Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Land Use Element Amendment 84-2 - LUE 84-2 - Environmental I
")RAP LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT 84-2 Environmental Impact Report 84-3 m huntington beach department of development services The Solid Waste Facility locational criteria would require that the proposed or existing site be within or predominantly surrounded by industrial and/or public/quasi-public utility uses, and that truck routes be located in close proximity. The area of concern is surrounded on three sides by areas general planned Light Industrial and zoned M1 Light Industrial District (Figures 3-1 and 3-2). The existing uses on these properties include an equipment rental to the north, a lumber yard to the south, and vacant industrial property to the west. Across Nichols Street to the east is an area general planned Medium Density Residential and zoned CF-E (Community Facilities-Education) and CF-R (Community Facilities-Recreational). This area is occupied by Oakview School and Park. In addition to the separation from the site created by Nichols Street, buildings within the school grounds are located 280 feet east thereby reducing exposure to noise from truck traffic. The nearest truck route is Warner Avenue located 1,000 feet north of the site. Environmental review has been conducted during several different stages of development of the site. Negative Declaration Nos. 81-4 and 84-9 addressed the construction of the transfer station facility and its subsequent expansion. This report utilized the information contained within these two negative declarations. It also allows an additional comment period for State and local agencies to make their concerns known. No communications, either written or oral, were received on the negative declarations. 3.1.3 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the Warner - Nichols area of concern be redesignated from General Industrial to Solid Waste Facility. 3.2 Warner - Magnolia Area 3.2.1 Background The area of concern is located on the west side of Magnolia Street approximately 450 feet north of Warner Avenue. Owned by S & K Greenhouses Inc., the site contains 10.40 + gross acres (including a portion of an Orange County flood control channel) and currently supports a commercial nursery. The applicant has requested that the area of concern be redesignated from General Commercial to Mixed Development to allow construction of 152 apartments and a mini warehouse storage development. The area of concern was previously analyzed as a part of General Plan Amendment 80-2. The site's land use designation was changed from Low Density Residential to General Commercial to allow construction of a proposed 150,000 square foot office condominium development. The proposed office development was never constructed, and the site was reanalyzed as part of General Plan Amendment 83-2. The City Council denied the request to High Density Residential. 3.2.2 Analysis This section analyzes four possible land use alternatives for the site. Mixed Development, Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential and General Commercial (Office) - with regard to impacts on surrounding land uses, economic feasibility, housing concerns, public works and service capacities, available utilities, traffic and circulation impacts, and environmental concerns. 0115D t6� WARNER AVE A FIR OR. 1 l r CAM AVE- L ' CF-E -- _ p CF-R WINTERSBURG - _ HIGH ECAR AVE SCHOOL -- - -- CF-E - 1 I_ NERAL I J[ s s s _ I I USTRIAL I �'DA E D FOR RE F Q z- T - _ .,�. w., � D I L 5LA �II 1- I i I SPEER R E C R E ' - A T l O N -R _ I' NEWMAN RONALD - Z W Z p J o f o oL L7 ...1 _ c TALBERT AVE Existing General Plan Area of Concern 3 . 1 9 (�o Q @402 huntington beach planning division figure 3-1 WARNER AVE J1, I L + — _ -- • + --- MI I R2 3 R5 • °o f,R C4-MS' I° N CAIN AVE r R Z I !0 _.., I I ]o' H CF-ECQ Cv �r° I MI EMI I R2 R2 •I I > R 2 - °J CF-R AV _- CED-R AVE R2 '°° : R2' . R2 �Rz II MI °+ i RI -'33I. RI . CF—E 2 I ---- ]]o ro 4 �,,. DR =s M 1-M H P 1FN I M I I .:;:.._ __ .: IAMDRERLL DR °RA u a RI ---Loo.�°�— - R3 R3 BARTgR1 � I � J� I C 4' RI RIRI RI 10M°R 3 I ' CF-C II R3 ' FDRD DR • Ji Z I I RI _.6,•_ EF ° R3 V M M M M ro Fe) i RI• CD a.. 'RI-CD I -A R31 UF RI-C RI-CD ;RI-CD =RI-CD„" R3 R33 0 R3 R3 •pJI r sLA w / - 4-61 F a cD = R M I-CD o b MI MH cl cif M •°aOf J SGEERA-C _ f' C. Ca R2�Em a — srI .° CF—R �J MI M I a R3 Rr, 1 3" R3 R2 C4. r+E+Mr. •vf — 7".TV MI-CD MI R2 hr A t/1 • iia oo DYf'n L ,w... -7i6T wl C 3 X o r I O O _ RONALD OR 9 � �' : o _ MI I R2 I I W ...,°y; dF M I M1-CD a R3 . R3" , w �E1r ° R2 R2 C41 DO MI-CD I M I M I R3' R Rs R5 $ _ TALBERT AVE Existing Zoning Area of Concern 3 . 1 M ( 0 0<602 huntington beach planning division figure 3-2 i 1. Land Use The City's General Plan (Figure 3-3) designates property north and west of the study area as Low Density Residential and property to the south as General Commercial. Property east of the study area is located within the City of Fountain Valley. Surrounding land uses include single-family homes to the west, Pleasant View Elementary School and the San Diego Freeway to the north, commercial recreation to the east, and a mixture of retail commercial uses and offices immediately to the south across the Orange County Flood Control Channel. The area of concern is currently zoned (Q) R5, Qualified Office Professional (Figure 3-4). Property to the west is zoned R1 and property north of the site is zoned CF-E, Community Facility-Educational. Property south of the study area has C2, Community Business District, zoning. The area of concern occupies a strategic location at the intersection of a major arterial (Warner Avenue) and a primary arterial (Magnolia Street) and has a high degree of visibility from the southbound lanes of the San Diego Freeway. .The desirability of the site for residential development is seriously limited by complicated access. The freeway off ramp on Magnolia Street creates a steady flow of traffic past the site during the afternoon rush hour, making left turns out of the area impossible. Due to close proximity of the intersection, the access ways to the development could never be signalized, neither Warner or Magnolia. It is possible that a median could be constructed on Magnolia Street with a left turn pocket for traffic into the area. This would enable traffic heading north to enter the site without negotiating a U-turn. Conner Drive would probably remain closed to through traffic unless the site was redesignated Low Density Residential. Given the site's restricted access, a residential development would be impacted by the two story commercial development to the south and affected by traffic noise from the San Diego freeway. Low Density Residential development in the area of concern could accommodate approximately 64 condominiums. Implementing zoning would likely be RI-PD (Low Density-Planned Development). Of all the land use designations considered, Low Density Residential would be most compatible with the single-family homes to the west, and would have the least effect on the circulation in the vicinity of the project. If the area were redesignated for Medium Density Residential, a maximum of 150 units could be built with R2 zoning. Access would be more of a problem than it would be with Low Density Residential as traffic volumes would be greater. A denser development would also have a greater impact on adjacent uses unless properly buffered and separated. Traffic noise would also be a significant issue for this alternative. The General Commercial designation allows either retail commercial or office uses; impacts on the surrounding areas would vary depending on the zoning applied. The flood control channel reduces street frontage and the existing two story commercial development at the corner and along Warner Avenue eliminates important visibility. The greatest impact from an office development would be on circulation, but otherwise a low intensity office use would be compatible with adjacent residential uses. 0I15D -- -FIWI.Zl � CR HASTINGS Cp — — Z—L J Ax zir JO _ - C R Q WAGERS CR _ SAVOY C ' (NEN Y CR _ U sr �9 CR IYE DE VILLE CR 9CS O` �\ j Pleasant View Park z DR M — W CF- E Q O o V) z CR FERGUSON CR — Q J ROYAL DR CR CAMEL CR I I •r-+ -� o CID NER J SALEM CR SLOW DENSITY L DR —RESIDENTIAL l%r PEREK CR GENERAL COMMERCIAL l -- - ----- - — KENT CR ; 1- 1 �1 / C CR I — JERRETT C � D . O wrn Z Y J 1 - C GENERAL RF.c�,F At!( COMMERCIAL N — ANTHONY D. CR w _ - o Ti 0 ED m , _ n 9 r C_J a _� Warner Ave. I 'A "X`77 23 OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY / Ln - — C --- rr ANCHO AvE r—T—1 n r-- Existing General Plan A& Area of Concern 3 . 2 9 0— o O a 0 ,2 huntington beach planning division figure 3-3 Z4 ^�— -- RI - IRI RI ,I RI RI RI RI V RI = RI R1 Rf RI z I RI RI \ a 1 . R I R II- R I ✓ I � C RI I RI rvur RI .o•i�--� DE VaLF. CR`'• 'L RI C 4RP' R RI F �i qAR RI —� LNMNP Du � I �� 1 � IN T a 'el �� Du RI I ^o,Rl CF—E I T° '> RI RI RI RI L y DP;NDn Ca �j I � - i n Pa. RI '1 ^,RI ■ 1 � Cq �RI€ RI II�� RI RI 'j RI Ik RI }` RI RI _ = p 11 tnNCn$TLP DR / 0' nriNC IT oR nRNtr pP RIY`LFR' , (0)R5 � a ( RI _ RI ..— RI 'RI .\o� P. WD Qu. ._- -_- - '_ _- _- - 1 i RI 1 ,, r -- -------- l/ /. C4„J $n RD CR .CHI L7 _ \i— T_I f. RI v l f I- IIIr.-r R3 _ ( _ L R__ �r C4 I . 1t rc T.... pu < RI P . RII` RS �'EW:3 Rl tLn o cP RI .. / C 2 41 PI RI L-_ _JIL_Jm Werner Ave, - - --- -- RI nMSI/PDnM DP C C4,• ,M2 R2 P2 R2 1'I RI 1 SIN I Iw.ro RI Xj~ RI 1zi Ll --— DR r REMRRGNDT DR RI RI RI RIi RI I I RI o MARSEILLF DR O RI 2 r POLDER CR . C4„ a RI IF a e o _ RI VG LE NCi< DR 1 RI 1 RI I 1 rf RiE5L4NU Existing Zoning Area of Concern 3 .2 mq o Q (N402 huntington beach planning division figure 3-4 SHOMixa - ZX ow o s a L. U . ao ` = : mm zv► z s — m0 m D ° Nm = v a - � V i a d a a � z w i�\��Zlx m S3r`J' i }} !.y r 1 ■ ■ -li .rl / \\llvtl OrvvH 1v13W I r-� 531Orv,tlS Llvrvd5v Siviaaivw i .jef r•� J� n - 13 i 4 \ z„ O N m KERm17•F)oRius FAIR HUNTINGTON BEACH APARTMENTS HOELSCHER GUGGENHEIM PARTNERS i 1 a - J J W . 1 ` s r � C 70 I ' I, Ci \ x �. \ O H ICl:lt�llf 1)/)Kll'1 IAIA I' ARTNE NTINGTON BEACH APARTMENTS:pia a un »a:�n tiF.4 OELSCHER GUGGENHEIM RS 14411,111:1 IIAIA Mn(;Nc.n 1 n I FIII 11111{ H „,. I I 101 Al i'Al Cl i 1 n rfr � I $. f 1 1::Ion ;o.two rn 11 ' m ru 1 1 LJ C C 1 L 'L O U {� M I I:I :'�IIi IAI';I1 AI:II,I IV IF V11 li'I II IIiI 11�/NiiiNi.lw /' ww� • a fn- [A'f111 I:Al ll'!1:1111 F: A",:',I II:I A!I' INf: �I. 11 ANI:IMr'JI Illi'r ItJt:It11II'.'� I,IN:INI li •iA I I L ENTRY ELEVATION i I I DEREK CIRCLE ELEVATION I' , . _ 7a `a •F,r _.. .. �.�-�^,-fie n ,..._. CONNER DRIVE ELEVATION I I • - CLYDE CARPENTER & ASSOCIATES, INC �- `•�r.� '} 'v=�`-'% >�- "fir _ _— o-.M1c,uVe„ 1 I I �I i - - _ NORTH ELEVATION I 1�;'.. — •- �.. ^:u.:ucuen;r a r "d IxWaiGa..r cp .u�:l:m FWY. RAMP ELEV. --- - -- I - i NORTH-EAST ELEVATION CLYDE CARPENTER 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. -'•V� G���% �"� �= -'�".'.r�'".��='�"=�` /_•-,C _ - '_ Ga.V,T� 22.:: -_o-:.,4 —{ - ....•.o � his � �� . 1 Jame 19, 1984 ; 1 1 1 AS A NEIGff)ORING PROPERTY CANER, I AM IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT CN THE S & K GREENHOUSE PROPERTY OONSISTIl� OF MINI WAREHOUSE AND A 152 UNIT APARTMENT PRWECT PROVIDED THAT aXMP,S MM IS MT OPENED UP FOR ENTRY AND ACCESS. NAME ADDRESS fr Jz1.24 - 1 y� i t ya f T Z A ii-�, pet. 14 4 2 &k CL-A& : 1 � i 1 Jtme 19, 1984 AS A NEIGfBORING PROPERTY OY►1N R, I AM IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ON THE S & K GREENHOUSE PROPERTY CONSISTING OF MINI WAREHOUSE AND A 152 UNIT APARTMENT PRQJECT PROVIDED THAT CONNORS LRIVE IS NOT OPENED UP FOR ENTRY AND ' ACCESS. ' NAME _ _ ADDRESS ' f,�46 aad &�n /, , zLg-- ZZ Le I r� 7 , 14 t3 -' z C,4 .e. G ' June 19, 1984 ' AS A NEIGD30RING PROPERTY MNER, I AM IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ON THE S & K GREENHOUSE PROPERTY C.'ONSISTING OF MINI WAREHOUSE AND A 152 UNIT APARTMENT PROJEI;T PROVIDED THAT CONNORS ERIVE IS NOT OPENED UP MR ENTRY AND ' ACCESS. NAME ADDRESS ' 7 00 gzz � �� /�iooZ. �, � �a 9z 6_�•_ . 1�2 •tr o� �-� .G'. 9 z� �� a- �b zalzn JAI y / - — 1 ' June 19 1984 AS A NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNER, I AN IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSED DEVEMPIENT ON THE S i R GREENHOUSE PROPERTY OONSISTIIG OF MM Wl2iOLW AND A 152 UNIT APAR'IM T PRO7BCT PROVIDED THAT CONN RS DRIVE IS NOT OPENED UP FOR FNIRY AND ACCESS. NAM ADiRFSS tom'&. Y-7 AL41, c))4 g-]!� I k/-gel I �`7 Z�klof t C- - 3 lr 8. (? dW, Sh 701 06, L6IV/ nAk- 22, ` O1 46. 04 cAr) IN THE (/ Superior Court �ttc �o OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Wwa,3,3 ty �•h f — 9 In and for the County of Orange CITY OF HUWTINGTON BEACH PROOF OF PUBLICATION CITY CLERK � APR 3, 1 � pNOt11 il I—?— &.S�. LEGAL ADVERTISEMENT PUBLIC N0TX8 State of California ) County of Orange )ss• t_A. 84.2•EIR 84-3 ZONE CASE 84.91 DARLENE CUMBERLAND ZONE CAR W19 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a That I am and at all times herein mentioned was a citizen of public hearing will be held by the City Council of the City of Huntington Badet the United States,over the age of twenty-one years,and that I in the Council Chamber of she Civic Cen- ter, Huntington Beach,at the how of am not a party to,nor interested in the above entitled matter; 7:30 P.M.,or as soon thereafter r poeei- that I am the principal clerk of the printer of the ble on Monday, the 5th of November, 1984,for the purpose of consi de ee oposed amendment to the lend�se HUNT I NGTO N BEACH IND. REV. ement of the General Plan(LUE 94.2). Environmental Impact Report 94.3.Zone e a newspaper of general circulation,published in the City of Case 84.9 and Zone Case W10 which includes the following items: Ara 2.1 .Create a solid Waste Fa- ci •ceteg HUNTINGTON BEACH A2uAdd policy IanBrmRe to the County of Orange and which newspaper is published for the Land Use Elemeenrt establishing com+wt County Airport disemination of local news and intelligence of a general charac- Environnment�al Land Use Plan. ter, and which newspaper at all times herein mentioned had Ara 3.1 - Redesignate 4.85 acres ap- and still has a bona fide subscription list of paying subscribers, located west of Nichols Sweet and Warner prozirnatay 1,000 feet south of Warmer and which newspaper has been established, printed and pub- Avenue Fran General lndu.trial to Solid lished at regular intervals in the said County of Orange for a Waste Facility' period exceeding one year; Area 3.2 - Redesignate 10.4 sues that the notice, of which the located west of Magnolia Street and cep• annexed is a printed copy, has been published in the regular proximately 450 feet north of Warner Avenue from General Commercial to and entire issue of said newspaper,and not in any supplement Mixed Development.Ise Can Na.84-19 thereof,on the following dates,to wit: would redesignate the came property from (Q) R5 (Qualified Office Profes- sional District) to R3 (Medium-High Density Residential District)and Ml-A (Restricted Mamtfactunng District)• OCTOBER 259 1984 Area 3� P=7.te �east located south of Pearce treat BhAsa Chic&Street from Medium Density Residential to General Commercial.14W Case No.149 would redesignate the s®e property from R2(Medium Density Pei. dentin(District) to C4 (Highway Cow mercial District(. „ to All interested per&ons arc ted I certify (or declare) under penalty of Perjury that the forego- attend said hearing amd express opinions for or against [and ing is true and correct. ment 84-21EIR 84-3 and Zone Can 84-91 Zone Case 84-10. Dated at......Garden-Grave........................ Further information may be obtained from the Office of the City Clerk.2000 Main Street,Huntington Bach,Califar- Califor t 2 t day of 1 Die 92W-(714)5s5-5227. Dated:October 19,1984 City of Huntington.Beach . ........ . . GlyClrkM Wentworth Pub.Oct 25,19M Signature Hunt.Beach Ind.m369Tr STATE OF CALIFORNIA—OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR - GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH tl� `� `�°'� y a 1400 TENTH STREET d� SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 /f yt 2 1--Q a 1/Q eL 9 C E k",.14 vz July 19, 1984 , (916/445-0613) (A`& Mr. Howard Zelefsky City of Huntington--Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Subject: SCH# 84062006, Negative Declaration No. 84-9/Administrative Review No. 84-17 Dear Mr. Zelefsky: The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named environmental document to selected state agencies for review. The review period is closed and none of the state agencies have continents. This letter certifies only that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the • California Environmental Quality Act (EIR Guidelines, Section 15205) . Where applicable, this should not be construed as a waiver of any jurisdictional authority or title interests of the State of California. The project may still require approval from -state agencies with permit authority or jurisdiction by law. If so, the state agencies will have to use the environmental document in their decision-making. Please contact then inr- mediately after the document is finalized with a copy of the final document, the Notice of Determination, adopted mitigation measures, and any statements of overriding considerations. Once the document is adopted (Negative Declaration) or certified (final EIR) and if a decision is made to approve the project, a Notice of Determination must be filed with the County Clerk. If the project requires discretionary approval from any state agency, the Notice of Determination must also be filed with the Secretary for Resources (EIR Guidelines, Section 15094(b)) . Sincerelyr G� HUNTINGTON BEACH John B. Ohanian DEVELOPMENT. SERVICES Chief Deputy Director JUL 2 ' t"A P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 NOTICE OF COMPLLM(IN UV MWID'-WAL DIXSriOW 7RAMUTUL FORM . 1. F7•jeci Title: Negative Decla ion No. 84-9/Administrat ' Review No. 84-17 L"I Agenc.: City of Huntington Beach 3. Contact Person: Howard Zelefsky $a. Stet Address: 2000 Main Street 3b. City: Huntington Beach 3c. ",:m.nty: Orange sd. Zip. 92648 ' 3e. Pbone: ( 714 ) 536-5271 PBf1J13C1• LO=ON 4. county: Orange 4a. city/Co..ualty: Huntington Beach 4b. Assessor's Parcel No. 111-3 6 0-11 gc, Section 26 Twp. 5 Range 11 Sa. Cross streets: Nichols(between Warner/ 5b. For Rural, Nearest Slater Community: State Air- Rail- Water- ports C. ways d' ways .. DOGtlMOM TYPE 8. LOCAL AMCM TSB 9. D69EU)PV 7r ITPB (=A 01. General Plan Update 01. Residential: Units Acres 01. NOP 06. NOE 02. New Element 02. Office: Sq. Ft. 02. Early Cons 07. -NOC 03. General Plan Amendment Acres Employees 03. X Ne% Dec 08. _NOD 04. _Master Plan 03. _Shopping/Commercial: Sq. Ft. 04. Draft EIR 05. Annexation Acres Employees Supplement/ 06. rSpecific Plan 04. _Industrial: Sq. Ft. 05. Subsequent EIR (Prior 30 No.: 07. Ccmmuaity Plan Acres Employees 08. Redevelopment 05. Water Facilities: WD NEPA 09. _Rezone 06. _Transportation: Type Draft 09. NOI 11. - EIS 10. land Division 07. Hining: Mineral �i6division, Parcel 10. _F KSI 12. _EA Map, Tract lisp, etc.) 08. _Power: Type Watts OTHER 11. Use Permit 09. _Waste Treatment: Type 13. _Joint Document 12. ;Waste Ygmt Plan 10. ' OCS Related 14. _Final Document 13. _Cancel Ag Preserve - il. _Otber: 15. Other 14. X Other Admn . Review 10. TOTAL ACfIFS: 4 . 65 11. 7WAL JOBS CREATED: 12. P9UIECr ISSUES DISCUS= IN DOCaME T 15. Septic Systems 23. Water Quality 01. _Aesthetic/Visual 08. _Flooding/Drainage 16. -_Sewer Capacity 24. _Rater Supply 02. _Agricultural Land 09. Geologic/Seismic 17. _Social 25. _Wet land/Riparian 03. _Air Quality 10. Jobs/Housing Balance 18. Soil Erosion 26. Wildlife 04. _Archaeological/Historical 11. M.1nerals 19. X Solid Waste 27. Growth Inducing 05. _Coastal Zone 12. _Noise 20. _Toxic/Hazardous 28. _lnccmpa.tible ianduse 06. _E:coneimic 13. _Public Services 21. _Traffic/Circulation 29. _Cumulative Effects 07. _Fire Hazard 14. _Schools 22. _Vegetation 30. Other 13. FMD G (approx) Federal S State S Total S 14. PBESENr IJ1!® USE AM WffUC: Ti'ansfer station - Ml. ( Light Industrial) 15. PRO.Wr DFSQirPTION: To increase the amount of industrial, commercial , and residential refuse to be recycled ( 500-800 tons to 1200-1500 tons ) at an existing transfer station. 16. SIG11AIMM OF LEAD AGEWT TATM: /n Y DATE' NM: Clearinghouse will assign Ldrnr.;ficat/us nurnbers t ii rev sects. :f n SCH numtr r already exists for a project e.b• frcm a Notice of Preparation or prevrdraft docucen pi fill it in. 1 • '4 TY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INITIA�TUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL 'IMPACTS I. BACKGROUND 1. Applicant Rainbow .Disposal Address P.O.Box 1026,Hunt.Bch. ,CA Company, Inc, 3. kephone ( 714) 847-3581 4. Project Location 17.121 Nichols St..(bet*W Warner an S ater Ave. 5. Project Title/Description .Increase tondklor transfer station 6.. Date 3-20-84 II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: (Explanations o�salI "iYes" and "Maybe" answers are required on attached sheet). 1. Physical -Environment: Will the project have a significant impact on the physical environment with respect to: a h drolo b air quality, c geology, d flora and p ) Y 9Y� ) q Y� ) 9 9Y� ) fauna, e) noise, f) archaeological/historical . Yes Maybe No X Other 2. Impact of Environment on Project: Will the project be subject to impacts from the surrounding environment? i .e. , natural environment; manmade environment. Yes Maybe No x 3. Impacts on Public Services: Will the project have a significant impact upon, or re- sult in a need for a new or altered government service in any of the following areas: fire, police, schools, parks or other governmental agencies. Yes Maybe No X Impacts on Traffic/Circulation: Will project result in substantial vehicular move- ment, or impact surrounding circulation system, or increase traffic hazard? Yes Maybe No * - see attached traffic flow map 5. Will the project result in a substantial alteration or have a negative affect on the existing: land use, population/housing, energy/utilities, natural resources, • human health? Yes Maybe No x (i. Other potential environmental impacts not discussed above (see attached sheet). III.. OTHER RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES AND/OR PERSONS CONTACTED ( X ) See Attached ( ) Not Applicable IV. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE: 1.. Will project degrade quality of envirornent? Yes Maybe No x ; 2. Will project achieve short-term goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental --- goals? Yes Maybe No x 3:' Does the project have impacts which ar individually limited but cumulatively considerable? Yes Maybe No x .., 4. Will the project adversely affect human 'beings either directly or indirectly? Yes Maybe No X V. DETERMINATION ( X ) Negative Declaration ( ) Negative Declaration With Mitigation ( ) Environmental Impact Report DATE f��'� SIGNATURE A,NNING ~� ZONING AT AC:HM,,:/'� 13 DM 31 SECTIONAL DISTRICT MAP 26 - 5 - 11 Cjryy .Ohr•10 are,l t, tn6o ••.•,,,.Y..•'e. .'•...•.' e. ... Ct7+' CMUNCIL O9r•N•NCE f00 )f7 LEGEND' 6M['lot D oPC NO •uf N0to :)Po NO '�• ] ••rr9t,•y •U•Ctn rv, In•R• .._ -.._ ...-._.— _-- i,y-, rro r.r,. at not rc[ 6•fr•�cr 1 UN rFIN G rh ON h 1 �L C:L 1. f� LewVwr..a •••l.tlpK..ea1,•a a. . 6» ...r,f<,.. 1 1 /(� 1rl` /1 f'�` 1 f � 1 L :' t f;(, ':7 rw,t w •r wt Kr Pn•<r 1 19 l f 1 G, E' �•0 U 1, T Y, �• �1 1 i 1 1•' V I t N I �\, •t w n. �; i°t I l�.•��rN•.n[ r..lr YIOtKt llrw!" 1 I l � J • � :P.rt K•M 1ltY• tMENDEO BY ZONE CASE' _ far�) eo•..oa.r.t<•utf lK[N.eq�taU•ftaK• '0•,tH.t7x.N[.hx.tot,206.2�1 7tt.77• V, Yr 7a f06.N6,S7f.5••.f<9.556-SS9.X9-),t•769,•67,50•.SO5.509.66.7.6{•t5.66-�•,66-Sr,PP66-7 [i_ij •rw.,..••rKt••NftC•v<f 6•!r•Kr 66-30.6r•1 xx.►P 6r.S.r,►ASA. Pr69 . 10.1.10.4 PP r0-6.r1- 1.7 7-7 a,r7.�n.•< �t•sr r<77r 76- • -• - r..r t•.e fr••K• : .. a•mq •Hr d.• I� WARNER +C, AVE » » i. 1 _ - --- - --- 'F „aRz��l R 5_ 4 I �F °N II f� ] C 4 1 Cat. AV( l.._.R 2—Y.1�I ,O «l .� y fe1 I x.:;trN•.o. �.:,, ••r f:70t1 1 - [ R2• P.2 •eMI h11 ,ni i C, as t[or_= 2 KANC-,cW - - - — - _ . m T1I�M',CLR CF—R —J a. v"'Oij flyJ.CAR 2• R 2 MI M I uarn Liii- on I I (.1 I RI RI J RI RI :IRI •• CF-C .1 Pur�n pn• 3 ro6o __ _ n•• I � — RI ...•..e, 1cl I IR3I I t7 M to M7 = M M7 ' CC A . . ; tSal:CD� RI-CD �IRI-Co:? ;R3 W -- -- _ _ U V y — R3 ° �3 Ii3 R3 •P� I ¢ I 1 CU ' e MI-CD > MH 'ro i f o o - 1•el —` A J CF-R M I R2 1--� i -- • I<M1 -----R 2--— I m - 1 x. C F :y 1 _ op R 2 —� MI-CD to `MI — CD t I12 R2 C4 W ..� I ptl.. n5 +11 R5• . TALBERT - - AVE P.- ATTACHMENT C " \�1 T. _ pp n-I SJ A.I •t - AWGOS7 . U"n' n-n' test• ovr - Y # £ c I I RAINBOW ��•` rytct w ownn- - - nr.l q,M a •O•,-., n,•m •.r., rtr u..v, I —ECrv�eN.vF RECYCLING £ CENTER & ,xn AN ' 7X,,, ' 1—n •1-m vrn TRANSFER 01111 Alf P s. € STATION 17/bn I-M r 1+rtM x1•rn 2Art!Y1 `Ayfn 7•nM Ji•1 2"m• 7>700 t. "AAhl Q All - Y AOM Vane 00 n n�M Ann O]vt r1C)Q0 SL AIf11 Ave - 'b \ 1 \ ���— --- Ix+l a7•n ` erYr tALPFpt AvE uVio L _ •. - T .. XALEf ht 7 MA."1 r t. • FLLl.S AVE Av[MAr#OAiU'inArnC ss 5t. _ '1 • 74 I"un oE-00 v 70p0 U- . � ♦!1 )Rn 1 � nOM• n<W ny^.l n"Yt �1`M 0000 / 1--- r; (A4TIEa'AVE 20000 k SOOOO , p: A•J1� Aa.rr Arrn A6m ]IIM _ 1'{';PK FOWN AVE 40000 50000 •'(� _ r' ' 7 ?e . A1J» mn Rrl_�l le 23 J •ht 14ri)' 60000 - - _ •1 •tl 1 — A.A45 AVE- 70000 l '++ ,IIV!• • 1 '•rn• vrn• Ayrr 7Yff• 1978 . 1 IJ(t1ANAPOLIS AVE. 1 r0 r _� 7- - M1J'r1 ' '-1^.�filiJ�■• ' tj - AlI dNTA IIE P • t s c 4 ■ \/ , 1Jv. • A—crl r�i )•IfiO HA 4rL rON AVE y CITY OF urn I+.%w.PlG AVE l•� i 1' HUNTINGTON BEACH 'IS s.. TRAFFIC FLOW 1, MAP 6--mo as:o 3080 %eoretT 0(7� 1l(' GENERAL VICINITY. MAP —9— 4 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEAC /. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPITMENT • P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach. CA.92648 h .•. ►.. Tel: (714) 536.5271 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM Fee - $115.00 FOR CITY USE ONLY RAINBOW DISPOSAL COMPANY., INC. Date nnnlicant/Authorized Agent Received: 7 • Project 'Number: P.O.BOX 1026 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA: 92647 Department of .Origin : ' Mai 1 inq Address V !�aey✓i & ( 714 ) 847-3581 Other Applications or f - eP one Permit Numbers : - PHIL HOHSTEIN l'conerty Owner . SAME AS ABOVE Nailing Address/Telephone 1. 0 Project Information (please attach -Plot Plan and submit photographs of subject property) 1 . 1 Nature of Project: Give complete description of the proposed project. The project is an existing Solid Waste Transfer Station for Commercial , Industrial, & Residential refuse of which 1200 to 1500 tons of refuse can' be transfer to a landfill daily. 1 . 2 Location of Project : (Address , nearest street intersections) 17121 Nichols (between Warner & Slater) 1 . 3 Assessor ' s Parcel Number: 111-360-11, 111-360-12 A-BD-EV-2A 1 . 4 What is the present zoning on the property? M-2 1 . 5 What is the surrounding land use to the: North Equipment Rental Yard _ South Lumber Yard East Park 'Rest Railroad Tracks 1 . 6 If the project is -commercial or industrial give .a complete description- of activities and other pertinent information including but not limited to estimated employment per shift and any -potential ha-zardous materials which may be used, etc . To service the rubbish transfer needs of the area, specifically the local commercial haulers , the City of H. B. Dept. of Public Works , Park Maintenance etc. The City of F.V. Dept. of Public Works , the ,local school districts and thb general public. No hazardous materials will be used at the site, and between.. 15 to 25 employees will be employed. 1 . 7 If the project is residential, indicate number, .types and size of units and associated facilities. NSA 1 . 8 If the project is institutional, indicate the major function , estimated employment per shift and maximum occupancy . N%A 1 .9 Project land area -(acres) 4 .65 Number of parking spaces 150 1. 10 Square feet of building area 1300 Number of floors 1 1 . 11 Height of tallest structure involved in the project 25 Ft. 2. 0 Environmental Setting . . I nrainaa c, and flood Control .0 P l easo describe how on-site drainage will be accommodated. Site is graded to slope to the existing street. land form • ,: . Is the site presently graded? Yes h) Indicate the gross cubic yards of grading proposed N/A the acres of land to be graded N/A the amount c earth to be transported on the site N/A , and the amount of earth to be transported off the site N/A • c) what -will be the maximum height and grade of cut on fill after -grading is completed? One ( 1) Ft. 2 . 3 Soils a) ; Type -of soils on the subject site? (Submit soils report Iif :available) . Clayesandy 2. 4 Vegetation. a) Attach .a man indicating the location, type and size of trees located on the site. Indicate below the number, type and size of trees ;to be removed as a result of the project: No Trees Removed - 2 . 5 Water Quality a) Does -any portion of the project abut or encroach on beaches , estuaries, bays , tidelands , or inland water areas? NO b) Describe how the project will effect any body ' of water . N/A 2. 6 Air Ouality a) If the project is industrial , describe and list air pollution sources and quantity and - types of pollutants emitted as a result of the project. N/A 2 . 7 Noise a Describe .any adjacent off-site noise sources (i . e . , air- port-s , industry , freeways) . N/A l�) W11.11 liolso, wi I I be produced by the project If available , I�l � .��:i• ilivo noise levels in decible measurement and typical time distribution when noise will be produced . Noise will be generated by the dumping action of the trucks , present levels of noise will not be exceeded. • eccom ar ' th c. How will noise produced by the prod t p e wi � . existing noise levels? Same existing levels raffiv Approximately flow much traffic will be generated by the project : (check one) 0-50 vehicular trips per day 50 - 250 vehicular trips per day XXX 250 ;- 5-00 vehicular trips per day over 500 -vehicular trips per day 3.0 Public Services and Facilities 3. 1 Water a) Will the project require installation or replacement of new waterlines? NO b) Please estimate the daily volume in gallons required to. serve the- project. 500 Gallons Per -Day 3. 2 Sewer a) Will the project require installation or replacement of new sewer lines? NO b) Please indicate the approximate amount of sewage generated from the project. about 300 Gallons Per Day 3. 3 Solid Waste a) If the project - is industrial , describe the type and amount (pounds/day) of solid waste generated by the project. Industrial, Commercial, & Residential Solid Waste, which will generate 1200 to 1500 Tons Per Day. 4 . 0 Social 4 . 1 Population Displacement a) Will any residential occupants be displaced by the project activities? No i l)) Describ(% briefly the type of buildings or improvements to ho domolished by the project. NONE )1 . 0 Mitigating Measure • � . 1 Are there measures included in the project which may conserve nonrenewable resources (e.g. electricity, gas, water) ? Please describe. Project will conserve fuel & nonrenewable resources. S . 2 Are there measures included in the project which would protect • or enhance flora and fauna? Please describe. N/A - . 3 Are there measures proposed in the design of the project to reduce noise pollution? Please describe. Trans,fer station operations will be conducted in an semi-enclosed building. . 4 Are there measures proposed in the design of the project (e. g. architectural treatment and landscaping) which have been coordinated with design of the existing community to minimize visual effect? Please describe . Project has a six ft. concrete wall & extensive landscaping is in place. (Grass, Shrubs & Trees ) - . 5 Are there measures proposed in the design of the project to reduce water pollution? Please describe. N/A � . 6 Are there measures proposed which would reduce air pollution? List any Air Pollution Control District equipment required. N/A . 7 Are there measures or facilities designed into the project to facilitate resource recovery and/or energy conservation (e.g. solar- heating, special insulation, etc. ) ? Please describe. Resource recovery.• will be conducted along with newsprint & corrugated filber recycling. D . 0 Alternatives � . 1 Are there alternatives to the project which may result in a lesser adverse environmental effect? Please explain all project alternat- ives on an attached sheet.LONG TERM: The purpose of the projec- is to lessen adverse environmental effects related to the Solid Waste ** here-hy c-ort i fy that the information herein is true and accurate to I i o loos t. of my knowledge.. Industry & local communities . At this present time, this is our al rnative for the future. 3-ice=�y gnature Date Filed i pl b h B� NS Since 7891 V n Nfl V 21984 JACK FOTI VICE PRESIDENT CITYOF HUNTINGr CORPORATE DEVELOPMENT CITY COUNCIL ®rNFI�OFFICE �H November 1, 1984 Mayor Protem of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, Calif. 92648 The Honorable ? A. Thomas Since we may not be able to attend the November 5, 1984 hearing on the band Use Element Admendment #84-2 and the accompanying Environmental Impact Report #84.3, I am writing you to express our strong objection concerning the pro- posed admendment. The Bekins Moving & Storage Company has operated from its location at 7572 Warner Avenue for approximately twenty years. Until recently, we understood that the 4.65 acres had been used as a truck repair facility and in that regard, it was a compatible use with our storage of household goods. More recently, we have learned that solid waste is being stored in transit at the site. We also understand that more intense uses of this property will be permitted if the proposed admendment is approved. Bekins customers regularly visit our facility on Warner Avenue to retrieve from and deliver items to their storage accounts. The vast majority of our customers at this site are residents of Huntington Beach, and I know these customers will not tolerate having their household goods stored next to a solid waste facility. The loss of these customers will create large losses for our busi- ness and greatly diminish the value of this property. Therefore, I urge you to deny this proposed admendment. Cor 'ally, a F ti Vice President Corporate Development DJ/dj TNt 891UN8 COMPANY • 777 FLOWER STREET. GLENDALE. CALIFORNIA 91201 • (818) 507.1200 REQUESI4013 CITY COUNCIL WTION Date December 27 , 1984 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson , City Administrator Prepared by: James W. Palin , Director , Development ServicesoJiLp Subject: LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 84-2 ITEM 3. 1 ITY C'O�I7NGIL -ROVED BY C /� Consistent with Council Policy? [ Yes [ ] New Policy or Ex �itn .-�1_19-. -- Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Altern a ctions,Atta iA CITY CLL I Q acme 5 e.' ,`f�'4 STATEMENT OF ISSUE : ®�d �uA�„ Cti+/��t,u�+ "n,,ti On November 19 , 19849 the City Council considered Land Use Element Amendment No. 84-2 . Item 3. 1 , a request to redesignate the Rainbow Disposal Transfer Station site from General Industrial to Solid Waste 'b ~eu'4"'' Facility, was continued for additional staff research of public 411s;4vs complaints. Staff was also directed to coordinate a meeting with the *` V-- kgls Rainbow Disposal Company, a member of the City Council , and representatives of the surrounding property owners to address theoN- issues raised on November 19. RECOMMENDATION : + W1041 Surt 1 A" 19*J4K0b. Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution 5457C approving Land Use Element Amendment No. 84-2 to include Item 3. 1 , redesignating the 4 . 65 acres located west of Nichols Street and approximately 1 ,000 feet south of Warner Avenue from General Industrial to Solid Waste Facility. ANALYSIS : At their November 51, 1984 meeting , the City Council tabled Area 3. 1 of Land Use Element Amendment No. 84-2 pending research into the history of entitlements on the Rainbow Disposal Transfer Station site and a review of citizen complaints regarding the existing operation. This information was presented at the November 19 meeting (Attachment 2 ) , at which time the City Council continued Area 3 . 1 for additional staff research of complaints expressed at the public hearing . Staff was also directed to coordinate a meeting with the Rainbow Disposal Company, a member of the City Council , and representatives of the surrounding property owners to address the issues expressed at the hearing . Staff met with Stan Tkaczyk of Rainbow, Mayor Bailey, and representatives of the surrounding property owners . The property owners reiterated their reasons for opposing the Land Use Element amendment request and outlined the environmental complaints against the facility ' s operation. These concerns include (see attached petition and letter) : PIO 4/84 1 . Increased truck traffic on Nichols Street impacting business , residential ; and school uses near the site. 2 . Increased waste drainage onto Nichols Street when waste is dumped onto the ground before transfer. 3 . Increased health hazard from rodents , birds , and the storage of waste for long periods of time . 4 . Increased odor and noise levels. The Rainbow Disposal Company provided staff with a tour of the transfer station facility. Standard station operational procedures were demonstrated in the control of debris , odor , and pests. The operational procedures conducted by Rainbow are outlined in Attachment 5. As practiced on a daily or periodic basis ; these procedures appeared sufficient to mitigate a number of the concerns expressed. However , staff contacted the South Coast Air Quality Management District and Orange County Vector Control District to determine the extent of public complaints and violations since the station began operation in 1983 . As indicated in the attached letters , the periodic inspections conducted by these agencies have not revealed any odor or pest control violations . In the area of wastewater disposal , staff researched City files , and contacted the California Regional Water Quality Control Board and Orange County Sanitation District. The Regional Water Quality Control Board recently inspected the transfer station and reviewed the facility' s sanitary waste disposal plan (Attachment 8) . All wastewater collected on-site is discharged into a series of clarifiers. Solids are separated and removed , and the clarified water is discharged to the City' s sewer line in Nichols Street. Inspection of the wastewater system revealed that the Rainbow Disposal Company maintains the transfer and yard areas in a clean manner with adequate disposal of wastewater into the clarifiers and community sewer system. As long as the current level of maintenance is continued ; even at the proposed 1500 ton capacity, the Water Quality Control Board finds no need to require a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit . With the current method of disposal ; the Orange County Sanitation District has likewise indicated that an industrial discharge permit is not required of the transfer station facility. The Police Department researched its files in response to complaints about service calls and traffic activity (Attachment 9) . Police records indicate that the Rainbow transfer station has not generated any service calls , nor have any of the traffic accidents occurring in the area involved Rainbow transfer vehicles . Staff also examined the ramifications of disapproving the Land use Element amendment or continuing it for further environmental study.- Rainbow is currently operating under a solid waste facilities permit from the Orange County Solid Waste Enforcement Agency and State Solid Waste Management Board (Attachment 10) . This permit allows the facility to operate at a peak capacity of 800 tons per day . Rainbow' s (0172D) -2- RCA - LUE 84-2 • • application to expand to a peak capacity of 1500 tons per day is pending approval from the County and State contingent upon the City ' s approval of the General Plan Amendment . Both agencies have verbally consented to allow Rainbow to operate at 1500 tons per day during the finalization of the General Plan Amendment process : While the County Solid Waste Enforcement Agency and State Solid Waste Management Board have not set a date certain for the City to act on the amendment , it is probable that both agencies would withdraw verbal consent to operate at 1500 tons per day if the City continues or denies the Land Use Element amendment. If the amendment is denied , the pending permit for 1500 tons would not be approved. However , it should be kept in mind that denial of the amendment would still allow Rainbow to operate at 800 tons per day in accordance with its existing permit. On August 20, 1984 , the City Council approved the Orange County Solid Waste Management Plan which designates the Rainbow transfer station on the map of "Other Public and Privately Operated Solid Waste Facilities" and describes the Rainbow facility as having a planned capacity of 1500 tons per day (Attachment 11) . To deny the land use amendment request would make the City General Plan inconsistent with the Solid Waste Management Plan on both points . FUNDING SOURCE: None required. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS : 1 . Deny Area 3 . 1 retaining the site as General Industrial . 2 . Continue Area 3 . 1 and reconsider EIR 84-3 to expand on the environmental issues raised and to investigate mitigation measures . ATTACHMENTS : 1 . Resolution 5457C approving Area 3 . 1 2. Request for Council Action dated November 15 , 1984 3 . Letter from Bekins Van and Storage dated November 1 , 1984 4. Petition submitted by Chuck and Linda Lombardo opposing approval of Area 3. 1 dated November 19 , 1984 5 . Rainbow Transfer Station Operational Procedures 6. Letter from the South Coast Air Quality Management District dated December 22 , 1984. 7 . Letter from the Orange County Vector Control District dated December 18 , 1984 8 . Letter from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board dated December 12 , 1984 (0172D) -3- RCA - LUE 84-2 9. Letter from Police Department dated December 5 , 1984 10. Rainbow Solid Waste Facilities Permit 11 . Orange County Solid Waste Management Plan - Other Public and Privately Operated Solid Waste Facilities Map. Privately Owned and Operated Facilities , pp. 3-6 and 3-7 . CWT:JWP :CC: jr (0172D) -4- RCA - LUE 84-2 i ATTACHMENT 2 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Date November IS . 1984 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, City Administrator Prepared by: James W. Palin, Director , Development Services Subject: LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 84-2/EIR 84-3 Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: On November 5 , 1984, the City Council considered Land Use Element Amendment No. 84-2/Environmental Impact Report No. 84-3. Action was taken to ap rove Items 2. 1 (creation of a Solid Waste Facility designation and 3. 2 (redesignation of the S$K Nursery site from General Commercial to Mixed Development. Item 2. 2 (wording for the Airport Land Use Commission project review) was continued for the Attorney to provide clarification. Item 3. 1 (redesignation of the • Rainbow Disposal Transfer site from General Industrial to Solid Waste Facility)was tabled pending additional staff research into entitlements and citizen complaints. Item 3. 3 was sent back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration at the applicant ' s request . This transmittal is for Items 2 . 2 . , 3. 1 and 3. 3. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council direct the City Attorney to prepare Resolution 5457 B to include Items 2 . 2 , 3. 1 and 3. 3 with the recommendations contained in Attachment 1 . ANALYSIS: Area 2. 2 (Airport Land Use Commission) The City Council requested that the Attorney' s office provide an opinion regarding whether the State Law requiring consistency between General Plans and Airport Land Use Commission Plans is applicable to charter cities . In the attached memo , the City Attorney has indicated that the requirement is applicable to charter cities. Staff has also determined that Assembly Bill 3551 will require that all cities whose General Plans are not found to be consistent must submit all development plans to the Airport Land Use Commission for review. This bill will become effective on January 1 , 1985. Staff continues to recommend approval of this amendment • request. • s Area 3. 1 (Rainbow Disposal ) At their November 5 , 1984 meeting , the City Council tabled Area 3 . 1 pending research into the history of entitlements on the site and a review of citizen complaints regarding the existing operation. The following is a chronological listing of city discretionary entitlements for the Rainbow Disposal transfer station: ENTITLEMENT REQUEST APPROVED DATE AR 81 -9/ND 81-4 Expansion of existing truck 3/04/81 repair facility to include transfer station, recycling center and office building . AR 82-12 Modification of approved on- 4/21/82 site circulation plan AR 83-13 Addition to transfer building 4/14/83 AR 84-17/ND 84-9 ,increase from 500-800 tons per 4/04/84 day to 1 , 200-1 , 500 tons per day Staff has asked the departments of Police , Fire and Public Works to research their files for evidence of past complaints against the • existing transfer station operation. The Fire Department indicated that they noted a problem on February 1 , 1984 when trash had accumulated around the Halves for the fire sprinkler sys gm. Rain ow state at it was the result of__he6_vy- -1roIiday trash collection and would be eliminated with the purchase of new equipment . The problem was resolved to the Fire Department ' s satisfaction. If staff receives any word of other complaints , they will be forwarded to the City Council at the November 19, 1984 meeting. _Staff recommends approval- of this amendment request. Area 3 . 3 _ Area 3. 3 is a request to changethe land use designation on 3 . 0 acres of property located on the southeast corner of Pearce Drive and Bolsa Chica Street , from Medium Density Residential to General Commercial . The concurrent Zone Change No. 84-9 was from R2 to C4 . The Planning Commission recommended approval of the land -use amendment and zone change requests at its October 16 , 1984 meeting . Prior to the November 5 , 1984 City Council meeting , however , the applicant submitted a letter indicating that he preferred to retain the existing residential designation and requested that it be sent back to the Planning Commission for a determination on whether or not they would withdraw their recommendation for approval of the change. The City Council honored the request to send it back to the • Planning Commission. The Planning Commission considered the request for withdrawal of Area 3 . 3 and Zone Change 84-9 at their November 13, 1984 meeting. �� ''0e (1386d) -2- 0 • Upon discussion they agreed to recommend that the City Council remove Area 3. 3 from Land Use Element Amendment 84-2 and that Zone Change 84-9 be withdrawn provided that access to any residential project on the .site be taken exclusively from Pearce Drive. Staff continues to recommend approval of the original request for General Commercial. FUNDING SOURCE: No funds required. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: The City Council may direct the City Attorney to prepare Resolution 5457 B with fewer items than recommended by staff. ATTACHMENTS : 1 . Summary of Amendment Requests 2 . Memo from Gail Hutton dated November 14 , 1984 3. Board of Zoning Adjustments ' minutes regarding Rainbow Disposal Transfer Station 4 . Letter from Rainbow Disposal dated November 14, 1984 S. Letter from Ken Moody dated October 24 , 1984 6. Request for Council Action dated October 26 , 1984 • JWP:HS:ajh • /,3 A ' (1386d) -3- ATTACHMENT 1 SUMMARY-OF' REQUESTS .Item 2 . 2 - Staff requests that policy language be added to the Land Use Ll.ement to meet the requi.remerit of State law which provides that local general hlaris he consistent with county airport environs land use plans . Staff. recommernc;s that the following pol. i.cy language be added to the Land Use Element : "Any project which requires a notice of proposed construction of alteration by the FAA, Urlder FAR hart 77 , shall submit a col.y of the FAA application to the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) , and hrov i. de the City w i. th the F'AA and ALUC responses . If the ALUC requests review of the project, then the project shall be submitted to the Commission . Notice of any ALUC determination of i.nconsist.ency, with the Comm:ission' s Airport Lnv.irons Land Use Plan (AELUP) , must be given to the City within 60 calendar days from the date of referral of the application to the ALUC, and shall be considered before the C i.ty takes any ac t i.on on the project . if the Commission fails to give such notice of inconsistency within that period, the proposed project shall be deemed consistent with the ALLUP. " Planning Commission_Recommendati.on : Approval Staff Recommendation : Approval Area 3 . 1 - The City-initiated request is to redesi.911ate 4 .65 acres .located west of Nichols Street and approximately 1 , 000 feet south of Warner Avenue from General Industrial to Solid Waste Facility. Staff recommends approval of the request . Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval Staff Recommendation : Approval Area 3 . 3 - The applicant ' s r:eques t i.s to redesignate 3 .0 acres located east of Bolsa Chica Street and south of Pearce Street from Medium I;ensity Residential to General Commercial . Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the applicant' s request to General Commercial . Zone Change No . 84-9 was submitted by the applicant to be processed concurrently with this land use amendment request. On October 24 , 1984 the applicant submitted a letter requesting that this item be withdrawn from the amendment. Planning Commission Recommendation : Withdrawl Staff Recommendation : Approval �� CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACtWTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HUNTINGTON BEACH NOV 15 1984 To onprable Mayor Jack Kel.1,y From Ga11 1luttCRO. Box 190 a d Members of the City Council. Cit,yHMiVion Beach, CA 92648 Subject Lan Use Element 84-2; Date 13 November 19811 Area . 2 At the ovember 5, 19811 meeting you asked whether referral of certain nd use matters to the Airport Land Use Commission was legal required. The state la concerning airport land use commissions appears to' apply to char er cities . (Public Utilities Code §21670. ) Generally, whe an issue is one of statewide concern the legis- lature has the wer to regulate. (Bishop v. City of San Jose (1969 ) 1 C . 3d 56, 81 C.. 465; see California Constitution, Article XI , section 5. ) The legislature has Glared that orderly development of airports in the state, and safe y and noise considerations , support the legislative regulations While such legislative declarations are not bi.ndi.nf; on the c tries , it would appear that there is suf- ficient statewide interest,. -in airport development and safety to support application of the aw to charter cities . Thus , to the extent the states aw requires prior submittal of general and specific plans , am dments , and projects to the local Airport Land Use Commission, it ppears that the city should comply. (See Public Utilities Co e §21676. ) The proposed language in Area 2 . 2 i also designed to implement federal regulations relating to cons uction and alteration of land forms in and around airports , (S e Part 77 , Federal Aviation Regulations , Objects Affecting .Navigable Airspace , 77 . 13 et seq . ) Federal powers to regule interstate commerce also support imposition of certain federa . controls on local government . Public Utilities Code §21659 r quires a permit -from the state Department of Transportation ` or construction falling within the federal regulations . Public Utilities Code §21674 appears to permit the review of such pr lects by the loca-1 Airport Land Use Commission to determine the co orrnance with the federal and state requirements, since the co\11epartm em- powered to ssist local agencies and coordinate GAIL HUTTON City Attorney cc : Charles W. Thompson , City Administrator James W. Palin , Director, Development Servint MINUTES: Fi.B, BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS Fet-rnary 25, 1981 op ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 81-9 Applicant: Rainbow Disposal Company, Inc. To permit an expansion of present facility from 1 . 81 acres to 4 . 65 acres located on the west side of Nichols Street at 17121 Nichols Street. This request is covered by Negative Declaration No. 81-4 . Mr . Stan Tkaczyk was present to represent the application. Chairman Tindall requested the applicant to briefly explain the request. Mr. Tkaczyk stated that several new buildings would be constructed, in addition to various services to be offered, such as a transfer station, recycling center and office buildings. Secretary Lipps stated that the Board was not aware of the addition of services, additionally, landscaping requirements are deficient, and the Board had some concern regarding turning radius ' and on-site traffic flow. It was recommended that the request be continued one week in order to allow the applicant to meet with the Board to discuss the proposal . ON MOTION BY TINDALL AND SECOND BY KELLY, ACTION nN NEGATIVE DECLARATION O0. 81-4 WAS DEFERRED UNTIL ACTION ON ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 81-9 WAS TAY,EN. AYES: Tindall , Kelly, Lipps NOES: None ABSENT: None ADMINISTRATIVE REVIE NO. 81-13 Applicant: The System Investment Group To permit the constructio of an 11, 837 sq. ft. industrial building located on the south side o System Drive, approximately 115 feet east of Chemical. This request is covered by Envir mental Impact Report No. 73-16 previously approved. Secretary Lipps briefly outlined the a lication, -noting that the proposal was substantially in compliance with th Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Fire Representative Kelly recommended that ives be widened to meet Fire Department requirements . Conditions of proval were discussed . Chairman Tindall noted that the plan was nicel layed out. pow NIJ'1'L:S : H.B. B(& OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS Ma - 4 , 1981 Page i - Traffic circu tion and .drives; - Parking layout; - Lot area; - Lot width and lot de h; - Type of use and its re ion to property and improvements in the immediate vicinity; - Past, administrative action ardiny this property . B. GENERAL CONDITIONS: 1 . Proof of, or application of nec ,nary building permits shall be obtained for 14 x 20 exis • ng temporary building shown on plot plan submitted March 2, 981 within six (6) months of this action. AYES : Spencer, Kelly, Tindall NOES: None ABSENT: None ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 81-9 (Continued from 2/25/81) Applicant: Rainbow Disposal Company, Inc . To permit an expansion of present facility from 1 . 