Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Notice of Appeal - The Pegasus School (Planning Application
Jackson Tidus A LAW CORPORATION �ai3 3' 2u 5, 35 v: :.c, . November 25, 2019 Direct Dial: 949.851.7409 Email: mstaples@jacksontidus.law Reply to: Irvine Office File No: 9852.126876 VIA EMAIL AND HAND DELIVERY BY MESSENGER Mr. Oliver Chi, City Manager City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Re: Notice of Appeal-The Pegasus School (Planning Application No. 18-284) Dear Mr. Chi: We represent The Pegasus School, in connection with its appeal of the drainage fees imposed by the City of Huntington Beach ("City") on Conditional Use Permit No. 18- 042/Design Review Board No. 18-027, Planning Application No. 18-284 (Pegasus School Campus Master Plan). The Pegasus School's appeal is submitted pursuant to Section 17.73.030 of the City's Municipal Code ("City Code"). The information required under City Code section 17.73.030(B)(2) is set forth below: a. The Pegasus School paid the drainage fee that is the subject of this appeal, totaling$202,958.00, under protest on August 28, 2019. b. The factual elements of this dispute and legal theories forming the bases for The Pegasus School's protest and appeal are set forth in the appeal letter enclosed herein. c. The name and address of the applicant is below: Shawna Schaffner CAA Planning 30900 Rancho Viejo Road, Suite 285 San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675 d. The name and address of the property owner is below: The Pegasus School 19692 Lexington Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Attn: Rene Cogan Irvine Office Westlake Village Office 2030 Main Street, 12th Floor 2815 Townsgate Road, Suite 200 www.jacksontid us.law Irvine,California 92614 Westlake Village, California 91361 t 949.752.8585 f 949.752.0597 t 805.230.0023 f 805.230.0087 Mr. Oliver Chi, City Manager City of Huntington Beach November 25, 2019 Page 2 e. The 13.66-acre property, including the 2.65-acre project site, is located at 19692 Lexington Lane, Huntington Beach, CA 92646 (east side of Lexington Lane, between Shalom Drive and Shangri La Drive). The property is the site of an existing private school, commonly known as The Pegasus School. f. The gross square footage of The Pegasus School remodel includes the demolition of approximately 12,100 sq. ft. of classrooms and construction of 24,500 sq. ft. of classroom/library floor space, resulting in a net increase of 12,400 sq. ft. of classroom/library floor space within the existing school footprint, and the reconfiguration and expansion of an existing parking lot and drop off area. g. The building permit was issued on September 18, 2019. Pursuant to City Code section 17.73.030(C), we request that a hearing be scheduled within sixty(60)days to consider and render a decision on The Pegasus School's appeal. Please feel free to contact us, if you should have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Michele A. Staples Enclosure cc: Ms. Robin Estanislau, City Clerk* Mr. Michael E. Gates, Esq.,City Attorney* *via email only 1466050.1 Jackson Tidus 7 A LAW CORPORATION 2013 - u9 November 25, 2019 Direct Dial: 949.851.7409 Email: mstaples@jacksontidus.law Reply to: Irvine Office File No: 9852.126876 VIA EMAIL AND HAND DELIVERY BY MESSENGER Mr. Oliver Chi, City Manager City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Re: Appeal Letter for Drainage Fees Imposed on The Pegasus School (Planning Application No. 18-284) Dear Mr. Chi: 1. INTRODUCTION. We represent The Pegasus School, the owner of the approximately 13.66-acre property located at 19692 Lexington Lane, in the City of Huntington Beach, Orange County, State of California, (the "Property"). The Property is the site of the former Arevalos Elementary School. The Pegasus School was established on the Property in 1989, and has received several approvals from the City of Huntington Beach ("City") since then. However, for the first time, the City has demanded payment of a drainage fee and is imposing this fee on the Property's entire gross acreage, even though the pending development project only touches a small portion of the Property. The City's actions have left The Pegasus School with no choice but to take all actions to protect its rights. The factual elements of this dispute and legal theories forming the bases for The Pegasus School's appeal are set forth below. The City has imposed significant drainage fees under Chapter 14.48 of the City's Municipal Code ("Drainage Fee"), in connection with The Pegasus School's application for Conditional Use Permit No. 18-042/Design Review Board No. 18-027 on development of approximately 2.65 acres that are part of the Pegasus School Campus Master Plan, Planning Application No. 18-284 (collectively, the "Project"). The City demanded payment of Drainage Fees on the entire gross acreage of the Property, totaling $202,958.00, which The Pegasus School paid under protest on August 28, 2019. (See Attachment 1.) The purpose of this letter is to formally protest and appeal the City's imposition of the improper fee on The Pegasus School's Project under Section 17.73.030 of the City's Municipal Code ("City Code"), and to request a Irvine Office Westlake Village Office 2030 Main Street, 12th Floor 2815 Townsgate Road,Suite 200 www.jacksontidus.law Irvine,California 92614 Westlake Village, California 91361 t 949.752.8585 f 949.752.0597 t 805.230.0023 f 805.230.0087 Mr. Oliver Chi, City Manager City of Huntington Beach November 25, 2019 Page 2 refund, with interest, on the portion of the fee unlawfully imposed on the Project under Government Code section 66020.1 As explained in further detail below, there seems to be some confusion about the circumstances under which the City is authorized to impose the Drainage Fee on the gross acreage of an applicant's property, as opposed to the development area. The City's Drainage Fee was adopted pursuant to California Government Code section 66483 of the Subdivision Map Act (Gov. Code, §§ 66410, et seq.). (City Code, § 14.48.010(A).) Section 66483 allows a city to impose a drainage fee on a subdivision's gross acreage under certain conditions. However, The Pegasus School's Project is not a subdivision and the legislative authority under Government Code section 66483 does not apply here. Rather, the City's imposition of the Drainage Fee on the Project is subject to the provisions of the Mitigation Fee Act (Gov. Code, §§ 66000, et seq.) and the United States and California Constitutions (U.S. Const. amend. V, XIV; Cal. Const. art. XI, § 7), which require that land use exactions must be roughly proportional both in nature and extent to the impact of the development project. Imposing the Drainage Fee on the Property's gross acreage violates the nexus requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act and the United States and California Constitutions. In this case, the City is authorized to impose the Drainage Fee on, at most, the 1.78-acre portion of the Project that adds impermeable area. 2. FACTUAL ELEMENTS GIVING RISE TO THE PEGASUS SCHOOL'S PROTEST. A. City Code Chapter 14.48—Drainage Fee. On June 2, 1975, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1985, which added Chapter 14.48 "Drainage" to the City Code. (See Attachment 2.) The Ordinance listed thirty-three (33) "Drainage Districts" with a corresponding "Fee Per Gross Acre" for each district. (Attachment 2, § 14.48.050.) The Drainage Fee ranged from $500 to a maximum of$4,000 per gross acre. (Id.) Seven of the 33 Drainage Districts did not require a Drainage Fee (Drainage Districts 4, 513, 5C, 5D, 8A, 8E, 11). (Id.) On October 14, 1985, the City approved Ordinance No. 2798, which adopted the July 1985 Master Plan of Drainage. (See Attachment 3.) The Master Plan of Drainage consolidated the original local drainage districts around major projects and actual drainage areas, resulting in six drainage areas. (Attachment 4, p. 4.) Based on the Master Plan of Drainage, the Property is located within the boundaries of the Santa Ana River Drainage Area. (Id., p. 6.) According to 1 We have submitted a Public Records Act request seeking documents related to the City's adoption of the Drainage Fee(Reference No. C001301-111919). We reserve the right to supplement this appeal letter after those documents are received. Mr. Oliver Chi, City Manager City of Huntington Beach November 25, 2019 Page 3 the Master Plan of Drainage, the Santa Ana River Drainage Area: "is almost completely developed and no funds are on hand. Two high priority projects are identified within the district. Possibilities for fundiL7g appear to be limited to City General Fund or Assessment District." (Id., p. 8 [emphasis added].) The drainage provision of the City Code was adopted pursuant to Government Code section 66483, et seq., which is part of the Subdivision Map Act. (City Code, § 14.48.010(A).) According to the City Code, "All necessary drainage fees established by the City shall be deposited with the City prior to recordation of a subdivision map or issuance of a building permit if a subdivision map is not required." (City Code, § 14.48.050(C).) In addition, the City has the ability to accept "other proper and valid consideration" in lieu of accepting cash. (City Code, § 14.48.030(B).) Ordinance No. 3741, adopted on August 21, 2006, amended Chapter 14.48 to allow annual adjustment of the Drainage Fee. We understand that the current Drainage Fee is $14,488 per acre. (Public Works Fee Schedule, Updated July 1, 2019.) B. Prior Approvals Issued by the City for the Property. The City has reviewed and analyzed the Property numerous times in connection with its approval of several conditional use permits ("CUP") for operation of The Pegasus School. The Property was subdivided in or around 1953, long before the Drainage Fee was adopted. We understand that the Fountain Valley School District formerly owned the Property and built the Arevalos Elementary School on the site as a public school in or around 1965. The Arevalos Elementary School operated on the Property until about 1988, and was leased to The Pegasus School in or around 1989. The Pegasus School purchased the Property on or about August 27, 2003. Over the course of 30 years since The Pegasus School established the private school on the Property, the City has reviewed and approved several development applications for the Property. None of the applications involved a subdivision. The prior approvals issued by the City relating to The Pegasus School are summarized below: i. 1989 — CUP No. 88-56. On February 7, 1989, the Planning Commission approved CUP No. 88-56, which allowed The Pegasus School to be established on the Property, which was the vacant Arevalos Elementary School site. The Pegasus School would operate in the existing 23 classrooms, 3 multi-purpose rooms, and administrative building. The Planning Commission included various conditions of approval on CUP No. 88-56, none of which included Drainage Fees under Chapter 14.48, which was in effect at the time of the approval. (See Attachment 5.) Mr. Oliver Chi, City Manager City of Huntington Beach November 25, 2019 Page 4 ii. 1995 — CUP No. 95-33. On July 18, 1995, the Planning Commission approved CUP No. 95-33, which allowed The Pegasus School to add eight (8) modular buildings as classrooms and to increase maximum enrollment from 300 to 500 students. The proposed expansion also created 56 additional parking spaces and an additional drop- off/pick-up area. The conditions of approval did not require payment of the Drainage Fee. (See Attachment 6.) iii. 1997 — CUP No. 96-89. On April 8, 1997, the Planning Commission conditionally approved CUP No. 96-89 and Negative Declaration No. 96-17 for the phased Pegasus School Master Plan. The approval allowed for various existing buildings on the Property to be expanded, as well as construction of new buildings. Specifically, the entitlements allowed The Pegasus School to construct: a 1,400 square foot addition to its administration building, a 1,000 square foot addition to the middle school building, and an 18,000 square foot gymnasium with a 3,000 square foot storage mezzanine. The conditions of approval and mitigation measures did not include any requirement to pay the Drainage Fee. (See Attachment 7.) iv. 2002 — Entitlement Plan Amendment 01-01. On January 8, 2002, the Planning Commission approved Entitlement Plan Amendment No. 01-01, which amended Condition of Approval No. 2 of CUP No. 95-33 to allow an increase in student enrollment from 500 to 565 students. The conditions of approval did not require payment of the Drainage Fee. (See Attachment 8.) V. 2016 — Entitlement Plan Amendment 15-002. On December 13, 2016, the Planning Commission approved Entitlement Plan Amendment No. 15-002, which amended Condition of Approval No. 5B of Entitlement Plan Amendment No. 01-01, to allow an increase in student enrollment from 565 to 595. The conditions of approval did not require payment of the Drainage Fee. (See Attachment 9.) Although the approvals detailed above were all issued a ter the City adopted the Drainage Fee, none of these approvals mentioned Drainage Fees or imposed payment of such fees as a condition of approval or mitigation measure. The City approved an amendment to The Pegasus School's prior entitlements as recently as December 2016, but did not require payment of Drainage Fees under City Code Chapter 14.48. The City has had multiple opportunities in the past to impose the Drainage Fee as part of The Pegasus School's prior approvals, but did not do so. The existing improvements on the 11.88 acres outside of the new impervious area created by the Project were previously approved and are therefore not subject to any new fees or conditions. Mr. Oliver Chi, City Manager City of Huntington Beach November 25, 2019 Page 5 C. City Requires Payment of Drainage Fee as Part of Project Approval. On or about November 2, 2018, The Pegasus School submitted an application for CUP No. 18-042/Design Review Board No. 18-027, as part of the Pegasus School Campus Master Plan, Planning Application No. 18-284. The Project includes parking lot improvements and the removal of existing portable classroom facilities, to be replaced with permanent facilities. Specifically, the permit is for a two-phase remodel that allows seven existing modular buildings to be replaced with a permanent classroom building, resulting in a net increase of 12,400 square feet of classroom and library floor space within the existing school footprint. The parking lot will also be reoriented to allow for additional on-site vehicular stacking. These parking lot improvements do not create any new driveways or drive aisles. The Project will not change the existing use of the Property, nor will it increase the number of classrooms or change the maximum number of students permitted by CUP No. 18- 042. Although the entire Property consists of approximately 13.66 acres, the Project boundary is 2.65 acres and the Project improvements create only 1.78 acres of new impervious area. (See Attachment 10.) The Project improvements include bio-swales and pervious pavement to fully offset the Project's drainage impacts. The result is that the Project does not increase drainage impacts beyond the Property's pre-existing condition. On January 18, 2019, the City sent The Pegasus School a document titled "Project Implementation Code Requirements" related to the Project, which included the following development requirement before a building permit could be issued: "A drainage fee for the subject development shall be paid at the rate applicable at the time of Building Permit issuance. The current rate of$14,497 per gross acre is subject to periodic adjustments. This project consists of 14.0 gross acres (including its tributary area portions along the half street frontages) for a total required drainage fee of$202,958. City records indicate the previous use on this property never paid this required fee. Per provisions of the City Municipal Code, this one-time fee shall be paid for all subdivisions or development of land. (MC 14.48)" (See Attachment 11, p. 6.) On February 8, 2019, a letter was written to the City on behalf of The Pegasus School inquiring about the unexpected Drainage Fee requirement. While waiting for a reply from the City, the Planning Commission approved The Pegasus School's Project on February 26, 2019. (Attachment 12.) The Planning Commission found the Project to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") under CEQA Guidelines section 15314 because the Project involves a minor addition to an existing school. The City considered the Project to be a remodel that would "revitalize and modernize an existing school with improvements." Mr. Oliver Chi, City Manager City of Huntington Beach November 25, 2019 Page 6 (Attachment 12, p. 3.) One of the Planning Commission's findings of approval determined that the Project would not be detrimental to existing improvements in the area. (Id.) On March 21, 2019,the City responded to The Pegasus School's February 8, 2019, letter, claiming the Drainage Fee was justified because "The subject project is within the drainage area and drainage fees have not previously been paid." (Attachment 13.) The City also asserted it had studied "nearly 200 projects" in detail to support its application of the City Code to the Project. On June 17, 2019, the City informed The Pegasus School that it could pay the Drainage Fee under protest and file an appeal pursuant to City Code section 17.73.030. When The Pegasus School applied for a building permit, the City calculated the Drainage Fee totaling $202,958.00 based on the Property's gross acreage.2 In compliance with City Code section 17.73.030, The Pegasus School paid the Drainage Fee, totaling $202,958.00, under protest on August 28, 2019. (See Attachment 1.) The City issued The Pegasus School a building permit for the Project on September 18, 2019. Several months later (at The Pegasus School's request), on November 8, 2019, the City provided The Pegasus School with a list of all projects studied by the City for which the Drainage Fee was collected during the past ten years, without providing the requested project documentation. (Attachment 14.) The Pegasus School has submitted a formal request for the project documentation under the California Public Records Act (Gov. Code, §§ 6250, et seq.). However, the City has not yet provided the requested documents. The Pegasus School reserves the right to supplement this appeal after receiving the requested public documents. 3. LEGAL BASIS FOR THE PEGASUS SCHOOL'S APPEAL The City cannot impose Drainage Fees on the Property's gross acreage because the Project does not involve a subdivision and affects only 2.65 acres of the Property, with only 1.78 acres of new impervious area. The Legislature authorized local agencies to impose drainage fees on gross acreage under Government Code section 66483, as a condition of approving the subdivision of land under the Subdivision Map Act. The conditions of Government Code section 66483 "govern a city's imposition of drainage fees when regulating the division of land" so that "drainage facilities needed for new subdivisions are constructed." (66 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 120 (1983) [emphasis in original].) That is not the case here. The Pegasus School's Project does not z The City apparently calculated the Drainage Fee based on$14,497 per acre,multiplied by 14 acres. The Drainage Fee is listed as $14,488 on the City's current fee schedule, dated July 1, 2019. Additionally, the Property's gross acreage actually totals 13.66 acres,not 14 acres,according to Assessor's Parcel Map 155-04. Mr. Oliver Chi, City Manager City of Huntington Beach November 25, 2019 Page 7 fall within the scope of Government Code section 66483 because it does not involve a subdivision. In California, development impact fees are subject to the Mitigation Fee Act whether the fees are established for a broad class of projects by legislation of general applicability, or to a specific project on an ad hoc basis. (Gov. Code, §§ 66000, subd. (b), 66001.) The Mitigation Fee Act establishes not only a procedural process that must be followed before fees can be levied, but also a statutory standard against which monetary exactions by local governments are measured. (Ehrlich v. City of Culver City (1996) 12 CalAth 854, 864-865.) Under the Mitigation Fee Act: "In any action imposing a fee as a condition of approval of a development project by a local agency, the local agency shall determine how there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility or portion of the public facility attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed." (Gov. Code, § 66001, subd. (b).) The City's imposition of the Drainage Fee on the Property's gross acreage violates the Mitigation Fee Act because the City has failed to show a reasonable relationship between the amount and use of the fee and the class of development on which it is imposed. (Shapell Industries, Inc. v. Governing Board(1991) 1 Cal.AppAth 218 [facilities fees are justified only to the extent they are limited to the cost of increased services made necessary by virtue of development].) Here, the Mitigation Fee Act and Constitutional nexus requirements limit imposition of the Drainage Fee to, at most, the 1.78-acre area of increased impermeable area. (Gov. Code, § 66001; Ehrlich, supra, 12 CalAth at p. 880.) However, in this case, the Project incorporates bio-swales and permeable pavement that fully mitigate the Project's drainage impacts so that the Project will result in no increased drainage beyond the Property's pre-existing condition. (See Attachment 10.) As a result, the Project does not impact the existing public drainage facilities or create a need for additional public drainage facilities. Additionally, there is no legal authority for the City to impose a new development impact fee on the Property's existing development outside of the Project area. The Mitigation Fee Act defines a "development project" as a project undertaken for the purpose of development, including a project involving the issuance of a permit for construction or reconstruction, but not a permit to operate. (Gov. Code, § 66000(a).) The City's demand for over $200,000 from The Pegasus School violates the Mitigation Fee Act (Gov. Code, §§ 66000 et seq.), and amounts to an unconstitutional taking under the United States and California Constitutions. The United States and California Constitutions as well as California laws prohibit a government agency from collecting impact fees in excess of the fair share owed by the project developer. (Gov. Code, §§ Mr. Oliver Chi, City Manager City of Huntington Beach November 25, 2019 Page 8 66000 et seq.; Nolan v. California Coastal Commission (1987) 483 U.S. 825; Dollan v. City of Tigard(1994) 512 U.S. 374.) In Nollan and Dolan, the United States Supreme Court concluded that certain exactions imposed by governmental agencies as a condition to development were subject to a heightened level of scrutiny, above and beyond the reasonable basis or arbitrary and capricious standard. Under the more stringent standard set forth in Nollan and Dolan, a determination must first be made as to whether an "essential nexus" exists between a permit condition imposed by a government agency and a "legitimate state interest." (Nollan, supra, 483 U.S. at p. 837.) Once such an"essential nexus" is found to exist,the court must then determine whether there is "rough proportionality" between the exaction and the projected impact of the proposed development. (Dolan, supra, 512 U.S. at pp. 383-384, 391.) The California Supreme Court has ruled that Nollan and Dolan apply to certain monetary fees and exactions. (Ehrlich, supra, 12 Cal.4th at pp. 864-865.) Under Government Code section 66001(b), the City has the burden to show that there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility or portion of the public facility attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed. The courts interpret the subdivision (b) "reasonable relationship" standard, as embodying the standard of review formulated the United States Supreme Court in Nollan and Dolan. (Ehrlich, supra, 12 CalAth at p. 860.) The exaction must be more than "theoretically" or "plausibly" related to the ends served by the exaction or fee; Nollan and Dolan require a "factually sustainable proportionality" between the effects of a proposed project and a given exaction. (Ehrlich, supra, 12 Ca1.4th at p. 880.) The Nollan standard requires the City to prove that there is an essential nexus between a legitimate state interest and the fees exacted by the City. If the presence of a nexus exists, the City must prove that the required degree of connection exists between the exactions imposed by the City and the projected impact of the proposed development. Here, the City cannot show that there is a "reasonable relationship" or "essential nexus" between the amount of the Drainage Fee and the Project's drainage impacts. The City has imposed the Drainage Fee on the entire gross acreage of the Property (See Attachment 11, p. 6), even though the Project's improvements only affect a small portion of the Property. As discussed above, the Project does not involve a subdivision, so the City is not authorized under Section 66483 of the Subdivision Map Act to impose the Drainage Fee on the Property's gross acreage. The Project will only touch 2.65 acres, which is less than 20% of the Property's overall acreage, and will result in a net increase of only 12,400 square feet. In addition, the Project's improvements create only 1.78 acres of new impervious area. (See Attachment 10.) At most, the City is authorized to impose the Drainage Fee on 1.78 acres of the Property. However, in Mr. Oliver Chi, City Manager City of Huntington Beach November 25, 2019 Page 9 this case, the Project's incorporation of bio-swales and pervious pavement fully offsets the Project's drainage impacts. It is patently unreasonable to require an applicant to pay over $200,000.00 in Drainage Fees for the minimal work to be completed as part of this Project. The City found the Project to be exempt from CEQA as a minor addition to an existing school and referred to the Project as a "remodel." The Pegasus School will be replacing seven portable buildings with a permanent classroom building, and also proposes to expand the existing parking area in order to benefit the surrounding community. The City cannot charge the Drainage Fee on areas of the Property that aren't subject to the instant approvals. (See Cresta Bella, LP v. Poway Unified School Dist. (2013) 218 Cal.AppAth 438 [impact fee could not be imposed on pre-existing square footage; fee could only be imposed on the increased square footage].) Cresta Bella involved a challenge to imposition of a school impact fee on a developer's project that would demolish an existing structure and replace it with a new, larger structure. The developer argued that the fee was improperly charged for the entire square footage of the new structure, rather than only the increased square footage created by the development. The statutory scheme in that case allows school districts to impose school impact fees on new residential construction, subject to a statutorily defined maximum amount. The court of appeal agreed with the developer, finding that in order to justify fees on the preexisting square footage, there had to be a correlation between the preexisting square footage and the increase in student population. The fee could be imposed on development of additional square footage because such construction generated additional students. However, imposition of the fees on preexisting square footage did not pass the reasonable relationship test. Similarly here, the City has not shown that The Pegasus School's preexisting development creates impacts requiring construction of new drainage facilities. The Master Plan of Drainage does not include information showing how preexisting square footage contributes to an increased impact on drainage facilities. According to the Master Plan of Drainage, facilities funding for the Santa Ana River Drainage Area where the Property is located, would be provided from the City's General Fund or an Assessment District. (Attachment 4, p. 8.) In other words, the Master Plan of Drainage did not contemplate imposing Drainage Fees on developed properties within the Santa Ana River Drainage Area. Thus, there is no nexus between the Project's potential drainage impacts related to 1.78 acres of the Property and the City's imposition of the Drainage Fee on the Property's acreage outside of the Project area. Based on these facts, the City cannot show a sufficient relationship between the Drainage Fee on the developed portion of the Property outside of the new impervious area and the projected impact of The Pegasus School's proposed improvements to the existing school. Mr. Oliver Chi, City Manager City of Huntington Beach November 25, 2019 Page 10 The City's actions are also inconsistent with past practices and approvals related to this Property. Beginning in 1989, the City has issued many entitlements and approvals for The Pegasus School. Yet, until now,the City has never conditioned any approvals on payment of the Drainage Fee. The City is effectively imposing new Drainage Fees on previous use and development of the Property completed decades ago. This violates The Pegasus School's vested rights in the prior validly issued approvals. (Davidson v. County of San Diego (1996) 49 Cal.AppAth 639 [vested right is created when a property owner has performed substantial work and incurred substantial liabilities in good faith reliance upon a validly issued permit].) Once a vested right is created, the landowner is entitled to complete and use the development as approved without change or modification. (Id., see also Stewart Enterprises, Inc. v. City of Oakland(2016) 248 Cal.AppAth 410 [doctrine of vested rights insulates property owner from retroactive change in zoning, building, or other laws and ordinances once the vested right has been established].) In imposing this fee requirement, the City wrongly justifies its actions on grounds that "the previous use on this property never paid this required fee." (Attachment 11, p. 6.) The Property was subdivided in or around 1953 (long before the Drainage Fee was first adopted), and has not been subdivided since that time. Thus, the City's attempt to impose the Drainage Fee on the developed portions of the Property constitutes an unlawful exaction levied long after The Pegasus School's improvements and uses were vested. In addition, the spreadsheet listing the "nearly 200 projects" studied by the City to show its "past practices" for collecting Drainage Fees does not support the City's position. (See Attachment 14.) First, there is insufficient information provided about each of the projects, making it impossible to determine what type of permit or entitlement was involved. We have submitted a formal request for public records related to these projects. Furthermore, none of the projects summarized on the City's spreadsheet involve a situation like the one at issue here. With the exception of six larger projects all involving subdivisions, the majority of these projects involved sites with less than one acre of land (most of which involve 1/10-acre). According to the spreadsheet, the six projects that paid the most significant fees were all tract developments with subdivision maps affecting virtually all (if not all) of the gross site acreage. The Pegasus School's Project involves improvements to a small portion of the larger Property. No division of land is involved that would authorize imposition of the Drainage Fees on the gross acreage of the Property under Section 66483 of the Subdivision Map Act, discussed above. Finally, the City should be estopped from imposing the Drainage Fee on the Property by waiting too long to impose such fees on prior development applications for the Property. Any retroactive claim for the Drainage Fee is barred by the doctrines of laches and estoppel because Mr. Oliver Chi, City Manager City of Huntington Beach November 25, 2019 Page 11 The Pegasus School has been prejudiced by the City's delayed actions. (City of Los Angeles v. Los Angeles County (1937) 9 Cal.2d 624, 630 [municipality is subject to the rules of laches and estoppel in cases wherein equity and justice require their application].) Additionally, fairness precludes the City from imposing the current fee on prior development of the Property. The original fee has multiplied over the years and is now significantly higher than the amount in effect during the previous development applications. The City has had many opportunities to impose the Drainage Fee, but is treating the most recent modifications as an artificial trigger to retroactively collect increased fees on vested development. 4. CONCLUSION. Based on the foregoing analysis, there is no legal justification for the City's imposition of Drainage Fees outside of the 1.78 acres of new impervious area created by the Project. Therefore, The Pegasus School requests a refund of the Drainage Fee imposed on the non- impacted Project area ($177,169.36) that was paid under protest, plus interest.3 Because the Project's drainage impacts are fully offset by the bio-swales and pervious pavement, The Pegasus School also has grounds to request a refund of the entire $202,958.00 Drainage Fee paid under protest, plus interest. The Pegasus School therefore reserves the right to seek a full refund of the amount paid under protest, plus interest, depending on the outcome of the pending Public Records Act request, and/or if the refund is denied at the City Manager's administrative hearing and the decision is appealed to the City Council. We look forward to your prompt response to this letter. Please feel free to contact us, if you should have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Michele A. Staples Attachments: 1. Receipt of Payment of Drainage Fee, dated August 28, 2019 2. Ordinance No. 1985, dated June 2, 1975 3. Ordinance No. 2798, dated October 14, 1985 4. July 1985 Master Plan of Drainage 5. Conditional Use Permit No. 88-56 Approvals 6. Conditional Use Permit No. 95-33 Approvals 7. Conditional Use Permit No. 96-89 Approvals 3 The City's current Drainage Fee of$14,488 applied to the Project area of 1.78 acres totals$25,788.64. Mr. Oliver Chi, City Manager City of Huntington Beach November 25, 2019 Page 12 8. Entitlement Plan Amendment No. 01-01 Approvals 9. Entitlement Plan Amendment No. 15-002 Approvals 10. Pegasus School Drainage Area Exhibit 11. Project Implementation Code Requirements, dated January 18, 2019 12. Planning Commission Minutes, dated February 26, 2019 13. Letter from Tom Herbel to Shawna Schaffner, dated March 21, 2019 14. Spreadsheet of drainage fees collected by City, dated November 8, 2019 cc: Ms. Robin Estanislau, City Clerk* Mr. Michael E. Gates, Esq., City Attorney* *via email only 2015 X TV 26 5: 39 Attachment 1 Estanislau, Robin From: Estanislau, Robin Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2019 1:54 PM To: 'Jason Lopez' Subject: RE: Pegasus School City of HB Drainage Fee Letter Hello,Jason. Just sending a confirmation that your communication has been received and forwarded to the appropriate representations for follow-up. Sincerely, Robin Estanislau, CMC, City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 714-536-5405 f �S T v Please consider the HB City Clerk's office for your passport needs! From:Jason Lopez<jlopez@thepegasusschool.org> Sent:Wednesday,August 28,2019 6:55 PM To: Kiff, Dave<dave.kiff@surfcity-hb.org>; Estanislau, Robin<Robin.Estanislau@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: Pegasus School City of HB Drainage Fee Letter Please see electronic transmittal below. Jason Lopez Head of School I THE PEGASUS SCHOOL The Pegasus School 19692 Lexington Lane Huntington on Beach CA 92646 714.964.1224 x1107 0 NOTICE TO RECIPIENT; If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are prohibited from sharing, copying,or otherwise using or disclosing its contents. If you have received this e-mail in error, piease notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and permanently delete this e-mail and any attachments without reading, forwarding or saving them.Thank you. 1 THE PEGASUS SCJi00L August 21,2019 VIA ELECTRONIC-TRANSMITTAL City Manager's Office Mr. Dave Kiff City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Subject: The Pegasus School—Appeal,by Protest,Development Impact Fees for Drainage Impact Fees Paid Under M.C. 14.48 Drainage Dear Mr. Kiff- This correspondence shall serve as formal notice pursuant to Huntington Beach Municipal Code Section 17.17.030 that The Pegasus School, as the owner of the existing private school located on Lexington Avenue between Shangri La Drive and Shalom Drive at 19692 Lexington Lane, , is appealing the$202,958 drainage fee purported to be due under Chapter 14.48 of the Municipal Code in connection with our application to remove seven modular buildings and construct a new 18,000 sf classroom building. The permits associated with this appeal are: Building Permit-Plan Check#B2019002995 Z� Building Electrical Permit-Plan Check 9 E2019002998 Building Mechanical-Permit#M201 9002997 Building Plumbing-Permit 9 P2019002996 While we would like to acknowledge and thank the various City divisions who have assisted Pegasus School throughout this project, we do not feel the drainage fees adopted under Huntington Beach Municipal Code Section 14.48 are appropriate in this circumstance. As required by Huntington Beach Municipal Code Section 17.73.030, we will provide the full facts and circumstances providingthis appeal in detail within ninety 90 days of the date of our payment of the protested$202,958 delivered concurrently with this correspondence. We believe the above information is sufficient to preserve our right to appeal the drainage fee. However, should additional information be necessary, please do not hesitate to contact me at (714) 964-1224xl 105 or ilopeznathepegasusschool.org and I would be glad to be of assistance, Sincerely, THE PEGASUS SCHOOL ?