Street and Yorktown Avenue. The present authorized level of manning is 1.15 officers per 1,000 persons. None of the alternatives considered would significantly increase the level of staffing needed to adequately serve the area of concern. Fire protection for the area of concern is provided by the City of Huntington Beach from the Gothard Station located north of Ellis Avenue on the .west side of Gothard Street. The area of concern lies within the five minute response area of the station and can be adequately serviced regardless of the selected alternative. f. Schools The area of concern is served by Crestview Elementary and Middle School and Oceanview High School. Students generated by the alternative land uses considered are estimated as follows: 20 mom 1 Crestview Oceanview Medium Density Residential 16 8 High Density Residential 2 4 The alternative medium density residential designation would have the greater impact on local schools. Crestview School is currently operating at capacity, but the Oceanview School District indicates that due to declining enrollments it will have no problem accommodating the additional students generated by either alternative. Oceanview High School can also accommodate the additional students. g. Gas and Electrical Utilities .Natural gas service and electrical service are provided by the Southern California Gas Company and the Edison Company respectively. A two-inch steel main gas supply line is located in Newman Avenue. Two 3/4-inch feeder lines extend from the supply . line to service the existing single family unit on the southern portion. of the study area. Extension of thse lines will adequately service development under the medium or high density designations. Overhead 12KV electrical lines run east and west on Newman Avenue and north and south on Van Buren Street. The lines on Newman Avenue would supply power to the area of concern. Gas service is generally provided as a normal extension of existing facilities. However, the availability of natural gas service is based upon present conditions of gas supply and regulatory policies. As a public utility, the Southern California Gas Company is under the jurisdiction of the California Public Utilities Commission. Federal regulatory agencies can also affect gas supply. Should these agencies take any action which affects gas supply or the conditions under . which service is available, gas service will be provided according to the revised conditions. The Southern California Edison Company has indicated that electrical load requirements can be met provided that electrical demand does not exceed estimates and there are no unexpected outages to major sources of electrical supply. The total electrical system demand is expected to continue to increase annually. If plans to proceed with future construction of new generating facilities are delayed, Edison's capability to serve all customer loads during peak demand periods could become marginal by 1984. O O O 21 I ■ i h. Solid Waste Disposal The . Rainbow Disposal Company provides solid waste collection to the City of Huntington Beach. No local service constraints are expected under any of the alternative land use designations. 5. Traffic Circulation Access to the area of concern is taken via Newman Avenue which ends in a cul-de-sac 1,300 feet east of the study area. Newman Avenue intersects Beach Boulevard, a major arterial, 630 feet to the west. Traffic volume on Beach Boulevard at that point averages 47,000 trips daily which is slightly above the nominal capacity of 45,000 trips per day for that arterial. Traffic on Newman ranges from 1,500 to 2,000 daily trips which is below the 5,000 trip capacity. Because there is no traffic signal at the intersection of Newman Avenue and Beach Boulevard, left turn traffic from Newman Avenue must either wait for traffic to clear on Beach Boulevard before crossing, or travel north to the traffic signal at the intersection of Beach Boulevard and Slater Avenue to turn south. Any development of the study area would therefore increase traffic volumes on Cameron, and Van Buren Streets which both connect Newman Avenue to Slater Avenue. The Department of Public Works has indicated that there are no plans to install a traffic signal at.the intersection of Beach Boulevard and Newman Avenue. Using factors contained in the February 1980 Huntington Beach Transportation Demand Model Report, it is estimated that a medium density designation would result in 244 vehicle trips per day while high density would generate 440 .trips. These traffic volumes could constitute significant additions to Cameron and Van Buren Streets. Slater Avenue with a current daily traffic volume of 10,700 trips may also be impacted by additional left turns involving Cameron and Van Buren Streets. Maximum capacity on Slater Avenue, a designated secondary arterial, is 20,000 daily trips. 6. Environmental Issues a. No ise The exterior portion of the study area falls within an acceptable noise level of Ldn 60. Mitigation measures, such as unit modification, building placement and barrier construction may be necessary to reduce interior noise levels to Ldn 45. Ad&k 22 b. Air Quality Both land use alternatives would adversely affect air quality within the South Coast region, but the medium density residential use would generate less pollutants than -the proposed high density designation. Daily emissions would total .05 tons for medium density and .09 tons for high density. The primary air emissions generated include carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides, particulates, and sulfur oxides from mobile and stationary sources. Automobile and traffic produce most of the pollutants with a small portion attributable to local heating. The following table summarizes the air emissions generated by the two land use alternatives: Medium Density Residential Mobile .05 Stationary Negl. TOTAL .05 High Density Residential Mobile .09 Stationary NegL TOTAL .09 Vehicular emissions were calculated from EPA AP-42 for the average vehicle' in the South Coast Air Basin. The 1980 emission factors were used to determine -vehicular generation of carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide, sulfur oxide, particulates, and hydrocarbon emissions. Stationary emission factors were obtained from the Air Quality Management District for commercial and home heating, and were adapted from the Journal of APCA, April 1962, page 158. The estimated tonnage of pollutants may be reduced as newer motor vehicles replace older models, new advances in engine design are implemented, public transportation is expanded, or regional plans are adopted to reduce vehicle traffic volumes. 2.2.3 Staff Recommendation The amendment request is to redesignate the area of concern from medium density residential to high density residential. If sewer and drainage rights-of-way are required, the only development constraint would be verticle access to and - from Beach Boulevard. Traffic analysis has indicated that capacities on all streets in the area are adequate to convey traffic that would be associated with high density development of the study area to and from the 23 � J .��MAN - -L—• DR. of Wl GENERAL ?—` 3 � 1-. COMMERCIAL W in w 0l i a o Q H W0 CC J `--- > CL ARKDAIIJ AD MS - AVE Z J z ,R T RTHP a NO 0 z z J DR . 3 R SOUR W cr z P D RO I UCT O I 2 — - r a m - Q 11 m I MEDIUM DE NSITY — --- z z RE SIDENTIAL T I — I 2 Q 4 I H 4 ' I 31 -- W W I I YA Q f I I W LOW _ H r Y C W I n a DENSITY Z - I J CAPE NEW I RESIDENTIAL �����•'_ , I I --- W 0 a rn - a 1 I I I - C F I R I P SO TH R U 0 T R I I 0 I I I I I I I I I I I - - I I I I -t I I U I 1 z I O O I Lr I m a SEAPORT I I I .....�.... AVE J . >... ... -T LOW J L r- W W - I GENERAL , J MUNSTER 9 DENSITY COMMERCIAL ? z RESIDENTIAL i _ ( r -- W O I - v r J I I I AVE. MALLOY r J , at tj O > Y 0 (ll � ,11 1 I i r 110w L..AVE INDiANAPOLIS 14"NSI'T A 0I RESIDENTIAL Area of Concern 2.3 0 0 0 0 FEB. Q1 r O 24 huntington beach planning division Figure 2-7 r traffic signal at the intersection of Slater Avenue and Beach Boulevard. High density development of the study area would be compatible with the high density development directly to the east and the mixed medium and high residential density development to the west and north. Staff, therefore, recommends that the Newman-Beach area be redesignated to high density residential. 2.2.4 Planning Commission Recommendation 0 The Planning Commission recommends that. the 2.5 acre area located on the north side of Newman Avenue 630 feet east of Beach Boulevard be redesignated from medium density residential to high density residential. 2.3 ADAMS - BEACH AREA A third area of concern addressed by Land Use Element Amendment 81-1 is located south of Adams Avenue and east of Beach Boulevard (Figure 2-7). The amendment was requested by the Mola Development Corporation. 2.3.1 Background The applicant's request is to redesignate approximately 59.55 .acres at the southeast corner of Adams Avenue and Beach. Boulevard from resource production general commercial and low density residential, to planned community which would be implemented through a specific plan (all of the above stated land uses would be eligible activities within a planned community designation). The area, under a single ownership, is divided north - south by an Orange County Flood Control District drainage channel. West of the channel, the applicant requests redesignation of 16.01 acres of resource production and 5.21 acres of commercial. Existing uses within this sector are primary resource production, with a gas station at the intersection of Adams and Beach. Chevron USA, Inc. has two lease sites with a total of nine active producer wells, three of which are held in conjunction with the applicant. In addition to the active producers, there are three idle producer wells, which may be returned to production; three new wells are anticipated to begin drilling this summer. East of the flood control channel, the applicant requests redesignation of 38.33 acres of low density residential. This portion of the study area is vacant with the exception of all operations. Chevron, USA, Inc. has a third lease site. in this sector which includes six active producer wells and seven idle producer wells, one of which is owned in conjunction with the applicant; four new wells are anticipated to begin drilling this summer. 25 "KA R2 C2I x.! ,,. ,« RI l i M U RI p r� I Lei 1. I, CR itiPlpl_Ult ` —0 R2 R2 ,.. cR. I /" RI � RI RI : RI Rl RI a 11 !!0 R4 I I 2 R;OD fl) mIN•IFw[LL ._.U11 I Dw RI Df� RI RI . RI RI RI RI 0 0 TR? R2-0 I I I / f �� �"•iFMrT = DORM RI www_RI RI I •n]A«n za R2 /� I �.:r',�i i• ow RI RI Ci"T T, J ' �, RI Q}9 kxIF c o o I ; �' - RI .� 'I 1 r �LTAw9DR / / ; RI. RI 1 N N O O I x-kR.:Ui /RI/ l'NWN lNl , I L.. w--I ,•arrnD �A $ W4101. a� E-ChAIiRpIFT -p N N I __.... A FDA RK S I 'm I N, tl �� RI I .RI r RI �� J RI m RI MI'x a -0 -0 R3-0 R3-0 ° I I alog I �� �•` �.9�wnyRl` 1. RI �a _- ADAMS ' �.D I RI RI N (OIOLDTOW C2 I - RI= o TNPORT DR RI 3 a[ �A--- m iR b F SPECIFIC PLAN _p I F� / RI RI RI F RI RI DR (DISTRICT 2) `/ -01 RI i DR NP%T N C VI 6]0 T _0 Fl p ;,._,, RI RI RI g6 a0 oAVE. I R2-PoDe-:10:-Rn2•'_P p-1 '-C�I NL eRl I a RI RI RI 0 RAOI xD11FOLN DR xEL"R AC' RI RI RI P NE. R- A o - . i y F w !oo I Is I i // OUTNP r DR U CiF-R. � RI �RI-0 RI D sE9oa�DRRI R3 C4 1 I •IQ• RI RI I RI UP M �D� ; m, C2 I F57--�ZQI !D VLL AVE. -!`4 RI RI i - RI z MONSTER DR THU TON ULN" R3 R3" R3 C4 I' =]39 RI RI RI RI RI ��� ° ° I AVe. 4/ RI RI ALLOT= DR RI RI l R D s ZiRI O RI RI RI T�C) as�R3IIR3 IOuC R3 C � � � I�I�U AVEt I2!! INDIANAPO IS RI RI RI nn I D p� RI a RIlzf RI RI Cl � ILJiI 'I lu ry � DRPTwooD D • ••o•- � RI AVE. ' RI REILLY RI DR a I J J RI i RI CF-E TERN CR SAIL w. RI RI RI RI RI HERON CR RI �l ILJllls�l kl � ID c . i s RI Y 1 I RI Lu CRANE CR RI a KINGFISHER � n ray Area of Concern 2.3 O FEB. 81 O - 26 Figure 2-8 Zoning within the area of concern is consistent with current General Plan land use designations (Figure 2-8), and is summarized below: ZONING DISTRICT ACRES RA-0 Residential Agricultural District 9.74 combined with oil production . RA-01 Residential Agricultural District 6.47 combined with oil production RI-O Single Family Residence District 34.60 combined with oil production RI-OI Single Family Residence District 3.73 combined with oil production C2 Community Business District 3.82 C4 Highway Commercial District 1.10 4 The resource production and commercial areas west of the drainage channel are bounded by commercial land use designations to the north and south and medium density residential west of Beach Boulevard. Currently under construction, the commercial area north of Adams Avenue will be the site of the approved 200,000 square foot Newland Center. The low density residential portion of the study area adjoins low density residential subdivisions on the north, east, and south. The north side is also abutted by a designated linear park along the bluffs between Adams Avenue and Yorktown Avenue. Existing General Plan land use designations for the site and the surrounding area are shown in Figure 2-1. The area. of concern was part of Land Use Element Amendment 80-2. The applicant's initial request was to redesignate the area west of the flood control channel to high density residential and commercial, and the area to the east of the channel, medium density residential (Alternative 3, Figure 2-9). In addition to the applicant's request, three other alternatives were analyzed: Alternative 1 - Redesignation of the area west of the flood control channel to high density residential and commercial, and retention of the low density residential designation to the east. Alternative 2 - Medium density residential and commercial west of the channel, and a combination of low and medium density residential to the east. ACWk 27 e u Dal I - WE pfipp& NMI tllib� ��I mn;nm ffm amm NOW cc c pc= MINap IBM ahIIII I�Illil ■ :::�;� �:;;pk � _ ��H • 111111 _:■ iElglll Bll@I � � _ '•�llll 11 1 is ':.gip =ilk __ I/!11 Illllli 141010 Ulu IIE • 111 • ''•�yyy'u :IAt iUll= _� - • ��� :Ilq 11111= _ -� ►� yip fir, i�i — HIH- - 7 ���. lid IIIH= - •7L %�ryt 11111111t111111111i1111 = ■ '16�9 Illltllltlltlllllilllll =� ■ � annuilt Innu If . gas ME �c ►► ill ' `i11 ► • - - a y III-: INH �'- _- _- �� - !! __ I � ro I � ► � ���NHI���Ir YtlYI min�. . flpl@p appal plippl _ , __ I1i11�1 \i mn;u_n MIN ppip& AHM ii!!«NE BhNai -_IIl:ifl we e"Naa Jul "AFR ME p�sNn 449 lfllll -11111 • _ 1111111 a , nilp l o %J • 'Iililll I ii!P 4pi!9@ 'It tl;� q.!"Epl _ _ w1111 •111111 • G�r aplglp it$l =_ .I/ 'lilllll �- �b!lIp ,lii!!p ,yN !J:h�l __ :1/1111- 111111 �i�y4�� is tllllillillllll 11�1 Iil�� � � � ���`�yp� (0 � �� IIIIIII►il it Ilt�Ili =' �` .