81 acres to 4 . 65 acres located on the west side of Nichols Street at 17121 Nichols Street. This request is covered by Negative Declaration No. 81-4 . ON MOTION BY TINDALL AND SECOND BY SPENCER, THE BOARD HAVING FOUND THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT, ADOPTED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO . 81-4 WITH THE FOLLOWING MITIGATING MEASURES CONTAINED IN .ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 81-9 GENERAL CONDITIONS 8 AND 9 IMPOSED ON ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 81-9 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES : Spencer, Kelly, Tindall NOES : None ABSENT: None Chairman Tindall introduced the application to the Board. Mr . Stan Tkaczyk was present to represent the application . Mr. Dan Van Dori), project engineer was also present. Secretary Spencer stated that the proposed additional uses are allowable within the zone (recycling, transfer station ) . Mr . Tkaczyk stated that machine'ry consisted of a baler, shredder, compressors and blowers, all of which are designed for low noise levels . fie addressed the type of waste material which will be accepted , statingi that ordorous type materials are not highly resalable, and storage is difficult, therefore will not be accepting this type. 1 i�I7NUTE5: H. B. BOARD OF ONING ADJUSTMENTS March 4 , 1981 \ Page 4 George Tindall expressed concern regarding traffic flow patterns onsite , in particular public vs . disposal trucks . Mr . Tkaczyk noted that hours of operation would differ from the hours utilized by the public for r recycling. i 1 Fire Representative Kelly expressed concern regarding storage of waste materials after working hours. He recommended that storage be prohibited ! after hours, or that proper fire protection devices be installed to avoid fire hazards_. He cited that the adjacent lumber yard as a potential problem . i Board member Kelly also requested that the building be sprinklered. Mr. Van Dorp stated that fire hoses are proposed throughout the building, noting that sprinklers would be ineffective for this type of operation. ! (Mr. Van Dorp is a registered fire protection engineer) . ! The Board discussed landscaping. Secretary Spencer stated that high density landscaping would be required along the north and south property lines , in addition, the area adjacent to Nichols Street shall be bermed/ mounded. Discussion regarding consolidating two parcels into one lot followed. Mr. Tkaczyk stated that filing a parcel map may not be possible, and requested that a letter of agreement be sufficient. i Secretary Spencer stated that a reciprocal easement agreement is necessary, however, he will contact the City Attorney for an opinion regarding a lette! of agreement between property owners in lieu of filing and recording a parcel map. Further Board discussion followed . ON MOTION BY TINDALL AND SECOND BY SPENCER, ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 81-9 WAS APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AS FOLLOWS : CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: A. TO BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS : 1. The conceptual plot plan and elevations received March 4 , 1981 shall be the approved layout. In its approval action, the Board of Zoning Adjustments considered the following issues relating to the•conceputal plan: • P- , MINUTES: H.B . 'WRD OF ZONING ADJUSTML•:NTS March 4 , 1981 Page 5 - Traffic circulation and drives; - Parking layout; - Lot area; - Lot width and lot depth; - Type of use and its relation to property and improvements in the immediate vicinity; - Past administrative action regarding this property. 2 . The following plans shall be submitted to the Secretary of the Board: a. Landscape and irrigation plan complying with Article 979 o'f the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code and landscaping specifications on file in the Department of Public Works. b. Rooftop mechanical equipment screening plan. Said i plan shall indicate screening of all rooftop mechanical equipment and shall delineate the type of material proposed to screen said equipment. B. GENERAL CONDITIONS : 1. Storage of waste material in transfer station after working hours is prohibited, (unless applicant provides adequate fire protection devices.] 2. Landscaped area adjacent( to Nichols Street shall be mounded (bermed) per Section 9791 (b) of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code . 3 . Applicant shall comply with all applicable Fire Code require- ments. 4 . Landscaping along the north and south property lines shall be of high density foliage. ' 5. Applicant shall provide on-site parking for employees, thereby discouraging employee parking along Nichols Street. 6 . Equipment shall meet all Orange County noise ordinance require- ments prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. 7. Applicant shall record a parcel map consolidating two (2) parcels into one (1) lot prior to issuance of building permits, or in the alternative assure reciprocal drive easements with an acceptable recorded document. -{ MINUTES : H.B . BOARD ZONING ADJUSTMENTS March 4 , 1981 Page 6 • 8 . All building spoils , such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material shall be disposed of at an offsite facility equipped to handle them. 9 . If lighting is included in the parking lot and/or recreational area, energy efficient lamps shall be used (e.g. high pressure sodium vapor, metal halide) . All outside lighting shall be directed to prevent "spillage" onto adjacent properties . AYES: Spencer, Kelly, Tindall NOES: None ABSENT: None CONSQITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 81-12 Ap 1 ant: A a Neishi To permi a six (6) foot high block wall to encroach five (5) feet into front and setback located on the west side of Marina View, approx . 200 feet nor of Los Patos (17181 Marina View) . This request is Categorical Exemption Class 5, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. • Mr. Dan Armstrong was esent to represent the application. Chairman Tindall introduced the a lication to the Board . Secretary Spencer briefly outlined the reque noting that the will would consist of block and wrought iron. Fire Representative Kelly state that he had field checked the site, noting that the wall was partiall uilt, except for the addition of wrought iron. Chairman Tindall opened the public hears Mr . Armstrong stated that the addition of the wall would allow the operty owner more privacy He stated that the property slopes from fro to back, therefore, the fence would be four (4 ) feet high at the side lk point, Chairman Tindall recommended that the application e continued in order to allow the applicant to submit cross sections and levations of the proposed fence and for Board members to field check t site . ON MOTION BY TINDALL AND SECOND BY SPENCER, CONDITIONAL E EPTION NO. 81-12 WAS CONTINUED IN ORDER FOR THE APPLICANT TO SUBMI REVISED PLANS REFLECTING THE PROPOSED FENCE IN RELATION TO THE PROPER AYES: Kelly, Tindall , Spencer NOES: None ABSENT: None s�%C,io r Minutes : H. B. Board of ZoIing Adjustments March 1-0, 1982 Page Six In its approval action, the Roat.d of 7.oninq Adjustments cons ered the following issues relating to the conceptual plan: - Traffic circulation and drives; - Parking layout; - Lot area; - I,ot width and lot depth; - Type of use and its relation to pro ty and improvements in the immediate vicinity. GENERAL CONDITIONS: 1. Prior to issuance o uilding permits, two and one-half ( 2-1/2) feet of alley s be dedicated . 2 . Exterior s shall meet the requirements of the Uniform Buildi ode. AYES- Webb, Smith, Kelly, Vogelsang, Crosby N None OBTAIN: None 0 MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS : ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 81-9 Applicant: Rainbow Disposal Co. , Inc. To permit a one (1 ) year extension of Administrative Review No. 81-9 oriqinally approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustments on March 4 , 1981, covering an expansion of present facility from 1 . 81 acres to 4 . 65 acres located at 17121 Nichols Street. Staff reported that financial delays brought about by the Federal SBA Program and other financial institutions , of which they have no control , created their dela-v. The extension will allow them the necessary time required for- this project. IT WAS THE CONSENSUS OF THE BOARD TO GRANT A ONE (1) YEAR EXTENSION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE•; RFVIL•:W NO. 81-9. TIIEIR BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, THE, MEI'TING wAS ADJOURNED. Florence Webb, Acti.ng Secretary Board of Zoning Adjustments 'Q' Minutes : H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 21 , 1982 Page Sewn of abutting property t.o the north shall be provi.i�od as depicte on the approved plot plan by the superimposed yellow Gros tching prior to final . inspection. 3 . "No Parking - Fire signs shall be posted per Fire Department standards an ecifications. 4 . Fire protection shall be provid er Fire Department standards and specifications. AYES: Vogelsang, Smith, Crosby NOES: None ABSTAIN: Webb ADMINSTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 82-12 Applicant: Rainbow Disposal Company, --Inc . - To permit change of circulation to previously approved site plan . Property located at 17121 Nichols Street, zoned M-1 , Light Industrial District. • The proposal was introduced by staff . Mr. Ron Yeo, Architect, and. Stanley F. Tkaczyk, Vice President of Rainbow Disposal, were present to represent application. Mr. Yeo addressed the Board and stated that the new plan submitted was basically the same as submitted for A. R. No. 81-9 with -he excepti of: the driveways . The new plr n has a safer traffic flow pattern onsite keeping cars and trucks separated . The plan depicts three driveways in lieu of two shown on original plan; two for trucks, allowing one for egress and one for ingress , with the remaining driveway for use by the public and employees . Directional signage was discussed. Previous Conditions of Approval imposed on Administrative Review No. 81-9 were discussed with the applicant. The Board concurred with all Conditions imposed previously with the exception of one General Condition (No. 7) which stated that the applicant' s parcel. map would have to record "prior to issuance of building permits" which was changed to read "prior to- occupancy" . ON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY WEBB, ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW": NO. 82-12 WAS GRANTED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL IMPOSED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL,: A. TO BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS : 1 . The conceptual plot plan received April 7 , 1982 shall be the approved layout, subject to the modifications Y described herein: -7- BZA 4/21/82 Minutes : H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 21 , 1982 Page Fight a. A grading, elevation, and traffic circulation sign plan shall be submitted to the Secretary of the Board for review and approval. If such plans comply with the modifications outlined by the Board, said plans shall be approved and made a permanent part of the administrative file. In its approval action, the Board of Zoning Adjustments considered the following issues relating to the conceptual plan: - Traffic circulation and drives; - Parking layout; - Lot area; - Lot width and lot depth; - Type of use and its relation to property and improvements in the immediate vicinity; - Past administrative action regarding this property. 2. The following plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Secretary of the Board: a. Landscape and irrigation plan complying with Article 979 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code and land- scaping specifications on file in the Department of Public Works. b. Rooftop mechanical equipment screening plan . Said plan shall indicate screening of all rooftop mechanical equipment and shall delineate the type of material proposed to screen said equipment . B. GENERAL CONDITIONS : 1. Storage of waste material in transfer station after working hours is prohibited, unless applicant provides adequate fire protection devices . 2. Landscaped area adjacent to Nichols Street shall be mounded (bermed) per Section 9791 (b) of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 3 . Applicant shall comply with all applicable Fire Code require- ments. 4 . Landscaping along the north and south property lines shall be of high density foilage, 5. Applicant shall provide on-site parking for employees, thereby 3 discouraging employee parking along Nichols Street. BZA 4/21/82 Minutes : H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 21, 1982 Page Nine 6. Equipment shall meet. all Orange County noise ordinance require- ments prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. 7 . Applicant shall record a parcel map consolidating two (2) parcels into one (1) parcel prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, or in the alternative, provide an acceptable recorded copy of a reciprocal drive easement to the Secretary of the Board prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. 8. All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material shall be disposed of at an offsite *facility equipped to handle them. 9. If lighting is included in the parking lot, energy efficient lamps shall be used (e.g. high pressure sodium vapor, metal halide) . All outside lighting shall be directed to prevent "spillage" onto adjacent properties. AYES : Webb, Vogelsang, Smith, Crosby NOES: None ABSTAIN: None • ANqINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 82-13 A cant: Huntington Harbour Anglers To perms a parking lot charity bazzar on May 15, 1982 from 7 : 00 a.m. unti : 00 p.m. at 16898 Algonquin. Staff introduc request with no one present to speak for or against charity bazzar. The Board reviewed th roposal discussing location, flow of traffic in the shopping center, d fire accessways . ON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECO BY VOGELSANG, ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 82-13 WAS GRANTED WITH TH OLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL IMPOSED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1 . The plot plan received April 7 , 1982, hall be the conceptual layout. 2 . A revised site plan showing dimensioned fir accessways shall be submitted for review and approval by the Fi e Department prior to issuance of permits. 3 . The applicant shall obtain all necessary electrical rmits . -9- BZA 4/21/82 ��pz, • • • Minutes: II.B. Board of Ioi) ing Adjustments April 13, 1983 Page Five are required, the apr-)].icant Ghal i be liable for ex ses incurred. 6. All Alcoholic Beverage Control. requirem s shall be met. 7 . Appropriate signs (temporary) fo he direction of traffic and on-site parking shell be ovided by the applicant . Said signs, location, an ntent to be as recommended by the Traffic Divis ' of the Police Department. 8 . The applicant all provide for clean-up of the area each evening a closing of the event. AYES: Godfrey, Kelly, Evans, Vogelsang, Smith NO None STAIN: None ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW N0. 83-13 Applicant: Rainbow Disposal Company, Inc. To permit an addition to a transfer station 1- ii1ding located at 17121 Nichols Street (approx. 660 ft. south of Warner Avenue) . • Chairman Kelly introduced the applicant ' s rec.]uest and stated that this request is categorically exempt, Class. 1 , California Environ- mental Quality Act, 1970 . Secretary Godfrey explained that. Rainbow Disposal wishes to expand a previously approved enlargement (A.R. No. 82-12) of their transfer station in addition to adding an enclosure with a cover . IIe suggested that if the Board approves today' s increased expansion that the s«:Ite conditions imposed on Administrative Review No. 82-12 be complied with; that public access to the recycling area will not be significantl-' encroached upon by the new structure and that the circulation: pattern rentain substantially as previously approved . Further, that in a conversation held with Stan Tkaczyk, Vice-President of Rainbow Disposal , he was assured of compliance with the previously approved plan. Stan Tkaczyk addressed the Board . Ile informed the Board that presently their transfer station enlargement approved on A.R. No. 82-12 is eighty (80) percent completed which they feel will not adequately serve their needs. Fie stated that this new plot plan is an overlay of the previously approved plan with the exception of the expansion to the transfer station. Discussion carried on the environmental impact allowing the transfe� station at subject location, approved not only by the City but by �,0 �/ -5- BZA 4/13/83 i Minutes: II .B. Board of 'honing Adjustments April 13 , 1983 Page Six the Orange County Solid Waste Matia(tement 13()arci . It was stated that Rainbow Disposal. will have t.r) apply for .-I new permit to allow for the increased tonnage project.ec] for ��roc��_:;s.i.ng by the transfer' station to 1, 200 tons per clay; their existing permit allows up to 800 tons per day. Board Member Evans expressed his concern over the long-term implications being evident (deterioration of the roadway in addition to impacting Nichols Street) . Stan Tkaczyk explained that if they were asked by the City to increase the width of Nichols Street in order to be allowed to haul 1 , 200 to 1, 500 tons per day in order to obtain a permit providing their transfer station to run at full capacity they would not be interested I in the increased business created by the County closing down their transfer stations. He felt the proposed enlargement to the transfer station will enhance the situation for the consumers in Huntington Beach and other areas serviced helping to keep rates reduced . Mr . Tkaczyk stated that if they increase their processing to 1 , 200 tons per day an additional four (4 ) semi-trucks would be required . It was felt that the request before the Board was for approval of an expansion to the transfer station; that at a later date the voice of the City may impose conditions if necessary as the authority to , operate a solid waste facility is a bifurcated one requiring both the City and the Orange County Solid Waste Management both to grant approval for an operation of this sort. ON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY VOGELSANG, ADMTN1STRATIVE RIIVIE1,1 NO. 83-13 WAS APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND VOTE FOLLOWTNG: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The revised conceptual site plan received April 5, 1983 shall be the approved layout. In its approval action, the Board of Zoning Adjustments considered the following issues relating to the conceptual plan: Traffic circulation and drives; - Lot area : Lot width and lot depth; Type of use and its relation to property and improvements in the immediate vicinity; Past administrative action regarding this property. General Conditions: • 1. All pertinent Conditions imposed on Administrative Review No. 82-12 shall be complied with. r(� -6- BZA 4/13J83 • • • • Minutes : H.R. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 13 , 1983 Page Seven 2. The public access to the recycling area shall not be signifi- cantly encroached upon by the new structure. 3 . That the circulation pattern established and approved on Administrative Review No. 82-12 will remain. AYES : Godfrey, Smith, Vogelsang NOES: Evans, Kelly ABSTAIN: None ENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 83-559 A licant: Mr . Luis Lopez To p mit consolidation of two (2) parcels into one (1 ) parcel for purpos of constructing a residential structure thereon. Subject property ' s located at 17100 Sims Street (east side of street) . Chairman Ke introduced the application and stated that this request is ca gorically exempt, Class. 15, California Environmental Quality Act, 1 0. Mr. Luis Lopez, pr erty owner, addressed the Board and stated that he had reviewe nd concurred with the Conditions of Approval. The application was rev wed by the Board and fc,und to be in sub- stantial ordinance code c formanc:e . Findings and conditions of approval were discussed . ON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND SMITH, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 83-559 WAS APPROVED WITH FINDIN CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND VOTE FOLLOWING: FINDINGS: l. ' The proposed land consolidation for e construction of a single-family residence is consistent th the City ' s General Plan and is in compliance with the size nd shape of property necessary for this type of development. 2. The site is physically suited for this type development. 3. The General Plan sets forth provisions for this pe of development. 4 . The property was studied and approved for this intens y of land use and for this type of residential structure at a time* the designation was placed on the property. �S� -7- BZA 4/13/83 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 4 , 1984 Page Eight AYES : Godfrey, Evans, Smith, Vincent NOES : None ABSTAIN: None NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 84-9 AND ADMINIS'T'RATIVE REVIEW NO. 84-17 A�licant: Rainbow Disposal -Co. , Inc_. To permit an increase in tonnage from 1, 200 to 1 , 500 tons daily . Site location - 1.7121 Nichols Street. Chairman Smith introduced the application. Staff informed all concerned that Rainbow Disposal Co. , an exist- ing solid waste transfer station for commercial , industrial and residential refuse, is proposing an increase in tonnage from 1, 200 to 1, 500 tons daily. Rainbow Disposal has received approval from the Orange County Solid Waste Enforcement Agency and, if approved by the Board , increased daily tonnage may commence . • Administrative Reviews No. 83-13 and 82-12 approved an expansion to the transfer station building felt to adequately serve the increase in refuse created by the closing of. the County of Oranc.?e Transfer Station. Mr. . Stanley F . Tkaczyk, V. P. )f Rainbow, was present to speak o;) the request . He was informed that a condition of approval imposed on A. R. No. 82-12 requesting that a parcel map consolidating tho t.••:_ parcels into one parcel, or in the alternative, provide an accepLabl; recorded copy of a reciprocal drive easement has not been complied with. The applicant stated this was an oversight on their part ; that a reciprocal drive easement was preferred and could be submitted to the Board within thirty (30) days . He informed the Board that they expect construction to be completed by mid-year, 1984 . Loading, stacking capabilities, access, circulation, and use of a new 950 "B" tractor were discussed . Mr . Tkaczyk conf. ir►,ie'.' that their. services will be open to the general public immedia,01 " completion of their expansion. Fire Dept. . concerns were discussedt i .e . stacking of debris 100/200 ft . beyond the extremity of the building and placement of .fire protective devices . Mr. . Tkaczyk- explained that at Christmas time they had a heavier influx wh.i.ch created a stacking problem felt to be alleviated upon completion and use of the new addition; also, use of the new tractor purchased since that time. They have mPt with the Fire Department , mDve7 their fire protection devices to another location satisfvinc, ttzis • concern. ON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY SMITH, NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 84-9 AND ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO . 84-17 WERE APPROVED .vS '$ FOLLOWS, SUCCEEDED BY VOTE: As,o,'I� -8- BZA 4/4/84-D*l Minutes: H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 4 , 1984 Page Nine CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1 . The revised conceptual site plan dated March 15, 1984 , shall be the approved layout. 2 . All pertinent Conditions imposed on Administrative Review No. 82-12 and 83-13 shall be complied with. 3 . A parcel map shall be submitted prior to final inspection, or in the alternative, provide an acceptable recorded copy of a reciprocal drive easement to the Secretary of the Board within thirty (30) days. 4 . Location of all existing fire protection system equipment shall be approved by the Fire Department. AYES : Godfrey, Evans, Smith NOES : Vincent ABSTAIN: None MINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 84-20 • A icant: Charles Cook and Dr . James A. Ferlita To per t a 1 , 570 sq. ft. addition to an existing building for medical p etice expansion. Subject site location is 6042 Bolsa Avenu Chairman Smith troduced the proposal stating that this request is categorically empt, Class . 1 , under the California Environ- mental Quality Act 1970. Plans for the second sto addition to the existing medical facility were discussed wi Mr . C .M. Thomson, A. I .A . for the project. The applicant stat that they are contemplating two - handicapped parking spaces in ' eu of * one (1) required by Title 24 . It was noted that the plan consi ed of an overage of landscapincl and parking. Conditions for approval were discussed king into consideration the fact that no change .is proposed to th ground level . It was the consensus of all of the Board Memb s that the applica t ' .: site plan was substantially in compliance with de requirements warranting approval of his request . ON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY VINCENT, ADMINISTRAT REVIEW NO. 84-20 WAS CONDITIONALLY APPROVED AS FOLLOWS , SUCCEE BY VO`1• Yt`1 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: `•` 1. A revised site plan shall be submitted depicting the modifica ons -9- BZA 4/4/84 ,14 IDISPOSIt O c0 o�c n P.O. BOX 1026 • HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92647 • PHONE (714) 847-3581 November 14 , 1984 James W. Palin Director of Development Services City of Huntington Beach P.O. Box 190 Dear Mr. Palin: To answer some questions that have arised recently, Rainbow Disposal Company Inc. has been operating its "state-of-the art" transfer station since November of 1983 . We have complied with every requirement that was necessary to con- struct and to operate this facility. During the completed operation of the facility, we have been inspected by the Orange County Enforement Agency on a monthly basis , from the conception of the project and to this date, have never had any health code violations . The South Coast Air Quality Management people have made visits to our facility and have found no violations and have in fact commented that the facility is of the finest they have seen. To further our good neighbor policy, from the beginning of our operation, we retained a pest control company, which by law we are not required to do, to guarantee that no migration or infections of any kind has existed or will ever exist. I welcome tours of our facility by you or any member of your staff . And I hope this will help clarify our performance. If you have any further questions , please feel free to cont- act me. Sincere , HUNTINGTON BEACH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Stanley F. Tkaczyk NOV 14 �84 Vice President T - V • P.O. Box 190 SFT/ew Huntington Beach, CA 92648 4641 LOS PATOS REMVE0 HUN i INGTON BEACH, CA 92649 CITY CLf.ciC CIiY iir (714)840-1827 HUHTIKG—,Gt( 9LLCf!. f,l,(.if. 0ctob 24 , 1984 City of Huntington Beach 7 2000 Mai Street Huntingto Beach , Calif Dear Members of City Council I would like t request that you not take action on LAND USE ELEMENT NO . 84-2/EIR 84- 'Lone Case No . 84-9 , at this time , but to send it back down to the anning Commission for reconsideration . Tiie reason I am requ ting this action is as follows : i filed for the zone cha ge at the same time as rry TT 12206 & CE 84-05 because of the deadline d to in doing so with the city . During these last few months , sinc filing , I have had a market analysis done by Charles Clark , a pla ner here at the city , and have been working with several brokers garding developing this into a commercial project . With the i ut that has been received from those with experience in the deve opment of strip shopping centers , I have been advised that this is n t a good location and that the price of the land is to high for the types of retail and commercial development we would beable to put in . Therefore , I have decided to build ten fo r-plexs and one tri -plex apartment building as shown on TT 12206 . hese buildings are appraised at approximately $730 ,000 . 00 each hich is consistent with the surrounding neighborhood . In closing , I would like to state that I will be vaible to discuss with any of you any questions you may have regardi g my request to withdraw my application for rezoning . Thank You �I K6n Moody tntington beach develo menf services parde tment p S-Af f REPORT To : Planning Commission From: Development Services Date: November 13, 1984 Subjec LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 84-2 AREA 3 .3 PLARCL-BOLSA CHICA AREA AND ZONE CHANGE NO . 84-9 On November 5 , 1984 the City Council reviewed Land Use Element No . 84-2 . Prior to he meeting Council reviewed a letter from the applicant for Are 3 .3 . The amendment would redesignate 3 .0 acres located on the sou east corner of Bolsa Ch.ica Street and Pearce Drive from medium de sity residential to general ccn;merc.ial . In addition, Zone Change o . 84-9 requesting a change front F.2 to C4 was processed concurrently ith the Land Use Amendment . The applicant indicated that he had de ided that he would prefer to develope the site under the existing medium density residential designation. Due to the fact that the Plan ing Commission recommended approval of the amendment and zone change the meeting of October 16 , 1984 ; the City Council referred this r quest for withdrawal back to the Planning Commission . The City Co cil directed that the Planning Commission review this request and eport back to the Council by their November 19 , 1984 meeting. In ddition, the applicants request for residential subdivision Te tative Tract 12206 on the subject property has been appealed to t City Council by adjacent property owners . The appeal is schedule to be heard by the City Council on November 19, 1984. The appl .ica is redesigning the project to take access off of Bolsa Ch.ica St eet rather than Pearce Drive as approved by the Planning Commission. This new design will be presented to the City Council as an alternat ve to the previous layout. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission uphold th it approval of Land Use Element Amendment No. 84-2 and Zone Case No. 4-9 and recommend adoption by City Council . Attachments : 1 . Letter from Ken Moody dated October 24 , 1984 2 . Staff Report dated October 16, 1984 �S J;1P :HS : jr A-f M-23 B y2 $ REQUES'rFOR CITY COUNCIL-ACTION Date oc.tobcr 26, 1984 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, City Administrator �NO Prepared by: James W. Palin, Director , Development Services 0 Subject: LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 84-2/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 84-3 Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Transmitted for public hearing is Lana Use Element Amendment No. 84-2 and Environmental Impact Report No . 84-3 . The amendment addresses a number of proposed changes to the Land Use Element as requested by both private property owners and the City of Huntington Beach . Section 2 .0 of the amendment addresses Administrative Items and Section 3 .0 addresses changes to the General Plan Land Use Map. The requests are being forwarded to the City Council along with the Planning Commission' s recommendation as part of Land Use Element Amendment No. 84-2 . Planning Commission Action : ON MOTION BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY HIGGINS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 84-3 WAS APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES : Higgins , Winchell , Li.vengood, Porter , Erskine , Schumacher , Mirjahangir NOES : None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None The Planning Commission took separate straw votes on each request item. These votes , along with any discussion, are included in the attached draft minutes of the Planning Commission' s October 16 , 1984 meeting . ON MOTION BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY HIGGINS LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 84-2 WAS APPROVED (PER STRAW VOZES ) ADOPTING RESOLUTION NO. 1333 AS AMENDED TO REFLECT PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION, AND RECOMMENDED 1-0 THE CITY COUNCIL FOR I-INAL ADOPTION, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: / AYES : Higgins , Winchell , Li.verigood, Porter , Lrskine , Schumacher , Mirjahangir NOES : None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN : None -�-1?itf, •~3 P10 4/81 y TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Methodology 1.2 Environmental Assessment 2.0 Administrative Items 2.1 Solid Waste Facility 2.2 Consistency with Airport Environs Land Use Plan 3.0 Areas of Concern 3.1 Warner - Nichols Area 3.2 Warner - Magnolia Area 3.3 Pearce - Bolsa Chica Area 4.0 Environmental Changes Appendices A Fiscal Impact Land Use Assumptions B Pearce - Bolsa Chica Market Study C FAA Evaluation of Airport Impact D Initial Studies E Letters of Comment (1254d) Land Use Categories ANTS i G COMM.— CITY COUNCIL oATCaTE NESOLunqu Dare ncsoLunoN ��G) RESIDENTIAL N-6-]6 ❑6T 12-6-76 436e C,, Estate 2un/gac 6-7-71 1196 B-I-T] 448q •y f �. < 9-29-TT 1202 II-T-]T 4551 h. h 1GE � 26-0T 1206 12-I94T 45T2 y7jT Estate 53un/gac e-1-Te I23z a-zI-T6 , ®Estate <_4un/gac Io-2 TII I— a-1.- 4696 / =LOW Density II-21-9 12]2 2 IB T9 4T06 3-6-. 12.1 3 19-T9 4728 / 3�Ifi-80 1261 4)-80 4665 = \ =a r Medium Density Io-zI eo izfie Iz-Is-eo 4936 5 gEGp Medium High Density 5-I9-81 2)3 6 15 BI" 053 G'y�E �.[�7,. 11-3-BI I2)6 12-T-61 5053 R High Density 11-1)-91 1279 12 21 8I 5060 6-2 11 52 /'• / / l 12 20 62 5206 12-19- 1299 25265 4.4-83 1314 5-I6-93 5265 / / \ / - Io-4-e3 Im4 II-zse3 53z) v - - - COMMERCIAL 12-6-03 1315 -7-84 5341 % zi <:'. - +-'1\ ®General 4-3-64 131] 5-]-84 5373 Visitor-Serving RE Office Professional - MIXED USES - Development I::: :.a::a_=ii_`is'i:i' / \ ®Mixed D P i'ii" 'ii= " i€ =' -.:::...:. \ / \ Office/Residential Commercial/Support _3 e . Surt Recreatio n INDUSTRIAL .. General ............. \ �Resource Production Industrial Energy Production I� OPEN SPACE M Water a = - Conservation a� R¢creation Y I C;`OTHER USES Public,Quasi-Public,lnstitutional L._.j Planned Community Ej Planning Reserve Coastal Zone Boundary r // = -- _ �• \ is � _ _ - I -- � _ � c _ _ Y PACIFIC COAST (.z NW pC6AN j PACIFIC PACIFIC OCEAN ® GENERAL PLAN HUNTINGTON BEACH C4LIFORNIA LAND USE DIAGRAM 1 PLANNING DIVISION Adopted December1976 Revised MAY 1984 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report analyzes Amendment 84-2 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 twenty-fourth amendment to the element. Existing General Plan land uses throughout the City are depicted in the attached Land Use Diagram. 1.1 Methodology This amendment to the Land Use Element considers requests to change the land use designations in three areas of the City (Figure 1-1). Two are requests from private property owners and one is a City initiated request. The first site is located southwest of Warner Avenue and Nichols Street. The second is located north of Warner Avenue and west of Magnolia Street. The third is the southeast corner of Pearce Street and Bolsa Chico Street. Being handled administratively are two items: establishment of a new land use designation for solid waste facilities and policy language establishing consistency between the City General Plan and the County Airport Environs Land Use Plan. The amendment requests are analyzed in terms of the existing conditions on the site, anticipated impact on surrounding areas, major land uses and environmental issues, and consistency with adopted City Goals and policies. 0115D >s .3 3. 1 3.2 a -fL 9 \ / Areas of Concern 0 0 a o A2 huntington beach planning division figure 1-1 1.2 Environmental Assessment i Section 15166 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 84-2. An initial study addressing the areas of concern was prepared pursuant to Section 15081 of the State Government Code to identify potentially significant impacts associated with the proposed land use designations. The EIR focuses on those impacts that were determined to be significant. The environmental setting and significant impacts associated with the issue areas identified in the initial ' study are addressed under each area of concern (Sections 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3). Alternative land use designations and feasible mitigation measures to minimize significant effects are also discussed in these sections. Section 4.0 addresses overall environmental changes related to the following considerations: 1) the relationship between local short-term productivity; 2) irreversible or unavoidable environmental changes; and 3) growth inducing impacts. 0115D 2.0 ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS This section addresses staff initiated proposals to add a solid waste facility category to the existing land use plan categories and policy language establishing consistency between the County Airport Environs Land Use Plan and the City General Plan. 2.1 Solid Waste Facility In 1983, the State legislature passed several bills (AB3302, AB3433 and AB 1388) which relate solid waste management to local general plans. The overall intent of this legislation with respect to laws governing solid waste facilities is: 1) To prevent siting of solid waste facilities in incompatible areas; 2) To protect existing and proposed solid waste facilities from encroachment of incompatible land uses; 3) To identify potential sites for solid waste facilities; 4) To provide a more comprehensive and coordinated siting process for solid waste facilities. In siting a solid waste facility the law requires that local agencies make a finding of consistency with the general plan. In order for this to occur the jurisdiction must identify the facility on the land use diagram of the land use element based on findings of compatibility with surrounding uses. In order to provide a mechanism for identifying solid waste facilities in the Huntington Beach General Plan, a Solid Waste Facility land use category should be created and incorporated into the Land Use Element. 0115D 2.1.1 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the Solid Waste Facility category be added to the Land Use Element. Solid waste facilities include all facilities accepting municipal solid waste such as dump sites (excepting Class III sites), transfer stations, and biomass conversion projects. It is intended that solid waste facilities be located within or predominantly surrounded by industrial and/or public/quasi-public utility areas, and be in close proximity to designated truck routes. 2.2 Consistency with Airport Environs Land Use Plan Section 21675 of the Public Utilities Code of the State of California requires the Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County to formulate a comprehensive land use plan for the area surrounding each public airport within Orange County. The purpose of the plan (Airport Environs Land Use Plan) is to protect the public from the adverse effects of aircraft noise, to ensure that people and facilities are not concentrated in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents, and to ensure that no structures or activities adversely affect navigable airspace. Implementation of the plan is designed to forestall urban encroachment on airports and allow for their continued operation. The Airport Plan's primary concern for the Meadowlark area centers on how building heights of future development may affect the airport's navigable airspace. Recent State legislation has made it mandatory that the City's General Plan and/or implementing zoning regulations be consistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan. 2.2.1 Staff Recommendation In order for the Airport Land Use Commission to be able to make a finding of consistency with the City General Plan, staff recommends that the following policy language be added to the Land Use Element: "Any project which requires a notice of proposed construction or alteration by the FAA, under FAR part 77, shall submit a copy of the FAA application to the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC), and provide the City with the FAA and ALUC responses. If the ALUC requests review of the project, then the project shall be submitted to the Commission. Notice of any ALUC determination of inconsistency, with the Commission's Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP), must be given to the City within 60 calendar days from the date of referral of the application to the ALUC, and shall be considered before the City takes any action on the project. If the Commission fails to give such notice of inconsistency within that period, the proposed project shall be deemed consistent with the AELUP." 0115D 3.0 AREAS OF CONCERN The section addresses each request area identified in Figure 1-1. 3.1 Warner - Nichols Area 3.1.1 Background This area of concern covers approximately 4.65 acres west of Nichols Street and 1,000 feet south of Warner Avenue. The Department of Development Services requests that the site be redesignated from General Industrial to Solid Waste Facility. The property is currently zoned MI, Light Industrial District and is occupied by the Rainbow Disposal Company. The Rainbow Disposal Company provides three basic services: a refuse collection operation, transfer station, and a recycling center for the Huntington Beach/Westminster area. 3.1.2 Analysis The study area has been included in this amendment in order to comply with recent legislation relating solid waste management to local general plans (see Section 2.1 of this report). The law requires that solid waste facilities be depicted on local general plan land use diagrams if they meet local land use compatibility criteria. 0115D The applicant's proposal for 152 apartments would have the same impact on the surrounding land uses and circulation that a medium density development would have. The purpose behind the proposed mini warehouse units is to provide a buffer between the proposed medium high density residential and the existing low density neighborhood to the west. However, the proposed plan shows the storage buildings built at zero Iot line which would also have adverse impacts on the adjacent single family homes. In addition, the proposed warehouse constitutes an industrial use, and it would be spot planning and zoning to place such a use in an area surrounded by residential uses. 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 (see Appendix A). For purposes of analysis, the revenues and expenditures of each alternative were projected over a .10 - year period, 1984 - 1994. The results are summarized in the table below: _AL_T I A_LT 2 _A_LT 3 _A_L_T 4 Mixed Low Density Medium General Development Residential Density Res Commercial ----- ------- ---- -------- Revenue $500,662 $249,288 $576,860 $298,417 Cost $456,830 $201,162 $445,882 $565,095 Revenue Minus Cost $ 41,832 $ 48,127 $130,978 —$266,678 Revenue/Cost 1.09 1.24 1.29 .53 3. Housing The City's Housing Element of the General Plan includes policies aimed at increasing housing opportunities for households with low and moderate incomes and promoting the availability of rental housing stock. The applicant's proposal for 152 apartment units would increase the supply of rental housing and would possibly create opportunities for households with moderate incomes. 4. Public Services and Utilities a. Sewers The area of concern is served by an existing eight-inch sewer line located at Conner Drive that terminates at the western property line of the site. The line runs through the single family tract into a 69-inch County trunk sewer in Warner Avenue. The Orange County Sanitation District has indicated that all the alternatives considered could be accommodated by connecting into the existing eight-inch Conner Drive line. The eight-inch line should, however, be analyzed for capacity by the developer. 0115D b. Water Existing uses within the area of concern draw water from an existing eight-inch line in Conner Drive. A 12-inch line is located along the north side of Warner Avenue connecting into a City water well located south of the site. The Department of Public Works has indicated that any change in use of the subject property would require connection of an eight inch line into the 12-inch line in Warner Avenue with a cross connection into the area of concern. Development would further require connection of the existing eight-inch water main in Royal Drive into the existing main in Conner Drive. The Conner Drive main must also be connected into the existing mains serving the commercial development south of the site. Once this is completed, adequate water supply could be provided for any of the land use alternatives considered. C. Drainage Drainage from the area of concern is conveyed directly into the County flood control channel. The Flood Control District has indicated that runoff from development under any of the proposed land use designations could be adequately accommodated by the existing facility. Should the open drainage channel be enclosed to provide additional parking, special drains would have to be installed to prevent excess storm water in the channel from backing up onto the site during heavy storms. d. Parks The area of concern is located just south of Pleasant View Elementary School, two acres of which are developed as a neighborhood park. The Recreation Element indicates that park demand in the quarter section where the area of concern is located will be met or exceeded at ultimate development. Residential development would increase the demand for park facilities, but due to the park's proximity to the area of concern, the demand would be adequately met. Mini storage development on the site would act to reduce park demand within the quartersection. e. Police and Fire Protection Police service for the area of concern is provided by the City of Huntington Beach which operates from a central facility located at Main Street and Yorktown Avenue. No additional staffing is anticipated should the site develop as Low Density Residential. Development of 152 apartments and the mini warehouses or development of the entire site as Medium Density Residential may require an additional officer. An office development would require one to two additional officers. Fire response to the area of concern is provided by the City of Huntington Beach from the Murdy Station, located south of Edinger Avenue on the west side of Gothard Street. Design of the access on Magnolia Street and Warner Avenue should allow adequate width for two fire response units to enter the site simultaneously (24 foot minimum). A fire access gate must be provided at Conner Drive to provide a second access to the adjacent low density residential development to the west. 0115D f. Schools The area of concern is located within the Oceanview School District and is served by Pleasant View Elementary School, Westmont Middle School and Ocean View High School. Cue to a downward trend in student enrollment, the schools could easily accommodate the increase in students generated by any of the residential alternatives considered for the area of concern. A general commercial development would have no impact on the area's schools. g. Gas and Electric Utilities and Telephone Natural gas service and electrical service are provided by the Southern California Gas Company and Southern California Edison, respectively. A three-inch gas line currently runs onto the site from Magnolia Street, which is adequate to accommodate any of the alternative land uses being considered. Electrical service is available from existing 12KV overhead lines along the site's northern property line. 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. General Telephone has indicated that adequate service could be provided for the area of concern under any of the land use alternatives. 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. Internal street circulation within the project would have to be designed to accommodate the company's refuse trucks without any backing up required. 5. Traffic and Circulation The area of concern fronts on Magnolia Street, a primary arterial with an average daily traffic volume of 32,000 vehicles. Warner Avenue is a major arterial with an average daily volume of 27,000 vehicles. Projected daily traffic volumes generated by the alternative land use designations are: 0115D I Land Use Alternative Traffic Generation Low Density Residential 560 trips/day Medium Density Residential 825-1,050 trips/day Mixed Use 152 apartments 836 Mini storage _80 Total 916 Commercial General 2,250 Development of general commercial uses would contribute significantly higher traffic volumes to local arterials than would a low density residential use. The medium density and mixed use alternatives would generate moderate traffic volumes. The site's limited accessibility and the location of the freeway off ramp present considerable circulation problems that will be difficult to mitigate for any alternative. A new motel across Magnolia Street from the site (Fountain Valley) will add traffic, congesting the intersection to a greater extent than previously projected. The motel is a three story building with 48 units and is projected to generate 460 trips/day. The only access is right in, right out on Magnolia Street. Access to the site is complicated by the freeway off ramp on Magnolia Street which creates a steady flow of traffic past the site during the afternoon rush hour. Due to the high traffic volumes generated by the off ramp, the Public Works Department has indicated that access to the site from Magnolia Street could not be signalized and should be limited to "right in" and "right out" turns only. There is a possibility for a left turn lane to provide ingress from northbound Magnolia Street with a redesigned raised median. The driveway access on Warner Avenue would be limited to "right in" and "right out" turns only. I Staff recommends that Conner Drive remain closed to through traffic to avoid routing additional vehicles through the existing single-family neighborhood west of the area of concern. Conner Drive should be properly finished off with a cul-de-sac. The Fire Department has indicated that a fire access only gate must be provided to allow a second access into the single-family residential tract. Presently the only access to the neighborhood is Asari Lane. The Fire Department considers a single entrance an unnecessary risk that should be alleviated. 6. Environmental Issues a. Noise The area of concern lies directly south of the San Diego Freeway and west of Magnolia Street. Approximately 65 percent of the site falls with the Ldn 60 contour, with a narrow area along Magnolia Street within the Ldn 65 contour (based on projected ground transportation noise contours for 1990). Any of the land uses considered for the site would be negatively impacted by traffic noise, particularly the residential alternatives. Special noise attenuation measures such as unit modification, building placement, walls and landscaping could be employed to reduce this exposure and guarantee interior noise levels of less than Ldn 45, required by California insulation standards. 0115D b. Air Quality Development of the area of concern under any of the proposed alternative designations would adversely affect air quality in the South Coast Air Basin, primarily due to increased automobile and truck traffic generated by land uses. The projected daily emission generated by the alternative land use designations are as follows: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (70 units) Mobile Emissions .037 tons/day Stationary Emissions Negligible _ TOTAL .037 tons/day MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (150 units) Mobile Emissions .055 - .070 tons/day Stationary Emissions Negligible _ TOTAL .055 - .070 tons/day COMMERCIAL GENERAL (offices) Mobile Emissions .14 tons/day Stationary Emissions Negligible _ TOTAL .14 tons/day MIXED DEVELOPMENT (152 apts + Mini Warehouse Storage) Mobile Emissions .060 tons/day Stationary Emissions Negli ible TOTAL .060 tons/day 3.2.3 Staff Recommendation After analyzing the various alternative land use designations for the area of concern, staff recommends the area remain designated General Commercial. The applicant's request for Mixed Development including Medium High Density Residential and Industrial would be inappropriate. Residential use should be discouraged due to the area of concern's proximity to the San Diego Freeway and associated noise and environmental impacts. In the past, residential use has been rejected for the site. Since that time traffic volumes have increased. Staff recommends that the previous decision for General Commercial designation be upheld since office-professional uses would have fewer impacts ' on the adjacent single-family homes. 3.3 Pearce-Balsa Chica Area 3.3.1 Background Area of concern 3.3 is a request by Ken and Janet Moody to change the General Plan designation on 3.0 acres of property located at the southeast corner of Pearce Street and Balsa Chica Street from Medium Density Residential to General Commercial. 