-ason L�pez Head of School c. Robin Estanislau,City Clerk CASH RECEIPT CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH P.O. BOX 711 HUNTINGTON BEACH,CALIFORNIA 92648.0711 'Vf ',a www.huntingtonbeachca.gov/payments U � ]r M F a DATE Issuing Dept. OC.tC De t.Pho 7 City Of Htington Bed Al FUNDS RECEIVED FROM late: 81/28/2019 Cashier:caseye ADDRESS 2- I Ice: CITYH Iran #;17 tch2496 _moo ��+'� Phone#: Receipts FOR lAt #: 00557292 _ lt"ot e 19—Chi! AMOUNT RECEIVED Cash V.Check# t 0 Credit Card Payment Total: $202,958.00 Prepared Received Finance B PCB By Approval IF OBJECT=50000 THRU 90000,FINANCE APPROVAL REQUIRED Approval Date "ansaGl i on Total: $202 958,00 Business Unit I Object I Subs I Sub,—Ledger jjype7 Check Tendered : $202,958.00 Please visit us on the web wwW.surfcity-Worg -- — -- — -- -------- — TOTAL $ '+. 2 Stamped Validation Only l Please do not write in the box below i �.---...._..........--..._......_ No. g 6 Attachment 2 DRDTNAME NO. 198-5 AN ORDINANCE 0? THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING THE HUNTINGTON BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING THERETO NEW CHAPTER 14. 48 ESTABLISH- ING DRAINAGE FEES The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does, ordain as follows: SECTION 1 . The Huntington Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding thereto new Chapter 14. 48 entitled, "Dratnage," ZD to read as follows., Chapter 14. 48 DRAINAGE 14. 48. ola Master plan of drainage. Reference Is made to the city' s master plan of drainage which is hereby adopted uursuant to the Government Code of the state of California, and more particularly Section 65300 of said Code. Said drainage plan was determined by the Board of Super- visors of the county of Orange to be in conformity with the county drainage plan. A copy of the city's master plan of drainage is on file in the city clerk's office and the same is made a part hereof as if fully set forth in this chapter. The city council hereby finds, by adopting the city's master plan of drainage, that the subdivision and development of property within the district area requires the construction of the facilities as set forth in the master plan of drainage. The city council hereby finds, by adopting the city' s master plan of drainage, that the fees as hereinafter set forth are fairly apportioned within the district area as set forth in the Government Code of the state of California, and more particularly, Sections 66483 and 661187 thereof. 14.48. 020 Drainage area. The district boundaries of the drainage areas are hereby declared to be those identified in the local drainage areas map which is on file In the city clerk's office, and the same are made a part hereof as if fully set forth in this chapter. All drainage facilities set forth in the master plan of drainage for the city of Huntington Beach are in addition to present local drainage facilities serving the drainage areas. JG:k 14 .48.030 Drainage furd. There is hereby created a separate fund which shall be known as the "planned local drain- age facilities fund. " All moneys collected pursuant to this chapter shall be deposited in accordance with the Business and Professions Code of the state of California. in said drain- age fund. The city shall have the right In lieu of accepting cash, pursuant to this chapter, to accept otb.er proper and valid consideration. 14. 48.040 Advances from general fund. The city t-..ay advance funds from its general fund to pay the cost of con- structing drainage facilities within a local drainage area and may reimburse the general fund for such advances from the planned local drainage facilities fund for the local drainage area in whilch the drainage facilities were constructed. 14.48. 050 Drainage fee. There is hereby established the following drainage fee schedule: Drainage District Fee Per Gross Acre 2 $ 500 2A 2 ,000 3 1,500 4 Completed 0 5 2 ,000 5A 2 ,000 5B Completed 0 5C Completed 0 5D Completed 0 6A 2 ,000 6B 2,000 6 C 2,000 7A 2,800 7B 2,000 7C 2.1000 7D 2000 7E 3,000 7F 23-ODO 7G 3,000 7H 21-000 71 4,000 8A 0 8B 2>800 8C 3,500 8D 1,650 8E 0 8F 2,300 2. Drainage District Fee Per Gross Acre 8G $ 3,500 8H 2,500 9 2,500 10 1,500 11 Completed 0 12 2,000 Said fee shall be collected, deposited and expended pur- suant to Sections 66483 and 66487 of the Government Code of the state of California and all other applicable laws of the state of California. All necessary drainage fees established by the city shall be deposited with the city prior to recordation of subdivision map or issuance of a buildin,", permit if a subdivision map is not required. The subdivider or person to whom a building permit has been -issued may make application for a reimbursement agreement. 111. 48.060 Applicability. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all subdivisions of land and the develop- ment of all land within the drainage area unless the fees were previously paid by prior development. it shall be the responsibility of the applicant to con- struct all on-site improvements as may be required by the city, Including all off-site drainage facilities as are required by the city. The applicant shall be reimbursed by the city for all required off-site construction, In accordance with Section 14. 48. 070. 111 . 48.070 Conditions governing reimbursements. Not- withstanding any other provisions of this chapter, the payment of re.-Punds shall be governed as follows: (a) Refunds shall. be payable for a period of five (5) years from date of applicant's application. (b ) Refunds shall be made from subsequent development at the rate per acre developed set forth in Section 14.48. 050 of this chapter. (c) Refunds shall not exceed 90 percent of orf-site con- struction costs. (d) Refunds shall bear no interest. (e) The city shall not be liable for payment of any refund by reason of its failure to collect or receive from any person the service fee for connecting into the main line paid for by applicant. (f) The city' s refusal to allow any connection or connections into the main line paid for by applicant shall not make the city 3. liable to applicant for any refund which might have accrued to applicant if such connection had been permitted. (g) The city retains the right to allow a connection by a public agency exempted from payment of connection fees and shall not be liable to applicant for refund because of said connection. (h) Reimbursement agreements covering the payment of refunds shall be in writing. SECTION 2. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsectlon, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason field to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of' the remaining portions of this ordinance. The city council hereby declares it would have passed this ordinance and each section, sub— section, sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that one or more of the sections, subsections., sentences, clauses, or phrases thereof be declared unconstitutional or Invalid. SECTION 3. This -ordinance shall take effect thirty days after Its adoption- The city clerk shall certify to the pas— sage of this ordinance and cause same to be pablished within fifteen days after adoption In the Huntington Beach News, a weekly newspaper of general circulation, printed and published in Huntington Beach, California. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the city council of the city of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the end day of June, 1975. ATTEST: a yor City Clerk APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO FORM: ,4;.4e; City Ad!qinicstrator Wf Attorne city Attorne 4. Ord. No. 1985 STATE OF CALIFORNIA } COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CTTY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) 1, ALICIA M. WENTWORTH, the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of member8 of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing ordinance was read to said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 14th day of may 19_75 , and was again read to said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 2nd day of June , 19 75 and was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of more than a majority of all the members of said City Council. AYES: Councilmen: Wieder. Bartlett. Matney. Shipley, Duke. Gibbs NOES: Councilmen: None ABSENT: Councilmen: Coen City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California 1, Alici;t M. V,entwor_a f,r ° C E."K of tl, (nY of 1 Hu,':_, Ion :f :,. aepu ity C erk Attachment 3 - - sEE yes rs�8 ORDINANCE NO. 2798 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING THE HUNTINGTON BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE BY AMENDING SECTION 14.48.010, 14.48.020, AND 14.48.050 RELATING TO REVISED MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. The Huntington Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by amending sections 14.48.010, 14.48.020 and 14.48. 050 to read as follows: 14.48.010 Master plan of drainage. Reference is made to the city's master plan of drainage, dated July, 1985, which is hereby adopted pursuant to California Government Code sections 66483 et seq. Said drainage plan has been determined by the Board of Supervisors of the county of Orange to be in 'conformity with the county drainage plan. A copy of the city's master plan of drainage, dated July, 1985, is on file in the city clerk ' s office and the same is made a part hereof as if fully set forth in this chapter. The city council hereby finds, by adopting the city's master plan of drainage, that the subdivision and development of property within the district areas requires the construction of the facilities as set forth in the aforementioned master plan of drainage. The city council hereby finds, by adopting the city's master plan of drainage, that the fees, established by resolu- tion of the city council, are fairly apportioned within the drainage areas set out in the master plan for the city, dated July, 1985. 14.48.020 Drainage areas. The boundaries of the drainage areas are hereby declared to be those identified in the master plan of drainage, dated July, 1985, which is on file in the city clerk' s office, and the same are made a part hereof as though fully set forth in this chapter. 1. All drainage facilities set forth in the master plan of drainage for the city of Huntington Beach are in addition to present local drainage facilities serving the drainage areas. 14.48.050 Drainage fees. There is hereby established a requirement for the payment of fees for the purpose of de- fraying the actual or estimated costs of constructing planned drainage facilities for the removal of surface and storm waters for the various drainage areas. Actual drainage fees for each drainage area shall be established and amended from time to time by resolution of the city council. Such fees shall be collected, deposited and expended pur- suant to California Government Code sections 66483 et seq. , and all other applicable laws of the state of California. All necessary drainage fees established by the city shall be deposited with the city prior to recordation of a subdivi- sion map, or issuance of a building permit if a subdivision map is not required. The subdivider or person to whom a building permit has been issued may make application for a reimbursement agreement. SECTION 2. This ordinance shall take effect thirty days after its passage. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of adjourned Huntington Beach at a regular/ meeting thereof held on the 14th day of October 1985. Mayor ATTEST APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Clerk City A orne REVIEW D APPROVED: IN ATED AND APPRO i City Administra r Director of Public Works ahb; 8/15/85 0723L/3673 2. F�l�� . w, � 1�85�,. �� Analysis In October, 1979, L.D. King completed a Master Plan of Drainage for the City of Huntington Beach. The Master Plan identified City-owned drainage facilities in need of improvement, and reccammended additional facilities to be constructed. The new facilities, and facility improvements, described in the 1979 L.D. King plan form the basis of this report. Chapter 14.48 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code adopts the City's Master Plan of Drainage and divides the City into 34 local drainage areas. The Master Plan describes drainage facilities which must be constructed or improved in each of these drainage districts and the City collects fees for construction of these facilities. Drainage fees are set by Council resolution and are applied to the development of all land within the drainage area Although the creation of 34 drainage districts made sense in 1960, now it would be more desirable to consolidate districts around major projects and actual drainage basins. The City drainage system is tributary to five major Orange County Flood Control District Channels including the Santa Ana River. The hydraulic characteristics of these channels are the determining factor in the design of City-owned channels and pump stations. By consolidating existing drainage districts into basins which are served by the County channels, the 34 existing drainage basins can be reduced to six. A description of the proposed consolidation follows: Santa Ana River Drainage Area Drainage Districts 7D and 7G contribute storm run-off directly to the Santa Ana River through the Meredith and Hamilton Pump Stations. Reimb. Agr Unfunded Undvd Present District Funds Available Outstanding Projects Priority* Acreage Fee/Acre 7D $ 1,905 $ 3,658 $ 650,000 6 <10 $ 2,775 700,000 27 7G 14,993 -0- 250,000 3 20 4,450 900,000 29 Talbert Channel Drainage Area Drainage Districts 6A, 6B, 6C, 7B, 7C, 7H and 7F contribute flow to the Talbert Channel from five pump stations. The drainage districts should be consolidated since the contribution of flow from each district is limited by the Talbert Channel capacity and future improvements must be carefully coordinated. Reim. Agr Unfunded Undvd District Funds Available Outstanding Projects Priorile Acreage Fee/Acre 6A $ 95,776 -0- $1,300,000 23 410 $ 2,775 6B 67,357 -0- 950,000 4 < 10 2,225 6C 51,164 -0- -0- - < 1D 3,350 7B 53,569 -0- 200,000 10 10 2,775 350,000 24 -7 MASTER PLAN OF, DRAINAGE AREAS 9-5-II I - I\ DM 9 f D 1 HUNTINGTON HARBOUR y. ;11 6-5-11 14 1 mis' ' WINTERSBURG CHANNEL 24- 19-5-11 -5-11 21-�-II 25-5-H 11" DM 28\ DM 21 D 24 DI 1 25 5 DM 27 30 5-II 29-5-11 2*j-,LI 27- -5-11 25 -11 L "-11 r AM 35 DM 34 W433 C 32 M 31 D —,n32- 11 i 33-5-1 1 K. 35-5-11 DM DM 37 ..z- 38 "m 39, 0 /eTALBERT CHANNEL/,/A, 5-6-11 3-6-11 2 -11 1-6 1 54- DM4 2 0 DM 12-I-Il 7- 10 SANTA ANA 14 12 m i 13 IDM7 RIVER DOWNTOW 10 18- 17-6-10 10 14- 13-6-11 CITY OF <�'_pm I D ID) 0 Dm t9 i- HUNTINGTON BEACH HUNTINGTON ORANGE COUNTY CALIFORNIA BEACH CHANNEL TV Reinb Agr Unfunded Undvd District Funds Available Outstanding Projects Priority* Acreage Fee/Acre 7C $ -0- $27,105 $400,000 32 30 $ 2,775 7F 121,161 -0- 400,000 28 .410 2,775 7H -0- -0- -0- -- -0- -0- Huntington Beach Channel Drainage Area Drainage Districts 7A, 7E, 7I, 8B, 8C and 8G contribute to flows in the Huntington Beach Channel through three pump stations and several gravity storm drains. The Huntington Beach Channel is under-designed and all future improvements to facilities contributing flow to the channel must be coordinated. Reimb Agr Unfunded Undvd District Funds Available Outstanding Projects Priority* Acreage Fee/Acre 7A $ (14,440) $ 134,789 $ 600,000 31 e10 $ 4,000 7E 262,646 113,246 300,000 11 80 4,450 -0- -0- - <10 5,000 7I 68,906 -0- -0- - 40 5,000 8B (363,280) -0- 1,300,000 37 50 8,350 8C 17,341 -0- -0- - 20 5,000 8G 260,854 127,680.00 300,000 38 80 7,800 l Downtown Drainage Area Drainage Districts 8A, 8D, 8F and 8H comprise this area. All run-off is directly to the ocean by gravity flow. Permits for discharge across the State beaches all require special mitigation and coordination with the State Parks and Recreation. Reimb Agr Unfunded Undvd Fee/Acre District Funds Available Outstanding Projects Priority* Acreage 8A $ -0- $ -0- $ 550,000 21 .410 $ -0- 250,000 22 8D (744) -0- 4,000,000 14 <10 2,225 8F (62,174) -0- -0- -- 20 3,350 8H 158,032 -0- 200,000 15 <10 4,000 200,000 16 160,000 17 100,000 18 Wintersburg Channel Drainage Area Drainage Districts 3, 4, 5, 5A, 5B, 5C, 5D, 9, 10 and 11 contribute flow to the Wintersburg Channel through four pump stations and numerous gravity lines. The Wintersburg Channel is not adquate to handle all the flow which it receives. Careful coordination and planning of all drainage improvements in this area will be required to ensure the highest level of flood protection. Wintersburg Channel (Cont.) Reimb Agr Unfunded Undvd Fee/Acre District Funds Available Outstandi Projects Priority* Acreage 3 $ 25,492.00 -0- $ 500,000 5 15 4,450 700,000 30 y 4 (15,617) -0- 1,500,000 2 < 10 -0- 1,000,000 25 5 30,819 97,921 300,000 13 80 2,225 250,000 26 5A (73,210) -0- 170,000 35 '- 10 2,775 250,000 44 100,000 45 5B 68,080 -0- -0- -- 10 -0- 5C 106,864 -0- -0- -- -0- -10 5D (1,015) -0- -0- -- 10 -0- 9 552,697 179,652 750,000 7 600 7,250 93,240 1,250,000 12 700,000 34 340,000 39 250,000 40 800,000 47 300,000 48 10 64,894 -0- -0- 10 2,225 11 (32,200) -0- -0- -- < 10 Canpleted Huntington Harbour Drainage Area Drainage Districts 2, 2A and 12 make up this area which drains to the harbor. Because of the debris and silting problems in the harbor, improvements proposed in these districts must be carefully coordinated. Reimb Agr Unfunded Undvd Fee/Acre District Funds Available Outstanding Projects Priori Acreage 2 $ 263,214 $ 3,478 $ 250,000 8 410 725 250,000 9 750,000 36 1,000,000 41 200,000 42 200,000 43 2A 306,733 -0- 700,000 33 c 10 2,775 12 214,339 27,974 160,000 19 80 7,250 700,000 20 800,000 49 * see Appendix A The proposed fees for the new drainage areas are listed on Table 1. Even with the consolidation, not all the projects listed in Appendix A could be accomplished. The effect of the new drainage areas would be as follows: r Santa Ana River Drainage Area The district is almost completely developed and no funds are on hand. Two high priority projects are identified within the district. Possibilities for funding appear to be limited to City General Fund or Assessment District. Talbert Channel Drainage Area Consolidation of the districts will yield less than 50 acres of underdeveloped land. Funds on hand are about $400,000. Two high priority projects identi- fied within the district would remain unfunded without General Fund or Assess- ment District Funding. Huntington Beach Channel Drainage Area District consolidation should give over 300 underdeveloped acres, which could generate over two million dollars in additional funds. Together with the $232,000 on hand, the highest priority projects could be accomplished. Wintersbuurg Channel Drainage Area Consolidation of existing drainage districts would give 700 acres of under- developed land worth four million dollars in drainage funds. Together with $750,000 on hand, the three projects with the highest priority could be accomplished. Huntington Harbour Drainage Area Consolidation would allow adequate funds to complete the three highest priority projects. Downtown Drainage Area As the downtown area is redeveloped, adequate funds could be generated to complete many of the highest priority projects. TABLE OF DRAINAGE FEES DRAINAGE AREA TOTAL UNDEV./UNPAID* PROP. ACRES ACRES DRAIN FEE Santa Ana River 770 20 9,000 Talbert Channel 1,925 20 7,000 Huntington Beach Channel 2,450 340 7,000 Downtown 775 270 6,000 Wintersburg Channel 5,595 740 5,500 Huntington Harbour 1,840 170 5,500 H *UNDEV/UNPAID: Areas that are vacant or previously developed and did not pay fees because the drainage fee was not established at that time. UNFUNDED DRAINAGE PROJECTS 1. Pump Station Controls/Shields; Bolsa Chica $80,000 Purchase and install new engine controls in the Shields and Bolsa Chica pump stations. These controls will complete the automation of control systems for storm drain pump engines by funding them for two districts where drainage funds are unavailable Shields Pump $1 ,500 ,000 Design, acquire land for, construct and equip new pump station; redesign, reconstruct and re-equip existing pump station; and con- nect both to new storm drain system. Existing system is unable to handle designed drainage runoff. Capacity needs to be expanded by 88% . This is our most serious potential problem area. This drain- age district (No. 4) is without funds. 3. Hamilton Engine Addition $250 , 000 Purchase and install a fourth engine at the Hamilton pump station. Existing capacity of station is deficient to handle designed drain- age runoff in this critical area. 4 . Flounder P.S. and Storm Drains $950,000 modification to Flounder Pump Station to increase capacity and in- stallation of additional storm drains. To provide for system modifications to eliminate flooding in the vicinty. 5. Michael Drive System Pump Station $500,000 Construct drainage pump station to discharge from City's C6-561 Channel into the County's C6 Channel . To relieve flooding in the Michael Drive area when County channel flows impede flows in the City channels. owl Upgrade Modifications to the Meredith Drainage Pump Sta. $650, 000 Purchase and install three 3 new engines and pumps to replace existing. Pump station is deficient to handle design flows . New engines and pumps to increase capacity. 7 . Slater Pump Station $750 , 000 Three additional engines and pumps. To increase station to capacity required. Station presently adequate. Additional pumping capacity needed as development occurs in the drainage area. B . Scenario Pumz Station $250 ,000 Upgrade station 2% . To increase capacity of station. Presently, station is marginal. Storm drains are needed to this station which then will result in a deficiency. 9. Scenario Storm Drain $250 , 000 Construct 6 storm drain in Scenario Drive from Fantasia Lane to the Scenario pump station. To correct street capacity deficiencies which are anticipated to be in existence at this time. Note: Scenario pump station would need upgrading prior to this project. 10. Adams Pump Station $200 ,000 Upgrade station 16%) . To increase capacity; station is presently adequate, however, additional storm drains are needed to this pump station at which time it will become deficient. Page 2 ;p ll. Newland Pump Station $300 ,000 Upgrade station with larger engines and pumps (63%) . To increase capacity. This need will arise as additional developments are accomplished within the drainage area. 12. Loss of Channel Lining Phase II $1 ,250,000 Construct concrete lining for the C05SO4 (Slater) Flood Control Channel between Springdale Street and Goldenwest Street. This project is needed to improve hydraulic characteristics of the existing earthen channel and prevent erosion that endangers adjacent private property. 13. Newland/Heil Storm Drain $300 , 000 Construct 36" RCP storm drain in Heil Ave. from Newland St. west approximately 8001 . Construct 24" RCP storm drain in Heil Ave. from Newland St. east approximately 1,100 ' . To eliminate cross gutter in Newland Street on the north side of Heil Avenue in the City of Westminster and correct storm drain deficiencies in area. 11 , 12th & Main St, Storm Drain . $4 ,000,000 Construct RCP storm cTrain in 12th St. between Palm Ave. an Main Street. Construct 72" RCP in Main St. between 12th St. and Adams Avenue. Construct 60" RCP in Main St. between Adams Ave. and Utica Avenue. Construct 48" RCP in Main St. between Utica and Yorktown. Construct 30" RCP branch in Palm Avenue . Construct 48" & 36" RCP branch in 12th Street. Construct 30" & 24" RCP branch in Adams Avenue. This project is needed to relieve the existing storm drain deficiencies in drainage districts 8D & 8F. 15. 18th Street Storm Drain $200,000 Construct 4' RCP storm drain from Beach up 18th St. to Orange Avenue. Construct 18" RCP in Orange Ave. from 18th St. east to 17th Street. This storm drain is needed to relieve severe street capacity deficiencies in drainage district 8H. 16. 20th Street Storm Drain $200,000 Construct 24" RCP storm drain from P.C.H. north to Orange Avenue. Construct 18" RCP in Orange Ave. from 20th St. west to 21st Street. This storm drain is needed to relieve severe street capacity deficiencies in drainage district 8H . 17. Goldenwest Street Storm Drain $160, 000 Construct 48" RCP storm drain. Construct the 24" RCP in Golden- west St. from P.C.H. north to Orange Avenue. Construct 24" RCP in Orange Ave. from Goldenwest St. east to 22nd Street. This storm drain is needed to relieve severe street capacity deficien- cies in drainage district 8H. 18 . 16th Street Storm Drain $100 ,000 Construct 4" RCP storm drain in 16th Street from P.C.H. north to Olive Avenue. This storm drain is needed to relieve severe street capacity deficiencies in drainage district 8H . I Unfunded Drainage Projects Page 3 19 . Bolsa Chica Street Storm Drain - $160, 000 Construct RCP storm drain in Bolsa Chica Street from Warner Avenue south to Los Patos Avenue. 20. Heil/Le Grand Storm Drain - $700 ,000 Construct 2"-66' RCP storm drain in Heil Avenue from C07 channel east to Le Grand Lane. Construct 66"-24" storm drain in Le Grand Lane from Heil Avenue south to Prairie Drive. 21. Sixth Street Storm Drain $550,000 Construct RCP storm drain from Beach up Sixth St. to Olive Avenue. Construct 36"-24" RCP in Olive Avenue from Sixth Street west to Eighth Street. Construct 36"-24" RCP in Olive Avenue from Sixth Street east to Main Street. Existing storm drains in district 8A are approximately 50% deficient. Construction of this storm drain would help relieve this condition. 22 . Lake Street Storm Drain $250 , 000 Construct 30" RCP storm drain in Lake Street from Beach to 0 ivelivel Avenue. Construct 24" RCP in Olive Avenue from Lake Street west to Second Street. Construction of this storm drain along with the Sixth Street storm drain will remove all the storm drain deficiencies in drainage district 8A. 23 . Edison R/W Storm Drain $1 ,300 , 000 Construct an 84" storm drain parallel to existing 84" storm drain from the D05 flood control channel to Brookhurst Street at which point it reduces to 42" . The proposed storm drain continues easterly approximately 2000 ft. in the Edison R/W at which point the storm drain branches north and south with 24" storm drain. This storm drain will remove and will correct all storm drain and street capacity deficiencies in drainage district 6A. 124 . Adams Avenue Storm Drain $350 ,000 Construct 60" storm drain in Adams Avenue frontage road between the Adams pump station and Bushard Street paralleling the existing 60" storm drains. This storm drain is needed to correct the exist- ing deficient condition in Drainage District 7B. 25. Shields/Springdale Storm Drain $1, 000, 000 Construct " storm drain in Shields Dr. from pump station to Springdale Street. Construct 36" storm drain in Gildred Circle from Springdale Street to Green View Lane. Construct 36" storm drain in Springdale Street from Shields Drive north to Annette Circle. Construct 24" storm drain in Springdale Street from Annette Circle to Heil Avenue. Construct 18" storm drain in Springdale Street from Heil Avenue north approximately 900 feet. Construct 30" storm drain in Springdale Street from Shields Drive south approximately 700 feet. This project is needed to correct the 50% deficiency in the western half of drainage district No. 4 . 26 . Volga Storm Drain $250 , 000 Construct 4" storm drain in alley north of Volga Drive P.E. R W to Sher Lane. Construct 18" storm drain from Sher Lane easterly to Parkside Street then southerly in Parkside Street to Stark Avenue . Page 4 27. Meredith Storm Drain $700, 000 Construct 60" storm drain in Midland Lane from Meredith pump station north to Niagara Drive, then west on Niagara Drive to Lawson Lane, then north on Lawson Lane to Adams Avenue where the storm drain branches westerly with a 42" pipe and easterly with a 24" pipe. This project will correct all storm drain deficiencies in drainage district 7D. . 28 . Indianapolis Storm Drain $400,000 Construct " storm drain in Indianapolis Avenue from the Indian- apolis pump station west to Bushard Street. This project will correct all storm drain deficiencies in drainage district 7F. 29. Brookhurst Storm Drain $900,000 Construct storm drain in Brookhurst Street from Hamilton Ave. to a point north of Atlanta Ave. and from that point construct a short stretch of 24" storm drain. This project will correct all storm drain deficiencies in drainage district 7G. 30. Slater/Newland Storm Drain $700, 000 Construct 4" storm drain in Slater Avenue from the C06 channel west to Newland street, then south on Newland Street to Talbert, then west on Talbert to Hartlund Street. Construct 48" storm drain in Hartlund Street from Talbert Avenue south to Gladys Avenue. Construct 30" storm drain in Hartlund Street from Gladys Avenue south to Kiner Avenue. Construct 24" storm drain in Hartlund Avenue from Kiner Avenue south to Le Conte Drive, thence west on Le Conte Drive to Springtime Lane. Construct 30" storm drain in Gladys Avenue from Hartlund Street west to Wharton Street, thence south on Wharton Street to Sterling Avenue. Construct 24" storm drain in Sterling Avenue from Wharton Street west to Lisa Lane, thence south on Lisa Lane to Kiner Avenue. The two branches of this proposed storm drain will remove all street capacity defi- ciencies in drainage district 3 . 31. D01 Storm Drain $600 ,000 Construct " storm drain in the O.C.F.C.D. R/W from the Atlanta pump station north to Kingfisher Drive. Construct 36" storm drain in O.C.F.C.D. R/W from Kingfisher Drive north to Indianapolis Avenue where it branches easterly (24") and westerly (18") to capture drainage from both sides of the channel . The existing storm drain system in this area is 40% deficient. Construction of this project will remove all storm drain deficiencies in drainage district 7A. 32 . Banning Storm Drain $400 , 000 Construct 54" storm drain in Banning Avenue from Banning pump station west to Bushard Street, thence construct a 42" storm drain southeasterly in Cape May Lane to Wood Island Lane. The existing storm drains are 50% deficient. Construction of this project will eliminate the deficiency in drainage district 7C. Unfunded Drainage Projects Page 5 33 . Graham Storm Drain $700, 000 Construct 7511 storm drain in Graham Street from the C04 c annel north approximately 300 ' , then construct a 66" storm drain from the ending point of the 75" storm drain north to Research Drive. Construct 36" storm drain in Graham Street from Research Drive north to McFadden Avenue. Construction of this storm drain will alleviate the existing deficiency in drainage district 2A. 34 . Edwards/Goldenwest Storm Drain $700,000 Construct 60" storm drain rom Lake to Central Park between Goldenwest and Edwards Streets south to Ellis Avenue. From Ellis Avenue construct 42" storm drain south approximately 2000 feet . This project is needed because there are no storm drain facilities in this area and future development is anticipated. 35. Edwards Storm Drain $170 , 000 Construct 24' storm drain in Edwards Street from Edinger Avenue north to Down Drive. Construction of this storm drain will help alleviate street capacity deficiencies in drainage district 5A. 36 . Graham/Heil Storm Drain $750 ,000 Construct " storm drain from bend in C07 channel southeasterly to intersection of Graham Street and Meadowlark Drive. Construct 48" storm drain in Graham Street from Meadowlark Drive south to Heil Avenue, thence east on Heil Avenue to Clubhouse Lane, thence south approximately 400 feet into Meadowlark Golf Course. Con- struction of this project will correct storm drain deficiencies in this area of drainage district 2. ...r 37 . Beach/Atlanta Storm Drains $1 ,300 , 000 Construct 4 storm drain in Beach Blvd. from approximately 600 feet N/o Atlanta for 700 feet, thence northerly 1300 feet with a 36" storm drain. Construct 48" storm drain from a point approxi- mately 500 feet north of Atlanta Avenue in Beach Blvd. northwest to Frankfort Avenue, then westerly in Frankfort Avenue with a 30" storm drain to Delaware Street, then north on Delaware Street to Geneva Avenue. Construct 18" storm drain in Delaware from Geneva Avenue north to Hartford Avenue, then east on Hartford Avenue approximately 150 feet. Construct 36" storm drain in Atlanta Avenue from approximately 1200 feet W/o Beach Blvd. to Huntington Street, then west to Alabama Street with an 16" storm drain. Con- struct a 30" storm drain in Beach Blvd. from Atlanta Avenue south approximately 1600 feet. The construction of this project will alleviate storm drain deficiencies in drainage district 8B. 38 . Garfield Storm Drain Phase II $300,000 Construct 42" storm drain in Garfield Avenue from approximately 370 feet west of the centerline of Delaware Street to approximately 600 feet west of the centerline of Huntington Street, then westerly approximately 600 feet with 36" storm drain. From that point westerly in Garfield Avenue with 33" storm drain to Crystal Street. This project will correct the storm drain deficiencies in this area of drainage district 8G. Unfunded Drainage Projects Page 6 39 . Springdale Storm Drain $340 ,000 Construct " storm drain in Springdale Street from the CO SO c an- nel north to Palo Alto Drive. Construct 24" storm drain in Spring- dale Street from Palo Alto Drive north to Rosemont Drive. Construct 24" storm drain in Palo Alto Drive from Springdale Street east to La Mesa Lane. This project will alleviate storm drain deficiencies in this portion of drainage district 9 . 40. Prescott/Flintstone Storm Drains $250,000 Construct 24". storm rain 1n Prescott Lane from Nutwood Circle south to Torin Drive. Construct 24" storm drain in Flintstone Lane from approximately 150 feet S/o Fenley Drive south to Armada Drive, then east on Armada Drive to McKinney Circle. This project will correct existing street capacity deficiencies in this section of drainage district 9 . 41. Cornell Storm Drain $1,000, 000 Construct 66 storm drain in Cornell Drive from the C04 channel east to Columbia Lane. Construct 48" storm drain in Cornell Drive from Columbia Lane east to .Edwards Street. Construct 36" storm drain in Cornell Drive from Edwards Street east to Hanover Lane. This project will relieve the existing storm drain deficiency in this portion of drainage district 2. 42. Halifax Storm Drain $200,000 Construct ' storm drain in Halifax Drive from Edwards Street east to Hanover Lane. Construct 24" storm drain in Halifax Drive from Hanover Lane east to Victoria Lane. This project will relieve the existing street capacity deficiency in this portion of drainage district 2. 43 . Meadowlark/Birdie Storm Drain $150, 000 Construct 6 storm drain in Meadowlark Drive from Graham Street east to Birdie Lane, thence south in Birdie Lane to Venturi Drive. This project will correct the storm drain deficiencies in this portion of drainage district 2. 44 . Edinger/Sherbeck Storm Drain $250, 000 Construct 36" storm drain in Edinger Avenue from Belfast Lane east to Sherbeck Lane. Construct 24" storm drain in Edinger Avenue from Sherbeck Lane east to Malm Circle. Construct 18" storm drain in Edinger Avenue from Malm Circle east to Feola Circle. Construct 18" storm drain in Sherbeck Drive from Edinger Avenue north to Breeland Drive. This project will alleviate street capacity defi- ciencies in this portion of drainage district 5A. 45. Redlands Storm Drain $100,000 Construct 24" storm drain in Redlands Lane from Defiance Drive tev o Lafayette Drive. This project will alleviate street capacity deficiencies in this portion of drainage district 5A. 6 . Stardust Storm Drain $100, 000 Construct 4 storm drain in Stardust Drive from Nevada Driv^'e east to Hammon Lane . This project will correct the street capacity deficiency in this area. The project is not located in an established drainage district. Unfunded Drainage Projects Pace 7 47 . Gothard/Goldenwest Storm Drains $800, 000 Construct storm drain Trom Ellis Avenue midway between Golden- west Street and Gothard Street southwesterly to Goldenwest Street, then south in Goldenwest Street with 60" storm drain to Ernest Avenue. Construct 48" storm drain in Goldenwest Street from Ernest Avenue south approximately 500 feet, thence southerly in Golden- west Street with 56" storm drain to Garfield Avenue. Construct 90" storm drain from Ellis midway between Goldenwest Street and Gothard Street southeasterly to joint existing 72" drain in Gothard Street. From joint point in Gothard Street construct approximately 600 feet of 30" , then approximately 600 feet of 24" southerly down Gothard Street. This project is needed because there are no storm drain facilities in this portion of drainage district 9 and future development is anticipated. 