� 11111 11111111 Bill 11f ■ �� �� IIIIIitliili1111i1111I,�� ��� lisle poll _--m • , _ ---III-: __- Gi /gHI�_A/I►IINM�M 11�/ � 1_' • aiJ'<�_'�I-■_H/3I��.1�ipfNU \III •/�__ ar11H \ i/I - Ism I at>�7IIa1-��. aV�.Vi �� - �ilnU••\tea" �.vi Alternative 4 - Medium density residential and commercial west of the channel and low density residential to the east. Staff recommendations for the area of concern at that time were for the northern 25 acres on the east side of the flood control channel to be redesignated from low density residential to medium density residential in order to provide the opportunity for low and moderate income housing as a condition of development of the property. It was also.recommended that the southern 13 acres east of the channel retain. the existing low density residential designation for development of single family homes and completion of the local circulation system. Staff .further recommended that a commercial designation of the southeast corner of the intersection covering approximately seven acres was appropriate and may complement . adjacent commercial developments. Finally, staff recommended that the area west of the flood control channel (approximately nine acres), be redesignated high density residential from resource production and commercial. Staff's land use recommendations are depicted in Figure 2-10. Following the October 21, 1980 public hearings on the Land Use Amendment, the Planning Commission recommended that the area retain the existing resource production, commercial and low. density residential land use designations. Four hundred and eighty nine residents living adjacent to the area signed petitions or sent letters in opposition to the proposed amendment. The property owners opposed the medium and high density residential request, and desired that the area retain a low density residential designation. The Planning Commission. deleted the Adams-Beach area from Land Use Element Amendment 80-2. The Mola Development Corporation subsequently filed an appeal to the City Council for reconsideration on December 15, 1980. Council denied the appeal and upheld the Planning Commission. 2.3.2 Analysis The Mola Development Corporation has requested that the area of concern be redesignated planned community. The planned community; for a total development average of approximately 800 residential units with a mixture of densities. The planned community designation allows for the creation of a quality living environment through implementation of a development plan on a minimum 50 acre area. Processing the development plan will follow existing City zoning and subdivision codes. Specifically, through the process of subdivision, site plan and circulation plan reviews integrated developments will be established which are in conformance with the policies of the General Plan. ACM& J 29 — - �4KMAN DR. a GENF,RAI, 1— z I COMMERCIAL Iz f J ;II� W Yn O QJr 0 CLARKDA6 I m u x ::_...<. .. ...... . J Q NORTH P O T R t E ` G}�NR AL z Z m J I J MME A CO RC L DR W 2 V 2 r u ML ��: :•: Q ll IUIV I m I DENS TY 1v1EDIUM ESIDENT L -DENSITY J LOW I L N .R LSID E TA � Z 1 DENSIT— Y II a w ESII) I R ENTIA L _ Wlot I , m I - a I W 3 1 i Y W 6 i Q 2 V i i J A W C PE E _ I x 4J N Q ' •�� I V I I I I IX F — R I I : TH'•:�:'' S POR OU T DR. i I I is I I I I 1 i I 1 I i > HIGH ` LOw --- -``-- - DENSITY DENSITY Z 1 I RESIDENTIAL:::: RESIDENTIAL<` `` a I � 8 I I I I Ea I I :. SPORT I I 1 AVE � GENERAL MONSTER W COMMERCIAL 3 o W � AVE. two �_ W MA wy Y H M I 1 1 Y - 0W iA Y Y .,.AVE +"INDiANAPWS RESIDENTIAL ADAMS-BEACH AREA STAFF RECOMMENDATION 80-2 C3 O FEB. 81 O 30 huntington beach planning division Figure 2-10 b Three new alternative development patterns (Alternatives 5 A, B, & C) have been analyzed with respect to the applicant's request for a planned community designation and are discussed in the analysis .section. The applicant's planned community requests along with four alternatives (Alternatives 1-4) and the staff recommendation presented in Land Use Element Amendment 80-2. are summarized for commparison in Figure 2-11. The body of the analysis section will concentrate on the three new scenarios. The applicant has.submitted the following conceptual outline for the proposed project. The area east of the flood control channel is proposed for the development of 280 to 400 units (7-10 units per acre). The units are to be clustered with the surrounding open space to remain as close as possible in its present natural state. There will also be .a transition area with a substantial setback from the existing single family homes to the east 'of the area of concern. The new units adjacent to the single family home tract will be of a lower intensity than other portions of the project area east of the flood control channel. The new units_ will be oriented into the.project .area and not face the.existing residential area, therefore allowing additional privacy to the adjacent home owners. Building heights will not exceed 35 feet and no public streets will connect this project with the surrounding single family tracts. The area west of the flood control channel is proposed for the development of 400 to 600 units (20 to 30 units per acre). The units are to be clustered in larger structures than the ones proposed for the east side of the channel; with building heights from three to six stories. The surrounding open space will be maintained as close to its present natural state as possible. The area presently in oil production will also be maintained in a natural setting. It is anticipated that oil production will continue at an intensive level in this area for the next several years. When production has ceased, the area will be turned-over to the Homeowners Association. In addition, a small commercial area adjacent to the existing gas station at the intersection of Beach Boulevard and Adams Avenue may be incorporated into the project specific plan, if residential development proves to.be infeasible at that location. 1. Land Use The applicant's new proposal and the alternative land use mixes are analyzed in terms of the following considerations: a. The commercial area proposed in all alternatives will support approximately 16,000 square feet of retail space including integration of the existing gas station. 31 W N ALTERNATIVE PROPOSALS SUMMARY ADAMS - BEACH AREA 2. 3 DEVELOPMENT TOTAL RESIDENTIAL TOTAL SCHOOL AGE TOTAL TOTAL ALTERNATIVES COMMERCIAL UNITS POPULATION POPULATION TRAFFIC AIR Square GENERATION POLLUTANTS Footage Low Med. High Total Elqm- id. High (TRIPS/DAY) (TONS/DAY) Den. Den. Den. Footage Low Med. Hig h Total DEVELOPMENT ALLOWABLE UNDER EXISTING 35,000 385 - - 385 1232 119 139 150 4459 .84 LAND USE DESIGNATION (Low Den. Residential) ALTERNATIVE 1 LAND USE AMENDMENT 80-2 58,000 768 - 504 772 1456 66 75 97 6430 1.23 ALTERNATIVE 2 58,000 59 593 - 652 1368 130 175 159 4920 .96 LAND USE AMENDMENT 80-2 ALTERNATIVE 3 LAND USE AMENDMENT 80-1 58,000 - 575 504 1079 1988 150 206 182 7865 1.52 (Applicant's Original Request ALTERNATIVE 4 58,000 268 218 - 486 1021 124 152 154 4290 .82 LAND USE AMENDMENT 80-2 STAFF RECOMMENDATION LAND'USE AMENDMENT 80-2 58,000 375 93 328 796 1761 144 162 190 8018. 1.52 ALTERNATIVE 5 LAND USE AMENDMENT 81-1 A 16,000 290. - 400 680 1784 99 105 137 5794 1.14 (Minimum Development) APPLICANT'S REQUEST B 16,000 - 400 400 800 1672 88 108 120 5970 1.18 LAND USE AMENDMENT 81-1 LAND USE AMENDMENT 81-1 C (Maximum Development) 16,000 - 400 600 1000 2116 94 110 134 7390 1.46 I Figure 2-11 I • , b. The alternatives vary in the. mix of residential densities from a low of seven units per acre to a high of 35 units per acre. . The applicant's planned community request calls for a total development of approximately 800 units with a mixture of residential densities. C. The general character of the area east of the Orange County Flood Control District channel is that of a low density residential subdivision. The study area directly abuts single family residences on the east and south, and is separated from similar developments to the north by Adams Avenue. A low density residential designation of this sector of the study area would be most compatible with these uses. A higher density could be compatible provided that the development is clustered and the overall maximum density is less than 15 units per acre. This area would also serve as a transition between the low density to the east and the high density to the west. d. Higher intensity uses characterize the area west of the channel. Medium density residential development presently exists west of Beach Boulevard and commercial uses abut the site on the north and south. The requested high density residential on this part of the site should be compatible with these uses. Adams Avenue and Beach Boulevard are major arterials which serve as. a focus for high intensity commercial and residential uses. While the Beach-Adams intersection will. soon support 200,000 square feet of commercial space, the study area in proximity to the center would be most appropriate for high density residential development to compliment it. Beach Boulevard will provide 'a logical separation of the high density use from the medium density .residential developments and commercial busines§es to the west. e. The redesignation of the area west of the drainage channel to high density residential could provide sufficient consumer demand to support additional commercial space in the area of concern. A market analysis was conducted for the Beach Boulevard and Atlanta Avenue intersection (one mile south of the study area) in June, 1978, in conjunction with General Plan Amendment 78-1. Because the two areas are close in proximity, the analysis is applicable to the present study. The Beach-Atlanta market study indicated that because -there were adequate existing and proposed shopping centers in the general area, additional neighborhood centers anchored by food and drug businesses are not desirable. However, the development of a small convenience center with a 33 i liquor store and perhaps a number of offices and/or small retail shops would be more appropriate. The applicant has indicated that if commercial development is feasible at the proposed location, a small convenience center will be incorporated into the specific plan. f. Oil production within the area of concern is an additional consideration. The area contains 15 active and 10 idle producer wells, four of which (three active and one idle) are owned by the applicant. Production from this field averages 48,545 barrels of oil and 73,000 million cubic feet of natural gas annually. Plans are presently in the works to significantly increase these totals. The applicant has indicated that the oil production will be preserved through the consolidation of operations and will not be adversely affected by proposed developments. The applicant and Chevron will need to reach an understanding on the development proposal, however, no difficulties are anticipated. 2. Economic Considerations The Planning staff in cooperation with Ultrasystems, Inc. conducted a fiscal impact analysis of the land use alternatives using the computerized methodology developed for the City. For the purposes of analysis, the revenues and expenditures of each alternative were projected over a ten year period, 1981-1991. The results are detailed in Appendix A. 3. Housing The existing low density residential land use designation on the area of concern will allow for a total development of approximately 400 units (up to seven units per acre) without the requirement of. a General Plan Amendment. The applicant's request is for a cluster development in two areas. The area east of the flood control channel is proposed for the development of 280 to 400 units (approximately 280 would be permitted under the existing low density residential designation). The area west of the flood control channel is proposed for the development of 400 to 600 units. Estimated total units for this proposal will be approximately 800, housing 1672 people. The request for a planned community designation will offer greater flexibility for unit placement within the area and provides the City with the additional controls through the regulations of a specific plan. i 34 � I The City's housing goals, adopted through the Housing Element, call for: The attainment of decent housing within a satisying living environment for housholds of all socioeconomic, racial and ethnic groups in Huntington Beach. - The provision of a variety of housing opportunities by type, tenure, and cost for households of all sizes throughout the City. - The development of a balanced residential environment with access to employment opportunities, community facilities, and adequate services. Many of the City's goals and policies may be more readily implemented in areas. designated for medium and high density residential. Areas designated medium and high density residential offer the best opportunities to provide affordable housing, especially if density bonuses are to be utilized. There are, however, few .remaining medium and high density areas within the City. All alternative proposals for the area of concern offer opportunities for low and moderate income housing. Through the adoption of an inclusionary zoning ordinance the City could require that 10 to 25 percent of the total housing units be made available to low and moderate income households. This could amount to between 80 and 200 units with the applicant's request for a total project of approximately 800 units. The alternatives presented in Land Use Element 80-2 offered a potential range of from 49 to 270 affordable units. 