0115D The site is occupied by a nursery at the corner of Pearce Street and Bolsa Chica Street with a single brick residence and garage located in the rear along Pearce Street. The southern one-third of the property is vacant. The amendment analyzes two potential land use designations for the 3.0 acre site: (1) Medium Density Residential and (2) General Commercial. The applicant is requesting a change in land use designation for the purpose of constructing a 61,800 square foot retail commercial shopping plaza. The project proposes to utilize approximately 2.34 additional acres of existing commercially planned property directly south of the area of concern along Bolsa Chica Street. This project will be integrated with existing office and commercial developments to the south. 3.3.2 Analysis 1. Land Use The City's General Plan designates property to the east and west of the study area as Medium Density Residential (Figure 3-5). The area north of the site is designated Low Density Residential, and the area south of the study area is designated General Commercial. The area of concern is currently zoned R2, Medium Density Residential district (Figure 3-6). Property to the north is zoned RI (Low Density Residential District); to the east is R2 (Medium Density Residential District); to the south is (Q) C4 (Qualified Highway Commercial District; and to the west is R3 (Medium HIgh Density Residential District). Surrounding land uses include a single-family subdivision to the north across Pearce Street, medium density condominiums to the west across Bolsa Chica Street, an open storage area and single residence to the south, and a mix of new apartments and older single-family homes to the east. Medium density residential development in the area of concern could accommodate approximately 30 units (10 units/acre). A medium density designation of the site is generally in character with existing and planned land uses in the area. Residential densities are similar to the east and west, and with proper setbacks and buffering could be compatible with the commercial area to the south. Pearce Street separates the site from the single-family neighborhood to the north. The applicant has proposed to develop approximately 48,600 square feet of commercial uses on the site. This would include a nursery of 5,200 square feet, a restaurant of 9,120 square feet and first floor shops and second floor shops of a commercial plaza totaling 34,280 square feet. These uses would be integrated with two parcels of commercial property on the south which would accommodate a mini-department store of 13,200 square feet. The subject property is located approximately 900-1300 feet north of the Bolse Chica Street and Warner Avenue intersection. The distance of the site from this intersection would appear to limit exposure for commercial uses. However, Warner Avenue and Bolsa Chica Street are both designated as major arterials on the Circulation Plan of Arterial Streets and Highways which would support a broader commercial area. At similar locations in the City (such as the intersection of Warner Avenue/Goldenwest Street), commercial land use designations have been extended similar distances along the arterials, and remained economically viable and compatible with surrounding uses. 0115D ui1,1:■�1� �` 1u11111111 11 1111 ' �' 1��1n11NiN1 811�1111 DID gun., TO � � NIr111111 1 ■ -_: � ■ � I�11111111 � �a� ' :1. ■ i■ ■i 111111111;INn _ ��a� C � nisi■ • � it �� �1■,� ���11'�� -;S_ • ; '�' all" , �� i •�i i%I��N � DID 11'.7 t t$ • Do( mi: ■ ■■M� EAGLE • .�e nrl r�I�G■ir� � ���r _ �� �■H■' . W' I I IT OW MEADLARK DRRI I re'•y,• DR OANO DR _ - RI Y : 1 R I DR- M H VENTURI R Id RI RI RI W RI RI RI RI RI o RI I RI 0 c f c D —_ a u z z g ,IO i3 z < a 0 c 5T00111"AV F z L' R2 C4 i t M H h EAL EMTE W MIDDLE=Off !L0 RI I RI RI —f RI RI RI NEIL pppp K :a�� :�m.o1 , R2 R2 R2 = C4 f '" CR oywo:u " 2 R2 R2 MH x RI RI R3 R2 t D. RI RI ROS W b TALL °' 1 C F- R CF_R R2 o RI RIFIR RI � ,L,�,�<v�2i R 2 R 2 , 3��, ' R2' RI �onio» R 1 RI R2 R2 sT (Q)MH =RI < ROSc R2 R2 R2 R2 R3 n•��. I � RI -MILO S, R3 : �a RI ! a C2 ROS I. R3 9~ 4.... $ R3 R3 = R3 c 2 i C4 j � — L.- Ry M_.... ....... gg WARIER AVE iaJ r"..Cq -.R R5 ��CeIO)'C4�, RI — -- RI R R3 ` `a'E a�_ I ete i EL DORA00 OR ROGER s 6 .,o.. R3 R3 Ca' �.; R2 R2 RI ;RI IR i z V i�..�'�_ll._i___ _.�� a,Krer.o.R2 o R I REN LE N nNa RE R3- 9 - a C2=I R2 N " F i RI RI I RI ICI RI n^ ORo a RI a RI ; RI W RI RI lI RI , \,R3 {� Z o, iR, a RI RI $: R3-23 ? GLENFW OR -�� RI-CZ `. ..Ri ..a�R ;R R3 RI W� RI J" V / RI_CZ RI KENILWORTN RI R2-Po-I4-C ` ♦�CS •6 'I D 51 - - Q•L .�S�E9'�E'il^.'1�f 0000' -- -off R I-CZ RI /.,. .., L.L.D•WDI R. : VRLTO $W J C F-E Existing Zoning Area of Concern 3 . 3 1 @3 o @40 huntington beach planning division figure 3-6 The Bolsa Chica/Warner intersection may be capable of supporting similar intensities of commercial development. However, existing developments are fragmented and small in scope. There are no major shopping centers at the intersection with supermarket, drugstore or other anchors. The only part of the intersection remaining where a major shopping center could be constructed is an approximate 10 - 15 acre site extending east along Warner Avenue. This area is now part of Meadowlark Airport and under a single ownership. It is questionable as to how much commercial development can be supported at the intersection. Perhaps additional commercial uses could be economically viable along both Warner and Bolsa Chica. If not, however, a decision will be necessary as to which extension should be emphasized in terms of the most desirable mix of commercial uses and economic viability. A marketing study is presented in Appendix B of this analysis to aid decision-makers in answering these questions. The applicant has indicated that portions of the proposed commercial center would be two stories in height. This height would not be significantly different from the medium density areas to the east and west. Lower intensity uses, such as the nursery and restaurant, would be one story in height and located at the north end of the site. This would provide compatibility with the single-family neighborhood north of Pearce Street. The subject property is located less than one-quarter mile from Meadowlark Airport, and consequently any new development comes under the purview of the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission. Recent legislation has made it mandatory that the City's General Plan and implementing zoning regulations be consistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan. The City has taken steps to meet this requirement by incorporating Section 2.2 of this amendment into the General Plan. The Airport Plan's primary concern for the Meadowlark area centers on how heights of future development may adversely affect the airport's navigable airspace. It is expected that any proposed development under the General Commercial and Medium Density Residential land use designations will not exceed two stories. The Federal Aviation Agency has been asked to prepare an evaluation of such a height at the subject location, and has indicated that the proposal will not have any adverse impact on airport operations (Appendix C). 2. Economic Considerations a. Fiscal Impact 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 (see Appendix A), For purposes of analysis, the revenues and expenditures of each alternative were projected over a 10-year period, 1984-1994. The results are summarized in the table below: 0115D Alt. 1 _Alt._2 Medium Density General Condos Commercial Revenue $139,154 $229,278 Cost $135,902 $276,299 Revenue Minus Cost $ 3,252 — $ 47,021 Revenue/Cost 1.02 .83 b. Marketing Analysis A marketing study was also performed to analyze the capability of the Bolsa Chica/Warner intersection to support additional commercial uses, and is presented in Appendix B. 3. Housing Approving the applicant's request for a General Commercial designation would have no significant impact on the City's housing stock. A redesignation to Medium Density Residential could result in an expansion of the City's housing stock, but the addition would not be significant due to the small size of the area. Medium Density Residential development, however, would offer the possibility of increased affordability to potential homebuyers. 4. Public Services and Utilities a. Sewers An 8-inch sewer line runs in Bolsa Chica Street. Connection into this line would provide adequate sewer service for both of the alternatives considered for the study area. b. Water The area of concern is presently unserved by water facilities with the exception of an 8-inch line in Pearce Street which serves the existing nursery and single-family homes to the north. An 8-inch water main would be required in Bolse Chica Street to complete the loop system between Warner Avenue and Pearce Street. Once this is accomplished, development would be possible under any of the alternatives considered for the study area. C. Drainage The Public Works Department has indicated that with proper grading the site would optimally drain to Bolsa Chica Street which has adequate capacity to accommodate storm drainage from any of the proposed land use alternatives. 0115D d. Parks Gibbs Park, a 5.0 acre neighborhood park facility, is located within the same quarter section as the study area. The area of concern also falls within the service area of Marina Community Park, according to the parks analysis contained in the Recreation Element to the General Plan. Staff believes that the Medium Density Residential alternative would be adequately served by existing park facilities in the area. Commercial development would not increase recreational demand. e. Police and Fire Protection Police service for the area of concern is provided by the City of Huntington Beach which operates from a central facility located at Main Street and Yorktown Avenue. Because of the small size of the study area no additional staffing is anticipated should the site develop under any of the alternatives considered in this report. Fire response to the area of concern is provided by the City of Huntington Beach from the Heil Avenue Station located approximately one mile northeast of the study area. Because of the close proximity of the fire station and the accessibility of the arterial location, no significant concerns are anticipated at this time in providing adequate fire protection for any of the alternatives considered for the site. f. Schools The area of concern is located within the Oceanview Elementary School District and Huntington Beach High School District and is served by Harbor View School and Marina High School. Due to a downward trend in student enrollment, the schools could easily accommodate the increase in students generated by the residential alternative considered for the area of concern. A general commercial development has no impact on the area's schools. g. Gas, Electrical and Telephone Utilities Natural gas service and electrical service are provided by the Southern California Gas Company and Southern California Edison, respectively. The Southern California Edison Company has indicated that electrical load requirements can be met for any of the land uses considered for the study area provided that electrical demand does not exceed estimates, and there are no unexpected outages to major sources of electrical supply. Similarly, the Southern California Gas Company foresees no difficulty in serving future development under any of the proposed land uses provided current natural gas supplies continue to be available. The General Telephone Company, which provides telephone service for Huntington Beach, has indicated that adequate service can be provided for the area of concern under any of the land use alternatives. h. Solid Waste Disposal 0115D i 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 assuming there is adequate access to accommodate the company's refuse trucks. 5. Traffic & Circulation The area of concern fronts on Bolsa Chica Street, a primary arterial with an average daily traffic volume of 34,000 vehicles. Bolsa Chica has a capacity for approximately 45,000 vehicles (between Warner and Heil) which allows considerable growth. Projected daily traffic volumes from the study area are estimated as follows: Land Use Alternative Traffic Generation Medium Density Residential (30 Units) 200 trips/day Commercial General Nursery 255 Restaurant 1,500 Shops (2 levels) 1 L028 Total 2,783 trips/day Access to the site for either alternative could be accomplished with ingress and egress from Pearce Street with no significant impact on the surrounding residential neighborhoods. It is preferable not to have ingress or egress from Bolsa Chica. If unavoidable, one access point could be allowed, as far south of Pearce as possible. 6. Environmental Issues a. Noise The area of concern lies along a primary arterial (Bolsa Chica Street). Based on projected 1990 Ground Transportation Noise Exposure Impacts, the majority of the site falls within the Ldn 65 noise contour, with only a small portion along Bolsa Chica Street within the Ldn 70 noise contour. These noise levels are within acceptable levels for commercial development. Residential development, however, would be affected by traffic noise, but special mitigation measures such as unit modification, walls, berming and/or landscaping could be employed to reduce this noise exposure and guarantee acceptable noise levels of less than Ldn 45. b. Air Quality Development of the area of concern under either of the proposed alternative designations would impact air quality in the South Coast Air Basin, primarily due to increased automobile and truck traffic generated by land uses. The projected daily emissions generated by the alternative land use designations are as follows: 0115D Land Mobile Stationary Total Use Sources _Sources Med. Den. Res. .048 Negligible .048 General Commercial .472 Negligible .472 The estimated amount of pollution from automobile traffic may be reduced as newer, more efficient vehicles replace older models and as public transit is expanded. 3.3.3 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the applicant's request, redesignating the 3.0 acre site from Medium Density Residential to General Commercial. Approval of the applicant's request will allow for the development of a commercial plaza on the 3.0 acre site. This development would be integrated with 2.34 additional acres of underutilized commercial property and existing commercial developments to the south to complete the project. The comprehensive nature of the project would allow the new commercial area to meet locational criteria specified in the General Plan. The commercial designation could be compatible with the Low Density Residential area north of Pearce, provided that during consideration of development entitlements, single-story and low intensity uses are sited at the north end of the property. The marketing analysis conducted for the site additionally suggests that the area of concern is capable of supporting commercial uses in conjunction with others that could develop on the Meadowlark Airport site. i 0115D 4.0 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 recommended land use changes in Section 3.0. 4.1 Short-term and Long-term Productivity Amendment 84-2 does not in and of itself create long term impacts. Rather, it makes changes in the general types of land uses that may be allowed on a particular area at the time of development. Amendment 84-2 seeks to identify short-range issues within a context of long-range goals, policies, and environmental planning programs. The amendment itself acts as 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 would have significant short-term effects, such as creating non-conforming uses, reducing or increasing intensity of development permitted, and providing stimulus for development. 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. 0115D 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. 4.3 Growth Inducing Impacts The proposed amendment is estimated to have a growth inducing effect on one area of concern and a growth reducing effect in another area of concern, generating a net increase in population of 158 over the City's existing General Plan. Since the estimated increase is small, the increased demand on public services and utilities would be negligible. Incremental effects on air quality, water quality, traffic and noise levels should be mitigated by acting in accord with General Plan policies and programs. An Air Quality Management Plan for the south coast area has been developed based on population projections which reflect the existing general plans of this City and other jurisdictions. If the alternatives chosen in this General Plan Amendment result in a net gain in population over and above that predicted by the existing General Plan, then the amendment may be inconsistent with the region's Air Quality Management Plan. Mitigation measures would include any actions at the project level or City-wide to reduce increases in automobile traffic and increase the use of mass transit facilities. 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 City and County-wide to reduce these impacts such as: 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. Waterspread where appropriate to recharge the underground water supply. 4. Meter water and encourage repair of leaky connections to stimulate more economical use. 5. Reduce consumption of toilets and showers by requiring appropriate modifications to these appliances. 6. Prohibit the use of open gas lighting in public or private buildings. 7. Strategically place electric lights to maximize their efficiency. Their size and power consumption should be minimized as much as possible. B. Discourage electrical heating in public and private structures. Encourage solar-assisted heating systems. 9. Encourage the use of reflecting and/or insulating glass in structures where windows are not shaded by exterior architectural projections or natural plants. 0115D APPENDIX A Fiscal Impact Land Use Assumptions Area 3.2 and Area 3.3 (1254d) Area 3.2 In cooperation with Ultrasystems, Inc., the computerized fiscal impact methodology was used to analyze the proposed land uses considered for the Magnolia - Warner Area of Concern 3.2 Four land use alternatives were evaluated for the 10.4 + acre site: 1. Medium High Density Residential (approximately 22 units per acre) 152 apartment units on 7.10 acres with an estimated market value of $60,000 per unit; and Light Industrial - mini warehouse (82,790 square foot structure) on 3.30 acres with a market value of $60 per square foot. 2. Low Density Residential (approximately six (6) units per acre) 64 condominium units with an estimated market value of $130,000 per unit. 3. Medium Density Residential (approximately 14 units per acre) 150 condominium units with an estimated market value of $120,000 per unit. 4. Commercial Office (150,000 square foot structure) with an estimated market value of $125 per square foot. Results: Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Apartments Low-Density Med.-Density Commercial Mini-Whse. Condominium Condominium Office Revenues $500,662 $249,288 $576,860 $2989417 Cost 458,830 201,162 445,882 565,095 Revenue Minus Cost 41,832 48,127 130,978 —266,678 Revenue to Cost Ratio 1.09 1.24 1.29 .53 The above table indicates that, over a ten year period, all of the residential alternative and the mixed development will generate a surplus to the City ranging from $41,832 for mixed development and $130,978 for medium density condominiums (14 units/acre). An office professional use on the 10.4 + acre site has a negative cash flow projection of $266,678. Qualification of Results It must be noted that the results of the fiscal impact analysis should only be considered to be approximations of the costs and revenues associated with the land use alternatives. Actual taxable building values, spendable resident incomes and commercial sales tax generation rates may vary from those figures used to operate the model. Such variations, along with unforeseen State tax formula changes, may substantially affect the actual revenues generated. City expenditures may also vary from estimated levels. As such, the fiscal impact results should be recognized as approximations and should be considered in comparative terms only, rather than as absolute projections of costs and revenues. If cost and revenue tables for different alternatives appear to be somewhat close to the same, then the alternatives should be considered to have identical fiscal impacts rather than measurable differences. Additionally, fiscal impact results which are close to the breakeven point should be considered to be inconclusive rather than actual statements of whether a land use will result in a fiscal surplus or a deficit to the Ctiy. (1254d) Area 3.3 In cooperation with Ultrasystems, Inc., the computerized fiscal impact methodology was used to analyze the proposed land use considered for the Bolsa Chica and Peirce Area of Concern 3.3. Two land use alternatives were evaluated for the 3.0+ acre site: 1. Medium Density Residential (approximately 14 units per acre) 43 apartment units with an estimated market value of $75,000 per unit. 2. General Commercial (48,600 square feet of structure) with an estimated market value of $125 per square foot. Results: Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Medium Density Apartments General Commercial Revenue $139,154 $229,278 Cost 1359902 276,299 Revenue Minus Cost 3,252 -47,021 Revenue to Cost Ratio 1.02 .83 The above table indicates that, over a ten year period, the residential alternative medium density apartments (14 units/acre) will generate a surplus of $3,252. For the same period, a general commercial use will have a negative cash flow of $47,021. Qualification of Results It must be noted that the results of the fiscal impact analysis should only be considered to be approximations of the costs and revenues associated with the land use alternatives. Actual taxable building values, spendable resident incomes and commercial sales tax generation rates may vary from those figures used to operate the model. Such variations, along with unforeseen State tax formula changes, may substantially affect the actual revenues the fiscal impact results should be recognized as approximations and should be considered in comparative terms only, rather than as absolute projections of costs and revenues. If cost and revenue tables for different alternatives appear to be somewhat close to the same, then the alternatives should be considered to have identical fiscal impacts rather than measurable differences. Additionally, fiscal impact results which are close to the breakeven point should be considered to be inconclusive rather then actual statements of whether a land use will result in a fiscal surplus or a deficit to the City. (1254d) APPENDIX B Pearce-Bolsa Chica Market Study Area 3.3 (1254d) PEARCE-BOLSA CHICA MARKET ANALYSIS INTRODUCTION: Land Use Element Amendment 84-2 addresses a request by a private property owner to redesignate approximately 3.0 acres of land south of Pearce Street and east of Bolsa Chica Street from medium density residential to general commercial. The intent of the amendment is to incorporate the subject property into a larger shopping area that would include 2.34 acres of commercially designated parcels to the south. Such a development would extend commercial uses 1300 feet along Bolsa Chica Street between Warner Avenue and Pearce Street. Due to landownership patterns, much of the commercial property at the intersection of Warner Avenue and Bolsa Chica Street have developed in a fragmented and piecemeal manner. As a result, the development of a neighborhood shopping center with major food and drug anchors has been precluded in much of the area. The only remaining opportunity for such a development, should demand support it, would be a portion of the Meadowlark Airport site along Warner Avenue east of Bolsa Chica Street. This area was the subject of a General Plan amendment request in 1981 which was eventually withdrawn. The options to develop neighborhood convenience uses on the Meadowlark site and/or at the Pearce-Bolsa Chica site warrants a re-evaluation of the present and future demand for commercial property and land uses in this area of the City. Commercial uses can be generally classified into five categories based on the size and location of the facility, the kinds of goods and services offered, and the size of the market area and population served. These categories are: Convenience: - 1/2 to 1 1/2 acres in size - located at intersection of secondary or local arterial streets - 1/2 mile radius market area - 3000 people served Neighborhood: - 1 1/2 to 10 acres in size - located at major or primary arterial intersections - supermarket and/or drug store plus 10-15 smaller retailers, services, or offices - 1 mile radius market area - 10,000 people served Community: - 10 to 35 acres in size - located at major or primary arterial intersections - mini-department store or supermarket anchors plus a variety of other stores - 10 to 15 minute drive market area - 15,000 or more people served Regional: - 35 or more acres in size - located at major arterial and freeway - 1 to 5 department stores plus other retailers - up to 30 minute drive market area - 500,000 people served Specialty: - size varies - located on major arterials or in tourist areas (0141D) uses vary, usually center around a theme market area varies population served varies Because of its location, the intersection of Boise Chica Street and Warner Avenue would not be an optimum location for both regional and community commercial centers. It is three miles from the nearest freeway, and due to its proximity to the coast draws essentially on a 180 degree market area. Regional centers cater to a market of approximately 500,000 persons; in a suburban area like Orange County this translates roughly to a five to ten mile radius market area. Presently, there are two regional centers located in or adjacent to the City of Huntington Beach (Huntington Center and Westminster Mall) as well as two additional regional centers within a twenty minute drive (South Coast Plaza in Costa Mesa and Newport Center in Newport Beach). The existence of these competing centers nearby and the poor locational qualities of the site make development of a regional commercial facility unfeasible at Boise Chica Street and Warner Avenue. Community commercial centers operate on roughly a two to three mile radius service area. At the present time, a number of community shopping centers exist within three miles of Bolsa Chica and Warner. These facilities are located at the intersections of Algonquin Street and Boardwalk Drive (87,200 square feet); Edinger Avenue and Springdale Street (southwest corner - 132,280 square feet); Goldenwest Street and Edinger Avenue (southwest corner - 169,850 square feet, southeast corner - 197,887 square feet); and Goldenwest Street and Warner Avenue (northwest corner - 173,157 square feet, northeast corner - 130,000 square feet). Using the formula of one community center per 15,000 persons, the area west of Beach Boulevard and north of Talbert Avenue, which houses approximately 75,000 persons, could be expected to support five such community centers. The six centers listed above appear to provide the quantity and variety of community stores and services needed for the northwest portion of Huntington Beach. Although the question of central location and convenient freeway access are not as crucial a consideration in siting community centers as with regional centers, the 180 degree market areas offered by Bolsa Chica and Warner site is a deterrent to developing a community center considering the competition from existing facilities in the area. e The potential may exist for a specialty shopping center in vicinity of the area of concern. However, some of the dollars used in calculating supportable space may be drawn to existing facilities or future sites in close proximity with greater drawing potential. Any new speciality shopping facility would have to compete with nearby Peter's Landing, a 60,000 square foot development in Huntington Harbour featuring a variety of restaurants and specialty shops. Within one mile south of the Bolsa Chice Street and Warner Avenue site, speciality commercial/visitor serving uses are being planned as a part of the Orange County Local Coastal Plan and State Coastal Conservancy Habitat Plan for the unincorporated Bolse Chica. Both agencies have been coordinating their planning efforts for the Bolsa Chice, and will submit the approved Coastal Conservancy plan to the State Coastal Commission in November, 1984. The existing plan would designate approximately 35 acres of land in the Bolsa Chica for visitor serving uses, which would feature a hotel, and a variety of restaurants and marina-related speciality shops. As with any specialty commercial or visitor serving uses developed along the coast, the City's efforts to revitalize the downtown area could also be impacted. Given these considerations, the development of a specialty commercial center at Bolsa Chica Street and Warner Avenue is not visualized as feasible or desirable. While the problems of location, access, and competition make the intersection of Bolsa Chica Street and Warner Avenue an undesirable location for regional, community, and (0141D) E Ip I MH R2 11 I C E I :'�c` ''! q J—I C2 % RI-C2 RI �c: A. CF.E. !I'�U 5a RI - .wu cr. , I , 'l l RFCZ !II MH — — -----� MH_ I RI wl' i J. TIT, r IJ I I R2 R2 Icn I U3 a I R. jfl ! r RI --.�C \ l _-- �_. MH I�RZ R2 CQ }t� n RI PI rRl cue 2�,� r y,. R2 1�� T II'ry I i I,. 'B al y� R I 1 2 .IRz� Rz i i° •I CF-R Ri ROS RI R ( CF-R R3 R2R2 R2rR2�c ti,.rf:l �;R2r ir, n ct ' (Q)MH � R ,y 2 R2 'R21R2 R2� R2 R3 i R2 C4 CZ R I R3 3 R3 H R3 z C2 ROS i�� 'ud iSM z _* ,I 'Lq Ca -a r . .. R R3 r .. _�4R. RI-CZ• - _.. I R3 R3`C4 ,1 R2 pat- `Cc "'�. C2 R,.IR2 .,i •r a R3-19 R WR-CZ =-- _._ �� _ ... ��I cz' - JRIC RrCZ' � ��_ � k1�23C PI-CZ 4 _ (a'Ci•..., i.Cr R..CZ ..aW Rt.cn RI CZ .. - - [ R3 ♦ I RhCZ a CF�-E R ` ♦♦ / •�\a���K.z^�� , ._arc: L: R.�,a. .j '•`'. S�yyn , ♦/ / ` `-C.z`. �.T'r. P'N'�1(.I ` C, - 'fit ... Ye • .. a t •� CF-E CZ �♦ R. un A f, V HUNTINGTON BEACH C4LIFORNIK Aearce-B®/sa Chica smw PLANNING DIVISION Market Study Area specialty shopping centers, there may be potential for the development of a convenience and/or neighborhood facility in the area. The following analysis addresses the feasibility of developing these kinds of facilities in the Bolsa Chica/Warner area. NEIGHBORHOOD/CONVENIENCE COMMERCIAL USES METHODOLOGY: For the purpose of this report, convenience and neighborhood uses are addressed simultaneously in this section. This analysis attempts to determine the market support for neighborhood convenience retail facilities in a given trade area. Market support is primarily a function of the buying power of the trade area residents and an assessment of existing commercial facilities. Buying power is based on the area's population size and median family income. This buying power can be translated into supportable square footage of retail facilities. A comparison of supportable square footage to existing and ultimate General Planned facilities indicate whether there is unused potential support for additional commercial uses in the trade area. A combination of housing, population, income and retail sales data was utilized to determine the total amount of supportable square footage for various types of neighborhood uses for the market area. The primary market area is defined by taking half the distance between the nearest surrounding neighborhood and community centers, and the intersection in question. For statistical purposes, the primary market area in this analysis is defined as being bounded by Heil Avenue on the north, Springdale Street on the east, the southern limits of proposed development in the Bolsa Chica on the south, and Algonquin Street/Warner Avenue on the west (see attached figure). Three alternative population figures are used to produce a range of demand figures based on (A) existing housing units, (B) ultimate housing units under expected land use designations excluding the Bolsa Chica, and (C) ultimate housing units under expected land use designations including the Bolsa Chica. These alternative population figures are multiplied by adjusted 1984 City-wide per capita taxable sales figures in order to estimate the anticipated sales potential for the market area. Date regarding the typical types, sizes and sales per square foot of uses found in neighborhood centers are taken from the Urban Land Institute's 1981 Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers and adjusted to 1984 terms. This date makes it possible to translate the sales potential of the area into supportable square footage for the various categories of neighborhood uses to see how much of the current and future demand is being met by existing and projected uses in the area. Current and future demand are also measured against the addition of proposed commercial uses at Bolsa Chica and Pearce Streets and a hypothetical commercial development on the Meadowlark Airport property along Warner Avenue. The difference between demand and supply can be used to determine if there is a need for additional neighborhood commercial uses and if so, what types of uses would be most viable for the market area. Tables I and 2 summarize the data. (0141D) TABLE 1 NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER POTENTIAL A B C Ultimate Units Ultimate Units Existing Under General Plan Under General Plan Housing Units Minus Bolsa Chica Plus Bolsa Chica Households a 47402 5,973 9,755 Population a 10,992 15,013 24,710 1984 Total b 6,496.25 $6496.25 $6496.25 Taxable Sales Per Capita Total Taxable $71,406,780 $97,52B�201 $160,522,330 Sales Potential SALES POTENTIAL BY CATEGORYc CATEGORY Food $12,281,966 $16,774,850 $27,609,840 Drug 2,499,237 3,413,487 59618,282 Apparel 1,927,983 2,633,261 4,334,103 Liquor 1,071,102 1,462,923 2,407,835 Eating/Drinking 6,855,051 9,362,707 15,410,143 Gen. Merchandise 8,711,627 11,898,440 19,583,724 Home Improvement 2,449,253 3045,217 5,505,916 Services/Office 3,570,339 4,876,410 8,026,1 17 SUPPORTABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE BY CATEGORYd CATEGORY Food 34,024 sq.ft. 46,470 sq.ft. 76,486 sq.ft. Drug 13,546 18,501 30,452 Apparel 121067 16,481 27,125 Liquor 4,635 6,331 100420 Eating/Drinking 52,329 71,471 117,635 Gen. Merchandise 92,167 125,883 207,191 Home Improvement 33,699 46,027 75,756 Services/Office 104,518 142,752 234,957 Total 346,985 473,916 780,022 0141D TABLE 2 EXISTING AND PROJECTED RETAIL AND OFFICE SPACE IN MARKET AREA A B C EXISTING SPACE EXISTING SPACE 1984 EXISTING SPACE PEARCE-BOLSA CHICA PEARCE-BOLSA CHICA CATEGORY EXISTING SPACE PEARCE-BOLSA CHICA MEADOWLARK MEADOWLARK F ood 36,046 43,546 73,546 73,546 +2,022 -2,924 +27,076 -2,940 Drug 23,589 34,389 49,389 49,389 +10,043 +15,888 +30,888 +18,937 Apparel 3,186 8,686 11,686 11,686 -8,881 -7,795 -4,795 -15,439 Liquor 37,205 37,205 37,205 37,205 +32,570 +30,874 +30,874 +26,785 Eating/Drinking 56,572 65,692 77,692 77,692 +4,243 -51779 +6,221 -39,943 General Merchandise 309858 46,538 58,538 58,538 -61,309 -79,345 -67,345 -148,653 Home Improvement 201483 33,683 41,683 41,683 -13,2 l6 -12,344 -4,344 -34,073 Services/Office 148,237 148,237 168,237 168,237 +43,719 +5,485 +25,485 -66,720 TOTAL 356,176 417,976 517,976 517,976 +9,191 559940 +44,060 -262,046 NOTES TO TABLE 1: a. Household and Population figures based on Department of Development Services estimates. b. Data extrapolated from "Trade Outlets and Taxable Retail Sales, "State Board of Equalization, per capita sales figure adjusted according to median family income data taken from the United States Census for the City of Huntington Beach, 1980. C. Sales of retail goods in the categories listed account for approximately 43 percent of total retail sales in Huntington Beach (Source: "Trade Outlets and Taxable Retail Sales", State Board of Equalization): Food 8.6% Drug 2.0% Apparel 2.7% Liquor 1.5% Eating/Drinking 9.6% General Merchandise 12.2% Home Improvement 3.4% Services/Office 3.0% Other 57.0% Apparel and General Merchandise categories are normally not associated with convenience neighborhood centers. However, the applicant is proposing these uses at the Pearce-Bolsa Chica site in lieu of development of some typical neighborhood uses and in combination with some convenience center uses. Consequently, an analysis of the demand for these uses within the market area is included in the study. In addition, much of the developed commercial property within the market area consists of Professional Office and Service complexes. The figures thus reflect full demand of such uses whether as part of a neighborhood center or existing as separate developments. Dollar figures for the Food and Drug categories are adjusted by factors of 2.0 and 1.75 respectively to account for additional sales of non-taxable items based on total estimated California food and drug sales from various services. d. Median sales per square foot values for typical commercial categories are as follows: Food $360.98 per square foot Drug $184.50 per square foot Apparel $159.78 per square foot Liquor $231.09 per square foot Eating/Drinking $131.00 per square foot General Merchandise $94.52 per square foot Home Improvement $72.68 per square foot Services/Office $34.16 per square foot (Source: The Urban Land Institute, Dollars and Cents of Shopping Centers, 1981, adjusted to 1984). CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of total square footage, the existing supply of commercial uses in the market area is sufficient to meet the current demand (Scenario A). This oversupply can be (0141D) attributed in part to overlapping demand from surrounding market areas, as more than half of the commercial uses listed in Table 2 under the existing scenario were located near the periphery of the defined market area. These uses are supported to some extent by consumers located outside the market area, increasing the actual demand and sales potential data. This increase is probably balanced by consumers living in the specified market area who visit other commercial centers outside the area. As a result, some oversupply still exists in square footage. Scenario B compares the demand for commercial space with supply over the short-term, and assumes that the remaining areas designated for residential use develop according to the General Plan with the exception of the unincorporated Bolsa Chica which remains vacant. Scenario C represents the long-term, and assumes development in the Bolsa Chica. With the exception of the visitor-serving commercial uses currently under consideration in the Bolse Chica, the only remaining areas for potential commercial development within the market area include the applicant's proposal at Pearce and Bolsa Chica Streets, and a portion of the Meadowlark Airport site along Warner Avenue. Consequently, the applicant's proposed commercial development is assumed to develop under the short-term scenario with the Meadowlark site being analyzed under both the short-term and long-term. In Scenario B, the data generally show that the demand generated by future residential development within the market area will be sufficient to support additional commercial square footage. However, until residential development occurs in the Bolsa Chica portion of the market area, demand will only support one additional commercial center at either the Pearce-Bolsa Chica site or at the Meadowlark Airport site. Once the Bolsa Chica develops according to the long-term scenario, demand will be more than adequate to support both commercial sites. The overall square footage figures show that future demand will accommodate ultimate potential commercial supply; however, when this supply is broken down into specific categories some imbalances are revealed. Compared to the estimated supportable square footage over the short-term, the addition of the commercial uses proposed by the applicant translates into a surplus of space in the drug, liquor, and service/office categories, and a deficiency of space in the food, apparel, eating/drinking, general merchandise and home improvement categories. This takes into account that the applicant is proposing a commercial development with the following mix of tenants: convenience market/bakery (7,500 square feet), drugstore (10,800 square feet), apparel stores (5,500 square feet), restaurant (9,120 square feet), mini-department store (13,200 square feet), hardware store/nursery (13,200 square feet), and other general merchandise shops (2,480 square feet). The data suggests that the market area can accommodate all proposed commercial uses at Pearce-Bolsa Chica with the possible exception of the drug category. the proposed development will add square footage to the already existing surplus of drug establishments within the defined market area. The same conclusion would hold true in the long-term. The addition of a typical neighborhood center at Meadowlark anchored by a supermarket and drugstore in the short-term would create an oversupply in the food, drug, liquor, and, service/office categories. Without the needed food and drug anchors, a shopping center at the 100,000 square foot magnitude would be infeasible. However, at ultimate development in the long-term, surpluses would exist in only the drug and liquor categories. This indicates that the market area could support the proposed convenience market at the Pearce-Bolse Chica site as well as a supermarket at the Meadowlark site. Rather than a drugstore anchor at the Meadowlark site, the data suggests that it would be feasible to provide an additional anchor in the form of a home improvement store or a general merchandise facility. The figures indicate that substantial demand will exist in the general merchandise category with both locations probably being able to support such (0141D) uses as major anchors. This would further be substantiated in the fact that only two of the six community shopping centers located within the general area contain such anchors. The two shopping centers that accommodate such uses are located at Edinger and Goldenwest, close to the Huntington Regional Shopping Center but outside of the defined market area of this study. Most of the existing eating and drinking establishments within the market area consist of small sandwich shops, bars, and fast food operations. The addition of major restaurants at the Pearce-Bolse Chica site and Meadowlark site will still leave considerable demand for such uses at ultimate development. Since specialty and restaurant uses in the Bolsa Chica visitor-serving area were not included in the analysis, it is assumed that restaurant development in the Bolsa Chica will bring supply in line with demand for such uses in the study area. The supply of liquor establishments will likely remain relatively constant over the long-term, regardless of whether commercial uses are developed at either of the two sites or both. This is the result of one large liquor establishment recently taking over the total square footage of a former supermarket on the periphery of the market area. The supply of service and professional office uses will show a considerable surplus during the short-term as the result of the high concentration of office complexes at the intersection of Warner Avenue and Bolsa Chica Street and within existing neighborhood centers. However, demand will exceed supply as the Bolsa Chica develops. The development of expected service uses at the two sites under consideration will not significantly affect this balance. In summary, there appears to be sufficient demand to support additional commercial square footage in specified categories. While the Pearce-Bolsa Chica site and Meadowlark Airport site can support commercial uses in most categories at ultimate development, the overall surplus of square footage in the drug category would appear to preclude that use as a major anchor at either site. Perhaps more appropriate at the Pearce-Bolsa Chica site would be a combination of additional retail shops, services/offices, and/or eating/drinking establishments. To complement a supermarket on the Meadowlark site, perhaps a home improvement store or general merchandise use as a major anchor would be more appropriate based on the demand figures for the area. (0141D) APPENDIX C FAA Evaluation of Airport Impact Area 3.3 (1254d) DO NOT REMOVE CARBONS Form Approved OMR No 2120 © Aeronautical Study Number tut ,.he.dt NOTICE OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OR ALTERATION n t��4arfen.enwrsfMnen L�l�1 l•/i 1. Nature o1 Proposal 2. Complete esc ono Structure A Type B Class C Work Schedule Dales A inctudeeffecove radiated power and assigned frequency New Corsstnxtion Permanent )3eginnmg _ 1 at1 existing.proposed or modified AM.FM.or TV broadca stations utilizing this structure ❑ Adershoh ❑ Temporary (Duration months) End 9_s8 5 • B Include size and Conhguretton of pourer transmission tin 3a Name and address of Individual, company, corporation, etc. proposing the and their supporting towers in the vicinity of FAA faCJitr cortstn,ction Or alteration. (Number.Street.City.Stara and Zip Code) and public airports r� C Include mlormatior.showing site orientation,dtmensrot (7 1 4 ) 840-2922 and construction materials of the proposed structure area Gob Tohphone Number See enclosed map F Ken Moody/J.T, Moody Company 4641 Los Patios Huntington Beach , Calif 92b49 Name.aMms and telephone number of proponent-s representative if different than 3 above Donna Oliveira 17402 Forbes Lane Huntington Beach , Calif . 92649 (if more space is required continue on a separate shoal. 4. Location of Structure rAE Hei ht and Elevation (Corrilow►a to the risarsat A Coordinates B Nearest City or Town.and State C Name of neares'airport netipon.wgm Pat t. lPvallon of site above mean sea level Huntin ton Beach �r ap�ar 'Ai rt m(1)Distance from structure to nearest point o' eight of Structure including all Latitude 43 0 8 Within city limits Miles nearest runway 440 feet gn appurtenances water and situatated�Y! e� 35 �901 tl , 1 3" (2)Direction from structure to airport C Overall height above mear sea level(A-B) 2 tide within city limits D Description of location of site with respect to highN,ye.streets airports prominent terrain features.existing structures-etc Attach a U S Geological Survey quadrangle map or equivalent showing the relationship of construction site to neares'airports) (d more space is required continue on a separate sheer o1 paper and attach Io rri)s notice-) See enclosed map Notice fs required by Pen 77 of the federal Avtatron Regulations 114 C F.R Pan 77)pursuant to Section 1101 of the Federal Anafton Act of 1958 as amended(49 i)S C I ICI) Persons who knowingly and willingly violate the Notice requirements of Pon 77 are subrect to a tine(cnmrnsl pens try y of nor more than$500 for the first ollense and not more than S2.0W for subsequent offenses,pursuant to Section 902(s)of the Federal Aviation Act of ISM as amended 149 V S.0 14721a)) 1 HEREBY CERTIFY that all of the above statements made by an are true, complete, and correct to the hest of my knowledge.In addition,I agree to obstruction marts and/or Iigttt thesbucture in accordance with established marking& lighting standards If necessary. Dale Typed Nsnne/Tltk of person F(i)r,g Nollee S r! 8- 13-84 Donng tFM t Y r, �.� r '`,r�'%:a' .1 1:'.�.. ♦': FAA wK&Wwmftffn oft ftfrf r dr,lwa it 7 ,'.` �31tppefmafMal NWk!Ot G1MbU Or1 FM j7DrfTf�4t30•Y M'aWired f Won t3te ptafted 13 At wow;a Moms 6ekrro the siw of coristnitl.. Boss trot raltquke a route b FM. 13 W,thm tiro days sllef ate construction roaches Its grvalest height as an obstruction under on ( wty usind rtlsrsa ard cl FA.R.Part T7.Subpart C. This determination e L f ut. -and.raiW rot beattazardbairnevigation. a extended.revised or lerminsted the imufng office. ib tldsrrt"Isid as on obstruChor.under the (b)the construction is wrest to kownsrt,g autnonty of fire Fedarsr Conti milt,kstrioro Convri Sion aW ndards Cl FAR.Part 77.Subpart C.but appiicat ion for a cagtruGron permit is made to the FCC on or bebrs the strove s Pwauon dale.In wic '-:lrorild not be a rnaarc to air navigation the determination empires on the dale p escnbed by the FCC for Oomprabon of constnsbon.of on t 0 Should be O.balrueWn ❑ frnarked. ( here FCC domes the application 13 fiphuti per FAA Atfvituwy C tular NOTE Request for extension of the effective pariod of this delerminialion must be postmarked or towing office at 1eaSt 15 Qays prior to the expiration data f.. y.Chapter,($) It the structure is Iwbieci W site licensing authority of the FCC,a copy of this determination will be ser: , ton.rnarkir,g and fighting are not Agency- Remarks: ii t. M1 S pale 7 t• Fom 74WI (4-W)SUPERSEDES PREv+OUS EDITION DO NOT EMOVE CAR Ir_ .i Tl i.i i..,._ _ )• _ILL I1.i r; — wr.NnV r',E4 _Dw. CASTLE --7rT- T 7 }}O DR 1 , III VAMf�U4 CF-E __1-�__ E 4 LITTLER —r--r �-\ SP AD DH t 2 rTf CUR.OR -- I., Ii . I`4E ADDWE eHr u— DH � 1"- - - I \,� �1 PPi r � I I I � yG POOyI\. I C I ;1,(.\ COP P ~ I I I I I VENTUPI —� DR I Z E 1 4e RSHe[L OP I r� •��� c I � ` I 0 1 �I i _11-LLL�_1 i�_I)=C-� I I i Cel 6.wTE I'. 41DDLECOrr _ OR L-A 'Eam�lE 4--;- C. D LI I-i.I+CR tom{ ie n � I - = ;' I I OOr LTY- - I FA (UWti.DS- (n E.-, I J 11� z ic(D [n . O w POPwG OP a NE- 1C a / 10 wcFrlr D --�..--—�--—AVE — Existing General Plan Area of Concern 3 . 3 0 huntington beach planning division f i q u r c 3-5 APPENDIX D Initial Studies Area 3.2 and Area 3.3 (I 254d) 3 2 I NVII MNMI N I Al-_ 0 IF CKLIS I I ORM Oo He ('ornplett-d Ity I_crnd Agency) {. I3ockgrourx1 I . Nnme of Proponent City of Huntington (_;each 7. Address and Phone Number of Proponent 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 (714) 536-5271 3. D(.1te of Checklist StAnnitted July 13 , 1984 4. Agwicy Requiring Checklist City of Huntington Beach 5. rJ(niu. of Proposal, if opplicahle - General PI-an Amendment No. 84-.X II. I nvirOFUTx-r►tul 1"II)Ocis (I x,>l(molions of all "yes" and "rnnyhe" answers tyre rc cured on (tttrtched .heats.) Yes M(IYIx• No I . I or th. Will the proposal resell ill: a. Jnstoble f4irth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? x b. Disrnfptions, displacements, Qornpaction or overcoverjog of the soil? x C. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? x d. the rlestrix Lion, covering or modification ,f nny unique geologic or physical features? x V. Any irx in •.vinyl or water erosion of "oils, either, on m- off the srlc' X f. ( h(u)(tes in deposition or c►osinn of beach scrods, or ( han(jes in si I to t ion, deposit ion or (-rosion which ntoy rn(xlify the ch n ool of (r river or s t ream or file, bed of the ocean or ony bay, inlet or lake? x �1 309 Yvs, M<rYtx• No cl. I xj)o;tito of I)fx)pIi nr litoprr Iy to rlr•olo- clic hnlctrrfs Birch a.; r cull»I�utkr s, I(if dsll(if 's, rnu<Islides, ground foilure, or similar hazards,? X 2. Air. Will the proposal result ir,: et. `,uhst(intinl air emissions or deterioration of nntbient air rtunlity? X b. The creation of objectionable- odors? X C. Alterotion of air movement, moisture, or lernperafute, or any chango in climate, either locally or regionally'? X 3. Water. Will the proposol r(-sult in: a. Clutnges in currents, or Ow course of di- rrc:tioo of water movements, in either marine. or fresh writ rers? h. Ch(inges in obsorMlon mite•;, rlruincrge pot- terns, or the rate and omount of surface rkinoff? X f1 C. Alterations to Ihc• course' or flow of flood wntr'rs X d. Chongo in Ihr• rtrnnunl of st,rfnre water in any water brxly? X V. I)ischnrgf info surfnr.e wrttors, or in any olterntion of smfnc:e water (1wility, in- cluding but riot limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X f. Alterotion of the dire-ction or rate of flow of ground waters? X g. ('hinge in the <lunntity of Around graters, either through dlr-(r't additions or with- drawals, or throucfh inter'coption of no ttrtui(er by cuts or oxcavctlions? h. ',ubstontiol rr•dIK'tirx) in Il,r amount of writer otherwise ovniloble for public water srtpplies? x i. F Kposure of peoplo or proporly to writer rr•- loted ha/aids such as f lrx-vdiixt or tidal woven? X ;to Yes M( I e No /I. Plant Life. Will tlir proposal result in: n. Change in the diversity of species, or nurnber of tiny species of plants (including trees, shrnths, gmss, crops, rind ngtxotic p lnn t s)? X b. I?e(ImIio4i of the nirrnbc•rs of (Iffy unique, rare or encdnmcic•red sp(tc-des of pinnts? X C. Introdcx:ti(xi of new specie: of pinnts into an area, or in a borrier to the normal replenishment of existing species. X d. Reduction in acrecxte of any agricultural crop? X 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, load animals Inc iudinq reptiles, fish and shellfish, berithic organisms or ins(--.('Is)? X I I?vdix-Iio4i ()f th(• ntIrrttler% nl tiny rgli(Itrr•, r(Ire or (•rr(I(Iff(Ic•rt•(I ti )(. it••. of X t Inlrothu burr of ffrw stc(•t iw. tcf (sticrtnls inIo off (jr(,o, or reNoll in o b(n r for to the rTcigrotiot) or movemeril of mirnnls"? X d. I)eterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? X 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increasos in existing noise levels? X b. Fxposure of people to severe noise levels? X 7. Light aril Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare"? X 8. Lund Use. Will the proposal rvstrlt in n sub- stantial atlerntion of the present or planned land use of an area? X 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Ifwrease in the rate of lice of any natural X ,.� resources' 311 2 1-7U94 Yes muzr t fo 1). 4 -,1(it tinl rlel>I( tir,n of it lot IrrvtewnfI nalurnl re'�oljrr.e•.' X 10. M%k of lhtset. Will the prgmsol involve: a. A risk of on oxplosion or the release of h(Ifordrxis suhsionces (irx•lexlirxt, Ixtl tx)t limited to. oil, pesticides, c.hernicols or rcxliotion) in the event of on accident or upset conditions? X b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or on emergency .evacuation plan? X II. Polm lot ion. Will the proposal niter the location, rlistributi(-e), elensity, or growth rate of the Iern on poputot ion of on area? X 12. 