48 . Meadowlark Storm Drain $300,000 Construct 2 storm drain from intersection of Warner Avenue and Graham Street 750 feet easterly into the Meadowlark Golf Course, then northerly 750 feet. This project will be needed if the golf course area develops. Drainage district 49 . Warner/Lynn Storm Drain $800,000 Construct " storm drain in Warner Avenue from Weatherly Bay east to Orion Avenue. Construct 42" storm drain in Warner Avenue from Orion Avenue to Lynn Street. Construct 27" storm drain in Lynn Street for Warner Avenue south to Hermanson Circle. This project will correct the storm drain deficiency that exists in this portion of drainage district 12 . Ord. No. 2798 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) I, ALICIA M. WENTWORTH, the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing ordinance was read to said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 16th day of September 19 85 , and was again read to said City Council at a regular adjourned meeting thereof held on the 14th day of October 19 85 and was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of more than a majority of all the members of said City Council. AYES: Councilmen: Kelly, macAllister, Bailey, Finley, Green, Thomas NOES: Councilmen: None ABSENT: Councilmen: Mandic City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California 1, Alicia M. Wentworth CITY CLERK of the City Ot Huntington Beach and ex-officio Clerk of the City Couna, do hereby certtY teat a synopsis of this ordinance han been puo}'.shed In the Huntington Beach Inde.)endent on �0 4/ - : Q.S ... ...... - ...... 2 ................. in rccor:lancc r.ith the City Charter V. sad City. AUC1A M. WENTWORTH ....................................._............_........................................... • City Clerk _.. ._..._._ .. .... .. Clerk ................ Deputy City Attachment 4 REQUE FOR CITY COUNCIWCTION' Date L Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Submitted by: Charles Thompson, City Adminis Prepared by: Paul E. Cook, Director of Public Subject: Revised Master Plan of Drainage Consistent with Council Policy? \ [ ] Yes [x] New Polly y or E pt �S Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source,,�kft'ernative Actions, Attachments: Statement of Issue: Since 1960, the City has had 34 drainage areas in which it collected fees. Now it makes sense to consolidate these districts around major projects and actual drainage areas. Reccmmendation: Adopt the ordinance amending the Municipal Code Sections 14.48.010, 14.48.020 and 14.48.050 relating to a revised Master Plan of Drainage. Adopt the Resolution establishing drainage fees for the new drainage area. Analysis: In October, 1979, L.D. King completed a Master Plan of Drainage for the City of Huntington Beach. The Master Plan identified City-owned drainage facilities in need of improvement, and reccnu ended additional facilities to be constructed. The new facilities, and facility improvements, described in the 1979 L.D. King plan, are still valid. Chapter 14.48 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code adopts the City's Master Plan of Drainage and divides the City into 34 local drainage areas. The Master Plan describes drainage facilities which must be constructed or improved in each of these drainage districts and the City collects fees for construction of these facilities. Drainage fees are set by Council resolution and are applied to the development of all land within the drainage area. Although the creation of 34 drainage districts made sense in 1960, now it would be more desirable to consolidate districts around major projects and actual drainage basins. The City drainage system is tributary to five major Orange County Flood Control District Channels including the Santa Ana River. The hydraulic characteris- tics of these channels are the determining factor in the design of City-owned channels and pump stations. By consolidating existing drainage districts into basins which are served by the County channels, the 34 existing drainage basins can be reduced to six. Expenditure of funds accumulated in the 34 existing drainage area would still be limited to areas from which they were generated. There are no substantial changes proposed in the projects identified in the 1979 Master Plan or in the magnitude of the drainage fee per acre. The primary chute is in the number of drainage areas. Funding Source: No expenditure of funds is involved in the change in the number of drainage areas. PIO 4/84 Request for City Council Action ff ,, Master Plan of Drainage *»'Nptember 5, 1985 Page 2 Alternative Action: 1. Leave the number of drainage areas at 34. 2. Establish drainage areas at a number other than 6 or 34. Attachuents: 1. July 1985 Master Plan of Drainage 2. ordinance amending Sections 14.48.010, 14.48.020 and 14.48.050 of the Municipal Code 3. Resolution relating to drainage fees CWr:PEC:LE:lw ��I�AN���.�RAIi�AC,E +���Y.���.985� `�, Analysis In October, 1979, L.D. King completed a Master Plan of Drainage for the City of Huntington Beach. The Master Plan identified City-owned drainage facilities in need of improvement, and recomTexled additional facilities to be constructed. The new facilities, and facility improvements, described in the 1979 L.D. King plan form the basis of this report. Chapter 14.48 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code adopts the City's Master Plan of Drainage and divides the City into 34 local drainage areas. The Master Plan describes drainage facilities which must be constructed or improved in each of these drainage districts and the City collects fees for construction of these facilities. Drainage fees are set by Council resolution and are applied to the development of all land within the drainage area Although the creation of 34 drainage districts made sense in 1960, now it would be more desirable to consolidate districts around major projects and actual drainage basins. The City drainage system is tributary to five major Orange County Flood Control District Channels including the Santa Ana River. The hydraulic characteristics of these channels are the determining factor in the design of City-owned channels and pump stations. By consolidating existing drainage districts into basins which are served by the County channels, the 34 existing drainage basins can be reduced to six. A description of the proposed consolidation follows: Santa Ana River Drainage Area Drainage Districts 7D and 7G contribute storm run-cff directly to the Santa Ana River through the Meredith and Hamilton Pump Stations. Reir.b. Agr Unfunded Undvd Present District Funds Available Outstanding Projects Priority* Acreage Fee/Acre 7D $ 1,905 $ 3,658 $ 650,000 6 r 10 $ 2,775 700,000 27 7G 14,993 -0- 250,000 3 20 4,450 900,000 29 Talbert Channel Drainage Area Drainage Districts 6A, 6B, 6C, 7B, 7C, 7H and 7F contribute flow to the Talbert Channel from five pump stations. The drainage districts should be consolidated since the contribution of flow from each district is limited by the Talbert Channel capacity and future improvements must be carefully coordinated. Reim. Agr Unfunded Undvd District Funds Available Outstanding Projects Priori Acreage Fee/Acre 6A $ 95,776 -0- $1,300,000 23 410 $ 2,775 6B 67,357 -0- 950,000 4 < 10 2,225 6C 51,164 -0- -0- - 10 3,350 7B 53,569 -0- 200,000 10 10 2,775 350,000 24 Reimb Agr Unfunded Undvd District Funds Available Outstanding Projects Priority* Acreage Fee/Acre 7C $ -0- $27,105 $400,000 32 30 $ 2,775 7F 121,161 -0- 400,000 28 .410 2,775 7H -0- -0- -0- -0- -0- Huntington Beach Channel Drainage Area Drainage Districts 7A, 7E, 7I, 8B, 8C and 8G contribute to flaws in the Huntington Beach C'-omel through three pump stations and several gravity storm drains. The Huntington Beach Channel is under-designed and all future improvements to facilities contributing flaw to the channel must be coordinated. Reimb Agr Unfunded Undvd District Funds Available Outstanding Projects Priority* Acreage Fee/Acre 7A $ (14,440) $ 134,789 $ 600,000 31 -c 10 $ 4,000 7E 262,646 113,246 300,000 11 80 4,450 -0- -0- - <10 5,000 7I 68,906 -0- -0- - 40 5,000 8B (363,280) -0- 1,300,000 37 50 8,350 8C 17,341 -0- -0- - 20 5,000 8G 260,854 127,680.00 300,000 38 80 7,800 Downtown Drainage Area Drainage Districts 8A, 8D, 8F and 8H comprise this area. All run-off is directly to the ocean by gravity flow. Permits for discharge across the State beaches all require special mitigation and coordination with the State Parks and Recreation. Reimb Agr Unfunded Undvd Fee/Acre District Funds Available Outstanding Projects Priori * Acreage 8F $ -0- $ -0- $ 550,000 21 '4 10 $ -0- 250,000 22 8D (744) -0- 4,000,000 14 <10 2,225 8F (62,174) -0- -0- -- 20 3,350 8H 158,032 -0- 200,000 15 <10 4,000 200,000 16 160,000 17 100,000 18 Wintersburg Channel Drainage Area Drainage Districts 3, 4, 5, 5A, 5B, 5C, 5D, 9, 10 and 11 contribute flow to the Wintersburg Channel through four FArnp stations and numerous gravity lines. The Wintersburg Channel is not adquate to handle all the flaw which it receives. Careful coordination and planning of all drainage improvements in this area will be required to ensure the highest level of flood protection. MASTER PLAN OF DRAINAGE AREAS 9-5-11 I - DM 9 D J HUNT INGTON HARBOUR „-tl 15-5-I. 14- !1 M`i8= — WINTERSBURG CHANNEL I 24 0-5-11 21-5 !I 22 5 II 23 5-I 5 u 1- DM 2R. DM 21 DN Z3 DM24 DM25 D+' S DM.27 1 I 30 5 1 25 5 II 25L J1 27-5-II -5 II 25 -il ADM 35\�� DM 34 DM 33 DM32 DM 3� I D G -- - =c. �32 5-1! -11 35-5-I1 -II 0M 36 DM 37 .-' 36M 39 D ,0 TALBcRT CHANNE • r �% I i i j 5-6-11 \ I1 3-6-11 2 -11 i 1-6 5+6- D M 4 \•��• •`��� 2 I ^Dbt UM f 1G 11 11- II 12 6-I! 7-6 10 \ CAF`i A f<NA DWI pM7 F12 RI�JEr DOWNTOWN "x © 04 13_6-u_ le IG 17-6-10 CITY OF `<".�21 D _ D 0 DM19 HUNTINGTON BEACH HUNT I N GTON ' - r ORANGE COUNTY CALIFORNIA BEACH CHANNEL ?-I ol 11Da,t[�,C•Y M � u an1lr,a _ \ Wintersburg Channel (Cont.) Reimb Agr Unfunded Undvd Fee/Acre District Funds Available outstanding Projects Priori Acreage 3 $ 251492.00 -0- $ 500,000 5 15 4,450 700,000 30 4 (15,617) -0- 1,500,000 2 10 -0- 1,000,000 25 5 30,819 97,921 300,000 13 80 2,225 250,000 26 5A (73,210) -0- 170,000 35 10 2,775 250,000 44 100,000 45 5B 68,080 -0- -0- -- 10 -0- 5C 106,864 -0- -0- -- -0- -10 5D (1,015) -0- -0- - 10 -0- 9 552,697 179,652 750,000 7 600 7,250 93,240 1,250,000 12 700,000 34 340,000 39 250,000 40 800,000 47 300,000 48 10 64,894 -0- -0- 10 2,225 11 (32,200) -0- -0- -- < 10 Campleted Huntington Harbour Drainage Area Drainage Districts 2, 2A and 12 make up this area which drains to the harbor. Because of the debris and silting problems in the harbor, improvements proposed in these districts must be carefully coordinated. Reimb Agr Unfunded Undvd Fee/Acre District Funds Available Outstanding Projects Priori T* Acreage 2 $ 263,214 $ 3,478 $ 250,000 8 <10 725 250,000 9 750,000 36 1,000,000 41 200,000 42 200,000 43 2A 306,733 -0- 700,000 33 < 10 2,775 12 214,339 27,974 160,000 19 80 7,250 700,000 20- 800,000 49 * See Appendix A The proposed fees for the new drainage areas are listed on Table 1. Even with the consolidation, not all the projects listed in Appendix A could be accurplished. The effect of the new drainage areas would be as follows: Santa Ana River Drainage Area The district is almost eupletely developed and no fonds are on hand. Two high priority projects are identified within the district. Possibilities for funding appear to be limited to City General Fund or Assessment District. Talbert Channel Drainage Area Consolidation of the districts will yield less than 50 acres of underdeveloped land. Funds on hand are about $400,000. Two high priority projects identi- fied within the district would remain unfunded without General Fund or Assess- ment District Funding. Huntington Beach Channel Drainage Area District consolidation should give over 300 underdeveloped acres, which could generate over two million dollars in additional funds. Together with the $232,000 on hand, the highest priority projects could be accarplished. Wintersburg Channel Drainage Area Consolidation of existing drainage districts would give 700 acres of under- developed land worth four million dollars in drainage funds. Together with $750,000 on hand, the three projects with the highest priority could be accomplished. Huntington Harbour Drainage Area Consolidation would allow adequate funds to ccuplete the three highest priority projects. Downtown Drainage Area As the downtown area is redeveloped, adequate funds could be generated to cmplete many of the highest priority projects. TABLE OF DRAINAGE FEES DRAINAGE AREA TOTAL UNDEV./ NPAID* PROP. ACRES ACRES DRAIN FEE Santa Ana River 770 20 9,000 Talbert Channel 1,925 20 7,000 Huntington Beach Channel 2,450 340 7,000 Downtown 775 270 6,000 Wintershurg Channel 5,595 740 5,500 Huntington Harbour 1,840 170 5,500 H *UNDEV/UNPAID: Areas that are vacant or previously developed and did not pay fees because the drainage fee was not established at that time. 1. Pump Station ContrOW/Shields; Bolsa Chica $80,000 Purchase and install new engine controls in the Shields and Bolsa Chica pump stations. These controls will complete the automation of control systems for storm drain pump engines by funding them for two districts where drainage funds are unavailable 2 . Shields Pump $1 ,500 ,000 Design, acquire land for, construct and equip new pump station; redesign, reconstruct and re-equip existing pump station; and con- nect both to new storm drain system. Existing system is unable to handle designed drainage runoff. - Capacity needs to be .expanded by 88% . This is our most serious potential problem area. This drain- age district (No. 4) is without funds . 3. Hamilton Engine Addition $250, 000 Purchase and install a fourth engine at the Hamilton pump station. on. Existing capacity of station is deficient to handle designed drain- age runoff in this critical area. 4 . Flounder P.S. and Storm Drains $950 ,000 Modification to Flounder Pump Station to increase capacity and in- stallation of additional storm drains. To provide for system modifications to eliminate flooding in the vicinty. 5 . Michael Drive System Pump Station $500, 000 Construct drainage pump station to discharge from City 's C6-561 Channel into the County's C6 Channel . To relieve flooding in the Michael Drive area when County channel 'flows impede flows in the Citv channels. 6 . Upgrade Modifications to the Meredith Drainage Pump Sta. $650, 000 Purchase and install three 3 new engines and pumps to replace existing. Pump station is deficient to handle design flows. New engines and pumps to increase capacity. 7 . Slater Pump Station $750 , 000 Three additional engines and pumps. To increase station to capacity required. Station presently adequate. Additional pumping capacity needed as development occurs in the drainage area. S . Scenario Pumz Station $250 , 000 Upgrade station % To increase capacity of station. Presently, station is marginal. Storm drains are needed to this station which then will result in a deficiency. 9 . Scenario Storm Drain $250 , 000 Construct 6 storm drain in Scenario Drive from Fantasia Lane to the Scenario pump station. To correct street capacity deficiencies which are anticipated to be in existence at this time. Note: Scenario pump station would need upgrading prior to this project. 10. Adams Pump Station $200 ,000 Upgrade station 16%) . To increase capacity; station is presently adequate, however, additional storm drains are needed to this pump station at which time it will become deficient. royc 11 . Newland Pump Station T 5300 ,000 Upgrade station with larger engines and pumps (63%) . To increase capacity. This need will arise as additional developments are accomplished within the drainage area . 12. Loss of Channel Lining Phase II $1 ,250 ,000 Construct concrete liningf r the C05SO4 (Slater) Flood Contro Channel between Springdale Street and Goldenwest Street. This project is needed to improve hydraulic characteristics of the existing earthen channel and prevent erosion that endangers adjacent private property. 13. Newland/Heil Storm Drain $300,000 Construct 36" RCP storm drain in Heil Ave. from Newland St. west approximately 8001 . Construct 24" RCP storm drain in Heil Ave. from Newland St. east approximately 1,100 ' . To eliminate cross gutter in Newland Street on the north side of Heil Avenue in the City of Westminster and correct storm drain deficiencies in area. 14 . 12th & Main St. Storm Drain . $4 ,000, 000 Construct RCP storm drain in 12th St. between Palm Ave. an Main Street. Construct 72" RCP in Main St. between 12th St. and Adams Avenue. Construct 60" RCP in Main St. between Adams Ave. and Utica Avenue. Construct 48" RCP in Main St. between Utica and Yorktown. Construct 30" RCP branch in Palm Avenue . Construct 48" & 36" RCP branch in 12th Street. Construct 30" & 24" RCP branch in Adams Avenue. This project is needed to relieve the existing storm drain deficiencies in drainage districts 8D & 8F . 15. 18th Street Storm Drain $200 , 000 Construct 24" RCP storm drain from Beach up 18th St. to Orange Avenue. Construct 16" RCP in Orange Ave. from 18th St. east to 17th Street. This storm drain is needed to relieve severe street capacity deficiencies in drainage district 8H. 16 . 20th Street Storm Drain $200, 000 Construct 24" RCP storm drain from P.C.H. north to Orange Avenue. Construct 18" RCP in Orange Ave. from 20th St. west to 21st Street. This storm drain is needed to relieve severe street capacity deficiencies in drainage district 8H. 17 . Goldenwest Street Storm Drain $160, 000 Construct 48" RCP storm drain. Construct the 24" RCP in Golden- west St. from P.C.H. north to Orange Avenue . Construct 24" RCP in Orange Ave. from Goldenwest St. east to 22nd Street. This storm drain is needed to relieve severe street capacity deficien- cies in drainage district 8H. 18 . 16th Street Storm Drain $100, 000 Construct 4" RCP storm drain in 16th Street from P.C.H . north to Olive Avenue. This storm drain is needed to relieve severe street capacity deficiencies in drainage district 8H. Untuncied drainage rro3ects Page 3 1R. Bolsa Chica Street Storm Drain - $160, 000 Construct RCP storm drain in Bolsa Chica Street from Warner Avenue south to Los Patos Avenue. 20. Heil/Le Grand Storm Drain - $700 , 000 Construct 2"-66" RCP storm drain in Heil Avenue from C07 channel east to Le Grand Lane. Construct 66"-24" storm drain in Le Grand Lane from Heil Avenue south to Prairie Drive. 21. Sixth Street Storm Drain $550 ,000 Construct RCP storm drain from Beach up Sixth St. to Olive Avenue. Construct 36"-24" RCP in Olive Avenue from Sixth Street west to Eighth Street. Construct 36"-24" RCP in Olive Avenue from Sixth Street east to Main Street. Existing storm drains in district 8A are approximately 50€ deficient. Construction of this storm drain would help relieve this condition. 22 . Lake Street Storm Drain $250,000 Construct 30" RCP storm drain in Lake Street from Beach to O ve Avenue. Construct 24" RCP in Olive Avenue from Lake Street west to Second Street. Construction of this storm drain along with the Sixth Street storm drain will remove all the storm drain deficiencies in drainage district 8A. 23. Edison R/W Storm Drain $1 ,300,000 Construct an 84" storm. drain parallel to existing 84" storm drain from the D05 flood control channel to Brookhurst Street at which point it reduces to 42" . The proposed storm drain conti.n-aes easterly approximately 2000 ft. in the Edison R/h at which point the storm drain branches north and south with 24" storm drain. This storm drain will remove and will correct all storm drain and street capacity deficiencies in drainage district 6A. 24 . Adams Avenue Storm Drain $350 , 000 Construct 60 storm drain in Adams Avenue frontage road between the Adams pump station and Bushard Street paralleling the existing 60" storm drains. This storm drain is needed to correct the exist- ing deficient condition in Drainage District 7B. 25. Shields/Springdale Storm Drain $1 ,000 ,000 Construct " storm rain in Shields Dr. from pump station to Springdale Street. Construct 36" storm drain in Gildred Circle from Springdale Street to Green View Lane. Construct 36" storm drain in Springdale Street from Shields Drive north to Annette Circle. Construct 24" storm drain in Springdale Street from Annette Circle to Heil Avenue. Construct 18" storm drain in Springdale Street from Heil Avenue north approximately 900 feet. Construct 30" storm drain in Springdale Street from Shields Drive south approximately 700 feet. This project is needed to correct the 50€ deficiency in the western half of drainage district No. 4 . 26 . Volga Storm Drain $250 , 000 Construct 4" storm drain in alley north of Volga Drive P.E. RTW to Sher Lane. Construct 18" storm drain from Sher Lane easterly to Parkside Street then southerly in Parkside Street to Stark Avenue. Page 4 27. -Meredith Storm Drain $700,000 Construct 60" storm drain in Midland Lane from Meredith pump station north to Niagara Drive, then west on Niagara Drive to Lawson Lane, then north on Lawson Lane to Adams Avenue where the storm drain branches westerly with a 42" pipe and easterly with a 24" pipe. This project will correct all storm drain deficiencies in drainage district 7D. • 28 . Indianapolis Storm Drain $400,000 Construct " storm rain in Indianapolis Avenue from the Indian- apolis pump station west to. Bushard Street. This project will correct all storm drain deficiencies in drainage district 7F. 29 . Brookhurst Storm Drain $900, 000 Construct 48ir storm drain in Brookhurst Street from Hamilton n Ave. to a point north of Atlanta Ave. and from that point construct a short stretch of 24" storm drain. This project will correct all storm drain deficiencies in drainage district 7G. 30. Slater/Newland Storm Drain $700, 000 Construct 4" storm drain in Slater Avenue from the C06 channe west to Newland street, then south on Newland Street to Talbert, then west on Talbert to Hartlund Street. Construct 48" storm drain in Hartlund Street from Talbert Avenue south to Gladys Avenue. Construct 30" storm drain in Hartlund Street from Gladys Avenue south to Kiner Avenue. Construct 24" storm drain in Hartlund Avenue from Kiner Avenue south to Le Conte Drive, thence west on Le Conte Drive to Springtime Lane. Construct 30" storm drain in Gladys Avenue from Hartlund Street west to Wharton Street, thence south on Wharton Street to Sterling Avenue. Construct 24" storm drain in Sterling Avenue from Wharton Street west to Lisa Lane, thence south on Lisa Lane to Kiner Avenue. The two branches of this proposed storm drain will remove all street capacity defi- ciencies in drainage district 3 . 31. DO1 Storm Drain $600 ,000 Construct storm drain in the O.C.F.C.D. R/W from the Atlanta pump station north to Kingfisher Drive. Construct 36" storm drain in O.C.F.C.D. R/W from Kingfisher Drive north to Indianapolis Avenue where it branches easterly (24") and westerly (18") to capture drainage from both sides of the channel . The existing storm drain system in this area is 40$ deficient. Construction of this project will remove all storm drain deficiencies in drainage district 7A. 32. Banning Storm Drain $400 , 000 Construct 54" storm drain in Banning Avenue from Banning pump station west to Bushard Street, thence construct a 42" storm drain southeasterly in Cape May Lane to Wood Island Lane. The existing storm drains are 50% deficient. Construction of this project will eliminate the deficiency in drainage district 7C. Unfunded Drainage Projects Page . 5 33 ; Graham Storm Drain $700 , 000 Construct 5 storm drain in Graham Street from the C04 c an�ne-1' north approximately 300 ' , then construct a 66" storm drain from the ending point of the 75" storm drain north to Research Drive . Construct 36" storm drain in Graham Street from Research Drive north to McFadden Avenue . Construction of this storm drain will alleviate the existing deficiency in drainage district 2A. 34 . Edwards/Goldenwest Storm Drain , $700 , 000 Construct 60" storm drain from Lake to Central Park between Goldenwest and Edwards Streets south to Ellis Avenue . From Ellis Avenue construct 42" storm drain south approximately 2000 feet . This project is needed because there are no storm drain facilities in this area and future development is anticipated. 35 . Edwards Storm Drain $170 , 000 Construct 24 " storm drain in Edwards Street from Edinger Avenue north to Down Drive. Construction of this storm drain will help alleviate street capacity deficiencies in drainage district 5A . 36 . Graham/Heil Storm Drain $750 , 000 Construct 5 storm drain from bend in C07 channel southeasterly to intersection of Graham Street and Meadowlark Drive. Construct 48" storm drain in Graham Street from Meadowlark Drive south to Heil Avenue , thence east on Heil Avenue to Clubhouse Lane, thence south approximately 400 feet into Meadowlark Golf Course. Con- struction of this project will correct storm drain deficiencies in this area cf drainage district 2 . 37 . Beach/Atlanta Storm Drains $1 ,300 ,000 Construct storm rain in Beach Blvd. from approximately 600 feet N/o Atlanta for 700 feet, thence northerly 1300 feet with a 36" storm drain. Construct 48" storm drain from a point approxi- mately 500 feet north of Atlanta Avenue in Beach Blvd. northwest to Frankfort Avenue, then westerly in Frankfort Avenue with a 30" storm drain to Delaware Street, then north on Delaware Street to Geneva Avenue. Construct 18" storm drain in Delaware from Geneva Avenue north to Hartford Avenue, then east on Hartford Avenue approximately 150 feet. Construct 36" storm drain in Atlanta Avenue from approximately 1200 feet W/o Beach Blvd. to Huntington Street, then west to Alabama Street with an 16" storm drain. Con- struct a 30" storm drain in Beach Blvd. from Atlanta Avenue south approximately 1600 feet. The construction of this project will alleviate storm drain deficiencies in drainage district 8B . 38 . Garfield Storm Drain Phase II $300 , 000 Construct 42" storm drain in Garfield Avenue from approximately 370 feet west of the centerline of Delaware Street to approximately 600 feet west of the centerline of Huntington Street, then westerly approximately 600 feet with 36" storm drain. From that point westerly in Garfield Avenue with 33" storm drain to Crystal Street. This project will correct the storm drain deficiencies in this area of drainage district 8G . Page 6 39 . Springdale Storm Drain $340 , 000 Construct " storm drain in Springdale Street from the C05SOT chan- nel north to Palo Alto Drive. Construct 24" storm drain in Spring- dale Street from Palo Alto Drive north to Rosemont Drive. Construct 24" storm drain in Palo Alto Drive from Springdale Street east to La Mesa Lane. This project will alleviate storm drain deficiencies in this portion of drainage district 9 . 40. Prescott/Flintstone Storm Drains $250, 000 Construct storm drain in Prescott Lane from Nutwood Circle south to Torin Drive. Construct 24" storm drain in Flintstone Lane from approximately 150 feet S/o Fenley Drive south to Armada Drive, then east on Armada Drive to McKinney Circle. This project will correct existing street capacity deficiencies in this section of drainage district 9 . 41 . Cornell Storm Drain $1 , 000 , 000 Construct 66" storm drain in Cornell Drive from the C04 channel east to Columbia Lane. Construct 48" storm drain in Cornell Drive from Columbia Lane east to .Edwards Street. Construct 36" storm drain in Cornell Drive from Edwards Street east to Hanover Lane . This project will relieve the existing storm drain deficiency in this portion of drainage district 2 . 42 . Halifax Storm Drain $200 , 000 Construct TO---storm drain in Halifax Drive from Edwards Street east to Hanover Lane . Construct 24" storm drain in Halifax. Drive from Hanover Lane east to Victoria Lane. This project will relieve the existing street capacity deficiency in this portion of drainage district 2. 43 . Meadowlark/Birdie Storm Drain $150, 000 Construct 6 storm drain in Meadowlark Drive from Graham Street east to Birdie Lane , thence south in Birdie Lane to Venturi Drive . This project will correct the storm drain deficiencies in this portion of drainage district 2 . 44 . Edinger/Sherbeck Storm Drain $250 , 000 Construct 36" storm drain in Edinger Avenue from Belfast Lane east to Sherbeck Lane. Construct 24" storm drain in Edinger Avenue from Sherbeck Lane east to Malm Circle . Construct 18" storm drain in Edinger Avenue from Malm Circle east to Feola Circle . Construct 18" storm drain in Sherbeck Drive from Edinger Avenue north to Breeland Drive. This project will alleviate street capacity defi- ciencies in this portion of drainage district 5A. 45. Redlands Storm Drain $100 , 000 Construct 24" storm drain in Redlands Lane from Defiance Dri e to Lafayette Drive. This project will alleviate street capacity deficiencies in this portion of drainage district 5A. 46 . Stardust Storm Drain $10� 0, 000 Construct 4 ' storm drain in Stardust Drive from Nevada Drive east to Hammon Lane. This project will correct the street capacity deficiency in this area . The project is not located in an established drainage district. Pace •7� 47 . Gothard/Goldenwest Storm Drains $800, 000 Construct storm drain from Ellis Avenue midway between Golden- west n Street and Gothard Street southwesterly to Goldenwest Street, then south in Goldenwest Street with 60" storm drain to Ernest Avenue. Construct 48" storm drain in Goldenwest Street from Ernest Avenue south approximately 500 feet, thence southerly in Golden- west Street with 56" storm drain to Garfield Avenue. Construct 90" storm drain from Ellis midway between Goldenwest Street and Gothard Street southeasterly to joint existing 72" drain in Gothard Street. From joint point in Gothard Street construct approximately 600 feet of 30" , then approximately 600 feet of 24" southerly down Gothard Street. This project is needed because there are no storm drain facilities in this portion of drainage district 9 and future development is anticipated. 48 . Meadowlark Storm Drain $300 , 000 Construct 2" storm drain from intersection of Warner Avenue and Graham Street 750 feet easterly into the Meadowlark Golf Course, then northerly 750 feet. This project will be needed if the golf course area develops . Drainage district 49 . Warner/Lynn Storm Drain $800, 000 Construct 54" storm drain in Warner Avenue from Weatherly Bay east to Orion Avenue. Construct 42" storm drain in Warner Avenue from Orion Avenue to Lynn Street. Construct 27" storm drain in Lynn Street for Warner Avenue south to Hermanson Circle. This project will correct the storm drain deficiency that exists in this portion of drainage district 12 . C- No. 2798 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ) I, ALICIA M. WENTWORTH, the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing ordinance was read to said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 16th day of September 1985 , and was again read to said City Council at a regular adjourned meeting thereof held on the 14th day of October , 19 85 , and was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of more than a majority of all the members of said City Council. AYES: Councilmen: Kelly, macAllister, Bailey, Finley, Green, Thomas NOES: Councilmen: None ABSENT: Councilmen: Mandic City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California Attachment 5 F�MAMMNRM.Aw Huntington Beach Planning Commission P.O. BOX 190 CALIPORWA 8264S Date: February 10, 1989 NOTICE OF ACTION . A� licant: Pegasus School - 18685 Santa Ynez, Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Subject. ' CONDITIONAL USE FERHIT NO. 88-56 Your application was acted upon by the Huntington Beach Planning Commission on February 7, 1489 and your request.was: Withdrawn Approved Approved with Conditions xX (See Attached) Disapproved Tabled Continued until Under the provisions of the Huntir n Beach Ordinance Code, the action taken by the Planning Commission : final unless an appeal is filed to t1:e City Council by'you or an interested party. Said appeal must be in writing and must set forth in detail the actions and grounds by and upon which the applicant or interested party deems himself aggrieved. Said appeal must be accompanied by a filing fee of one hundred and .sixty-five ($165) dollars and b= submitted to the City Clerk's office within ten (10) days of the date of the Commission's action. In your case, the last day for filing an appeal and paying the filing fee is I February 17., 1989 Provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code are ouch that ny application becomes null and void one (1) year after final approval, unless actual construction has started. A-PC-LT-IA Huntington Beach Planning Commission w P.O. BOX 190 CALIFORNIA 92642 February 10, 1989 Pegasus School 12585 Santa Ynez Fountain Valley, CA 92708 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 88-56 REQUEST: To establish a Pegasus School for pre-school through grade 8 in the vacant Arevalos Elementary school site, LOCATION: 19692 Lexingtor. Lane (approximately 1,200 feet north of Adams Avenue and 2,000 feet east of Brockhurst Street) DATE OF ACTION: February 7, 1989 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL: 1. The establishment, maintenance and operation of tl:fl Pegasus School will not be detrimental to: a. The general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity; b. Property and improvements in the vicinity of such use or building. 2. The granting of the conditional use permit for the Pagasus School will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. 3. The proposed Pegasus School is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan and Land Use Map because the property was originally developed as a school site. 9. The access to and parking for the proposed use does not create an undue traffic problem because adequate parking and drop-off areas are provided on site, and no excessive traffic will be generated. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 88-56 Page Two CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan and floor plans received and dated January 19, 1989, shall be the approved layout. 2. Hours of operation shall be limited to between 7:00 AM and 6:00 (school hours: 8:45 AM to 2:45 PPS; extended day care: 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM) except for occasional special night time school-related events. 3. The tota;_ combined preschool and daycare enrollment shall not exceed 300 students per day. The pre-school shall be limited to two classrooms. Any expansion in number shall require approval of the Planning Commission. 4. Any additional uses (i.e. schools, organizations) shall require a new conditional use permit with completed traffic and parking analyses for each specific use. 5. Prior to operation, the applicant shall obtain approval from Orange County Social Services Department. Applicant shall file with the Department of Community Development a copy of the license issued by the Social Services Department within 90 days of approval. If the applicant fails to obtain license from Orange County Social Services Department this conditional use permit shall be revoked with all monies spent at applicant's risk. 6. Applicant shall obtain a business license from the City of Huntington Beach prior to operation. 7. The Pegasus School shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code including Section. 9634.3, Building Division, and Fire Department. S. The applicant shall meet all applicbble local, State and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards. 9. A fire alarm system shall be required pursuant to Fire Department Standards. 10. Requirements of the Department of Public Works include: a. Construct wheelchair ramps at corners. b. Install street lights, if required. C. Remove and replace damaged or deteriorated Public Works improvements. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 88-56 Page Three 11. Prior to future use of buses or vanpools, approval shall be required by the Planning Director. 12. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke this conditional use permit if any violation of these conditions or. the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs. I hereby certify that Conditional Use Permit No. 88-56 w;;s approved by the Planning Commission of the City of Huntington Beach on February 7, 1989, upon the foregoing findings and conditions. This approval represents conceptual approval only; detailed plans must be submitted for review and the aforementioned conditions completed prior to final approval. Sincerely, Mike Adams, Secretary Planning Commission by: co t es Senior Planner MA:SH:kls (2039d-1-3) huntington beach department of community development sraFF EPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Community Development DATE: February 7, 1989 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 88-56 APY&LCBClx: Pegasus School DATE ACCEPTED: 18685 Santa Ynez January 20, 1989 Fountain Valley, CA 92708 LAANDA_TQRt RRQCESSING DATE: PROnERTY Fountain Valley School March 21, 1989 OWNER: District 17210 Oak Street ZQNE: CF-E-FP2 (Community Fountain valley, CA 92708 Facilities-Educational- Floodplain Dist. 2) RFOUEST: To establish a Pegasus School for pre-school GENERAL PLAN: Low Density through grade 6 in the Residential vacant Arevalos Elementary school site. 9=571BG USE: Vacant Arevalos Elementary LOCATION: 19692 Lexington Lane School site (approximately 1,200 feet north of Adams Avenue and ACREAGE: 13.66 acres 2,000 feet east of Brookhurst Street) 1.0 SUGGESTED ACTION: Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 88-56 with findings and conditions of approval. 