4. Public Services and Utilities a. Sewers The study area is currently serviced by a 24-inch Orange County trunkline in Adams Avenue. No new sewer facilities are master planned for the area. Any new development within the area of concern would connect to the County trunkline. The Orange County Sanitation District has indicated that this facility will be adequate to serve the area under the alternatives presented. A sewer easement runs thorough the area (north-south) on the eastern side of the flood control channel. b. Water An existing eight-inch water line in Beach Boulevard extending 600 feet south of Adams Avenue now serves the area of concern. The Department of Public Works indicates that this line would require an extension to the study area's southerly boundary to adequately, provide water service to future developments. In addition, an existing 35 12-inch water main in Adams Avenue west of Beach Boulevard would require an easterly extension to serve the area. Those facilities are projected to adequately service the study area regardless of the density mix of residential development selected. However, developers in the area would also be required to design and install a fire hydrant and water main distribution system for the area, consisting of a six-inch loop with fire hydrants. C. Drainage and Flood Control. The area of concern is located in the Talbert Gap, and is subject to local and regional flood hazard. Severe ponding occurs on-site between Beach Boulevard and the Orange County Flood Control District DO-I Channel. The study area in general is also subject to regional flooding in the 100- and 200- year storms. The area of concern is presently serviced by a 60-inch line but new drainage facilities are planned. West of the flood control channel in the vicinity of the intermittent pond, a 48-inch drainage line is master planned. This facility will connect with the Orange County Flood .Control District pump station at Adams Avenue, which will collect and disperse water flow to the DO-I Channel. Measures are being taken to eliminate the regional flood hazard posed by the Santa Ana River. The United Stated Army Corps of Engineers has proposed a plan that would make the City and the rest of Orange County flood safe from a 100-year storm. However, the project will be implemented in phases and not completed before 1999. In the interim, development within flood hazard areas will be regulated by the programs for flood hazard abatement in the adopted Seismic-Safety Element. In addition, as a participant in the Federal Flood Insurance Program, Huntington Beach flood hazards are governed by the regulations imposed by the Federal Insurance Administration. The program requires that all new construction and substantial improvements of residential structures have the lowest inhabitable floor elevated above the base flood level. Flood maps are now being revised under an emergency phase to establish specific base flood levels within communities subject to flood hazard. The base flood level within the area of concern has preliminarily been set at 11 feet, which means that the lowest habitable floor would be constructed above that level. At2t& 36 i Compliance would necessitate significant elevation of structures in the study area or utilization of the lowest level for garage space to reduce the need for fill. No compliance with these regulations is required until the regular phase begins. As participants in the program, the City's eligibility for disaster relief and other Federal funding would be suspended if it does not comply with the regular phase. d. Parks The 1977 Parks Analysis indicates that the demand for neighborhood park space in vicinity of .the study area is greater than the current supply. Approximately 33 acres have been acquired for future park development within one-fourth of a mile of the study area. Bartlett Park, a passive park, will consist of 30.5 acres of linear park along the bluffs directly north of Adams Avenue. The Drew Park, a neighborhood park, is located east of the study area with 2.6 acres acquired for development. These sites may not be sufficient to accommodate the demand for park space generated by the development alternatives. Additional park space may be required within the project area. e. Police and Fire Protection . The Police Department operates from a single police facility located at Main Street and Yorktown Avenue. The present authorized level of police manning is approximately 1.15 officers per 1,000 persons. Development under the alternatives presented will require no more than two additional officers. Response time is of . primary importance in determining the adequacy of fire . protection coverage. Fire stations should be located to provide an average response time of five minutes or less in 90 percent of the incidents. The area of concern is served by the Lake Fire Station one-half mile away, and is entirely within this response limit. When comparing the land use alternatives no difference in response time is expected. As the study area develops, higher levels of manning will be, necessary if the Fire, Department is to maintain the level of service required. f. Schools The area of concern lies within the Huntington Beach Elementary School District. The proposal would . generate an estimated 88-99 elementary school aged children and 105-110 middle school children. 37 The Huntington Beach Elementary School District has indicated that sufficient excess capacity exists in area schools to accommodate the student load. The study area is also served by the Huntington Beach High School District. The proposal would generate an estimated 120-137 additional students. These students would attend Edison High School which is located approximately 1k miles from the area of concern. While any additional students would contribute to the already overcrowded conditions within the school district, declining enrollment in the elementary school system should result in a long-term decline in high school requirements. g. Gas and Electrical Utilities Natural gas service and electrical service are provided by the Southern California Gas Company and the Edison Company respectively. A four-inch main gas supply line and an overhead 12KV electrical line runs east-west along Adams Avenue to serve the area of concern. Gas service is generally provided as a normal extension of existing faciliites. However, the availability of natural gas service is based upon present conditions of gas supply and regulatory policies. As a public utility, the Southern California Gas Company is under the jurisdiction of the California Public Utilities Commission. Federal regulatory agencies can also affect gas supply. Should these agencies take any action which affects gas supply or the conditions . under which service is available, gas service will be provided according to the revised conditions. o . The Southern California Edison Company has indicated that electrical load requirements can be met provided that electrical demand does not exceed estimates and there are no unexpected outages to major sources of electrical supply. The total electrical system demand is expected to continue to increase annually. If plans to proceed with future construction of new generating facilities are delayed, Edison's capability to serve all customer loads during peak demand periods could become marginal by 1984. h. Solid Waste Disposal The Rainbow Disposal Company provides solid waste collection to the City of Huntington Beach. No local service constraints are expected under any of the alternatives. 38 I • I 5. Traffic Circulation Access to the study area is taken from Adams Avenue and Beach Boulevard, which are designated major arterials by the Circulation Plan of Arterial Streets and Highways. The design capacity of these streets is 45,000 vehicles per day. Traffic volumes in vicinity of the study area are 14,500 daily trips on Adams Avenue, and 25,000 trips per day on Beach Boulevard. Because the Orange County Flood Control District DO-1 Channel effectively divides the area of concern, the two sections will have different access points. The area east of the channel will take access off Adams Avenue, while the area to the west will be oriented primarily to Beach Boulevard. It is estimated that the new residential request will result in . between 5304 and 6900 additional vehicle trips, of which 2464-2640 trips will be directed to Adams Avenue and 2840-5260 trips to . Beach Boulevard. A convenience commercial center (16,000 square feet) will produce an additional 490 vehicle trip ends equally distributed between Beach Boulevard and Adams Avenue. This will bring the total vehicle trips generated by this proposal to between 5794 and 7390 per day. The Department of Public Works has indicated that the traffic volumes generated by the new alternatives will not exceed design capacities on adjacent arterials and'will.not have a significant effect on local street traffic flow. Although present traffic volumes are well under capacities, new development may add to the presently over capacity volumes north of the project site along Beach Boulevard. While the additions to the over all volumes of this or any individual project may be minimal the cumulative effect over time can be significant. The project area is adjacent to exisiting Orange County Transit District routes on both Beach Boulevard and Adams Avenue. Additional transit facilities, such as bus turnout and bus shelters may be necessary at key locations for greater convenience and .accessibility. This may also partially relieve the traffic counts on the presently over capacity sections of Beach Boulevard. 6. Environmental Issues This section identifies the significant environmental impacts associated with the land uses evaluated. a. Geotechnical The North Branch Fault of the Newport-Inglewood Fault Zone traverses the area of concern from the southeast to the northwest. The Indianapolis Avenue Fault intersects the North Branch Fault from the east. Although faults lace the study area, it is not a designated earthquake hazard area. However, any development may At=& 39 • I be subject to seismic activity. Appropriate structural requirements would be imposed by the City on all such projects. In addition, an engineering geologist's analysis may also be required. Liquefaction potential may be high in some areas west of the flood control channel where frequent ponding occurs. From this perspective, high density residential development may not be feasible in this location without substantial modification of structural design. Soil samples and borings should also be performed for any development or structure to be located within or near these areas. Topographically, most of the study area is located within the floodplain of the Talbert Gap. However, a six-acre area in the southwest corner of the site is part of the Huntington Beach Mesa with elevations up to 11 feet above the floodplain. In addition, significant filling may be required to bring the area to a finished grade that meets the requirements of the Federal Flood Insurance Program. This filling may create additional environmental impacts with the importation and transportation of materials. b. No ise New residential developments adjacent to Adams Avenue and Beach Boulevard will be subjected to noise levels in excess of the normally acceptable levels for residential areas. Typical exterior treatments such as walls and berms may not be feasible to reduce the Ldn 70 level to the City standard of Ldn 60 for exterior and Ldn 45 for interior noise levels. In this case, special mitigation measures. such as unit modifications, building placement, and barrier construction, would be required to reduce the noise to acceptable levels. Residential developments will also be subject to noise levels in excess of Ldn 60 from oil pumps and engines as production phases out in the study area. These impacts can be mitigated through barriers, oil equipment mufflers, and building placement. C. Air Quality All development alternatives will adversely effect air quality within the South Coast Air Basin. The following table summarizes the air emissions generated by the new proposal: 40 Emission Source Tons of Emissions/Day Low/High Density Residential (680 Total Units) w/Convenience Commercial Center (16,000 square feet) Mob ile 1.13 Stationary .01 . TOTAL 1.14 Medium/High Density Residential (800 Total Units) w/Convenience Commercial Center (16,000 square feet) Mobile 1.17 Stationary .01 TOTAL 1.18 Medium/High Density Residential (1,000 Total Units) w/Convenience Commercial Center (16,000 square feet) Mobile 1c45 Stationary .01 TOTAL 1.46 Vehicular emissions were calculated from EPA AP-42 for the average vehicle in the South Coast Air Basin. The 1980 emission factors were used to determine vehicular generation of carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide, sulfur oxide, particulates, and hydrocarbon emissions. Stationary emission factors were obtained from the Air Quality Management District for commercial and home heating, and were adapted from the Journal of APCA, April 1962, page 158. The estimated tonnage of emissions may be reduced as newer motor vehicles replace older models, new advances in engine design and motor vehicle inspections are implemented, public transportation is expanded, or regional plans are implemented to reduce vehicular trips. d. Wetlands The area of concern contains a pond area west of the flood control channel. This site has been determined to have wetland habitat value and in turn significant wildlife value by the State Department of Fish and Game. ARX 41 The Department of Fish and Game further states: "wetlands such as the one contained on the subject parcel are at a premium and warrant protection . . . we encourage the preservation of the wetland habitat on the site . . . we believe that this position is consistent with the Resource Agency's Wetlands Policy" (Appendix B). In addition, some 59 species of birds have been sighted in the area and recorded by adjacent residents over the past 31 years. These . sightings have been verified by Audubon Society members and field personnel from the Department of Fish and Game (Appendix B). All concur that this site is of significant local ecological importance. The applicant has proposed that development west of the flood control channel be clustered and concentrated on the mesa area above the wetlands site. The applicant is further proposing that the wetlands area remain in its natural state and not be developed for residential uses. 2.3.3 Staff Recommendation The amendment request is for the redisgnation of the area of concern to a planned community land use. The area of concern is a large parcel (59.55 acres), with a variety of activities proposed, including a number of residential types and densities. This is the type of project which is most suited for a planned community designation. The planned community designation will provide additional design control. throughout the implementation process, with the requirement of the development of a specific plan. After analyzing the various development alternatives which could occur based on the existing residential designations in the city's general plan and the nature of the applicant's request, staff recommends that the area of concern be redesignated to planned community. The planned community designation will require the implementation of a comprehensive, coordinated planning process and will allow for greater flexibility with regard to plan implementation. This should promote development of a plan compatible with surrounding and existing uses within the area. The staff believes that the planned community designation would provide the most realistic approach for any future development on the site. 42 • I 2.3.4 Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission recommends that the 59.55 acre area located south of Adams Avenue and east of Beach Boulevard be redesignated from resource production, general commercial and low density residential to planned community, which would be implemented through a specific plan. 2.4 ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES In accordance with California .Environmental Quality Act guidelines, an environmental assessment is required to address short-term and long-term effects, irreversible environmental changes, and growth inducing impacts of the total project or plan. This section analyzes these concerns in context of the alternative land uses in Section 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3. 