1lrxisirxj. Will the proposal affect existing hous- ing, or create o dernoxf for additional housing? X 13. -rrrtrtsportotion/t:'irculotion. Will the proposal result in: a. (;enerntion of mbstontiol odditional vehici for movement? X h. 1 Heck of) exitilinrl l,nrl<inrl fru-ilities, or demoild for new peaking? X C. Suhsfantiol inyrr>ct upon existing tronspor- tation sysloms? X d. Alterations to present patterns of r:ircula- t ion or r novernen t of people and/or goods? X e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air trnff ic? X f. Irxurease in traffic fwards to motor vehicles, Bicyclists or pedestrians? X 14. Pt,bl is Services. Will t ho propo.so l have on effect upon, or result in o ry•erl for new or altered governmental srrvices in nny of the following areas: X (I, f-ire protection? X 1). Police protection? _ X_ C. Schools? X 112 Yes Maybe rk� d. forks or nlher rerreatinivil facilities? X r. Maintennnre of public f(W-ilities, includinq roads? X f. Other r.loverm-nental services? X IS. rnerly. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial arnrirnts of feel or cnergy? X b. `Mbstontial increase in (1cinand upon exist- ing sour (1s of energy, or require the development of new sortrccs of energy? X 16. Utilities. Will the propnso! result in ct need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? X h. ( rrrnntuni( atmils ,yStVIlI%'.) X C. Water? X d. )'ewer or svotic lanl<s? --x V. Storm wrrtcrr draiooge? X f. Solid waste and disposal? X 17. Ifuin(m F-leolth. Will the proposul result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? X h. Exposure of people to potential health haz ords? X 18. !\est het ics. Will the proposal result in the ohstruction of ony scenic_ vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the Creation of Crrr aesthetically offensive site open to public view? x 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in nn impost upon the duality or cloantity of existing rec:rent ionol opportunities? X 20. Cultural flescxwrces. a. Will ttx. prcjrosol result in tlx- alteration of or ttx- <krstriw:tiort of o prehistoric or historic orcliaeologicul site"? x 313 Yes M�tx� t�10 b. Will 1t►e prq)osol resl►It in (Averse physical or ncstlx-tic effects to o prehisloric or historic builctinq, sirmilure, or ol)ject? X C. Ike-s the pr(4)osal hove the potential to ecUse o physicol clxvxle which wcx►Id affect unique ethnic cultural values? x d. Will the projx)sol restrict existioo religious or sacred Uses within the potential impact ore(? X 21. Mandatory Finclirx)s of Signif icancc. ot. 1)oc,s the pmjrc 1 hove the poferifinl to deotrode the clr.►ality of the envirooment, suhstonlially reduce the hobitot of a fish or wildlife species, ccerse o fish or wild- life populntinn to drop helow self sus- laininq levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or on imo l commun i i y, reduce file cumber or restrict tho ronge of o rare or endangered plant or (initial or eliminote important exomples of the n-urjor periods of C olifornio history or prehistory? X 1). I)cx fire proll�c l lim" file pntf-11tinl to cn Nov,, short-loner, to tho diwnclvuntwle of Ioliq-ter rn, anvil rwilliclitrrl ypxrl;? (/\ short- trill) irnpm-f on file crrviliminr•nt is mw which occurs in or r(•Iclfively hrief, definitive pt-riod of time while load-terrrn irnprrcts will endurem, wall into the future.) X C. 1)(> s the proio-ct hove irrrimcls which are individually limited, hot cr►rnulritively con- sideruhle? (n I -ct may mpinct Oil two or more s(�parnte resources where file impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those inpocts on the environment is significant.) _ _t d. i)ous fh(� proloct have envir(xunentorl effects which will ccurse suhstculllol odverse effects on hi► mi) heincts, either dirocfly or indirectly? x Discussion of F.nvironryrental i voluotioxl IV. fkternlination �A (To be completed by fix- Leml A(jency) • �Irr On the hm"i" of this il. • I(II evnlrl(Itlon: ;ram I IImi III uIt Ill1 1;1't Jm)(-I I ( ()( JI I ) tl( 11 hnvr rt si(Inilirrntt ( Ifrrt on the environnte•nt, (nil (1 NI'( $A I IV[ I )I (`I AIZA 1101`1 will h(• prf1mi d find I11(If (1Ith-P(III tke proposed project could hove (I slgnIfic(IrrI effect on the environment, there will not he n si(tnificnnt effect in this ease _ heCaUSe the tmitigafion measures describe-(1 on on attached sheet have been added to the project. A NF(,ATIVf"= DECLARATION WILL ICE PREPARED. find t1w- proposed proj(rt MAY have a significunt effect on the environ- --- rment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPOIRT is required,_. X Bate , - Signature For (No1(•: This is Only (I smigested forty). Public agencies are free to devise their ovm format for initial studies,) �1 315 zt:ncr; rlagnc) a 3•. �' rt lb. Construction on the subject site will result in removal and overcovering of soil. C. Construction on the subject site may result in slight modification of the existing topography. 2a. Construction may generate increased air emmissions from traffic, A cumulative assessment of air quality impacts should be prepared taking into account existing air quality standards. 6a. Increased automobile traffic and short- term construction may result in increased noise levels. 8. The land use will change from commercial use to mixed use including residential. 11. The proposed residential development will add population to the subject area . 12. The proposed project will add housing to the local supply. 13 a-d, f . Projects eventually constructed will result in a substantial amount of automobile traffic which may significantly impact the City ' s circulation system. Based on the number of additional trips generated by projects which will ultimately develop on the site, a general assessment on street and intersection capacities should be presented . Eqress and ingress should also be addressed due to the situation of the project in relation to the freeway off- ramp and the intersection of Warner and Magnolia. 14 a-e. The potential increases An intensity of use resulting from projects which will be developed may result in significant demand for the expansion of governmental services. A general assessment of the concerns of the potentially affected governmental units should be determined and presented in the EIR. 16 a-f . The potential increases in intensity of use resulting from projects which will be developed may result in significant demand for expansion of existing utility systems. A general assessment of the concerns of the potentially affected agencies should be determined and presented in the EIR. 21 c,d. The cumulative effects on traffic, air quality and public utilities may be considerable and could adversely affect the local population. 0929d hearce/Bolsa Chica 3 . 3 f NVIRONMI NIAI U If=('KLIST f ORM (to Re ('ornplelod Icy I.eml Agency) I. 13cx:kgr mm-,d I . Morrie of Prop(xrent City or Huntington Beach 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent 2000 Main Street lluntincton Beacli, CA 92648 (714) 536-5271 3. Bate of Checklist Stbrnifted July 13 , 1984 4. Agency Requiring Checklist City_of Huntington Leach 5. N(m-v of Proposal, it (ipplicoble General Plan Amendment No. 84-1. 11. I-nviromrxntol In4-)(x-ts (I xplowifi"ns of oll "yes" orui "rnoyhe" onsw(•r,; we rrYlirired or) off(rch(:d Sher fs.) Yes McJYIxr tJo I . f orth. Will the proposal result in: o. (Instable rnrth conditions or in changes x in geologic subsimc tures? h. I)isripti"is, displacements, cc,mpoction or overcovering of the soil? X C. ( honge in topogrophy or ground surface relief features? X d. The desfr,rc-tion, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? X e. Any incre(ise in wind or woler erosion of sciils, vithor on or off the site" t (. ( h(uuoes in deposition or erosion of beach mauls, or ( horxlr•.s in siIf(if ion. dvpo�if ion or erosion which nary nuxlify the ( bonne{ of n river or sfrcom or the bed of the oceon or ony boy, inlet or Inke? X 309 Yes McrYtx• No q. I xposure• of I foply or propci tv to gvolo- elic hwords such (is o(irth(pi(il -s, lorulslidc s, 111u(Islides, ground follow, or similm- hazards? x 1, Air. Will III(- pioposol rosult ill: et. Substantial air errii-sions or deforioration of ambient air guolity? x b. The creation of objectionoblo odors"? x C. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? x I Water. Will the proposal resin t in: a. Changes in currents, or the course of di- r(-c.t ion of water rr,ov,�rnents, in either marine or fresh waters? x h. Changes in obsorption rot(-s, dminacle pnt- terns, or the rate nod rmyxnrt of surface runoff? x U. Alteration-, In the• coursf- or flow of flood wo to rs? x d. ( hongr in the• (imount of �ourfoce writer in nny wotet b(xly? e•. I)ischorgo into surf ace wn tars, or in any alleration of surfacer water quolity, in- cluding bot not limited to te'rnperatore, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? x f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? x q. C'honge in the quantity of (around waters, either through direct odditrnns or with- drnwols, or throm-1h irrterr-f,ptinn of an oluifer by cuts or r•xcavotions? x h. tiubst(nitiol rodrk•tIon in the amount of water otherwise (miiloble for public water sr-)pp lies? x i. F xposure of pe-ople> or woperty to water rf-- loted hotords such eis floodirxf or tidal waves? x 110 Yes moo HO �^ 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal roslllt in: a. Chcinge ill the diversity of species, or number of any species of Illnnts (includinq trees, s )ruhs, (Irass, crops, (incl cull Kitic h. lzedllc-li(ul nI th<• llmlllwfr ' 'd (illy urli(Illf" lore or en(Iunclered spec ir•s of Illnnts? X c. Introduction of new species of plants into on urea, or in o harrier to thh normal replenishment of existing species? X d, Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? X S. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of ally species of onirnals (birds, land onlimils inc imling rf-ptiles, fish and shellfish, henthic oronnisrns or insects)? X h. I6•(IIN-IM11 if lllr' Illlrlllwr1 rd (Illy lllll(lllei rare or r•n(Icln(Ir.r(•(I qw( If-% III (Irlinulfs? X ( . I(ltro(hi ti()fl of ll(.w sl1( ( w-, of (rlilnnls into (III or(•a, or rvsul t ill a h(ir r i(vr to the migration or movement of clrlimols? X d. Deterioration to existing fish or _wildlife habitat? X 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? X b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X 7. Light orxl Glare. Will the proposa I produce new light or glare? X 8. Lorxl Use. Will the proposal result in n sub- stantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? X 9. Noturol Resmuces. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural X resources? 311 IS' 7,W4 Yes t cw No h. `,1.a)�,l(if ItI'll doid-1i(,n (d no nronr•wclhlo nwturrll reummruc? x M. Risk of th►sct. Will the prcposul involve.: o. A risk of (m oxplosion or Ilw releme of l►nzotd(xls substances �Itx'IlKlI1K�, Ixat Ilot limited to, oil, pesticides, chernicols or radiation) in the event of on accident or upset conditions? x b. Possible interference with on emergency response plan or on emergency .evocuation plan? x H. Population. Will ttw- proposal alter the location, distrihutiolt, donsity, or growth rate of the hA.tnxln popuIctt icxt of an clrc,rl? x 12. I kx►sitxt. Will the ploposol (tffn-t r.xistim) holls- incl, or cmotc cI demond for additioncll housing? x 13. -1rcrosfxtrt(it ion/C'ircu lot ion. Will the proposol result in: ct. (lrnerctlion of srrt,strintirll odclitirnxtl vehicular rccuvi,ment? x h. 1 Ifecte on exI%tin(t 1)crrlcing (w-Ilitie;, or dent(nul fo►r liew x C. `urhstorttirtl itig)oct upon existing tronspor- tntlon sysloms? x d. Alterrttions to present pottern5 of e7ircula- tion or movement of people oncl/or goods? x P. Alterations to woterborne, rail or oir tulff ic? x f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? x Ill. Ptkl is Services. Will IN, propr>sa I have (in effect upon, or result in o rx,erl f0�r new or oltvred governrnentol services in ony of the following orens: x n, lire protection"? x b. Police protc-cation? _ x C. Schools? 312 Yes Mv be No d, Porks or other recrentionnl fncilitios? X V. Mnintenonc e of public f,K_ililic•ti, inclurlincl r nods"? X f. (7)ther c3overm-nentol servic t-s'? _ _ X IS. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. ()se of substantial arnotrrnts of fuel or energy? X b. Substantiol increase in demand uponexist- ing sourk.es of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? X 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in n need for new systerns, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: n, Power or natural gas? X b, ('urnnruni� nlirrnti sysle-nrs? X r, Wcrter? }{ d. ;ewer or Septic t(lllk5? X e. Storm woter drain(x)e? X f. Solid waste and disposal? X 17. Hurnmi Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Crention of any health hozdrd or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? X_ h. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? _ X 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of an scenic vista or view open to y p the public, or will the proposol result in the creation of (In nestheticolly offensive site open to public view"' X 19, 1Zmrvolicrr, Will tho proposol rescrlt in on impoc-t upon the ctuolity or c111ontity of exictinq rec-re•ot ionol oppor tunit ics? X 20. Cultural Rescxrrces. a. Will the proposal result in t1w. alteration of or ttx- ck-strtx:1 icxr of n prehistoric or historic orchoeological site'? X 313 Yes Maw No b. Will 1l►e prc4xosal result in (idver,�( physical or oesthretic effects to o prehistoric or historic huildirxt, strt►cture, or ol)ject? X C. Does the prq)osol hove the potential to cause a physical cl uiW which wmold affect unique ethnic cultural values? x d. Will the prc4>osol restrict existirxt religious or s xcred uses within the potential irnpoct oreo? X 21. Mandatory Firxlings of Significorx-e. a. Does the proj,-ct have the potential to declrode the duality of the e-nviroe►rnent, suhstnntiolly reduce the hobilnt of a fish or wildlife species, rrr.rse' a fish or wild- life populntinn to drop b(-Imv self sus- inininq levels, Threaten to eliminate n plant or anin-ml community, reduce the number or restrict the ramie of n rare or endangered plant nr animal or elimkvite important examples of the ry)ajor periods of California history or prehistory? - _ X_ h. 1)(w•s the proWc-f hcrvr• f1w polrnlinl to (Jr hieve short-ferry), to the ditiodvunlacle of load-tc•rrrr, envircxinreninl (lcxrl5? (n short- Ir•rm ImImcl on Ihu envirotimt•nl is one` which occurs in o relatively hrief, definitive jwriod of time while long-terra irnpncts will endure well into the future.) X C. i)ex-s the project have irnpncts which are individually limited, but curnulritively con- sideroble? (A project may intact or) two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those inn)octs on the environment is significant.) X d. Does the project have envircxirnentol effects which will cause suhstontiol ndverse effects on bunion beings, either directly or indirectly? X 111. Discussion of Unvirorrruentol 17vallKrI i0iI I V. i7eterminot ion (To be complr-led by the Lead Agvnc y) �* • )14 (hn the basis of this initial cvaluntion: i I find that the ptOIur;#-(i proje-i t ( ()l 11.I ) I Ir) I have n sielnif it ant e.ffe•rl on Ili• environment, and o NI ( .AllVI I )I ('I AkAllOf-1 will I>#• pi j)oled. find llw►t olthou(Jh tlx- proposed project coidd have n si(Inificr►nt effect I - an the e•nvi►onfne•nt, there will not be if si(Inific(int offeet in thi; case because the miti(Intion measures (kncribe-d on an attached :sheet have been added to the project. A NL_(;AIIVI DFULARATION WILL I3F PREPARED. find the prcj)oscfl project MAY haver n significant effect on the environ- ment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPAC I REPOf� G is required, I X Date ,� Si_ nature r or (Note: This is only n su(1(lested form. Public agencies are free to devise their oven format for initial studies.) �1 • 315 Pearce/ilolsa Chi.ca 3 . 3 lb. Construction on the subject site will result in removal and overcover inq of soil. C. Construction on the subject site may result in slight modification of the existing topography. 2a. Construction may generate increased air emissions from traffic. ' A cumulative assessment of air quality impacts should be prepared taking into account existing air quality standards. 6a. Increased automobile traffic and short- term construction may result in increased noise levels. 8. The land use will change from residential to commercial use . 11. The proposed commercial use will decrease the population of the subject area. 12. The proposed project will not add any housing to the local supply. 13 a-d, f . Projects eventually constructed will result in a substantial amount of automobile traffic which may significantly impact the City' s circulation system. Based on the number of additional trips generated by projects which will ultimately develop on the site , a general assessment on street and intersection capacities should be presented. 14 a-e . The potential increases in intensity of use resulting from projects which will be developed may result in significant demand for the expansion of governmental services. A general assessment of the concern"s of the potentially affected governmental units should be determined and presented in the EI R. 16 a-f . The potential increases in intensity of use resulting from projects which will be developed may result in significant demand for expansion of existing utility systems. A general assessment of the concerns of the potentially affected agencies should be determined and presented in the EIR. 21 c ,d. The cumulative effects on traffic, air quality and public utilities may be considerable and could adversely affect the local population. 0929d APPENDIX E Letters of Comment (►2sad) ✓rtit`T+oq o COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS ` _�_ AREA CODE TELEPHONES: 540-2910 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 9 6 2-2 41 1 P. 0. BOX 8127. FOUNTAIN VALLEY.CALIFORNIA 92728-8127 10844 ELLIS AVENUE(EUCLID OFF-RAMP. SAN DIEGO FREEWAY) September 24, 1984 Huntington Beach Department of Development Services 2000 Main Street P. 0. Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Subject: Land Use Element Amendment 84-3 Environmental Impact Report 84-3 The Districts are in receipt of subject Environmental Impact Report. The first area of concern, Section 3.1, lying within County Sanitation District No. 11, has been master planned by the Districts for industrial use using a flow coefficient of 3880 gallons per day per acre which is a compatible use with the City's land use change. The second area of concern, Section 3.2, is located within County Sanitation District No. 3 and has been master planned by the Districts for commercial development using a flow coefficient of 3230 gallons per day per acre. The staff recommendation that the area remain designated general commercial would be consistent with the Sanitation Districts' Master Plan. Area of concern, Section 3.3, lies within the boundaries of County Sanitation District No. 11 and has been master planned by the Districts for low density residential development using a flow coefficient of 1550 gallons per day per acre. Developments with flows in excess of the Districts' Master Plan should incorporate all possible flow reduction measures. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to call . Hilary J. Baker Senior Engineering Aide HJB/jb HUNTINGTON BEACH HJB:276/EIR City DEVELOPMENT SERVICES SEP 2 6 04 P. 0. Box 190 Huntin-ton Beach. CA 921W COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS Imo: %._-/ EA �o���s iJ1 f i '� • ��� �'( 540 291 O OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA . 9 6 2-2 41 1 P. O. BOX 8127. FOUNTAIN VALLEY. CALIFORNIA 92 728-8 1 2 7 10844 ELLIS AVENUE(EUCLID OFF-RAMP. SAN DIEGO FREEWAY) I I 1 I August 16, 1984 I City of Huntington Beach Department of Development Services 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Subject: Notice of Preparation EIR No. 84-3 � The Districts are in receipt of your inquiry regarding service to three separate areas within the City. Area 3 .1 is located within County Sanitation District No . 3 . This project site has been master planned by the Sanitation District for industrial development using a flow coefficient of 3880 gallons per day per acre. Area 3 . 2 , the area north of Warner and west of Magnolia, is located within County Sanitation District No. 3 and has been master planned by the District for medium density residential development using a flow coefficient of 3880 gallons per day per acre . Area 3 . 3 , the four acres south of Pearce Street and east of Bolsa Chica , have been master planned by the Sanitation District for low density residential development using a flow coefficient of 1550 gallons per day per acre . This area is located within County Sanitation District No . 11 . The Sanitation District ' s .trunk sewer and treatment plant facilities have been sized to accommodate master planned flows . Wastewater from the District 's service area is treated at treatment plants in Fountain Valley and Huntington Beach . The Sanitation Districts have an ongoing operations program to maintain applicable waste discharge standards while handling increased tributary flows . At the present time , an environmental impact report is being prepared to evaluate modifications to the two treatment plants . HUNTINGTON BEACH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES P.O. Box 190 Hilntinpton RAach, CA 92648 i • 16COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS ' of ORANGE COUNTY,CALIFORN[A City of Huntington Beach P0 BOX 8127 Notice of Preparation EIR No. 84-3 10844 ELLIS AVENUE August 16, 1984 FOUNTAIN VALLEY.CALIFORNIA 92708 Page two (714)540-2910 (714)962.2411 If you have any questions regarding this matter , please do not hesitate to call . 8z �11647 d' W Hilary J. Baker Senior Engineering Aide HJB/jb HJB:258 STATE OF CALIFORNIA—HEALTH AND WELFAVGENCY • GEORGE DEL)KMEAA!r4, Governor DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES 2151 BERKELEY WAY i o BERKELEY, CA 94704 ' 415/540-2665 August 14, 1984 Pamela Sapetto CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Department of Development Services 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 SUBJECT: City of Huntington Beach's NOP for General Plan Amendment 84-3 SCH #84071803 The Department has reviewed the subject environmental document and offers the following comments. For your information and assistance, enclosed is a document prepared by the Noise Control Program entitled, "Guidelines for Noise Study Reports as Part of Environmental Impact Reports", which indicates the type of information the Department considers important in EIRs. Specific comments about the proposed General Plan Amendments follow. Area 3. 1: A solid waste transfer station may have significant noise effects upon nearby residential apd educational (CF-E) uses. These should be described in detail id the EIR. Area 3.2: On-site noise levels due to existing and expected traffic on the San Diego Freeway should be described. In addition, the proposed industrial use may generate significant noise which directly affects the proposed residential use. This noise may also affect the Pleasant View School north of the site. These noise effects should be described and quantified in the EIR. Area 3.3: Certain commercial uses are significant generators of noise. In- sofar as possible, the noise effects of the expected commercial uses on the site should be described. HUNTINGTON BEACH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 .K Pamela Sapetto -2- August 14, 1984 If you have any questions or need further information concerning these com- ments, please contact Dr. Jerome Lukas of the Noise Control Program, Office of Local Environmental Health Programs, at 2151 Berkeley Way, Room No. 613, Berkeley, CA 94704, 415/540-2665. Stuart E. Richardson, Jr. , R.S. , Chief Office of Local Environmental Health Programs rome S. Lukas, Ph.D. / Senior Psychoacoustician NOISE CONTROL PROGRAM Enclosure cc: Environmental Health Division State Clearinghouse Guidelines for Noise Study Reports as Part of Environmental Impact Reports California Office of Noise Control California Department of Health Services 2151 Berkeley Way Berkeley, California 94704 May 1982 Because complaints about environmental noise are so frequent, the Office of Noise Control recommends that every project with a potential for increasing environmental noise levels or which may be affected by existing or future noise sources should have a Noise Study Report. This report assesses how noise levels associated with the project may affect people. The infor- mation contained in the Noise Study Report should be summarized in the Environmental Impact Report or Environmental Impact Statement, and kept on file by the lead agency for review by those with a specific interest in noise. The attached is designed to help those who prepare Noise Study Reports and Environmental Impact Reports and reviewers of Environmental Impact Reports. Because there are so many different combinations of noise sources and receivers (people impacted by those sources), it is virtually impossible to develop guidelines that cover all situations. Nevertheless, the guidelines should help to bring some consistency to the way noise information is presented in environ- mental documents. i Suggested Contents of a Noise Study Report I. A brief description of the project in terms of its effect on the noise environment and a description of the existing noise environment and its impact upon the project (homes near a freeway, for example). II. Two scale maps -- one showing the existing setting and the proposed project with adjacent land uses, receptors, and noise sources identified, and the second map showing the future condition (use a time span of no less than 10 years, unless the project's life span is less) with the proposed project and proposed land uses, receptors, and noise sources identified. III. A detailed survey of the existing noise environment. A. The noise survey should encompass the proposed project area and must include any noise sensitive receptors, both near and far. The survey should establish the exist- ing ambient noise level which may then be used to evaluate compliance of the pro- posed project with applicable noise standards. The standards should be local (city, county) but in their absence state or federal standards may be used The rationale for the selection of noise survey sites should be included in the report. B. The survey should cover the time periods when the noise environment may be affected by the proposed project. C. The survey should encompass enough days to be representative of the existing "nor- mal" noise environment. Discussion of the similarity or dissimilarity of the noise environment during the survey period with that during other times of the year should be included. D. For the time periods measured, the reported noise data should include the Lem L 1, L10, L50, L90, and identification of typical noise levels emitted by existing sources. If day and night measurements are made, report the Ld„ also. Ld„ is approximately equal to CNEL; either descriptor may be used. It is imperative that the descriptor conform to that used in the appropriate standard. E. Summarize the present environment by providing a noise contour map showing lines of equal noise level in 5 dB steps, extending down to Ld„ = 60. In quiet areas lower contours should be shown also. F. Identify the noise measurement equipment used in the survey by manufacturer, type, and date of last calibration. IV. A description of the future noise environment for each project alternative. The scope of the analysis and the metrics used will depend on the type of project, but as a minimum the following information must be provided: A. Discussion of the type of noise sources and their proximity to potentially impacted areas. B. Operations/activity data: 1. Average daily level of activity (traffic volume, flights per day. hours on per day, etc.). 2. Distribution of activity over day and nighttime periods, days of the week, and seasonal variations. 3. Composition of noise sources M trucks, aircraft fleet mix, machinery type, etc.). ONC 5/82 - 2 - .. 4. Frequency spectrum of sources (1/3 octave band data are preferable). 5. Any unusual characteristics of the sources (impulsiveness, tonality, etc.). C. Method used to predict future levels. 1. Reference to the prediction model used, if standard (e.g., FHWA-RD-77-108, etc.). 2. if corrections to a standard model are made or empirical modeling is used, state the procedure in detail. 3. Show typical levels (e.g., LI, Lio, etc.) at the receptors. 4. Give any other data yielded by the model you used. D. Contours of future levels should be included (down to Ld,, 55 where applicable), and superimposed over projected population (receptor) densities. V. Impact A. Quantify anticipated changes.in the noise environment by comparing ambient infor- mation with estimated source emissions. Evaluate the changes in light of applicable standards. B. Discuss how this project relates to the Noise Element of the applicable general plan. C. Discuss the anticipated effects of increased noise levels (speech interference, sleep disturbance, disruption of wildlife habitat, etc.). VI. Mitigation A. Discuss how adverse noise impacts can be mitigated, suggesting alternative tech- niques for mitigation, their relative effectiveness, and feasibility of implementation. Provide a table listing the most and least effective techniques. For this table, effectiveness should be defined in terms of the number of people being exposed to noise at some given level. B. Responsibility for effectuating the mitigation measures should be assigned. C. Discuss any noise impacts that cannot be mitigated, and why mitigation is not feasi- ble. ONC 5/82 Summarization of Noise Study Reports in Environmental Impact Reports or Statements Information included in the Environmental Impact Report or Statement should be a summary of the noise study. The following information must be included: A. Maps showing the existing setting and the proposed project with adjacent land uses and noise sources identified. Pertinent distances should be noted. B. A description of the existing noise environment. C. The change in the noise environment for each project alternative. D. A discussion of the impacts for the alternatives. E. A discussion of the compatibility of the project with the applicable Noise Element of the General Plan or the most applicable noise laws or ordinances. F. A discussion of mitigation measures, clearly identifying the locations and number of people affected when mitigation is not feasible. G. Statements of: (1) where to obtain a copy of the Noise Study Report from which the information was taken (or the Noise Study Report may be included as an appen- dix, and (2) the name of the consultant who conducted the Noise Study if it was not conducted by the author of the Environmental Impact Report. I ONC 5/82 STATE OF CALIFORNIA—BUSINESS AND TRANSPORTATION AGENCY `-`GEORGP`DEUMEIIAN,, ve.nn DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 7, P.O. BOX 2304, LOS ANGELES 90051 (213) 620-5335 July 23 , 1984 Notice of Preparation EIR No. 84-3 General Plan Amendment Change City of Huntington Beach Department of Development Services 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Gentlemen: The Notice of Preparation for the above plan change has been reviewed by Caltrans staff. Caltrans has no discretionary approval power over the area which lies south of Warner Avenue nor the area east of Bolsa Chica , and will not act as a Responsible Agency. We will , however, be a Review Agency because of our expertise in transportation planning and the operation of transportation systems or facilities potentially impacted. From the information given we are unable to determine if we will be a Responsible Agency for the area which lies west of Magnolia Street. If Caltrans is a Responsible Agency, an encroachment permit will be necessary and you will be required to comply with the circulation and notice requirements identified in Sections 15066 (g) , 15083 (f) ( 4) , 15085 (h) ( 3) , 15160 (c) , 15161 . 6 (b) ( 2) , and 151615 (c) of the State EIR Guidelines . Unmitigated residential development is not a compatible land use adjacent to a freeway. Noise studies will be necessary. Where noise levels exceed acceptable standards , a commitment to noise I mitigation mPasuras shol.11d be made nr. for to any develcpmcnt in the area. ! A discussion of the impacts of the three projects on traffic congestion should be included. In particular , the effects on the San Diego Freeway should be analyzed . Quantify the existing traffic characteristics in the area and the estimated impact of the proposed project. Our staff can provide you with traffic data for the above referenced State facilities if neeeded. Contact person in our agency for this project is Paul Gonzales . He may be reached at (213) 620-3992 . HUNTINGTON BEACH Very truly yours , DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PIL 2 r LLANTINE,Chief Environmental Planning Branch P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 � , . ate• — - NTA�,�` CITY OF FOUNTAIN VAL�(�71 Y CIVIC CENTER 4) 963- U I < 10200 SLATER AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 2 FCoo GpV �t July 12, 1984 City of Huntington Beach Department of Development Services 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 RE: NOTICE OF PREPARATION (EIR NO. 84-3 ) AREA 3 . 2, PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT COVERING 9. 21 ACRES OF PROPERTY SITUATED GENERALLY ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE SAN DIEGO FREEWAY, WEST OF MAGNOLIA STREET, ADJACENT TO THE CITY OF FOUNTAIN VALLEY Gentlemen: On July 10, 1984, the City Clerk received Notice of Preparation for EIR No. 84-3, which includes in part the Lindborg-Dahl property situated along the south side of the Freeway west of Magnolia Street adjacent to the City of Fountain Valley. The City of Fountain Valley has a strong interest in that matter, especially as it pertains to traffic circulation and congestion in the area. In view of this, I want to request that you submit to us environmental information which you' ve developed. Moreover, it would be helpful if we could arrange for one of your staff members to brief our Planning Commission• on your plans. This would not only be beneficial for our Commission, but would give the Commissioners opportunity to describe their concerns directly to the Huntington Beach staff. Your assistance with regard to this matter will be sincerely appreciated. Very truly yours, C TY F TA VALLEY Clinton erro HUNTINGTON BEACH Planning and Building Director DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CS:ke (UL 1 ' cc: Public Works Director Planning Commission P.O. Box 190 City Manager Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Planner Real Estate Development and Investment. October 8 1984 Planning_ Commission . ' CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 RE: LAND USE E[17 Q]T 84-2 8.5 Acre Site at Warner/Magnolia S & K Greenhouse Site Dear Commissioners: As applicant of the above referenced Land Use Element, we would like to take ,. this opportunity to explain the reasons for our request. The project involves a proposal to construct a 152 apartment unit and a 120,000 ' square foot self storage on 8.5 acres of land located 516feet North of Warner Avenue on the West side of Magnolia Street. The site is presently zoned (Q) R-5 and has an approved site plan to construct 178,000 square feet of office. During the past three years, the property owner and brokerage cormRinity have been attempting to market the property. Unfortunately, they have been unsuccessful. The reasons given by the developexs who have declined to purchase the site and lenders who would not provide the necessary financing were: ' 1. Restricted access 2. Limited freeway visibility 3. Heavy traffic on Magnolia Avenue ' 4. Surplus of office space and the amount of space ready for construction. Our studies indicate this site is a secondary office site that will compete with far better locations and, therefore, there is no current demand or future ` demand for office space at this location or any other secondary location. Development of office space at a secondary location will only dilute the efforts to provide a strong market at primary locations resultinq in slow absorption and ' f a weakened base. The following information concerning office supply and past absorption of office ' space .in the Huntington Beach, Fountain valley market area is submitted for your consideration. This information was obtained from Black's Guide 1984 of the Orange County Office Space Market, Newport Economics and an updated survey by telephone. ' 4665 MacArthur Court, Suite 275 • Newport Beach, California 92660 • (714) 851-2116 ' Planning Ccamission Page 2 October 8, 1984 ' Total Exist' Office Space ce Canbined Market 2,027,613 sa. ft. � .. ' Total Vacancy (October 1, 1984) 469,055 Vacancy Rate 23% Annual Absorption (1981-1984) 158,114 sq. ft. Number of Years of Available Supply 3 years Office Space Proposed of Under Construction 583,000 sq. ft. ' Additional Number of Years Supply 3.7 years TOTAL PRQJB= SUPPLY AVAILABI 1,052,055 sq. ft. Based on prior absorption rates the supply of existing office space and office P �r uPP Y �� space proposed will take 6.7 years to absorb. Also, the Beach Blvd. Corridor provides numerous opportunities for primary office space that is not yet proposed. We believe this corridor will provide the city's future in attracting high quality office space. ' After the last attempt by the property owner to change the zoning of their property, they sought the advice of real estate and land use consultants to evaluate alternative uses. They confirmed the secondary nature of this site for office use and identified the following unique characteristics relating to this site that need to be addressed: ' 1. Restricted Access 2. Limited freeway visibility 3. Adjacent single family homes 4. Lack of signalized ingress and egress to Magnolia Street 5. High traffic volume on Magnolia Avenue due to 405 freeway off ramp. ' Points 1, 3 and 5 relate to traffic problems, indicating a preference for a project with lower traffic volumes. Point 4 also relates to traffic but in a more indirect manner. It is concerned with the traffic impact development of this property would have on the residential neighborhood. Our plan for development addresses these concerns while providing a ca .ratable relationship between uses. The proposed apartrtient conplex will not only be attractive and satisfy a housing need but it will generate far less cars per day than the projected office use. Also the close proximity of an apartment site to the freeway and arterial highways is desirable. ' The self storage area has been designed to provide a low intensity development that will generate the least amount of impact on the adjacent single family housing. It is a low traffic generator and must be designed with security in mind. rbe proposed use while being compatible with the surrounding area, is high enough to make it economically feasible to cover the flood control channel, to improve access to Magnolia Street and provide access to Warner Avenue thereby_ further reducing traffic impacts. ' Planning Conrussion Page 3 October 8, 1984 With regard to our specific request, cae offer the following comients for your consideration. The vast majority of apartments were built 10 years ago. The lack of construction over this period was due to high interest rates combined with other unfavorable building conditions. In order to encourage construction of apartment units, the Federal Government has provided for the issuance of tax exempt bonds thereby permitting lower interest rates. However, recognizing the changing sentiment of the Federal Government, no one knows how long the program will be available. As evidence of the need for additional rental housing, we have provided a survey of existing apartment projects. The survey was conducted on October 1, 1984. ' Total Number of Complexes Surveyed 37 Total Number of Units 6,125 Total Number of Vacant Units 24 Vacancy Rate .4 of 1% ' In summary, we trust we have demonstrated that this site is not a highly desirable location for office use and could have a negative effect on development of viable office space along the Beach Blvd. Corridor and that development of the site as we have proposed will be compatible with the area and the city's goal to provide a balanced housing supply. Respectfully Submitted, THE GUGGENHEIM CCMPANY Dan Guggenheim DG/br 1 t i 1 Lhdbo, IDA 1 rev Inc. ' October 3, 1984 Mr. Jim Palin ' City of Huntington Beach P.O. Banc 190 Huntington Beach, CA. 92648 Re: Magnolia Warner General Plan #84-2 The purpose of this letter is -to examine the reasons we feel that the property subject to the above referenced General Plan amendment,request is not suitable for office development in either the short or long term. Originally we requested the zone change to conlMercial in the belief that freeway visability would offset any problems caused by the limited access and practically non-existent street visability to the property. However, during the development negotiations it became clear that the neighborhood would strongly resist an office complex high enough to establish strong freeway visability. We nevertheless proceeded with our working drawings and pre-marketing efforts in an effort to obtain sufficient pre-leasing to begin construction. Admittedly this was during the worst of the last recession, however we did meet with r"eal'tenants who eventualy leased somewhere and the property did not generate significant interest. Regardless of economic timing, this site will remain of marginal commercial value unless a high rise building is approved there. Even with planning staff approval, our history With the residential neighborhood indicates that an active opposition would be faced with an excellent chance of either outright denial or the imposition of conditions denying the economic viability of the development. Normally the amount of money invested by a developer in a proposed development is not a material factor in your determination as to the worthiness of a proposed development. However in this instance, the information is revelant in order to show the commercial unsuitability of the property for a commercial development. After we invested over $250,000 in non-refundable option money, plans, and pre-sales efforts, we walked from the property turning our plans and approvals over to the property owner. The ' Shimohara Family marketed the property for three years and to my knowledge received no' -offers based on a commercial use, thus their attenpt one year ago for Senior Citizen Housing. P.O. BOX 9029 • 17220 NEWHOPE STREET, SUITE 226 9 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 0(714)641-9844 t We respectfully suggest that the property is either a marginal mid-rise site or an excellent apartment location if the impact on the single family residences to the West can be mitigated. To provide this mitigation, we are suggesting the use of passive storage to act as a buffer and everybody seems to like the idea (neighboring businesses and residents), except the planning department. The proposed mixed use development has the support of the local residents and provides the least traffic impact of all offered development alternatives except non-development. We respectfully suggest approval of the requested General Plan Amendment. Sincerely, ' DAVTD D. DAHL President DDD/blz cc: Charles Thompson City Administrator r AERIAL ' I j M .�• I . }i trim iIca •°'' V AIR oo if1.07 t a r y? 41. �. �1; .�"°`/� - -•� 3 •Yr ry` �"� • f , �. �, ���. ALA(` if � 0! ��•�, � '% r.` }`'r• , �.. %r r r `4 F��ff� .�' F � :k. �^; �` ` � *� ,���":C' �. .��^t- .�y�.7 `�v' / .,r.�I C / - '� r .3 t � � ,Fc•f. '� i j"; r s`r .;.�. �� . .. •< �• /� � .,C fit§ �Z� � �. , i/. :.n a..:.� a. . »-. _ar uc....�,.. a .a,v,..s�w '� �.._ �,,. �;h *.PF4'_Y _,•._.�, � ����� q+.q. v 11` 7s Hilt' . ,�!�1.. ,t_ - � 'i .'�,*% . '. �i.�', �. �Q• .: � � 'fir ""'• :��• ° ��= �,,, iAAA�fffvvvfffrrr ;l•• r ,e�.' � �a 4. S44K. I OFFICE SURVEY . Huntington Beach, OG -� -- Fountain Valle -- Y Bola Fe. Ar Ava. r SEAL Edi Ave. Ave m BEACH Edo Ave M Swan. m ® o . , mWarner ®Ave. x Warne, Ave, ?� ® to ® 0 bt r Slater nn Awa HUNTING ON Tel Ave.13 TalEert O ``HARBOR Flalde St ` Ell COSTA yvEllisAve. O MESA Garfald ® Ave. a Total Existing Office Space Cmbined Market 2,027,613 90 FT A A ar =1 Vacancy as of October 1, 1984 469,055 9Q FT e Combined Huntington Beach-Fountain Valley Vacancy Rate 23% Annual Absorption 1981-1984 158,114 SQ FT m m m Ourrent Njd)er of Years Supply 3 Proposed or Under Construction 583,000 9Q FT ®/ Additional 3.7 PACIFIC •�� � TotalOmb Supply ir Years Supply 6.7 OCEAN tt MAP NO. OUDING NAME `i RENTING AGENT SIZE RENT AVAILA9II ITy VA�� II. ADDRESS CONTACT 80 FEET SO-FEET SPACE 1 Old Huntington Pro.Plaza Jim Larkin 2 Buildings $.65 Gross Immediate..New 714/808 Adams Ave. Larkin 6 Assoc. 2 Stories Each +NI Utilities 500 to 12,200 Kmtington Beach CA 714.536-8836 24,000 total M:U YB:80 PR: 8.500 Argosy Simmons/Schonkeber 2 Stories $.95 Net Irnrnediate.JVew 2 5011 Argosy Ave. S.B.E.Marketing 9,705 per fl. +Everything 646 to 4,000 Huntington Beach CA 714-960-6551 21,571 total M:R YB:80 PR:3.0 11,180 Huntington Executive Park Stephanie Whitcomb 4 Buildings $ 1.20. 1.30 Gross Immedate..Relet 3 16052-168 Beach Blvd. Huntington Executive Park 2UStories Each Full Service 540 to 1,800 Huntington Beach 714-847-2531 112,000 total M:R YB:72 PR4.0 2.904 Mark Friend 2 Stories $ 1.25 Gross Immediate..Relet 4 16371 Beach Blvd. Coldwell Banker 7,500 per fl. Full Service 500 to 12,000 Huntington Beach CA 714.973-5300 15,000 total M:U YB: Pk4.0 3,000 5 Mutual Escrow Leonard Licter 2 Stories To Be Determined Immediate..Relet 17111 Beach Blvd. Lichter Development 7,500 per fl. Limited Huntington Beach CA 714-846.1351 15,000 total M:R YB:75 PR:4.0 LaQuesta Center Mr.R.La Quests 2 Buildings To Be Determined Mmediate••Relet 480 6 17301 Beach Blvd. La Questa Center 2 Stories Each 400 to Huntington Beach 714.842.2834 12,000 total M:R YB: PR:. 600 Beach Proffessional Ctr. Virginia Langham 2 Buildings To Be Determined Irnmedlate..Relet 7 17610.12 Beach Blvd. Beach Professional Centre 2 Stories Each Limited 300 Huntington Beach 714-847.1307 42,000 total M:R YB:68 PR: 8 Huntington Beach Pro Bldg Bill Wiles 2 Stories S.65 Gross lmmedlate..Relet 18090 Beach Blvd. Bill Wiles Mgmt. 4,000 per fl. Full Service Unit of 1,400 Huntington Beach CA 714-842-6208 8,630 total M:U Y8:79 PR:5.0 805 9 Windriver Park Susan Neal 3 Stories $ 1.05 Gross Immediate-New 18141 Beach Blvd. Windriver Trading 15,000 per fl. Full Service Partial floor to 25,000 Huntington Beach CA 714-839-0510 30,000 total M:R YB: PR:4.0 20.000 1 0 Beach Pointe Tom Kubisak 2 Stories $ 1.00 Gross Immediate-New 18351 Beach Blvd. Johnstown American Co. 5,500 per fl. Full Service 1.100 to 9f Huntington Beach 714-855-1200 11,000 total M:U Y8:82 PR:3.0 3,547 Huntington Pacifica Ron Miller 3 Stories $ 1.35 Gross Immediate..New. 11 18377 Beach Blvd. Coldwell Banker Inv.Div. 12,000 per fl. Full Service 655 to 5,000 Huntington Beach CA 714.834-9393 42,000 total M:R Y6:82 PR:4.0 9.000 ' 12 Beachstone Plaza Thomasian/Worth 2 Buildings $ 1.20 Gross Immediate..New 18632 Beach Blvd. Ashwill Schneider 2 Stories Each Full Service 500 to 1,200 Huntington Beach CA 714-978-8000 35,000 total M:R YB:82 PR-.4 3,650 ' Thomasian/Worth 2 Stories To Be Determined linmediale-Relet 1,016 13 18700 Beach Blvd. Ashwill Schneider 10,500 per fl. Soo to Huntington Beach CA 714-978-80M 21,000 total M:R YB:80 Pk4.0 3,650 S8E Financial Centre Simmons/Schonleber 4 Stories $ 1.50 Gross knmediate..New. 30,000 14 19671 Beach Blvd. S.B.E.Marketing 13,825 per It +All Utilities 200 to Huntington Beach CA 714-960.6551 63,278 total M:R Y8:83 PR:3.0 6,000 ' Newland Building Bill Walkup 2 Stories To Be Determined Future Proposed 21 000 15 19860 Beach Blvd. Signal Development 10,500 per fl. Partial floor to Huntington Beach 714-261-0360 21,000 total M:R YB: PR: 21.000 Landmark Bldg. Nader Shah/Kay Harvey 3 Stories $ 1.10 Gross Immediste..New ' 16 19900 Beach Blvd. Grubb 6 Ellis-Comm.Bkge. 10,000 per fl. Full Service 853 to 2,000 Huntington Beach CA 714.937-0881 20.000 total M-U Y8:82 PR.5.0 1,688 1 Mr.Hibbs 4 Stories For Sale/Lease knmedate.A%ew 30,000 ' 20422 Beach Blvd. F.D.I.C. 9,000 per fl. 500 to Huntington Beach CA 714-851.4100 34.000 total M:R YB:82 Pk4.0 34,000 18 Huntington Plaza 1 Glenn Koorhan 2 Stories To Be Determined Immediate,.New Botsa Ave.6 Dan Lane Kacor Development 12,500 per fl Limited Huntington Beach CA 619438-2636 27,000 total M:R YB:83 PR-4.0 1 n Hw*rtton Plaza 8 Glem Koortm 2 Stories To Be Determined UM Delivery25,000 7 5772 Bola Ave. Kam Development 13.000 per Ill. so to Huntington Beach CA 619-438.2636 26,000 total M:t YB. PR:4.0 26,000 SUBTOTALS: 580,479 172,396 I ' ' MAP NO. 6UII.DING NAME RENTING AGENT SIZE RF]rT AVAIIJIaQ.rTY VACANT ADDRESS CONTACT SQ-FEET SQ.FErr SPACE Huntington Nat'l.Centre Frank Woolsey 2 Buildings $ 1.10.1.25 Gross ktlmediaoe..Relet 20 16531-61 Bolsa Chico Rd. Lands West Properties Inc IUStories Each Full Service UniOed Huntington Beach CA 714-846-0665 25,000 total M:R Y8:82 PR. Harbour Business Center Nader Shah/Kay Harvey 4 Buildings $ 1.25 Gross knmed� 1 20Y 16872.902 Bolsa.Chice Rd. Grubb&Ellis-Comm.Bkge. 2 Stories Each ull Service Uric of - Huntington Beach CA 714-937-0881 43,000 total M:U Y6:82 PR4.0 1,155 ' Brookhurst Financial Plz. Doris Palardy 2 Stories To Be Determined hmediiate..Relet 22 20902 Brookhurst St Commercial Property Mgmt 7,250 per fl. Limited Huntington Beach 714-731-5460 14.500 total M:R YB: PR:.' Bruce Aynes 2 Stories To Be Determined knmediate..Rekt 23 20951 Brookhurst St 4,500 per fl. Limited Huntington Beach 714.962-6683 9.000 total M:R YB:71 PR4.0 ' RED Plaza Ron Ort 2 Stories $.90 Gross km+edia e-Relet 24 21062 Brookhurst St Real Estate Professionals 5,500 per fl. Full Service Unit of 1,200 Huntington Beach CA 714.963-8377 11,000 total M:R YB:77 PR3.5 300 2 The eusharo Mark Vincent 2 Stories To Be Determined knmediate.J'delet 22311 Brookhurst St Ashwill/Schneider 5,000 per fl. 600 to 1,800 Huntington Beach CA 714.476-2660 10,000 total M:R YB:77 PR:4.5 850 ' OfficeMs.Marata/Ms.Artery 2 Stories $.70 .90 Net Immediate-New. 26 center7400 Center Ave. Brokers West 9,500 per fl. + Everything 873 to 4,000 Plaza Huntington Beach CA 714.898-0733 19,000 total M:U Y6:82 PR4.0 2,000 ' 2 One Pacific Plaza Ph.l Mr.Shapiro/Mr.Murphy 6 Stories $ 1.55. 1.65 Gross immedivW-New 12 000 7777 Center Ave. Frost Trinen Partners 15,000 per fl. Full Service 1,000 to Huntington Beach CA 714-641.1111 98.000 total M:R Y8:82 PR3.7 6,000 ' 2 One Pacific Plaza-Ph.11 Rich Shapiro 12 Stories To Be Determined Future Proposed 7777 Center Ave. Frost Trinen Partners 15.000 per fl. Partial floor to Huntington Beach CA 714-641-1111 200.000 total M:R YB: PPc3.7 200.000 j 2 n One Pacifica Plaza Ph.II Rich Shapiro 6 Stories $ 1.60-1.80 Gross umDefvery 2/8:, 7777 Center Ave. Frost Trinen Partners 15,000 per In. Full Service Partial floor to 1 Huntington Beach CA 714-641-1111 98,000 total M:R YB: PR:3.7 98,000 Florida Prof.Bldg. Warren Lortie 3 Stories To Be Determined krmediate-Relet 30 18652 Florida St Warren Lorne&Assoc. 5,100 per fl. Lirn' 600 ' Huntington Beach 714-848-7262 16.000 total M:R Y6:80 PR:4.0 Garfield Bank Building J.Jasper/B.Rosgen 3 Stories $.70. 1.35 Gross kranediate.Rdet 31 9042 Garfield Ave. Development Prop. 8,000 per fl. + Cleaning 731 to 6,400 ' Huntington Beach CA 714-964-2479 16,000 total M:U YB:81 M4.0 860 Golden West Prof.Center Mike Clayton 1 Story $ 1.10 Gross m rin xUate..Relet 32 17161 Golden West Business Properties 8,000 per fl. Fun Service 700 to 1,500 Huntington Beach CA 714.385-1801 8,000 total MA Y8:80 M4.0 1.500 1 3 3 Prirxeland Huntington Bch Duncan/Worth 2 Stories $.60 Gross Ynmediate-.New 12,000 16712 Gothard St Ashwill Schneider 17.500 per fl. Full Service 80010 Huntington Beach CA 714-978-8000 35,000 total M:U YB:82 PR4.0 14.624 ' Sea Cliff Office Park Bill Ellis 4 Buildings f 1.10. 1.25 Gross Immediate..Rdet 25,000 34 2110-34 Main St Huntington Seacliif Corp. 2 Stories Each Full Service 35OtD Huntington Beach 714-536-7551 90,000 total M:U YB:82 PR4.0 7,000 ' The Main Office Robert Jarrard 2 Stories $ 1.15 Gross Immedwtit-Rdet 1,100 35 18600 Main St b Jarrard Development 7.000 per fl. Full Service 550 Huntington Beach CA 714-848-3133 14,200 total M:U YB:78 PR5.0 2,100 Peters Landing L Lockwood/C.Briseno 3 Buildings $ 1.35.1.50 Gross knmediafe..New 7,000 ' 36 16360-450 Pacific Coast Peters Landing 2 Stories Each Full Service 600 b Huntington Beach CA 714-840-1387 28,000 total M:R YB:79 PR:4.0 3.000 ' Slater Prof.Center Frank White 2 Stories To Be Determined kmrediate_Ret el 37 8071 Stater Ave. Coats&Wallace 8,400 per fl. tka of Huntington Beach CA 714-948-6177 16,800 total M R Y8:79 PR4.0 1.000 Huntington North Bus.Ctr Dick Burr 2 Buildings For Sale/Lease kmrediate..Row 38 7641 Talbert Ave. Huntington North Bus Cntr 2 Stories Each United ' Huntington Beach CA 714-847-9937 20,148 total M:R YB- PR:. SUBTOTALS: 473,648 73,801 HUNTINUTUN BLACH ' MAP NO BUILDING NAME RENTING AGENT SIZE RENT AVAILABILITY VAT ADDRESS CONTACT SQ FEET SQ. FEET SPACE Harbor Landing Shirley Myers 2 Stories 1.95- 1.15 Net Immediate-New 39 4911 Warner Ave. Double Gemini 15,000 per fl. + Everything 500 to 2000 Huntington Beach CA 714-840-2441 30.000 total M:R Y8:82 PR:. 3.000 40 Huntington Marina Steve Lefferdink 3 Stories $.90 Gross Immediate..Relet 6 800 ' 4952 Warner Ave. Lefferdink 13,000 per fl. Full Service 460 to Huntington Beach 714-846.3020 40,000 total M:R Y6:80 PR:4.0 1,700 Rich Walter 2 Stories $ 1.00 Gross Immediate..Relet 1 000 ' 41 5075 Warner Ave. Security Capital 8,000 per fl. + Elec. &Clean. 