2.0 GENERAL INFORMATION; Conditional Use Permit No. 88-56 is a request to establish a Pegasus School (private pre-school through grade 8) in the vacant Arevalos Elementary School site pursuant to Section 9630.c of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 3.0 SURROUNDING LAND USE ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DESTGNA':IONS: Ejjbiect roperty: GEITERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Residential ZONE: CF-E-FP2 (Community Facilities- Educational-Floodplain District 2) LAND USE; Vacant elementary school site C-5 191 ♦-F—C North. South and Mast of Subiect Property: GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Residential ZONE: Rl-FP2 (Low Density Residential- Floodplain District 2) LAND USE: Single family dwellings East of Subiect Property: GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Residential ZONE: R1-FP2 (Low Density Residential- Floodplain District 2) LAND USE: Edison Right-of-Way 4,Q ENVIRONMENTAL STAT.jk: The proposed project is categorically exempt pursuant to Class 1, Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act. 5.0 COASTAL_aJ& Sj,S: Not applicable. A_O REDEVELOPMENT STATUS: Not applicable. 7.0 .SPECIFIC PLAN: Not applicable. A.0 S BDIVI(jf °ION COEATTTZE: Not applicable. 9.0 ISSUES AND ANALYSIS: Foiect Description: School Hours of Operation: 6:45 AM to 2:45 PM Extended Day Care: 7:00 AI4 to 6:00 PM Staff: 4 full-time teachers; 2 part-time pre-school teachers 2 full-time assistants; 6 part-time assistants Parking Requirements: Parking Required for %-8 grades: 1.5 per clan. m x 21 classrooms - — parking spaces Parking Required for Pre-School: 1 per staff and 1 per class- Zoom x 2 classrooms - 6 parking spaces Total Parking spaces required: 33 + 6 a 39 spaces Total Parking spaces provided; 44 spaces (5 excess spaces) plus pick-up and drop-off area Staff Report - 2/7/89 -2- (1935d) The Pegasus School is a private, non-profit school and has obtained a master lease from the Fountain Valley school District to occupy the vacant Arevalos Elementary School site. Although the proposed enrollment is 93 students and is very small, Pegasus School intends to expand to a total of approximately 300 students • sing from pre-school through grade S. Also, Pegasus School intends to operate a summer session with a projected enrollment of approximately .100 students. There ace 23 classrooms, 3 multi-purpose rooms and an administrative building which is included in the lease between Pegasus School and the Fountain Valley School District. Two of the classrooms will be used for the pre-school and 21 classrooms will be used for the Pegasus School. In the narrative dated January 10, 1989, the Director of Pegasus School indicates that they may sub-lease space to a variety of other organizations. Staff recommends that a new conditional use permit be required for each additional use in order to monitor and evaluate potential impacts on the surrounding neighborhood and analyze parking demand. 10,0 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit No. 88-56 with the fallowing findings and conditions of approval. FINDINGS FOR APPRQYAL: 1. The establishment, maintenance snC operation of the Pegasus School will not be detrimental to: a. The general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity; b. Property and improvements in the vicinity of such use or building. 2. The granting of the conditional use permit for the Pegasus School will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. 3. The proposed Pegasus School is consistent with the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan and Land Use Map because the property was originally developed as a school site. 4. The access to and parking for the proposed use does not create an undue traffic problem because adequate parking and drop-off areas are provided on site, and no excessive traffic will be generated. CON011:00 GF APPROVAL: 1. The site plan and floor plans received and doted January 19, 1989, shall be the approved layout. Staff Report - 2/7/89 -3- (1935d) 2. Hours of operation shall be limited to between 7:00 A14 and 6:00 (school hours: 8:45 AM to 2:45 PM; extended day care: 7:D0 AM to 6:00 PDI) except for occasional special night time school-related events. 3. Thu total combined preschool and daycare enrollment shall not exceed 300 students per day. The pre-school shall be limited to two classrooms. An; expansion in number shall require approval of the Planning Commission. 4. Any additional uses (i.e. schools, organizations) shall require a new conditional use permit for each specific use. 5. Prior to operation, the applicant shall obtain approval from orange County Social Services Department. Applicant shall file with the Department of Community Development a copy of the license issued by the Social Services Department within 90 days of approval. If the applicant fails to obtain license from Orange County Social Services Department this conditional use permit shall be revoked with all monies spent at applicant's risk. 6. Applicant shall obtain a business license from the City of Huntington Beach prior to operation. 7. The Pegasus School shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code including Section 9634.3, Building Division, and Fire Department. B. The applicant shall meet all applicable local, State and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards. 9. A .'ire alarm system shall be required pursuant to Fire Department Standards. 10. Requirements of the Department of Public Works include: a. Construct wheelchair ramps at corners. b. Install street lights, if required. c. Remove and replace damaged or deteriorated Public Works Improvements. 11. Prior to future use of buses or vaopools, approval shall be required by the Planning Director. 12. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke this conditional use permit if any violation of these conditions or the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs. Staff Report - 2/7/89 -4- (1935d) z l 0 AUW 'n A The Planning Commission may deny Conditional Use Pa'mit No. 88-56 with findings. ATTACHMNTS: 1. Area map 2. Narrative 3, Sire plans dated received January 19 1989 9, Alternative F,.ndings for Denial SH:R1,F:kl a -5_ (1935d) Staff Report - 2/7/89 CF� Y .I A CUP ss-56 1 107ON MACH nANNIN3 OIVIM" w 9, RECEIVED 18685 Santa Yn Fwwafn V ky.CA 92708 (714)964-1224 7 $ JAN 16 DiREC OR:LAURA KATZ HATHAWAY r Otp-TUMT OF cm.,M.YIly OEY�LIWW^R n., January 10, 1989 Bob F.;aklin Planning Oa?m15siOn City of 8untington Beach Dear Mr. Franklin, She Pegasus School is an independent non-profit private school fommhded in 1984 for bright and gifted youngsters. Fhrcllment; Ah currently serve 93 students from preschool through third grade. Within the next five years our plans call for development through grade 8 with an enrollment of approximately 300 students. Praschool sbx1ents attend on a part time basis-2 frill days or 3 full days per week. Our summer program enrollment averages 100 students per session. Classrooms: 4ihere are 23 classrooms, 3 multi-pmspose rooms, and an ah^+riztxaticn buildinJ (plus storage and work areas). Vu-mgh June 1989 we will occupy about 12,000 sq. ft. of space and sub-lease the balan a to a variety of educational, cultural, or commercial organizations ompatible with our school and the neighborhood. Using following years we will increase the number of classrooms oc=pi.ed by our school as needed to meet enrollment requirements. We have master based the site from the Fbuntain Valley School District. Hors: Our school boors are 8:45 A.M. - 2:45 p.M. with extended day care for sbidents available from 7:00 A.M. - 6.00 P.M. Our school year is Septemu+ber- Mu* including the usual holidays. tam also cperate a summer,Program open to the community during July and August. The hors of operation are consistent with our school hors. Cccasionally we bare evening meetings or weekend events connected with our school. Staff: '4c currently employee 2 part time preschool teachers and 4 full time teachers. We have 2 full time instructimnl assistants and 6 gut time assistants. All teachers are credential led. We use parents occasionally to assist in the classroom, not as regular teachers. a„a.y.upm mYwa,w mo,�..rr� Staff also includes a director, assistant director, and seczetsry - all are full time arployees. We do not serve seals on cwFus. our school provides a challenging and nurturing environment fa-bright and curious learners. phase call me if you have arty ft ther questions. Sincerely, Laura Katz Pathaway Director cc! hark Sigler -z- �c Nsus A. 1n7o:�- I a685 Santa YneL Fauntaln Valley,CA 92708 � (714)964.1224 pIRECTOR:IACIRA KATZ HATtiAWAY January 20, 1989 PECEI�E.D Bob Franklin Plannu)g Omrdsaion J,o N{31989 city of Huntington Beach .."t..,DEAggrlK;,i Pf Dear Mr. Franklin, - tT In response to your request for urn-e information_ We are seeking a b3anket approval for the entire site. Examples of potent:-Lai tblants include: other small Private S&=15, or after school programs, a studio pro riding music, theatre, or darre training, offioas for a graphic artist, educational psychologist, or ocnputer data service. nmiber of classreans used, We expect all 23 classroom to be used, even though that might net occur until fall 1989, For the 1989-90 school year we ey_pect to use 8 classrvcrs, this mxter would expand yearly to meet enrollment until we utilize all 23 room. If you need more information, Please contact me. S' Y, Laura Fears Haui&w / Director cc: MnR Sigler A„o,.p.yq sa.—.vppaq.n. t Y F •��"� 4 w _fi.sVf 8 1 � YB � •� I ll I�1(l.' Y .I. 1 ATTACHMENT 4 ALTERNATIVE FINDINGS FOR DENIAL FTNDTNGS FOR DENTAL: 1. The establishment, maintenance and operation of the Pegasus School will be detrimental to: a. The general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity; h. Property and improvements in the vicinity of such use or building. 2. The granting of the conditional use permit for the Pegasus School will adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. 3. The proposed Pegasus School is inconsistent with the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan and Land Use Map because the property was originally developed as a school. site. 4. The access to and parking for the proposed use does create an undue traffic problem because adequate perking and drop—off areas are provided o�, site, and no excessive traffic will be generated. Attachment 6 `1 Sep {'r lot un i gton•Beach Planting Commission P.O. Box 190 California 92648 Date. July.21=1.995 NOTICE OF ACTION t v liearit; Jon Glasgow,320 Pine Street,Long Beach, CA 90802 roe } caner : Fountain Valley School District, 17210 Oak Street;Fountain Valley, CA 92708 �ulnect: CONDinONAL USE PERMIT NO..95,33 Your application was acted upon by the Hwitington Beach Planning Commission on: . .TuLy.1�;1995.. and yourrequest was: .• • -. .....r-- ____::_: .r.,:`.,... ....... .;.,. NVrTHDRAWN _ ,PROVEID . t. APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS XY (see attached). DISAPP�Zt3VED TABLED CONT�t E. D TJNTJL ; UW4-.the prpvisiotis of the Huntington Beach Ordinance code,the action taken by the Planning ' naWssion is final unless an Appeal is filed to the:City Council by you or an interested party. Said:appeal musik be in writing and must set forth in detail the actions.and grounds by and upon which the a licant or interested deems himselfA Aggrieved.. Said eat must be AP � Ply. g� Pp ncoo'mpanied by a filing fee of`twelve hundred($1,200)dollars and be submitted to the City erk's.bffce withiti ten(10)days of the slate of the Commission's action. X,Your,case)the last day for filing an appeal and paying the filing fee is. July 28, 1995 } r Provisi�rrs-of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code are such that any application becomes null 4and void one(1)year after final appro'vat,,.bless actual construction has.started, (pdW �mr ,.1:. :+n,..-a.+. •.rt.. ...+•.i,. .+-.1.w..14 ie7 b:.Y.A.AR:}.1Gi,R_'.t,�.,h..c,..111 ... s,. ..�:. "........ n r. --- , sc. �. 4�. �.8 ' .. Huntington Head Planning Commission' I'.O. BOX 190 CALIFORNIA 92640 t truly 21, I995 Ioa Glasgow. 320 Pine Street, Suite 610 Lozig Beach,CA 90802 '^. SUBTECT CONDITIONAL USE PETEtIVIIT NO.95-33 )PROPERTY 0WNtP,. Fountain Valley School Distris 17210 Oak Street Fountain Valley, 92708 l tMST: ]Expand existing Pegasus School by adding eight�Sj modular buildings for ;�----- p " ciassrnoms and administrative offices and increase the maximum enirollm' '? frotn'300 to 500.students. .. LOC1TIOi : 19692 Leiington Lane-Anewelos Elementary School Site i DATgi OF :ACTION: July I$, 1995 -; YiNbt GS.FOR APPROVAL-CONDTI'1ONAL USE pEPdWr NO 95-33: 1. Thepert!on of the expansion will not be detrimental to the generil welfare pfiersons :. wcaikigs nr residing in the vicinity and detrimental to the value of the property and " izttp�rorvenients.in the neighborhood. The school,site and the F�gasus School are consistent ; with the ity's General Plan and the school is* apprapria#e use for the elementary school . i �` Fa .Thy axitin of Conditional Use Permit N6.95-33 for the e,c anslon of Pe anus gr 1 p g School will not ioersely.affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington E ea6k The current and proposed General Plan designation for the Site and'the school use are consistent,with the s fienral.Plan which designates the site for educational land uses. -. 1aeI4 -1} •raw• : n..'" v ... .. ... I• 6 - sir.aK s...r�Aµfi. .._.y!1111M.A� � ... s.. ,. :a . . •A�<. ... s 't.w.. .. 3. The location, site 1a3 t,and design of the proposed eight(8) ..odular buildings properly ' adapt'to the adjacent structures: The modular buildings will comply with the technical requirements of the Fire Department,the Building Division,floodplain standards, fire Protection,foundations and seismic footings. 4. The proposed expansion of the Pegasus School will be compatible with adjacent properties 'because 56 additional parking spaces will be provided in addition to an expanded drop- -up up area, This will minimize on-street impacts to the neighborhood. -r 5. Oh-site parking and,circulation are adequate for the proposed expansion and will not create congestion because with the addition of 56 parking spaces and the additional drop-off/pick-up area will alleviate street impacts. The total number of 100 on-site parking spaces will result in 3 surplus parlang spaces: R CONDMONS OF APPROVAL-CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 95-33: s L The site plan,floor plans, and elevations dated received June 28, 1995 shall be the conceptually approved layout. fit.. The inawnum student enrollment shall be 500 students. 3. The 56 additional,parking spaces shall be provided concurrent with the use of the first modular building; #. Any mature trees removed.shall be replaced at a 2 to:1 ratio: 5, Thd modular buildings shall be architecturally compatible with the existing structures. 6. iiy=rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened fratx�any.view.'.Said screening shall be architecturally comptible with the building in terms of materials and colors. If screening is F' not designed specifically into the building,a rooftop mechanical equipment plan must be submitted showing screening and must be approved. 7. Tfoutduor lighting is included,high.pressure sodium vapor lamps or,similar energy savings iamps shall be used. All outside lighting shall be directed to prevent"spillage"onto adjacent '. properties and shall be noted on the site plan and.elevations: Prior, is issuance iif building permits,the applicaiitlovvner shall submit a copy of a completed FEMA elevation certificate Prior.to final building permit or Certificate of Occupancy, the y applicantlowneir'shall subtnit a copy of an elevation certificate-certifying the structure(s) was `. `''.•33 ecostructed in compliance tivith Chapter 222 of the Huntington Beach Zoning,:and;Subdivision Fug beparlirient requirements areas follows:` � ' 1OBG fire extinguishei shall be required for.each modular building. b; Service roads and fire lanes,as determined by the Fire Department,shall be posted and .narked. 'i (pcc1U32 2) {_ A c, Fire access late ' iall be maintained: If fire lane violation. occur and the services of the Fire Department are required the applicant will be liable for expenses incurred, 0.'UJithin six(6):months from the approval date ofthis.entitlement, a comprehensive traffic mitigation plan shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by the Department of Public ` Works and Community Development Department. Such plan shall be reviewed by Planning, Public Works,Traffic, and Police staff and discussed at a neighborhood meeting. It shall address concerns relative to vehicles stacking into public streets,double parking,vehicles parking in front of resident driveways, speeding,parking on street sweeping days, and make . recommendations(such as posting signs,providing a uniformed traffic policeman to monitor traffic,etc. ,to mitigate concerns. Approved recommendations shall be in lace within ';rt 1 g pp P the six(6)month time period, Any costs involved shall be at the expense of the school and/or school district. A copy of the plan shall be transmitted to the Planning Commission for their information. 11.Withhin orie(1)year from date of approval, a review of the use shall be conducted by staff to determine compliance with the traffic.mitigation plan and the conditions herein. If any ' violations occur,a report shall be t:-ansmitted to the Planning Commission. :x MORMATION ON SPECIFIC CODE REOUMEMPNTS: 1, Parking lot striping shall conformto Chapter.231 oftlt,Huntington Beach Zoning and :a a.,....,�.,..�.��..�:.:,_S�bdivlsion'Grdlnance:• .. 2. Traffic pact Fees shall be paid at the time of final building permit inspection of-the first unit. 3. "TI a development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance,Building Division, and Fire Department, except as no herein.; and shall;meet all applicable local,State and Federal Fire C.`odes,Ordinances, and standards. 4; iontlitional Use permit No. 95-33 shall:became Wulf and void unless:ekercised within one(1) f: yw of the date of final.approval: S., The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke Conditional Us Permit 146. 95-33-if , y viol ri of these conditions or the.Huntington Beach Ordinance..Code occurs: Ihereby certify#hat�Conditional Use Permit No:95-33 was approved b' the Planning "C&T=ssion of the City of Huntington Beach.on July:18, 1995,upon the foregoing findings and conditions. This approval represents conceptual approval only;detailed plans must be submitted ,m for review.and the aforementioned conditions completed prior to final approval: Sincerely,. -- , HowaidZelefsky,Secretary PI knin oxitmission by: Scott I-less, C Senior Planner ; ® Huntington Beach Planning Cornnussio>n N.NsvNNN/�Iv+�/NTIN/WIVMy/JAIyNNNNeaINI�r .. -. � P-0: Box 190 California 92648 r�... .,N'y:....wr.,.n ...w.+p:r�wwwr.+ww.::M..v nyr.•1r .rA`YY:we< .+ 1. r_ Mw4AamM':d/'.Y:V eMM.:+n wsa�.rrv:.'nws::h>w• Date: My 21, 1995 NOTICE OF ACTION Applicant: Jon Olasgdw,320 Pin.-Street,Long Beach, CA 90$02 PP. . pemy ;mac: Fountain Valley School District, 17210 Oak Street,Fountain Valley, CA92708 b'ect: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.95-33 Your application was acted upon by the Huntington Beach,Planning Commission on 7uly 18, 1995 and your.request was: APPROVED APPROVED WITS CONDITIONS- JiX '(see attached). DISAPPROVED T LI&D J :..--..:..ter.... -��.^+-�/.-�. .. ..�.ct.��..�r�-�. � _ .. �._.._ . _ _ -_.. _. .... ..,...,,.... .r..•i . - 4CONTINUED U1�1J.L Under the provision's of the I4tin ingto�B each{ordinance code,the action taken bk the Planning t orin*i ion is finial unless an appeal is filed to the City Council by you or an interested party. >i Said appeal must be m writing'and must set i:orth in detail the actions and grounds by and upoti which the applicant or interested party deems'himself aggrieved: Said.appeal must be sccotippaaiedby fling fee of twelve hundred($i, 04).dollars and be submitted to the City Clerk's office within ten(10)days of the date of the Commission's action. Irz ybu� case,the last day for fling an appeal and paying the filing lee is duly 28. 1995 s Provisions of the Huntington_Beach Ordinance Code are such that any application becomes null and void onal)year after:final approval,unless actual construction has started. . (p=032-3) MAM A,d ion Huntington Beach Planning.Commission _m _ P.O. BOx 190 CALIFORNIA~92648 y :... July 21 '1905 foil Glasgow 320 Pigp Street Long Bich,CA 90802. '. % IEC"r. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 95-33 OPER,1 Y Fountain Valley School District, i7210 Oak Street,Fountain Valley, CA r 92'708 F ' � T: Expand existing Pegasus School by addin eight(8)modular buildings for classrooms and administrative icffices-and increase the maximum enrollment from 300 to 500 students. Lt)CAT10N. .19692 Lexington I.Lane-Arevelos Elementary School Site DATI�OF .,AcTlolq: Auly 1,8;1995 FINDINGS FOR APPRO'VAL_.CONDITIONA.L USE PERMIT NO 95-33: l. The operation of the expansion will not be detrimental to the general welfare.of persons 4 working or residing in the vicinity and detrimental to.the value of the property and imp3.: tovemunts in the neighborhood. The school site and the Pegasus School are consistent . ivithlteit�'s General Plan and the school is an appropriate use for the elementary school site:. The.gran ting ni�� c1*#ional Use Petttiit No. 9$�33 for the expansion of Pegasus.School will tot adversely affect;the General PIan of the'City of Hunti--, ton F each. 'T'he current and . .. i ogosed General k'l' designation for the site and theschool use are consistent with the Oils General Plan which designates the site for educational land uses. 3. The location, site:ay c,and design of the proposed eight(8)_ Aular buildings properly adapt to the adjacent structures. The modular buildings will comply with the technical requirements of the Fire Department,the Building Division,iloodplain standards,fire protection,foundations and seismic footings, 0I'lre proposed expansion of the Pegasus School will be compatible with adjacent properties because 56additional parking spaces will be provided in addition to an expanded drop off/pick-up area. This will minimize on-street impacts to the neighborhood. 5.. On-site parking and circulation are adequate for the proposed expansion and will not create ' congestion because with the addition of 56 parking spaces and.the additional drop-off/pick,-up area will alleviate street impacts. The total number of 100 on-site parking spaces will result in 3 surplus parking spaces. COND)(Z`YONS OF APPROVAL-CONDMONAL USE PERMIT NO. 95-33: 1 The site plan,floor plans,and elevations dated receiv6d.June 28, 1995 shall be.the conceptually approved layout. 2.' The m ximum student enrollment shall be 50.0.students.' 3. The.56 additional parking spaces shall be provided concurrent with the use of the first modular building. 4. Any mature trees removed shall be replaced at,a 2 to I ratio. 5. ne modular buildings shall be architecturally compatible with the existing structur as. C. ,Ariy'roottop mechanical equipment shall be screened from any drew. Said screening shall be architecturally compatible with the building in terms of materials and colors. If screening is not designed specifically into the building, a rooftop mechanical equipment plan must be sy�itted showing screening andmust be approved. 7. 'Ifbilti4or.-lighting is included,high-pressure sodiumvapot..lamps or similar energy savings lamps shall be used. All outside lighting shall be directed to prevent"spillage" onto adjacent properties and shall be noted on the site plan and elevations. 8, Prior to issuance of building permits,the applicantlowner shall submit a copy of a completed FIV1,A,elevation certificate. Prior to,final building permit or Cer:ficate of Occupancy, the applicant/owner shall submit a copy;of an elevation certificate certifying the structure(s)was constructed in compliance with Chapter 222 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Oxdini ce: 3. Firs Department requirements areas follows:• 0ixe2AI K fire eietinguisher shall be required-for each modular build'n b. Service roads and fire lanes,as determined by the Fire Department, shr 'be posted and ..narked. l (Pcc1032-10}, i } _ ,t c, Fire access lanes all be maintained: If fire lane violations ,.xur and the services of the Fire Department are required the applicant wilt be liable for expenses incurred. 11).Within six(fi) months from the approval date of this entitlement, a comprehensive traffic mitigation plan shall be prepared and approved by the Department of Public Works and . Community Development Department. Such plan shall be reviewed by Planning,Public Works,Traffic, and Police staff and discussed at a neighborhood meeting, It shay address concerns relative tc vehicles stacking into public streets,double parking,vehicles parking in front of resident driveways,speeding, parking on street sweeping days,and make recommendations(such as posting signs,providing a uniformed traffic policeman to monitor traffic, etc.),.to mitigate these concerns, approved recommendations shall be in place within the six(G)month time period, Any costs involved shall be at the expense of the school and/or' school district. A copy of the plan shall be transmitted to the Planning Commission for their ; information. I i.Within one(I)year from date of approval,a review of the use shall be conducted by St;:ff to determine compliance.with the traffic mitigation plan and the conditions herein. If any '• violations occur; areport shall be transmitted to the Planning Commission. INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC CODE REQUIREMENTS� 1. Parking lot striping shall conform to Chapter 231 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance;, '2... Trai'lic Impact Fees shall be paid at the tirre'of final building permit inspection of the first unit.. 3, '.The:developt.n nt shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Huntington Beach Zoning .and Subdivision Ordinance,Building Division, and Fire Department,except as noted herein; end shall meet all applicable local,State and Federal Fire Codes;Ordinances,and standards. 4. Conditional Use Perrait No:.95-33 shhall become hull and void unless exercised within one(I yeai;of the date of final approval. the klanning Comrxussiozi reserves the tight.to.revoke.Conditional Use Permit l\to. 95-33•if . : . any violation of these conditions or the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs. I hereby certify that-Conditional Uze pernut N. .'95-33 was approved by the Planning Commission ofthe City ofHuntington Beach on July:18,1995, upon theforegoing findings and conditions. This approval represents conceptual approval only;detailed plans must be submitted for•rmew and the aforementioned conditions completed prior ta.final.approval, Howard Zelefsky, Secretary Planning Commission Scot les ,AICP :Spoor Planner .(pdr:1632-11) :.. Attachment 7 Auntington Beach Planning Commission P.O 190 CALIFORNIA 92648 Ceitib�`�" April 11, 1997 Jonathan Glasgow Intertices,Inc. 320 Pine Avenue, Suite 610 Long Beach,California 90802 SUB.IEC'F-, CONDITIONAL USE?ERNHT NO.96-89/NEGATIVE DECLARA TION NO.96-17 (Tegasus School Master Plan) 1 PROPERTY Q A N : Fountaia Valle; School District, 17210 Oak Street,Fountain Valley, CA 92708 REQUEST: To permit a phased master plan of development for Pegasus School which includes construction of a 1,400 square foot addition to the Administration Building,a 1,000 square foot addition to the Middle School Building, and construction of an 18,000 square foot Activities Center/Gymnasium with a 3,000 square foot storage mezzanine. LOCATION: 19692 Lexington Lane(At the closed Arevalos School,approximately 500 feet south of Yorktown Avenue,west of the Santa Ana Rives) DATE OF ACTION: April 8, 1997 Your application waa.acted upon by the P12arung Commission of the City of Huntington Beach on April 8, 1997,and your request was conditionally approved. Attached to this letter are the Findings and Conditions of Approval for this application. Please be advised that the Planning Commission reviews the conceptual plan as a basic request for entitlement of the use applied for and there may be additional requirements prior to commencement of the project. It is recommended that you immediately pursue completion of the conditions of approval and address all requirements of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance in order to expedite the processing/completion of your total application. The conceptual plan should not be construed as a precise plan reflecting conformance to all Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance requirements. (97cLo408-20) Under the provisions of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance,the action taken by the Phu ring'Commission becomes final at the expiration of the appeal period. A person desiring to appeal the decision shall file a written notice of appeal to the City Clerk within ten calendar days of the date of the Planning Commission's action. The notice of appeal shall include the name and address of the appellant,the decision being appealed,and the grounds for the appczl;it shall also be accompanied by a filing fee. The appeal fee is$500.00 for a single family dwelling property owner appealing the decision on his/her own property. The appeal fee is$1,200.00 for all other appeals. In your case,the last day for filing an appeal and paying the filing fee is April 18, 1997 Provisions of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance are such that any application becomes null and void vile(1)year after final approval,unless actual construction has started. . If there are any further questions,please contact Jane Madera,Associate PAnner at (714)536-5271. Sincerely, Howard Zelefsky,Secretary Planning Commission by: tsi�s,AlCP Senior Planner xe: Property Owner Attachment: Findings and Conditions of Approval (97cLo408-21) r �4Nl DING$ AND SUGGESTED CONDITIQNS OF APPROVAL C NDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO,96-89 FINDINGS FOR APPROVAT -NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO 96-17 1. The Negative Declaration No. 9647 has been prepared in compliance with Article 6 of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)Guidelines. It was advertised and available for a public comment period of twenty(20)days. Comments received during the comment period were considered by the Planning Commission, prior to action on the Negative Declaration and Conditional Use Permit No.96-89. 2. Mitigation measures,incorporated into the attached conditions of approval,avoid or reduce the project's effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment will occur. 3. There is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the Planning Commission that the project,as mitigated through the conditions of approval for Conditional Use Permit No. 96-9u'will have a significant effect on•zhe environment. MDINGS FOR APPROVAL-CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.96-89- I. Conditional Use Permit No.96-89 for the establishment,maintenance and operation of the phased master plan of development for the Pegasus School will not be detrimental to the general welfare of persons working or residing in the vicinity or detrimental to the value of the property and improvements in the neighborhood. The master plan consists of expansions to the Administration Building and Middle School Building along with construction of a new Activities Center/Gymnasium but does not propose any increase in enrollment,number of classrooms, or staffmembz, '.t'ith the conditions of approval imposed,the proposed construction at the former r school site.will not impede public use and access to existing t recreational opporbanities a !,rte and traffic and parking needs rzill be accc mmodated during high attendance events in a temporary parking lot. 2. The conditional use permit will be compatible with surrounding residential uses because the # } proposed construction is proposed in the center of the school campus and not immediately t adjacent to any residential units. In addition,with the conditions of approval imposed,the proposed construction at the former public school site will not irnpedc public use and access i to existing recreational opportunities at the site and traffic and parking needs will be accommodated during high attendance events in a temporary parking lot. Also,no lighting or bleachers are proposed in the athletic fields. (47CLNOS-22) 3. The proposed master plan of development for Pegasus School will comply with the provisions of the base district and other applicable provisions in Titles 20-25 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located. All code required minimum setbacks,maximum building height,maximum site coverage, et , will be provided by the proposed design of the project. 4, The granting of the conditional use permit will not adversely affect the Generai Plan. It is consistent with the Land Use Element designation of PS-(RL),(Public Semi-Public with underlying Low Density Residential on the subject p -iperty. in addition,it is consistent with the following goals and policies of the General Plan: a. Poiiev LU4.2.5- Require that all commercial,industrial, and public development incorporate appropriate design elements to facilitate access and use as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act. b. "fective LU 7.1: Accommodate the development of a balance of land uses that a) provides for the housing,commercial,employment,educational,cultural,entertainment, and recreation needs of existing and fittwe residents,b)provides employment opportunities for residents of the City and surrounding subregion, c)captures visitor and tourist activity,and d)provides open space and aesthetic"relief'from urban development. c. Ohiective LU 9.4: Provide for the inclusion of recreational,institutional,religious, educational,and service uses that support resident needs within residential neighborhoods. d. Folic v LU 9.4.3: Encourage the development and public use of City/District joint use facilities where City parks and school facilities adjoin one another in order to maximize the use of property,minimize the cost of development,and enhance the recreational and educational opportunities for the community. CONDITI011S OF APPR V L-CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 95-89 - 1. The site plan,floor plans and elevations received and dated November 20, 1996 shall be the conceptually approved layout with the following modifications: a. The wing walls proposed at the entrance to the restmoms in the Activities Center/Gymnasium shall be eliminated. b. Depict all new utility apparatus,such as but not limited to back flow devices and Edison transformers on the site plan. Utility meters shall be screened from view from public rights-of-way. Electric transformers in a required front or street side yard shall be enclosed in subsurface vaults. Backflow prevention devices shall be prohibited in the front yard setback and shall be screened from view. (Code Requirement) (97CL0408 23) c. All new exterior mechanical equipment shall be screened from view on all sides. Rooftop mechanical equipment shall be setback 15 feet from the exterior edges of the building. Equipment to be screened.includes,but is not limited to,heating,air conditioning,refrigeration equipment,plumbing lines,ductwork and transformers. Said screening shall be architecturally compatible with the building in terms of materials and colors. If screening is not designed specifically into the bt:'lding,a rooftop mechanical equipment plan showing screening must be submitted for review and approval with the application for building permit(s). (Code Requirement) d. Depict all new gas meters,water meters,electrical panels,air conditioning units,mailbox facilities and similar items on the site plan and elevations. If located on a building,they shall be architecturally designed into the building to appear as part of the building. They shall be architecturally compatible with the building and non-obtrusive,not interfere with sidewalk areas and comply with required setbacks. 2. Prior to of submittal for building permits for each phase,the following shall be completed: a. G,ning entitlement conditions of approval shall be printed verbatim on the cover page of all the working drawing sets used for issuance of building permits(architectura), structural,electrical,mechanical and plumbing). b. Since the elevations for Phases II and III are conceptuaul only at this time and the project is located in the PS zone,the Design Review Board and Department of Community Development shall review and approve the following(for Phases II and III only): 1) Revised site plan and elevations as modified pursuant to Condition No. 1. 