2.4.1 Short-Term and Long-Term Productivity Amendment "81-1 seeks to identify short-range issues within a context of long-range goals, policies, and environmental planning programs. The amendment is in itself a mitigation measure designed to minimize any adverse effects on long-term productivity resulting from short-term uses. One of the steps required to implement the amendment is an analysis of the zone changes necessary to bring the zoning into conformance with the General Plan. The zoning changes that would result will have significant short-term effects, such as creating non-conforming uses, reducing or increasing intensity of development permitted, and providing stimulus for development. The long-term effects would include land uses which implement General Plan policies. 2.4.2 Irreversible Environmental Changes The Amendment will mitigate most adverse effects. However, irreversible environmental change of a secondary nature can be expected from development under the proposed amendment. Loss of open space will occur as vacant land is converted to other uses. Although the option to recycle the land to open space after development is available, it is probably not economically feasible. Alteration of topography will be an irreversible change. Although mitigating " measures can be imposed as part of the development process, the natural topography will experience a negligible degree of modification. Construction materials of mineral origin will also be needed for development to occur, and fossil fuels will be committed for long periods to satisfy local energy demand. However, such development would be consistent with existing land use designations. AM& IN 43 2.4.2 Growth Inducing Impacts The proposed amendment will. also have growth inducing effects within the areas of concern. An additional population of 2380 persons could be generated by uses under Land Use Element Amendment 81-1, thereby creating an increased demand on public services and utilities and incrementally affecting air quality, water quality, traffic, and noise levels. The incremental impact on air quality would add a maximum of 1.71 tons of emissions per day to the South Coast Air Basin. The land uses under consideration in accord with General Plan policies and programs should mitigate many of the adverse effects generated by the expected growth. The demand for water and energy will likely increase as a result of the proposed land uses. in this amendment. Conservation measures can be implemented to reduce these impacts. The following water conservation measures are recommended for the community at large and individual structures where appropriate. (1) Reduce evaporation from reservoirs by encouraging underground storage or coating water surfaces with evaporation hindering films or substances. (2) Encourage tertiary treatment of and reuse of the return flow of public water supplies wherever such use is acceptable and safe. (3) Discourage development in areas where air conditioning may be used frequently and for long periods. (4) Land use planning should be sensitive to the underground water level and not produce greater demand on the underground water supply than is available. (5) Waterspreading where appropriate should be encouraged in order to recharge the underground water supply. (6) Metering of water can stimulate more economical use and encourage repair of leaky connections. (7) Toilets and showers are commonly over-designed and use more water than necessary. Consumption can be reduced by introducing appropriate modifications to toilets and showers. The following energy conservation measures are recommended for new structures: 44 1 ■ i (1) Open gas lighting should not be used in public or private.buildings. (2) Electric lights should be strategically placed to maximize their efficiency. Their size and power consumption should be minimized as much as possible. (3) Electrical heating in public and private structures should be discouraged. Solar-assisted heating systems should be encouraged. (4) Reflecting and/or insulating glass should be used in structures where windows are not shaded or exterior architectural projections or mature plants. 45` T—£ a,anbz3 917 SEVENTEENTH STREtT • V!��\�`J O 0 _ F., I III SIXTEENTH IIIIII E EIII II;1N T1I11II11I1.I1H 1I1I11II1III II 11I1I 11I 1I1II IIII1I1III I��r•�':#MI1I::�:`•:;:�%I1I:i`t,•.1I r:r:t:.si FIFTEENTH z {:£I11;f{,{sf•,�f{%I%;�1I'+:`f:+!:•r•'.I1I'•>%}'r}r%•.r'r,f'f:f,11•::�}11�'.;1 r::.•E:•:..�;r1 11 �;'•;;::•:::;}}f}';{:•�::::!I }:,j�#•'::' `?•':::Y�rff`•:{pr ti' i.;r:•%i::s•r :t : • m _ ' 1 FOURTEENTH m -1 3 K O Orl - - I I I 11 f I 1 I I I I I I. 1 I .;;: ?:r;;: :}• ''GI, � ;•••}•' 1 I I I I , 1 __..__ I I 1 I I I 1 1 I I 1 1 • ' 1 I 1 I . . :�, 'r:•'�� �:•,:'i,�;:�; ;�'j•;�:•��•};•, �'� THIRTEENTH ST. :;;L}::s:s:.•:i t::.:.::?;:•>: :•::: ::;r f:.;::, ----- .}}...;.. {:,.,}:{{�::•:::.+:::::rr•:.rr•x•.:}•{fi.S: O � I I I 1 I i 1 I I i m •{ .+k.;,•fi "{: :�•' t..4. Yr,h.: .:{: y1 N z In I I 1 1 I I I r. .•::::: i :: r:' i :1: :j;; O F-1 V/ Z 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I m ,.,''•{:` :ti.:i!'":•}:}::' �1'�'L' •. ': 'L:}: . ••. ,., ...•L:•:::.:: r,:'}''%:r{:'i;�`•.+i::$'?;:';:;:L•rr: }$ : •rr•'::k $;}:?C`r _t l r 6'i"t /"r,: •+ r$'f rf;%; f .{ :+i f?r{].".?: `,;{$ :,.} S} :'''�:• };•.• r" ; r f,.rr,:`' ,.`.+i i%r+rrir"{S•: fr•.`•ii•::.•.;....;;... r{::::.�.�.:� r:%:: •i r � .� `r� .��'�:: :;ryy :}{,�.,r?��.;:+r r�i:li,'i,:}:`i:•}:•:{::•'::i::{::{:.r•::rr•{:i:�": t}f --_ III I ' L•. !:S.Y,'• " +} •�'•''�}' f:r' ' '"�•}' " :;I':{Y'' f' :}:;:�#:;:'I:''�:; .. rri TENTH {:?. •�,:......}'•:?•};:::}}r.;;{`�`.:r •}} di, ,r ,}•.L� mmo --- ; I AV �(:"' •'•'r'L;i"'r• i c r"z G L,\ . •)• .�:•:' Y '' •`•� .• ••}'''' ";. (n i}`r {.•. ::fiii ::::.$;Gr• r:,ti:'k54' :.,fir.•{{.ti::rr r:.: :.:.' ' . .}•'r+j �rS'ii'{':.%�:"�ti•::LL.:};: r:':{'�' m -I }.tLtiy�7Si�.' :::V{:'}�}:?+.•:•?::r rrt::r i<:}:v:+.. {}rr!'' � .._.__ I - jar "'{:;• ...1 ''f"'' '��' ::;. }{:: # ____ III :} `+' � ':t;. .;}•/{,:;#,;•$'• ;►,. }:; •#};f�: ..'�# .`;# '+`•• r..• .v+f. :,!: }:�{:;•'}+. r.•:•,r,'•:+ :•5,:�}:fi.;.. .. . . :r r:r••:{v:v:rrv}.;, yy,� r :fr// f �•'f }'� { "•y f' :r�. rr"•' .:�{}{{:r:{:i}:}f{:.•r irr.:::r.....; .'C};}:+".�.f{{:. : •}:j;+};;'/r ; ::`r�r`;;k :;:�{�`y:•:. r�y:, `}}+.••r'•:';�•�:':'+.?•r::•:•>}.;.. ,i.;`,;;:`}:::r•:::yrr : ,f' .?�y�f.}is r+"• :{:.• fr�:�'i`••''ir:f"ff{• � � .'�`t"}� ' r: 00 _ _ SIXTH -- —. - _—. ST f • I 3.0 ADMINISTRATIVE ITEM 3.1 TOWNLOT SPECIFIC PLAN, AREA "A" The amendment request is to redesignate approximately 116.15 acres in Townlot Specific Plan Area A from low density residential to medium density residential. The area is bounded by Palm Avenue, Sixth Street, Walnut Avenue, Twelfth Street, Pecan .Avenue and the alley between Sixteenth and Seventeenth Streets. Existing Land Use Element and zoning designations are shown in Figures 3-1 and 3-2 respectively. The study area was included in Land Use Element Amendment .81-1 by direction of the City Council on February 2, 1981. The amendment is intended to establish consistency between the General Plan and zoning for the area. The issue of City-wide inconsistencies between the General Plan Land Use Element and zoning was addressed in a staff report prepared for the Planning Commission and City Council in November, 1978. The report identified areas in the City where inconsistencies existed, and categorized four general cases that explained them: 1. The land is vacant or is developed in accordance with the Land Use Element, however the zoning is inconsistent and needs to be brought into conformance via a zone change. A24 47 1 / V�.J PUAMJ Qti ,,tE` ro RI-0 :..."�' '►, a rr ---tie",° F ''RIOy, RI-0 RI R-1 F R-I R-I!gR2 -='-64-- 4^/ 1 c'°" 4 �4aq�pi�� �RI � RI RI �RI [C4, A-' 'RI O' '.►-. y4'd•t nb�� LOMA AVE PORn j. C9 ,I > BRIO c, q"i . Ci HH aH E CF—E b RI.O�B THIRTEENTH ST OSwEGO A � ry E � N P� '• q/ � R I I.:W"E:ti 3.:-n(::_I �. ;RI RI ia6 R I NOHVILLE f y CREST Z ST. FC L 3.1 yn RI RI TwELFt'�CF-R -0 R2 PLANU \( RI RI (:.L,.r:: PAR;:) I25 MEMPHIS— . CF-R ��>li!, a e CF—R ELEVENTH ST m�GR' RI r� 1 - _ RI TENTH �� u / �� - — R1 R2 sT.m r �;_ R 2 b- •��a' �RI KNOx VILI_E; cap _ p RE c R3 R2 R2 R Q \ W 44. HA'i ORD Q3 — 4jP = _3__� P in :CSC Z � a Q. PR—pE;15Fp Rl ELMIRA �3 \�`\ C` PP 5 \\ Q O a M M Z E DE TROIT IIr 0- Hluco— r �'•�3 P ? G n a _j I^^I ' ON OD dA�E O JP Q _ • C I C� 3 G�GM f G�G� v f� :4 P o ,000 y C g SCOLE -- W.EEi p . C3 cl 042�Dy~P -ATLANTA Area of Concern 3.1 O O o o FEB. 81 O 48 Figure 3-2 2. In a large independent area the existing development reflects the zoning designation, however, the Land Use Element is not consistent and the General Plan should be amended. 3. The existing development reflects the zoning designation, however the area is relatively small within the context of a larger surrounding area. In these cases, either a zone change or a General Plan Amendment could be appropriate, depending on the individual location and circumstances. 4. The existing development reflects the. . zoning designation, however the area is too small to meet the size criteria found in the General Plan for the area to be shown on the Land Use Diagram and is therefore considered to be consistent. One of the largest areas considered in the report was the Townlot Specific Plan Area. A. The study identified the 116.15 acre area as one where existing development reflected the zoning (specific plan) designation, and the Land Use Element was .not consistent. Staff recommended that the Land Use Element be redesignated from low density to medium density residential. The arguments supporting a redesignation of the area of concern are still applicable. The low density residential designation allows a maximum density of seven dwelling units per acre, while medium density permits from seven to 15 units per acre. The Townlot Specific Plan Area A ordinance permits development normally associated with low density residential areas; namely, single-family dwellings and duplexes. However, because of the small lot configurations (25 feet by 117.5 feet) in the Townlot Area and the standard development site criteria indicated in the specific plan, the average density of developments within Area A is 8.53 units per acre. As a result, the densities allowed under the specific plan actually produce medium density residential developments which should be so designated on the Land Use Element diagram. While a change in the land use designation will bring about the desired consistency, it will not affect the underlying zoning or future development in Area A. The Townlot Specific Plan ordinance will regulate future development and maintain the single-family/duplex character and density intended. Another consideration is that west of the study area is an additional 40 acres which is also designated Townlot Specific Plan Area A. It is bounded by Palm Avenue, Twenty-second Street, Orange Avenue, Eighteenth Street, Pecan Avenue, and the alleyway between Seventeenth and Eighteenth Streets. 49 This section of Area A is similar to the 'larger area to the east and is designated medium density residential in the Land Use Element. Therefore, a change in the land use designation on the area of concern from low density to medium density residential would be consistent with previously established directions for the area. 3.1.2 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that townlot specific plan area A be redesignated from low density residential to medium density residential in order to make the general plan land use designation and the area zoning consistent. 3.1.3 Planning.Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission recommends that the 116.15 acre area located within Townlot Specific Plan Area A (bound by Palm Avenue, Sixth Street, Walnut Avenue, Twelfth 'Street, Pecan Avenue, and the alley between Sixteenth and Seventeenth Streets), be redesignated from low density residential to medium density residential. MI 50 4.0 AMENDMENT SUMMARY The following table summarizes the proposed land use amendments addressed in Section 2.0 and 3.0 as recommended by the Planning Commission. 4.1 Summary of Proposed Land Use Element Amendment 81-1 Proposed land use acreage summary Land.Use Existing Proposed Net Change Category Gross Acres Gross Acres Gross Acres Residential Low Density 154.48 0 -154.48 Medium Density 2.5 116.15 +113.65 High Density 0 2.5 +2.5 Planned Community 0 59.55 +59.55 Commercial 5.21 0 -5.21* Resource Production 16.01 0 -16.01* Total 178.2 178.2 *The commercial and resource production acreage is within the proposed planned community acreage, both commercial and resource production are allowable uses within a planned community designation. mms Him un 51 Net Projected Population Change Residential Net Change Max. Units Total Population Type Gross Acres Per Gross Acre Units Per Unit Population . Low density -154.48 7 -1081 3.2 -3459 Medium Density +113.65* 15 +1705 2.93 +4995 High Density +2.5 22 +54 2.22 +119 Planned Community +59.55 * * 1.71-2.22 +678 +1655 *Project density, total units and population will be determined through the implementation of a specific plan. 52 APPENDICES APPENDIX A FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT 81-1 In cooperation with Ultrasystems; Inc., the computerized fiscal impact methodology was used to analyze the proposed land uses presented in Land Use Element Amendment 81-1. The fiscal impact evaluation encompassed the land use alternatives considered for areas of concern, 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3. The alternative land uses considered in Area 2.3 are Alternatives 5A, 5B and 5C. The . first four alternatives for .that area were evaluated in Land Use Element Amendment 80-2. The fiscal impact analysis at that time indicated .that all four land use alternatives would generate a net. surplus to the City over ten years. Alternative 3 produced the highest estimated surplus = $1,035,300. The other alternatives were estimated to generate surpluses ranging from $.662,800 for Alternative 4 to $924,000 for Alternative 1. Area 2.1 (Ellis-Beach Area) Three land use alternatives were evaluated for the 1.89 acre area located south of Ellis Avenue and east of Beach Boulevard: 1) Office/Professional - 44,600 square feet of office space with an estimated value of 1,701,000. 