900 to r Huntington Beach CA 714-846.7726 16.000 total M:R YB:60 PR:5.0 2,000 4 Tobin Prof.Building Francis Hsu 2 Stories $.85 Gross Immediate..Relet r Warner2 000 5142 Warner Ave. Fullerton Office Center 5.000 per fl. Full Service 100 to ' Huntington Beach CA 714-964.8808 15,000 total M:U Y6:76 PR:4.0 990 Park Place Shirley Myers 2 Stories $.95 Gross Immediate-New 5200 Warner Ave. Double Gemini 10,000 per fI. + All Utilities 718 to ' Huntington Beach CA 714-840-2441 20,000 total M:U Y8:82 PR:. 1,692 Plaza Cuidad David Boorke 2 Stories $.85 Net Immediate..Relet 7,000 44 8907 Warner Ave. David Boorke Reanor 17,500 per fl. + Everything 500 to Huntington Beach CA 714.546.9950 35,000 total M:U YB:79 PR:. 3,000 ' SUBTOTALS 156,000 18,800 TOTALS 1,210,127 264,997 * These two projects are included below. ' VACANCY RATE 22% ' PROJECTS PROPOSED OR UNDER CONSTRUCTION LOCATION DEVELOPER SQUARE FOOTAGE ' 1. Warner/Beach Nola Development 14 Stories 210,000 6 Stories 75,000 2. Center Avenue Rich Shapiro 12 Stories 200,000 6 Stories 98,000 ' GRAND TOTAL including Proposed or Under Construction 1,793,127 847,997 PROPOSED Vacancy Rate 47% ' FOUNTAIN VALLEY JLP NO. BUDDING NAME RENTING AGENT SIZE RENT AVAIT A nATT VACAW ADDRESS CONTACT So.FEET S0.MET SPACE Cky COWS Murrell/Beaudette/Buckingham 3 Buildings :1.15 Net In meMe_ m 100,000 1 17330 Brookhurst St. Coldwek Banker 3 Stories Each + Everytlwlg 1,000 to E AD PO.a Fountain Valley CA 714.955-6300 306.407 total M:R YB:83 M4.0 180.000 ' Valley Gardens Georgia Shaw 2 Stories To Be Determined Immediate..Relet 4,500 2 18430 Brookhurst St Wilbur&Dunkin 7,500 per fl. Limited Fountain Valley CA 714-964-3531 15.000 total M:R YB:77 PR:. ' The Centennial Plaza Jane Jasper 3 Stories $ 1.30-1.35 Gross knmediate..Relet 18837 Brookhurst St Development Prop. 105,000 per fl. Full Service 775 to 4,720 Fountain Valley CA 714-964-2479 25,000 total M:U YB:82 PR:4.0 4,000 Warner Newhope Bus.Ctr. Andy WIiford 3 Buildings $.90-1.15 Gross Immediate-New ' 4 17151.97 Newhope St S&A Management 1.2Stories Each Full Service 500 to 14,438 Fountain Valley 714-540-0537 55,015 total M:R YB:82 PR:4.0 1,000 Plaza Del Logo Mike Quaranta 3 Buildings To Be Determined Immediste..New 5 17220 Newhope St Plaza Del Lago Prop.Mgmt 2 Stories Each Limited 6,000 ' Fountain Valley CA 213.377.2211 45,000 total M:R YB: Pk. Gene Marinacci 2 Buildings $.75-.95 Net knmediate..Relet 2 000 6 17280 Newhope St Marinacci&Lindborg 2 Stories Each + Everything Limited I Fountain Valley CA 714-557-8262 14,000 total M:U YB: PR.. The Fountains Bruce Duncan 2 Buildings $ 1.20 Gross Immediate-New NO Answex 7 10101 Slater Ave. Rayoo Commercial Leasing 2 Stories Each + Eke:.&Clean. 447 to Fountain Valley CA 714.963-2739 53,399 total M:U YB:81 PR4.0 2,500 8 10221 Slater Ave. ler.Cynthia Poulos 2 Buildings $ 1.15-1.20 Gross Immediate..Relet 13,000 D.V.M. 2 Stories Each + E &Clean. 375 to Fountain Valley 714.549.1020 49,432 total M:U YB:76 PR:. 20,000 !' Star Real Estate Bldg. Dale Bush 3 Stories $ 1.40 Gross knmediate..Relet 9 10061 Talbert Ave. Dale Bush,Attorney 7,000 per fl. Full Service Unit of 4,000 Fountain Valley CA 714.964.4441 28,000 total M:R YB:79 Pk4.0 2,500 Fountain Valley Plaza Kim Josephson 3 Stories $ 1.65 Gross hnmediate..Relet I' 1 0 10540 Talbert Ave. Coldwell Banker 31,666 per fl. Full Service 1.500 to 22,000 Fountain Valley CA 714.955.6300 95.080 total M:U YB:81 PR:4.0 10,000 1, Larry Simpson 2 Stories $ 1.25 Grass Immediate-New 7 400 11 8700 Warner Norris Beggs&Simpson 10.000 per fl Full Service Unit of Fountain Valley CA 714-957-8444 20,000 total M:U YB: PR:. 1.300 Gary M.Schmidt 3 Stories $.90 Net knmediate..New 8,000 12 8840 Warner Ave. Gary M.Schmidt Const 10,075 per fl. + Everything 629 tD Fountain Valley CA 714-847-9954 20,153 total M:U YB:83 PR:. 10,000 Himko Ogata 2 Buildings To Be Determined knmediate..Reiet 13 10990 Warner Ave. R&H Investment 1&2Stories Each Limited ' Fountain Valley 714-751.5999 19,000 total M:R YB:73 PR:. 14 A Metrocentre-Fountain Vly Dan Lekich 2 Stories For Sale/Lease Immediate..New _ 10,000 't 11770 Warner Garry Plaza Sales Office 21,000 per fl. 560 to Fountain Valley CA 714.540-0327 42,000 total M:R YB:83 PR:3.5 42,000 Valley Plaza Terri Tonucci 2 Buildings $ 1.05-1.25 Net lmmediate..Relet 8,000 15 Warner&Bushard Centennial Properties 3 Stories Each + Everything 1,000 to ' Fountain Valley CA 714-530-8255 30,000 total M:R Y6:78 PR 4.0 11,241 TOTALS: 817,486 204,058 ' Vacancy Rate 25% I`�APAR`IMEW SURVEY HUNTINGTON BEACH APARTMENT RENTAL SURVEY OCTOBER 1, 1984 NAME/OWNER ADDRESS # UNITS # VACANCIES ' Los Arbolitos 8450 Atlanta 208 0 Huntington Sands 17861 Bell 42 1 Cambridge 17171 Bolsa Chica 130 The Californian 19822 Brookhurst 64 ' Huntington Vista 21551 Brookhurst 220 pl Casa del Sol 21661 Brookhurst 448 pl Huntington Meadows 8210 Constantine 62 0 Huntington Manor 19161 Delaware 77 0 Woodlake 6100 Edinger 156 2 Whiffletree 6200 Edinger 158 0 The Huntington 8400 Edinger 276 3 ' Huntington Terrace 18800 Florida 164 1 Huntington Granada 17111 Goldenwest 310 pl Monticello 17052 Green 96 Sea Environment 9632 Hamilton 66 QI ' Harbour Village 4561 Heil 26 0 Huntington Garden 4901 Heil 208 1 Sandpiper 8081 Holland 144 0 ' Seawind Village 15555 Huntington Village 277 2 Solterous 17301 Keelson Lane 118 2 ' Maddox Apartments 7051 Maddox 56 Beachwood 19132 Magnolia 120 1 ' Mora Kai 18881 Mora Kai 42 p1 Brookwood Manor 16851 Nichols 80 1 ' Huntington Creek 8211 San Angelo 193 1 Harbour Lights 16700 Saybrook 342 2 Huntington Seville 16112 Sher, 66 ' 16121 Parkside Springdale 16072 Springdale 76 0 Lamplighter 16102 Springdale 64 1 Huntington Continental 17101 Springdale 86 1 ' Warner Properties 17041 Stanley 56 3 Banbury Cross 16761 Viewpoint 400 Cont'd NAME/OWNER ADDRESS # UNITS # VACANCIES Californian 6242 Warner 232 0 Huntington West 6401 Warner 286 2 Casa Monterey 6551 Warner 208 �! Apple 6700 Warner 304 Windjammer 7701 Warner 264 6,125 24 TOTAL # OF COMPLEXES SURVEYED 37 TOTAL # OF UNITS 6,125 ' TOTAL # OF VACANCIES 24 VACANCY RATE 4/10ths of 1% 1 1 1 PROJk7CT PHOTOS "LAY"_'• 4 ram' a�"a<,x• � ,..,7• j ' tip t p� T* :�q � �• Iry VV��J�+� t� st., s � ,9nj.:. '�ts'iv,� � Yk•� �WITt !, �fi'�`s`�° r ''���_ ��`� , ��`-r`,$"$�-��! ���'Yrn�"�'=����'^4��r + T�P 1 ' "� s,�°•f.. =�_�� i -;�cx'. $� s,�� ��+� "".�„�� t �` y t �r� ,..,z•���r.�'�S'',F7�'�`�``t • I t ca r r y�•.�, ��•�"� .3�� ��,�''� t�r� .r !, Y •9 A:., '`J'c i, ",. ,"Y. :*.r� tom\r�` ,,�� �'",f�} '+q' ,', •e•�a.' '��"',F.'�' •x - .,J�}�r; �4'r - fiE� � •C r�r1t; `'';. a :, G;. T�r C a. L,y.. ��wf t'�F+iY• jR .'. :'u car L �S�jr4a „ j sat 6 A A o!': 4"tr' �� s y..�;,`r 'P}� '�&�'t�y�.e��X`!Fi'`«` p�'.tT �^ '�� �� ''�fi: * ��,�i,fiw� �t �•�i ,-'��,°�',�.i �' f� ,�a'4�j, t�"�c.,rF��{�. x '�i� {a�t. ,a �. �,+"X"#?'�` �r.�'+'.. - � �"4__. 3M' R�.. •� ii.�+ "�',�yry •9 Y�'i"!1(+P d'�.�� i '• •y,,+, .!�g�,/�'�.1..1�A,"xR"pr i.�C�� .��;y� �8 �'� a 9 t 'w f� ?ate .,'�' r f f� -a a �tY_`: r/TMr,,.-. 1""\y •xr, =� +J'• t\i 6 CIF* IS da° M1o, 1+ a i. f '� Y.,ia= t ,••`J� '°o-Y , s e�"" " •��e� � +.'•yam. ; 'a� Ql � ,>.t bit.��'�. � ".w` s �� - � \ �•f, 'k. iF� ! ,, r o � � _ �`� $�� .T�#� 'a e.9` ,.ss @ '''• m a_ t� 75 „'°`a;b.•fi '" y #. ; t a \�. . .py F•L ,;�•� 'S, Y,#' ' R- b� �y lajr AN ovt rMl x� � x ;g ti� kid ', � s �z a..�y' •.,,�.� � w '�' �� �X:���� t# 5 '� "t �, * .e�4 -e �.wx i� of f° trt t Ursa'" �'. 4� •. �; e � 471 FA V'4 Y w ' �+ �T•'� t' �� ram' 1� y+€•r � � �' , ,y"g°+ : re � i.,.r � r 11 r tt"�, *'"' •r/n'3 •� � � �C s a $ .n S '^�,#`� �' '""��'. w • y 9 • .f= 4 • a } •I - :„art`h°"��`S� Y �^ �, ,� � `* F` t"� ��r q,���•� .r , •_��y,� 111111 ` k Vo AV A. Ut �M fS. e r ` 5 o '9 ' 3 x- ,• a ;" .• - ._ ,' .� �,�� ��.'�, :filar >6;;,l.�;�T'� !. ����+)��%� .a. ,.. .k �[' t.t, ter: .« �.� • � — � .L w7 •w '-,Y�,i. .t .. i�' 3 .t s• :�r .L��•`, i''�, a� p Yb y ` r of p, �A��Y4'*"` ''�k � R+!` `�• .x'�r. �� k,.g'`;�`•! �1rt'.�' 'A�• a. •`•�^� .!� `y;`. .�"..� tia ."�s+�` A •1 ti -/ a h, as + ,+ t t. G. i�F :t �" ,?� P, 'I'°'L. � ' C*,.*, »Z• '/4�3 �'�' .� :�..., k,�`�'�'y�.��ySy,. .��e "'' tr ,S '�..�� yt fi,J `.' S� 4 r y y Y a Y' r j" -"�•� -.; �{... '. ,• �� �p, '�t. Y•z 5•c%L�Yti. �i�Vp �"ys.. �;��,��-.e `�' �ea` yitb' �h 3t t,.�' : C , e { . :'4w.u2' _...• ;t * ,�• {{ »a V } w •,,.� �. y �• /" • . ^�, '"�,R. +i��-,f��. a�`3* ..,�T+` :.�,f,�} r ,,?+ ��k ``+�. .w�,+� Y". ^h., ! � � ?.: '. �i.k�� '•$' f��� r a � ., x• 7•y•`� `� 2,;, � +c; ql j � ,� J' 1►e,7! t"�'''` i �;.r '�" r+., x + *`+;.• riJ ww k xi r ; .r �14i , � � y a'�T��'i'n.,.�Jk ��� ,k 1� � �v&c'd' F � .���• �� !, ,p "� �. Yf '�. t •�.:• �..� i i� ';�; y'�fY�•'!f�4��.1,��#°Gj�t't"g4a'��c$"°a 'yy++w, ' r'i x�iy� +�. +"*r .. *— t,,, f' r^ {7'Yl N�����t* y �a'} t � jY'� m 1} 1�{ °_• �i�s� t� s,yj �,�� G.. , ,�?+� �r���>z�tt,�- -t",�' 4•..� � �.. ��� t F t �� �� E R '`*'��.,Ifi ,.ems" y},r s' i w�..y ¢' 'fib., riff t•7�rF'�µ. 4�' �,�f,F�$4y.7. :•�3 .' ili�li ' 5 A. 71F�``S � �?. � {/,� ,�v i ,{�..y*+`'.• I ! i,:�,c.�,. � �+db� i^ � ��L + r ` 11 ' ` �` � �^ _ ..a � � 's• � ai w � f r � 1 P 11 3 d �e l 1 Y i, � I(. J tL f k"A'.t. •�MY 'u4 'Y1ril;h� L T y e�'�!+'�1.� aS'1 $3 ��. ,Fu��yy;."iV �z• � 1, f Y- 1 - �- `y.'nVr .k'� J:�°» z Y. „y/.`'a•f,y`7-.`r� .�. �.'F.,,+��' !�t, 12, "'� �� If' k i �' .rare �• . �+ E ��r ���� i�,`y �q- ;«, jr � r"¢¢ `*. �'-�t� "�4 '�� �r {�,�F•. "fh;a$ }.,g."' {IFf+#ia� ' �r �/ ¢✓; -. ,, r v s?4X. �'ya t r fry, ?♦�d.i.., �'. ��", }� :: r h arax f J ,Rwi a` t �� s + ! :*+ y a ,�y } Y N.. G:. q �n� � d. 14 - , `k1 k• �J,� � a '. � ,• a. s fa° k, • lei. .. � ,�. ' ,..e�'"�."�. t TI - '�^ G 11,T 1 L ,HS i �,✓ � r I ! � a , yh { i i I b � 4 LOW 1 yI sF - SW STIORA wa r h sue: M *.�•. o- `` -+'.�"� � � �a � awa. �'•6 wu•wAt3 �" ;,rey `�f,,�� .�'.aa „.+E. �J+r.r. .'.,wN��w� tu -+.,, i —L �.L - *�4 ''F �i l• ....eta °$.. ti I c 1 � . 44� i is•; �A„�a�r�'$tiO�.w�,''"'fit"a. q�"�.� 'yam �, i , ���' �, w �`�. RM - MINI STORAGE BLDGS. r. RIVERMEADOWS APARTMENTS HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA. H. fi �J L c 1�1f•- t�� s SYG 6 j, . i October 26, 1984 RCA - LUE 84-2/EIR 84-3 Page 2 Planning Commission Recommendation: 1 . Approve Environmental Impact Report No. 84-3 . 2 . Approve the recommendation of the Planning Commission (as indicated in Attachment 1 , Summary of Requests ) and adopt by resolution, Land Use Element Amendment No. 84-2. Staff Recommendations: The Department of Development Services ' staff recommendations are shown in Attachment 1 , Summary of Requests . ANALYSIS : The analysis for each item is contained in the Land Use Element Amendment/Environmental Impact . Report document. On October 24, 1984, the applicant for Area 3 .3 submitted a letter requesting that the City Council not take action on his amendment • and zone change request at this time . If the Council agrees to his request, this item should be removed from the amendment and referred back to the Planning Commission for their review and report. Environmental Status: Environmental documentation for the amendment requests may be found in the amendment report which also serves as Environmental Impact Report No. 84-3. The FIR was posted for a 30-day period ending October 12, 1984 . Public comments and staff responses constitute the Final EIR and are incorporated in the appendix of the report . ALTERNATIVES: The City Council may adopt the requested changes as recommended by the Planning Commission, as recommended by the planning staff , they may modify them as desired, or may retain the existing designations in the Land Use Element. ATTACHMENTS : 1 . Summary of Requests 2 . Letter from Ken Moody dated Cctober 24, 1984 . 3 . Land Use Element Amendment 4 . Draft Minutes from Public Hearing before the Planning Commission 105 . Resolution J WP:HS :a jh Q (1307d) ATTACHMENT 1 SUMMARY OF' REQUESTS Item 2 . 1 - Staff requests that a solid waste facility land use designation be created in order to satisfy recent State legislation regarding the siting of solid waste facilities . In siting a solid waste facility the law requires that local agencies make a finding of consistency with the general plan . In order for this to occur, the local jurisdiction must identify the facility on the land use diagram of the land use element based on findings of compatibility with surrounding uses . Staff recommends that policy language be created establishing this new designation and that such facilities meet the following location criteria of being located within or predominantly surrounded by industrial and/or public/quasi-public utility areas, and be in close proximity to designated truck routes . Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval Staff Recommendation: Approval Item 2 .2 - Staff requests that policy language be added to the Land Use Element to meet the requirement of State law which provides that local general plans be consistent with county airport environs land use plans . Staff recommends that the following policy language be added to the Land Use Element: "Any project which requires a notice of proposed construction of alteration by the FAA, under FAR part 77 , shall submit a copy of the FAA application to the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) , and provide the City with the FAA and ALUC responses . If the ALUC requests review of the project, then the project shall be submitted to the Commission . Notice of any ALUC determination of inconsistency, with the Commission' s Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) , must be given to the City within 60 calendar days from the date of referral of the application to the ALUC, and shall be considered before the City takes any action on the project . If the Commission fails to give such notice of inconsistency . within that period, the proposed project shall be deemed consistent with the AELUP. " ' Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval Staff Recommendation: Approval T 1 ( 1309d) ATTACHMENT 1 Page 2 Area 3 . 1 - The City-initiated request is to redesignate 4 .65 acres located west of Nichols Street and approximately 1 , 000 feet south of Warner Avenue from General Industrial to Solid Waste Facility. Staff recommends approval of the request . Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval Staff Recommendation: Approval Area 3 .2 - The applicant' s request is to redesignate 10 .4 acres located west of Magnolia Street and approximately 450 feet north of Warner Avenue from General Commercial to Mixed Development . Staff recommends that the applicant' s request be denied, and that the site retain the General Commercial designation Zone Change No. 84-10 was submitted by the applicant to be processed concurrently with this land use amendment request . Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval I Staff Recommendation: Denial Area 3 . 3 - The applicant' s request is to redesignate 3 .0 acres located east of Bolsa Chica Street and south of Pearce Street from Medium Density Residential to General Commercial . Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the applicant' s request to General Commercial . Zone Change No . 84-9 was submitted by the applicant to be processed concurrently with this land use amendment request. On October 24, 1984 , the applicant submitted a letter requesting that this item be removed from the amendment . The Council may wish to send this item and the Zone Change back to the Planning Commission to see if they would change their recommendation based on the applicant' s request. Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval Staff Recommendation : Approval HS :ajh (1309d) ATTACHMENT 3 _ Since 1891 JACK FOTI O»ci RFORATtt►Rwouw NOV 2 OD DMIOFM[Ni November 1, 1984 CITY CITY HUNTINGTON BEACH COUNCIL OFFICE Huntington Beach City Council 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, Calif. 92648 The Honorable Don MacAllister: Since we may not be able to attend the November 5, 1984 hearing on the land Use Element Admendment #84-2 and the accompanying Environmental Impact Report #84.3, I am writing you to express our strong objection concerning the pro- posed admerldment. The Bekins Moving & Storage Company has operated from its location at 7572 Warner Avenue for approximately twenty years. Until recently, we understood that the 4.65 acres had been used as a truck repair facility and in that regard, it was a compatible use with our storage of household goods. More recently, we have learned that solid waste is being stored in transit at the site. We also understand that more intense uses of this property will be permitted if. the proposed admendment is approved. Bekins customers regularly visit our facility on Warner Avenue to retrieve fran and deliver items to their storage accounts. The vast majority of our custcaers at this site are residents of Huntington Beach, and I know these customers will not tolerate having their household goods stored next to a solid waste facility. The loss of these customers will create large losses for our busi- ness and greatly diminish the value of this property. Therefore, I urge you to deny this proposed admendment. Cordially, HUNTINGTON BEACH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES vioe President DEC 0 6 1984 Corporate Development J1/dj P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 THE •[IONS COMPANY • 777 FLOWER STREET. GLENDALE. CALIFORNIA 91201 . 0161 907-1200 70 v • ATTACHMENT 4 � /2 INC y 17091 Palmdale Huntington Beach,CA 92647 1191m (714)847-4404 oU r.) ci V) hive � qr-s N dims I To �qd 0c��o �c � " i �'1orvS Y�UT d1d Nor T► nN-k TG - O 1 We rE3sidents, business owners�operty owners, and school per al hereby petition the Huntington Beach Sity Co to reject the request to re ate 4.65 acres dwned by Rainbow Disposal on Nichols Street, from general indus rial to solid waste for the following reasons: i. Increased truck traffic on roads that service Oceanview High School, Oakview Elementary School, aberty Christian School, the day care center at the south side of the w:kview School, business traffic, residential traffic, and senior citizen traffic at the church on the corner of Gothard and Warner. 2. Increased waste drainage onto the street when waste is dumped onto the ground bedore entering the big trucks, as their property is sloped towards the street. 3. Increased health hazard such as rodents, birds, etc- 4. Increased odor and noise level. 01� 5. We want the tonnage per day not to exceed the maxium of 800 tams. 1 Print Name: 61- / Address:1 -3 t) /VA s s Sign Name: Date & Phone optional t 19 AV Print Name:- 0 SC A-(0 Address: 11 M : Sign Name: Date & Phone optional ll Print Name: J71/ Epson Address: 17311 0s,60/5 Sign Name: T �L Date & Phone optional // /9 8 Print Name:- Mu ALA L H i wti A0 Address: IU1C1%1S ST Sign Name: Date & Phone optional / -/9- Print Name: "j)2/1wf Address: /7.3 S Sign Name: O- Date & Phone(optional) / —[� E/�sABFr� H!�//�c� Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional //'(9- Print Name: S Gc�E' O Sf,/ Address:. "3 Y- i C o L Sign Name: Date & Phone optional • i 9/ S< Print Name; Address: L 4� .S Sign Name: ' Date & Phone optional Print Name: �V f� Address: Sign Name: GCt� Date & Phone(optional)- Print Name: C rZ L 4 N.0 Address:__J_?..it/1, Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional) Print Name: kt!r" Address: Sign Name- Date & Phone(optimal) Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional , Print Name:�1v) Set Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional /</iq, • ATTACHMENT 5 • i P.O. BOX 1026 17121 NICHOLS ST. RAINBOW TRANSFER / RECYCLING JNC . HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92647-1026 IIIIIIIIIIIL (714) 847-3581 TRANSFER STATION OPERATIONAL PROCEDURE 1- DEBRIS CONTROL: a-Sweeper is run through-out the yard, including all drive ways and the street area at less five times per day. b-Manual clean-up of paper on perimeter property areas is done at least once a day. c-All semi ° s leaving the property are checked prior to leaving for lose debris . 2- ODOR CONTROL: a-All incoming loads with offensive odors are required to be dumped immediately into transfer trucks . This load is then sprayed with Malabate to control the odor. b-The dumping areas are all sprayed with Malabate on a daily basis ° c-The sweeper that sweeps the area at least five times per day also has Malabate chemicals to insure odorless conditions . d-At the end of the day, all trucks are also sprayed with odor controlling chemicals . 3- PEST. CONTROL: a-Pest control service is contracted with Bug Police Exterminating Company to inspect periodically during the month to set rodent traps through-out the area for various rodents , insects and pest. They also certify the conditions and monitoring results ° b-A representative from the Orange County Vector Control District periodically inspects records and on-site conditions . 4- ENVIRONMENTAL INSPECTIONS: The following agencies have inspected this facility: Orange County Solid Waste Enforcement Agency Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Agency South Coast Air Quality Management Agency Orange County Ventor Control District Bug Police Exterminating Company All of the above agencies have not found any violations during past years ; this facility opened in November, 1983 ATTACHMENT 6 • South Coast AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT 9150 FLAIR DRIVE, EL MONTE, CA 91731 (818)572-6200 December 21 , 1984 Mr. James W. Palin, Director HUNTINGTON BEACH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Development Services City of Huntington Beach P . 0. Box 190 DEC 2 6 1984 Huntington Beach, California 92643 Dear Mr. Pal in: P.C. Cox 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Rainbow Disposal Company With reference to subject request , files on the Rainbow Disposal Company at 17121 Nichols Street , contain no history of violations , warnings , or citizens complaints . An annual inspection conducted on September 26 , 1984 shows that the company has District permits for two booths or enclosures for the painting of trucks and dumpsters and one permit for a gasoline storage and dispensing system. The inspector noted no odors or emissions and found that operation of the equip- ment complied with District regulations . The inspector re- marked on the excellent housekeeping at the facility. a� C�lu telephone conversation with Mr. Charles Clark of your staff indicates that the City has received no complaints from nos ' citizens on dust or odors from rubbish sorting and dumping . r . Clark stated that trash was hauled away as soon as a load had accumulated and that the yard and access ways were paved. It is true that we have received complaints and have issued nuisance violations in connection with solid waste transfer at stations in other cities , but these situations resulted mainly from poor housekeeping , allowing trash to accumulate for days , and from dust raised by trucks on unpaved roadways . The District has no adverse information that would affect the City ' s consideration of a land use amendment . If you should have any further questions , feel free to contact Thomas Wiester at our Anaheim office , at (714) 991- 7200 . Sincerely, Edward Camarena EC : ldg Director of Enforcement cc : T. Wiester ATTACHMENT 7 Orange CoU&y Vector Contol District DISTRICT OFFICE • 13001 GARDEN GROVE BLVD.,GARDEN GROVE,CA 92643 MAILING ADDRESS • P.O.BOX$7.SANTA ANA,CALIFORNIA 92702 PHONE(AREA CODE 714)971.2421 BOARD OF TRUSTEES•1984 PRESIDENT-WILLIAMBANDARUK December 18, 1984 VICE-PRESIDENT-JAROLD B.COLE SECRETARY-FRANCESR.WOOD ANAHEIM JUDIE DE PERRY BREA DEAN F.MILLEN BUENA PARK KENNETHB-JONES Charles L. Clark, Associate Planner COSTA MESA WILLIAM BANDARUK City of Huntington Beach CYPRESS GERALD MULLEN Development Services FOUNTAIN VALLEY 2000 Main Street MARVIN P. FULLERTONADLER Huntington Beach, California 92648 FRANCES R.WOOD GARDEN GROVE J TILMAN WILLIAMS Dear Mr. Clark: HUNTINGTON BEACH WARREN G-HALL IRVINE MARYANNGAIDO Your inquiry regarding Rainbow Disposal Company at 17121 Nichols LAGUNA BEACH Street in Huntin ton Beach has been received and was ins ected MICHAEL E.MANG 9 P LAHABRA by the District three times in the last year. At each inspection DOROTHY LAPALMA WEDEL no evidence of rodent or fly production was noted. DANIEL D-COLLINS LOS ALAMITOS PAULBERNAL The physical transfer of the material is managed in such a manner NEWPORT BEACH RUTHELYN PLUMMER that it is highly unlikely to produce a food source or breeding ORANGE FRED L.BARRERA location for vectors. PLACENTIA ROBERT W.KUZNIK SANCLEMENTE At this time we would have no recommendation for improvement DR.WADE LOWER SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO or change in their procedure. JAROLD B.COLE SANTA ANA WILLIAM L.BOYNTON S' erel , SEAL BEACH y ///•/v�,/�'\ W E VANDERSTAAY STANTON FRANK MARSHOTT TUSTIN URSULA E.KENNEDY VILLA PARK ohn U. Pett MARTIE STEVENSON WESTMINSTER Vector Control Technician III KATHY BUCHOZ YORBA LINDA DAVID W.CROMWELL JUP/vb COUNTY OF ORANGE LEO F.KOHL DISTRICT MANAGER GILBERT L.CHALLET HUNTINGTON BEACH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES owq`'GE `0&'7 DEC 18 LQ84 v P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 , 0 o�ti ronrao'- A vector Is any Insect or other arthropod,rodent or other animal of public health significance capable of causing human discomfort,Injury,or capable of harboring or transmitting the causative agent of human disease. ATTACHMENT 8 STATE OF CALIFORNIA _ • 0 GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD .�..... SANTA ANA REGION ;dam 6809 INDIANA AVENUE, SUITE 200 RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92506 PHONE: (714) 684-9330 December 12, 1984 Mr. Charles L. Clark Associate Planner City of Huntington Beach P. 0. Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Dear Mr. Clark: Rainbow Disposal Company, Inc. Solid Waste Transfer Station This is in response to your December 5, 1984 letter regarding the operation of the waste transfer facility at 17121 Nichols Street. Please note that on December 10, 1984, A. John Mijares and Steven Overman of this office inspected the transfer facility to determine if the operation poses any threat to water quality and to determine whether or not a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit should be required for any discharge from the site. The inspection confirmed that all wastewater, washwater, and storm runoff water is collected and discharged into one of two three-stage clarifiers. Any solids are separated and removed and the clarified water is discharged to the community sanitary sewer system. All waste transfer areas are covered and the yard areas are swept clean daily. Overall , we observed very good housekeeping practices. Based on our findings, no threats to water quality by the transfer facility exist as long as all wastewater, washwater, and runoff water is adequately collected and discharged only to the sanitary sewer system. As long as there is no discharge to the stormdrain except the runoff from the front office parking lot, and as long as all other water from the site is discharged to the sanitary sewer system, there is no need to file for an NPDES Permit. Should you have any questions, please contact this office. Sincerely, tames R. Bennett Supervising Engineer cc: Richard Timm, Rainbow Disposal Company, Inc. SDO:kyb • • ATTACHMENT 9 IN T ER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION cL. . HUNTINGTON BEACH To 1%9. C. BURKENFIELD, Captain From .11t`1 ?10c�R1: Special Operations Corrunander Planning £, Research Coordinator Subject POLICE ACTIVITY NEAR 1b1[NBOW Date ll1:_:C0-1B1:R S, 1984 TRANSFER Because Rainbow transfer station is considering exp�inding their operation on Gothard, a number of concerned citizens who own businesses in that area approached City Council to voice disapprove] . Their primary compl.aint seemed to focus around T/C related calls due to increased traffic activity. In a study conducted by Police Planning and Research, all calls for service were examined in Reporting Districts 291 and 292 which comprise this area for the time period beginning January 1, 1984 through November 20, 1984. Of a total of 892 calls for service, approximately 60 were near Rainbow. The majority of these proximity calls were class.iFic.d in the theft categories or false alarms. Our records show no calls were generated at the Rainbow transfer location. With reference to traffic activity, there were 2 i-njury accidents and i property damage accident reports filed pertaining to t:h:i.s area and time period. Our records indicate none involved Rainbow transfer vehicles. JM:se STATE SOLID WASTS NANAORMENT SOAND SC:LID WASTE FACILITIES PERMIT • ATTACHMENT 10 • OF Sow me w•e-�� (way. I•/„) 1 4 ENFORCEMENT AGaNCY CONNTY LIWANTS FAC1UVV'Wffff0I7'W. Orange County Solid Waste Enforcement Agency Orange 30-AB-099 FACILITY NAME --- _-- I ►ROrowiD Rainbow Recycling/Transfer Station OPERATOR IIIs.1M — -- ------- — rw w► wovA�— Rainbow Disposal Compa_y, Inco_r_porat_ed_ _ o June 26 1981 FACILITY LOCATION aNFORCKMENT ASENCY I APPROVAL 17121 Nichols Street, Huntington Beach, CA 92647 I u1T24, 1981 Mailing Address: P. 0. Box 1026, Huntington Beach, CA 92647 FINDINGS — -- THIS PERMIT SHALL NOT BECOME EFFECTIVE UNTIL THE PROPOSED FACILITY IS BUILT AND OPERATIONAL_ PRIOR TO BEGINNING CONSTRUCTION, A COMPLETE SET OF ARCHITECHTURAL DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIOK!S APPROVED BY THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE ORANGE COUNTY SOLID WASTE ENFORCEMENT AGENCY AND THE STATE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD. The Orange County Solid Waste Enforcement Agency (hereinafter referred to as Enforcement Agency) finds that: 1. The Rainbow Recycling/Transfer Station is a new proposed Class II-2 resource recovery and large volume transfer station located on an M-1 zoned 4.65 acre parcel at 17121 Nichols Street, Huntington Beach, California 92647. The facility will be operated under the management organization of Rainbow Disposal Company, Inc. , who's existing company offices and refuse collection truck maintenance yard are located at this site. An enclosed recycling/transfer building (including the use of bins as a buy-back center for private individuals) will be located on a paved lot at the southwest corner of the property. Approximately 300 tons of combined Group 2 and Group 3 materials will be received daily by late 1981, reaching design capacity of 500 tons per day by 1985. Unusual peak loadings (up to 800 tons per day) could be accommodated through working double shifts. Processes at the facility include hand separation of resource recovery materials and mechanical reloading of transfer vehicles which will haul all remaining residue in 20-ton loads to an approved County landfill site. Operating hours are 8:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. , Monday through Saturday (6 days per week). The facility will be closed Sundays and standard holidays observed. The design and operation of this facility is specified in the Report of Disposal Site Information, which is hereby made a part of this permit. This permit is granted solely to the operator named above, and is not transferable. Upon a change of operator, this permit is subject to revocation. Upon a significant change in design or operation from that described in this permit or in attachments thereto for the existing design and operation of a facility operating immediately prior to August 15, 1977, or from the approved intended 'design and operation of a facility which was not operating prior to August 15. 1977. or which herein Is granted a permit modification, this permit is subject to revocation, suspension, modification or other appropriate action. This permit does not authorize the operation of any facility contrary to the State Minimum Standards for Solid Waste Handling and Disposal. This permit cannot be considered as permission to violate existing laws, ordinances, regulations, or statutes of other government agencies. Orange Co m y Solid Waste Enforcementgpncv BY ISIGNATUREJ TTEKW NAME 1111. Elden Gillespie TITLE 04 DATA Chairma 1��,L July 21. 1281 Solid Waste Facilities Permit Rainbow Recycling/Transfer Station Page 2 2. The following documents pertain to or condition design and operation of this facility: a. Ordinance No. 2622 of the Codified Ordinances of the County of Orange, California b. City of Huntington Beach Business License c. Huntington Beach Ordinance Code Administrative Review, Board of Zoning Adjustments d. State Minimum Standards for Solid Waste Handling and Disposal , Title 14, Division 7, Chapter 3 of the Government Code 3. Land uses within 1,000 feet of the boundary of this site include: North - US Equipment Rental/Orange County Ice Company, commercial South - James Lumber Company East - Oakview Park, Oakview School , apartments, (1) single family dwelling West - SPT Co. Railroad track, Randall Lumber, Ideal Pallet Company, (6) single family dwellings , (1) apartment, commercial 4. This permit is consistent with the Orange County Solid Waste Manage- ment Plan and the State Minimum Standards for Solid Waste Handling and Disposal . The Orange County Solid Waste Management Plan was prepared pursuant to Section 66780 of the .Government Code. 5. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66796.45, the issuance of the permit is in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended. On March 4, 1981, the City of Huntington Beach adopted a Negative Declaration for this facility, which is hereby made a part of this permit. CONDITIONS It is hereby ordered that the Rainbow Disposal Company, Incorporated shall comply with the following: Requirements 1. No provision or requirement of this permit shall be interpreted to relieve the operator from compliance with all applicable federal , state, regional , and local requirements and enactments. 2. Additional information concerning the design and operation of this facility must be furnished upon request by the Enforcement Agency. Solid Waste Facilitieslarmit • Rainbow Recycling/Transfer Station Page 3 Prohibitions 3. The following actions are prohibited in excess of what is received with household refuse: a. Group 1 or hazardous wastes b. Liquid wastes, containzerized or not c. Dead animals and parts thereof 4. Additional prohibitions at the facility are: d. Scavenging e. Acceptance of septic tank pumpings or sewage sludge Specifications 5. No significant change in design or operation of the facility (as stipulated in the Report of Disposal Site Information - Rainbow Disposal Company, Incorporated) is allowed, except for those changes which are required by the CONDITIONS section of this permit. 6. A copy of the most recent printing of the State Minimum Standards for Solid Waste Handling and Disposal and a copy of all other applicable permits issued for the operation of the facility must be available for review by site personnel , authorized representatives of the Enforcement Agency and all other applicable agencies during the course of normal working hours. 7. A copy of the most recent inspection report by the Enforcement Agency must be available for review by site personnel and authorized represent- atives of all other applicable agencies during normal working hours. 8. Restrooms, lunchrooms , and all other sanitary facilities shall meet State Minimum Standards and any requirements of the County Health Officer. 9. Adequate steps must be taken to prevent the propagation and attraction of flies, rodents , and all other vectors. 10. The resource recovery part of the operation shall not conflict with the responsibility of Rainbow Disposal Company, Incorporated, to meet the State Minimum Standards in operating the large volume transfer station. 11. Solid waste deposited for subsequent processing shall be limited to an amount that could reasonable be processed within a normal work day. No solid waste shall be stockpiled on the ground overnight. Solid Waste Facilities Permit Rainbow Recycling/Tra r Station • Page 4 0 12. To comply with Section 17497 (Personnel Health and Safety) of the State Minimum Standards, dust masks, suitable hearing protection devices and safety goggles shall be available to all persons working within the salvage facility and must be used when appropriate. Workers hand picking salvageable items shall be required to wear heavy-duty gloves. 13. Due to the close proximity of the site to existing residential housing, special operational procedures may have to be implemented to ensure conformance with the following Sections of the State Minimum Standards: a. Section 17701 - Nuisance Control b. Section 17706 - Dust Control c. Section 17712 - Noise Control 14. Trash from the salvage operation shall be hauled to an approved solid waste disposal station daily. Provisions 15. This permit is subject to review by the Enforcement Agency and may be suspended, revoked, or modified at any time for sufficient cause. Monitoring Program 16. A semi-annual report indicating the number of tons of solid waste received by the transfer station and the amount deposited at local solid waste disposal stations during the preceding period must be submitted to the Enforcement Agency. The report shall be signed by a responsible officer or representative of the permittee guaranteeing its accuracy. 18. A monitoring report shall be submitted to the Enforcement Agency in accordance with the following schedule: Reporting Period Report Due July thru December February 1 January thru June August 1 JG:kh 5/4/81 EXHIBIT 3.4 OTHER PUBLIC AND PRIVATELY OPERATED SOLID WASTE FACILITIES ` / e•� 1`) TRANSFER RAINBOWDISPOSAL TRANSFSFLR STAiION- •� • OOMAssms HUNTINGTON BEACH 02 ANAHEIM OISO TRANSFER S i • ANAHEIM () SUNSF.T FIBERS o ♦ b TRANSFER STATION- IRVINE (J 0 CITY OF HUNTINGTON rn y ` BEACH-LANDFILL (CLASS III ) 2 4� • 13� O CALIFORNIA NATIONAL • GUARD (LOS AI.AMITOS)- ••fir 7 ``�� •� `----------- LANDFILL (CLASS II) eo • �� ` C) AMINOIL (HUNTINGTON BEACH)-WASTE PROCESSING FACILITIES 0 CON ROCK LANDFILL Jy •'er• (CLASS III) - 4• 6 • ,�1/ ORANGE AS.COI •fir •� d - O (CLASS LANDFILL (CLASS III)- S E HUN71NOTON BE* H W � z g , 'o -- Fountain Valley. In the past, the Districts operated a drying area at Coyote Canyon, but this practice has been discontinued and the sludge is blended directly into the solid waste at the landfill . E. Federally Operated Sites The California National Guard Armed Forces Reserve Center (AFRC) in Los Alamitos operates a Class II cut and fill facility for the disposal of Group 2 and Group 3 wastes generated within the confines of the installation. The site is closed to use by the general public. It is estimated the site will provide disposal capacity to last beyond the year 2000. F. Privately Owned and Operated Facilities j 1. Landfills As-Con Landfill , located in Huntington Beach, is the only privately owned and operated facility in use in the County at this time. This is a Class III site for the disposal of Group 3 wastes only. The 37 acre site is open to the general public and disposal fees are charged for use of the facility. The site is now nearing completion and F plans for final use are incomplete at this time. Because of recently imposed disposal fees at County-operated landfills, more privately owned Class III sites may be devel- oped as the rehabilitation of gravel pits becomes economical- ly advantageous. 2. Transfer Stations e a. Rainbow Recycling/Transfer Station ; This is a new Class II-2 resource recovery and large volume transfer station located on a 4.65 acre site in Huntington Beach. The facility has the optimum capacity to handle up to 1,500 tons of Group 2 and Group 3 mate- t rials daily. Private collection vehicles dump in a large, enclosed holding area. The waste is then mechanically loaded into 20 ton capacity transfer vehicles for trans- portation to County landfill facilities. Hand separation of resource recovery materials is incorporated into the process. b. Sunset Fibre Industries Transfer/Resource Recover Station (Proposed) This facility, located at 16122 Construction Circle West in Irvine, is currently operating as a paper recycling station only. It is estimated that transfer operations will commence sometime during the summer of 1984. Initially, it is proposed that one transfer pit, accommodating two trailers simultaneously, will be used KEG:nm:jh WMP4-11-6 4-9-84 3-6 to transfer approximately 700 tons of Group 2 waste daily. The site will be reserved exclusively for public use on Sundays. Ultimate plans call for construction of a second pit, which will increase average daily ton- nage transferred to 1 ,200 tons, with a maximum capacity of 2,200 tons per day. Recoverable resource materials will be hand salvaged from the waste loads prior to final transfer loading. c. Anaheim Disposal Company, Inc. Recycling/Resource Recover Transfer at on This facility is presently under construction at 2761 E. White Star Avenue, Anaheim (adjacent to the 57 and 91 freeway interchange) . It will be a Class II-2 resource recovery and large volume transfer station. A pit trench operation will be used in conjunction with a bulldozer to compact refuse with a crane used to load transfer trucks. An estimated 2,000 tons of combined Group 2 and Group 3 materials are expected to be transferred daily by this facility. Maximum design capacity has been calculated to be over 4,100 tons per day. An enclosed recycling/ transfer building will house resource recovery operations, which will consist of hand separation of salvageable items. 3. Waste Processing Areas One such facility is currently in operation in the County. It is operated by Aminoil USA, Inc on a 13 acre site at 20101 Goldenwest Street in Huntington Beach. The site, which has been designated as a Class II-2 facility, is utilized as a series of drying cells to process rotary drilling muds, cuttings and wastewater brines from oil production. The primary objective of this process is to aerate and dry the waste products and promote aerobic degra- dation of the materials. Periodically, the dried material is transported to County landfill facilities for final dis- posal . Such removal of the dried material enables the site to operate indefinitely. G. Secondary Materials Industries Solid waste processing, salvaging and other resource recovery efforts are discussed in Chapter 6. H. Solid Waste Facilities That Have Been Closed Figure 3 shows solid waste facilities that have been closed, and Tables 5.6 and 5.7 describe each in detail . KEG:nm:jh WMP4-11-7 3-7 6-22-84 Authorized to Publish Advertisements of all*--cluding public Wr PUBLIC NOTICE notices by Decree of the Superior Court of Orange County, LAND USE ELEMENT California. Number A-6214, dated 29 September. 1961. and 84-2-SIR 84-3 A-24831. dated 1 1 June. 1963 ZONE CASE 84-Y/ ZONE CASE'84-10 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a-pubbe heilring STATE OF CALIFORNIA will be held by;heCflyCoun- cil of the City of Runtinpton Public No11u ♦aven�Yng coy«ed Beach, In the.::C'otlnpt County of Orange Chamber or,the CrvT�rr� by In, ar1ldevn is "t in r pant Center. Huntlffgton aeaCn _11, 10 pits column WId111 at the hour Of 7:30 P.M.,or as soon thereafter as poss- ible on Monday,the Sth day of November,1984,for the I am a Citizen of the United States and a resident of purpose of considering a proposed amendment to the the County aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen Land Use Element or the General Plan(LUE 84-2).En- years, and not a party to or interested in the below ea 3 Zonal Caseact 84 9e Report and entitled matter I am a principal clerk of the Orange Zone sa e 10ichinl ero- Coast DAILY PILOT, with which is combined the Area 2.1 -Create a Solid Waste Facility land use cat- NEWS-PRESS, a newspaper of general circulation, � egory. Area 22 - Add polity printed and published In the City of Costa Mesa, language' to the Land Usp Element establishing con- County of Orange. State of California, and that a X� County with the. Orange Land Use Element - Countyy with Environmen- tal Land Use Plari. Notice of Area 3.1 - Redesignate 4.65 acres located west of Nichols Street and'approx- Imately 1.000 feet south of Warner Avenue from Gen- eral Industrial to Solid Waste of which Copy As Facility. •d \N� Area - Redesignate copy, was panted and published in the Costa Mesa, 10.4 soreses located west or X Magnolia Street and approx- Newport Beach, Huntington Beach, Fountain Valley, imately 450 feet north of Warner Avenue from Gen- Irvine, the South Coast communities and Laguna eral Commercial to Mixed 1 time Development. ZONE CASE Beach issues of said newspaper for NO. 84-10 would re- designate the same property 1�4ii�4t�X�ko wit the issue(s) of from(Q)R5(Qualified Office i Professional District) to F3 �_• (Medium-High Density Resi- dential District) and M1-A (Restricted Manufacturing District).The Planning Com- O c t o b e r 26 198. 4 mission at its October 16, 1984 public hearing rec- :)mmended that a "Q" be added to the proposed M 1- 198 A and R3 Zoning to include future conditions on de- N velopment of the site to ensure compatibility with 198 surrounding uses. Area 3.3-Redesignate 3.0 acres located south of Pearce Street and east of 198 Bolsa Chica Street from Me- n dium Density Residential to VV1� General Commercial.ZONE ' CASE NO. 84-9 would re- designate the same property 198 ` '9 from R2 (Medium Density Residential District) C4 (Highway Commerciall Dls- �O trict). The Planning Com- mission at the October 16, 1 declare, under penalty of perjury, that the �. 1984 meeting recommend- foregoing is true and correct. recommend- ad that a"the proposeedd be placed on C4 zoning to include future conditions on development of the site to ensure compatibility with October 26 4 surrounding uses. I Executed on 1 98 — All interested persons are invited to attend said hear- at Costa Mes , California. .� hear- ing and express their opinions for or against Land ` Use Element 84-2/EIR 84-3 and Zone Case 84-9/Zone Case 84-10. Signat6re �� \ Furth ion may be obtained from tthe Office of the City Clerk, Main Street, Huntingtonn B Beach, California 92648 - (714) 536-5227. (A DATED: V Octobdr44,:1984 CITY APWN)NTMIOTON BEACH."III: Ali= M. IV Wentworth,City Clark Published Orange Coast PROOF OF PUBLICATION Daily Pilot October 26,1984 I F-393-393 REQUEST OR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Date November 15 , 1984 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, City Administrator e•WI. Prepared by: James W. Palin, Director , Development Services664>Np Subject: LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 84-2/EIR 84-3 Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: On November 5 , 1984, the City Council considered Land Use Element Amendment No. 84-2/Environmental Impact Report No. 84-3. Action was taken to ap rove Items 2 . 1 (creation of a Solid Waste Facility designation and 3. 2 (redesignation of the S$K Nursery site from General Commercial to Mixed Development. Item 2. 2 (wording for the Airport Land Use Commission project review) was continued for the Attorney to provide clarification. Item 3. 1 (redesignation of the Rainbow Disposal Transfer site from General Industrial to Solid Waste Facility was tabled pending additional staff research into entitlements and citizen complaints. Item 3. 3 was sent back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration at the applicant ' s request. This transmittal is for Items 2 . 2 . , 3. 1 and 3. 3. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council direct the City Attorney to prepare Resolution 5457 B to include Items 2 . 2 , 3. 1 and 3. 3 with the recommendations contained in Attachment 1 . ANALYSIS : Area 2. 2 (Airport Land Use Commission) The City Council requested that the Attorney' s office provide an opinion regarding whether the State Law requiring consistency between General Plans and Airport Land Use Commission Plans is applicable to charter cities. In the attached memo , the City Attorney has indicated that the requirement is applicable to charter cities. Staff has also determined that Assembly Bill 3551 will require that all cities whose General Plans are not found to be consistent must submit all development plans to the Airport Land Use Commission for review. This bill will become effective on January 1 , 1985. Staff continues to recommend approval of this amendment request. PIO 4/81 • Area 3. 1 (Rainbow Disposal ) At their November 5 , 1984 meeting , the City Council tabled Area 3. 1 pending research into the history of entitlements on the site and a review of citizen complaints regarding the existing operation. The following is a chronological listing of city discretionary entitlements for the Rainbow Disposal transfer station: ENTITLEMENT REQUEST APPROVED DATE I AR 81-9/ND 81-4 Expansion of existing truck 3/04/81 repair facility to include transfer station, recycling center and office building . AR 82-12 Modification of approved on- 4/21/82 site circulation plan AR 83-13 Addition to transfer building 4/14/83 AR 84-17/ND 84-9 Increase from 500-800 tons per 4/04/84 day to 1 , 200-1 , 500 tons per day Staff has asked the departments of Police, Fire and Public Works to research their files for evidence of past complaints against the existing transfer station operation. The Fire Department indicated that they noted a problem on February 1 , 1984 when trash had accumulated around the valves for the fire sprinkler system. Rainbow stated that it was the result of heavy holiday trash collection and would be eliminated with the purchase of new equipment . The problem was resolved to the Fire Department ' s satisfaction. If staff receives any word of other complaints , they will be forwarded to the City Council at the November 19, 1984 meeting . Staff recommends approval of this amendment request. Area 3. 3 Area 3. 3 is a request to change the land use designation on 3. 0 acres of property located on the southeast corner of Pearce Drive and Bolsa Chica Street , from Medium Density Residential to General Commercial . The concurrent Zone Change No. 84-9 was from R2 to C4 . The Planning Commission recommended approval of the land use amendment and zone change requests at its October 16 , 1984 meeting . Prior to the November 5 , 1984 City Council meeting , however, the applicant submitted a letter indicating that he preferred to retain the existing residential designation and requested that it be sent back to the Planning Commission for a determination on whether or not they would withdraw their recommendation for approval of the change. The City Council honored the request to send it back to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission considered the request for withdrawal of Area 3. 3 and Zone Change 84-9 at their November 13, 1984 meeting. '-6' ( 1386d) �l � -2- Upon discussion they agreed to recommend that the City Council remove Area 3. 3 from Land Use Element Amendment 84-2 and that Zone Change 84-9 be withdrawn provided that access to any residential project on the site be taken exclusively from Pearce Drive. Staff continues to recommend approval of the original request for General Commercial. FUNDING SOURCE : No funds required. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: The City Council may direct the City Attorney to prepare Resolution 5457 B with fewer items than recommended by staff. ATTACHMENTS : 1 . Summary of Amendment Requests 2 . Memo from Gail Hutton dated November 14 , 1984 3. Board of Zoning Adjustments ' minutes regarding Rainbow Disposal Transfer Station 4. Letter from Rainbow Disposal dated November 14, 1984 S. Letter from Ken Moody dated October 24 , 1984 6. Request for Council Action dated October 26 , 1984 JWP:HS:ajh ,3 S r R ' (1386d) -3- ATTACHMENT 1 • SUMMARY O ' REQUESTS Item 2 . 2 - Staff requests that policy language be added to the Land Use Element to meet the requirement of State law whi-ch provides that local general plans be consistent with county airport environs land use plans . Staff recommends that the following policy language be added to the Land Use Element: "Any project which requires a notice of proposed construction of alteration by the FAA, under FAR part 77 , shall submit a cc>py of the FAA application to the A i.rpor t Land Use Commission (ALUC) , and hrovi"de the City with the FAA .and ALUC responses . If the ALUC requests review of the project, then the project shall be s ubm i. t to d to the Commission . Notice of any ALUC determination of i_ncons is t.ency, with the Commission' s Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AFLUP) , must be given to the City within 60 calendar days from the date of referral of the application to the ALUC, and shall be considered before the City takes any action on the project . If the Commissi.c.n fails to give such notice of inconsistency within that period, the proposed project shall be deemed consistent with the AELUP. " Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval Staff Recommendation : Approval Area 3 . 1 - The City-.initiated request is to redesignate 4 .65 acres located west of INi"chols Street and approximately 1, 000 feet south of Warner Avenue from General Industrial. to Solid Waste Fac.i.li. ty. Staff recommends approval of the request . Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval Staff Recommendation : Approval Area 3 . 3 - The applicant ' s i.eques t i.s to redes i.gna to 3 .0 acres located east of Bolsa Chica Street and south of Pearce Street from Medium Density Residential to General Commercial . Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the applicant' s request to General Commercial . Zone Change No . 84-9 was submitted by the applicant to be processed concurrently with this land use amendment request. on October 24 , 1984 the applicant submitted a letter requesting that this item be withdrawn from the amendment. Planning Commission Recommendation: Withdrawl ���w•[� Staff Recommendation : " Approval ' CITY IF HUNTINGTON BEAf671NGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION DEVELOPMENT SERVICES HUNIINGTON BEACH NOV 15 1984 To 11onprable )`Mayor Jack Kelly From Gail NuttcRO. Box 190 and Members of 'the City Council CityHdMiVlonBeach, CA 92648 Subject Land Use Element 84-2; Date 13 November 1984 Area 2 .2 At the November 5, 1984 meeting you asked whether referral of certain land use matters to the Airport Land Use Commission was legally required. The state law concerning airport land use commissions appears to� apply to charter cities . (Public Utilities Code §21670. ) Generally, where an issue is one of statewide concern the legis- lature has the power to regulate. (Bishop v. City of San Jose (1969 ) 1 C . 