2) Proposed structures shall be architecturally c:zpatible with existing structures. c. All Fire Department requirements shall be noted on the building plans.(FD). 3. Prior to issuance of grading permits(for Phases I and II or as determined necessary by the Public Works Department).the following shall be completed: a. A grading plan,prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer,shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. (PW) b. A plan for silt control for all water runoff,from the property during construction and initial operation of the project may be required if deemed necessary by the Director of Public Works. (PW) (97CL0408 24) 4. Prior to issuance of building permits,the following shall be completed: a. Submit copy of the revised site plan,floor plans and elevations pursuant to Condition No. for review and approval and inclusion in the entitlement file to the Department of Community Development. b. A Landscape Construction Set must be submitted to the Department of Public Works and approved by the Departments of Public Works and Community Development. The Landscape Construction Set shall include a landscape plan prepared and signed by a State Licensed Landscape Architect which identifies the location,type,size and quantity of all existing plant materials to remain,existing plant materials to be removed and proposed plant materials;an irrigation plan;a grading plan; an approved site plan and a copy of the entitlement conditions of approval. The landscape plans shall be in conformance with Chapter 232 of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and applicable Design Guidelines. Any existing mature trees that must be removed shall be replaced at atwo to one ratio(2:1)with minimum 36 inch box trees and shall be incorporated into the project's landscape plan. (PNV) (Code Requirement) c. Hydrology and hydraulic studies shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for approval.(PW) d. A Grading and Erosion Control Plan for the new building,prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer,shall be submitted for review and approval to the Public Works Department. (Pw) e. A sewer study shall be submitted for Public Works Department approval. The developer shall design and construct the sewer system required to serve the development. The sewer lateral shall be 6 inches minimum. The Public Works Department shall determine if the sewer study is necessary prior to Phase I construction or only Phase II construction. f. All public water improvements shall be designed and installed per the City of Huntington Beach Water Division's Standard Plans, Specifications,and Design Criteria. g. The proposed building shall be served by the existing water service for the entire site. The developer shall verify that the existing water service size meets the UPC. h. A separate fire service,size and locate per the City of Huntington Beach Fire Department, shall be constructed per City of Huntington Beach water Division Standard Plan 618. 5. During construction,the applicant shall: a. Use water trucks or sprinkler systems L-1 all areas where vehicles travel to keep damp enough to prevent dust raised when leaving the site: (97CLQ448-25) b. Wet down areas in the late morning and after work is completed for the day; c Use low sulfur fuel(.051/6)by weight for construction equipment; d. Attempt to phase and schedule construction activities to avoid high ozone days(first stage smog alerts); e. Discontinue construction during second stage smog alerts. 6. Prior to final building permit inspection and approval or commencement of use,the following shall be completed: a. The applicant shall obtain any necessary permits from the South Coast Air Quality Management District and submit a copy to Department of Community Development. b. All improvements to the property shall be completed in accordance with the approv�:d plans and conditions of approval specified herein,including: 1) Landscaping; 2) Fire extinguishers will be installed and located in areas to comply with Huntington Beach Fire Code Standards. (FD) 3) A fire alarm system will be installed to comply with Huntington Beach Fire Department and Uniform Fire Code Standards. Shop drawings will be submitted to and approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. The system will provide the following. a) Manual pulls; b) Audible alarms; and c) Visual alarms(FD) 4) An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be installed in all new buildings that exceed 5,000 square feet. This shall comply with Huntington Beach Fire Department and Uniform Building Code Standards. Shop drawings shall be submitted to and approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. (FD) c. Compliance with all conditions of approval specified herein shall be accomplished and i verified by the Community Development Department. d. All building spoils,such as unusable lumber,wire,pipe,and other surplus or unusable material,shall be disposed of at an off-site facility equipped to handle them. (97CLo408-26) e. The project will comply will all provisions of Huntington Beach Municipal Code Title 17.04.085 and City Specification No.429 for new construction within the methane gas overlay districts. (FD) 7. The use shall comply with the following: a. The blacktop area to the northwest of the cul-de-sac on Shalom Drive shall be used for overflow parking during all special activities at the site,such as but not limited to,Back to School Night,Open House,Concerts,and major sporting activities. A minimum of two parl>ing lot attendants shall be provided from ore half hour before each event to facilitate proper use of the temporary parking lot since no parking stall striping will be required. (Mitigation Measure) b. All existing and relocated recreational activity areas which are currently open and available to the public shall remain open and available during and after all phases of the Master Plan. This mitigation measure regarding public accessibility to the school site sh 11 not be interpreted to result in a compromise to the safety of the children in attendance at Pegasus School. (Mitigation Measure) c. Only the uses described in the narrative shall be permitted. b 8. Pegasus School shall meet with their regular neighborhood committee one year after completion of Phase II in order to assess the parking and traffic at the site. If, after one year of operation,there are continual neighborhood concerns with traffic and/or parking,then the issues shall be analyzed by the Planning staff and if necessary,shall be subject to further review by the Planning Commission in order to resolve any outstanding concerns. (Mitigation Measure) 9. The Community Development Director ensures that all conditions of approval herein are complied with. The Community Development Dire, • hall be notified in writing if any changes to the site plan,elevations and floor plans are proposed as a result of the plan check process. Building permits shall not be issued until the Community Development Director has reviewed and approved the proposed changes for conformance with the intent of the Planning Commission's action and the conditions herein.If the proposed changes are of a substantial nature,an amendment to the original entitlement reviewed by the Planning Commission may be required pursuant to the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. 10.All other conditions of approval as imposed in previous entitlements for Pegasus School shall remain in effect. (94CL0408.27) MORMATION ON SPECIFIC CODE REOLMWMENTS: 1. Conditional Use Permit No. 96-89 shall not become effective until the ten day appeal period has elapsed. 2. Conditional Use Permit No. 96-89 shall become null and void unless exercised within on*; year of the date of final approval or such extension of time as may be granted by the Director pursuant to a written request submitted to the Department of Community Development a minimum 30 days prior to the expiration date. 3. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke Conditional Use Permit No. 96-39, pursuant to a public hearing for revocation,if any violation of these conditions or the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance or Municipal Code occurs. d. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid. The developer will be responsible for the payment of any additional.fees adopted in the "upcoming" Water Division Financial Master Plan. (PV ) 5. If determined necessary by the Public Works Traffic Engineering Division,Traffic Impact Fees shall be paid at the time of final inspection or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. (PW 6. An encroachment permit shall be required for all work within the public right-of-way. 7. A Certificate of Occupancy must be issued by the Department of Community Development prior to occupying each new building addition. 8. State-mandated school impact fees shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits. 9. The developmen'shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Municipal Code, Building Division,and Fire Department as well as applicable local, State and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances,and standards,except as noted herein. 10. Construction shall be limited to Monday-Saturday 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM. Construction shall be prohibited Sundays and Federal holidays. 11.The applicant shall submit a check in the amount of$38.00 for the posting of the Notice of Determination at the County of Orange Clerk's Office. The check shall be made out to the aunty of Orange and submitted to the Department of Community Development within two(2)days of the Planning Commission's action. (97CLO408-19). rb Bdadlk, rfine�nt of t iaamq t eta ne> t° s; , `k9Jt � y s ' h TO: Planning Commission FROM: Howard Zelefsky,Planning Director BY: Jane Madera,Associate Planner��/ DATE: April 8, 1997 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.96-89/1NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO.96-17(Pegasus School Master Plan) LOCATION: 19692 Lexington Lane(At the closed Arevalos School,approximately 500 feet south of Yorktown Avenue,west of the Santa Ana River) STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Conditional Use Permit No.96-39 and Negative Declaration 96-17 are a request for a master plan of development of the Pegasus School,a private,kindergarten through eight grade school currently operating at a former public school site. The project is proposed in phases and includes additions to the Administration Building and Middle School Building as well as construction of as Activities Center/Gymnasium and improvements to the athletic fields. Staff recommends approval of the project for the following reasons: the proposed master plan of development for the,Pegasus School will ce compatible with the surrounding residential neighborhood because the master plan does not propose any additional classroom space, • the student enrollment is not proposed beyond the previously approved 500 students, • a temporary parking lot will be utilized during high attendance events at the school, • the recreational facilities that are currently open and available to the public will remain available after implementation of the master plan, construction of the new Activities Center/Gymnasium is slated for the middle c chc school grounds and not immediately adjacent to any residential uses, no lighting or bleachers are proposed in the athletic fields,and the project will.be subject to staff review and Planning Commission review one year after completion of Phase II to analyze the traffic and parking situation at the site. ItCCOAMNDATION: Motion to: A. "Approve Negative Declaration No. 96-17 with findings and mitigation measures(Attachment No. 1)•" B. "Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 96-89 with findings and suggested conditions of approval (Attachment No, l)." GENERAL,INFORMATION: APPLICANT: Jonathan Glasgow,Intertices,Inc.,320 Pine Avenue, Suite 610,Long Beach,California 90802 PROPER,Y OWNER: Fountain Valley School District, 17210 Oak Street,Fountain Valley, CA 92708 REQUEST: To pen-nit a phased master plan of development for Pegasus School which includes construction of a 1,400 square foot addition to the Administration Building,a 1,000 square foot addition to the Middle School Building, and construction of an 18,000 square foot Activities Center/Gymnasium with a 3,000 square foot storage mezzanine. DATE ACCEPTED: March 6, 1997 SUBJECT PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING LAND USE,ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS: LOCATION GENERAL PLAN ZONING LAND USE Subject Property: PS-(RL)(Public Semi- PS-FP2(Public Semi- Pegasus School Public-Underlying Low Public-Flood Plain) Density Residential) North; West (across RL(Low Density RL-FP2(Low Density Single Fanuly Lexington Lane);. Residential) Residential-Flood Plain) Residential and South(across Shalom Drive)of Subject Property: East of Subject RL(Low Density RL-FP2(Low Density Edison Right-ot-Way Property: Residential) Residential-Flood Plain) Staff Report-4/8197 2 (97sr24) PROTECT PROPOSAL: Conditional Use PermitNo. 96-89 represents a request for the following: A. To permit a phased master plan of development for Pegasus School pursuant to Section 9220.1.d.A of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance(ZSO). Pegasus School is a private kindergarten through eight grade school currently operating at a closed public school site. Previous conditional use perniit approvals limit enrollment at the site to a maximum of 500 students. This proposal does not request an increase in enrollment, The proposed modifications consist of a . 30 square foot office addition to the Administration Building,a 1,400 square foot locker room and conference room addition to Building E(Middle School Building),and construction of a new 18,000 square foot Activities Center/Gymnasium with a 3,000 square foot storage mezzanine for a total addition of 23,500 square feet. The proposed project also includes reconstruction and improvements to the athletic fields at the site including baseball diamonds,soccer fields,sand volleyball court,and basketball/roller hockey facilities. Construction of four identity towers in front of Buildings C,D,E,and F and a clock tower is also proposed. The towers are designed approximately 35 feet tall and would serve to identify each building by school grade. The applicant has indicated that the request is necessary(see attached narrative)in order for the school to expand its office and conference space,to upgrade the restrooms to current standards pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA),and to provide an enclosed recreation and multi-purpose space for the existing school population. asin The master plan is proposed to be developed over three phases generally described below: phase L• Phase I consist of the improvements and new construction at the Administration Building and the Middle School Building. If approved,Phase I is expected to occur between the close of the school year in Summer of 1997 and the beginning of the next school year in Fall 1997. Phase I• Phase II consists of construction of the Activities Center/Gymnasitmn as well as the improvements to the athletic fields. Phase U is expected to occur in approximately one and one half to three years from conditional use permit approval. Phase II: Phase III consists of construction of the school identity towers and the clock tower. The tuning of construction of the towers is unknown at this time because financing for construction will be dependent upon find raising and parent donations. Staff Report-4/8/97 3 (97sr24) Background: As indicated above,Pegasus School has peen reviewed and analyzed under previous conditional use permits; once to es,:ablish the use and a second time to increase enrollment and construct modular classrooms. When the increased enrollment and modular classrooms were reviewed and approved in 1995,it was discovered that the school and surrounding neighborhood had been experiencing some parking and traffic problems. In an effort to alleviate traffic problems related to the school,the Planning Conunissi on imposed conditions of approval requiring implementation of a traffic mitigation plan in cooperation with the neighborhood,Police Department,Public Works Department,and Community Development Department. Consequently,Pegasus School coordinated with the neighborhood,parents of the students,and City Staff and.developed a Traffic Mitigation Committee and an action plan for drop-off and pick-up of the students. Pegasus instituted a staggered schedule so that parents are not arriving at the school all at the same time,a new parking lot includes a drop-off and pick-up lane to facilitate vehicle movenicat,and the staff regularly informs the neighborhood of upcoming events at the school. Please refer to the letter and sample community fliers in Attachment No. 3. ISSSUES:. General PIgn Conformance: The proposed project is consistent with the following goals and objectives of the City's General Plan and the Land Use Element designation of P(RL),Public with underlying Low Density Residential on the subject property: PnflCy LU 4.z.s: Require that all commercial,industrial,and public development incorporate appropriate design elements to facilitate access and use as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act. Objective l IZ 7 1: Accommodate the development of a balance of land uses that a)provides for the housing,commercial,employment,educational,cultural,entertairinient;and recreation needs of existing and future residents,b)provides employment opportunities for residents of the.City and surrutmding subregion,c)captures visitor and tourist activity,and d)provides open space and aesthetic"relief'from urban development. Obiective LU Q.4: Provide for the inclusion of recreational,institutional,religious, educational,and service uses that support.resident needs within residential neighborhoods. Policy LU 9.4.3: Encourage the ddvelopment and public use of City/District joint use facilities where City parks and school fa-ilities adjoin one another in order to maximiee the use of property,zninirnize the cost of development,and enhance the recreational and educational opportunities for the community. Staff Report-418/97 4 (97sr7-4) ZoaLzg Qm lin ante: This project is located in the PS(RL-FP2)-Public Semi-Public with an underlying how Density Residential designation-Flood Plain zone and complies with the requirements of that zone. Environmental Status: Staff has reviewed the enviroa rental assessment and determined that no significant impacts are anticipated as a result of the proposed project that could not be mitigated to a level of insignificance with proper design and engineering. Subsequently,Negative Declaration No.96-17(Attachment No.5) was prepared with litigation measures pursuant to Section 240.04 of the HBZSO and the provisions of the California Environment Quality Act(CEQA). The Department of Community Development advertised draft Negative Declaration No.96-17 for twenty (20)days commencing on"Larch 13, 1997 and ending on April 1. 1997. One comment was received from the Environmental Board and stated that the Board concurs with the negative declaration prepared for the project. Prior to any action on.Conditional Use Permit No.96-891,it is necessary for the Planning Commission to review and act on Negative Declaration No.96-17. Staff,in its initial study of the project,is recommending that the negative declaration be approved with findings and mitigation mea.ures. Coastal Titus: Not applicable. Rerlevelonntei! atus: Not applicable. DajVi Review Boa a: Not applicable. 1 fi .Subdivhion C'omndttee:. Not applicable. Other Departments Concerns: The Departments of Public Works and Fire,and Building Division have reconunended conditions which are incorporated into the conditions of approval. '11e Police Department recommended that a proposed wall at the entrance to the restrooms in the Activities Center/Gymnasium be removed so that it is a less likely lading place for someone who does not belong in the area. This recommended change has been included in the conditions of approval in Attachment No. 1. t ANALYSIS: While reviewing the proposed applicatioa for a roaster plan of development,staff was mostly concerned with potential traffic,and parlance impacts that may be generated as a result of the project. In addition, staff analyzed the proposed master plan for compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood. Staff Report-418/97 5 (97sr)4) 1'Q lC As a result of a previously approved entitlement for addition of eight modular classrooms(now amended to two modulars and six permanent classrooms),the applicant submitted a traffic study by Paul Cook and Associates to analyze the number of vehicle trips,and thus the amount of Traffic impact Fees,that would be required. While that dociunent has been reviewed but not yet approved by the City's Traffic Engineer, staff requested additional information regarding the number of vehicle trips that would be generated by the new proposed project. In particular,the number of vehicle trips generated by the new activities center ,md the improvements to the athletic fields. Mr. Cook was contracted by the school to conduct a further traffic analysis and prepare suggestions for mitigating any potential parking impacts that may be generated to the existing residential neighborhood. The traffic analysis indicated that most of the events expected to occur within the new activities center/gymnasium are student and parent functions that are already occurring at the site. The new activities center will allow the entire student population to gather in one place for assemblies and will be used for Back to School Night, Open House, Field Day(School Olympics),Grandparent's Day,etc., although these events will mostly take place throughout the campu_ The new gymnasium will also allow the school to establish a basketball team and to hold two conceits a year which are currently held off-site. The basketball team expects to hold weekly practices,play home games,and conduct playoff games in the Spring and in the Fall. Similarly,the proposed improvements to the field would allow the school to develop a track and field team which would practice once a week and hold one track meet on a weekend. Since basketball and track and field practices and games are typically held after school hours, it is anticipated that parents and other teams traveling to the site would not conflict with peak drop-of and pick-up of other students at the site. The existing roller hockey team at the school will continue to operate under the current.schedule of practice once a week and one or two Saturday tournaments a year. Mr. Cook's traffic analysis which included a number of estimated vehicle trips generated by the activities described above,has been determined to be adequate for review pairposes by the City of Huntington Beach Traffic Engineering Division_. The report estimates that the annual Back,,, School Night And Open House may draw up to 500 attendees on a weekday e aening from 7:00 PM to 9:00 MI.. The report estimates 3 persons per vehicle and therefore 170 vehicle trips would be generated at each event. Visitors are expected to arrive and depart throughout the two hour period with the peals of approx;mately 80%of the total attendees or 140 vehicles on-site at one time. Since the school parking lot has 1,00 spaces, approximately 42 vehicles would need to park on-street during the peak attendance time. Field Day is held anuuaily on a weekda,'from 2:00 PM to 4,00 PM with approximate attendance of 150 families. The report assumes one car pe,family or an additional 150 vehicle trips with a peak of about 90%being on-site at one time. Mr.Cook e ,.mates that approximately 50 vehicles would be available on- site'at that time and therefore,approximately 85 vehicles would park on-street. Staff Report-418/97 6 (97sr24) Grandparent's Day is held once a year on a weekday from$:00 AM to 12:00 PM and draws approximately 350 students,parents,and grandparents. The report assunnes the students are already on campus and 240 parents and grandparents attend with two persons per vehicle for a total of 120 additional vehicle trips with a peak of approximately 60%being on-site at one time. Approximately 50 parking spaces would be available on-site at that time,therefore 72 vehicles would park on the street. The semi-annual concerts are anticipated to draw the same number of vehicles at the same hours as the annual Back to School Night and Open House events except 100%of the attendees would be expected to be on-site at one time. Since there are 100 parking spaces currently on-site,approximately 72 vehicles would be required to park on the street. The report concludes that some of the activities would require on-street parking for a period of two to four hours either during the daytime or early evening hours. In addition,the report states that both the existing and future activities would have no significant impacts on existing traffic volumes because additional vehicle trips generated by these uses are insignificant and occur during off-peak hours. However,in order to mitigate any additional on-street parking needs,a mitigation measure(and condition of approval)has been included to require an existing paved play area near Shalom Drive to be utilizcd for overflow parking during events with high attendance. The applicant has included a sketch demonstrating that access to the paved play area is available and approximately 31 temporary parking spaces could be provided. There are some cases during the above described activities,such as Field Day and Grandparent's Day,when the overflow parking would not be feasible since the events occur during school hours. Therefore,in all above scenarios describing a need for on-street parking in the afternoons or evenings,each should be reduced by 31 spaces that will be provided in the temporary parking lot. Since the majority of events at the school are already existing and parking is currently occurring on the street,on-street parking should actually improve with the use of the 31 temporary parking spaces on the site. In order to ensure the proper operation of the temporary parking lot,a mitigation measure (and condition of approval)which requires Pegasus School to meet with their regular neighborhood committee one year after completion of Phase 11 has been included. If,after one year of operation,there are continual neighborhood concerns with traffic and/or parking, then the issues shall be analyzed by the Planning staff and if necessary,sliall be subject to further review by the Planning Commission in order to resolve any outstanding concerns. It should be noted that Pegasus School has not encouraged and does not anticipate use of the athletic facilities by any outside sports organizations such as AYSO,Little League,etc. However,Pegasus School is a long term lease holder from the Fountain Valley School District and does not have complete control over the site,therefore,it should be noted that these types of uses are purely speculative and fall under the jurisdiction of the school district. Staff Report-4/8/97 7 (97s.24) Since parking for private schools is based on the number of classrooms and the number of staff members, no additional on-site parking is required for this project since neither the number of classrooms or the number of staff members will be altered. The project currently requires 97 parking spaces on the site. With the recent parking lot improvements associated with the previously approved modular classrooms, the project currently provides 100 on-site parking spaces that will be available for parking during use of the athletic fields and activities center/gymnasium in addition to the 31 temporary parking spaces that will be made available. Com-patibility Staff has included several conditions of approval to ensure the continued computability of the Pegasus School with the surrounding residential neighborhood. Some of these items were also mitigation measures analyzed und,--Negative Declaration No.96-17. A condition of approval has been included to ensure that use of the recreational open space that is currently open and available for use by the public remain available after completion of the master plan. Also,the proposed Activities Center/Gymnasium is centrally located on the campus so as not to be immediately adjacent to any existing residential structures. As discussed above,no increase in either enrollment nor the number of staff members is proposed with this application and the types of activities that are expected to occur at the school are generally the same types of events that currently occur. Since staff is recommending that a temporary overflow parking lot be provided,no significant traffic and parking impacts are expect to occur. It should be noted that Pegasus School invited members of the surrounding community to a meeting to introduce the project and solicit input regarding the master plan from interested parties. The community meeting was held March 20, 1997 at 7:00 PM and although fliers were distributed to approximately 300 residences in the area,only one person attended the meeting. Please see Attachment No. 4 to review a copy of the flier and other notices that have been sent to the neighborhood since 1995. �UNVMARV: Staff recommends approval of the piaster plan for Pegasus School for the following reasons: the proposed master plan of development for the Pegasus School`.rill be compatible with the surrounding residential neighborhood because the master plan does not propose any additional classroom space, • the student enrollment is not proposed beyond the previously approved 500 students, a temporary parking lot will be utilized during high attendance events at the school, the recreational facilities that are currently open and available to the public will remain available after implementation of the master plan, • construction of the new Activities Center/Gymnasium is slated for the middle of the school grounds and not immediately adjacent to any residential uses, no lighting or bleachers are proposed in the athletic fields,and • the project will be subject to staff review and Planning Commission review one year after completion of Phase II to analyze the traffic and parking situation at the site. Staff Report-4/8197 8 (97sr24) ALTERNATIVE ACTION(S)- The Planning Commission may take alternative actions such as: A. Deny Conditional Use Permit No. 96-89 and Negative Declaration No. 96-17 with findings for denial. B. Continue Conditional Use Pemiit No.96-89 and Negative Declaration No, 96-17 and direct staff accordingly. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Findings and Suggested Conditions of Approval 2. Site Plan.,Floor Plans and Elevations dated November 20, 1996 3. Narrative 4. Letter from Dr.Laura Hathaway received March 31, 1997 5. Negative Declaration No. 96-17 (Includes Environmental Checklist,Mitigation Measures,and Comment Letter from City of Huntington Beach Envirownentai Board) SEi:7M:kjl Staff Report-418197 9 (97sr24) ATTACFIIVIFCNT NO. 1 FINDINGS AND SU('Cz11''iSTED CONJIMONS OF APPROVAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO.96-89 FiNT,)INQS FOR APPROVAL FOR NEGATIVE,UE!CLARA'FION ISO 96_717 1, T h.-?negative Declaration No. 96-17 has been prepared in compliance with Article 6 of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)Guidelines. It was advertised and available for a public comment period of twenty(20)days. Comments received during the comment period were considered by the Planning Commission, prior to action on the Negative Declaration and Conditional Use Permit No. 96-89. 2. Mitigation measures,incorporated into the attached conditions of approval, avoid or reduce the project's effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment will occur. 3. There is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the Plaiming Commission that the project,as mitigated through the conditions of approval for Conditional Use Permit No. 96-98 will have a significant effect on the environment. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 96-89- 1. Conditional Use Permit No.96-89 for the establishment,maintenance and operation of the phased master plan of development for the Pegasus School will not be detrimental to the general welfare of persons working or residnig in the vicinity or detrimental to the value of the property and improvements in the neighborhood. The master plan consists of expansions to the Administration 'Building and Middle School Building along with construction of a new Activities Center/Gymnasium but does not propose any increase in enrollment,number of classrooms,or staff members. With the conditions of approval imposed,the proposed construction at the former public school site will not impede public use and access to existing recreational opportunities at the site and traffic and parking needs will be accommodated during high attendance events in a temporary parking lot. 2. The conditional we permit will be compatible with stu-rounding residential uses because the proposed construction is proposed in the center of the school campus and not immediately adjacent to any residential units. In addition,with the conditions of approval imposed,the proposed construction at the former public school site will not impede public use and access to existing recreational opportunities at the site and traffic and parking needs will be accommodated during high attendance events in a temporary parking lot. Also,no lighting or bleachers are proposed in the athletic fields. Attachment-4/8197 (97sr24-10) 3. The proposed master plan of development for Pegasus School will comply with the provisions of the base district and other applicable provisions in Titles 20-25 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located. All code required minimum setbacks,maximum building height, maximum site coverage,etc.will be provided by the proposed design of the project. 4. The granting of the conditional use permit will not adversely affect th., General Plan. It is consistent j with the Land Use Element designation of PS-(RL),(Public Semi-Public with underlying Low Density Residential on the subject property. In addition,it is consistent with the following goals and policies of the General Plan: a. F&4r y LU 4.2.5, Require that all conunercial,industrial,and public development incorporate appropriate design elements to facilitate access and use as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act. b. Objective LU 7.1: Accommodate the development of a balance of land uses that a)provides for the housing, commercial,employment,educational,cultural,entertainment,and recreation needs of existing and future residents,b)provides employment opportunities for residents of the City and surrounding subregion,e) captures visitor and tourist activity,and d)provides open space and aesthetic"relief'from urban development. c. Olhiecrive LU 9.-1: Provide for the inclusion of recreational,institutional,religious,educational, and service uses that support resident needs within residential neighborhoods. d. Policy L U 9.d.3: Encourage the development and public use of City/District joint use facilities where City parks and school facilities adjoin one another in order to maximize the use of property, minimize the cost of development,and enhance the recreational and educational opportunities for the community. SUGGESTED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL-CONMITIONAL U5E PERMIT NO,96-89: 1, The site plan,floor plans and elevations received and dated November 20, 1996 shall be the conceptually approved layout with the following modifications: a. The wing walls proposed at the entrance to the restrooms in the Activities Center/Gymnasium shall be eliminated. b. Depict all new utility apparatus,such as but not limited to back flow devices and.Edison transformers an the site plan. Utility meters shall be screened from view from public rights-of way. Electric transformers in a required front or street side yard shall be enclosed in subsurface vaults. 13ackflow prevention devices shall be prohibited in the front yard setback and shall be screened from view. (Code Requirement) Attachment-4/8/97 (97sr24-1]) c. Alt new exterior mechanical equipment shall be screened from view on all sides. Rooftop mechanical equipment shall be setback 15 feet from the exterior edges of the building. Equipment to be screened includes,but is not limited to,heating,air conditioning,refrigeration equipment, plumbing lines,ductwork and transfonners. Suid screening shall be architecturally compatible with the building in terms of materials and colors, If screening is not designed specifically into the building,a rooftop mechanical equipment plan showing screening must be submitted for review i and approval with the application for building permit(s). (Code Requirement) d. Depict all new gas meters,water meters,electrical panels,air conditioning units,mailbox facilities and similar items on the site plan and elevations. If located on a building, they Shall be architecturally designed into the building to appear as part of the building. They shall be arclitecturally compatible with the building and non-obtrusive,r_at interfere with sidewalk areas and comply with required setbacks. 