2) Medium Density Residential - 27 medium density condominiums with an average sale price of $110,000 per unit. 3) Hi h Density Residential 47 high density condominums with an average sale price of $95,000 per unit. Table 1 shows that, over the ten-year period chosen, the medium density_ residential alternative generates a surplus of $13,800 on a .cash flow basis. The high density residential alternative produces a deficit of $15,900 while the office/professional alternative shows a $30,200 deficit: Area 2.2 (Newman - Beach Area) Two land use alternatives were evaluated for the 2.50 acre site located north of Newman Avenue and east of Beach Boulevard: 1) Medium Density Residential - 37 medium density condominiums with an average sale price of $125,000 per unit. 2) Hi h Density Residential - 62 high density condominiums with an average sale price of $115,000 per unit. Table 2 shows that, over the ten-year period selected, both land use alternatives generate a surplus ranging from $11,400 for the high density alternative to $34,400 for the medium density alternative. Area 2.3 (Adams - Beach Area) This area of concern covers 59.55 acres located south of Adams Avenue and east of Beach Boulevard. The following three land use options were analyzed: 5A) Low/Medium-High Density Residential - 280 low density condominiums with an average sale price of $135,000 per unit and 400 medium-high density condominiums with an average sale price of $105,000 per unit. 5B) Medium/Medium-High Density Residential - 400 medium density condominiums with an average sale price of $125,000 per unit and 400 medium-high density condominiums:with an average sale price of $105,000 per unit. 5C) Medium/High Density Residential - 400 medium density condominiums with an average sale price of $125,000 per unit and 600 high density condominiums with an average sale price of $95,000 per unit. Table 3 shows that all three land use alternatives generate a net surplus to the City over the next ten years. The low/medium-high density option (Alternative 5A) produces the highest surplus - $447,800. The other two alternatives generate surpluses ranging from $40,400 for the medium/high density option (Alternative 5C) to $203,800 for the medium/medium-high density option (Alternative 5B). Cumulative Fiscal Impact of LUE 81-1 In addition to evaluating each area of concern separately, the cumulative fiscal implications of Land Use Element Admendment 81-1 should be considered by decision-makers. As shown in Tables 1-3, the total fiscal impact of the amendment is optimized if the medium density residential alternatives are selected .for Areas 2.1 and 2.2, and the low/medium-high density residential alternative (5A) is selected for Area 2.3. This scenario would generate a maximum surplus of $496,000 over the next ten years. The least favorable combination of land uses from a fiscal standpoint occurs if office/professional is selected for Area 2.1, high density for Area 2.2, and medium/high density (Alternative 5C) is selected -for Area 2.3. However, this scenario still results in a net surplus of $21,600 over the ten-year period chosen. The significance of these results is that any combination of land uses selected will generate a positive fiscal impact on the C ity. • I TABLE 1: Ten-Year Summary Comparison of the Proposed Alternatives for the Ellis-Beach Area (Area 2.1). Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3 Cash Flow Basis Office/Professional Medium Density High Density Revenue (1) 128.0 160.9 263.7 Cost (1) 158.2 147.1 279.6 Revenue-Cost (1) -30.2 13.8 -15.9 Revenue/Cost .81 1.09 .94 (1) in $1,000 AUWMMLA i TABLE 2: Ten-Year Summary Comparison of the Proposed Alternatives for the Newman-Beach Area (Area 2.2). Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Cash Flow Basis Medium Density High Density Revenue (1.) 235.5 380.3 Cost (1) 201.1 368.9 Revenue-Cost(1) 34.4 11.4 Revenue/Cost 1.17 1.03 (1) in $1,000 AMAMWL TABLE 3: Ten-Year Summary Comparison of the Proposed Alternatives for the Adams-Beach Area (Area 2.3) Alt. 5A Alt. 5B Alt. 5C Low/Medium - Medium/Medium - Medium/High Cash Flow Basis High Density. High Density Density Revenue(l) 4,231.8 4,748.1 5,728.6 Cost (1) 3,784.0 4,544.3 5,688.2 Revenue-Cost (l) 447.8 203.8 40.4 Revenue/Cost 1.12 1.04 1.01 (1� in $1,000 0 a APPENDIX B E.I.R. COMMENTS AND RESPONSES _ Matt of tintut F (. GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH 1400 TENTH STREET T SACRAMENTO 95814 PLA j 1p,', EDMUND G. BROWN JR. DE PT GOVERNOR MAY 2.1 1981 - May 18, 19 81 Huhtin P. 0. BOX 190 James R. Barnes, Associate Planner 8tOnSeach, C;; 92648 City of Huntington Beach P. 0. Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 RE: SCH #81040265 - LAND USE ELEMENT NO. 81-1/VARIETY OF LAND USE REDESIGNATIONS TO RESIDENT Dear Mr. Barnes: State agencies have commented on your draft environmental impact report (see attached) , If you would like to discuss their concerns and recommendations , please contact the staff from the appropriate agencies. When preparing the final EIR, you must include all comments and responses (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15146) . The certified EIR must be considered in the- decision-making process for the project. . In addition, we urge you to respond directly to the agencies ' comments by writing to them, including the State Clearinghouse number on all correspondence.. Section 15002 (f) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that a governmental agency take certain actions if an EIR shows substantial adverse environmental impacts could result from a .project. These actions include changing the project, imposing conditions on the project, adopting plans or ordinances to avoid the problem, selecting an alternative to the project, or disapproving the project. In the event that the project is approved without adequate mitigation of significant effects , the lead agency must make. written findings for each unmitigated significant effect (Section 15088) and it must support its actions with a written statement of overriding considera- tions (Section 15089) . If the project requires discretionary approval from any state agency, the Notice of Determination must be filed with, the Secretary for Resources , as well as with the County Clerk. Please contact Sonia Binnendyk at (916) 445-0613 if you have any questions . Sincerely , tephen V. Williamson '" Mate Clearinghouse cc: Ken. Fellows , DWR A,111r, BRAIUMF:1 DI ISIC- CHEIF - DOTP May E, 19v; DepartAnent A-95 Coordinator 112E N Street A-95 REVI- Sacramento. California 95814 Attention: Mr. Darrell Husum ALLAN f'. IiErDRT - District 07 Project Review Comments SCI. NUMBEr. Land Use Element Blo40265 Amendment 81-1 Caltrans will be a Responsible Agency on the specific document for the proposal at Beach Blvd. and Adams Avenue since it appears an Encroachment Permit will be required from us. Since a State agency is a Responsible Agency, you are required to comply wit-.. the circulation, and notice requirements identified in Section 1506C( ) 15083(f) (4), 15085(h) (3), 151E0(c), 15161.5(b) (2), End 151615�c� of the State :EIR Guidelines. Additionally, in November 1980 local agencies were supplied pro- . cedures to be follot•:ed when Caltrans is a Responsible Agency. We are attaching another copy of these procedures for your convenience. It will also be necessary for your agency to obtain and present proof of all necessary permits required by other responsible agencies prior to iseuance of an Encroachment Permit by Caltrans. Thg Traffic section of the proposed document should. discuss this project 's impact on local circulation. Of main concern to our agency is State Route 39, Beach Boulevard. The . effect.s on thiE route should be analyzed. Quantify the .extsting traffic charac- tertstics ir. the area and the estimated impact of the proposed project. The traffic from this project and others planned in the area could have, an impact on transportation facilities. These cumulative impbets should be examined. One such proposal to take into con- sideratton is the Newland Center development. AN11. BARLEY DIVISION CHIEF - DOTP Page 2 May 60 1981 Provisions for alternatives to eingle-occupant automobiles should be encouraged. Possible strategies for encouragirkg the use of buses, carpools, vanpools, bicycles, or other transit serv:ces should be incorporated into your study any/or identified as mitigation r:.easures. If traffic impacts are significant` mitigation measures of the type identified here should be a condition for approval of this development. Contact person in our agency for this project is Ms. Sue McCullough. She mGy be reached at (213) 620-3758. ar4PWbY H. ALLAN H. HENDRIX, Chief Environmental Planning Branch Transportation District 07 Clearinghouse Coordinator For information, contact Jim Danley (ATSS) 640-5567 or (213) 620-5567 Y Attachment SMcC:bc cc : John Van Berkel H.Q. DOTP RKostnski JDanley SMcCullough STATE OF CALIFORNIA—BUSINESS AND TRANSPORTATION AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN JR.,Governor DEPARTMENT OF. TRANSPORTATION , DISTRICT 7, P.O. BOX 230A. LOS ANGELES 90051 _e (213) 620-5335 November 20, 1980 To: ALL COUNTY ROAD COMMISSIONERS, CITY ENGINEERS AND PLANNING DIRECTORS Subject: City or County Approved Projects where Caltrans is a Responsible Agency. Caltrans wants to help you to minimize time delays and unnecessary additional costs on those projects where Caltrans may be a Responsible agency under CEQA. We ask you, as a Lead Agency, to screen any project near a state highway during your initial reviews, to determine if any encroachment permits for facilities within the highway right of way., or approvals for mitigative or cooperative work, will be requ-ired from CALTRANS . Whenever such permits or approvals may be needed, the following action is requested. 1 . The environmental document should list Caltrans as a Responsible Agency. 2 . Coordination with Caltrans should be cited in the document . 3 . Work to be performed within Caltrans right of way should be described. This would include any impacts and proposed mitigation . 4 . ND's and EIR's where Caltrans is a Responsible Agency should be circulated through the State Clearinghouse . 5 . A "Notice of Determination"--must be filed with the Secretary for Resources, for projects. where Caltrans is a Responsible Agency. When asked to grant approval and/or a permit, Caltrans must have environmental documentation conforming to CE", regulations on which to base a decision . If the above listed basic action All County Road Commissioners, City Engineers and Planning Directors November 20, 1980 Page. 2 has not taken place, . delays will occur until the action is completed . The contact person regarding these matters is Allan H. Hendrix, Chief, Environmental Planning Branch (213) 620-5335 • For your federal-aid projects the above procedures may still apply. However, they will be addressed when you process the project in the normal manner through the Local Assistance Branch. Contact on federal-aid project matters is Jack Hallin, (213�erson 620-3340. Very 'ruly yours, ALLAN H. HENDRIX, Chief Environmental Planning Branch r LAND USE AMDNEDMENT 81-1 RESPONSES State of California Governor's Office of Planning and Research. A. No Repsonse Necessary RESPONSES State of California Department of Transportation I. Adams-Beach Area 2.3 A. All circulation and notice requirements required under the state E.I.R guidelines have been met. . B. All necessary permits required by other agencies will be presented to Cal Trans prior to a request for an encroachment permit. C. Traffic impact has been analyzed in the documentation. Additional traffic concerns will be addressed during the development of a specific plan. D. A discussion of buses as an alternative to automobile transportation was added to the document following a comment from the. Orange County Transportation District. Additional alternative transportation means may be considered at the time of the specific plan. .<r" 11I 41 O/ United States Department of the Interior PLA����!,! DEPT. �- FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE MAY 1 1981 ECOLOGICAL SERVICES 24000 Avila Road P. 0. Box 190 Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 Hurtington Beach, CA 92648 April 30, 1981 Mr. James R. Barnes, Associate Planner City of Huntington Beach Department of Development Services P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Re: DEIR 81-2, Land Use Element Amendment 81-1 This responds to your request in regard to the referenced project. e We are unable at this time to respond to this request due to funding and. manpower constraints. This does not preclude input at a later date should significant impacts to public fish and wildlife resources be identified, and funding and manpower resources be increased. Sincerely yours, Ralph C. Pisapia Field Supervisor 3 0 °Chevron . �''Fit ■i..� 117Yyp Chevron U.SA. Inc. P. 0. Box 606, La Habra, CA 90631 Phone (213) 694-7604 P�AI�+ a DEPT. April 23, 1981 APR 2 ? U 1„81 P. 0. pox 190 Hun Ineton beach, f LUE Amendment 81-1 Beach/Adams Area of Concern City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Attention: Mr. Mike Adams Department of Development Services Dear Mike: This will confirm the substance of yesterday's meeting, concerning the referenced matter, attended by yourself, Peter von Elton (Mola) and Bill Glazier and myself (Chevron) . 1 . You and Mr. von Elton stressed again that the proposed LUE Amendment affected only the penultimate land use designation and in no way affected the current "0" and "O1 " Resource Production zoning desig- nations. We were of course happy to finally resolve that matter since, as appears just below, our current oil operations upon the subject parcel are intense and, therefore, heavily reliant upon these compatible zoning suffixes. 