3d 563 81 Q.R. 465; see California Constitution, Article XI , section 5 . ) The legislature has declared that orderly development of airports in the state, and safety and noise considerations , support the legislative regulations . While such legislative declarations are not binding on the cities , it would appear that there is suf- ficient statewide interest in airport development and safety to support application of the law to charter cities . Thus , to the extent the state law requires prior submittal of general and specific plans , amendments , and projects to the local Airport Land Use Commission , it appears that the city should comply. (See Public Utilities Code §21676. ) The proposed language in Area 2 . 2 is also designed to implement federal regulations relating to construction and alteration of land forms in and around airports . (See Part 77, Federal Aviation Regulations , Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace , 77 . 13 et seq. ) Federal powers to regulate interstate commerce also support imposition of certain :federal controls on local government . Public Utilities Code §21659 requires a permit -from the state Department of Transportation for construction falling within the federal regulations . Public Utilities Code §21674 appears to permit the review of such projects by the local ^.irport Land Use Commission to determine the conformance with the federal and state requirements, since the commission is em- powe ed to ssist local agencies and coordinate planning. GAIL 11UTTON City Attorney cc : Charles W. Thompson , City Administrator { James W. Palin, Director, Development Services Department MINUTES : H .B . BOARD OF `CONING ADJUSTMENTS Fer- nary 25, 1981 Pac.,•_ 6 ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 81-9 Applicant: Rainbow Disposal Company, Inc. To permit an expansion of present facility from 1 . 81 acres to 4 . 65 acres located on the west side of Nichols Street at 17121 Nichols Street. This request is covered by Negative Declaration No. 81-4 . .. Mr. Stan Tkaczyk was present to represent the application. Chairman Tindall requested the applicant to briefly explain the request. Mr. Tkaczyk stated that several new buildings would be constructed, in addition to various services to be offered, such as a transfer station, recycling center and office buildings. Secretary Lipps stated that the Board was not aware of the addition of services, additionally, landscaping requirements are deficient, and the Board had some concern regarding turning radius ' and on-site traffic flow. It was recommended that the request be continued one week in order to allow the applicant to meet with the Board to discuss the proposal . ON MOTION BY TINDALL AND SECOND BY KELLY, ACTION CAN NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 81-4 WAS DEFERRED UNTIL ACTION ON ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 81-9 WAS TAKEN. AYES: Tindall , Kelly, Lipps NO}:S: None ABSENT: None ADMINISTRATIVE REVIE NO. 81-13 Applicant: The System Investment Group To permit the constructio of an 11, 837 sq. ft. industrial building located on the south side o System Drive, approximately 115 feet east of Chemical. This request is covered by Envir mental Impact Report No. 73-16 previously approved. Secretary Lipps briefly outlined the a lication, •noting that the proposal was substantially in compliance with th Huntington Beach Ordinance Code . Fire Representative Kelly recommended that ives be widened to meet Fire Department requirements. Conditions of proval were discussed. Chairman Tindall noted that the plan was nicel layed out. Nij`fES : H .B. BOARD O) NING ADJUSTMENTS Ma •h 4 , 1981 Page - Traffic circu tion and .drives; - Parking layout; - Lot area; - Lot width and lot de h; - Type of use and its re ion to property and improvements in the immediate vicinity; - Past administrative action arding this property . B. GENERAL CONDITIONS: 1. Proof of, or application of nec sary building permits shall be obtained for 14 x 20 exis ' ng temporary building shown on plot plan submitted March 2, 1981, within six (6) months of this action. AYES: Spencer, Kelly, Tindall NOES: None ABSENT: None ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 81-9 (Continued from 2/25/81) Applicant: Rainbow Disposal Company, Inc . To permit an expansion of present facility from 1 . 81 acres to 4 . 65 acres located on the west side of Nichols Street at 17121 Nichols Street. This request is covered by Negative Declaration No. 81-4 . ON MOTION BY TINDALL AND SECOND BY SPENCER, THE BOARD HAVING FOUND THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT, ADOPTED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 81-4 WITH THE FOLLOWING MITIGATING MEASURES CONTAINED IN ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 81-9 GENERAL CONDITIONS 8 AND 9 IMPOSED ON ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 81-9 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES : Spencer, Kelly, Tindall NOES : None ABSENT: None Chairman Tindall introduced the application to the Board. Mr. Stan Tkaczyk was present to represent the application. Mr. Dan Van Dorp, project engineer was also present. Secretary Spencer stated that the proposed additional uses are allowable within the zone (recycling, transfer station ) . Mr. Tkaczyk stated that machinery consisted of a baler, shredder, compressors and blowers, all of which are designed for low noise levels . He addressed the type of waste material which will be accepted, stating that ordorous type materials are not highly resalable, and storage is difficult, therefore will not be accepting this type. 1 MINUTES: H. B. BOARD O� NING ADJUSTMENTS March 4 , 1981 \ Page 4 ' I George Tindall expressed concern regarding traffic flow patterns onsite, in particular public vs . disposal trucks . Mr. Tkaczyk noted that hours of operation would differ from the hours utilized by the public for recycling. Fire Representative Kelly expressed concern regarding storage of waste materials after working hours . He recommended that storage be prohibited after hours, or that proper fire protection devices be installed to avoid fire hazards . He cited that the adjacent lumber yard as a potential problem, Board member Kelly also requested that the building be sprinklered. Mr. Van Dorp stated that fire hoses are proposed throughout the building, noting that sprinklers would be ineffective for this type of operation. (Mr. Van Dorp is a registered fire protection engineer) . i The Board discussed landscaping. Secretary Spencer stated that high density landscaping would be required along the north and south property lines , in addition, the area adjacent to Nichols Street shall be bermed/ mounded. Discussion regarding consolidating two parcels into one lot followed. Mr. Tkaczyk stated that filing a parcel map may not be possible, and requested that a letter of agreement be sufficient. ' Secretary Spencer stated that a reciprocal easement agreement is neces.sary, however, he will contact the City Attorney for an opinion regarding a letter of agreement between property owners in lieu of filing and recording a parcel map. Further Board discussion followed . ON MOTION BY TINDALL AND SECOND BY SPENCER, ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 81-9 WAS APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AS FOLLOWS: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: A. TO BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS : 1. The conceptual plot plan and elevations received March 4 , 1981 shall be the approved layout. In its approval action, the Board of Zoning Adjustments considered the following issues relating to the•conceputal plan: MINUTES: H .B . BOARD • ZONING ADJUSTMENTS March 4 , 1981 Page 5 - Traffic circulation and drives; - Parking layout; - Lot area; - Lot width and lot depth; - Type of use and its relation to property and improvements in the immediate vicinity; - Past administrative action regarding this property. 2 . The following plans shall be submitted to the Secretary of the Board: a. Landscape and irrigation plan complying with Article 979 o'f the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code and landscaping specifications on file in the Department of Public Works. b. Rooftop mechanical equipment screening plan. Said plan shall indicate screening of all rooftop mechanical equipment and shall delineate the type of material proposed to screen said equipment. B. GENERAL CONDITIONS : 1. Storage of waste material in transfer station after working hours is prohibited, (unless applicant provides adequate fire protection devices. 2. Landscaped area adjacent to Nichols Street shall be mounded (bermed) per Section 9791 (b) of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code . 3 . Applicant shall comply with all applicable Fire Code require- ments. 4 . Landscaping along the north and south property lines shall be of high density foliage. ' 5. Applicant shall provide on-site parking for employees, thereby discouraging employee-parking along Nichols Street. 6 . Equipment shall meet all Orange County noise ordinance require- ments prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. 7 . Applicant shall record a parcel map consolidating two (2) parcels into one (1) lot prior to issuance of building permits, i or in the alternative assure reciprocal drive easements with an acceptable recorded document. „�.,,...,,,.._- ..._. ,�.,,�,....._ .. . _-..,�,_...,..,,,...,,.,,•,^_,,..._,_.._..-„�,,,• a ...,....r MINUTES: H.B . BOARD ILONING ADJUSTMENTS March 4 , 1981 Page 6 8 . All building spoils , such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material shall be disposed of at an offsite facility equipped to handle them. 9 . If lighting is included in the parking lot and/or recreational area, energy efficient lamps shall be used (e .g. high pressure sodium vapor, metal halide) . All outside lighting shall be directed to prevent "spillage" onto adjacent properties . AYES: Spencer, Kelly, Tindall NOES: None ABSENT: None CO ITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 81-12 Appl ant: A a Neishi To permi a six (6) foot high block wall to encroach five (5) feet into front and setback located on the west side of Marina View, approx. 200 feet nor of Los Patos (17181 Marina View) . This request is Categorical Exemption Class 5, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970 . Mr. Dan Armstrong was esent to represent the application. Chairman Tindall introduced the a lication to the Board . Secretary Spencer briefly outlined the reque noting that the will would consist of block and wrought iron. Fire Representative Kelly state that he had field checked the site, noting that the wall was partiall wilt, except for the addition of wrought iron. Chairman Tindall opened the public hears Mr . Armstrong stated that the addition of the wall would allow the •operty owner more privacy He stated that the property slopes from fro to back, therefore, the fence would be four (4 ) feet high at the side lk point. Chairman Tindall recommended that the application e continued in order to allow the applicant to submit cross sections and levations of the proposed fence and for Board members to field check t site . ON MOTION BY TINDALL AND SECOND BY SPENCER, CONDITIONAL E EPTION NO. 81-12 WAS CONTINUED IN ORDER FOR THE APPLICANT TO SUBMI REVISED PLANS REFLECTING THE PROPOSED FENCE IN RELATION TO THE PROPER AYES: Kelly, Tindall , Spencer NOES: None ABSENT: None Minutes: H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments March 10, 1982 Page Six In its approval act-.ion, the Bo3zd of Zoning Adjustments cons ered the following issues relating to the conceptual plan: - Traffic circulation and drives; - Parking layout; - Lot area; - Lot width and lot depth; Type of use and its relation to pro ty and improvements in the immediate vicinity. GENERAL CONDITIONS : 1. Prior to issuance o uilding permits, two and one-half (2-1/2) feet of alley s be dedicated. 2 . Exterior s shall meet the requirements of the Uniform Buildi ode . AXES • Webb, Smith, Kelly, Vogelsang, Crosby N None -13STAIN: None MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS : ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 81-9 Applicant: Rainbow Disposal Co. , Inc . To permit a one (1 ) year extension of Administrative Review No. 81-9 originally approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustments on March 4 , 1981 , covering an expansion of present facility from 1 . 81 acres to 4 . 65 acres located at 17121 Nichols Street. Staff reported that financial delays brought about by the Federal SBA Program and other financial institutions, of which they leave rio control , created their delaxi. The extension will allow them the necessary time required for this project. IT WAS THE CONSENSUS OF THE BOARD TO GRANT A ONE (1) YEAR EXTENSION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE: REVIEW NO. 81-9 . THEIR BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED. Florence Webb, ActTn9 �Secretary Board of Zoning Adjustments �, -6- BZA 3/10/82 Minutes : H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 21 , 1982 Page Seven of t abutting property t-o the north shall be provi3ed as depicte on the approved plot- plan by the superimposed yellow cros tching prior to final . inspection. 3 . "No Parking - Fire Of signs shall be posted per Fire Department standards an ecifications. 4 . Fire -protection shall be provid er Fire Department standards and specifications. AYES: Vogelsang, Smith, Crosby NOES : None ABSTAIN: Webb ADMINSTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 82-12 Applicant: Rainbow Disposal Company, -Inc . To permit change of circulation to previously approved site plan. Property located at 17121 Nichols Street, zoned M-1 , Light Industrial District. The proposal was introduced by staff . Mr. Ron Yeo, Architect, and Stanley F. Tkaczyk, Vice President of Rainbow Disposal, were present to represent application. Mr. Yeo addressed the Board and stated that the new plan submitted was basically the same as submitted for A. R. No. 81-9 with _he except of the driveways . The new plan has a safer traffic flow pattern onsite keeping cars and trucks separated. The plan depicts three driveways in lieu of two shown on original plan; two for trucks, allowing one for egress and one for ingress , with the remaining driveway for use by the public and employees . Directional signage was discussed. Previous Conditions of Approval imposed on Administrative Review No. 81-9 were discussed with the applicant. The Board concurred with all Conditions imposed previously with the exception of one General Condition (No. 7) which stated that the applicant ' s parcel map would have to record "prior to issuance of building permits" which was changed to read "prior to. occupancy" . ON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY WEBB, ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 82-12 WAS GRANTED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL IMPOSED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: A. TO BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS : 1 . The conceptual plot plan received April 7 , 1982 shall be the approved layout, subject to the modifications Zifl Y described herein: -7- BZA 4/21/82 � • Minutes : H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 21 , 1982 Page Fight a. A grading, elevation, and traffic circulation sign plan shall be submitted to the Secretary of the Board for review and approval. If such plans comply with the modifications outlined by the Board, said plans shall be approved and made a permanent part of the administrative file. In its approval action, the Board of Zoning Adjustments considerekU the following issues relating to the conceptual plan: - Traffic circulation and drives; - Parking layout; - Lot area; - Lot width and lot depth; Type of use and its relation to property and improvements in the immediate vicinity; - Past administrative action regarding this property. 2. The following plans shall be submitted for review and approval by -the Secretary of the Board: a. Landscape and irrigation plan complying with Article 979 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code and land- scaping specifications on file in the Department of Public Works. b. Rooftop mechanical equipment screening plan. Said plan shall indicate screening of all rooftop mechanical equipment and shall delineate the type of material proposed to screen said equipment. B. GENERAL CONDITIONS : 1 . Storage of waste material in transfer station after working hours is prohibited, unless applicant provides adequate fire protection devices . 2. Landscaped area adjacent to Nichols Street shall be mounded (bermed) per Section 9791 (b) of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 3 . Applicant shall comply with all applicable fire Code require- ments. 4 . Landscaping along the north and south property lines shall be of high density foilage, 5. Applicant shall provide on-site parking for employees, thereby �3 discouraging employee parking along Nichols Street. -8- BZA 4/21/82 VA, Minutes : H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 21, 1982 Page Nine 6 . Equipment shall meet all Orange County noise ordinance require- ments prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. 7 . Applicant shall record a parcel map consolidating two (2) parcels into one (1) parcel prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, or in the alternative, provide an acceptable recorded copy of a reciprocal drive easement to the Secretary of the Board prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. 8 . All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material shall be disposed of at an offsite 'facility equipped to handle them. 9. If lighting is included in the parking lot, energy efficient lamps shall be used (e.g . high pressure sodium vapor, metal halide) . All outside lighting shall be directed to prevent "spillage" onto adjacent properties. 1 AYES : Webb, Vogelsang, Smith, Crosby NOES : None ABSTAIN: None AbqINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 82-13 App cant: Huntington Harbour Anglers To perms a parking lot charity bazzar on May 15, 1982 from 7 : 00 a.m. unti : 00 p.m. at 16898 Algonquin. Staff introduc request with no one present to speak for or against charity bazzar. The Board reviewed th proposal discussing location, flow of traffic in the shopping center, nd fire accessways . ON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECO BY VOGELSANG, ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 82-13 WAS GRANTED WITH TH OLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL IMPOSED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: N. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:. 1 . The plot plan received April 7 , 1982� hall be the conceptual layout. 2 . A revised site plan showing dimensioned fire accessways shall be submitted for review and approval by the Fi e Department prior to issuance of permits. 3 . The applicant shall obtain all necessary electrical rmits . A -9- BZA 4/21/82 � rY Minutes : H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 13, 1983 Page Five are required, the applicant stall be liable for ex ses incurred. 6. All Alcoholic Beverage Control requirem s shall be met. 7 . Appropriate signs (temporary) fo he direction of traffic and on-site parking shall be ovided by the applicant. Said signs, location, an ntent to be as recommended by the Traffic Divis ' of the Police Department. 8 . The applicant all provide for clean-up of the area each evening a closing of the event. AYES: Godfrey, Kelly, Evans, Vogelsang, Smith NO None STAIN: None ADMINISTRATIVE. REVIEW N10. 83-13 Applicant: Rainbow Disposal Company, Inc . To permit an addition to a transfer station 1- .iilding located at 17121 Nichols Street (approx. 660 ft. south of Warner Avenue) . Chairman Kelly introduced the applicant ' s recluest and stated that this request is categorically exempt, Class. 1 , California Environ- mental Quality Act, 1970 . Secretary Godfrey explained that Rainbow Disposal wishes to expand a previously approved enlargement (A. R. No. 82-12) of their transfer station in addition to adding an enclosure with a cover . He suggested that if the Board approves today ' s increased expansion that the same conditions imposed on Administrative Review No. 82-12 be complied with; that public access to the recycling area will not be significantly encroached upon by the new structure and that the circulation pattern remain substantially as previously approved . Further , that in a conversation held with Stan Tkaczyk, Vice-President of Rainbow Disposal , he was assured of compliance with the previously approved plan. Stan Tkaczyk addressed the Board. He informed the Board that presently their transfer station enlargement approved on A.R. No. 82-12 is eighty (80) percent completed which they feel will not adequately serve their needs. He stated that this new plot plan is an overlay of the previously approved plan with the exception of the expansion to the transfer station . Discussion carried on the environmental impact allowing the transfer station at subject location, approved not only by the City but by -5- BZA 4/13/8 3 Minutes: H.B. Board of ?oning Adjustments April 13 , 1983 Page Six the Orange County Solid Waste Management Board . It was stated that Rainbow Disposal will have to apply for. a new permit to allow for the increased tonnage projected for E:)rocessing by the transfer' station to 1, 200 tons per day; their existing permit allows up to 800 tons per day. Board Member Evans expressed his concern over the long-term implications being evident (deterioration of the roadway in addition to impacting Nichols Street) - Stan Tkaczyk explained that if they were asked by the City to increase the width of Nichols Street in order to be allowed to haul 1, 200 to 1, 500 tons per day in order to obtain a permit providing their transfer station to run at full capacity they would not be interested in the increased business created by the County closing down their transfer stations. He felt the proposed enlargement to the transfer station will enhance the situation for the consumers in Huntington Beach and other areas serviced helping to keep rates reduced . Mr. Tkaczyk stated that if they increase their processing to 1 , 200 tons per day an additional four (4 ) semi-trucks would be required . It was felt that the request before the Board was for approval of an expansion to the transfer station; that at a later date the voice of the City may impose conditions if necessary as the authority to " operate a solid waste facility is a bifurcated one requiring both the City and the Orange County Solid Waste Management both to grant approval for an operation of this sort. ON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY VOGELSANG, ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 83-13 WAS APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND VOTE FOLLOWING: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The revised conceptual site plan received April 5, 1983 shall be the approved layout. In its approval action, the Board of Zoning Adjustments considered the following issues relating to the conceptual plan: - Traffic circulation and drives; - Lot area : - Lot width and lot depth; - Type of use and its relation to property and improvements in the immediate vicinity; - Past administrative action regarding this property. General Conditions: 1. All pertinent Conditions imposed on Administrative Review No, 82-12 shall be complied with. R -6- BZA 4/13 83 7 Minutes : H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 13 , 1983 Page Seven 2. The public access to the recycling area shall not be signifi- cantly encroached upon by the new structure. 3 . That the circulation pattern established and approved on Administrative Review No. 82-12 will remain. AYES : Godfrey, Smith, Vogelsang NOES: Evans, Kelly ABSTAIN: None ENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 83-559 A licant: Mr. Luis Lopez To p mit consolidation of two (2) parcels into one (1) parcel for purpos of constructing a residential structure thereon. Subject property ' s located at 17100 Sims Street (east side of street) . Chairman Ke introduced the application and stated that this request is ca gorically exempt, Class. 15, California Environmental Quality Act, 1 0. Mr. Luis Lopez, pr erty owner, addressed the Board and stated that he had reviewe nd concurred with the Conditions of Approval. The application was rev wed by the Board and found to be in sub- stantial ordinance code c formarice . Findings and conditions of approval were discussed . ON MOTION BY EVANS AND* SECOND SMITH, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 83-559 WAS APPROVED WITH FINDIN CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND VOTE FOLLOWING: FINDINGS : 1. ' The proposed land consolidation for e construction of a single-family residence is consistent ith the City ' s General Plan and is in compliance with the size nd shape of property necessary for this type of development. 2. The site is physically suited for this type development. 3. The General Plan sets forth provisions for this pe of development. 4 . The property was studied and approved for this intens ty of land use and for this type of residential structure at e time the designation was placed on the property. 's\y'� -7- BZA 4/13/83 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 4 , 1984 Page Eight AYES : Godfrey, Evans, Smith, Vincent NOES : None ABSTAIN: None NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO . 84-9 AND ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 84-17 Applicant: Rainbow Disposal Co. , Inc . To permit an increase in tonnage from 1, 200 to 1 , 500 tons daily . Site location - 17121 Nichols Street. Chairman Smith introduced the application. Staff informed all concerned that Rainbow Disposal Co. , an exist- ing solid waste transfer station for commercial , industrial and residential refuse, is proposing an increase in tonnage from 1, 200 to 1, 500 tons daily. Rainbow Disposal has received approval from the Orange County Solid Waste Enforcement Agency and, if approved by the Board , increased daily tonnage may commence . Administrative Reviews No. 83-13 and 82-12 approved an expansion to the transfer station building felt to adequately serve the increase in .refuse created by the closing of the County of Orange Transfer Station. Mr. Stanley F . Tkaczyk, V.P. )f Rainbow, was present to speak on the request . He was informed that a condition of approval imposed on A. R. No . 82-12 requesting that a parcel map consolidating tho parcels into one parcel, or in the alternative, provide an acceptably recorded copy of a reciprocal drive easement has not been complied with. The applicant stated this was an oversight on their part ; that a reciprocal drive easement was preferred and could be submitted to the Board within thirty (30) days. He informed the Board that they expect construction to be completed by mid-year, 1984 . Loaning, stacking capabilities, access, circulation, and use of a new 950 "B" tractor were discussed . Mr . Tkaczyk confirmed that their. services will be open to the general public immediately u;-, , completion of their expansion. Fire Dept. . concerns were discussed i .e . stacking of debris 100/200 ft . beyond the extremity of the building and placement of .fire protective devices . Mr . Tkaczyk explained that at Christmas time they had a heavier influx which created a stacking problem felt to be alleviated upon completion and use of the new addition; also, use of the new tractor purchased since that time. They have met with the Fire Department, moved their fire protection devices to another location satisfying this concern. ON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY SMITH, NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 84-9 AND ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO . 84-17 WERE APPROVED AS FOLLOWS, SUCCEEDED BY VOTE: -8- BZA 4/4/84V Minutes: H. B. Board of Zoning Adjustments April 4 , 1984 Page Nine CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1 . The revised conceptual site plan dated March 15, 1984 , shall be the approved layout. 2 . All pertinent Conditions imposed on Administrative Review No. 82-12 and 83-13 shall be complied with. 3 . A parcel map shall be submitted prior to final inspection, or in the alternative, provide an acceptable recorded copy ' of a reciprocal drive easement to the Secretary of the Board within thirty (30) days. 4 . Location of all existing fire protection system equipment shall be approved by the Fire Department. AYES : Godfrey, Evans, Smith NOES: Vincent ABSTAIN: None MINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 84-20 A icant: Charles Cook and Dr . James A. Ferlita To per 't a 1 , 570 sq. ft. addition to an existing building for medical p ctice expansion. Subject site location is 6042 Bolsa Avenu Chairman Smith troduced the proposal stating that this request is categorically empt, Class . 1 , under the California Environ- mental Quality Act 1970. Plans for the second sto addition to the existing medical facility were discussed wi Mr . C .M. Thomson, A. I .A . for the project. The applicant stat that they are contemplating two - handicapped parking spaces in ' eu of *one (l) required by Title 24 . It was noted that the plan consi ed of an overage of landscaping and parking. Conditions for approval were discussed king into consideration the fact that no change is proposed to th ground level . It was the consensus of all of the Board Memb s that the applicant ' :. site plan was substantially in compliance with de requirements warranting approval of his request . ON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY VINCENT, ADMINISTRAT REVIEW NO. 84-20 WAS CONDITIONALLY APPROVED AS FOLLOWS , SUCCEE BY VOTE: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. A revised site plan shall be submitted depicting the modifica 'ons -9- BZA 4/4/84 ptSPOS4t �O 00 JZ c�c n P.O. BOX 1026 • HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92647 • PHONE (714) 847-3581 November 14 , 1984 James W. Palin Director of Development Services City of Huntington Beach P.O. Box 190 Dear Mr. Palin: To answer some questions that have arised recently, Rainbow Disposal Company Inc. has been operating its "state-of-the art" transfer station since November of 1983 . We have complied with every requirement that was necessary to con- struct and to operate this facility. During the completed operation of the facility, we have been inspected by the Orange County Enforement Agency on a monthly basis, from the conception of the project and to this date, have never had any health code violations . The South Coast Air Quality Management people have made visits to our facility and have found no violations and have in fact commented that the facility is of the finest they have seen. To further our good neighbor policy, from the beginning of our operation, we retained a pest control company, which by law we are not required to do, to guarantee that no migration or infections of any kind has existed or will ever exist. I welcome tours of our facility by you or any member of your staff. And I hope this will help clarify our performance. If you have any further questions , please feel free to cont- act me. Sincere , HUNTINGTON BEACH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Stanley F. trkaczyk NOV 14 i984 Vice President P.O. Box 190 ' SFT/ew Huntington Beach, CA 92648 'Keri (%Oody 4641 LOS PATOS RECEEiVEO RX HUN T INGTON BEACH, CA 92649 CITY r,M CITY ur (714)840-1827 Huh-1 NVI 70N 5CLCH. October 24 , 1984 OCT N 2 S7 City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach , Calif Dear Members of City Councii I would like to request that you not take action on LAND USE ELEMENT NO . 84-2/EIR 84-3 Zone Case No . 84-9 , at this time , but to send it back down to the Planning Commission for reconsideration . Tile reason I am requesting this action is as follows : i filed for the zone change at the same time as my TT 12206 & CE 84-05 because of the deadline date in doing so with the city . During these last few months , since filing , I have had a market analysis done by Charles Clark , a planner here at the city , and have been working with several brokers regarding developing this into a commercial project . with the ira.put that has been received from those with experience in the development of stria shopping centers , I have been advised that this is not a good location and that the price of the land is to high for the types of retail and commercial development we would beable to put in . Therefore , i have decided to build ten four-plexs and one tri -plex apartment building as shown on TT 12206 . These buildings are appraised at approximately $730 , 000 .00 each which is consistent with the surrounding neighborhood . In closing , I would like to state -that I will be avaible to discuss with any of you any questions you may have regarding my request to withdraw my application for rezoning . f . Thank You K6n Moody T9,�� ' Wington beach developmensery ices department STAFF SPORT To: Planning Commission From: Development Services Date: November 13, 1984 Subject: LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 64-2 AREA 3 .3 PEAP.CE,-BCLSA CHICA AREA AND ZONE CHANGE NO. 84-9 On November 5 , 1984 the City Council reviewed Land Use Element No. 84-2 . Prior to the meeting Council reviewed a letter from the applicant for Area 3 .3 . The amendment would redesignate 3 .0 acres located on the southeast corner of Bolsa Chica Street and Pearce Drive from medium density residential to general ccmmercial . In addition, Zcne Change No . 84-9 requesting a change from R2 to C4 was processed concurrently with the Land Use Amendment. The applicant indicated that he had decided that he would prefer to develope the site under the existing medium density residential designation. Due to the fact that the Planning Commission recommended approval of the amendment and zone change at the meeting of October 16 , 1984 ; the City Council referred this request for withdrawal back to the Planning Commission . The City Council directed that the Planning Commission review this request and report back to the Council by their November 19 , 1984 meeting . In add-ition, the applicants request for residential subdivision Tentative Tract 12206 on the subject property has been appealed to the City Council by adjacent property owners . The appeal is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on November 19, 1984 . The applicant is redesigning the project to take access off of Bolsa Chica Street rather than Pearce Drive as approved by the Planning Commission. This new design will be presented to the City Council as an alternative to the previous layout. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission uphold their approval of Land Use Element Amendment No. 84-2 and Zone Case No. 84-9 and recommend adoption by City Council . Attachments : ' 1 . Letter from Ken Moody dated October 24 , 1984 2 . Staff Report dated October 16 , 1984 JWP :HS : jr F� A-F M-238 i a r R UE EQ S OR CITY COUNCIL*TION Date October 26, 1984 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, City Administrator Prepared by: James W. Palin, Director , Development Services A Subject: LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 84-2/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 84-3 Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Transmitted for public hearing is Land Use Element Amendment No. 84-2 and Environmental Impact Report No . 84-3 . The amendment addresses a number of proposed changes to the Land Use Element as requested by both private property owners and the City of Huntington Beach. Section 2 .0 of the amendment addresses Administrative Items and Section 3 .0 addresses changes to the General Plan Land Use Map. The requests are being forwarded to the City Council along with the Planning Commission' s recommendation as part of Land Use Element Amendment No. 84-2 . Planning Commission Action: ON MOTION BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY HIGGINS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 84-3 WAS APPROVED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES : Higgins , Winchell , Li.vengood, Porter , Erskine , Schumacher , Mirjahangir NOES : None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None The Planning Commission took separate straw votes on each request item. These votes , along with any discussion, are included in the attached draft minutes of the Planning Commission' s October 16 , 1984 meeting . ON MOTION BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY HIGGINS LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 84-2 WAS APPROVED (PER STRAW VOTES ) ADOPTING RESOLUTION NO. 1333 AS AMENDED TO REFLECT PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION, AND RECOMMENDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL ADOPTION, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES : Higgins , Winchell , Livengood, Porter , Lrskine, Schumacher , M:irjahangir NOES : None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None -1 PrZ%-5:'0 •~� PIO 4181 October 26, 1984 RCA - LUE 84-2/EIR 84-3 Page 2 Planning Commission Recommendation: 1 . Approve Environmental Impact Report No . 84-3 . 2 . Approve the recommendation of the Planning Commission (as indicated in Attachment 1 , Summary of Requests ) and adopt by resolution, Land Use Element Amendment No . 84-2 . Staff Recommendations: The Department of Development Services ' staff recommendations are shown in Attachment 1, Summary of Requests . ANALYSIS : The analysis for each item is contained in the Land Use Element Amendment/Environmental Impact Report document. On October 24 , 1984, the applicant for Area 3 .3 submitted a letter requesting that the City Council not take action on his amendment and zone change request at this time. If the Council agrees to his request, this item should be removed from the amendment and referred back to the Planning Commission for their review and report. Environmental Status: Environmental documentation for the amendment requests may be found in the amendment report which also serves as Environmental Impact Report No. 84-3 . The FIR was posted for a 30-day period ending October 12, 1984 . Public comments and staff responses constitute the Final EIR and are incorporated in the appendix of the report. ALTERNATIVES : The City Council may adopt the requested changes as recommended by the Planning Commission, as recommended by the planning staff, they may modify them as desired, or may retain the existing designations in the Land Use Element. ATTACHMENTS : 1 . Summary of Requests 2 . Letter from Ken bloody dated Cctober 24, 1984 . 3 . Land Use Element Amendment 4 . Draft Minutes from Public Hearing before the Planning Commission 5 . Resolution JWP:HS :ajh (1307d) ATTACHMENT 1 SUMMARY OF' REQUESTS Item 2 . 1 - Staff requests that a solid waste facility land use designation be created in order to satisfy recent State legislation regarding the siting of solid waste facilities . In sitting a solid waste facility the law requires that local agencies make a finding of consistency with the general plan. In order for this to occur , the local jurisdiction must identify the facility on the land use diagram of the land use element based on findings of compatibility with surrounding uses . Staff recommends that policy language be created establishing this new designation and that such facilities meet the following location criteria of being located within or predominantly surrounded by industrial and/or public/quasi-public utility areas , and be in close proximity to designated truck routes . Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval Staff Recommendation: Approval Item 2 .2 - Staff requests that policy language be added to the Land Use Element to meet the. requirement of State . law which provides that local general plans be consistent with county airport environs land use plans . Staff recommends that the following policy language be added to the Land Use Element: "Any project which requires a notice of proposed construction of alteration by the FAA, under FAR part 77 , shall submit a copy of the FAA application to the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) , and provide the City with the F'AA and ALUC responses . If the ALUC requests review of the project, then the project shall be submitted to the Commission. Notice of any ALUC determination of inconsistency, with the Commission' s Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) , must be given to the City within 60 calendar days from the date of referral of the application to the ALUC, and shall be considered before the City takes any action on the project. If the Commission fails to give such notice of inconsistency . within that period,. the proposed project shall be deemed consistent with the AELUP. " Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval Staff Recommendation: Approval (1309d) ATTACHMENT 1 Page 2 Area 3 . 1 - The City-initiated request is to redesignate 4 .65 acres located west of Nichols Street and approximately 1,000 feet south of Warner Avenue from General Industrial to Solid Waste Facility. Staff recommends approval of the request. Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval Staff Recommendation: Approval Area 3 .2 - The applicant' s request is to redesignate 10 .4 acres located west of Magnolia Street and approximately 450 feet north of Warner Avenue from General Commercial to Mixed Development . Staff recommends that the applicant' s request be denied, and that the site retain the General Commercial designation. Zone Change No . 84-10 was submitted by the applicant to be processed concurrently with this land use amendment request. Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval Staff Recommendation: Denial Area 3 . 3 - The applicant' s request is to redesignate 3 .0 acres located east of Bolsa Chica Street and south of Pearce Street from Medium Density Residential to General Commercial . Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the applicant' s request to General Commercial . Zone Change No . 84-9 was submitted by the applicant to be processed concurrently with this land use amendment request. On October 24, 1984 , the applicant submitted a letter requesting that this item be removed from the amendment. The Council may wish to send this item and the Zone Change back to the Planning Commission to see if they would change their recommendation based on the applicant' s request. Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval Staff Recommendation: Approval 10 VIP HS :ajh (1309d) K,, goody 0 4641 LOS PATOS RECEIVED HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 CITY I CLERK CITY 0f (714)840.1827 HUhTIN3TGN BEACH,CALIF. October 24 , 1984 OCT N Z !7 City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach , Calif Dear Members of City Council I would like to request that you not take action on LAND USE ELEMENT NO . 84-2/EIR 84-3 Zone Case No . 84-9 , at this time , but to send it back down to the Planning Commission for reconsideration . The reason I am requesting this action is as follows : I filed for the zone change at the same time as my TT 12206 & CE 84-05 because of the deadline date in doing so with the city . During these last few months , since filing , I have had a market analysis done by Charles Clark , a planner here at the city , and have been working with several brokers regarding developing this into a commercial project. With the imput that has been received from those with experience in the development of strip shopping centers , I have been advised that this is not a good location and that the price of the land is to high for the types of retail and commercial development we would beable to put in . Therefore , I have decided to build ten four-plexs and one tri -plex apartment building as shown on TT 12206 . These buildings are appraised at approximately $730 , 000 .00 each which is consistent with the surrounding neighborhood . In closing , I would like to state that I will be avaible to discuss with any of you any questions you may have regarding my request to withdraw my application for rezoning . Thank You KZMood 6 Y Since 1891 L� JACK FOTI D VICE RA' DEVELOP NOV O V 21984 ESIDENT CORPORATi DEVi1pPM[N7 �Y November 1, 1984 .C'C OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ITY COUNCIL OFFICE Huntington Beach City Council 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, Calif. 92648 The Honorable Don MacAllister: Since we may not be able to attend the November 5, 1984 hearing on the Land Use Element Adnvxstnent #84-2 and the accompanying Environmental Impact Report #84.3, I am writing you to express our strong objection concerning the pro- posed admendment. The Bekins Moving & Storage Company has operated from its location at 7572 Warner Avenue for approximately twenty years. Until recently, we understood that the 4.65 acres had been used as a truck repair facility and in that regard, it was a compatible use with our storage of household goods. More recently, we have learned that solid waste is being stored in transit at the site. We also understand that mare intense uses of this property will be permitted it the proposed admendment is approved. Bekins custaners regularly visit our facility on Warner Avenue to retrieve fran and deliver items to their storage accounts. The vast majority of our customers at this site are residents of Huntington Beach, and I know these customers will not tolerate having their household goods stored next to a solid waste facility. The loss of these customers will create large losses for our busi- ness and greatly diminish the value of this property. Therefore, I urge you to deny this proposed adnvzbdnent. Cordially, ck oti Vice President Corporate Development JF/dj THE 1119IgNS COMPANY • 777 FLOWER STREET. GLENDALE. CALIFORNIA 91201 • 18181 507-1200 C 70 riti ,l i e Sim INC y 17091 Palmdale Huntington Beach,CA 92647 I�(714)847-4404bq/�-/ oU ,') c < < 1e ,� he� s1 0e ��ve MA"Md Pe+ I +) Or\j bLA j No i ILI, Lc K -1- L4,,A6 Lm We residents, business owner roperty owners, and school pe al hereby petition the u..i.ritington Beach Sity Col to reject the request to reignate 4.65 acres o-,Med by Rainbow Disposal on ichols Street, from general industrial to solid waste for the following reasons: 1. Increased truck traffic on roads that service Oceanview High School, Oakview Elementary School, Liberty Christian School, the day care center at the south side of the Oakview School, business traffic, residential traffic, and senior citizen traffic at the church on the corner of Gothard and Warner. 2. Increased waste drainage onto the street when waste is dumped onto the ground bedore entering the big trucks, as their property is sloped towards the street. 3. Increased health hazard such as rodents, birds, etc_ 4. Increased odor and noise level. 5 We want the tonnage per day not to exceed the maxium of 800 tons. / 1 Print Name: Address:l?311 A)\Schs Sign Name: Date & Phone optional n 1111 Print Name: p sc-"A-�0 Address: r 11 iC Sign Names Date & Phone optional 11 Print Name:_ J7// Address: 173// Sign Name: Soh Date & Phone(optional) Print Name: & ALD L • H iwM A.L) Address: Sign Name: adgl� Date & Phone(optional) Print Name: ']RAey Address: Sign Name: �_ �- Date & Phorie optional Print Name: E/�sABFr/�l i�c°4��'�C� Address: Sign Name: Q' Date & Phone(optional) Print Name: S Address:Z ',9 Sign Name: Date & Phone(ptional)._�,y�� Print Name:fA %JALA,A ,F Address: L.S Sign Name: �) . Date & Phone optional - - f Print Name: LU cA re- Address: 7 3 I N 1 c 4tOUS Sign Name: Us-'LuQ--� Date & Phone optional - I -,6 i Print Name: /* , S G 4W.0 Address: /r- o L Sign Name: Date & Phone optional i Print Name: Lc2j Address: 311 Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional) Print Name: Address:1,2- Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name; Date & Phone optional Irl �u We residents, business owners, -roperty owners, and school perk Al hereby petition the Huntington Beach Sity Cou to reject the request to re ,14,;mate 4.65 acres owned 'by Rainbow Disposal on Nichols Street, from general indusrial to solid waste for, the following reasons: 1. Increased truck traffic on roads that service Oceanview High School, Oakview Elementary School, Liberty Christian School, the day care center at the south side of the Cakview School, business traffic, residential traffic, and senior citizen traffic at the church on the corner of Gothard and Warner. 2. Increased waste drainage onto the street when waste is dumped onto the ground bedore entering the big trucks, as their property is sloped towards the street. 3, Increased health hazard such as rodents, birds, etc. 4. Increased odor--and noise level. 5• We want the tonnage per day not to exceed the maxium of 800 toms. Print Name: 'A �' Sign Name Date & Phone optional Print Name: w - _ Address: Sign Name: Dete & Phone optiCn Print Name:-Aa i U V Address: 1 , > Sign Name: Date & Phone option Print Name: (,y,� Address: PW Sign Name: _T Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date &Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional I Print Name: Address: Sign Name: "Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional We residents, business owners operty owners, and school per 1 hereby petition the Huntington Beach Sity Coin to reject the request to red ate 4.65 acres � owned by Rainbow Disposal on Nichols Street, from general industrial to solid waste for- the following reasons: i. Increased truck traffic on roads that service Oceanview High School, Oakview Elementary School, Liberty Christian School, the day care center at the south side of the Oakview School, business traffic, residential traffic, and senior citizen traffic at the church on the corner of f Gothard and Warner. 2. Increased waste drainage onto the street when waste is dumped onto the t' ground bedore entering the big trucks, as their property is sloped towards the street. 3. Increased health hazard such as rodents, birds, etc. 4. Increased odor -and noise level. 5. We want the tonnage per day not to exceed the maxium of 800 tons. Print Name:J 14q�/ 1.1 /''U 4� Address: 6-eKA Y,P f9 C/lZ C_`-P, ( A-11 O b if_de'e� Sign Name:,, tj R Date & Phone optional // t 8 4- - -7i� ci 6v i13 7 tl Print Name: ;`/;!SIC of �✓ir, Address: *41 Sign Name Date & Phone optional Print Name: ' /S V h C (2 Z,41CJC Addre ss: /S-2 uez aig/ Sign Name: Date & Phone optional CZi4) P�;;- � �11os° Cn-JsebiN.9To� �os'R. Print Name:l"114C- &C e % + L s%�rJ Address: 0 0 v o (/, /(/t1,3 r, 4. /7 /fi & Sign Name: p c • _4- Date & Phone optional Print Name: l I L-L Address: / / i Z Ste''I!� R� l fq Sign Name: '70 Date & Phone optional Print Name:/I L e Y Tip f4 /1 .7 �- �- Address: l l Z /J-Af T L_4w,) t2,eu Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional) , Print Name: /S C L e- Address: / Z T L(A,-') µ �f Sign Name: P i Date & Phone optional Print Name: /cam (ze 0 v f'Z All" /.. Address: Sign Name -4 4f k Date & Phone optional Q I Print Name: C AJ K-l rJ.f Address: Sign Name: ate & Phone(optional) Print Name: J d u j if Address: I e,-f L Lu( 1 d2 , If a cl Sign Name: Date & Phone optional - Print Name: 0 e_ R Address: I I/ Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional)S77( k4-1 0AF`71 Print Name: r e (,�/� Address: J ) ) PW IJe,&C 17'_ • if �Pa CL - Sign Name: rU, - Date & Phone optional Print Name: 9/ys//'Y(, 0_J,9 y1 Address Sign Name: , -�''� �� <� Date & one optional 7 We residents, business owners operty ovmers, and school pergmpl hereby petition the Huntington Beach Sity CoutW to reject the request to red hate 4.65 acres owned by Rainbow Disposal on Nichols Street, from general industrial to solid waste for. the following reasons: 1. Increased truck traffic on roads that service Oceanview High School, Oakview Elementary School, Liberty Christian School, the day care center at the south side of the Oakview School, business traffic, residential traffic, and senior citizen traffic at the church on the corner of Gothard and Warner. 2. Increased waste drainage onto the street when waste is dumped onto the ground bedore entering the big trucks, as their property is sloped towards the street. 3. Increased health hazard such as rodents, birds, etc_ 4. Increased odor and noise level. 5. We want the tonnage per day not to exceed the maxium of 800 tons. int Nam Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: 7 7 Sign Name: v� Date & Phone optional ¢�1 ;c�( � Print Name: d ;'t om` IZ S Address:- &06.1 S,4 ri M'P eL Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional)p Print Name: 4-,✓j I l 1Z Address:. 1 f' (J ( M d 0 Sign Name: Date & Phone optional r % Print Name su j f�EL L .t/"/ Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone opt o Print Name: dress: Sign 2lame: e & Phone(optional) �Z Print Name: CPI S G�I/L!� Address: k 3 G 2 Sign Name: �� Date & Phone optional c� Z - �;/ * 0 Q Print Name: r2/�r✓C I 1�P f T 2_ Address: 1 'Z a T l�p AtL U 2 14 9-Fc-cL Sign Name: pip �_ Date & Phone optional �- Print Name: Address: O 4 L Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional) a Print Name: 7�f �u L L Address: v U�1 S(J.-J Q Sign Name: RCZDate & Phone(optional) S 40 — 3-7 3 Print Name: �/J L(�� IZ ( S Address: � ('1 1 J `A (-re O L rl 0 ez Sign Name: s Date & Phone optional ( i Print Name: r?I E _ i eJ v Address: 1 3 � � L- L Itk -rc H Sign Name: ` Date & Phone optiona�lj Print Name: Address: Sign Name: C_ Date & Phone optional We 'residents, business owners operty owners, and school per al hereby petition the Huntington Beach Sity CouAW to reject the request to red�6 ate 4.65 acres owned by Rainbow Disposal on Nichols Street, from general industrial to solid waste for the following reasons: 1. Increased truck traffic on roads that service Oceanview High School, Oakview Elementary School, Liberty Christian School, the day care center at the south side of the Oakview School, business traffic, residential traffic, and senior citizen traffic at the church on the corner of Gothard and Warner. 2. Increased waste drainage onto the street when waste is dumped onto the ground bedore entering the big trucks, as their property is sloped towards the street. 