2. Prior to of submittal for building permits for each phase,the following shall be completed: a. Zoning entitlement conditions of approval shall be printed verbatim on the cover page of all the working drawing sets used for issuance of building permits(architectural,structural,electrical, mechanical and plumbing). b. Since the elevations for Phases II and III are coneeptuaul only at this time arid the project is located in the PS zone,the Dcsign Review Board and Department of Community Development j shall review and approve the following(for Phases II and III only): 4 1) Revised site plan and elevations as modified pursuant to Condition No. 1. i i 2) Proposed structures shall be architecturally compatible with existing structures. I c. All Fire Department requirements shall be noted on the building plans. (M). i 3. Prior to issuance of grading permits(for Phases I and II or as determined necessary by the Public iWorks Department),the following shall be completed: { a. A grading plan,prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer,shall be submitted to the Department of I Public Works;for review and approval. (PNIV) b. A plan for silt control for all water runoff from the property during construction and initial operation ofihe project may be required if deemed necessary by the Director of Public Works. (PW) 4 i j Attachment-4/8/97 (97sr24-12) 4. Prior to issuance of building permits,the following shall be completed: a. Submit copy of the revised site plan,floor plans and elevations pursuant to Condition No. I for review and approval and inclusion in the entitlement file to the Department of Community Development. b. A Landscape Construction Set must be submitted to the Department of Public Works and approved by the Departments of Public Works and Community Development. The Landscape Construction Set shall include a landscape plan prepared and signed by a State Licensed Landscape Architect which identifies the location,type,size and quantity of all existing plant materials to remain,existing plant materials to be removed and proposed plant materials;an irrigation plan;a grading plan;an approved site plan and a copy of the entitlement conditions of approval. The landscape plans shall be in conformance with Chapter 232 of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance and applicable Design Guidelines. Any existing mature trees that must be removed shall.be replaced at a two to one ratio(2:1)with minimum 36 inch box trees and shall be incorporated into the project's landscape plan. (PNV)(Code Requirament) z c. Hydrology and hydraulic studies shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for approval. (PW) d. A Grading and Erosion Control Plan for the new building,prepared by a Registered Ci-61 Engineer,shall be subnnitted for review and approval to the Public Works Department. (PW) e. A sewer study shall be submitted for Public Works Department approval. The developer shall design and construct the sewer system required to serve the development. The sewer lateral shall be 6 inches minimum. The Public Works Department shall determine if the sewer study is necessary prior to Phase?construction or only Phase 71 construction. f. All public water improvements shall be designed and installed per the City of Huntington Beach Water Division's Standard Plans,Specifications,and Design Criteria. g. The proposed building shall be served by the existing water service for the entire site. The developer shall verify that the existing water service size meets the UPC. h. A separate fire service,size and locate per the City of Huntington Beach Fire Department, shall be constructed per City of Huntington Beach water Division Standard Plan 618. S. During construction,the applicant ,hall: a. Use water tt �s or sprinkler systems in all areas where vehicles travel to keep damp enough to prevent dust raised when leaving the site: Attachment-4/8/97 (97sr24-13) b. Wet down areas in the late morning and aver work is completed for the day; c. Use low suifar fuel(.05%)by weight for construction equipment; d. Attempt to phase and schedule construction activities to avoid high ozone days(first stage smog alerts); e. Discontinue construction during second stage smog alerts. 6. Prior to final building permit inspection and approval or commencement of use,the following shall be completed: a. The applicant shall obtain any necessary permits from the South Coast Air Quality Management District and submit a copy to Department of Community Development. b All.improvements to the property shall be completed in accordance with the approved plans and conditions of approval specified herein,including: 1) Landscaping; 2) Fire extinguishers will be installed and located in areas to comply with Huntington Beach Fire Code Standards. (FD) 3) A fire alarm system will be installed to comply with Huntington Beach Fire Department and Uniform Fire Code Standards. Shop drawings will be submitted to and approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. The system will provide the following: a) Manual pulls; b) Audible alarnis;and c) Visual alarms(FD) 4) All automatic fire sprinkler system shall be installed in all new buildings that exceed 5,000 square feet. This shall comply with Huntington Beach Fire Department and Uniform Building Code Standards. Shop drawings shall be submitted to and approved by the Fire Department prior to installation. (FD) c, Compliance with all conditions of approval specified herein shall be accomplished and verified by the Community Development Department. d. All building spoils,such as unusable lumber,wire,pipe,and other surplus or unusable material, shall be disposed of at an off-site facility equipped to handle them. e. .The project will comply will all provisions of Huntington Beach Municipal Code Title 17.04.085 and City Specification No.429 for new construction wL tin the methane gas overlay districts. (FD) Attachment-4/8197 (97sr24-14) 7. The use shall comply with the following: a. The blacktop area to the northwest of the cul-de-sac on Shalom Drive Shall be used for overflow parking during all special activities at the site,such as but not limited to,Back to School Night, Open House,Concerts,and major sporting activities. A minimum of two parking lot attendants shall be provided from one half hour before each event to facilitate proper use of the temporary parking lot since no parking stall striping will he required. (Mitigation Measure) b. All existing and relocated recreational activity areas which are currently open and available to the public shall remain open and available during and after all phases of the Master Plan. This mitigation measure regarding public accessibility-to the school site shall not be interpreted to result in a compromise to the safety of the children in attendance at Pegasus School. (!Mitigation !Measure) c. Only the uses described in the narrative shall be permitted. S. Pegasus School shall meet with their regular neighborhood committee one year after completinn of Phase II in order to assess the parking and traffic at the site. If,after one year of operation,there are continual neighborhood concerns with traffic and/or parking,ther th-,issues shall be analyzed by the Planning staff and if necessary,shall be subject to hirther review by the Planning Commission in order to resolve any outstanding concerns. .(Mitigation Measure) 9. The Community Development Director ensures that all conditions of approval herein are complied with. The Community Development Director shall be notified in writing if any changes to the site plan,elevations and floor plans are proposed as a result of the plan check process. Building permits shall not be issued until the Community Development Director has reviewed and approved the proposed changes for conformance with the intent of the Planning Commission's action and the conditions herein.If the.proposed changes are of a substantial nature,an amendment to the original entitlement reviewed by the Planning Commission may be required pursuant to the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. 10.All other conditions of approval as imposed in previous entitlements for Pegasus School shall remain in effect. i M 1 i Attachment-418/97 (97sr24-15) f i INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC CODE REQUIREMENTS: 1- Conditional Use Permit No. 96-89 shall not become effective until the ten day appeal period has elapsed. 2. Conditional Use Permit No. 96-89 shall become null and void unless exercised within one year of the date of final approval or such extension of time as may be granted by the Director pursuant to a written request submitted to the Department of Community Development a minimum 30 days prior to the expiration date. 3. 1 i-o Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke Conditional Use Permit No.96-89,pursuant to a public bearing for revocation,if any violation of these conditions or the Huntington Beach 'Loaning and Subdivision Ordinance or Municipal Code occurs. 4, All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid. The developer will be responsible for the payment of any additional fees adopted in the"upcoming" Water Division Financial Master Plan. (PW) 5. If determined necessary by the Public Works Traffic Engineering Division,Traffic Impact Fees shall be paid at the time of final inspection or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. (PW 6. An encroachment permit shall be required for all work within the public right-of--way. 7. A Certificate of Occupancy must be issued by the Department of Comtnuuzity Development prior to occupying each new building addition. 8. State-mandated school impact fees shall be paid prior to issuance of building permits. 9. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Municipal Code,Building Division,and Fire Department as well as applicable local, State and Federal Fire Codes,Ordinances, and standards, except as noted herein. 10, Construction shall be limited to Monday-Saturday 7.00 AM to 8:00 PM. Construction shall be prohibited Sundays and Federal holidays. 11. The applicant shall submit a check in the amount of$38.00 for the posting of the Notice of Determination at the County of Orange Clerk's Office. The check shall be made out to the County of Orange and submitted to the Department of Community Development within two(2) days of the Planning Commission's action.. Attachment-,4/8/97 (97sr24-16) Attachment 8 City ®f Huntington Beach 9 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 DEPARTMENT OF PLANTING Phone 536-5271 Fax 374-1540 374-1648 NOTICE OF ACTION January 9, 2002 Ricardo Nieva 19692 Lexington Lane Huntington Beach CA 92646 SUBJECT: ENTITLEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 01-01 (PEGASUS SCHOOL EXPANSION)— (Continued from November 27, 2001 with Public Hearing closed) APPLICANT: Ricardo Nieva PROPERTY Fountain Valley School District OWNER: 9461 Talbert Avenue, Fountain Valley CA 92708 REQUEST: To amend Condition of Approval No. 2 of Conditional Use Permit No. 95-33 and allow an increase of student enrollment from 500 to 565 students. The project also includes a request to relocate 31 existing overflow parking spaces from Shalom Drive to behind the Activities Center and to permit the Shalom Drive parking lot for staff parking only. LOCATION: 19692 Lexington Lane (east side of Lexington Lane between Shalom Drive and Shangri La Drive) DATE OF ACTION: January 8, 2002 The Planning Commission of the City of Huntington Beach took action on your application on Tuesday, January 8, 2002, and your application was conditionally approved. Attached to this letter are the modified findings and modified conditions of approval. Please be advised that the Planning Commission reviews the conceptual plan as a basic request for entitlement of the use applied for and there may be additional requirements prior to commencement of the project. It is recommended that you immediately pursue completion of the conditions of approval and address all requirements of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance in order to expedite the processing/completion of your total application. The conceptual plan should not be construed as a precise plan, reflecting conformance to all Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance requirements. Under the provisions of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance, the-action taken by the Planning Commission becomes final at the expiration of the appeal period. A person desiring to appeal the decision shall file a written notice of appeal to the City Clerk within ten calendar days of the date of the Planning Commission's action. The notice of appeal shall EPA 01-01 January 9,2002 Page 2 include the name and address of the appellant, the decision being appealed, and the grounds for the appeal. A filing fee shall also accompany the notice of appeal. The appeal fee is $595.00 for a single-family dwelling property owner appealing the decision on his/her own property. The appeal fee is$1,770.00 for all other appeals. In your case, the last day for filing an appeal and paying the filing fee is January 18, 2002. Provisions of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance are such that any application becomes null and void one (1) year after final approval, unless actual construction has started. If there are any further questions, please contact Jane James, Senior Planner at(714) 536- 5596, or the Planning Department Zoning Counter at (714) 536-5271. Sincerely, Howard Zelefsky, Secretary Planning Commission By: He Faul nd, Principal Planner HZ:HF:JJ:ri c: Fountain Valley School District (02d0108) FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ENTITLEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 01-01 FINDINGS FOR PROJECTS EXEMPT FROM CEQA: The Planning Commission finds that the project will not have any significant effect on the environment and is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301, Class 1 of the CEQA Guidelines, because operation or minor alteration of existing private facilities involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that previously existing is exempt from environmental review. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL- ENTITLEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 01-01: 1. Entitlement Plan Amendment No. 01-01 for the expansion of an existing private school facility (Pegasus School) by: a)amending Conditional Use permit No. 95-33 Condition of Approval No. 2 to allow an increase of student enrollment from 500 to 565 students and a commitment by Pegasus School to not increase enrollment beyond 565; b) relocating 31 existing overflow parking spaces adjacent to the Activity Center building; and c) establishing a permanent staff parking lot with 35 parking spaces adjacent to the Shalom Drive frontage will not be detrimental to the general welfare of persons working or residing in the vicinity or detrimental to the value of the property and improvements in the neighborhood. The existing private school use on the subject site was previously approved by the Planning Commission. The proposed expansion will minimize noise and traffic impacts to adjacent residential areas by placing the overflow parking within the interior of the site and providing adequate parking to serve the facility on-site. 2. The entitlement plan amendment will be compatible with surrounding uses because: - No new structures are proposed to house the additional 65 students. - The temporary overflow parking area will be relocated within the center of the site and the parking area along Shalom will be utilized for staff parking only to minimize traffic and noise impact to adjacent residences. - The overflow parking area will be located approximately 200 ft. from the nearest residential lot to the north of the site and will only be used during scheduled events with high attendance during the year. - Traffic to and from the overflow parking area will be directed by two parking attendants who will be available at least half hour prior to and after events with high attendance. - Vehicular and pedestrian circulation paths leading to or through the overflow parking area during special events will be clearly designated by placement of wooden horses and caution tape to ensure safety of pedestrians and drivers. - No net increase in Pegasus related traffic trips will occur as a result of 65 additional students. 3. The proposed private school facility expansion will comply with the provisions of the base district and other applicable provisions in Titles 20-25 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance, including parking, and any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located. Eighteen permanent surplus parking spaces and 31 temporary overflow parking spaces will be provided on site. 4. The granting of the entitlement plan amendment will not adversely affect the General Plan. It is consistent with the Land Use Element designation of P(RL) Public, with and underlying designation of Residential Low Density on the subject property. In addition, it is consistent with the following goals and policies of the General Plan: (02c101081EPA 01-01) Attachment 1.1 Obiective_LU 7.1: Accommodate the development of a balance of land uses that a) provides for the housing, commercial, employment, educational, cultural, entertainment, and recreation needs of existing and future residents, b) provides employment opportunities for residents of the City and surrounding subregion, c) captures visitor and tourist activity, and d) provides open space and aesthetic"relief'from urban development. Objective LU 9.4: Provide for the inclusion of recreational, institutional, religious, educational, and service uses that support resident needs within residential neighborhoods. Policy LU 9.4.3: Encourage the development and public use of City/District joint use facilities where City parks and school facilities adjoin one another in order to maximize the use of property, minimize the cost of development, and enhance the recreational and educational opportunities for the community. The proposed development will allow the expansion of a private school facility, thereby enhancing the educational opportunities available to the youth of the community, and employment opportunities for residents of the City and surrounding region without impacting surrounding residential development. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL—ENTITLEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 01-01: 1. The site plan, floor plans and elevations received and dated July 30, 2001 shall be the conceptually approved layout. 2. Prior to enrolling any students beyond the current 500 student cap, Public Works Traffic Engineering and Planning staff shall utilize existing data or commission a new study, if necessary, to establish a baseline of current Pegasus School related vehicle trips in the neighborhood. A method of monitoring Pegasus School's vehicular trips on an annual basis shall also be established by the Public Works Traffic Engineering and Planning Departments. Establishing the baseline and the annual monitoring shall be at the expense of Pegasus School. 3. Fountain Valley School District shall be contacted to request relocation of the public school bus stop currently located on the north side of Shalom,just east of Lexington so that this section of Shalom can be utilized for carpool queuing. Pegasus School shall submit written evidence of their request to Fountain Valley School District and the District's response prior to enrolling any students beyond the 500 student cap. 4. Public Works staff shall be contacted to provide"No Parking 2:00 PM to 4:00 PM Monday- Friday"signs on the north side of Shalom Drive. Pegasus School shall submit written evidence of their request to Public Works and Public Works' response prior to enrolling any students beyond the 500 student cap. 5. The use shall comply with the following: a. Pegasus School shall adhere to the practices outlined in the Traffic Mitigation Program received and dated December 21, 2001 from Pegasus School and signed by the representative from Institutional Advancement. The Traffic Mitigation Plan shall be amended to include a minimum of three neighborhood meetings per year and the reference to adding a parking lot expansion on Lexington shall be deleted. b. Maximum student enrollment shall be 565 students. (02c10108/EPA 01-01) Attachment 1.2 c. A third bus shall be subsidized by Pegasus School. d. If Pegasus School is successful in obtaining relocation of the public school bus stop from the north side of Shalom, then the carpool queue line shall begin on the north side of Shalom Drive and end on Carmania. Carpooling vehicles shall only utilize the section of Shalom Drive between Lexington and Carmania. No carpooling vehicles shall utilize Shalom to the east of Carmania for queuing or turning movements. e. The temporary overflow parking area shall be limited to the designated area depicted on the site plan dated July 30, 2001, and shall be used for all high attendance events such as Back to School Night, Open House, and major sporting events during the year. f. Vehicular and pedestrian circulation paths leading to or through the overflow parking area during special events will be clearly designated by placement of barricades to ensure safety of pedestrians and drivers. g. A minimum of two parking lot attendants shall be provided one half hour prior to and until one half hour after each school event to facilitate proper use of the temporary overflow parking area., h. No net increase in Pegasus related vehicular traffic shall occur beyond the baseline of established trips as described in Condition of Approval No. 2 above. i. Pegasus School's vehicular trips shall be monitored on an annual basis at the direction of Public Works Traffic Engineering staff to determine that no net increase in school related vehicular trips has occurred. All monitoring efforts by Public Works staff shall be reimbursed by Pegasus School. j. Pegasus School facilities shall not be leased to other users. 9. A review of the use shall be conducted by staff, without public hearing, within 12 months of the issuance of Certificate of Occupancy to verify compliance with all conditions of approval and applicable Chapters of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. If it is determined that Pegasus School's vehicular trips have increased beyond the baseline as described in Condition of Approval No. 2, then a public hearing before the Planning Commission shall be scheduled. 10.All other conditions of approval for Conditional Use Permit No. 88-56, 95-33 and 96-89 shall remain in effect. 11.The Planning Director ensures that all conditions of approval herein are complied with. The Planning Director shall be notified in writing if any changes to the site plan, elevations and floor plans are proposed as a result of the plan check process. Building permits shall not be issued until the Planning Director has reviewed and approved the proposed changes for conformance with the intent of the Planning Commission's action and the conditions herein. If the proposed changes are of a substantial nature, an amendment to the original entitlement reviewed by the Planning Commission may be required pursuant to the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance. 12.The applicant and/or applicant's representative shall be responsible for ensuring the accuracy of all plans and information submitted to the City for review and approval. (02c10108/EPA 01-01) Attachment 1.3 INFORMATION ON SPECIFIC CODE REQUIREMENTS: 1. Entitlement Plan Amendment No. 01-01 shall not become effective until the ten-calendar day appeal period has elapsed. 2. Entitlement Plan Amendment No. 01-01 shall become null and void unless exercised within one year of the date of final approval which is January 8, 2003, or such extension of time as may be granted by the Director pursuant to a written request submitted to the Planning Department a minimum 30 days prior to the expiration date. 3. The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke Entitlement Plan Amendment No. 01-01, pursuant to a public hearing for revocation, if any violation of these conditions or the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance or Municipal Code occurs. 4. All applicable fees from the Building, Public Works, and Fire Departments shall be paid prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 5. The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Municipal Code, Building Division, and Fire Department as well as applicable local, State and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards, except as noted herein. 6. The applicant shall submit a check in the amount of$43.00 for the posting of the Notice of Exemption at the County of Orange Clerk's Office. The check shall be made out to the County of Orange and submitted to the Planning Department within two (2) days of the Planning Commission's action. 7. All landscaping shall be maintained in a neat and clean manner, and in conformance with the HBZSO. Prior to removing or replacing any landscaped areas, check with the Departments of Planning and Public Works for Code requirements. Substantial changes may require approval by the Planning Commission. 8. All permanent, temporary, or promotional signs shall conform to Chapter 233 of the HBZSO. Prior to installing any new signs, changing sign faces, or installing promotional signs, applicable permit(s) shall be obtained from the Planning Department. Violations of this ordinance requirement may result in permit revocation, recovery of code enforcement costs, and removal of installed signs. (02c10108/EPA 01-01) Attachment 1.4 O LIT City ®£ Huntington Beat 2000 MAIN STREET CALI FORMA 92648 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING Phone 536-5271 Fax 374-1540 374-1648 NOTICE OF ACTION November 28, 2001 Ricardo Nieva 19692 Lexington Lane Huntington Beach CA 92646 SUBJECT: ENTITLEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 01-01 (PEGASUS SCHOOL EXPANSION)—(Continued from August 14, 2001) APPLICANT: Ricardo Nieva 1 PROPERTY Fountain Valley School District OWNER: 9461 Talbert Avenue, Fountain Valley CA 92708 REQUEST: To amend Condition of Approval No. 2 of Conditional Use Permit No. 95-33 and allow an increase of student enrollment from 500 to 565 students. The project also includes a request to permit the use of four additional existing classrooms, the addition of 11 staff members, and modifications to the location of the existing on-site parking LOCATION: 19692 Lexington Lane (east side of Lexington Lane between Shalom Drive and Shangri La Drive) DATE OF ACTION: November 27, 2001 The Planning Commission of the City of Huntington Beach took action on your application on Tuesday, November 27, 2001, and your application was continued with the Public Hearing closed to January 8, 2002. If there are any further questions, please contact Jane James, Senior Planner at(714) 536- 5596, or the Planning Department Zoning Counter at (714) 536-5271. Sincerely, Howard Zelefsky, Secretary Planning Commission By: Herb Fauland, Senior Plan r HZ:H F:JJ:rl c: Fountain Valley School District (01c11127) J� City ®f Huntington Beach * 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING Phone 536-5271 Fax 374-1540 374-1648 NOTICE OF ACTION August 17, 2001 Ricardo Nieva 19692 Lexington Lane Huntington Beach CA 92646 SUBJECT: ENTITLEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 01-01 (THE PEGASUS_SCHOOL EXPANSION) APPLICANT: Ricardo Nieva, 19692 Lexington Lane, Huntington Beach CA 92646 REQUEST: To permit the expansion of the existing facility as follows: a) amend Conditional Use Permit No. 95-33/Conditional #2 to allow an increase of student enrollment from 500 to 565 students; b) utilize four(4) additional existing classrooms; c) add eleven (11) staff members; d) relocate the 31 overflow parking spaces adjacent to the activity center; and e) use the existing 35-parking space area along Shalom Drive for staff parking. LOCATION: 19692 Lexington Lane(east side of Lexington Lane between Shangh La Drive and Shalom Drive). DATE OF ACTION: August 14, 2001 The Planning Commission of the City of Huntington Beach took action on your application on Tuesday, August 14, 2001, and your application was continued to a date uncertain due to issues raised by neighbors and the Commission relative to traffic circulation, school operations and the public notification process. City staff will schedule a public hearing prior to the mandatory processing date of October 30, 2001. If there are any further questions, please contact Amy Wolfe,Associate Planner at(714) 375-5075, or the Planning Department Zoning Counter at(714) 536-5271. Sincerely, Howard Zelefsky, Secretary Planning Commission By: Scott 9ss, Principal Planner HZ:SH:WC:rl c: Fountain Valley School District Attachment 9 MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION �•� TUESDAY, DECEMBER 13, 2016 HUNTINGTON BEACH CIVIC CENTER 2000 MAIN STREET, HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92648 5:15 P.M. - ROOM B-8 (CITY HALL LOWER LEVEL) CANCELLED — NO STUDY SESSION 7:00 P.M. —COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Led by Commissioner Crowe P P P P A P ROLL CALL: Crowe, Kalmick, Pinchiff, Mandic, Hoskinson, Scandura Commissioner Hoskinson was absent. AGENDA APPROVAL A MOTION WAS MADE BY KALMICK, SECONDED BY MANDIC, TO APPROVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA OF DECEMBER 13, 2016, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Crowe, Kalmick, Pinchiff, Mandic, Scandura NOES: None ABSENT: Hoskinson ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED A. PUBLIC COMMENTS — NONE B. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS B-1. ENTITLEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 15-002 (PEGASUS SCHOOL) Applicant: Mark Foster Property Owner: Rene Cogan, The Pegasus School Request: To amend Condition of Approval No. 5.13 of Entitlement Plan Amendment No. 01-001 to allow an increase of student enrollment from 565 to 595 (30 additional students) at the Pegasus School. Location: 19692 Lexington Lane (east side of Lexington Ln., between Shalom Dr. and Shangri La Dr.) Environmental Status: The project is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15301, Class 1 of the California Environmental Quality Act. City Contact: Joanna Cortez, Assistant Planner 16p=1213 PC Minutes December 13. 2016 Page 2 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: "Approve Entitlement Plan Amendment No. 15-002 with findings and suggested conditions of approval (Attachment No. 1)." The Commission made the following disclosures: • Commissioner Crowe visited the site and spoke with administrative staff at the school. • Commissioner Kalmick spoke with staff. • Chair Pinchiff visited the site. • Commissioner Mandic visited the site. • Commissioner Scandura visited the site. Joanna Cortez, Assistant Planner, gave the staff presentation and an overview of the project. There was a brief discussion regarding potential traffic impacts to the surrounding residents. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Mark Foster, applicant, spoke in support of Item No. B-1. He noted that the increase in students is requested primarily as a result of the replacement of the part time preschool program with the full time junior-k program, increasing the number of full time students. He spoke briefly regarding the increased bus routes, and changes to the drop off/pick up program to incentivize bus and carpool usage. Jason Lopez, Pegasus School Principal, spoke in support of Item No. B-1, citing the changes to the curriculum increasing the number of full time student spots being requested. He noted that the number of students is still well under the numbers at nearby public schools. Donson Liu, LSA, spoke in support of Item No. B-1, gave a brief overview of the traffic study for the request. Nobu Stillwell, resident, spoke in support of Item No. B-1, stating that the school allows the community to utilize the site for community meetings. She noted that the increase in traffic would be minimal in her opinion. Sandy Deering, resident, spoke in support of Item No. B-1, citing the benefits of the school to the neighboring property values, and the contributions to the community. She indicated that the traffic associated with the school is less than neighboring public schools. WITH NO ONE ELSE PRESENT TO SPEAK, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Scandura noted that staggered pick up and drop off times for the varying grades would limit the potential for negative traffic impacts and stated that he was in support of the project. Commissioner Crowe confirmed with staff that the city would have no jurisdiction over this request if Pegasus School was a public school. 16pcm1213 PC Minutes December 13, 2016 Page 3 Commissioner Mandic noted that the original public school at the site had a larger number of students and would have produced far greater traffic impacts. Chair Pinchiff noted that traffic impacts are unavoidable with a school and stated that he was impressed with the work the staff at Pegasus School had done to mitigate those impacts. A MOTION WAS MADE BY SCANDURA, SECONDED BY KALMICK, TO APPROVE ENTITLEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 15-002 WITH FINDINGS AND SUGGESTED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Crowe, Kalmick, Pinchiff, Mandic, Scandura NOES: None ABSENT: Hoskinson ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED FINDINGS FOR PROJECTS EXEMPT FROM CEQA: The proposed project is categorically exempt pursuant to Class 1, Existing Facilities, Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, as operation or minor alteration of existing private facilities involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that previously existing as exempt from the provisions of CEQA. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL—ENTITLEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 15-002: 1. Entitlement Plan Amendment No. 15-002 to amend Condition of Approval No.5.b of Entitlement Plan Amendment No. 01-001 to allow an increase of student enrollment from 565 to 595 at the Pegasus School will not be detrimental to the general welfare of persons working or residing in the vicinity or detrimental to the value of the property and improvements in the neighborhood. The existing private school use on the subject site was previously approved by the Planning Commission and is consistent with EPA 01-01 and the 2001 Traffic Mitigation Plan. Based on the updated traffic study, the increase in students is below the baseline determined in 2001 and results in no net increase in Pegasus related traffic. Additionally, an updated comprehensive TMP outlines all existing and proposed mitigation measures to reduce traffic impacts in the neighborhood, such as increasing the bus ridership program, carpool program, and overflow parking. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated as a result of 30 additional students. 2. The entitlement plan amendment to allow an increase in student enrollment from 565 to 595 will be compatible with surrounding uses because the existing use will remain unchanged with the exception of the additional 30 students. No additional structures are proposed to house the additional students. Based on the updated traffic study, the increase in students is below the baseline determined in 2001 and results in no net increase in Pegasus related traffic. Additionally, an updated comprehensive TMP outlines all existing and proposed mitigation measures to reduce traffic impacts in the neighborhood, such as increasing the bus ridership program, carpool program, and overflow parking. 3. The proposed entitlement plan amendment to amend Condition of Approval No.5.b of Entitlement Plan Amendment No. 01-001 to allow an increase of student enrollment from 16p=1213 PC Minutes December 13,2016 Page 4 565 to 595 at the Pegasus School will comply with the provisions of the base district and other applicable provisions in Titles 20-25 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance, including parking, and any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located. Parking for educational use is calculated based on the number of classrooms, which the applicant is not proposing at this moment. Therefore, the existing on-site parking approved in 2001 is sufficient to accommodate the increase of 30 new students, however, 26 additional overflow parking spaces will be provided onsite. 4. The granting of the entitlement plan amendment will not adversely affect the General Plan. The project is consistent with the Land Use Element designation of P(RL) (Public-underlying designation Residential Low Density). The entitlement plan amendment is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of Public and the objective and polices of the City's General Plan as follows: A. Land Use Element Ob ective LU 9.4: Provide for the inclusion of recreational, institutional, religious, educational and service uses that support resident needs within residential neighborhoods. Policy LU 9.4.3: Encourage the development and public use of City/School District joint use facilities where City parks and school facilities adjoin one another in order to maximize the use of property, minimize the cost of development, ad enhance the recreational and educational opportunities for the community. The entitlement plan amendment will allow the expansion of a private school facility, thereby enhancing the educational opportunities available to the youth of the community without impacting surrounding residential development. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL— ENTITLEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 15-002: 1. The site plan received and dated June 2, 2016 shall be the conceptually approved layout. 2. The use shall comply with the following: a. Pegasus School shall adhere to the practices outlined in the Traffic Mitigation Program (TMP) received and dated October 11, 2016. b. Maximum school enrolment shall be 595 students. c. No net increase in Pegasus related vehicular traffic shall occur beyond the baseline of established trips as described in the TMP dated October 11, 2016. d. Pegasus School's vehicular trips shall be monitored on an annual basis to determine that no net increase in school related vehicular trips has occurred. 3. All other conditions of approval for Conditional Use Permit No. 88-56, 95-33, 96-89 and Entitlement Plan Amendment 01-01 shall remain in effect. 4. The applicant and/or applicant's representative shall be responsible for ensuring the accuracy of all plans and information submitted to the City for review and approval. 5. The development services departments (Building & Safety, Fire, Planning and Public Works) shall be responsible for ensuring compliance with all applicable code requirements and conditions of approval. The Director of Community Development may approve minor amendments to plans and/or conditions of approval as appropriate based on changed 16pcm1213 PC Minutes December 13,2016 Page 5 circumstances, new information or other relevant factors. Any proposed plan/project revisions shall be called out on the plan sets submitted for building permits. Permits shall not be issued until the Development Services Departments have reviewed and approved the proposed changes for conformance with the intent of the Planning Commission's action. If the proposed changes are of a substantial nature, an amendment to the original entitlement reviewed by the Planning may be required pursuant to the provisions of HBZSO Section 241.18. 6. Entitlement Plan Amendment No. 15-002 shall become null and void unless exercises within two years of the data of final approval by the Planning Commission or such extension of time as may be granted by the Director pursuant to a written request submitted to the Planning Division a minimum 30 days prior to the expiration date. INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS CONDITION: The owner of the property which is the subject of this project and the project applicant if different from the property owner, and each of their heirs, successors and assigns, shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Huntington Beach and its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action or proceedings, liability cost, including attorney's fees and costs against the City or its agents, officers or employees, to attack, set aside, void or annul any approval of the City, including but not limited to any approval granted by the City Council, Planning Commission, or Design Review Board concerning this project. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and should cooperate fully in the defense thereof. B-2. ZONING MAP AMENDMENT 16-001/ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 16- 003/LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO. 16-001/11SIEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 16-001 (SUNSET BEACH BEACHFRONT FLOOD REQUIREMENTS) Applicant: City of Huntington Beach Property Owner: Various Request: ZMA: To delete the current —FP3 (Floodplain Overlay) zoning designation on all beachfront properties and the beach in Sunset Beach which, among other things, will eliminate a current requirement for new homes to be built on a pilings or caissons foundation. ZTA: To amend the Sunset Beach Specific Plan (SBSP) by deleting the requirement for new homes on beachfront properties to be constructed on pilings or caissons in accord with the 1985 County of Orange Coastal Flood Plain Development Study. The current Federal Emergency.Management Agency (FEMA) flood insurance rate map is proposed to be used instead as the basis for new construction. LCPA: To amend the City's Local Coastal Program in accordance with ZMA No. 16-001 and ZTA No. 16-003. ND: To analyze the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. Location: Sunset Beach beachfront properties and the beach (151 parcels and the beach bounded by Anderson Street to the north, Warner Avenue to the south, the Pacific Ocean to the west, and South Pacific Avenue to the east) City Contact: Ricky Ramos, Senior Planner STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Motion to: A. "Approve Negative Declaration No. 16-001 with findings (Attachment No. 1) and forward to the City Council for adoption;" 16pcm1213 PC Minutes December 13,2016 Page 6 B. "Approve Zoning Map Amendment No. 16-001 with findings (Attachment No. 1) by approving the draft City Council Ordinance (Attachment No. 2) and forward to the City Council for adoption;" C. "Approve Zoning Text Amendment No. 16-003 with findings (Attachment No. 1) by approving the draft City Council Resolution (Attachment No. 3) and forward to the City Council for adoption;" D. "Approve Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 16-001 with findings (Attachment No. 1) by approving the draft City Council Resolution (Attachment No. 4) and forward to the City Council for adoption." The Commission made the following disclosures: • Commissioner Crowe reviewed the City Council meetings and spoke with other planning and building officials. • Commissioner Kalmick spoke with staff, an applicant with a project in the subject area, attended the City Council meeting, and visited the area. • Chair Pinchiff visited the area, and spoke with an applicant with a project in the area. • Commissioner Mandic attended the study session. • Commissioner Scandura spoke with staff, two City Council members, reviewed the City Council meeting on this request, and served on the Planning Commission during the annexation of Sunset Beach. Ricky Ramos, Senior Planner, gave the staff presentation and an overview of the project. There was a brief discussion on residents' ability to participate in FEMA programs, the liability for tort claims on administrative actions, the replenishment and maintenance of the seasonal berm, a status update on the sea level rise study in process, status of the FEMA Flood Zone Map update process, and that the City Council was given the option to obtain an updated study and did not pursue that option. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Karen Otis, Otis Architecture, spoke in support of Item No. B-2, stating that the county never fully adopted or enforced the 1985 Moffat Nichols study and that the FP3 designation refers to wave velocity which is not an issue in the subject area. Mike Adams, Adams and Associates, spoke in support of Item No. B-2. He stated that the flood concerns in this area are from the harbor, not the ocean, so that wave velocity is not a factor. He stated that he believed the foundation type should be part of the building pernit process. WITH NO ONE ELSE PRESENT TO SPEAK, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. There was a brief discussion regarding the finished floor height. Mr. Ramos indicated that staff had removed that requirement from the specific plan and would rely on the building code for finished floor height determination. 16pcm1213 PC Minutes December 13,2016 Page 7 Commissioner Scandura confirmed with staff that this request would be forwarded to the Coastal Commission, if approved by the City Council. Chair Pinchiff stated that he would have preferred to have an updated study. There was a brief discussion regarding the negative declaration. Chair Pinchiff and Commissioners Mandic and Scandura indicated that they would have preferred additional environmental analysis of the project. Commissioner Kalmick indicated that he felt a negative declaration was the appropriate environmental document for this request. Commissioner Scandura noted that the City Council directed this action be taken and noted that they could submit a minute action to the City Council to express their concerns with the negative declaration. A MOTION WAS MADE BY KALMICK, SECONDED BY SCANDURA, TO APPROVE NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 16-001 WITH FINDINGS AND FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Crowe, Kalmick, Scandura NOES: Pinchiff, Mandic ABSENT: Hoskinson ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED A MOTION WAS MADE BY SCANDURA, SECONDED BY CROWE, TO APPROVE ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO. 16-001 WITH FINDINGS BY APPROVING THE DRAFT CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE AND FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Crowe, Kalmick, Scandura NOES: Pinchiff, Mandic ABSENT: Hoskinson ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED Commissioner Kalmick stated that he would like to require the finished floor height be added back into the specific plan, to match the development in the subject area. 16p=1213 PC Minutes December 13, 2016 Page 8 A MOTION WAS MADE BY KALMICK, SECONDED BY SCANDURA, TO APPROVE ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 16-003 WITH FINDINGS AND MODIFICATIONS TO REQUIRE THAT THE FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION FOR NEW FLOOR CONSTRUCTION BE A MINIMUM OF TWO FEET ABOVE THE CENTER LINE AND THAT IT SLOPES TOWARDS SOUTH PACIFIC AVENUE BY APPROVING THE DRAFT CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION AND FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Crowe, Ka[mick, Scandura NOES: Pinchiff, Mandic ABSENT: Hoskinson ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED A MOTION WAS MADE BY KALMICK, SECONDED BY SCANDURA, TO APPROVE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO. 16-001 WITH FINDINGS BY APPROVING THE DRAFT CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION AND FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Crowe, Kalmick, Scandura NOES: Pinchiff, Mandic ABSENT: Hoskinson ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 16-001: 1. The Negative Declaration No. 16-001 has been prepared in compliance with Article 6 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. It was advertised and available for a public comment period of thirty (30) days. Comments received during the comment period were considered by the Planning Commission prior to action on the Negative Declaration, Zoning Map Amendment No. 16-001, Zoning Text Amendment No. 16-003, and Local Coastal Program Amendment No. 16-001. 2. There is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the Planning Commission that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL -ZONING MAP AMENDMENT NO. 16-001: 1. Zoning Map Amendment (ZMA) No. 16-001 to delete the current--FP3 (Floodplain Overlay) zoning designation on all beachfront properties and the beach in Sunset Beach which, among other things, will eliminate a current requirement for new homes to be built on a pilings or caissons foundation is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan and any applicable specific plan including: Coastal Element 16p=1213 PC Minutes December 13,2016 Page 9 Objective C 10.1 - Identify potential hazard areas in the City and manage/mitigate potential risks and impacts through land use regulation, public awareness and retrofitting where feasible. Policy C 10.1.2 - Promote land use patterns, zoning ordinances and locational criteria that mitigate potential risks posed by development in hazard areas, or which significantly reduce risk from seismic hazards. Policy C 10.1.14 - During major redevelopment or initial construction, require specific measures to be taken by developers, builders or property owners in flood prone areas, to prevent or reduce damage from flooding and the risks upon human safety. Development shall, to the maximum extent feasible and consistent with the Water and Marine Resource policies of this LCP, be designed and sited to: a) Avoid the use of protective devices, b) Avoid encroachments into the floodplain, and c) Remove any encroachments into the floodplain to restore the natural width of the floodplain. Environmental Hazards Element Goal EH 4 - Eliminate, to the greatest degree possible, the risk from flood hazards to life, property, public investment and social order in the City of Huntington Beach. Policy EH 4.1.2 - Establish and enforce standards which minimize financial loss and maximize protection of residents and business owners' property. Objective EH 4.3 - Protect individuals from physical harm in the event of flooding. While the —FP3 designation and the current requirement for pilings or caissons represent a higher design standard for flood protection and wave runup, the proposed amendments will enable the City to use the most current FEMA flood insurance rate map as the basis for new construction which still meets the minimum flood protection requirements consistent with the General Plan goals, objectives, and policies. In addition, FEMA has recently completed an Open Pacific Coast study which restudied coastal flood hazards statewide for the first time in 30 years thereby providing the most current information for floodplain management to minimize risk. FEMA will continue to provide updated flood insurance rate maps, as needed in the future, to address changing flood hazards. 2. ZMA No. 16-001 would delete the current —FP3 zoning designation on all beachfront properties and the beach in Sunset Beach. It will not change the uses authorized in and the other standards prescribed for the base zoning district for which it is proposed. 3. A community need is demonstrated for the change proposed because it will enable the City to update the floodplain overlay zoning information pursuant to the most current FEMA flood insurance rate map rather than an outdated 1985 County flood study. FEMA has recently completed an Open Pacific Coast study which restudied coastal flood hazards statewide for the first time in 30 years thereby providing the most current information as to which areas are subject to a floodplain overlay. 4. Its adoption will be in conformity with public convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice by enabling the City to use the most current FEMA flood insurance rate map rather 16pcm 1213 PC Minutes December 13,2016 Page 10 than an outdated 1985 County flood study to determine which areas are subject to a floodplain overlay. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL -ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT NO. 16-003: 1. Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) No. 16-003 to amend the Sunset Beach Specific Plan (SBSP) by deleting the requirement for new homes on beachfront properties to be constructed on pilings or caissons in accord with the 1985 County of Orange Coastal Flood Plain Development Study and using the current FEMA flood insurance rate map as the basis for new construction is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan and any applicable specific plan including: Coastal Element Objective C 10.1 - Identify potential hazard areas in the City and manage/mitigate potential risks and impacts through land use regulation, public awareness and retrofitting where feasible. Policy C 10.1.2 - Promote land use patterns, zoning ordinances and locational criteria that mitigate potential risks posed by development in hazard areas, or which significantly reduce risk from seismic hazards. Policy C 10.1.14 - During major redevelopment or initial construction, require specific measures to be taken by developers, builders or property owners in flood prone areas, to prevent or reduce damage from flooding and the risks upon human safety. Development shall, to the maximum extent feasible and consistent with the Water and Marine Resource policies of this LCP, be designed and sited to: a) Avoid the use of protective devices, b) Avoid encroachments into the floodplain, and c) Remove any encroachments into the floodplain to restore the natural width of the floodplain. Environmental Hazards Element Goal EH 4 - Eliminate, to the greatest degree possible, the risk from flood hazards to life, property, public investment and social order in the City of Huntington Beach. Policy EH 4.1.2 - Establish and enforce standards which minimize financial loss and maximize protection of residents and business owners' property. Objective EH 4.3 -Protect individuals from physical harm in the event of flooding. While the —FP3 designation and the current requirement for pilings or caissons represent a higher design standard for flood protection and wave runup, the proposed amendments will enable the City to use the most current FEMA flood insurance rate map as the basis for new construction which still meets the minimum flood protection requirements consistent with the General Plan goals, objectives, and policies. In addition, FEMA has recently completed an Open Pacific Coast study which restudied coastal flood hazards statewide for the first time in 30 years thereby providing the most current information for floodplain management to minimize risk. FEMA will continue to provide updated flood insurance rate maps, as needed in the future, to address changing flood hazards. 16pcm1213 PC Minutes December 13,2016 Page 11 2. ZTA No. 16-003 would amend the Sunset Beach Specific Plan (SBSP) by deleting the requirement for new homes on beachfront properties to be constructed on pilings or caissons in accord with the 1985 County of Orange Coastal Flood Plain Development Study and using the current FEMA flood insurance rate map as the basis for new construction. It will not change the uses authorized in and the other standards prescribed for the base zoning district for which it is proposed. 3. A community need is demonstrated for the change proposed which will enable the City to use the most current FEMA flood insurance rate map as the basis for floodplain management rather than an outdated 1985 County flood study. FEMA has recently completed an Open Pacific Coast study which restudied coastal flood hazards statewide for the first time in 30 years thereby providing the most current information for floodplain management to minimize risk. A. Its adoption will be in conformity with public convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice by enabling the City to use the most current FEMA flood insurance rate map as the basis for floodplain management rather than an outdated 1985 County flood study. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL—LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT NO. 16-001: 1. Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) No. 16-001 to the Huntington Beach Local Coastal Program in accordance with ZTA No. 16-003 and ZMA No. 16-001 is consistent with the General Plan designations in that it involves amendments to the floodplain overlay and the basis for floodplain management only by using the latest FEMA flood insurance rate map and will not change the General Plan designations for the subject properties. 2. The proposed change to the Local Coastal Program is in accordance with the policies, standards and provisions of the California Coastal Act that encourage mitigating potential hazards through land use regulations. The LCPA will not conflict with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act because it will not affect existing public access and recreation in the area. C. CONSENT CALENDAR C-1. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED FEBRUARY 9, 2016 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to: "Approve the February 9, 2016, Planning Commission Minutes as submitted." A MOTION WAS MADE BY KALMICK, SECONDED BY MANDIC, TO APPROVE THE FEBRUARY 9, 2016, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS AMENDED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Crowe, Kalmick, Pinchiff, Mandic NOES: None ABSENT: Hoskinson ABSTAIN: Scandura MOTION APPROVED 16pcm1213 PC Minutes December 13,2016 Page 12 C-2. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED MAY 10, 2016 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to: "Approve the May 10, 2016, Planning Commission Minutes as submitted." A MOTION WAS MADE BY KALMICK, SECONDED BY PINCHIFF, TO APPROVE THE MAY 10, 2016, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS SUBMITTED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Crowe, Kalmick, Pinchiff NOES: None ABSENT: Hoskinson ABSTAIN: Mandic, Scandura MOTION APPROVED C-3. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED MAY 24, 2016 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to: "Approve the May 24, 2016, Planning Commission Minutes as submitted." A MOTION WAS MADE BY CROWE, SECONDED BY PINCHIFF, TO APPROVE THE MAY 24, 2016, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS SUBMITTED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Crowe, Kalmick, Pinchiff NOES: None ABSENT: Hoskinson ABSTAIN: Mandic, Scandura MOTION APPROVED C-4. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED JUNE 14, 2016 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to: "Approve the June 14, 2016, Planning Commission Minutes as submitted." A MOTION WAS MADE BY PINCHIFF, SECONDED BY KALMICK, TO APPROVE THE JUNE 14, 2016, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS SUBMITTED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Crowe, Kalmick, Pinchiff NOES: None ABSENT: Hoskinson ABSTAIN: Mandic, Scandura MOTION APPROVED 16p=1213 PC Minutes December 13,2016 Page 13 C-5. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED AUGUST 9, 2016 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to: "Approve the August 9, 2016, Planning Commission Minutes as submitted." A MOTION WAS MADE BY PINCHIFF, SECONDED BY MANDIC, TO APPROVE THE AUGUST 9, 2016, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS SUBMITTED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Crowe, Kalrnick, Pinchiff, Mandic NOES: None ABSENT: Hoskinson ABSTAIN: Scandura MOTION APPROVED C-6. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED AUGUST 23, 2016 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to: "Approve the August 23, 2016, Planning Commission Minutes as submitted." A MOTION WAS MADE BY PINCHIFF, SECONDED BY KALMICK, TO APPROVE THE AUGUST 23, 2016, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS SUBMITTED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Kalmick, Pinchiff, Mandic NOES: None ABSENT: Hoskinson ABSTAIN: Crowe, Scandura MOTION APPROVED C-7. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED SEPTEMBER 13, 2016 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to: "Approve the September 13, 2016, Planning Commission Minutes as submitted." A MOTION WAS MADE BY PINCHIFF, SECONDED BY KALMICK, TO APPROVE THE SEPTEMBER 13, 2016, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS AMENDED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Crowe, Kalmick, Pinchiff, Mandic NOES: None ABSENT: Hoskinson ABSTAIN: Scandura MOTION APPROVED 16p=1213 PC Minutes December 13,2016 Page 14 C-8. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED OCTOBER 11, 2016 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to: "Approve the October 11, 2016, Planning Commission Minutes as submitted" A MOTION WAS MADE BY PINCHIFF SECONDED BY MANDIC, TO APPROVE THE OCTOBER 11, 2016, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS SUBMITTED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Crowe, Kalmick, Pinchiff, Mandic NOES: None ABSENT: Hoskinson ABSTAIN: Scandura MOTION APPROVED C-9. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED NOVEMBER 15, 2016 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to: "Approve the November 15, 2016, Planning Commission Minutes as submitted." A MOTION WAS MADE BY PINCHIFF, SECONDED BY KALMICK, TO APPROVE THE NOVEMBER 15, 2016, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS SUBMITTED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Crowe, Kalmick, Pinchiff, Mandic NOES: None ABSENT: Hoskinson ABSTAIN: Scandura MOTION APPROVED D. NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS - NONE E. PLANNING ITEMS E-1. CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS FROM PREVIOUS MEETING Scott Hess, Director of Community Development- reported on the items from the previous City Council Meeting. E-2. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING Scott Hess, Director of Community Development— reported on the items for the next City Council Meeting. E-3. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING Jane James, Planning Manager—reported on the items for the next Planning Commission Meeting. F. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS F-1. PLANNING COMMISSION REQUEST ITEMS - NONE 16p=1213 PC Minutes December 13, 2016 Page 15 F-2. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner Kalmick welcomed Commissioner Scandura to the Planning Commission and thanked Chair Pinchiff for his work as Planning Commission Chair. Commissioner Scandura thanked Mayor Delgleize for the appointment to the Planning Commission. He spoke regarding the work involved in serving on the Planning Commission and indicated that he looked forward to working with his fellow commissioners to serve the community. Commissioner Crowe thanked Chair Pinchiff for his work as Planning Commission Chair and wished him luck. He also welcomed Commissioner Scandura. Commissioner Mandic thanked Chair Pinchiff for his work as Planning Commission Chair. Chair Pinchiff stated that it was an honor to serve on the Planning Commission and encouraged the public to be involved with the work of the Planning Commission. He welcomed Commissioner Scandura to the Planning Commission. ADJOURNMENT: Adjourned at 9:03 PM to the next regularly scheduled meeting on Tuesday, December 27, 2016, at 5:15 PM. APPR /�Y: Scott ess, Secretary Connie Mandic, Chair 16p=1213 Attachment 10 I____ PROPERTY a••••.iRae•ua.. I a------ar.a...a�. .LINE TITT E 4 { _r,......-- _.._____ 3 __ .,_,.__------ EL iF�, F 81)svrM E -i ---------------------------------------------------- �I }r A pig EXI9TINfl HATHAWAY \� I 19592 LEXINGTON LANE —8 r� GYMNASIUM V ff PROPOSED SCIENCE ( •� BUILDING - 4 �A W Z ra r = i ^ •. ;� `; EXISTING MIDDLE ++, + �\ LFC'END Ur RICRT of $`•l \� SCHOOL BUILDING Z I i �• NEW IMPERVIOUS AREA Li.) I. x `�•� EXISTING BUILDING E NEW PERVIOUS AREA B ,r s aiE [ w -- 118 548 S.F. '� •••• LIMIT OF WORK AREA " f285 AC) EllSt811fi.�C �i C'Iia {(r 7L THE PEGASUS SCHOOL 71P0r`0t° N iE•HNJ:OGY Lw'E3MEi07 �`.,t v/P GASUS ,ORA�INAG�E AREA EXHIBIT Attachment 11 C ! TN' OF U1 U N TT N G T ON U , AC H F I T 17 L I C 0, 0 jZ Y, 53 I N.Tr V, VA [� J'A4 L rf 7' ,,\ 1, ,_- 0 NINk I' '-) I ' -k T T 0 X PROJECT IMPILF-MENTAT-10H CQUIL: RIE-QUIREMENTS. DATE-, JANUARY i e, 2019 M04trT NAME- PFOAS'Ll"i SQ 10011. CAMI3US MARTER PI. 04 ENTIIIIIJEWNTS- CUP 18.47, Off 18-27 PLNG APPLICATION NO, 201,0-264 ME OF PJ-A*Sr DEGPMBER 20, 201pi PROJCCT LOCAMN: 19692 LEXINGTON LANE 92.W (EAET SIDE OF LEXINGTON LANE BETWEEN SHALOINA DRR/E AND 53HANGRI LA DRIVE), 'PROJW# PLANNER, JOANNA CORTEX',-ASSOCIATE PLANNER PLAN REVIEW : BOB MILANI, SEHIOR CIVIL ENGINEEP yx IT-LEP114ONVE MAIL: 714-374-1735 1 BC18.ftA&,NIrTSI IRFQlTN--HB ORG PpoArq 0MRIP1't0J`4: TO PIRMIT THE REMOVAL AND REPI-ACEMENT OF WDULAR CLASSROW r-ACILITIE.S VVITH F'ERMANENTF FACILITIES FOR A NET INCREASE OF 12.400 SO. FT_ ALNQ PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS TO INCREASE A PARKING LOT For, ADDITIONAL ONSITE VEHICIJt-AR -STACKING The follovAnG is a list ormde requirements deerned apphoahlue to tt7e proposed project based m plans -is tfateo above, The itsrns below are to meet the G[ty of Huntington Beach-% MUnicipal Cade (1-#3MC,), Zompg aril Subdivi-sion Ordinance (Z'7S0), Department of Public Works Standard Plans iCrVif, W0-ar aild Landscaping) ano tfie American Pkjl lj(; Wogs Association (Al-'WA) Standams Specifi ofions for Public Works Gonsiructiorl (Grean Sook), the Change countV Drainage.Ar4ea ormiagemont Fl*m (DANIP), and the Cily Arboricoltural and Landscape Stamlardz andSpecificatlons The list jsvileridedtcA assfst the applic-ant by identifying ireq0tementzs; Wch ,.hall be satisfied cluTing V),e vuljouo,stages,of project permitting, impleme-matioui and consauctior, If-YOU IWE 'Ony qtJ6511i0n-. reqt1i'ding these requiremeentc;, phase crunf-Rd the Plan Rl-'VieWET Pr Project Planner, Page 2 of 6 THE FOLLOWING DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A GRADING PERMIT: 1. A Legal Description and Plat of the dedications to City to be prepared by a licensed surveyor or registered Civil Engineer authorized to practice land surveying and submitted to Public Works for review and approval. The dedication shall be recorded prior to issuance of a grading permit for the following easements to the City of Huntington Beach, and shall be shown on the Precise Grading Plan. (ZSO 230.084A) a. A 30-foot right-of-way easement dedication for street and public utilities along the Lexington Lane and Shalom Drive frontages is required (from centerline of street to the back of sidewalk, including around the curb return) that has not been previously dedicated. 2. A Precise Grading Plan, prepared by a Licensed Civil Engineer, shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval. (MC 17.05/ZSO 230.84) The plans shall comply with Public Works plan preparation guidelines and include the following improvements on the plan: a. Any damaged pavement, curb, gutter and sidewalk along the Lexington Lane and Shalom Drive frontages shall be removed and replaced per Public Works Standards. (ZSO 230.84) b. The existing 2 driveway approaches on Lexington Lane shall be removed and replaced with an ADA compliant driveway approach per Public Works Standard Plan No. 209 or 211. (ZSO 230.84) c. An ADA compliant access ramp at the northeast corner of Lexington Lane and Shalom Drive per Caltrans Standard Plan A88A. (ZSO 230.84, ADA) d. The existing sewer lateral may potentially be utilized if it is of adequate size, conforms to current Public Works Standards and is determined to be in serviceable condition by submitting a video of the lateral. If the sewer is determined to be inadequate, a new sewer lateral shall be installed, connecting to the main in the alley, per Public Works Standards. (ZSO 230.84) e. The existing domestic water service currently serving the existing development may potentially be utilized if it is of adequate size, conforms to current standards, and is in working condition as determined by the Water Inspector. If the property owner elects to utilize the existing water service, any non-conforming water service, meter, and backflow protection device shall be upgraded to conform to the current Water Division Standards. Alternatively, a new separate domestic water service, meter and backflow protection device may be installed per Water Division Standards and shall be sized to meet the minimum requirements set by the California Plumbing Code (CPC) f. The existing irrigation water service currently serving the existing development may potentially be utilized if it is of adequate size, conforms to current standards, and is in working condition as determined by the Utilities Division. If the property owner elects to utilize the existing water service, all non-conforming water meters and backflow protection devices shall be upgraded to conform to the current Water Division Standards. Alternatively, a new separate irrigation water service, meter and backflow protection device may be installed per Water Division Standards. (ZSO 232) g. The fire sprinkler system that is required by the Fire Department for the proposed development shall have a separate dedicated fire service line installed per Water Division Standards. (ZSO 230.84) Page 3 of 6 h. Any on-site fire hydrant that is required by the Fire Department to serve the proposed development shall become a private fire hydrant that is served by private fire water service. These private fire water services shall be separated from the public water main in Lexington Lane by construction of a double check detector assembly. The double check detector assembly shall be constructed per the City of Huntington Beach Standard Plan No. 618, and shall be sized to provide adequate fire flow protection for the private on-site fire hydrant. The double check detector assembly shall be located within landscape planter area or other area and screened from view by landscaping or other method as approved by the Department of Public Works. The on-going maintenance of this private fire water service and private fire hydrant shall be the responsibility of the development owner(s). (Resolution 5921, State of California Administrative Code, Title 17) 3. The developer shall submit for approval by the Fire Department and Water Division, a hydraulic water analysis to ensure that fire service connection from the point of connection to City water main to the backflow protection device satisfies Water Division standard requirements. 4. A Hydrology and Hydraulics Report shall be submitted for Public Works review and approval (10, 25, and 100-year storms shall be analyzed). The drainage improvements shall be designed and constructed as required by the Department of Public Works to mitigate impact of increased runoff due to development, or deficient, downstream systems. Design of all necessary drainage improvements shall provide mitigation for all rainfall event frequencies up to a 100-year frequency. The Hydrology and Hydraulic Report shall include, but not be limited to facilities sizing, limits of attenuation, downstream impacts and other related design features. Runoff shall be limited to existing 25-year flows, which must be established in the hydrology study. If the analyses shows that the City's current drainage system cannot meet the volume needs of the project runoff, the developer shall be required to attenuate site runoff to an amount not to exceed the existing 25-year storm as determined by the hydrology study. As an option, the developer may choose to explore low-flow design alternatives, onsite attenuation or detention, or upgrade the City's storm water system to accommodate the impacts of the new development, at no cost to the City. (ZSO 230.84) 5. Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permits for projects that will result in soil disturbance of one or more acres of land, the applicant shall demonstrate that coverage has been obtained under the Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges of Storm Water Runoff Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Order No. 2009-0009- DWQ) [General Construction Permit] by providing a copy of the Notice of Intent (NOI) submitted to the State of California Water Resources Control Board and a copy of the subsequent notification of the issuance of a Waste Discharge Identification (WDID) Number. Projects subject to this requirement shall prepare and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) conforming to the current National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and acceptance. A copy of the current SWPPP shall be kept at the project site and another copy to be submitted to the City. (DAMP) 6. A Project Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) conforming to the current Waste Discharge Requirements Permit for the County of Orange (Order No. R8-2009-0030) [MS4 Permit] prepared by a Licensed Civil Engineer, shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and acceptance. The WQMP shall address Section XII of the MS4 Permit and all current surface water quality issues. The project WQMP shall include the following: Page 4 of 6 a. Low Impact Development. b. Discusses regional or watershed programs (if applicable). c. Addresses Site Design BMPs (as applicable) such as minimizing impervious areas, maximizing permeability, minimizing directly connected impervious areas, creating reduced or"zero discharge" areas, and conserving natural areas. d. Incorporates the applicable Routine Source Control BMPs as defined in the Drainage Area Management Plan. (DAMP) e. Incorporates Treatment Control BMPs as defined in the DAMP. f. Generally describes the long-term operation and maintenance requirements for the Treatment Control BMPs. g. Identifies the entity that will be responsible for long-term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs. h. Describes the mechanism for funding the long-term operation and maintenance of the Treatment Control BMPs. i. Includes an Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan for all structural BMPs. j. After incorporating plan check comments of Public Works, three final WQMPs (signed by the owner and the Registered Civil Engineer of record) shall be submitted to Public Works for acceptance.After acceptance,two copies of the final report shall be returned to applicant for the production of a single complete electronic copy of the accepted version of the WQMP on CD media that includes: i. The 11" by 17" Site Plan in .TIFF format (400 by 400 dpi minimum). ii. The remainder of the complete WQMP in .PDF format including the signed and stamped title sheet, owner's certification sheet, Inspection/Maintenance Responsibility sheet, appendices, attachments and all educational material. k. The applicant shall return one CD media to Public Works for the project record file. 7. Indicate the type and location of Water Quality Treatment Control Best Management Practices (BMPs) on the Grading Plan consistent with the Project WQMP. The WQMP shall follow the City of Huntington Beach; Project Water Quality Management Plan Preparation Guidance Manual dated June 2008. The WQMP shall be submitted with the first submittal 8. A suitable location, as approved by the City, shall be depicted on the grading plan for the necessary trash enclosure(s). The area shall be paved with an impervious surface,designed not to allow run-on from adjoining areas, designed to divert drainage from adjoining roofs and pavements diverted around the area,and screened or walled to prevent off-site transport of trash. The trash enclosure area shall be covered or roofed with a solid, impervious material. Connection of trash area drains into the storm drain system is prohibited. If feasible, the trash enclosure area shall be connected into the sanitary sewer. (DAMP) 9. A soils report, prepared by a Licensed Engineer shall be submitted for reference only. (MC 17.05.150) 10. The applicant's grading/erosion control plan shall abide by the provisions of AQMD's Rule 403 as related to fugitive dust control. (AQMD Rule 403) 11. The name and phone number of an on-site field supervisor hired by the developer shall be submitted to the Planning and Public Works Departments. In addition, clearly visible signs Page 5 of 6 shall be posted on the perimeter of the site every 250 feet indicating who shall be contacted for information regarding this development and any construction/grading-related concerns. This contact person shall be available immediately to address any concerns or issues raised by adjacent property owners during the construction activity. He/She will be responsible for ensuring compliance with the conditions herein, specifically, grading activities, truck routes, construction hours, noise, etc. Signs shall include the applicant's contact number, regarding grading and construction activities, and "1-800-CUTSMOG" in the event there are concerns regarding fugitive dust and compliance with AQMD Rule No. 403. 