2. Our current and firmly established future operations are shown on . the attached plat. The plat shows Chevron's 12 active producers and 9 idle wells, the latter of which may well be returned to pro- duction rather than abandoned. Also shown on the plat are 7 proposed locations for which we have just filed applications to drill new wells this summer. Lastly, the plat shows the 4 existing Lower Bolsa Zone Unit wells, one of which, the Thomson #23, is currently idle. 3. In derogation of what I represented yesterday, the current total pro- duction upon the subject property, including both Chevron and LBZU production, is 133 b.o.p.d. , 3204 b.w.p.d and 200 mcf/d. These figures equate to 48,545 b.o. and 73,000 mcf annual totals. Of course, our short-term plans are for significantly increasing these totals. 4. Even by conservative estimates , it should be safe to state that Chevron U.S.A. Inc. will in all likelihood be maintaining consider- able oil operations upon the subject property well into the next century. o 91??N1TINGT"; ' Q�.AGI i United States Department of the Interior \ni. 6) DEPT. FISH AND WILDLIFE: SERVICE � � .. .,� MAY 1 9$ ECOLOGICAL. SERVICES 24000 Avila Road P. 0. Box 190 Laguna Niguel, CA 92677 Hurtington Beach, CA 92648 April 30, 1981 Mr. James R. Barnes, Associate Planner City of Huntington Beach Department of Development Services P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Re: DEIR 81-2, Land Use Element Amendment 81-1 This responds to your request in regard to the referenced project. We are unable at this tLme to respond to this request due to funding and manpower constraints. This does not preclude input at a later date should significant impacts to public fish and wildlife resources be identified, and funding and manpower resources be increased. Sincerely yours, �/ q a44,--C �� Ralph C. Pisapia Field Supervisor i City of Huntingtoh. Beach April 23, 1981 Attention: Mr. Mike Adams Page 2 5. Mola and Chevron will soon open formal negotiation aimed at accom- modating the simultaneous residential and resource production land uses envisioned by the LUE Amendment. No such agreement has yet . ,been reached. 6. It is understood that Environmental Impact Report 81-2, prepared by City for LUE Amendment 81-1., will be amended in conformity with the above corrections and clarifications of fact. 7. Finally, it is understood that Chevron, as a fee owner within 300 feet of the Beach/Adams property, will receive appropriate public notice of all meetings, hearings, etc. concerning this matter. Such notices--should be directed to: Chevron U.S.A. Inc. P. 0. Box 605 La Habra; CA 90631 Attention : Mr. W. D. Edman Division Manager Southern California Division Production Department On behalf of Chevron and the Lower Bo.lsa Zone Unit participants, I thank you for the opportunity given us to discuss and resolve our concerns with this important matter. Respectfully submitted, V. L. Byers, iI Attorney Southern District Land Department VLB:ab Attachment cc: Mola Development Corporation Huntington Beach, CA cc: Mr.. W. D. Edman La Habra, CA PLANNING ZONING • DM 13 SECTIONAL DISTRIC-T MAP 12 -6 - 11 HOT L N1.11 --11 N—A Ni 11.1 11,11 N�j nil, •.. ........... ("41TY OF IIILEGEND 1994 1 9?3 ;a 2.13'C-3 9.19 2 5!, F 3 G,-3 79 ?.,05 tpll HUNTINGTON BEACH I I 6r,-4, C4 [L2] C ORANGEj COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 6.4-6.1 41,r, "5 L4; II 3:66 77 AMENDED BY ZONE CASE: 16 k�-ill 67 '290 S.161.2132IS.237.261,300 3.6.394.461.482.514,531.54n.66-62 66-66 6_19_6] 1 3 0 SUFF;X LEUEND 22, 9-IR-61399 I. 7 7 :6!12_20 71 702 ADAMS AVE —1 L R1 R11 -1-0.1 C2 R1 R1 Q R I R1 RI R1 R1 R1 R1 R1 —0 R AxToN c S�.. R1 4 r go PA-01 Ri R1 R1 R1 RI-01 R I R1 R1 E ­11I.T5 C� Is ' RI RA-01 R I R1 R1 R1 GAI IT ,ERI RI-01 R1 R1 M R1 R1 y -31"s R1 R1 R1 RA-0 R R) L 4 R1 C F R R1 , I R1 R1 12 RI-0 R1 CF-E R1 R1 R1 r--Zzrl— R1 R1 R1 C2 I I I- z D" �'T , L I Z11 QR 1] R1 R1 R' R1 w 5-4 .6 R1 R1 T. pR R1 R1 32 F- I., R, R1 R11 J, R1 R1 R1 W R1 R1 ALLOY OR .1 R I R I To R I - , .9. R1 c...l".o )RI R I R1 RI R I RI INDI ANAPOLIS R 1� o R1 R1 R1 C1 T*DOO R1 R1 R1 REILLY DR c R1 ]ERN CR CF-E R R DR R I R1 E RN "R R1 WL CA RI R1 R1 R1 C R1 HER R R1 oc R1 HE r. R1 IRA QN5LT CR' L-A -uc KINGFISHER I, z R I R1 C R1 R1 R1 R11 R st—o CR ALVARAW R1 z rR cl r!R If R1 I C4 p c' -7 �V RIB R1 LRI u R1 R1 r R2-PD f 1V 1.1. C k.- w I R1 RI M ! i w u NOWIIIRD R1 R I y�Ca :L 0' R! C4 iI ATLANTA AVE � l YX , j 27 r I 4 ❑10 A" -- - - Ilk 31 17 ©2 20 O I ! 29 I I �28 . ; I { n n �y �) 9 ATHOMSON O L, rl C DAMERON j I i j23 e16A 32 1 CHEVRON U.S .A. INC. nI _ O Active Producers (12) Idle Producers (9) LOWER I OLSA ZONE UNIT 1 !01 Active Producers 3 Idly Producers (1 ) CURREN TOTAL PRODUCTION CUSA = 77± .bopd + gas LDZU = 38± bopd ii sv s� SCALE: 1"-200, is FUTURE CUSA PRODUCERS (A - G) RESPONSE Chevron USA, Inc. 1. Adams - Beach Area (2.3) A. No response necessary. B. The document was corrected to reflect these figures. C. The document was corrected to reflect these figures. D. The document was corrected to reflect these figures. E. No response necessary. F. No response necessary. G. No response necessary. I-IIJ,VTINGTC;' BEACH PLAN!i::; :'a DEPT. APR 15 1981 P. 0. Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 ORANGE COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT April 14, 1981 I Mr. James Barnes City of Huntington Beach Department of Development Services P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Dear Mr. Barnes: SUBJECT: LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT 81-1 DEIR 81-2 I Thank you for forwarding us a copy of Environmental Impact Report 81-2 relating to Land Use Element Amendment 81-1 for review and comment. The location of land use amendment proposal 2.1 (Ellis-Beach Area) is currently served by Line 37 which runs between Huntington Beach and La Habra. If the General Plan amendment is approved for High density residential uses, the District would request that adequate on-street space be provided for a bus stop or a bus turnout. i i Land use amendment proposal 2.2 (Newman-Beach Area) is not located on any of our existing routes, and we have no comments. i Land use amendment proposal 2.3 (Adams-Beach Area) could potentially j impact our service since we have existing routes on both Beach Boulevard and Adams Avenue. As indicated 1n the DETR, you are proposing .four different alternative land use schemes. Since it is the District's policy to encourage high density land uses along established transit routes, the District supports Alternatives 1 or 3, since both propose higher density uses of the area. Addition- ally, we recommend that transit facilities (bus turnouts, bus shelters) be provided at key locations on both Beach Boulevard and I Adams Avenue to make transit more convenient and accessible. The last amendment proposal, 3.1 (Townlot specific plan "A") merely represents an administrative, rather than a substantive General Plan change, and staff has no comment with relation to this proposed amendment. 11222 ACACIA PARKWAY • P.O. BOX 3005 • GARDEN GROVE, CALIFORNIA 92642 • PHONE(714) 971-6200 Mr. James Barnes I April 14, 1981 Page rTwo Once again, thank you for sending us a copy of DEIR 81-2 for review. Hopefully our comments will assist you in determining transit needs for the subject areas. We would appreciate your sending us a copy of the final EIR once our comments are addressed . Please feel free to contact me or Mike Haack at (714) 971-6405 if there are any questions. 1 Sincerely, Robert C. Hartwig, Environmental Coordinator I RCH:MHVL I I I j v d- I I I i i I i 0 RESPONSE . Orange County Transit District 1. Ellis - Beach Area (2.1) A. The comment was incorporated into the text of the document. 2. Newman - Beach Area (2.2) A. No comment, no response. 3. Adams - Beach Area (2.3) A. The comment was incorporated into the text of the document. 4. Townlot Specific Plan Area A A. No comment, no response. ' CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNIINGION HFACN To Huntington Beach Planning Staff and From Community Servic Com ission Commission by Norm Worthy Subiect Mola Pond--S-E of Beach Blvd. & Adams Date March 25, 1981 Avenue On March 11 , 1981 , the Community Services Commission recommended that the pond area of the 60+ acre Mola property located S-E of Beach Blvd. and Adams Avenue not be required as a City park or open space area for future use of local citizens since the 30 acre Bartlett Park, which contains a ten acre natural marsh, and the 2.5 acre Drew neighborhood park are in the immediate vicinity. A copy of the Commission's Park Requisition and Development Committee's minutes and the Commission Action Agenda of March 11 are attached. Also copies of letters received and replies sent to Mr. & Mrs. G. B. Amendola, Chris Schumaker and Jean Shiffer are attached since they originally requested the Commission to consider preserving the pond. NW:mcb Attachments MINUTES PARK ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Wednesday, January 28, 1981; 4:30 p.m. Tanaka Nursery Site (Beach and Memphis)/Civic Center Fifth Floor Conference Room Huntington Beach, California COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Tom Cooper, Chairman; Glen Dysinger; Lee Mossteller; . Martha Valentine; Norma Vander Molen STAFF PRESENT: Alan Ribera; Norm Worthy MOLA MARSH The meetingwas opened by Chairman Tom Cooper on the :.ite of .-the former Tanaka Nursery, Reach and Memphis, with Commissioners and staff gathering to look at the potential of recommending a portion of the Mola.60-acre parcel be retained as a natural marsh. This item was referred to the Committee at the December meeting when citizens spoke in favor of the City saving the marsh. The Committee continued their deliberations in the fifth floor conference room of the Civic Center and read excerpts from the Draft 80-2 Land Use Amendment pertaining to this area which was prepared by the Development Services Planning Division staff. Mr. Worthy indicated he had talked with Mr. Palin, Director of Development Services, who stated Mr. Mola had not filed a plan for development of his property as yet, but had requested the City Council consider redesignating his property commercial, high density residential and medium density residential. Upon analysis, the staff made the following recommendations: 1) The northern 25 acres be redesignated from low to medium density residential; 2) The southern 13 acres east of the channel retain the existing low density residential;. 3) A commercial designation be given the southeast corner of Adams and Beach; and 4) A high density residential land use designation be given the remaining .18 acres fronting the east side of Beach Boulevard. In addressing park needs, the Planning Division staff identified 30.5 acre Bartlett Park adjacent and north of Adams Avenue which contains 10 acres of natural marshland and 2.5 acre Drew Park, which is currently under development and located within 1/4 mile east of the Mola property. Mr. Worthy indicated to the Committee that if it was their desire to see the marsh retained as a City park or open space area, it would have to be approved by the City Council and an amendment made to the General Plan Open Space Element. . The Committee debated the pros and cons of the issue and then the following motion was made: 1 MOTION: Mr. Mossteller moved, seconded by Mr.Dysinger, the Park Acquisition and Development Committee recommend to the Community Services Commission that the subject marsh area within the Mola property, which is proposed for development, not be required as a City park or open space area for future use of local citizens since the 30-acre Bartlett Park, which contains a 10 acre natural marsh, and 2.5 aFre Drew Neighborhood Park are in the immediate vicinity. MOTION CARRIED. PARK ACQUISITION-AND DEVELOPMENT FEES r. WortRy distributed an updated rat park fee schedule with five alternatives to bring .� the park cash fees in line with the value of park property required. as dedication. He explained the 1980 appraisal increased our average neighborhood park land value over 500 V r I �✓v 4} 1 1190 Mr. Wm. C)SNedS ) CkairiKaA) ava1. Members � il }Cow►+.—w�uw;t' Sev��c..eo Cew+M►i�sion C itr Ho-11 TT KK 1 (YL 1 oh 1Jr U Ca - y � P.o►,r M r. ms hc5s Z G►4 Kv s51*oM Me.w•,bt rs ; ftf;red HKwrnnt" Im" 'I etches wbo ) for nearI fok4r e o n cL ox rt eac i -4 Vd - - e�ws� h� i���1 �h a. rKob I I� tee. ,,gyp � K � . �nd o►N�o olis.�e. u'IQ.Y = I�ve Wi IK ar.c�. �+avQ. �Xfire, ZtIh- � 1 "wsetadi in bird- Moot ah;wlal - i . -for Puxrs , ,�kt wt, 'Ve -�ou,r,dfi . VVI Pew iht`ereaifi �ctHwt rAobile rKs. I �ttr+riL wt, haue. feat- Yaw, IL4tX in8exJ ; to live. CIost, o -'tL ohd areaw can &OA y y 31vok. near Admv%s . �s has bee" a �►ea,lt�y ax �1"1tOt I wG ic1, un pe.tted rare birds COML fio h w.1'Kra� Y� 5� RntioL �1 � as we11 ao cov.,mci., birds . I'm e.hcloslK a list 4 birds Wt. kave. d rQ.cor d ir ih our elate bo i n hofie�ool{ since. (Iftr �'1 �977 semen ah de. 9 /�KdK w Societ 'Yv.w��rs aid r r CAS all oHr 31 hillhgs row► 0. Ca.r �ard on .aak �Ivo� . We 1►hK Ih�s prove 1 wt phis �Jnai'WO tr;n) "iroj-ICows ide 14 fisho►,,1c1 b� a.K ;dW bcrd- wa1:"4 'sifie tb mai n t'a;n q µ0.t�C p10.Kts � W .} 1 �;'� V� TKt, kAt. 4Wltlt 1 ION BtA(,h r*olclaHly � rR! 44 . � y 0"1 ohce in to loot r ears --. la1"e A .1- at jltr a to d�ok5►�t. x '1 I�Kc -to ro ost 1�' 1C cow►wt1SS iovr Uk Mr. tlola ) �9. � p -bta0h 3I Vd. a"d, sout o 14ota. -s tO donate a pohd are !a as earKI awes to okr city rxAtr- lta l- SorNd. 1 s it acceaoi and less ble. aerea e, ,�a1` wowlel �.�►abl� � dQ4 able 9 �Hhti n t'on ��rlt toI�ee� a 3�rt wl,�cti � t-1-J a nwtkral h"; 0t f r Pub Ot 0 la'�t of khim*43 birds ) "k 4rit . mahu� YIotgre - J T� 10di K9 5 a,&ol, he i q�hors Join ►Me in Nrocin YOK fio UK51aw �'"''fttr a ►is Vex Serio�l J�t i3 0. a1'cJra. rK T it.1r) y y P rK oNr C. . S in cere.ly VowrS ) S1 0 Mrs. Jean C. Shiffer 20701 Beach Blvd. • Space 77 �' Huntineton Beach, r.A 92648 .20701 Beach Blvd. Space 77 Huntington B Gh,.CA 926-18 S�xo'�ea B�ro1S Sse�► a1' e.� �anaKa "Pond " Are-a. (SotAT� 0�- Pt A►titS S'r E areJ Gmo e, Lon - b 116 d bo w'IT'C,AP-r Pi cd- 6 NA Crrw,6p- KnoT �oublt ` G'P..ter Corr"OMI'M Wf-sttLrn So►ndr3� der D4 cl�S ; Mal lord W i l S o re's 1�h al aro�c Pir,1"a� 1 Cow►mon Sn► doe, ,�}w►�rico►n W�clo�toh i 'orh� a GIA11 S11ov e.1 o r for St�.r �s am L�1 d 7ea1 C-oz IAh 1Cr►%4� - w�h�Q r , Cinnar►+oh Teal N1o�rn�no� �ov�. Gr"ij - wInyd Tca,l CArwasbac,K NIrtd K, I��is�,ar B1441e Commovi 0I 1�Kdcly Mot,k►hgbirtl Hooded Mel oviser C f.� ls�o��e,rhaad Shrike W Ta11Ita Kith ST"arl�r►o� H4WkS ; A4d bon's Warbl®r -Rea - 1-ki,Is 8 Houst Spar row Wes�'ar� MQac�ow�4rK So tjtA;n (?;; toA NawK) Rtid- wincyca Ia.cK loi r-t� mwtr's t 1 acK b,r colmmon Eo�rar S�.BIa.cK Ph0tb9 HOLASQ �1nc11 Snowy Eytl Sq : gmer.