3. Increased health hazard such as rodents, birds, etc. 4. Increased odor and noise level. 5. We want the tonnage per day not to exceed the maxium of 800 tons. Print Name: ti L/ ,I- t rt< ` . Addre ss: &-/ 1 I- U RZ 12Lc L Q 14" `- e c C-L Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: G✓v d r, Address: �3 S L-f j �it� 71e� Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional) ' Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional) _ Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional We residents, business owners, property owners, and school personal hereby petition the Huntington Beach Sity Council to reject the request to redesignate 4.65 acres owned by Rainbow Disposal on Nichols Street, from general industrial to solid waste for the following reasons: 4 1. Increased truck traffic on roads that service Oceanview High School, Oakview Elementary School, Idberty Christian School, the day care center at the south side of the Ca.kview School, business traffic, residential traffic, and senior citizen traffic at the church on the corner of Gothard and Warner. 2. Increased waste drainage onto the street when waste is dumped onto the ground bedore entering the big trucks, as their property is sloped towards the street. GRO-MOR DIVERSIFIED, INC. 3. Increased health hazard such as rodents, birds, etc. 17202 #9 GOTHARD ST. 4. Increased odor-and noise level. HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92641 CSL #386681 5. We want the tonnage per day not to exceed the maxium of 800 tons. Print Name: S Address: G a Fes 'n7� Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional Print Name: Address: � �l ,�.1.4��-�1 t3 Sign Name: Date & Phone optional) 1 - Print Nam IU cam- Address: ZZ Of' Sign Name: / Date & Phone optional -1 — - Print Name: Tr j4o _ Address: U Sign Name: i Date & Phone(optional) Print Name: 4ZD' i� Address: 1 224 A 1 ZLLQ. Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional)_jJ-19- _ Print Name: �2�~� Address: hl 1 A S 1 Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional) _ Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: "',o'�{ ,.�-� Address: � �, a Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional) a-?- 149 ao_T Print Name: Address: ( t\! Aie- Sign Name: Date & Phone optional. ►g-9l-1 -11 LQ i� We residents, business owners, property owners, and school personal hereby petition I� the Huntington Beach Sity Co*1hols to reject the request to red grate 4.65 acres l owned by Rainbow Disposal on Street, from general inddWial to solid waste f or_ the following reasons: 1. Increased truck traffic on roads that service Oceanview High School, Oakview Elementary School, Liberty Christian School, the day care center j at the south side of the Oakview School, business traffic, residential traffic, and senior citizen traffic at the church on the corner of Gothard and Warner. i 2. Increased waste drainage onto the street when waste is dumped onto the r ground bedore entering the big trucks, as their property is sloped towards the street. 3. Increased health hazard such as rodents, birds, etc_ 4. Increased odor and noise level. 5. We want the tonnage per day not to exceed the maxium of 800 tons. Print Name: fAIKE Address: 7& f p^tT I a b41//E Sign Name: y1 Date & Phone optional Print Name:4610' Address: Sign Name: Var ft Date & Phone optional Print Name: /t' Addre ss: /7 oA �j D Ti6�.�le Sign Name: Date & Phone optional j Print Name: Ny Address: /7,�Oa G o T�fI�PA Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional) ^ Print Name: Address: Sign Name: �� �ayJ.w,,{� Date & Phone optional Print Name: \ `fi5 Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional) Print Name: tk S /J�_ Address. /7:O.Z Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Z'kAddress: " ._-,7 S, 3. Sign Name: .Date & Phone optional / - ' Print Name: (/ L Address: _ Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: --=r= a Address: _ Sign Name: o Q� T COLs a•> Date & Phone(optional) :297e�►l Print Name: O. Address: Z O ( 2ri 4� U Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address- ZGZ f1�.1a.e, (/ Sign Name- Date & Phone(optional) eyrZ-t C'lE Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional We residents, business owners, roperty o,mers, and school personal hereby petition the Huntington Beach Sity Co to reject the request to re ate 4.65 acres I,) owned by Rainbow Disposal on ols Street, from general indu : al to solid waste for. the following reasons: 'f 1. Increased truck traffic on roads that service Oceanview High School, ' Ca.kview Elementary School, Liberty Christian School, the day care center at the south side of the Oakview School, business traffic, residential traffic, and senior citizen traffic at the church on the corner of Gothard and Warner. 2. Increased waste drainage onto the street when waste is dumped onto the ground bedore entering the big trucks, as their property is sloped towards the street. 3. Increased health hazard such as rodents, birds, etc_ 4. Increased odor and noise level, 5. We want the tonnage per day not to exceed the maxium of 800 tons. Print Name: J�{1' Address: /' �c�-- Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional) / Print Name: I Csar4 L SM 4- _ Address: 17 3!/ ��/� 1-1 6 Sign Name: Date & Phone optional I Print Name: Address: ! Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name:Ste-r ( 8F4.I Cu) ) Address: )C k S /! Sign Name: t,c).(,�11 � Date & Phone optional //-)�f- Print Name: XANpy L- 7:3 A CX SoAv Address: 1 1 ,11 r -1 L -�-+�• Sign Name: Date & Phone optional ) Print Name: C19 -VO WAI°6- Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: r_ n v i �� Address: 17311 Sign Name: �- Date & Phone optio al Print Name: t&e> Address: ' Sign Name: � ,;, -�Lc ( g-c Date & Phone optional - d Print Name: �j,�n F-• f'! iv EN Address: 7� " ` tac'✓ i Sign Name: Date & Phone optional /i Print Name:w- .t y Address: Sign Name: ��� �Q ,t ;_�_ -j�, � �,. Date & Phone(optional) Print Name: ¢ 1 S L Fl Address:1 /I 7� E Sign Name: n P�— _ Date & Phone optional ` I Print Name: r4d AoL6 p Act Address: .3// Sign Name: �"C.04 Date & Phone optional / / Print Name: E a P Address: /// Sign Name: Date & Phone optional 1!•- _ Y We residents, business owners property owners, and school personal hereby petition the Huntington Beach Sity Go l to reject the request to re gnate 4.65 acres owned by Rainbow Disposal on chols Street, from general ind rial to solid waste for the following reasons: 1. Increased truck traffic on roads that service Oceanview High School, Oakview Elementary School, Liberty Christian School, the day care center at the south side of the Oakview School, business traffic, residential traffic, and senior citizen traffic at the church on the corner of Gothard and Warner. 2. Increased waste drainage onto the street when waste is dumped onto the ground bedore entering the big trucks, as their property is sloped towards the street. 3. Increased health hazard such as rodents, birds, etc_ 4. Increased odor and noise level. 5. We want the tonnage per day not to exceed the maxium of 800 tons. Print Name: /✓/QS )a Y" 6:dCL Address:�j73 / / 1Cho)� S7• AB Sign Name: Date & Phone optional //-/9-T�- Print Name: L y Address: /�3 / Sign Name: Date & Phone optional ///Y-J, - Print Name:, � Address: 1 7 31/ rV! LS 54- 141 Sign Name: Date & Phone optional il- / Print Name: i 1h 0 _ Address: -7ij N)ctAv s-7 Sign Name: „i L�Q Date & Phone optional /I - I q Azy Print Name: fU p • 4S Address: f73//• , /L y BLs• ,5 ,(jr Sign Name: Date & Phone optional r/-/ FL Y Print Name: Address: 173// 'A 4&T3 Sign Name- / Date & Ph.one(optional _ c(- Print Name- C Address: ! t-�O c Sign Name: Date & Phone optional - Print Name: C✓w,n K4, Address: 1?3)/ N,A--b Sign Name: Vc�,�.: ) c�• Date & Phone optional //� lS- ray Print Name: f !y S Address: I a ? t 0/S Sign Name: - Date & Phone(optional)- �/_i c�_/y s/ Print Name: TiLlc, S Address: 0311 NJ 1CMLS Sign Name: Date & Phone optional 1 I-II 1-1YJ4 Print Name: gala/ AL16mla4f Address: 173// l5 1. Sign Name: Date & Phone optional / Print Name: C V Cee,44. Address: / Z311 All d /G L-s /y P _ Sign Name: Date & Phone optional //'/-/�- &' Print Name: raj/ Address: / ? 3// 4/!C4i-o aA /0�,P5 Sign Name: dL Date & Phone optional //-/5/ -k4l We 'residents, business owners roperty owners, and school per al hereby petition the H,;rtington Beach Sity Coil to reject the request to re grate 4.65 acres awned by Rainbow Disposal on Nichols Street, from general indu rial to solid waste for the following reasons: 1. Increased truck traffic on roads that service Oceanview High School, Cakview Elementary School, Liberty Christian School, the day care center at the south side of the Oakview School, business traffic, residential traffic, and senior citizen traffic at the church on the corner of Gothard and Warner. 2. Increased waste drainage onto the street when waste is dumped onto the ground bedore entering the big trucks, as their property is sloped towards the street. 3. Increased health hazard such as rodents, birds, etc_ 4. Increased odor and noise level. 5. We want the tonnage per day not to exceed the maxim of 800 tons. Print Name: Address:. V.-1 k��j Z Sign Name: Date & Phone optional ��'�-_&G 9N 4 Print Name Sign me- Date & Phone optional - Print Name: �' Address: �7�y � 4�WkJdt _ Sign Name: JtO Date & Phone optional --mot_7T Print Name: Address: v%, c. l 2 Sign Name: Date & Phone optional -M�l`[ -Mr Print Name; L Address: 17112 % -PA Sign Name: OdifM Date & Phone optional �3` ?-7 Z Z 2 Print Name: Address Sign Name: Date & Phone optional j2XZ Z Wjr.S'— dto Print Name: Address: Sign Name: - Date & Phone optional 8 y7 f' 1 Print Name: Address: Z. lZ. ALM�1i Sign Name: Date & Phoneptional $�'�- •�Z Print Name: Address: / Sign Name: OKAV L�' Date & Phone optional T17- TZ Z Print Name: Lm rl: ece4 ' Address: 17147-1 A ,'t T-"'Akt-MVALE Sign Name: Date & Phone optional 747 • 7 ZZ 9 IV Print Name: p„,, ,a �w,�ynL Address: 171410 ;1Z 4-,OW A 4 Lg Sign Name: ` ,pyp Date & Phone optional y Print Namc Address: Sign Name: V Date & Phone(optional) Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Vie residents, business owners roperty owners, and school personal hereby petition the Huntington Beach Sity Coin to reject the request to re gnate 4.65 acres 'f a,,,med by Rainbow Disposal on P chols Street, from general indu rial to solid waste ;! for the following reasons: 1. Increased truck traffic on roads that service Oceanview High School, Oakview Elementary School, Idbe.rty Christian School, the day care center at the south side of the Oakview School, business traffic, residential traffic, and senior citizen traffic at the church on the corner of Gothard and Warner. 2. Increased waste drainage onto the street when waste is dumped onto the ground bedore entering the big trucks, as their property is sloped towards the street. 3. Increased health hazard such as rodents, birds, etc.. 4. Increased odor-and noise level. 5. We want the tonnage per day not to exceed the maxium of 800 tons. Print Name: Me " ermes. stein Address: 7422 Cedar St . Hunt Bch, CA 92647 Sign Name: Date & Phone optional 1 1- 19-8 4 (714) 8 4 7-9 6 5 7 Print Name: Mark Fli pin Z Address: 7422 Cedar St . Hunt Bch, CA 92647 Sign Name: Date & Phone optional 11- 19-84 (714) 847-9657 Print Name: Andrea Whitney Address: 7422 Cedar St . Hunt Bch , CA 92647 i Sign Name: _ Date & Phone optional 9657 Edie MermeIstein 7422 Cedar St . Hunt Bch CA- 92647 Print Name: Address: , Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional) 11- 19- 4 7-9 6 5 7 Print Name: Jesus Gaytan Address: 7422 Cedar St . Hunt Bch , CA 92647 Sign Name: y Date & Phone optional 1 19_ (714 ) 8 4 7-c 6 5 7 i Print Name: Address: Sign Name- Date & Phone optional, 1 1 - 19-8 4 (71 4) g 4 7-9 6 S 7 f Print Name: J ier Lopez Ga to Address: 7422 Cedar S 647 Sign Name: Date & Phone optional 11- 19- 8 4_ (714) 8 4.7-6 5 7 Print Name: G orge I arra Address: 7422 Cedar St . Hunt Bch - 647 , Sign Name: Date & Phone optional 11- 19-8 4 (714) 8 4 7-9 6 5 7 Print Name: Pa ricinio Alvarado Address: 7422 Cedar St . Hunt Bch , 647 Sign Name: Q Date & Phone optional 11- 19-84 (714) 847-9657 Print Name: C a 1 o s, Lo pe z Address: 7422 Cedar St H __9J_647 Sign Name: 024d& Date & Phone optional 11- 19-84 (714) 847-9657 Print Name: Vctor Belmonte Address:7422 Cedar St . Hu Bch . 647 Sign Name: 1 /i Date & Phone optional 11 - 19-84 (714) 847-9657 Print Name: Manual Rodriquez Address:7422 Cedar St . Hunt Bch . 647 Sign Name: l a ��� Date & Phone optional 1 1- 19-8 4 (7 141 8 4 7-9 6 5 7 I Print Name: Address:7422 Cedar St . Hunt Bch CA 92647 Sign Name: QQ4 e yl _ Date & Phone optional 1 1 - 1 9- 8 4 (714) 8 4 7-9 6 5 7 (i We-residents, business owners, property owners, and school personal hereby petition the Huntington Beach Sity Counrft to reject the request to rede, ate 4.65 acres owned by Rainbow Disposal on N ols Street, from general Indus 1 to solid waste fox the following reasons: 1. Increased truck traffic on roads that service Oceanview High School, Oakview Elementary School, Liberty Christian School, the day care center at the south side of the Oakview School, business traffic, residential traffic, and senior citizen traffic at the church on the corner of Gothard and Warner. 2. Increased waste drainage onto the street when waste is dumped onto the ground bedore entering the big trucks, as their property is sloped towards the street. 3. Increased health hazard such as rodents, birds, etc. 4. Increased odor and noise level. 5. We want the tonnage per day not to exceed the maxium of 800 tons. Print Name: �� dress: - Sign Name: Date & Phone optional It-_/,_ y , Print Name: Q Address: /7 Q Q -,O Sign Name; 'T Date & Phone optional u Print Name: o Q Address: 7 P a �d 5 r. Si Name: Date & Phone o ional �y J/ Print Name: / AJ Address: /r1��2- t q Sign Name; -i_ Date & Phone optiona]_ Print Name: Address: `rQK£ Sign Name: Date & Phone optional c it Print Name: (� Address: `� 6 Sign Name: _ Date & Phone optional Print Name: - ,J /� . ; Ar-Fo' Address: `' - e c'D` Sign Name: .JJ ' ' Date & Phone optional / / q Print Name: V,L;1-,(C Address: 7 Sign Name: 124e, Date & Phone optional Print Name: -�p� ,�j S-hs� Address: Sign Name: �_ ` �,.���� r Date & Phone(optional) Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional We residents, business ownerANi operty owners, and school personal hereby petition the Ht-nting`uon Beach Sity Co to reject the request to red ate 4.65 acres owned by Rainbow Disposal onols Street, from general indus al to solid waste i for the following reasons: �I 1. Increased truck traffic on roads that service Oceanview High School, Oakview Elementary School, Liberty Christian School, the day care center at the south side of the Oakview School, business traffic, residential i traffic, and senior citizen traffic at the church on the corner of Gothard and Warner. 2. Increased waste drainage onto the street when waste is dumped onto the ground bedore entering the big trucks, as their property is sloped towards the street. 3. Increased health hazard such as rodents, birds, etc_ 4. Increased odor and noise level. 5. We want the tonnage per day not to exceed the maxium of 800 tons. Print Name:LE/ ' Address:/7/.A/ S7} ter-„ 41411A, Sign Name: 2 Date & Phone optional (•71+)- *f►X-9 31 Print Name: �� Address: /-2/ • O 1012 Sign Name: Date & Phone optional 19�A / 7 / Print Name: n ' Q Address: Q ,I ' Sign Name: Date & Phone optional I Print Name• L DST Address: S3 IY) - 0 T Sign Name: • c,,,, Date & Phone optional or Print Name:/tr; &Jer S e.4,L Address: AI Sign Name: ,,„( cam Date & Phone optional 1I Print Name: d ,, Address: /2 Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional) lp / Print Name• Address: 3 27 /V- Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional) Print Name- Address: 00 V-V. Ila`i Sign Name. U Date & Phone optional c 0 A Print Name: Address: 1,2o9la Sign Name: V ap, Date & Phone optional Print Name:- Addre ss: 1 7/' ]_ L;a ,o p 4 a— Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name DQi✓t t L e-(� Address: l�— Sign Name: Date &, Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: _ Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional We- residents, business owners, roperty owners, and school personal hereby petition the Huntington Beach Sity Coun=to reject the request to redeiWate 4.65 acres Q,-med by Rainbow Disposal on N ols Street, from general indus al to solid waste for the following reasons: 1. Increased truck traffic on roads that service Oceanview High School, Oa,kview Elementary School, Liberty Christian School, the day care center at the south side of the Oakview School, business traffic, residential traffic, and senior citizen traffic at the church on the corner of Gothard and Warner. i 2. Increased waste drainage onto the street when waste is dumped onto the ground bedore entering the big trucks, as their property is sloped towards the street. 3. Increased health hazard such as rodents, birds, etc. 4. Increased odor and noise level. 5. We want the tonnage per day not to exceed the maxium of 800 tons. Print Name: ,�Osr/ Add re s: '► d4 A, Sign Name: • Date & Phone optional Print NameAddress: ((�� ) /). Uv . Addre ss� LVI 1'�'� aJ � Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: to & Phone(optional).— Print Name: G f l 1,',,j,, ,,Address: 1-75 /.1 !��' 6 UVca � Sign Name: `c-k-1 Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional e residents, business owners, roperty o•"mers, and school personal hereby petition the 11.Wntington Beach Sity Coin to reject the request to red ate 4.65 acres owned al by Rainbow Dispos on ols Street, from general indu ial to solid waste -or the following reasons: 1. Increased truck traffic on roads that service Oceanview High School, Oa.kview Elementary School, Liberty Christian School, the day care center at the south side of the Oa.kview School, business traffic, residential traffic, and senior citizen traffic at the church on the corner of Gothard and Warner. 2. Increased waste drainage onto the street when waste is dumped onto the ground bedore entering the big trucks, as their property is sloped towards the street. 3. Increased health hazard such as rodents, birds, etc_ 4. Increased odor-and noise level. 5. We want the tonnage per day not to exceed the maxium of 800 tons. Print Name: 0Address: / Sign Name: Date & Phone optional _ c Print Name Address:! �O (55�a/ i y/// Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional Print Name: �,�,¢,�/�/�'T y[pZ d�dresRt - Sign Name: Date & Phone optional //_ Print Name: 2...�_a Address: 3Z 4n Y-9, (A g244� Sign Name: ' Date & Phone optional 942-3q% Print Name: A-S Address: Sign. Name: Date & Phone optional L ,,/- Print Name: Address: Sign Name: �, Date & Phone optional 1 — Print Nam e r/S Addre s s: Y.0 2, J Sign Nam Date & Phone optional �Tg�. / < Print Name: /(,L/ Address: 7:2- OIA4_4fp" Sign Name: ' Date & Phone optional - — Print Name: p o Address: �• Sign Name: Date & Phone optional -�j��jl� ,� Print Nam it J dress: y Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: 7 02 Sign Name: / / Date & Phone optional c� Print Name: L�w U Address: PA) M d 6-1t• N 7" yO Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional) Y7 Z,75a ^-) Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional) We residents, business owners, operty owners, and school pets al hereby petition the Runtington Beach Sity Coin to reject the request to red ate 4.65 acres owned by Rainbow Disposal on NO ols Street, from general indus ial to solid waste for the following reasons: it 1. Increased truck traffic on roads that service Oceanview High School, 1 Oakview Elementary School, Liberty Christian School, the day care center at the south side of the Oakview School, business traffic, residential traffic, and senior citizen traffic at the church on the corner of Gothard and Warner. i 2. Increased waste drainage onto the street when waste is dumped onto the ground bedore entering the big trucks, as their property is sloped towards the street. 3. Increased health hazard such as rodents, birds, etc. 4. Increased odor and noise level. 5. We want the tonnage per day not to exceed the maxium of 800 tons. Print Name: L9 Address: Z)5 — / —8 Sign Name: Date & Phone optional g(I-$— S SI R Print Name: A Lp ;I'-A Deb , r Address: 1-70`1/ Pa In da /- Sign Name: _ Date & Phone(optional) Print Name: Address: IYO,557 Sign Name; Date & Phone(optional) Print Name: NLr Address: /9 5—/ Oe&L1,3�,alZ114 _ Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional) g ig 5`S`1 A9 Print N rn Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: -Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: _ Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional We' residents, business owners, operty owners, and school pers al hereby petition the Rmtington Beach City CounW to reject the request to red ate 4.65 acres i owned by Rainbow Disposal on Nic ols Street, from general indus ial to solid waste for the following reasons: 1. Increased truck traffic on roads that service Oceanview High School, Oakview Elementary School, Liberty Christian School, the day care center I at the south side of the Oakview School, business traffic, residential traffic, and senior citizen traffic at the church on the corner of Gothard and Warner. 2. Increased waste drainage onto the street when waste is dumped onto the ground bedore entering the big trucks, as their property is sloped towards the street. 3. Increased health hazard such as rodents, birds, etc. 4. Increased odor-and noise level. 5. We want the tonnage per day not to exceed the maxium of 800 tons. Print Name: owp -T-Y/LEe- Address: -?�- W4&"ulj r Sign Name: _ Date & Phone optional Print Name:��•�✓ ���,�, Address: /T- Sign Name: - Date & Phone(optional) ;j24,,7 S'3/Z Print Name: Address:17o9� Sign Name: Date & Phone optional y7; c/o Print Name:/Q p,y /`7/�iQg.�.o O Address: /7 a.�/ Sign Name: Date & Phone optional 1/7. y'9 o / Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date &. Phone(optional) Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional f� Print Name: Address: 1 Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional We residents, business owners, owners, and school perso hereby petition the Huntington Beach Sity GounOerty o reject the request to rede4gate 4.65 acres o ned by Rainbow Disposal on Nichols Street, from general industrial to solid waste for the following reasons: 1. Increased truck traffic on roads that service Oceanview High School, Oakview Elementary School, Liberty Christian School, the day care center at the south side of the Cakview School, business traffic, residential ! traffic, and senior citizen traffic at the church on the corner of Gothard and Warner. 2. Increased waste drainage onto the street when waste is dumped onto the ground bedore entering the big trucks, as their property is sloped towards the street. 3. Increased health hazard such as rodents, birds, etc. 4. Increased odor- and noise level. 5. We want the tonnage per day not to exceed the maxium of 800 tons. Print Name: Ec Address: -7& /k/C�er A4 . Sign Name: Date & Phone optional (7•y) SY-7_zeqy7 Print Name: kOJO Obf&ARD Address: y /v Sign Name• Date & Phone optional b - f- Print Name: >,� �� Address: � ______ Sign Name: Date & Phone optional 7-,3 -/ Print Name: D - 14 Address:' Sign Name: Date & Aone optional Print Name: A t L \,-'.l Addre ss: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional _ residents, business owner roperty owners, and school pe al hereby petition the' Huntington_ Beach Sity Co1Wl to reject the request to re agnate gnate 4.65 acres owned by Rainbow Disposal on Nichols Street, from general industrial to solid waste • f*or the following reasons: i 1. Increased truck traffic on roads that service Oceanview High School, Oakview Elementary School, Liberty Christian School, the day care center at the south side of the Oakview School, business traffic, residential traffic, and senior citizen traffic at the church on the corner of , Gothard and Warner. j 2. Increased waste drainage onto the street when waste is dumped onto the ground bedore entering the big trucks, as their property is sloped towards the street. 4 3 Increased health hazard such as rodents, birds, etc. 4. Increased odor -and noise level. 5. We want the tonnage per day not to exceed the maxium of 800 tons. Print Name: 1 Address:Cc� ( 9 Sign Name: Date & Phone o onal Print .Name: 5 'gue. O 5Y Address: i/3a Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional) Print Name: L)OA.)c i9 /991,-c//0 Address:_ (� Sign Name: C, „�v,u., � �, � Date & Phone optional "J l7 i Print Name: �_2',44 Address. Sign Name: c(j. Date & Phone(optional �,pd Print Name: Address: n ✓ `. Sign Name: - " Date & Phone(optional) Print Name: (D w A-Jv E ' , t 2�9?_ Address: / Sign Name: r y2,,�-�� Date & Phone optional J/ 7—/7- S'f Print Name: - Address: /.'0.�� A_,�� Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional) -� Print Name: (� ,JiS Address: 6 CC e- /7 n Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: �� � `� Address: Sign Name: _ ' Date & Phone(optional) ---- Print Name: GZf`GL lr o✓n Address: l U�? d�Q2 7 - Sign Name Date & Phone(optional) Print Name:- uy L16;/'�./ Address: Sign Name: �n,u/ li vyy,�L,�,,,r- Date & Phone optional Print Name: AP- Gj _ Address: / ZMA pz�k. Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: L— A - Address: Sign Name: 4 ? Date & Phone op ional) v Y;o residents, business owner owners, and school peal hereby petition r the .Kuntinbton Beach Sit Co to reject the request to re grate 4.65 acres `owned by Rainbow Disposal on Nichols Street, from general industrial to solid waste for the following reasons: 1. Increased truck traffic on roads that service Oceanview High School, Oakview Elementary School, Liberty Christian School, the day care center at the south side of the Oakview School, business traffic, residential traffic, and senior citizen traffic at the church on the corner of Gothard and Warner. 2. Increased waste drainage onto the street when waste is dumped onto the ground bedore entering the big trucks, as their property is sloped towards the street. 3. Increased health hazard such as rodents, birds, etc_ 4. Increased odor and noise level. 5. We want the tonnage per day not to exceed the maxium of 800 tons. Print Name: - Address: / 70 Sign Name: _ Date & Phone(optional) lam 01 Print Name: L Address: % C-- Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: =e-'W%.e-SS M , (3 c, Address: A JC S Sign Name: ��, a Date & Phone optional -/6 I Print Name Address: �_31' �/ )OC Sign Name: ' Date & Phone optional Print Name ;2rr�( Address: 1'7 q/l %�►c� ,Lt �`� - Sign Name: Date & Phone(optional) Print Name: 1 + a • �o (lr� Y� I 1�— Address: `�� Cr Sign Name: Date & Phone optional42 Print Name: lociL4 l A. ,z-o�,�G _ Addre s s: Sign Name: s 1 Date & Phone(optional) Print Name: ��.S G n [� Address: CCee& LeA yLlt Ana- Sign Name: s_l�e, ,�,, �„ Date & Phone optional q7y_ -)•-i {- � Print Name: ,,,rs Ty / Address:_ L 7 , , G•Fij.v� �y-c.� NAB/., Sign Name: , ,,, >F, Date & Phone(optional) Print Name: Address: Sign Name; Date & Phone optional i Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date & Phone optional Print Name: Address: Sign Name: Date e.';. Phone optional ! 4 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL AG ION Date October 26, 1984 • Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Submitted by: Charles W. Thompson, City Administr, o 4 P Prepared by: James W. Palxn, Director , Development Services � Subject: LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 84-2/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPAC REPORT NO. 84-3 �e S�15 Statement of Issue, Reco ndation,Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments: i 1 STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Transmitted for public h aring is Land Use Element Amendment No. 84-2 and Environmental, Im act Report No . 84-3 . The..a, endment addresses a number of pro osed changes to the Land Use Element as requested by both private roperty owners and the City of Huntington Beach. Section 2 .0 of tyre �mendment addresses Administrative Items and Section 3 .0 addresses 'ctranges to the General Plan Land Use Map. The requests are being forwa ded to the City C�uncil along with the Planning Commission' s recomme dation as part ' odf Land Use Element Amendment No. 84-2 . Planning Commission Action: ON MOTION BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND 'BY HIGfINS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 84-3 WAS APPROVED BY T FOLWING VOTE: AYES: Higgins, Winchell, Liv i. 00d, Porter, Erskine, Schumacher, Mir jahangi NOES : None ABSENT: , None ABSTAIN: None The Planning Commission took s parate stra votes on each request item. These votes , along with any discussi n, are included in the ..,. attached draft minutes of the Planning Commi sion' s October 16 , 1984 meeting. ON MOTION BY LIVENGOOD AND SECOND BY HIGGINS LA USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 84-2 WAS A IROVED (PER STRAW VOTES ADOPTING RESOLUTION NO. 1333 AS' TENDED TO REFLECT PLANNIN COMMISSION ACTION, AND RECOMMENDE O THE CITY COUNCIL F'OR PI ADOPTION, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES : Higgins _Winchell, Livengood, Porter , Er ine, Schuma her, Mirjahangir NOES : None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None \ate P10 4/81 "� October 26, 1984 RCA - LUE 84-2/EIR 84-3 Page 2 Planning Commission Recommendation: 1 . Approve Environmental Impact Report No. 84-3 . 2. Approve the recommendation of the Planning Commission (as indicated in Attachment 1, Summary of Requests ) and adopt by resolution, Land Use Element Amendment No. 84-2. Staff Recommendations: The Department of Development Services' staff recommendations are shown in Attachment 1, Summary of Requests. ANALYSIS : The analysis for each item is contained in the Land Use Element Amendment/Environmental Impact Report document. On October 24, 1984, the applicant for Area 3 .3 submitted a letter requesting that the City Council not take action on his amendment and zone change request at this time. If the Council agrees to his request, this item should be removed from the amendment and referred back to the Planning Commission for their review and report. Environmental Status: Environmental documentation for the amendment requests may be found in the amendment report which also serves as Environmental Impact Report No. 84-3. The EIR was posted for a 30-day period ending October 12, 1984. Public comments and staff responses constitute the Final EIR and are incorporated in the appendix of the report. ALTERNATIVES : The City Council may adopt the requested changes as recommended by the Planning Commission, as recommended by the planning staff, they may modify them as desired, or may retain the existing designations in the Land Use Element. ATTACHMENTS: 1 . Summary of Requests 2 . Letter from Ken Moody dated October 24, 1984. 3 . Land Use Element Amendment 4. Resolution JWP:HS:ajh (1307d) ATTACHMENT 1 SUMMARY OF REQUESTS Item 2 .1 - Staff requests that a solid waste facility land use designation be created in order to satisfy recent State legislation regarding the siting of solid waste facilities . In siting a solid waste facility the law requires that local agencies make a finding of consistency with the general plan. In order for this to occur, the local jurisdiction must identify the facility on the land use diagram of the land use element based on findings of compatibility with surrounding uses . Staff recommends that policy language be created establishing this new designation and that such facilities meet the following location criteria of being located within or predominantly surrounded by industrial and/or public/quasi-public utility areas , and be in close proximity to designated truck routes. Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval Staff Recommendation: Approval Item 2.2 - Staff requests that policy language be added to the Land Use Element to meet the requirement of State law which provides that local general plans be consistent with county airport environs land use plans . Staff recommends that the following policy language be added to the Land Use Element: "Any project which requires a notice of proposed construction of alteration by the FAA, under FAR part 77 , shall submit a copy of the FAA application to the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) , and provide the City with the FAA and ALUC responses . If the ALUC requests review of the project, then the project shall be submitted to the Commission. Notice of any ALUC determination of inconsistency, with the Commission' s Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) , must be given to the City within 60 calendar days from the date of referral of the application to the ALUC, and shall be considered before the City takes any action on the project. If the Commission fails to give such notice of inconsistency within that period, the proposed project shall be deemed consistent with the AELUP. " Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval Staff Recommendation: Approval 3 (1309d) �� ` Q ATTACHMENT 1 Page 2 Area 3.1 - The City-initiated request is to redesignate 4 .65 acres located west of Nichols Street and approximately 1,000 feet south of Warner Avenue from General Industrial to Solid Waste Facility. Staff recommends approval of the request. Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval Staff Recommendation: Approval Area 3 .2 - The applicant' s request is to redesignate 10.4 acres located west of Magnolia Street and approximately 450 feet north of Warner Avenue from General Commercial to Mixed Development. Staff recommends that the applicant' s request be denied, and that the site retain the General Commercial designation. Zone Change No. 84-10 was submitted by the applicant to be processed concurrently with this land use amendment request. Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval Staff Recommendation: Denial Area 3 .3 - The applicant' s request is to redesignate 3 .0 acres located east of Bolsa Chica Street and south of Pearce Street from Medium Density Residential to General Commercial. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the applicant' s request to General Commercial. Zone Change No . 84-9 was submitted by the applicant to be processed concurrently with this land use amendment request. On October 24, 1984, the applicant submitted a letter requesting that this item be removed from the amendment. The Council may wish to send this item and the Zone Change back to the Planning Commission to see if they would change their recommendation based on the applicant' s request. Planning Commission Recommendation: Approval Staff Recommendation: Approval HS:ajh (1309d) 1 ttington beach development services department 5TA F f -REPORT 10: Planning Commission FROM: Development Services DATE: October 16 , 1964 SUBJECT : LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT NO. 84-2 , ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 64-3 1 .0 SUGGESTED ACTION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: 1 . Approve Environmental Impact Report No. 84-3 ; 2 . Adopt by resolution Land Use Element Amendment No . 64-2 with the staff recommendations outlined in Section 2 .0 of this i report. 2 .0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Transmitted for public hearing are Land Use Element Amendment No . 84-2 and Environmental Impact Report No . 84-3 . The amendment addresses two administrative items as requested by the City, and three proposed changes to the General Plan Land Use Liagram as requested by the City and private property owners . The amendment consists of the following recommended changes: Item 2 . 1 - Staff requests that a solid waste facility land use designation be created in order to satisfy recent State legislation regarding the siting of solid waste facilities . In siting a solid waste facility the law requires that local agencies make a finding of consistency with the general plan. In order for this to occur, the local jurisdiction must identify the facility on the land use diagram of the land use element based on findings of compatibility with surrounding uses . Staff recommends that policy language be created establishing this new designation and that such facilities meet the following location criteria of being located within or predominantly surrounded by industrial and/or public/quasi-public utility areas, and be in close proximity to designated truck routes . A-FM-238 �-Ia=' a'' � s Item 2 .2 - Staff requests that policy language be added to the Land Use Element to meet the requirement of State law which provides that local general Flans be consistent with county airport environs land use plans . Staff recommends that the following policy language be added to the Land Use Element: "Any project which requires a notice of proposed construction of alteration by the FAA, under FAR part 77, shall submit a copy of the FAA application to the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) , and provide the City with the FAA and ALUC responses . If the ALUC requests review of the project, then the project shall be submitted to the Commission. Notice of any ALUC determination of inconsistency, with the Commission' s Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) , must be given to the City within 60 calendar days from the date of referral of the application to the ALUC, and shall be considered before the City takes any action on the project . If the Commission fails to give such notice of inconsistency within that period, the proposed project shall be deemed consistent with the ALLUP. " Area 3 .1 - The City-initiated request is to redesignate 4 .65 acres located west of Nichols Street and approximately 1, 000 feet south of Warner Avenue from General Industrial to tM*N Solid Waste Facility. Staff recommends approval of the request . Area 3 .2 - The applicant' s request is to redesignate 10 .4 acres located west of Magnolia Street and approximately 450 feet north of Warner Avenue from General Commercial to Mixed Development. Staff recommends that the applicant' s request be denied, and that the site retain the General Commercial designation. Zone Change No. 84-10 was submitted by the applicant to be processed concurrently with this land use amendment request . Area 3 .3 - The applicant' s request is to redesignate 3 .0 acres located east of Bolsa Chica Street and south of Pearce Street from Medium Density Residential to General Commercial Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the applicant' s request to General Commercial . Zone Change No . 84-9 was submitted by the applicant to be processed concurrently with this land use amendment request. 3 .0 ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS : Land Use Element Amendment No. 84-2 was prepared in conjunction with Environmental Impact Report No. 84-3 . EIR 84-3 was posted for a 45-day review period which ended on October 12 , 1984 . Written comments and responses are contained in the LUE/EIR report. TTL v r (1246d) -2- Staff Report 10-16-84 �. ATTACHMENTS : 1 . LUE 84-2/EIR 84-3 (same document) 2 . Resolution No . adopting LUE 84-2 3 . Letter from Lindborg-Dahl Investors , Inc . JWP: CC:aj TJ (1246d) -3- Staff Report 10-16-84 RESOLUTION NO. 1333 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA, RECCMMENDING ADOPTION OF LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT TO THE GENERAL PLAN NO. 84-2 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 amendment to the Land Use Element: 1 . That a Solid Waste Facility land use category be created and incorporated into the Land Use Element ; it is intended that solid waste facilities be located within or predominantly surrounded by industrial and/or public/quasi-public utility areas, and be in close proximity to designated truck routes ; 2 . That the following policy language be added to the Land Use Element regarding consistency with the County Airport Environs Land Use Plan: "Any- project which requires a notice of proposed construction or alteration by the FAA, under FAR part 77 , shall submit a copy of the FAA application to the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) , and provide the City with the FAA and ALUC responses . If the ALUC requests review of the project, then the project shall be submitted to the Commission. Notice of any ALUC determination of inconsistency, with the Commission' s Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) , must be given to the City within 60 calendar days from the date of referral of the application to the ALUC, and shall be considered before the City takes any action on the project. If the Commission fails to give such notice of inconsistency within that period, the proposed. project shall be deemed consistent with the AELUP ; " 3 . That 4 .65 acres located west of Nichols Street and 1,000 feet south of Warner Avenue be redesignated from General Industrial to Solid Waste Facility; 4. That 3 .0 acres located at the southeast corner of Pearce Street and Bolsa Chica Street be redesignated from Medium Density Residential to General Commercial . (1255d) -D _ 10% _,� ► WHEREAS , A PUBLIC HEARING ON ADOPTION OF Land Use Element I Amendment to the General Plan No . 84-2 was held by the City Planning Commission on October 16, 1984 , 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 amendment 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 sixteenth day of October , 1984, by the following roll call vote : AYES : NOES : ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: James W. Palin, Secretary Marcus M. Porter, Chairman Q (1255d) � �� r''' 111V �cr h1c. HUNTINGTON BEACH DEVELOPMENT SERVICES October 3, 1984 Mr. Jim Palin OCT U City of Huntington Beach P.O. Box 190 P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA. 92648 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Re: Magnolia Warner General Plan #84-2 The purpose of this letter is to examine the reasons we feel that the property subject to the above referenced General Plan amendment request is not suitable for office development in either the short or long term. Originally we requested the zone change to commercial in the belief that freeway visability would offset any problems caused by the limited access and practically non-existent street visability to the property. However, during the development negotiations it became clear that the neighborhood would strongly resist an office complex high enough to establish strong freeway visability. We nevertheless proceeded with our working drawings and pre-marketing efforts in an effort to obtain sufficient pre-leasing to begin construction. Admittedly this was during the worst of the last recession, however we did meet with real tenants who eventualy leased somewhere and the property did not generate significant interest. Regardless of economic timing , this site will remain of marginal commercial value unless a high rise building is approved there. Even with planning staff approval, our history with the residential neighborhood indicates that an active opposition would be faced with an excellent chance of either outright denial or the imposition of conditions denying the economic viability of the development. Normally the amount of money invested by a developer in a proposed development is not a material factor in your determination as to the worthiness of a proposed development. However in this instance, the information is revelant in order to show the commercial unsuitability of the property for a commercial development. After we invested over $250,000 in ,non-refundable option money, plans, and pre-sales efforts, we walked from the property turning our plans and approvals over to the property owner. The Shimohara Family marketed the property for three years and to my knowledge received no offers based on a commercial use, thus their attempt one year ago for Senior Citizen Housing. ,I P.O. BOX 9029 9 17220 NEWHOPE STREET, SUITE 226 • FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708• (714)641-9944 We respectfully suggest that the property is either a marginal mid-rise site or an excellent apartment location if the impact on the single family residences to the West can be mitigated. To provide this mitigation, we are suggesting the use of passive storage to act as a buffer and everybody seems to like the idea (neighboring businesses and residents) , except the planning department. The proposed mixed use development has the support of the local residents and provides the least traffic impact of all offered development alternatives except non-development. We respectfully suggest approval of the requested General Plan Amendment. Sincerely, DAVID D. DAHL President DDD/blz cc: Charles Thompson City Administrator �V A z� ,�, m'1 Publish October 25, 1984 LAND USE ELEMENT 84-2 - EIR 84-3 ZONE CASE 84-9/ZONE CASE 84-10 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 5th of November , 1984 , for the purpose of considering a proposed amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan (LUE 84-2) . Environmental Impact Report 84-3, Zone Case 84-9 and Zone Case 84-10 which includes the following items: Area 2 .1 - Create a Solid Waste Facility land use category. Area 2 .2 - Add policy language to the Land Use Element establishing consistency with the Orange County Airport Environmental Land Use Plan. Area 3 . 1 - Redesignate 4 . 65 acres located west of Nichols Street and approximately 1,000 feet south of Warner Avenue from General Industrial to Solid Waste Facility. Area 3 .2 - Redesignate 10 .4 acres located west of Magnolia Street and approximately 450 feet north of Warner Avenue from General Commercial to Mixed Development. Zone Case No. 84-10 would redesignate the same property from (Q) R5 (Qualified Office Professional District) to R3 (Medium-High Density Residential District) and M1-A (Restricted Manufacturing District) . -Lv Vp Area 3 .3 - Redesignate 3 . 0 acres located south of Pearce Street and east of Bolsa Chica Street from Medium Density Residential to General Commercial. Zone Case No. 84-9 would redesignate the same property from R2 (Medium Density Residential District) to C4 (Highway Commercial District) . All interested persons are invited to attend said hearing and express their opinions for or against Land Use Element 84-2/EIR 84-3 and Zone Case 84-9/Zone Case 84-10 Further information may be obtained from the Office of the City Clerk, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, california 92648 - (714) 536-5227. DATED: October 19, 1984 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH By: Alicia M. Wentworth City Clerk -- INTHR Superior Court OFTHE c4e zl� 8 STATE OF CALIFORNIA In and for the County of Orange /74Z CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING PROOF OF PUBLICATION Public Hearing LUE 84-2 l ND uS LefoeM State of Galifornia ) County of Orange ) s 24NQ Cst1CSe -9/2pr+P CATS S'Y�o "'WAL NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Rita J. Richter NOTICE ISHF.RKHY GIVEN that 9 public hearing will be held by the City That I am and at all times herein mentioned was a citizen of Morning Commission of the City of the United States,over the age of twenty-one years,and that I Huntingu,n Beach, California, for the ed am not a art to,nor interested in the above entitled matter; purpose d he I-Arin a emtpotof party amendment to the Land Use Element of that I Am the principal clerk of the printer of the the General Plan(LUE.84.2).Envtron- mental linrpActl Re 3 7one G1Mag► a - 94 9,and 7 ne�•to,which in• Huntington Beach Ind. Review clude the(Nlowing items: 2.1_y.I Create a Solid Waste Facility land a newspaper of general circulation,published in the City of 0 `s(/ Acid i -.� Policy language to the Land Use FJemeat eetabligh1ng conaiatency with the Orange County Airport Envi• Huntindton Beach rona Land Ura Plan. 3,1,g■ 0.. Redr i p.note 4 M acres located County of Orange and which newspaper is published for the went of Nichols Street and aprrm>ci- r- metely 1A00 feel south of Werner c,tsemination of local news and intelligence of a general ch;trac- Avenue from Oeneral Industrial to ter, and which newspaper at till times herein mentioned had Solid want..F'acttit . and still has a bona fide subscription list of paying subscribers, __ a'Redesignate scree toasted Wert of Magnolia Street and opprou. and which newspaper has been established, printed and pub- Matti r 450 feet north,of Warner Ave- lished at regular intervals in the said County of Orange for a nut from General Commercial to period exceeding one year; that the notice, of which the Mired Devel,gx ant 7xme Change No.84.10 would redesignate the same annexed is a printed copy, has been published in the regular property Irom (Q) RS(qualified Of. and entire issue of said newspaper,and not in any supplement (ics Professional District) to R3 (.-Medium Huth Density Residential thereof,on the fullowing dates,to wit: District)and MI-A(Restricted Wriu. factoring District). 3,3 A Redesignate 3.0 scree located south of Pearce Street And out of Boles Chico Street frgo Medium Density October 41 1984 Petition" to General Commercial Zone Change No 84.9 remild rodeo note the *ems property horn R2 (Medium Denapr Meldentief Dis- trict) to C4 (Highway Commercial Distrit). Raid healing will be hold at the hour of 7:00 p.m. oa Tuesday, October III, 1984.In the Council Chambers Building I certify (nr declare) under penalty of;perjury that the forego- of the Civic Center 2000 Main Street, in is true and correct. Huntington Beach,Ulfornie.All inter- g etted peruvta are Invited to attend said hearing and eaprom their opintent for or Dated at..................G.a rd en.G r0 Y.e. agalrw the propped General Plan — \ Amendment,Environments)Impact Re. Pert, and Zane Change«, Further infnr- 4t h O c t o b e l34 motion may he obtained from the City Ca fornia,this .,l.....day of ..........r9... ... De artment of Dever.�pm..nt Servites. Te phone No.(714)fi38 b2Ti. j etsd this 4lh dayof October.19U. -� -- ..ti.�Rita J. Richter C1TY PLANNING COMMISSION ,c I IUNTINGTON BEACH By JamesPdln / Secretary QU Signature Pub Oct./,1984W DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Hunt,Beach Ind.Rev.036WA OCT 0 '-Q1 f P.O. 60X 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 • Publish October 25, 1984 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CODE AMENDMENT NO 83-15 MOBILEHOMES/MANUFACTURED HOMES 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 5th day of November 1984 for the purpose of considering Code Amendment No. 83-15, a proposal to allow mobilehomes/manufactured homes on lots zoned Rl , Low Density Residential District. Negative Declaration No. 83-17 will also be considered. All interested persons are invited to attend said hearing and express their opinions for or against said Code Amendment No. 83-15. Further information may be obtained from the Office of the City Clerk, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California. 92648 - (714) 536-5227 DATED October 11 , 1984 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH By: Alicia M. Wentworth City Clerk �b NOTICE OTIW OF PU IC HEARING _ NOTICE . a a p is Baring will be held by the City of the City �f Hunt ' to Beach, California, for the purpose of considering 6k, � J�Zp2.r--<� Said hearing . ill be held at the hour of P.M. , on �.�. • �. Cd in the Council Chambers Building of the Civic Center, 2000 Main\"r' eet, untington Beach, California. All interested p invited to attend said hearing and express their opinions inst the proposed Further information may be tained from the City Planning Department. Telephone No. (714) 536-527 DATED this day of CITY P NNING COMMISSION �`'✓ By 1� • �/' t r F Publish October 25, 1984 LAND USE ELEMENT 84-2 - EIR 84-3 ZONE CASE 84-9/ZONE CASE 84-10 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 5th of November , 1984 , for the purpose of considering a proposed amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan (LUE 84-2) . Environmental Impact Report 84-3, Zone Case 84-9 and Zone Case 84-10 which includes the following items: Area 2 . 1 - Create a Solid Waste Facility land use category. Area 2 . 2 - Add policy language to the Land Use Element establishing consistency with the Orange County Airport Environmental Land Use Plan. Area 3 . 1 - Redesignate 4 . 65 acres located west of Nichols Street and approximately 1,000 feet south of Warner Avenue from General Industrial to Solid Waste Facility. Area 3 .2 - Redesignate 10 .4 acres located west of Magnolia Street and approximately 450 feet north of Warner Avenue from General Commercial to Mixed Development. Zone Case No. 84-10 would redesignate the same property from (Q) R5 (Qualified Office Professional District) to R3 (Medium-High Density Residential District) and Ml-A (Restricted Manufacturing District) . The Planning Commission at its October 16, 1984 public hearing recommended that a "Q" be added to the proposed MI-A and R3 Zoning to include future conditions on development of the site to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses . (OVER) • Area 3 .3 - Redesignate 3 .0 acres located south of Pearce Street and east of Bolsa Chica Street from Medium Density Residential to General Commercial. Zone Case No. 84-9 would redesignate the same property from R2 (Medium Density Residential District) to C4 (Highway Commercial District) . The Planning Commission at the October 16, 1984 meeting recommended that a "Q" be placed on the proposed C4 zoning to include future conditions on development of the site to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses. All interested persons are invited to attend said hearing and express their opinions for or against Land Use Element 84-2/EIR 84-3 and Zone Case 84-9/Zone Case 84-10 Further information may be obtained from the Office of the City Clerk, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648 - (714 ) 536-5227. DATED: October 24, 1984 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH By: Alicia M. Wentworth City Clerk HUNTIN N BEACH + DE`! LOPM� SERVICES OCT 2` + Publish October 25, 1984 P.O. Box 190 Huntind',on Beach, CA 9264,�' LAND USE ELEMENT 84-2 - EIR 84-3 ZONE CASE 84-9/ZONE CASE 84-10 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 5th of November, 1984, for the purpose of considering a proposed amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan (LUE 84-2) . Environmental Impact Report 84-3, Zone Case 84-9 and Zone Case 84-10 which includes the following items: Area 2 .1 - Create a Solid Waste Facility land use category. Area 2 .2 - Add policy language to the Land Use Element establishing consistency with the Orange County Airport Environmental Land Use Plan. Area 3 .1 - Redesignate 4 . 