$%lt'trn Avhe r;can &o' ih oh Gryt%t 'BIKE �eron Savo►nrnq h S rr'o0 j Pn^lw��ri,can Coot White - crowned SparroW /l► iricah (Avocetf" SOnq S�JGI'YOW . T3)ac1e\- vwzKo-a S¢w,', - Pmlr\oTe4 Ptovfr cdotQd Si3htiv% records cvL K 'I II dLer 0va1.la61L- All w?,m madL Sol ►1'ary oar rorKt-4 on attic, 3o W I I e-r- so�►t1� ol+ A do mw S'trear. C-mo..ter 19.11ow 1p-95 C�irrsJean Sh'Gh� O`oher �sstr y�Ilowla�S Ff pale 3 I 1 _ I HUNTING ON SEA CITY OF. CH i ? 2000 MAIN STREE-f CALIFORNIA 02648 P. 0. Box 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT (714) 536-5486 Vincent G.Moorhouse, Director March 25, 1981 i Mrs. Jean C. Shiffer 20701 Beach Boulevard, Space 77 Huntington Beach, CA 926.48 Dear Mrs. Shiffer: We refer to your letter of December 4, 1980 recommending the preservation of the pond on the east side of Beach Boulevard, south of Adams, as a pond. This matter was referred to the Park Acquisition and Development Committee. After extensive deliberations, including a visit to the site, a recommenda- tion was made. At their March 11 , 1981 meeting the Community Services Commission approved the following recommended action : "That the subject marsh area within the Mola property, which is proposed for development, not be required as a City park or open space area for future use of local citizens since the 30-acre Bartlett Park, which contains a 10-acre natural marsh, and 2.5 acre Drew neighborhood Park are. in the immediate vicinity." While this action is not in keeping with your request, the Commission is very appreciative of the time and effort which you devoted to this project, and especially the list of species of birds seen at the "Tanaka Pond. " We . hope these birds will find refuge in nearby areas when the pond ceases to be available. If you have any other areas of concern, please do not hesitate to contact us . Sincerely, Vivian Borns , Secretary Community Services Commission V B._ me cc: Charles Thompson, City Administrator Vincent G. Moorhouse, Director, Community Services Department Recreation and Park Development — Beach Operations — Human Services r; ' f /l , l( Gi 0.e C& �(; is r : !_ �1.C•L W�G..i�� .( �,, . /.('/t_'-rL '�J"C.i.' -�.l.Z :'7.L:-.7r�' l••L�./-GIt -«.. a A .� c)1.'- 1.• �C. � .�. /J �- •, /! ��. � 1. � 1 �`t� �.t.�.Ci:c / (` / . / l� CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 P. 0. Box 190 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT (714) 536-5486 Vincent G. Moorhouse, Director March 25, 1981 a •- Mr. & Mrs. G. B. Amendola 20251 Cape Cottage Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Amendola: We refer .to your letter of December 9, 1980 recommending the preservation of the pond on the east side of Beach Boulevard, south of Adams , as a pond. This matter was referred to the Park Acquisition and Development Committee. After extensive deliberations, including a visit to the site, a recommenda- tion was made. At their March 11 , 1981 meeting the Community Services Commission approved the following recommended action: "That the subject marsh area within the Mola property, which is proposed for development, not be required as a City park or open space area for future use of local citizens since the 30-acre Bartlett Park, which contains a 10-acre natural marsh, and a 2.5 acre Drew neighborhood Park are in the immediate vicinity.". While this action is not in keeping with your request , the Commission is very appreciative of the time and effort which you devoted to this project. We hope you will feel free to give your input on any other areas of concern in the future. d Sincerely, Vivian Borns, Secretary Community Services Commission VB1 nc cc: Charles Thompson, City Administrator Vincent G. Moorhouse, Director, Community Services Department Recreation and Park Development — Beach Operations — Human Services AuENDA - March 11, 1981 Page 5 . STAFF b. Park Acquisition and Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Torn Cooper ACTION Minutes of January 28, 1981 and March. 3, 1981 meetings. REQUIRED. 1. MOLA MARSH RA: Recommend to the Community Services Commission that the subject marsh area within the Mola property, which is proposed for development, not be requi.r.ed as a City park or open space area for future use of local citizens since the 30-acre Bartlett Park, which contains a 10-acre natural marsh, and 2.5-acre Drew Neighborhood Park are In the immediate vicinity. :MOVED RA, MOTION. CARRIED. STAFF 2. PARK ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT FEES ACTION REQUIRED. RA: Recommend to the Community Services Commission that the 50 Percent Median Fee schedule be recommended for adoption by the City Council along with ordinance changes that would require developers of property parcels 40 acres or larger to provide private neighborhood park open space of 2.5 acres per 1,000 new residents and elimination of the 50 percent credit for golf courses and waterways. MOVED RA, MOTION CARRIED. Commission requested staff include in the transmittal to the City Council that. Commission is willing to hold a public hearing on this .item if the Council wishes further information, etc. STAFF 3. NEWLAND HOUSE AND GROUNDS (Cost Estimate Included) ACTION REQUIRED. RA: Recommend approval of the conceptual plan for Newland House landscaping and ancillary rear yard structures as prepared by Alan Rihera and .the estimated $297,000 development cosi; i)e included in the 1981-82 Park Acquisition and Development Fund budget, with the understanding that the existing security fence be retained until the shopping center and Newland House grounds development is completed.. Correct spelling of "Kerins" in Committee minutes for March 3. MOVED RA, MOTION CARRIED (Rivera - Nay) . Commission requested staff include in the transmittal their sensitivity to the Historical Society's desires and recommendations. STAFF 4. REVIEW CAPITAL BUDGET 1981-82 - Referred staff for ACTION revisions to the draft budget by prioritizing expenditures REQUIRED. and meet again with the Committee the week of March 15 to finalize the Capital Budget request. NO ACTION, Committee meeting set for Tuesday, March 17, 6:30 a.m. , at Denny's Restaurant, to discuss the CAPITAL BUDGET and CITY GYM REHABILITATION REPORT. STATE OF CALIFORNIA—RESOURCES AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN JR.,Ccvernor ' DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME 350 Golden Shore Long Beach, CA 90802 (273) 590-5113 . November 17, 1980 Tn JNII!t.':G DEPT, James R. Barnes, Associate Planner. N O V 1 7 1H. (1 ', City of Huntington Beach P. 0. Box 1 JO Department of Development Services Planning Division Huntington Beach, CA 92648 P.O. Box.190 . Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Dear Mr. Barnes: On September 2 of this year we received the Land Use Element Amendment 80-2, Environmental Impact Report 80-3 (SCH 80082707) distributed by the City of Huntington Beach. We submitted no comments on the document at that time. However, upon closer examination we find that the document was severely lacking in information concerning the 59.55—acre parcel located south of Adams Avenue and east of Beach Boulevard. There is no mention in the document as to the wetland habitat contained on site. The document does mention severe pondingp but we feel that the site has wetland habitat value and in turn significant wild— life value. Wetlands such as the one contained on the subject parcel are at a premium and warrant protection - not destruction. We feel that granting the proposed Land Use Element change will lead to the destruction. of a significant wildlife resource of the City of Huntington Beach. Field personnel have observed numerous bird species utilizing the acre in question and feel that it is of local ecological importance. Additionally, we feel that the EIR was inadequate and did not sufficiently repre— sent the resource value of the parcel. Accordinglyv we oppose the proposed redesignation of the parcel from Resource Production? Commerical, and Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential, High Density Residential and Commercial. Wei in fact, encourage the preservation of the wetland habitat on the site. We believe that this position is consistent with the Resource Agency's Wetlands Policy, a copy of which is attached for your information. Thank you for this opportunity to present our comments. If you have any questions, please contact Jack L. Spruill of our Environmental Services staff at 213-590-5137• Sincerely, 47 Fred A. Worthley Jr. Regional Manager Region 5 Attachment Zi , U [ i;etlancis Policy J'or Pr.nposc,',i Coaslr_uc`i.on Project, rOM Orrice of the Secfel.ar'y' - T, ISMA�111F' PA}:CELS 1:'::Ci:? 'i' i=. i:i; ,C,Gt: - - \� i;�i.(,1..�_C'. .`i'l.i,�': I" i10LICY There ncec]s to be an zimcndmcnt to the R. 'au- Policy (ado?ted Septe-imb`r 22 , 1977) to al]_c::r under ;.r)eei.•:r]. conclitions the developr..;_nt of steal]_ , isolated :•:etlanc-Is :,?hcrc- the! public !�ct:cf is s of a project far outwoic,;l the loss of the Some small , iso- lated wetlan0s have very lirnitcci biological , educa:'-i.onal , recrc.tional , and open spacc values . SllC.i] l/CtliillC':� �ir.C' tt'�)i.C'il'_l j localk- C, i.n I:C'rrJ_- dcntial , co_:u;^rcial , or industri,r]_ areas _:nd are by st.rect or storm Grain runoff . Some crcatc: pu')1.ir health, and- -safer-Y r-O.71hiG;: . Their locatio^ is riot conducive to the O.J. t] Gc:] f-:01•1 01: 1-0 their. n.4n�:ccc] •nt for fish , i•iil12].i.fc , educa.t] CM, UL` I:CCrC��ti Orl . 11: :;L]Ctl Cz'ses fish , %,ildlifc , rcorcattion , v;at cr C_,u�:li_t.}' , and public Ahc::l ::h an''. safety %•:ould be served -.;et.ter by permitting t.hc:r.;c n:arrir.al 1•:cil.-inds t:.) be dcvsJ opcd,. and . by requiring compensation ''hc-1 l wauld ubstant ial]. restore Or G?'1hance a wetland at another. 10Ca ti.UI1 . Therefore, it is the policy of the Resources AC 1cncy that this ;:gcr:ey and its Dcpartments Boards , and Cor-Lmi`sJ Uns j authorize or a ppImavc projects ghat- fill or otherwise halla or destroy wetlands of one hZilf acre or less when all. of the follo-wing findin—js /iiild conditions a2:-c met: Findings : d 1. T I i e t•;etland has inSi.g.nijicant biological , .educational , .and recreational values . 2. The c:etland is surrounde0 by r.csident:i.a]. , co;i nercial , or induct-rial v7hich ctrc' incon.i atiblc with the functioning of the wetland as a significant fish or wildlife habitat. .3. The wetland is not adjacent to another eletland, water- way.- or open space. t 1 1'it►dinc --hall be supported by written ' and/or photographic evidence. r.Awl xi:41.1t.1Vi' .. hiigc 2 I A : Thcrc 3 s, no fCL-isUble mec-ins of re�-,t.or incj or Ir,':nag]_ng tl)c weL1-_ nd to Li significant Level_ of I JJ.cill proc?uctivit.y . 5. Igo Lli:]_Cuc f e,,-,6 ingcred, or rare plant or an11'i.:13. Woul.cl be advoi.. .-el.y affected if the wetland wcrc dcr;;troye.d . Condi.ti.ons : .The loss of the wetland shall be compensated oIl at least an acre for Acre ba,:is . The shall create a new wet: .E111 l or restore a docirddcd wetland ]_n a location Lhat w11.1 be ut111'l(:!d bj' f1S!1 or 1111d1.1iC . '1'hC compensation `;'lal1. CI"cc-lte Fl ?Jet"1L-:ild Of si.gnifici:nt biological value . The Lone-tcr.m .�7ctlnnd values of the compensation lands shill not be less after project cc.il- pletion than th,! co-mbiped wetland values of the p.-ojcct and compensation lands under prctrojc•ct conch bolls . Cornp4nsation measures shall he i.n writing and in th^ : form of- cit'rlcr Conti itio:l; on a permit or an acrrecmont sicincu 'by th(a applicant and the Dcpartinumt of fish and Gagne or the Resources Agency. The respon,ioi l.it:y for the inter.proUation and application o� this policy to any project: is del egated . to the De:Dar. tmcnt- of Fish and Came., and is subject: to appeal to the Soc.re*ary for Resources . • /s/ IIUE)' D. JOHNSIC.N Hucy D. Johnson Sccrctary for Resources S Environmental Board 2 CI fY OF HUNTINC TON BEACH 11Iwnvc,ovnrn01 Post Office: Box 100 Huntington Beach, Gflifoini�i 02648 TO: James R. Barnes, Associate Planner FROM: Irwin _1laydock, Chairman DATE: October 14, 1980 SUBJECT: ADAMS-BEACH BOULEVARD - GPA 2 . 2 MOLA DEVELOPMENT s The Environmental Board has serious concerns about the preservation of the valuable wildlife habitat on this property. Particularly the ponding area along . Beach used by large numbers of migiatory fowl . If these concerns can be .mitigated, the Board favors Alternative #1 as providing the best mix of housing opportunities. The low density will be most compatible with adjacent low density uses . High density uses along Beach could offer a creative way to offer diverse housing types to the public and is will buffered by the flood control channel from the low density uses . Possibily all or a portion of the wildlife habitat along Beach should be preserved. Specific concerns are: 1) This area is the very worst in the City for tule fog at .the inter- section of Beach and Adams. Will this fact be addressed in traffic analysis. 2) . Neither wildlife nor plantlife were addressed in the EIR. Shouldn' t these factors be included since great numbers of migratory and in- digneous birds do use the waters here at various times of the year? 3) It has .been noticed that water here does not vary. with tidal levels . Is water here fresh or salt? Is there any indication that this or part of this area could be classified as a marsh or wetlands? t 4) Should other agencies be contacted regarding possible impacts on sensitive habitat? do i E LAND USE AMENDMENT 80-2 RESPONSES ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD 1. Adams - Beach Area (2.2) A. No response necessary. B. A complete list of vegetation and wildlife in the area of concern has not been compiled. In order to determine the extent of vegetation and wildlife on site, a biologist report should be required prior to development. C. The Department of Public Works has indicated that the pond located on the site is attributed to a combination of runoff collecting in an area of impermeable soils and high groundwater. D. This EIR was circulated for comment to all State agencies through the State Clearinghouse. The State Department of Fish and Game had no comment on the amendment nor was any indication given as to whether the site could be considered a sensitive habitat. 