65 acres located west of Nichols Street and approximately 1,000 feet south of Warner Avenue from General Industrial to Solid Waste Facility. Area 3 .2 - Redesignate 10 .4 acres located west of Magnolia Street and approximately 450 feet north of Warner Avenue from General Commercial to Mixed Development. Zone Case No. 84-10 would redesignate the same property from (Q) R5 (Qualified Office Professional District) to R3 (Medium-High Density Residential District) ands Ml-A �Restr icted Manufacturing/ / District) . `/!tie 16 pmi-4 /�oih lac �Qa�:a� r�cJa'��,,,.oq d�J 4t�- �..oi. �C �J4 �� / .9 ✓PC `:lei 'Cps>I i`rya f-1z"I jc��'�, oyd O J�^^'fQ/a/J C.CLa L o� �yQ Ji�o '�J CW.♦�.�'� G�p,('t TAJi 1�, ,,.,,}� J • Area 3 .3 - Redesignate 3 . 0 acres located south of Pearce Street and east of Bolsa Chica Street from Medium Density Residential to General Commercial. Zone Case No. 84-9 would redesignate the same property from R2 (Medium Density Residential District) to C4 (Highway Commercial District) . 71= / Jg' i..c(u !L AfJv All interested persons are invited to attend said hearing and express their opinions for or against Land Use Element 84-2/EIR 84-3 and Zone Case 84-9/Zone Case 84-10 Further information may be obtained from the Office of the City Clerk , 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, california 92648 - (714) 536-5227. DATED: October 19, 1984 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH By: Alicia M. Wentworth I City Clerk 933-810-06 EPSTEIN. LESTER ALAN C4-007 4908 PEARCE ST HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 92714 933-810-07 CURLEY, ROBERT F 04-007 4912 PEARCE ST HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 92646 9 10-01 ERICKSON, ROBERT F 933-810-08 CHAPMAN, RONALD P 007 4892 PEARCE AVE 04-007 8192 PRESTWICK CIR HUNTINGTH BCH, CAL 92649 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92646 _ I .yJl • V 933-810-02 HERBOLD, ALBERT B TR 933-810-09 FELTY, GRACE 04-007 3993 ALAODIN OR 04-007 4918 PEARCE AVE HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 HUNTINGTN BCH, CAL 92649 933-810-03 NIELSEN, TERRY 933-810-10 PRUDEN. CLARENCE A JR 04-007 4898 PEARCE ST 04-007 4936 PEARCE ST HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 HUNTINGTN BCH, CAL 92649 � 933-810-04 REED. DIANE li 933-810-11 GARCIA. EOUARDO Y 07 4902 PEARCE ST 04-007 4938 PEARCE ST HUNTINGTH BCH, CAL 92649 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 i 933-810-05 MANNA, ALL£N 933-810-12 PLECHNER, CAROL A 04-007 4906 PEARCE AVE 04-007 4942 PEARCE ST HUNTINGTN BCH, CAL 92649 HUNTIIIGTN BCH, CAL 92649 Y 933-810-13 VALOV, KATE H 933-810-20 VISCETTO, EMILIE 933-810-27 YATES, VAUGHN WAYNE 04-007 KALPAKOFF, KAREN E 04-007 4976 PEARCE ST 04-007 4966 MARLIN OR 4946 PEARCE ST HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 HUNTINGTONI BEACH, CA 92649 HUNTINGTN BCH, CAL 92649 933-810-14 SAY, RANDALL S 933-810-21 MILLER, HOWARD H 933-810-28 CANNON, ELANE K • 04-017 17441 FLOWER LN 04-007 4978 PEARCE AVE 04-007 4968 MARLIN DR HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92647 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 933-810-1S ASHBY, TOM 933-810-22 STANTON, RICHARD E 933-810-29 RIVIERA HUNTINGTON 04-007 4952 PEARCE ST 04-007 4982 PEARCE ST 04-007 CONDOMINIUMS INC HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 %:JEST, JOHN T 5512 BRITTCN OR LONG LEACH, CA 90816 933-810-16 HUANG, GLORIA W 933-810-23 WARREN, GEORGE L 933-810-30 TONGBAI, PAIBUL 04-007 4440 IRONWOOD AVE 04-007 26C4 S BOROER 04-007 1905 N COLLEGE AVE SEAL BEACH, CA 90740 CORONA, CA 91720 SUITE D SANTA ANA, CA 92706 933-810-17 GOEKE, ROBERT F 933-810-24 THURMAN, DEBRA K 933-810-31 PHILLIPS. KATHLEEN E 04-007 1990 FEDERAL AVE 04-007 THURMAN, RALPH S O4-007 4978 MARLIN DR COSTA MESA, CA 92627 361 CANADA SOMBRE HUNTINGTN BCH, CAL 92649 • LA HABRA, CA 90631 933-810-18 ELLIS, KATHLEEN 0 933-810-25 DALSIMER, CHRISTOPHER T 933-810-32 NORTON, JUDY E 04-007 4968 PEARCE AVE 04-007 4992 PEARCE ST < 04-007 4982 MARLIN OR HUNTINGTN BCH, CAL 92649 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 HUNTIlIGTII BCH, CAL 92649 933-810-19 CUMMINGS. ALBERT F 3RO 933-810-26 PRICE, MARTIN DONALD 933-810-33 TULLIO, JAMES A 04-007 4972 PEARCE ST i 04-007 4962 MARLIN OR 926 04-007 49°6 MARLIN DR HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649; HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 HUNTINGTN BCII, CAL 92649 931-810-34 WILLIAMS, HENRY L 933-810-41 ERIKSSON, LARS 933-810-48 SHEDLOCK, ROBERT 04-007 4988 MARLIN OR 434 04-007 4965 BONITA OR 04-007 P 0 BOX 685 HUNTI14GTON BEACH, CA 92649 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 SUNSET BEACH, CA 90742 933-810-35 HERSH, DALE R 933-810-42 SHAVER, PAMELA 933-810-49 FURNISS, STEPHEN GRAHAM 04-007 4987 BONITA DR 04-007 4961 BONITO OR 04-007 PARKER, ANTHONY C HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 5762 SILVA ST • LAKEWOOD., CA 90713 933-810-36 TOWNSENO, ROBERT F 933-810-43 CARLEY, MARIE A 933-810-50 NISSEN. MAUREEN H 04-007 4981 BONITO OR 04-007 16301 SNAPPER LN 04-007 4964 BONITA OR HUNTINGTN BCH, CAL 92649 HUNTINGTN BCH, CAL 92649 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 933-810-37 ZAPTIFF, ELVERA 933-810-44 PRETTY, CHARLES W 933-810-51 GUERIN, PATRICIA C 04-007 1?819 CORBY AVE 04-007 1090 PAGE ST 21 04-007 4966 BONITO OR ARTESIA. CA 90701 SAN FRANCISCO. CA 94117 HUNTINGTN BCH, CAL 92649 933-810-38 HAMM, RICHARD A 933-810-45 LOPEZ, ADOLFO 933-810-SZ SCHREIBER* MAX S TR 04-007 21372 BROOKHURST ST 04-007 16811 SNAPPER LN 04-007 17161 GOLOEN:4EST ST #E SUITE 524 HUNTINGTN BCH, CAL 92649 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92647 HUNTINGTON BEACH. CA 92646 • 933-810-39 JAFFE, ANDRIENNE 933-810-46 SMITH, DOUGLAS 0 933-810-53 LITTLE , PATRICK J 04-007 4971 BONITO OR 04-007 16815 SNAPPER LN 04-007 4972 BONITO DR HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 HUNTINGTN BCH, CAL 92649 HUNTINGTNI BCH. CAL 92649 933-810-40 HAMU. KAINO J 933-810-47 WERNER, JAMES E JR 933-810-54 LANG, ROBERT P 04-007 25142 WANDERING LH 04-007 15792 WICKLOW LN 04-007 4976 BONITO OR EL TORO, CA 92630 HUNTINGTN BCH, CAL 92647 HUNTINGTN BCH, CAL 92649 933-810-SS VENTLING, CYNTHIA 933-810-62 RICHARDSON, PETER A 933-810-69 RIPHAGEN. GARY ET AL 04-007 4978 BONITO OR 04-007 4961 SHARK DR 04-007 RIPHAGEN, MERLE HUNTINGTON BEACH. CA 92649 HUNTINGTON BEACH. CA 92649 11445 E 178TH ST ARTESIA. CA 90701 933-810-56 STEWARY, KARL M 933-810-63 MOVSOVICH, LIBBY-ANN ET 933-810-70 PERKINS, EVELYN J 04-007 604 THAMES NAY 04-007 AL 04-007 16839 BREAM LN COSTA MESA, CA 92626 4957 SHARK DR HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 • HUNTINGTN BCH, CAL 92649 933-810-57 MOLLET, ROY LEE 933-610-64 BARRY, JOANNE M 933-810-71 KROPFLI, PETER K 04-007 203 2NO ST 04-007 4955 SHARK OR 04-007 16841 BREAM LN SEAL BEACH. CA 90740 HUNTINGTN BCH. CAL 92649 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 933-810-58 O'FARRELL, RUTH A 933-810-65 GETTLEMAN, STEVE M 933-810-72 ANTHONY, BARBARA L 04-007 3647 OVERLAND AVE 04-007 4951 SHARK OR 04-007 16843 BREAM LN LOS ANGELES, CA 90034 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 HUNTINGTN BCH, CAL 92649 933-810-59 HUBBARD, GEORGE W 933-810-66 HARGIS. RICHARD N 933-810-73 COX, RANDALL I 04-007 9678 CHENILLE AVE 04-007 4947 SHARK DR 04-007 16845 BREAM LN FOUNTAIN VLY, CAL 92708 HUNTINGTN BCH, CAL 92649 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 • 933-810-60 MOLLET, ROY L 933-810-67 ARMSTRONG, WILLIAM C 933-810-74 HAN, KNANG YOUNG 04-007 203 2NO ST 04-007 16827 BREAM LN 04-007 16847 BREAM LN SEAL BEACH, CA 90740 HUNTINGTN 8CH, CAL 92649 HUNTINGTO11 BEACH, CA 92649 e 933-810-61 PHILLIPS. KEITH 0 933-810-68 STONE, KENNETH W 933-810-75 HARLAN. BETTY L 04-007 4967 SHARK DR 04-007 16831 BREAM LN 04-007 491S SHARK DR HUNTINGTN BCH, CAL 92649 HUNTINGTN BCH, CAL 92649 HUNTINGT11 BCH, CAL 92649 933-810-76 WEST, JOHN T 933-610-83 SOBCZYK, R08ERT E 933-810-90 ARMSTRONG, GEORGE A 04-007 5512 E BRITTON OR 04-007 16832 BARRACUDA LN 04-007 9780 EMMONS CIR LONG BEACH, CAL 90815 HUNTINGTN BCH, CAL 92649 FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA 92708 933-810-77 STONE, RICK 933-810-84 MUKANOS, TIM 933-810-91 RIVIERA HUNTINGTON 04-007 4907 SHARK OR C4-007 16828 BARRACUDA LN 04-007 CGNOOMINIUMS INC • HUNTINGTON BEACH. CA 92649 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 %WEST, JOHN T 5512 BRITTON OR LONG BEACH, CA 90816 933-810-78 OROSZ, JACK E 933-810-85 SMITH, ROBERTA C 933-810-92 WHITE, MARVIN L. 04-007 4905 SHARK DR 04-007 16826 BARRACUDA LN 04-007 4896 SKIPJACK DR HUNTINGTON BEACH& CA 92649 HUNTINGTN BCH, CAL 92649 HUt;TIIIGTN BCH, CAL 92649 933-810-79 BYRNES, ROBERT C 933-810-86 SOGDIAN. SAMUEL 933-810-93 FITHIAN, ROBERT M 04-007 4901 SHARK DR 04-007 3892 SIRIUS OR 04-007 6582 RENNRICK CIR IIUNTIN3TN BCH, CAL 92649 HUNTINGTOY BEACH, CA 92649 HUNTrNGTO!4 BEACIJ, CA 92647 933-810-80 BALAZS, ALBIN 0 933-810-87 OE JARNETTE, RONTLE 933-810-94 KELLY, JANE L 04-007 4897 SHARK OR 04-007 16822 BARRACUDA LN 04-007 P 0 BOX 1087 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 HUNTINGTON BEACH. CA 92649 HUNTINGTOtJ BEACH, CA 92647 • 933-810-81 JASPER, HERMAN B 933-810-88 GODDARD, S WARREN 933-810-95 GILPIN, DON E 04-007 4895 SHARK DR 04-007 16818 BARRACUDA LN4 04-007 5703 LAKIA DR HUNTINGTN BCH, CAL 92649 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92649 CYPRESS, CAL 90630 933-810-82 BUCKSBAUM, SOL 933-810-89 BROUGH, ALAN J 933-810-96 WOJTASZEK, WALTER J 04-007 3834 MISTRAL OR 04-007 6332 ATHE14A DR 04-007 4908 SKIPJACK OR HUNTINGTN BCH, CAL 92649 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92647 HUt4TIIJGTJJ BCH, CAL 92649 14624113 14524115 Cl.SdO Nerlo Joel P. Oviatt 933-810-98 SALCM. FRANK A 04-007 961 SANOLEWOOD 9340 Bolsa Ave 4812 Hemmn_son Car. LA HABRA, CA Westminster, CA 92683 H.B. CA 92649 14624114 14624116 Jan Law Richard Quine 16811 Roosevelt Rd. 2200 Park Newport #401 H.B. CA 92649 Newport. Bch., CA 926W 14U4117 14624118 Irene Horton Hony Yen Hsu 933-810-97 BROKER, BRUCE 20821 Crestview La 120M B Centralia Ave 0 4—0 0 7 12 HUNTER H.B. CA 92646 Hawaiian Gardens, CA 90716 IRVINEs CA 14624105 14624106 Jewell Nation Jewell Nation 4802 Curtis Circle 4802 Canis Circle H.B. CA 92649 H.B. CA 92649 14624119 14624136 Henry Kunagai Hang Yen Hsu 19021 E. Canyon Drive 120M B Centralia Ave Orange, CA 92667 Hawaiian Gardens, CA 90716 14624120 146241 Hong Yen Hsu Carl Wieland 120D B Centralia Ave 16771 Roosevelt Rd. Hawaiian dens, CA H.B. CA 92649 14624150 14624151 Satinder Sueroop Satinder Swaroop 5 Rue C1 ateau Royal 5 Rue Chateau Royal. Newport Beach, CA 92660' Newport Beach, CA 92660 I 14624154 i 14623341 ACD Develpmnt Co. Chester Drahos 540 Golden Cir. Dr. #300 16701 Roosevelt Lane Santa Ana, CA 92705 i H.B. CA 92649 14623342 14623343 Barnet Cohen I Eugene Carrothers 16721 Roosevelt Ln. 1 5091 Pearce St. H.B. CA 92649 H.B. CA 92649 1462344 14623345 Werner Puttner Harold Jackson 5081 Pearce 5071 Pearce H.B. CA 92649 H.B. CA 92649 14623346 14623347 IAbyne Springer Frank Marshott 5061 Pearce 8732 Westminster Ave # 4 H.B. CA 92649 Westin. CA 92683 • 14623348 14623349 -- Elliott Rumble Donald Dodd 5031 Pearce 5021 Pearce H.B. CA 92649 - H.B. CA 92649 178=1 14623350 'Thomas Tuttle John Tattam P.O. Box 3445 5011 Pearce Tednal Island, CA 90731 H.B. CA 92649 17822212 17822213 Leon flledjian City of H.B. 6802 Kings Harbour P.O. Box 190 Rancho Palos Verdes H.B. CA 92648 CA 90274 17822214 17822215 Perfecto Apodaca Mary Oberhaus 3617 E. Broadway 9772 Verde Mar Dr. Lang Beach, CA 908M H.B. CA 92646 17822216 1782334 Gilbert MkLImeister Fukuji Hiroshiim 17164 Edgewater 16851 Balsa Chica H.B. CA 92649 H.B. CA 92649 ;,"je CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH P.O. BOX 190 CALIFORNIA 92648 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES BUILDING DIVISION(714)536-5241 PLANNING DIVISION 1714)536-5271 Dear Property Owner : The Department of Development Services has received a request to amend the Land Use Element of the City' s General Plan and a zone change for the area outlined on the attached map. The applicant has requested that 3 .0 acres located south of Pearce Street and east of Bolsa Chica Street be redesignated from Medium Density Residential to General Commercial . Zone Change No . 84-9 would redesignate the same property from R2 (Medium Density Residential District) to C4 (Highway Commercial District) . A public hearing will be held on Land Use Element Amendment No. 84-2, Zone Change No . 84-9, and the accompanying Environmental Impact Report No . 84.3 on Monday, November 5 , 1984, before the City Council at which time you may address the Council and state your position concerning the proposed amendment, zone change, and environmental impact report. The hearing will take place in the Civic Center Council Chambers at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California at 7:30 p.m. Please contact Hal Simmons of my staff at (714) 536-5271, if you have any questions regarding the amendment or EIR. Sincerely, 6/ames W. Palin Director of Development Services JWP:HS:ajh (1294d) EDINaER AVE. iL • Tom'= I .� M NRICK SEN DR R, •UDPCr S L777 � F I 17 ' J I r i t j MCNGR M 0. E AVE L IUD4 CR I J IL I CF-E I 1 - I,►0 DR (.W RVL DR N Z Q J LITTLER SN --T Q W I i l i ; I CLeRK OR DR -� I .SED a_�'--`._IT C_Ip Lj CF-E TT--- 1 TT-7- -- I;I 4E cOciwL ell. DR 111 . 1 Legµ I DR >4 VAR CR H -_-• I I vENTURI OR .� •--S I 1 - i Z - I Z EI W ! o �j �_ L-- a W Z i G F _ t F` i MARSHALL I pR U 0L M.� 'J CeI iE NTE DR MIp LECpFE `a' DR I I I I Tr CR RNNiLL , M J 1 T, l D�v9 ' '- - 1�1 �.L, ' f I II � IT I I I IT CF- R �Tr� l� ;T•Lti�o, a f10N IVN ' D. I I I I I ReNIT MeP• <_N T CDONDS CR M �_... 1 Z z 1 GILDRED CR. 3 YC•o0. a O TRO"Y OR 4 Z �- CJ F�A ' 1 1 0 a I z 4•pT D m I .y .� _ VIE- CR - - Q. WARNFP AVE Existing General Plan Area of Concern 3 . 3 0 huntington beach planning division Publish October 25 , 1984 LAND USE ELEMENT 84-2 - EIR 84-3 ZONE CASE 84-9/ZONE CASE 84-10 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 5th of November , 1984 , for the purpose of considering a proposed amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan (LUE 84-2) . Environmental Impact Report 84-3, Zone Case 84-9 and Zone Case 84-10 which includes the following items: Area 2 . 1 - Create a Solid Waste Facility land use category. Area 2 . 2 - Add policy language to the Land Use Element establishing consistency with the Orange County Airport Environmental Land Use Plan. Area 3 . 1 - Redesignate 4 . 65 acres located west of Nichols Street and approximately 1,000 feet south of Warner Avenue from General Industrial to Solid Waste Facility. Area 3.2 - Redesignate 10 .4 acres located west of Magnolia Street and approximately 450 feet north of Warner Avenue from General Commercial to Mixed Development. Zone Case No. 84-10 would redesignate the same property from (Q) R5 (Qualified Office Professional District) to R3 (Medium-High Density Residential District) and Ml-A (Restricted Manufacturing District) . The Planning Commission at its October 16, 1984 public hearing recommended that a "Q" be added to the proposed M1-A and R3 Zoning to include future conditions on development of the site to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses. (OVER) Area 3 . 3 - Redesignate 3 . 0 acres located south of Pearce Street and east of Bolsa Chica Street from Medium Density Residential to General Commercial. Zone Case No. 84-9 would redesignate the same property from R2 (Medium Density Residential District) to C4 (Highway Commercial District) . The Planning Commission at the October 16, 1984 meeting recommended that a "Q" be placed on the proposed C4 zoning to include future conditions on development of the site to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses. All interested persons are invited to attend said hearing and express their opinions for or against Land Use Element 84-2/EIR 84-3 and Zone Case 84-9/Zone Case 84-10 Further information may be obtained from the Office of the City Clerk, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648 - (714) 536-5227. DATED: October 24, 1984 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH By: Alicia M. Wentworth City Clerk Publish October 25, 1984 LAND USE ELEMENT 84-2 - EIR 84-3 ZONE CASE 84-9/ZONE CASE 84-10 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 5th of November , 1984 , for the purpose of considering a proposed amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan (LUE 84-2) . Environmental Impact Report 84-3, Zone Case 84-9 and Zone Case 84-10 which includes the following items: Area 2 . 1 - Create a Solid Waste Facility land use category. Area 2 . 2 - Add policy language to the Land Use Element establishing consistency with the Orange County Airport Environmental Land Use Plan. Area 3 . 1 - Redesignate 4 . 65 acres located west of Nichols Street and approximately 1,000 feet south of Warner Avenue from General Industrial to Solid Waste Facility. Area 3 .2 - Redesignate 10 .4 acres located west of Magnolia Street and approximately 450 feet north of Warner Avenue from General Commercial to Mixed Development. Zone Case No. 84-10 would redesignate the same property from (Q) R5 (Qualified Office Professional District) to R3 (Medium-High Density Residential District) and MI-A (Restricted Manufacturing District) . The Planning Commission at its October 16, 1984 public hearing recommended that a "Q" be added to the proposed M1-A and R3 Zoning to include future conditions on development of the site to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses . (OVER) Area 3 . 3 - Redesignate 3 . 0 acres located south of Pearce Street and east of Bolsa Chica Street from Medium Density Residential to General Commercial. Zone Case No. 84-9 would redesignate the same property from R2 (Medium Density Residential District) to C4 (Highway Commercial District) . The Planning Commission at the October 16, 1984 meeting recommended that a "Q" be placed on the proposed C4 zoning to include future conditions on development of the site to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses. All interested persons are invited to attend said hearing and express their opinions for or against Land Use Element 84-2/EIR 84-3 and Zone Case 84-9/Zone Case 84-10 Further information may be obtained from the Office of the City Clerk , 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648 - (714) 536-5227. DATED: October 24, 1984 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH By: Alicia M. Wentworth City Clerk ' 107-812-22 lW7-812-32 107-812-42 TWINEM, WILLIAM YF.R, TERRY C IWARSH, AUGUST JOHN 879L DEREK CIR 8851 JARRETT CIR 8761 ANTHONY DR 11UNTTNTON BEACH CA 92647 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 9264; 107-812-23 107-812-33 107-812-43 GOZEK, JOHN LIAO, YEE LEHMAN, ANNA S 8782 DEREK CIR 8852 JARRETT CIR 8781 ANTHONY DR HUNTINTON BEACH CA 92647 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 9264; 107-812-24 107-812-34 107-812-44 MOREL, RICHARD BLUNDELL, ROBERT GORME, ERNEST A 8762 DEREK CIR 8842 JARRETT CIR 8791 ANTHONY DR HIINTINTON BEACH CA 92647 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 9264- i 1 107-812-25 107-812-35 107-812-45 MC FARLANE, JOHN ROSHAN, ARDESHIR APPLEBY, VICKIE LYNN 8761 JARRETT CIR 9602 PORT CLYDE DR 8801 ANTHONY DR HUNTIN ON BEACH CA 92647 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 HUNTINGTON BEACI•I CA 92641 107-812-26 107-812-36 107-812-46 BRUSS, HERMAN LOUROS, MIKE LIN, MARSHALL K 8781 JARRETT CIR 8822 JARRETT CIR 8821 ANTHONY DR HU%TINGTON BEACH CA 92647 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 HUiv'TING'i0N BEACH CA 9264; 107-812-27 107-812-37 107-812-47 KIM IiAK LANG, JOHN D KITTLAUS, GUENTER j 879.i JARRETT CIR 8802 JARRETT CIR 8831 ANTHONY DR HUNTINTON BEACH CA 92647 HUN-TINGTON BEACH, CA 92647 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 9264 w 107-812-28 107-812-3R 107-812-49 HAUG, GAYSON WOLF, GERALD L KLIPPEL, PHILIP 18341 GUM TREE LANE 8792 JARRETT CIR 17631 SAN RO(?UE LA HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92646 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 107-812-29 107-812-39 107-812-48 LANDERS, ROBERT DEPT OF VETS AFFAIRS OF STATI RUIZ, JORGE 5041 MC FADDEN AVE 8782 JARRETT CIR 8842 ANTHONY DR HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92647 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92b47 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 107-812-30 107-812-40 104-812-50 RODRIQUEZ, KAE ANN WALKUP, DALLAS MOSER, JUDITH E 8831 JARRETT CIR 8762 JARRETT CIR 8822 ANTHONY--DR HINTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 HUNTINTON BEACH CA 92647 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 107-812-31 107-812-41 107-812-51 CHA, SEUNG SUP LEE, MANION F SAATI ANDRE 8841 JARRETT CIR 16902 ROQUE LN 8802 ANTHONY DR HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 HUNTINTON BEACH CA 92647 ZGl4E:7 O -� 143-294-01 W7-652-10 WISIG, 7-812-04 HUISH. JOHN, M HOOL, OCEAN VIEW DIST ROBERT t. 168b0 MAGNOLIA AVE 17021 BEACH BLVD 5184 CALZADO FOUNTAIN VALLEY CA 92608 HUNTINGTONV BEACH CA 92647 LAGUNA BEACH CA 92653 143-301-31 107-811-01 107-812-05 HUISH, JAMES W BOOKER, CLAYTON E JR KRENZIN, RONALD j 9063 9ECREATION CIR 8851 CONNER DR 8802 CONNER DR FOUNTAIN VALLEY CA HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 91647 HUNTIftTON BEACH CA 92647 I 1 143-301-36 107-811-02 107-812-14 i TOMDAN ENTERPRISES INC SKANDS, JEROME A SEELEY, HAROLD 2575 W VEVERLY BLVD 11337 SNOWDROP DR 9512 HIGHTIDE DR LOS ANGELES CA 90057 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92646 1 107-231-07 107-811-03 107-812-15 TAMURA ENTERPRISES MATSEN, CHESTER C JR SMAGLIK, RAY 3102 WILSHIRE BLVD 8831 CONNER DR 8841 DEREK CIR LOS ANGELES CA 90010 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 91647 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 107-231-08 107-811-04 107- 812-16 ORANGE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL MILLER, JAY C ROGERS, DAN 0 10 9$ 8821 CONNER DR 8851 DEREK CIR Sq„1ta A.+P►� C A 011102- HUNTINGTON BEACII CA 92647 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 107-231-09 107-•811-05 107-812-17 UNION OIL CO OF CAL COTIEN, MARC BACON, GLEN PO BOX 7600 7212 SUNBREEZE DR 8852 DEREK CIR LOS ANGELES CA HUTINGTON BEACH CA 92674 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 107-231-10 w 107-811-06 107-812-18 BROWN, JOHN GREEN, IRVING EDWARDS, PAUL 2845 MESA VERDE DR E # 7 17530 SANTA DOMINGO CIR 8842 DEREK CIR COSTA MESA CA 92626 FOUNTAIN VALLEY CA HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 107-231-11 107-812-01 107-812-19 SCHOOL, OCEAN VIEW DIST ARMSTRONG, ED14ARD ANDREW GONZALES, JORGE ! 7972 WARNER AVE 8852 CONNER DR 8832 DEREK CIR HUNTINTON BEACH CA 92647 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 107-231-15 107-812-02 107-812-20 S & K GREENHOUSES INC KUPCHIK, RAYMOND GOLDSTROM, JOSE 16811 MAGNOLIA ST 8842 CONNER DR 8822 DEREK CIR HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 91646 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 107-231-16 107-812-03 107-812-21 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH CLARK, CHARLES L SENA, FRUTOZO PO BOX 190 8832 CONNER DR 8802 DEREK CUR HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 • ` Publish October 25, 1984 LAND USE ELEMENT 84-2 - EIR 84-3 ZONE CASE 84-9/ZONE CASE 84-10 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 5th of November , 1984 , for the purpose of considering a proposed amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan (LUE 84-2) . Environmental Impact Report 84-3, Zone Case 84-9 and Zone Case 84-10 which includes the following items: Area 2 . 1 - Create a Solid Waste Facility land use category. Area 2.2 - Add policy language to the Land Use Element establishing consistency with the Orange County Airport Environmental Land Use Plan. Area 3 . 1 - Redesignate 4 . 65 acres located west of Nichols Street and approximately 1,000 feet south of Warner Avenue from General Industrial to Solid Waste Facility. Area 3 .2 - Redesignate 10 .4 acres located west of Magnolia Street and approximately 450 feet north of Warner Avenue from General Commercial to Mixed Development. Zone Case No. 84-10 would redesignate the same property from (Q) R5 (Qualified Office Professional District) to R3 (Medium-High Density Residential District) and M1-A (Restricted Manufacturing District) . The Planning Commission at its October 16, 1984 public hearing recommended that a "Q" be added to the proposed M1-A and R3 Zoning to include future conditions on development of the site to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses . (OVER) Area 3 .3 - Redesignate 3 . 0 acres located south of Pearce Street and east of Bolsa Chica Street from Medium Density Residential to General Commercial. Zone Case No. 84-9 would redesignate the same property from R2 (Medium Density Residential District) to C4 (Highway Commercial District) . The Planning Commission at the October 16, 1984 meeting recommended that a "Q" be placed on the proposed C4 zoning to include future conditions on development of the site to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses. All interested persons are invited to attend said hearing and express their opinions for or against Land Use Element 84-2/EIR 84-3 and Zone Case 84-9/Zone Case 84-10 Further information may be obtained from the Office of the City Clerk, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648 - (714) 536-5227. DATED: October 24, 1984 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH By: Alicia M. Wentworth City Clerk CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH P.O. BOX 190 CALIFORNIA 92648 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES BUILDING DIVISION(714)536-5241 PLANNING DIVISION (714)536-5271 Dear Property Owner : The Department of Development Services has received a request to amend the Land Use Element of the City' s General Plan and a zone change for the area outlined on the attached map. The applicant has requested that 10.4 acres located west of Magnolia Street and approximately 450 feet north of Warner Avenue be redesignated from Ceneral Commercial to Mixed Development. Zone Change No . 84-10 would redesignate the same property from (Q)R5 (Qualified Office Professional District) to R3 (Medium High Density Residential District) and N,1-A (Restricted Manufacturing District ) . The Planning Commission, at its public hearing on October 16 , 1984, recommended that a "Q" be placed on the N,1-A and R3 zoning to include conditions of development . A public hearing will be held on Land Use Element Amendment No . 84-2 , Zone Change No . 84-10, and the accompanying Environmental Impact Report No. 84-3 on Monday, November 5 , 1984, before the City Council at which time you n,ay address the Council and state your position concerning the proposed amendment, zone change , and environmental impact report. The hearing will take place in the Civic Center Council Chambers at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California at 7 :30 p.m. Please contact Hal Simmons of my staff at (714) 536-5271 , if you have any questions regarding the amendment, EIR or conditions on the proposed (Q)M1-A and (Q)R3 zoning . Sincerely, ()James W. Palin Director of Development Services WP: HIS:a jh (1293d) i C R . i,A,T )pjr,S C p zJ % CR - wA",FH7 .R SAVOY C 1 11 A� PI VII LI 11111 T Vi(,w 11,-irk DR rr IWIREP C14 CF- E D 0 V) CR 'FEPG SON CR `A I" E P�FERGUSON IGU SON C"' ROYAL DR. CR CAMEL CFR C, j ON It ! - -T. SALE Iy T�1 ' , , I F-Irf v. Ur) GI-:NFW\1, AL. (K Fril CH L) J.!I?PF T I C CR "Jr i �3 1 of Ui C GEN F:RA r., () ui Aij TM)i4y of COMFRCIA1, PUY 7 Eli 0 U) co 0 m AL ID -- L- - t- A FOUNTAIN OF F y Ul N, 140 Av i T- V,r Existing General Plan Area of Concern 3 . 2 huntington beach planning division I � I I ' 'R I • I • I I � ' I I I i I 111-023-02 , 03 , 04 ; 111-023-05 ,06 , 07,08, 12 , 13 ' 111-023-16 Alevy, Allen E. I Hansen, Jorgen D. i Mermelstein, Melvin 6665 Long Beach Blvd. i 554 Stewart Canyon Rd. I P• 0. Box 2300 Long Beach, CA 90805 I Fallbrook , CA 92028 ; Huntington Bch. , _ CA 926Z I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ I - - - - • - - - - - - - - - - I I 111-023-18 , 19 I 111-360-03 1111-360-06 Anderson, William E. Bekins Van & Storage Co. James Lumber Co. 17066 Palmdale Street I 910 Grand Central Ave. I P. 0. Box 1188 Huntington Bch. , CA 92741 Glendale, CA 91201 i Huntington Bch. , CA 926-- I 1 - - - -- - - - - - - - - -I - - - - - - - _ I - - - - - - - - 111-360-08 i 111-360-11, 12 ; 111-360-13 , 14 Nichols, Zexie M. I Hohnstein, Phil Hepprich, Joerg 14581 Harper Street ' P. 0. Box 1026 10478 Sioux River Midway City, CA 92655 ; Huntington Bch. , CA 92647 Fountain Valley, CA 927; I ' , 111-360-15 i 111-360-16 111-372-07 Longley, William F. Royden Ice Co. Furuta, Raymond H. 7502 Warner Avenue ; 5337 Bellaire Avenue I 17102 S. Nichols St. Huntington Bch. , CA 92647 1 No. Hollywood, CA 91607 Huntington Bch. , CA 926- 111-372-08,09 , 10 , 11 111-372-12 , 13 , 14 Ocean View School Dist. I School, Ocean View Dist. 16940 B Street 1 7972 Warner Avenue I Huntington Bch. , CA 92647 Huntington Bch. , CA 92647 I I ------------------ ----- -----------------------L---------------------- I , - I I I , • I I I I I I I I I � I I , I � I I � I I I I I - I I I I I I I I I I I i 1 i I I I I I I I - - - - - - -I - - - - - -- - - ------ ------- -- --------- ------------ I I � I ' CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH P.O. BOX 190 CALIFORNIA 92648 DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES BUILDING DIVISION 1714)536-5241 PLANNING DIVISION 1714)536.5271 Dear Property Owner: The Department of Development Services has received a request to amend the Land Use Element of the City' s General Plan for the area outlined on the attached map. The applicant has requested that 4.65 acres located west of Nichols Street and approximately 1,000 feet south of Warner Avenue be redesignated from General Industrial to Solid Waste Facility. A public hearing will be held on Land Use Element Amendment No. 84-2 and the accompanying Environmental Impact Report No. 84.3 on Monday, November 5, 1984, before the City Council at which time you may address the Council and state your position concerning the proposed amendment and environmental impact report. The hearing will take place in the Civic Center Council Chambers at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California at 7 :30 p.m. Please contact Hal Simmons of my staff at (714) 536-5271 , if you have any questions regarding the amendment or EIR. Sincerely, ames W. Palin Director of Development Services JWP:HS:ajh (1292d) r . WARN AVE I -1 -- - - FIR DR. CAW iVE -- CF-R WINTERSBUKG - . . m HIGH ! - EOAR wt --- SCHOOL - TTT DR f:•: F.-A ':.-.. -) NgIELI OR IogIN 1 _ I,hI; I - .. NERAL � = - -` _ I USTRIAL - J `- E _. CF C - IOR D _ - 0 / _ i.. .�. Y... S T D N1 I L El �Ti�T ITr II�11 I -- - - r - - 5 EER I ' j x.wlns c+ R E C R E A T l O N f CF-R ru_E i NEWMAN l, - I I W ftt .:y RONaLO R I L `- O ♦ ` J Q � I i� I Z 19 I jj �AwI0 r4� . m I ' - TALBERT AVE Existing General Plan Area of Concern 3 . 1 0 huntington beach planning division Publish October 25, 1984 LAND USE ELEMENT 84-2 - EIR 84-3 ZONE CASE 84-9/ZONE CASE 84-10 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 5th of November , 1984 , for the purpose of considering a proposed amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan (LUE 84-2) . Environmental Impact Report 84-3, Zone Case 84-9 and Zone Case 84-10 which includes the following items: Area 2 . 1 - Create a Solid Waste Facility land use category. Area 2. 2 - Add policy language to the Land Use Element establishing consistency with the Orange County Airport Environmental Land Use Plan. Area 3 . 1 - Redesignate 4 . 65 acres located west of Nichols Street and approximately 1,000 feet south of Warner Avenue from General Industrial to Solid Waste Facility. Area 3 .2 - Redesignate 10 .4 acres located west of Magnolia Street and approximately 450 feet north of Warner Avenue from General Commercial to Mixed Development. Zone Case No. 84-10 would redesignate the same property from (Q) R5 (Qualified Office Professional District) to R3 (Medium-High Density Residential District) and Ml-A (Restricted Manufacturing District) . The Planning Commission at its October 16, 1984 public hearing recommended that a "Q" be added to the proposed M1-A and R3 Zoning to include future conditions on development of the site to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses. (OVER) Area 3 . 3 - Redesignate 3 . 0 acres located south of Pearce Street and east of Bolsa Chica Street from Medium Density Residential to General Commercial. Zone Case No. 84-9 would redesignate the same property from R2 (Medium Density Residential District) to C4 (Highway Commercial District) . The Planning Commission at the October 16, 1984 meeting recommended that a "Q" be placed on the proposed C4 zoning to include future conditions on development of the site to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses. All interested persons are invited to attend said hearing and express their opinions for or against Land Use Element 84-2/EIR 84-3 and Zone Case 84-9/Zone Case 84-10 Further information may be obtained from the Office of the City Clerk, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648 - (714) 536-5227. DATED: October 24, 1984 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH By: Alicia M. Wentworth City Clerk =-=INTHR- ?Ie_----_ ! 6 {Lr1's Superior Court Ct f �- C��nc� � tMee�i OF THE (J STATE OF CALIFORNIA In and for the County of Orange 7 4XZ CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, PLANNING PROOF OF PUBLICATION Public Hearing LUE 84-2 JA0.0 use Lee, Fa State of California ) '�p ae �e —9/Za,rQ 15A� County of Orange )ss- _ "MAI,NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Rita J.. Richter NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public,hearing will be held by the City That I am and at all times herein mentioned was a citizen of. Planning Commission of the City of the United States,over the age of twenty-one years,and that I Huntington Beach, California, for the purpose of considering� a proposed am not a party to,nor interested in the above entitled matter; amendment to the Land Use Element of that I am the principal clerk of the printer of the the General Plan(LUE 84-2).Environ- mental Imppae Rect 3,Zone Chexge. (A a4 84-9,and 7nne t 4-10,which in- cludethe(oilowigg items Huntington Beach Ind—Review Z 1-- . 41Create.alid Waste Facility land a newspaper of general circulation,published in the City of us0.-Adory. g P Y �—y.+� Add policy Itingue�e,to the Lend Use Element establishing consistency with the Orange County Airport.Envi- Huntington Beach 31 mns land Use Plan. �.'�P '# Redesi p•hate 4.65 acres located County of Orange and which newspaper is published for the west of Nichols Street and approxi- disetnination of local news and intelligence of a general charac- mately IJ100 feet south of Warner ter, and which newspaper at all tunes herein mentioned had Avenue from General Industrial toSolid waste Facility. and still has a bona fide subscription list if paying subscribers, —d0 Redesignate 10.4 acres located and which newspaper has been established, printed and ub- west of. olio Street and approxi- I p matelyy 4511 eet'north of Warner Ave- lished at regular intervals in the said County of Orange for a nue from General Commercial to period exceeding one year, that the notice, of which the 'Mixed Development. Zone Change annexed is a printed copy, has been published in the re No.84-10 would redesignate the samed=ular property from (Q) R5(Qualified Of- and ont.ire issue of said newspaper,and not in any supplement (D(ice Professional District) to R3 al thereof,on the following dates,to wit: Dietnct)and MI - factoring District). 3^3 Ah Redesignate 3.0 acree located south of Pearce Street and east of Boles Chica October 4, 1984 Residential Street from Medium Density eeidentlal to General Commercial. Zone Change Nq 84-9 would red.'g- nate the same proppeertyy from Et2 (Medium Density ReeI ential Dis- trict) to C4 (Highway Commercial District). Said hearing will be held at the hour. of 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, October 16, 1984,in the Council Chambers Building I Certify (nT declare) trader penalty of perjury thnt the forego- of the Civic Center 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach,6alifornis.All'inter- sated is true and.CorreCt. sated persons are invited to attend said hearing and express their o�ppinions for or Dated at..................0.21 r.d en..C7 rA Y.e............ against the proposed General Plan r-� Amendment,Environmental Impact Re- port,and Zone Changes. Further infor- /` /. 4t h 0 C t o be 8¢ motion may be obtained from the City Cal fornia,this .......day of ..........r9... Department of Develo gent Services. Telephone No.(714)fi36- 271. Dated this 4th de of October,1994. i `� _ �..T. ... ,.,Rita J. Richter y i CITY PLANNING COMMISSION By James W.Palia, l% Signature HUNTINGTON BEACH Secretary Pub.Oct.4,1984 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Hmit,,Beach Ind.Rev.p3686o 0 C T 0 �' e, P.O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 . (i STATE 00 CALIFORNIA—OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR - ' GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor lqw OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH = : 14W TENTH STREET SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 k , July 19, 1984 (916/445-0613) Mr. Howard Zelefsky City of Huntington-Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Subject: SCH# 84062006, Negative Declaration No. 84-9/Administrative Review No. 84-17 Dear Mr. Zelefsky: The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named environmental document to selected state agencies for review. The review period is closed and none of the state agencies have comments. This letter certifies only -that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (EIR Guidelines, Section 15205) . Where applicable, this should not be construed as a waiver of any jurisdictional authority or title interests of the State of California. The project may still require approval from .state agencies with permit authority or jurisdiction by law. If so, the state agencies will have to use the environmental document in their decisiorrmaking. Please contact then iffr mediately of ter. the document is finalized with a copy of the final document, the Notice of Determination, adopted mitigation measures, and any statements of overriding .considerations. Once the document is adopted (Negative Declaration) or certified (final EIR) and if a decision is made to approve the project, a Notice of Determination must be filed with the County Clerk. If the project requires discretionary approval from any state agency, the Notice of Determination must also be filed with the Secretary for Resources (EIR Guidelines), Section 15094(b)) . Sincerely. LI�G�John B. Ghanian HUNTINGTON BEACH Chief Deputy Director DEVELOPMENT SERVICES JUL 2 L;,A P.O. Box 190 �, / Huntington Beach, CA 92648 NOTICE OF C171P=Cli VV &W0'-, PM DOLT um .1nu 9 n& P= I 71 1. {Pr-3ect Title: Negative Decla-ion No. 84-9/Administrat- Review No. 84-17 Now L.--al Agency: City Lf Huntington Beach 3. Contact Person: Howard Zelefsky sa. Str!-et Address 2000 Main Street 3b. City: Huntington Beach 3c. -:tints: Orange 3d. Zip: 92648 3e. Phone_ ( 714 ) 536-5271 PsQn LL0 ►TICH 4. county: Orange 4a. city/Cccmunity: Huntington Beach 4b. Assessor's Parcel No. 111-3 6 0-11.qc• section 26 TIWP. 5 Range 11 Sa. Cross streets: Nichols(b-e t w e e n Warner/ 5b. For Rural, Nearest Slater Community: State Air- Rail- Water- 6. Wlthln 2 miles: s. "n , 3 9 b' ports c. ways d Ways 7. DOC771dW TYPE 8. IACAL ACTICII TSB 9. DRVE LEVAC If TTPB CMA 01. General Plan Update 01. Residential: Units Acres 01. NM 06. _NOE 02. _New Element 02. Office: Sq. Ft. 02. Early Cons 07. NOC 03. General Plan Amendment Acres Employees 03. X Neg Dec 08. NOD 04. !aster Plan 03. Shopping/Commercial: Sq. Ft. 04. Draft EIR C5. Annexation Acres Employees Supplement/ 06. _Specific Plan 04. _Industrial: Sq. Ft. 05. Subsequent EIR (Prior SCH No.: 07. �Cnm2la ty Plan Acres Employees 08. Redevelopt,emt 05. Water Facilities: M3D NFPA _09. _Rezone 06. Transportation: Type Draft - 09. NOI 11. EIS 10. Land Division 07. Mining: Mineral �ibdivision. Parcel 10. _FCNSI 12. _EA Nap, Tract Map. etc.) 08. _Power: Type Watts aimm 11. _U se.Permit 09. _Waste Treatment: Tyre- 13. Joint Document 12. Waste Mgmt Plan 10. ' OCS Related 14. Final Document 13. Cancel Ag Preserve il. Cltber: 15. Other 14. X Other Admn. Review 10. TMAL, ACRES: 4 . 65 11. 70M JOBS CREATM: 12. POWI CT ISSUES DISCII.S= IN DOQ7]MT 15. Septic Systems 23. Water Quality 01. Aesthetic/Visual 08. _Flooding/Drainage 16. -_Sewer Capacity 24. _Water Supply 02. _Agricultural Iand 09. Geologic/Seismic 17. _Social 25. wetland/Riparian 03. _Air Quality 10. Jobs/Housing Balance 18. Soil Erosion 26. Wildlife N. _Archaeological/Historical 11. liinerals 19. X Solid Waste 2:. Growth Inducing 05. _Coastal Zone 12. _Noise 20. Toxic/Ham rdous 28. _Incompatible Landuse 06. Economic 13. _Public Services 21. _Traffic/Circulation 29. _Cumulative Effects 07. _Fire Razard 14. _Schools 22. _Vegetation 30. Other 13. PIAIDUC (approx) Federal 5 State S Total 5 14. PSFSENT LAM USE AID ZOfflM: Transfer station - Ml. ( Light Industrial ) 15. POWECT L1E=PTIU1: To increase the amount of industrial , commercial , and residential refuse to be recycled ( 500-8C0 tons to 1200-1500 tons ) at an existing transfer station . 16. SIGRAIMM OF ISAD AGENCT Rl�'E RrATTVE/L.isdraft DATE: �'/ NOTE: Clearinghouse will assign ident:ficaters [ al new ,ects. ;f a SC}i number already exists fora project ,e.b,e.b. from a Notice of Preparation or prey documen �1 ii11 it in. i n OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INITI*TY TUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL 'IMPACT I. BACKGROUND ' 1. Applicant Rainbow .Disposal Addres1—i P• .Box 1026,Hunt.Bch. ,CA Company, Inc. 3. elephone71 ? 847-3581 4. Project Location 17121 Nichols St..(betteh Warner and S ater Ave. 5. Project Title/Description Increase ton*d 4for transfer station 6. Date 3-20-84 �T 11. ENVIRONMENTAL --IMPACTS: (Explanations of`� all "•Yes" and "Maybe" answers are required on attached sheet). Physical .Environment: Will the project have a significant impact on the physical (� environment with respect to: a) hydrology, b) air quality, c) geology, d) flora and fauna, e) noise, f) archaeological/historical . Yes Maybe No X Other 2. Impact of Environment on Project: Will -the project be subject to impacts from the surrounding environment? i .e. , natural environment; manmade environment. Yes Maybe No X 3. Impacts on Public Services: Will the project have a significant impact upon, or re- sult in a need for a new or altered government service in any of the following areas: fire, police, schools, parks or other governmental agencies. Yes Maybe No X Impacts on Traffic/Circulation: Will project result in substantial vehicular move- ment, or impact surrounding circulation system, or increase traffic hazard? Yes Maybe No * - see attached traffic flow map 5. Will the project result in a substantial alteration or have a negative affect on the existing: land use, population/housing, energy/utilities, natural resources, human health? Yes Maybe No X f. Other potential environmental impacts not discussed above (see attached sheet) . III. OTHER RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES AND/OR PERSONS CONTACTED ( X ) See Attached ( ) Not Applicable IV. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE: 1.. Will project degrade quality of envirorpent? Yes Maybe No X .; 2. Will project achieve short-term goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental -- goals? Yes Maybe No X j 3. rpoes the project have impacts which ar�individually limited but cumulatively considerable? Yes Maybe No X 4. Will the project adversely affect human '-beings either directly or indirectly? Yes Maybe No _ y V. DETERMINATION ( X ) Negative Declaration ( ) Negative Declaration With Mitigation { ) Environmental Impact Report DATE SIGNATURE t INNING, ZONING I1rI'TACIIM,r�'' DM 31 IF r' �IECTIONAI DISTRICT MAP 26 ---il . •s•a . . ,t CIrI',y 01", I f l/� (nUN!,L O4 D'Na N!( NO 739 ,END' •YL,3DED OPC.No- AYLNDED 7-0 NO :�: ] «,aa,••y •rw•cvt tu••a D,taKf _..—. _..._— --- t:P] t.o Y•n •nrot Nca h3+ar•r lJNrl'1NGrl'UN BEACH = <<LI (°w,�t..ga„.1,IIWL.•,°«a,•.Lr as ...,,,�., • e; -•'•i ,r•_) 1,6.• •Pouf,P.•t O,f•a•af T � 1 „• i , rwa, PnoE•cl etr.<. � ) itANGyi•t COUNTY, CALIFORNIA ! ... E.: I•• 1 �._e o—� . _ coY•,Y••r..ac a,otl r•u.cna•u III'-.'AMENDED 8Y ZONE CASE- ': I'r.� "r..c e•r•••• •D•.t.{.t>j.167.nt.7D:.:a{.j�l.nj.j3> Y,+.Y7 DS 06.776.339.341.3•8,354.339.%1371•T6•1,467.304,303.$0 P. A.7,6{•,),6{-,a,66-51.PP 66.3 �•• [�r=] ,r:u-•.r•rti••4I Y.,vLtMtaKr {{•30.{t.l 1 {7•jj.►Ptr.3•r►63.,"Pr69 c.Pr to.t,ro.a,PP70{./i-,7.>2-7•,t7.,n,,a 6 ortc-j.r7.7{. • .._ nr.w lt,I•c. I1;1 7i•j60.71•jj,79<I!10. - i - -- Y•na.( PL.r°/.« WARNER AVE r t. » R2 I O C 4 CAIN AVE :i' Lam.R2.���' .,D11 I R 2• P.2 MI „MI R co n � I PJ11 N F>C k; — . -- I Tr:nN)ftR CF-R '_i"— — ,.•(L a �� IyMI H 2 R 2 Z 6ETj/ Da S M I , .- .. .... C M I M I ' R3On I �t� al Y----o.K•e 1-- -- Y H3 ( r _ �1 • RI 11UR RI ,RI It K --- I ~ SI CF �rH3—� l— 1.3 I R1 ...,, °�.._ IC 1 r 1 ;I IR3I I Cr RI• CO -- RI-CD — _- II �I Lt E> o aMc Q'c' It C RI CD s %IRI•Co ' R3 I D 3 y � ¢ Af 1 C4•CO ! e • Mi-CD {� 7C; 1 .. o•. MH 11 c l i - O 3,0 jr i CF-R �; MI ( S- C�3J -- _ R 2 I -CQ H3 �<MI F2 1II r•., 1 I .' j W �i- ..• _ .tl L1j 39 rlr•.•��•.�•• I JO l0 __ D - JF W M I-CD — ---f�2 a•— ^MI - CD la]}"In3 I It2 R2 lJJ1�1 W C4 Pay ( m TALRERT AVE ATTACHMENT C i R � ~ O.1 CA A:f .r 2 t AA?50S r tar i Y r } flr•r A(I rrl -LE E £ RAINBOW ���� ,y,l, � nwm -- nr,t f.tlrr a •ar•• m•m •rm pn \ym 1 —(crv.CR A✓f RECYCLING r CENTER & TRANSFER STATION P s € J - - ,1rQr) ,>n.M r � ,ti•nrl 7•YYh 1<N10 `,`rV, 7•M�r �()'�' 711!tD r 217b0 HIFA/R At - ' ,Iar T l� ,arr• • vm ocrr>•' nvv\ wvt•t 9)r`n n;tCp SLArIEq AVE LuEtip SCALE f:xr 1w..,yam r,C- • - _ (LL1S AVE r JK.IPArt D.,Lt IY.".c J _ 5000 a ! = a 1.n r JS a•m• nmr• wy.a o�^n 5 r.01)S 0000 - i ___ •.7 } Affm� } GAgr'EZ r A.0 20000 30D00 - .\. !«r. ` A•ft.: At.ri• arfn f 7rKVl... rOgK(OWN AVE •0000 - v !1 •. l 50000 afrn I ...n, 1'+m• 93 1dr170 l�'Y\D - SQ000 - •�. A — A1AUS AVE- r �{ 70000 - - 1.1 'f ft .,v's f� ]w r• vrn. vrn Y AYn lY!!, 1978 � .� rlDuNAop,15 AVE �4 r. 0 ` •.non y r�� nM �a•n AfLANtA At£ w 44, yl • p I.�n+ „Yn'. •Ylnp rrAMILION AVE CITY OF LC t HUNTINGTON BEACH `t TRAFFIC FLOW MAP -ja�,LEf 01 75 J!1. GENERAL VICINITY MAP —9— '. CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEAC, /. `DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DE�TMENT } P.O.Box 190 4 Huntington Beach,CA.92648 . -• .�•n r���n Tel: (714)53&5271 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM Fee - $115.00 FOR CITY USE ONLY _ RAINBOW DISPOSAL COMPANY., INC. Date 3 -/S -,F nnnlicant/Authorized Agent Received: . • - Project Number: P.O.BOX 1026 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA: 92647 Department of .Origin: ' Mailinq Address V rv/ (714 ) 847-3581 Other Applications or t'e ep one Permit Numbers : — PHIL HOHSTEIN I 'rooerty Owner . SAME AS ABOVE Mailinct Address/Telephone 1. 0 Project Information (please attach Plot Plan and submit photographs of subject property) 1 . 1 Nature of Project: Give complete description of the proposed project. The project is an existing Solid Waste Transfer Station for Commercial, Industrial, &Residential refuse of which 1200 to 1500 tons of refuse can' be transfer to a landfill daily. 1 . 2 Location of Project : (Address , nearest street intersections) 17121 Nichols (between Warner & Slater ) I • ; Assessor ' s Parcel Number: 111-360-11 , 111-360-12 A—BD—EV-2A 1 . 4 What is the present zoning on the property? M-2 1 . 5 What is the surrounding land use to the: North Equipment Rental Yard _ South Lumber Yard East Park *Rest -Rai-lroad Tracks 1 . 6 If the project is commercial or industrial give .a complete description of activities and other pertinent information including but not limited to estimated employment per shift and any-- potential hazardous materials which may be used, etc . To service the rubbish transfer needs of the area, specifically the local commercial haulers , the City of H. B. Dept. of Public Works , Park Maintenance etc. The City of F.V. Dept. of Public Works , the local school districts and the general public. No hazardous materials will be used at the site, and between.; 15 to 25 employees will be employed. 1 . 7 If the project is residential, indicate number, types and size of units and associated facilities. NSA 1 . 8 If the project is institutional, indicate the major function , estimated employment per shift and maximum occupancy . N/A 1 .9 Project land area (acres) 4 . 65 Number of parking spaces 150 1. 10 Square feet of building area 1300 Number of floors 1 1 . 11 Height of tallest structure involved in the project 25 Ft. 2 . 0 Environmental Setting nrainaa o and flood Control ..i) Plea!;- describe how on-site drainage will be accommodated . Site is graded to slope to the existing street. . . l,anci form • Is the site presently graded? Yes h) Indicate they gross cubic yards of grading proposed N/A _ the acres of land to be qraded _N/A , the amount_ c earth to be transported on the site N/A , and the amount of earth to be transported off the site N/A • c) what will be the maximum height and grade of cut or fill after grading is completed? one ( 1) Ft. 2. 3 Soils a) ; Type of soils on the subject site? (Submit soils report i . I if available) . Clayesandy 2. 4 Vegetation. a) Attach a man indicating the location, type and size of trees located on the s*te . Indicate below the number, type and size of trees ,to be removed as a result of the project: - No Trees Removed - 2 . 5 hater Quality a) Does any portion of the project abut or encroach on beaches , estuaries , bays , tidelands , or inland water areas? NO b) Describe how the project will effect any body ' of water. N/A 2. 6 Air nuality a) If the project is industrial , describe and list air pollution sources and quantity and types of pollutants emitted as a result of the project. N/A 2 . 7 Noise a) ncscribe .any adjacent off-site noise sources ( i . e . , air- F o r t-s , industry , freeways) . N/A l,) W11.11 1101 ::J• wi I 1 ho produced by the hrojoct'' If avai1.1bla , llr.�::�• Ativv noise levels in decible measurement and typical time, distribution when noise will be produced . Noise will be generated by the dumping action of the trucks , present levels of noise will not be exceeded. c.• How will noise produced b the ro 'ect •om are with P Y P ] P • existing noise - levels? Same existing levels '. . H Traffic Approximately flow much t,ra f. f is will be generated by the project : (check one) 0-50 vehicular trips per day 50 - 250 vehicular trips per day XXX 2501- 500 vehicular trips per day over 500 vehicular trips per day 3.0 Public Services and Facilities 3. 1 Water a) Will the project require installation or replacement of new waterlines? NO _ b) Please estimate the daily volume in gallons required to serve the project. 500 Gallons Per •Day 3. 2 Sewer a) Will the project require installation or replacement of new sewer lines? NO I I •b) Please indicate the approximate amount of sewage generated from the project. about 300 Gallons Per Day 3. 3 Solid Waste a) If _ the project - is industrial , describe the type and amount (pounds/day) of solid waste generated by the project. Industrial, Commercial, & Residential Solid Waste, which will generate 1200 to 1500 Tons Per Day. 4 . 0 Social 4 . 1 Population Displacement 0) Will any residential occupants be displaced by the project activities? No r h) DO L-r i lac• briefly the type of buildings or improvements to he domol ished by the project. NONE 0 , Mitigating Measure � . 1 Are there measures included in the project which may conserve nonrenewable resources (e. g. electricity, gas, water) ? Please describe. Project will conserve fuel & nonrenewable resources. 5. 2 Are there-measures included in the project which would protect • or enhance flora and fauna? Please describe. N/A 5 . 3 Are there measures proposed in the design of the project to reduce noise pollution? Please describe. Trans,fer station operations will be conducted in an semi-enclosed building. 15. 4 Are there-measures proposed in the design of the project (e. g. architectural treatment and landscaping) which have been coordinated with design of the existing community to minimize visual effect? Please describe . Project has a six ft. concrete wall & extensive landscaping is in place. (Grass , Shrubs & Trees ) 5. 5 Are there measures proposed in the design of the project to _ reduce water pollution? Please describe. N/A 5. 6 Are there measures proposed which would reduce air pollution? List any Air Pollution Control District equipment . required. N/A 5.7 Are there measures or facilities designed into the project to facilitate resource recovery and/or energy conservation (e.g. solar .heating, special insulation, etc. ) ? Please describe. Resource recovery: will be conducted along with newsprint & corrugated filber recycling. 5 . 0 Alternatives 6. 1 Are there alternatives to the project which may result in a lesser adverse environmental effect? Please explain all project alternatives on an attached sheet.LONG TERM: The purpose of the projec, is to lessen adverse environmental effects related to the Solid Waste ** i hert-hy certify that the information herein is true and accurate to the best. of my knowledge. '�* Industry & local communities . At this present time , this is our al rnative for the future. 3-�3-�y gnature Date Filed