1 • , OTHER COMMENTS AND PUBLIC INPUT 1. Adams - Beach Area (2.2) A. All comments received have been incorporated into the text of the document (Land Use Amendment 81-1). IN THE Superior Court OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA In and for the County of Orange CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH+ CITY CLERK PROOF OF PUBLICATION HEARING. LAND USE ELEMENT 81-1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC BEARING of Land Use Element Amendment N 81-1. t AREA 3.1 OF LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT NO.81-1 Copies of the proposed Land se Element Amendment and-Environmental I TO THE GENERAL PLAN AND EDt NO.81-2 Impact Report are available for review in the City Clerk's Office. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held by the City All interested persona are imfed to attend said hearing and express their Council of the City of Huntington Beach,in the Council Chamber of the Civic Center, opinions for or against said Area 3.lof Land Use Element Amendment No.81-1 and State of California ) Huntington Beach,at the hour of 7:30 P.M.,or as soon thereafter as possible on EIR No.81-2. County of Orange )eB' Monday,the 15th day of June,1981,for the purpose of considering Area 3.1 of Land Further information may be obtained from the Office of the City Clerk,2000 Use Element Amendment No.81-1 to the General Plan,a request to redesir to Main Street,Huntington Reach,C difornia 92648—(714)536.5227: 116.15 acres of property between Twenty-Second Street, Walnut Avenue, Palm DATED JUNE 1,1981. Rita J. Richter Avenue and Sixth Street from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residen-- CITY OF HUNTINGTONBEAE tial(Area 3:1). By:ALICIA M.WENTWORTH�' , A legal description is on rile in the Development Services Office. Pub.June 4,1981 City Clerk That I am and at all times herein mentioned was a citizen of Environmental Impact Report No.81-2 will be heard in conjunction with Area 3.1 Hunt.Beach Ind.Rev.910106 ' the United States,over the age of twenty-one years,and that I aUAM, , am not a party to,nor interested in the above entitled matter; y ?,, U ut—I I_I" t_I" I—'11-_f I___ that I am the principal clerk of the printer of the Rio �c• o ' RI n b� ° R I R I .�j ,a`" \ �'a' R10 .a "f.t^`/. N. `rn•'',.: D aRI RI RI 'IAI ,R2 �4 Huntington Beach Ind. Review /�/ ^ •F..o .� `• III; a newspaper of general circulation,published in the City of e� v / .'' R I I]IIII °/ r ) � RI RI iR1 ,'• RI` R2 .0..,..: . �" •..b. t '--. Huntington Beach �� E i fi Q q CF—E RI RI ° County of Orange and which newspaper is published for the ° -o o- / <� disemination of local news and intelligence of a general charac- ter, and which newspaper at all times herein mentioned had < \ `'' RI RI •` R2. 6LD�d' and still has a bona fide subscription list of paying subscribers, O� ""�c 1_0I f FLAG( and which newspaper has been established, printed and pub- J�`� �r . 1 RI lished at regular intervals in the said County of Orange fora period exceeding one year; that the notice, of which the ��ry R I annexed is a printed copy, has been published in the regular / r Fit and entire issue of said newspaper,and not in any supplement / \ • l'al RI v r .,.R� ( 1 , thereof,on the following dates,to wit: VO> r �J, R I R2 a June 49 1981 /\N' R2 1- \ CJ 1 I certify(or declare) under penalty of perjury that the P Y Pe J rY forego- ing is true and correct. � � �•.'►�� i Garden Grove � _t Datedat........................... ............. /'ONE/ Californi ,t is ....4t.Nay of .J. . ".. 81. .a 00 i ature \. '''�jF� s� " t•: �. Ir-,�`",�" ti L� J J > O aL < CJATL � 0 � vy CJ�/ _ \t• tit - .,• ;� v Area of Concern 3.1 �3 0 0 0 ' O FEB.81' IN THE Superior Court OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA In and for the County of Orange CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, CITY CLERK PROOF OF PUBLICATION Hearing 81-1 EIR 81-2 x NOTICE OF 1 1.Itl G HEARING,, AMENDMENT{Ny81 1xT0 THE GENERAL PLAN State of California SAND EIR1N0 81 2 a ' CE IS HEREBY GIVEN�t1 at a puhlic h-A!_ +will be held by the City �, County of Orange )ss [:�L7ANiD,_dgETEiEM* ot the City ofpHuntington Wach m the Council Chamber of the Civic Center !Hunt--&n�Beach at thebho6_of*1:30 P M Io'ilFiF aoon�thereafter as poaFibl"e on x.i Monday the 15'th day oFJ''dne 1981rfpr the purpose ofrconsldering Land Uee Element .i Rita J. Richter Amendment No:81 1 tttheyGeneral Plan requests to a Area E ' {Dele`ted) t+ > Area 2 2 Redesignate-2 50 acreOiWiited,3northTof Newman Avenue, approx� That I am and at all times herein mentioned was a citizen of mately feet east ofBMW014oulevard from Medium Densiiy Resi the United States,over the age of twenty-one years,and that I dentlal�High Density ReB�denGal= am not a party to,nor interested in the above entitled matter; Area'�2 3;Redesignate.59.55 acres located.south of Adams Avenue and eanof ; Beach Boulevard from Resource Production,Commercial and Losw ' that I am the principal clerk of the printer of the _ " ,Density Residential to Planned Community jg Area 3 t,_Redesigh'ate 116A5 acres of propert between T en Send btreeT Walnut Avenue Palm Avenue and Slath Street from Low Densy 'Residential to Medium Den ty Residential S Huntington Beach Ind. Review A'rlegaldescriptioniegneleintheDevelopmentSemcesOffice y a newspaper of general circulation,published in the City of'-"` Environmental Impact Report No 81 2 will be h#eardxm conjunction with the Land Use Element Amendment No 8l'-1 i Coples 4f the proposed Land Uee Element Amendment3yand Em.ronmenw] Huntington Beach IImpactReportareavailablefor;e&w'intheCti'ClIL'd sOffee _µ� E All terestedpeis s are mw icdrto attendsaidhearmg and expr their o inione forf.or'against said Land:Uce Element AmendmentrNo 81 1 endElR{ ; County of Orange and which newspaper is published for the <u r disemination of local news and intelligence of a general charac- Further information may be obtained from`the fice..-of the City` Clerk 2000 ter, and which newspaper at all times herein mentionedhad Mai"niStreet Huntington Be ch Cahfo�ma92648=(714)553t 5 , rf DATED May 29 t1981t r 'w and still has a bona fide subscription list of paying subscribers, ` 5C-ITY OF,HUNTINGTON BEAC and which newspaper has been established, printed and pub- { By ALIGIA-M WT N., RTH r CltyGlerk lished at regular intervals in the said County of Orange fora +�• F s -^I . Pub:June 41981 period exceeding one year; that the notice,-.of which the Hunt.Beachlnd.Rev.u10107 annexed is a printed copy, has been published.in the regular and entire issue of said newspaper,and not in any supplement thereof,on the following dates,to wit: June 49 1981 I certify(or declare)under penalty of perjury that the forego- ing is true and correct. Garden Grove Datedat................................................ Califor '&isday of .AUne .. ....... Signature 1 Form No.CAF-81380 PIJBL�C HEARING WTI C OF. AREA 3.1 OF LAND USE�ELEMENT AMENDMENT NO.. 81-1 Authorized to Publish Advertisements of all kinds, including public notices by Decree of the Superior Court HUNTINGTON BEACH. TO THE NERAL PLAN AND EIR NO. 814 of Orange.County, California, Number A-6214, dated 29 I r` September, 1961,and A-24831,dated 11 June, 1963. NOTICE IS HEREBY'GIVItN that a public hearing will be held by the City. Council of the.City of.Huntington Beach, in the Council Chamber of the Civic Center, Huntington Beach, at the hour-of 7:30 P.M., or-as soon thereafter as STATE OF CALI FORNIA j possible on Monday the 15th day of June, 1981. for the purpose of considering Area. 3.1 of;-Land m Use ;Eleent 'Amendment No: 81-1. to the County of Orange I General Plan, a request to- redesi:gnatip 116.13 acres of property between overea ythisaffidaviiissetin I Twenty-Second Street, Walnut Averir�l6t Palm Avenue and Sixth Street from 6 point with 10 pica �uiumn Low Density Residential to Medium Density. Residential (Area 3.1). . width. A legal description.is on file in;the Development Services Office. . 'Environmental .Impact Report No. 81-2 will•.-be heard in conjunction with I am a Citizen of the United States and a resident of I Area 3.1 of Land Use.Element-Amendment-No.81-1. the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen ' Copies of.the proposed: Land Use':Element.Amendment and Environmental years, and not a party to or interested in the below Impact Report.are available for rev.i'e in.the City Clerk's Office. - ' All interested persons are invited-to'attend said hearing and express their, entitled matter. I am a principal clerk of the Orange opinionS•for or.against said Area,3.1 Of'l:and Use Element Amendment No. Coast DAILY PILOT, with which is combined the 81-1 and EI R.No. 81-2. NEWS PRESS, a newspaper of general circulation, Further information-'may be obtained from•the Office of the City Clerk, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California. 92648- (714) 536-5527 printed and published in the City of Costa Mesa, DATED June 1,1981 County of Orange, State of California, and that a CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Public Hearing By: Alicia M. Wentworth Notice of City Clerk CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH of whichcopyPC Qi// / c py a ttached hereto is a true and complete -J CI!__ I. Co W ✓/./^=��/: i% /, ++ I j''i.. •Ri� _..I__ il.•��-'ll� II -0 copy, as printed and published in the Costa Mesa, rr /csecTioriry�j° A R R;l R 'iR,I,R;, I. I .� ;j NLOT� V�'%j�� ,.*� !.'•... i I__fl_��;-.l ---..i.l. _ Newport Beach, Huntington Beach, Fountain Valley, sPi ci�ica�n E CF-E Irvine, the South Coast communities and Laguna �/ '�j. Beach issues of said newspaper P " %' <✓ i h° I >al �`� r� ��-- 1 GLUI > I �t9AlS8bsx�xgl�caac�oo�xQ issueissd of >' I'\��' �' ,�� N, '�,r j�� :)�: --�C F-R_ l I LAn(I for on June 4 198 198 %r'TOWNLOT8PECIFI�v�j' J PLAN PJ� A,l :� i•• -),. ,j /ice / / �! �I.. \�i ' I I_... 1 198 \^`\�'CJ �" ��tt J // \ \\ 31 RJ.I1U Cj 4 LY /i(SECTIVI A') 198 . `.\ � !`' W,NL.OTISPEGFIC/PLAN `I^I;,i,i v 1•I_ i. AREA-ONES l_IU i.Q 198 1 declare, under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing is true and correct. I_...__., \✓: I1-I Ilia June 4 '�.: '`� I . Executed on 19 \: J Z �, , , �.' ��, J�'.i' ! it at Costa Mesa " I ` `� �� California. 8 i '� `��,. < 'J�. ,, ice./.: . ✓' .;;' 'I. - IL. r Signature \\ , <r�'ar ( '+..,•;< Area of Concern 3.1 PROOF OF PUBLI o � o 0 FEB. 1 � � } O � LLLJJJ LLL...JJJ Publish_ [4L81 NOTICE OF PUBLIC -HEARING AREA 3.1 OF LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 81-1 TO THE :GENERAL PLAN AND EIR NO. 81'2 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will- be held by the City Council � . of the City of Hunti.ngton .Beach, in the Council Chamber of the Civic Center, Huntington Beach, at the .hour of 7:30 P.M. , or as soon thereafter as possible on Monday the 1.5th day of June .19 81 . for. the purpose of cons-idering Area :3.1 of Land Use .Element Amendment No. 81-1 to the General Plan, a request to redesignate 116.15 acres of property between Twenty-Second Street,. Walnut Avenue, Palm Avenue and Sixth Street from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential. (Area 3.1). A legal descripiion.: is on .file in the Development Services Office. Environmental Impact Report No. 81-2.will be heard •in conjunction with Area 3.1 of Land Use Element Amendment No. 81-1. Copies of the proposed Land Use Element Amendment and Environmental Impact Report are available for review in the City Clerk's Office. All interested-persons are invited to. attend said hearing and express their opinions for or against said .Area •3.1 of Land Use Element Amendment No. 81-1 And EIR"No. Further information may be obtained from the Office of the City Clerk, 2000 Main Street, Huntington 'Beach', 'California. 92648 - (714) 536-5227 DATED, June 11 1991 CITY' OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 'By: Alicia M. Wentworth City Clerk Publish 6/4181 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AREA 3.1 OF LAND- USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 81-1 TO THE GENERAL .PLAN AND EIR NO. 81-2 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that 'a public hearing will be held by the City 'Council of the City, .of Huntington Beach',. in-the Council Chamber of the Civic Center, Huntington Beach, atthe hour of . . 7:30 P.M. , or as soon thereafter as. possible on Monday the 15th day of June 19 81 . for the purpose. of considering Area 3.1 of Land Use Element Amendment No. 81-1 to the General Plan, a request to redesignate 116.15 acres of property between Twenty-Second Street, Walnut Avenue, Palm Avenue and Sixth Street from Low' Density Residential . to Medium Density Residential (Area 3.1). A legal description is on file in the Development Services Office. Environmental Impact Report No.. 81-2 Will be-heard in conjunction With Area 3.1 of Land Use Element Amendment No: 81-1. Copies of.the proposed Land_ Use Element Amendment and Environmental 'Impact Report are available 'for review in the City Clerk's Office. All _ iriterested persons .are -invited to. attend said hearing and express their opinions for or. against `said Area '3:1 of Land Use Element Amendment No-. 81-1 And EIK'No. 81-2. 'Further information may tie obtained from the Office of the City Clerk; 2000 Main Street,`Huntington:Beach, California.. 92648. - (714) 536-5227 DATED ..June IS- 1981 CITY OF HUNTINGTON. BEACH 'By: Alicia M. Wentworth City Clerk Publish 6/4�81 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AREA 3.1 OF LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 81-1 TO THE 'GENERAL .PLAN AND EIR NO. 81-2 ; NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that-a public hearing' wili be held by the City Council of the City of. Huntington Beach,. in the Council Chamber of the Civic Center, Huntington Beach, at the .hour. of 7:30 P.M. , or. as. soon .thereafter as possible on Monday' the 15th day of June 19 .81 for' the purpose. of considering Area ,3.1 of Land Use Element Amendment No. 81-1 to the General Plan, a request to redesignate 116.15 acres of property between Twenty-Second Street, Walnut Avehue, 'Pal'm Avenue and Sixth Street from Low _Density Residential to Medium Density Residential. (Area 3.1). A legal description. is on file in the Development Services Office. Environmental Impact Report No. 81-2 will be heard .in conjunction with Area 3.1 of Land Use Element Amendment No. 81-1 . Copies of the proposed Land Use Element Amendment and Envirohmental Impact Report are available for review in the City Clerk's Office. All interested 'persons .are invited-to attend said hearing .and express their opinions for or against `said -Area '3..1 of Land Use Element Amendment No. 81-1 And EIR No. 81-2. Further information may be obtained from the Office of the Ci.ty Clerk, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach:, California. 92648. - (714) 536 ',5227 DATED. June 1,. 1981- CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH By: Alicia M. . Wentworth City Clerk