12. The applicant shall notify all property owners and tenants within 300 feet of the perimeter of the property of a tentative grading schedule at least 30 days prior to such grading. THE FOLLOWING DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE COMPLIED WITH DURING GRADING OPERATIONS: 13, An Encroachment Permit is required for all work within the City's right-of-way. (MC 12.38.010/MC 14.36.030) 14. The developer shall coordinate the development of a truck haul route with the Department of Public Works if the import or export of material in excess of 5000 cubic yards is required. This plan shall include the approximate number of truck trips and the proposed truck haul routes. It shall specify the hours in which transport activities can occur and methods to mitigate construction-related impacts to adjacent residents. These plans must be submitted for approval to the Department of Public Works. (MC 17.05.210) 15. Water trucks will be utilized on the site and shall be available to be used throughout the day during site grading to keep the soil damp enough to prevent dust being raised by the operations. (California Stormwater BMP Handbook, Construction Wind Erosion WE-1) 16. All haul trucks shall arrive at the site no earlier than 8:00 a.m. or leave the site no later than 5:00 p.m., and shall be limited to Monday through Friday only. (MC 17.05) 17. Wet down the areas that are to be graded or that is being graded, in the late morning and after work is completed for the day. (WE-1/MC 17.05) 18. The construction disturbance area shall be kept as small as possible. (California Stormwater BMP Handbook, Construction Erosion Control EC-1) (DAMP) 19. All haul trucks shall be covered or have water applied to the exposed surface prior to leaving the site to prevent dust from impacting the surrounding areas. (DAMP) 20. Prior to leaving the site, all haul trucks shall be washed off on-site on a gravel surface to prevent dirt and dust from leaving the site and impacting public streets. (DAMP) 21. Comply with appropriate sections of AQMD Rule 403, particularly to minimize fugitive dust and noise to surrounding areas. (AQMD Rule 403) 22. Wind barriers shall be installed along the perimeter of the site. (DAMP) 23. All construction materials, wastes, grading or demolition debris and stockpiles of soils, aggregates, soil amendments, etc. shall be properly covered, stored and secured to prevent transport into surface or ground waters by wind, rain, tracking, tidal erosion or dispersion. (DAMP) Page 6 of 6 THE FOLLOWING DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT: 24. A Precise Grading Permit shall be issued. (MC 17.05) 25. A drainage fee for the subject development shall be paid at the rate applicable at the time of Building Permit issuance. The current rate of $14,497 per gross acre is subject to periodic adjustments. This project consists of 14.0 gross acres (including its tributary area portions along the half street frontages) for a total required drainage fee of $202,958. City records indicate the previous use on this property never paid this required fee. Per provisions of the City Municipal Code, this one-time fee shall be paid for all subdivisions or development of land. (MC 14.48) 26. The applicable Orange County Sanitation District Capital Facility Capacity Charge shall be paid to the City Department of Public Works. (Ordinance OCSD-40) THE FOLLOWING DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO FINAL INSPECTION OR OCCUPANCY: 27. Complete all improvements as shown on the approved grading, and improvement plans. (MC 17.05) 28. All existing and new utilities shall be undergrounded. (MC 17.64) 29. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid at the current rate unless otherwise stated, per the Public Works Fee Schedule adopted by the City Council and available on the city web site at http://www.surfcity-hb.org/files/users/public works/fee schedule.pdf. (ZSO 240.06/ZSO 250.16) 30. Prior to grading or building permit close-out and/or the issuance of a certificate of use or a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall: a. Demonstrate that all structural Best Management Practices (BMPs) described in the Project WQMP have been constructed and installed in conformance with approved plans and specifications. b. Demonstrate all drainage courses, pipes, gutters, basins, etc. are clean and properly constructed. c. Demonstrate that applicant is prepared to implement all non-structural BMPs described in the Project WQMP. d. Demonstrate that an adequate number of copies of the approved Project WQMP are available for the future occupiers. Attachment 12 °� � MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION j } TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 2019 l�C 1e HUNTINGTON BEACH CIVIC CENTER �L/ 2000 MAIN STREET, HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92648 6:00 P.M.—COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Led by Vice-Chair Grant P P P P P P A ROLL CALL: Scandura, Ray, Grant, Garcia, Kalmick, Perkins, Mandic Commissioner Mandic was absent. AGENDA APPROVAL A MOTION WAS MADE BY KALMICK, SECONDED BY SCANDURA, TO APPROVE THE FEBRUARY 26, 2019, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Scandura, Ray, Grant, Garcia, Kalmick, Perkins NOES: None ABSENT: Mandic ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED PUBLIC COMMENTS - NONE PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 19-164 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 18-042 (PEGASUS SCHOOL REMODEL): To permit a two-phased campus remodel for the demolition of approximately 12,100 sq. ft. of classrooms and construction of 24,500 sq. ft. of classrooms/library: Phase 1 - Replace seven modular classrooms with a 16,600 sq. ft., single-story classroom/lab building at an overall height of 23 ft.-6 in. and reconfiguration and expansion of an existing parking lot and drop off area; Phase 2 - Replace an existing classroom building with a 5,651 sq. ft., single-story library building at an overall height of 23 ft.-7 in. and install playground equipment at 19692 Lexington Lane; and find the project exempt from CEQA. 19pcm0226 PC Minutes February 26,2019 Page 2 LOCATION: 19692 Lexington Lane, 92646 (east side of Lexington Ln., between Shalom Dr. and Shangri La Dr.) RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the Planning Commission take the following actions: A) Find the proposed project categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15314, Class 14.; B) Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 18-042 with suggested findings and conditions of approval (Attachment No. 1). The Commission made the following disclosures: • Commissioner Scandura has visited the site, met with the Chief Financial Officer, spoke with staff, and voted on the previous entitlement. • Commissioner Ray had no disclosures. • Vice-Chair Grant visited the site and attended the Design Review Board meeting. • Chair Garcia had no disclosures. • Commissioner Kalmick had no disclosures. • Commissioner Perkins had no disclosures. Joanna Cortez, Associate Planner, gave the staff presentation and an overview of the project. There was discussion on the following items: the construction schedule and the proposed mitigation measures THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED, Shawna Schaffner, applicant, and Jason Lopez, Pegasus School, spoke in support of the proposed project. Mr. Lopez indicated a need to improve the parking to alleviate stress on the surrounding neighborhood, and the need to replace portable classrooms with permanent facilities. Ms. Schaffner gave a detailed overview of the project schedule. Mr. Lopez and Ms. Schaffner stated that the student numbers would not be increased through this project. Tamara Berardi , spoke in opposition to the proposed project, citing concerns with the potential traffic impacts and the loss of open space WITH NO ONE ELSE PRESENT TO SPEAK, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. There was discussion regarding the construction traffic, the potential driveway impacts for residents, and temporary construction traffic signage. 19pcm0226 PC Minutes February 26,2019 Page 3 A MOTION WAS MADE BY KALMICK, SECONDED BY RAY, TO FIND THE PROPOSED PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT PURSUANT TO SECTION 15314, CLASS 14 AND APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 18-042 WITH SUGGESTED FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Scandura, Ray, Grant, Garcia, Kalmick, Perkins NOES: None ABSENT: Mandic ABSTAIN: None MOTION APPROVED FINDINGS FOR PROJECTS EXEMPT FROM CEQA: The Planning Commission finds that the project will not have any significant effect on the environment and is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15314, Class 14 — Minor Additions to Schools of the CEQA Guidelines as the project is located at an existing school and involves the construction of a small parking lot and two new buildings that will not increase original student capacity by more than 25% or 10 classrooms. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL -CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 18-042: 1. Conditional Use Permit No. 18-042 for a phased development to remove existing modular and classroom buildings, construct two new classroom buildings, install new playground equipment, and expand an existing parking lot will not be detrimental to the general welfare of persons working or residing in the vicinity nor detrimental to the value of the property and improvements in the neighborhood because the project will revitalize and modernize an existing school with improvements consistent with the General Plan land use and zoning designations. The proposed project will replace seven modular classrooms and an existing classroom building and is compatible in the proportion, scale, and character of the remaining school buildings and adjoining residential uses. The new buildings will house classrooms and labs in one building and a library/media center with administrative/meeting areas in the second building. The one-story school buildings are consistent with the height requirements and complement the adjacent uses. Additionally, the design of the new buildings is attractive and will incorporate architectural elements such as clerestory windows, articulating rooflines, metal fascia accents, multi-colored fiber cement panels, and brick veneer base. The new buildings will be oriented in a manner that will create a school quad with new landscape, hardscape, and outdoor seating for the students. The day to day school activities will continue to operate with no changes and the school, as conditioned, will not increase student enrollment (Condition No. 2). Additionally, classroom count will not increase with the proposed improvements. The playground equipment is proposed in the center of the campus, away from nearby residential uses. The parking lot expansion will reorient and increase the length of the Lexington Ln. parking area with no new driveways or additional drive aisles. The pick-up and drop off curb will be increased, allowing approximately 45 more cars to queue onsite instead of along Lexington Ln. The school's existing traffic mitigation plan (Condition No. 2) will continue to be implemented with the expanded parking lot. 19pcm0225 PC Minutes February 26,2019 Page 4 2. The General Plan Land Use Map designation on the subject property is currently PS (RL) (Public Semipublic/Residential Low Density). Conditional Use Permit No. 18-042 to remove existing modular and classroom buildings, construct two new classroom buildings, install new playground equipment, and expand an existing parking lot is consistent with this designation and the goals, policies, and objectives of the City's General Plan as follows: Land Use Element Goal LU-1: New commercial, industrial, and residential development is coordinated to ensure that the land use pattern is consistent with the overall goals and needs of the community. Policy LU-1(D): Ensure that new development projects are of compatible proportion, scale, and character to complement adjoining uses. Goal LU-6: Neighborhood school sites adapt over time to meet the changing needs of the community. The project will revitalize and modernize an existing school with improvements consistent with the General Plan land use of PS (RL). The proposed project will replace seven modular classrooms and an existing classroom building and is compatible in the proportion, scale, and character of the remaining school buildings and adjoining residential uses. The new buildings will house classrooms and labs in one building and a library/media center with administrative/meeting areas in the second building. Classroom count nor student enrollment will increase with the new site improvements. The one-story school buildings are consistent with the height requirements and complement the adjacent uses. Additionally, the design of the new buildings is attractive and will incorporate architectural elements such as clerestory windows, articulating rooflines, metal fascia accents, multi-colored fiber cement panels, and brick veneer base. The new buildings will be oriented in a manner that would create a school quad with new landscape, hardscape, and outdoor seating for the students. The proposed improvements will allow the expansion of a private school facility, thereby enhancing the educational opportunities available to the youth of the community without impacting surrounding residential development. Circulation Element Goal CIRC-1c: Through ongoing evaluation of jurisdiction, efficient transportation management provides the highest level of safety, service, and resources. Policy CIRC-1c(G): Limit driveway access points, require driveways to be wide enough to accommodate traffic flow from and to arterial roadways, and establish mechanisms to consolidate driveways where feasible and necessary to minimize impacts to the smooth, efficient, and controlled flow of vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. The parking lot expansion will reorient and increase the length of the Lexington Ln. parking area and will not add any new driveways or additional drive aisles. The pick-up and drop off curb will be increased and will allow approximately 45 more cars to queue onsite instead of along Lexington Ln. 3. Conditional Use Permit No. 18-042 to remove existing modular and classroom buildings, construct two new classroom buildings, install new playground equipment, and expand an existing parking lot will comply with the provisions of the base zoning district and other 1 gpcm0226 PC Minutes February 26,2019 Page 5 applicable provisions in Titles 20-25 of the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance such as setbacks, building height, floor area ratio, landscape, and parking. Parking for educational use is calculated based on the number of classrooms, which the applicant is not proposing at this moment. Therefore, the existing on-site parking approved in 2001 is sufficient to accommodate the proposed buildings as the classroom count is not proposed to increase. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL—CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 18-042. 1. The site plan, floor plan, and elevations received and dated December 20, 2018 shall be the conceptually approved phased layout with the following modification: driveway entrances along Lexington Ln. shall add pavement treatment such as interlocking unit pavers or scored and colored concrete. 2. All other conditions of approval for Conditional Use Permit No. 88-56, 89-022, 95-33, 96-89, Entitlement Plan Amendment No. 01-01 and 15-002 shall remain in effect. 3. All construction staging and parking shall occur on the school's property and shall not impede required parking spaces and/or drop off and pick up curb. 4. Construction shall be limited to the following hours: a. Monday-Friday: 7:00 AM —8:00 PM b. Saturday: 9:00 AM—6:00 PM C. Sunday/federal holiday: No construction 5. At least 14 days prior to any grading activity associated with each phase, the applicant/developer shall provide notice in writing to property owners of record and tenants of properties within a 500-foot radius of the project site as noticed for the public hearing, The notice shall include a general description of planned grading activities and an estimated timeline for commencement and completion of work and a contact person name with phone number. Prior to issuance of the grading permit, a copy of the notice and list of recipients shall be submitted to the Community Development Department. 6. Prior to submittal for building permits, the following shall be completed: a. Zoning entitlement conditions of approval, code requirements identified herein and code requirements identified in separately transmitted memorandum from the Departments of Fire and Public Works shall be printed verbatim on one of the first three pages of all the working drawing sets used for issuance of building permits (architectural, structural, electrical, mechanical and plumbing) and shall be referenced in the sheet index. The minimum font size utilized for printed text shall be 12 point. b. The property owner/developer shall include a list on the plans to identify which sustainable or "green" building practices will be incorporated into the project from the U.S. Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Program certification or Building It Green's Green Building Guidelines and Rating Systems. 7. Prior to issuance of building permits, the following shall be included: An interim parking and building materials storage plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Department to assure adequate parking and restroom facilities are available for employees and contractors during the project's construction phase and that adjacent properties will not 19pcm0226 PC Minutes February 26,2019 Page 6 be impacted by their location. The plan shall also be reviewed and approved by the Fire Department and Public Works Department. The applicant shall obtain any necessary encroachment permits from the Department of Public Works. 8. The structure(s) cannot be occupied, the final building permit(s) cannot be approved, and utilities cannot be released, and issuance of Certificate of Occupancy until the following has been completed: a. Compliance with all conditions of approval specified herein shall be accomplished and verified by the Community Development Department. b. All improvements must be completed in accordance with approved plans, except as provided for by conditions of approval. c. All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material, shall be disposed of at an off-site facility equipped to handle them. d. A Certificate of Occupancy for each phase must be approved by the Planning Division and issued by the Building and Safety Division, 9. New signage shall be reviewed under separate permits and applicable processing. 10. The Development Services Departments (Community Development, Fire, and Police Department) shall be responsible for ensuring compliance with all applicable code requirements and conditions of approval. The Director of Community Development may approve minor amendments to plans and/or conditions of approval as appropriate based on changed circumstances, new information or other relevant factors. Any proposed plan/project revisions shall be called out on the plan sets submitted for building permits. Permits shall not be issued until the Development Services Departments have reviewed and approved the proposed changes for conformance with the intent of the Planning Commission's action. If the proposed changes are of a substantial nature, an amendment to the original entitlement reviewed by the Planning Commission may be required pursuant to the provisions of HBZSO Section 241.18. 11. Conditional Use Permit No. 18-042 shall become null and void unless Phase 1 is exercised within two (2) years of the date of final approval or such extension of time as may be granted by the Director pursuant to a written request submitted to the Community Development Department a minimum 30 days prior to the expiration date. INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS CONDITION: The owner of the property which is the subject of this project and the project applicant if different from the property owner, and each of their heirs, successors and assigns, shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Huntington Beach and its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action or proceedings, liability cost, including attorney's fees and costs against the City or its agents, officers or employees, to attack, set aside, void or annul any approval of the City, including but not limited to any approval granted by the City Council, Planning Commission, or Design Review Board concerning this project. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and should cooperate fully in the defense thereof. 19pcm0226 PC Minutes February 26,2019 Page 7 CONSENT CALENDAR 19-251 APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED SEPTEMBER 25, 2018 Recommended Action: That the Planning Commission take the following action: "Approve the September 25, 2018 Planning Commission Minutes as submitted." A MOTION WAS MADE BY KALMICK, SECONDED BY RAY, TO APPROVE THE SEPTEMBER 25, 2018, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS SUBMITTED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Scandura, Ray, Grant, Garcia, Kalmick NOES: None ABSENT: Mandic ABSTAIN: Perkins MOTION APPROVED 19-252 APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES DATED OCTOBER 3 2018 Recommended Action: That the Planning Commission take the following action: "Approve the October 3, 2018 Planning Commission Workshop Minutes as submitted." A MOTION WAS MADE BY KALMICK, SECONDED BY RAY, TO APPROVE THE OCTOBER 3, 2018, PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MINUTES AS SUBMITTED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Scandura, Ray, Garcia, Kalmick NOES: None ABSENT: Mandic ABSTAIN: Perkins, Grant MOTION APPROVED 19-253 APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED OCTOBER 23, 2018 Recommended Action: That the Planning Commission take the following action: "Approve the October 23, 2018 Planning Commission Minutes as submitted." A MOTION WAS MADE BY KALMICK, SECONDED BY RAY, TO APPROVE THE OCTOBER 23, 2018, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS SUBMITTED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Scandura, Ray, Grant, Garcia, Kalmick NOES: None ABSENT: Mandic 19p=0226 PC Minutes February 26,2019 Page 8 ABSTAIN: Perkins MOTION APPROVED 19-254 APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES DATED NOVEMBER 13 2018 Recommended Action: That the Planning Commission take the following action: "Approve the November 13, 2018 Planning Commission Minutes as submitted." A MOTION WAS MADE BY KALMICK, SECONDED BY RAY, TO APPROVE THE NOVEMBER 13, 2018, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AS SUBMITTED, BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Ray, Grant, Garcia, Kalmick NOES: None ABSENT: Mandic ABSTAIN: Scandura, Perkins MOTION APPROVED NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS - NONE PLANNING ITEMS Jennifer Villasenor, Deputy Director of Community Development, reported on the items from the previous and upcoming City Council Meetings. Jane James, Planning Manager, reported on the items for the next Planning Commission Meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS Commissioner Grant reported on the recent Design Review Board meeting. ADJOURNMENT: Adjourned at 6:42 PM to the next regularly scheduled meeting of Tuesday, March 12, 2019. APPROVED BY: _ . 'V Jen fifer illasenor, Acting Secretary Pat Garcia, Chairperson 19p=0226 Attachment 13 Public Works Department o`recmr°, Public Works March 21, 2019 CAA Planning 309U0 Rancho Viejo Road,Suite 285 San Juan Capistrano,CA 92675 Attention: ShawnaL.Schaffner Chief Executive Officer SUBJECT: The Pegasus School Campus Master Plan Project Planning Application Nm.2O18-ZO4 Dear Ms.Schaffner, This letter is in response to Your correspondence, dated February 8, 2019 (copy attached), concerning your request for a reduction of the drainage fee for the subject project. Please be assured that much thoughtful consideration was given to your request. Payment of the Drainage Fee|sare4ui,enoentof Section 14.48.OS0of the City o(Huntington Beach Municipal Code, and applies to "the development of all land within the drainage area unless the fees were previously paid by the prior dove|opnnent." The subject project is within the drainage area and drainage fees have not previously been paid. Consequently, the Drainage Fee in the amount of $lU]'9SD /|.e. $14,497 per acre at I4.0 acres) was the proposed Code Requirement for your project. Because the Municipal Code does not explicitly define any exemptions or waivers for this code requirement, we extensively researched the City's past practices in this regard. Going back over the past ten years, we reviewed in detail all City projects,for which a drainage fee was collected. We discovered that the City's application of this code and methodology for its calculation has been consistent throughout this time, without exception. The drainage fee applied to the total gross acreage of the entire parcel proposed to be developed, and was paid by the owner of that parcel unless fees were previously paid, regardless of when the property was originally developed. Your letter suggests that collection of this fee is "improper" because the site was originally developed prior to the adoption of the fee. It is important to note that the vast majority of the sites in Huntington Beach were, in fact, developed prior to when the Drainage Fee was adopted in 1985. The fee is a one-time fee paid by the property owner proposing to develop the property after the fee was adopted. We have found no records of the City waiving a drainage fee because the "original development" pre-dated the adoption of the fee, regardless of prior ownership. The only wavier allowed per the Code is if the fee had previously been paid. Your letter also requests that the basis of the fee amount be reduced from the gross acreage of the entire site (14.0 acres)to just that portion of the site that is being "developed" (0.53 acres). In effect,this would reduce the Drainage Fee from$202,958 to$7,683. Our historical records reveal that we have consistently applied the Drainage Fee to the acreage of the entire site (and its tributary area), not just that portion of the site that was proposed to be developed or re-developed. The acreage of the "site" parcel (not the footprint of the proposed improvement) has consistently been the basis for the Drainage Fee calculation. We understand that the Drainage Fee represents approximately 5% of your total estimated project cost, and can certainly appreciate your concern with respect to your project budget. We hope that you can understand our responsibility: we simply cannot pick and choose which projects we apply the Code to. We must be fair and consistent in our application of the Code, as we have been for at least the ten years of records and nearly 200 projects we studied in detail. If you have any questions or need further information, please feel free to contact Principal Civil Engineer Deborah De Bow of my staff at ddebow @Nurfcit -hb.q,%!, or(714)536-5528, Sincerely, Tom Herbel,P.E. City Engineer Attachment TH:TH:DD:sw cc: Debbie De Bow,Principal Civil Engineer Bob Milani,Senior Civil Engineer CAA PLANNING February 8,2019 Travis Hopkins Director of Public Works City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach,CA 92648 Subject: The Pegasus School Campus Master Plan Project Planning Application No.2018-284 Dear Mr.Hopkins: This letter is in regard to the Project Implementation Code Requirements, dated November 26, 2018,for the Pegasus School Campus Master Plan. CAA Planning has been retained to assist the Pegasus School with its application to the City for the conditional use permit related to the Pegasus School Campus Master Plan. The proposed project involves the replacement of existing portable classrooms with permanent classroom buildings,and reorienting the parking lot to allow for increased on-site vehicle queuing. We have reviewed the proposed Conditions of Approval with Pegasus and our project team and are currently in the process of preparing for construction document submittal. There is one condition of approval that does not seem appropriate in this circumstance. Condition 25 is requiring that a drainage fee be paid for the entire 14.0 acre campus. However, only a small portion of the campus is actually being developed as part of the proposed project. The basis for the fee calculation in the condition appears to be simply that the City has no record that drainage fees have been previously paid on any portion of the campus. While this may be true,this does not appear to be an appropriate justification for this fee calculation. The Pegasus campus was originally a public school developed under the Division of the State Architect for the Fountain Valley Unified School District in the early 1960s - outside of the jurisdiction of the City of Huntington Beach. Huntington Beach Municipal Code Section 14.48, which establishes the authority for the drainage fee for the subdivision and development of land, was not even adopted until 1985 — more than 20 years after the campus was developed. We acknowledge that a drainage fee is appropriate for the areas of new development on the campus, but the City cannot impose drainage fees for areas of the campus that are preexisting and not subject to new development. In addition,because the school predates the statutory basis for the fee, the imposition of the fee for the entire school site would be improper. We request that the drainage fee imposed be roughly proportional to the impacts of the proposed project. In this instance,the Pegasus School is only developing 0.53 acre of the campus. The area where improvements are being added to the campus where none currently exist is depicted on the 30900 Rancho Viejo Road,Suite 289•San Juan Capistrano,CA 92675•(949)581-2888•Fax(949)581-3599 PYsFY 5ca'.Yii Mt.Travis Hopkins February 8,2019 Page 2 of 2 attached Drainage Area Exhibit. The remainder of the campus is not being impacted by the Campus Master PIan. Further, in connection with the application the proposed project has been planned consistent with a Hydrology and Hydraulics Report that will ensure that the campus, will produce.less runoff than exists from the campus in its current configuration, thus negating the justification for a drainage impact fee. Based on the foregoing,the Pegasus School respectfully requests that Condition 25 be revised to impose the drainage fee on the 0.53 acre of the campus being impacted by the current development application. We are very hopeful you can modify Condition 25 as requested because as proposed the fee would have severe impacts on the viability of the project given the schools tight budget as a non-profit institution. Should you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter further, please do not hesitate to call me at(949) 581-2888. Sincerely, CAA PLANNING,INC. Shawna L. Schaffner �? Chief Executive Officer Attachment:Drainage Area Exhibit c: Bob Milani,Senior Civil Engineer Joanna Cortez,Associate Planner Jason Lopez,Pegasus School _-7-7 '7 VA, Fh woo JIM agog: QN! TV Aw zoo Elio..... ..... I f irTMT too=' X .I two 4 J.— N::. 41 6111t�o-, -: vv- 1, 'Ir -W -w� L7: nE U 1'. L:4 f IN r--r-- g MY!: DOM; Lill B" ........... T MON.. a-R wit, VM", K 'I-J wit v 4% 'Z: j Lgjg . ... .. up- pow KNOW A,[No': V%W . - 7--q :r-�:On 01"AFT, A.0 L 19262 LEXINGTON LANE LEGEND T QW0 I , * - imp vt N, Am5r'! rj, I x Not"! '"D A pup NMI ..I I I I I I I I I I I I F3 T"r. THE PEGASUS SCHOOL Stantec PEGASUS VRAI�GEAR�EXKMTT 304c.== Attachment 14 Was Gross AC PW# Address Street Site Acreage Fee Acrerage Used? Fee Amount Reviewer Notes 07-031 310&312 2nd 0.150 0.190 Yes $2,521.00 JM 07-067 52111th 0.130 0.160 Yes $2,123.00 JW 08-006 1209 Pine 0.160 0.240 Yes $3,185.00 KW 08-058 16767 Hoskins 0.190 0.230 Yes $3,052.00 JM 08-062 15520 Goldenwest 1.500 2.150 Yes $28,531.00 KW 09-001 7772 Warner 0.610 0.882 Yes $12,242.16 BM 09-008 1837 Park 0.180 0.220 Yes $2,919.00 BM 09-010 16667 Bolero 0.110 0.140 Yes $1,857.00 1M l 09-011 16872 Coral Cay 0.160 0.160 Yes $2,123.00 BM 09-012 1019 12th 0.250 0.110 Yes $1,509.00 BM Staff calculation error 09-014 3282 Falkland 0.110 0.132 Yes $1,752.00 BM 09-018 16992 Baruna 0.110 0.149 Yes $1,977.00 BM 09-029 1103 Huntington 0.080 0.100 Yes $1,327.00 JM 09-034 4935 Warner 1.300 1.290 Yes $17,905.00 BM 09-037 1741 Park 0.180 0.220 Yes $2,919.00 JM 09-045 601&603 8th 0.130 0.300 Yes $4,164.00 1M 10-002 71213th 0.130 0.190 Yes $2,637.00 1M 10-006 403 Crest 0.140 0.320 Yes $4,442.00 JM 10-011 17032 Bolsa Chica 0.460 0.730 Yes $10,132.00 BM 10-013 402 22nd 0.070 0.233 Yes $3,234.00 1M 10-023 16922 Bolsa Chica 1.010 0.759 Yes $10,535.00 BM 0.251 acres previously paid 10-024 1118&1120 Huntington 0.160 0.318 Yes $4,414.00 JM 10-033 40614th 0.070 0.089 Yes $1,235.00 BM 10-038 8471 Warner 0.510 0.926 Yes $12,853.00 BM 10-046 8231 Garfield 0.140 0.138 Yes $1,915.44 BM 10-050 31012th 0.070 0.093 Yes $1,291.00 JM 10-054 17452 Keelson 0.330 0.570 Yes $7,912.00 BM 10-056 7742 Glencoe 0.190 0.360 Yes $4,997.00 JM 30-058 1814 Main 0.180 0.255 Yes $3,539.00 JM 30-060 310&312 11th 0.140 0.190 Yes $2,637.00 JM 11-001 625&627 Frankfort 0.160 0.220 Yes $6,054.00 JM 11-003 309&311 6TH 0.140 0.187 Yes $2,596.00 JM 11-004 520 Geneva 0.140 0.150 Yes $2,082.00 BM 11-008 719 Owen 0.150 0.189 Yes $2,623.00 JM 11-010 7415 Harriman 0.230 0.229 Yes $3,179.00 SB 11-011 18451 Patterson 0.180 0.213 Yes $2,956.00 BM 11-017 16961 Beach 1.030 0.600 1 Yes $8,328.00 BM 0.430 acres previously paid 11-039 328 9th 0.130 0.326 Yes $4,525.00 JM 11-054 517&519 13th 0.140 0.180 Yes $2,498.00 1M 12-005 6561 Edinger 0.770 0.932 Yes $12,936.00 BM 12-006 904 Palm 0.190 0.245 Yes $3,401.00 JM 12-009 1107 Pine 0.220 0.290 Yes $4,025.00 JM 12-010 7302 Center 3.140 4.560 Yes $63,293.00 BM 1 Was Gross AC pW#t Address Street Site Acreage Fee Acrerage Used? Fee Amount Reviewer Notes 12-016 1 221&223 12th 0.140 0.187 Yes $2,596.00 BM 12-017 19891 Beach 3.180 4.210 Yes $58,435.00 BM 12-018 17200 Goldenwest 2.710 3.380 Yes $46,914.40 BM 12-025 502 California 0.150 0.328 Yes $4,553.00 1M 12-029 18502 Beach 2.740 3.590 Yes $49,829.00 BM 12-032 6012 Edinger 0.360 0.720 Yes $9,994.00 SB 12-035 405&407 14th 0.140 0.186 Yes $2,582.00 BM _ 12-038 1109&1111 California 0.160 0.205 Yes $2,845.00 BM 12-040 1217th 0.070 0.092 Yes $1,277.00 BM 12-048 217 9th 0.070 0.095 Yes $1,319.00 SB 12-049 613&615 loth 0.140 0.180 Yes $2,498.00 1M 12-054 1202&1204 England 0.160 0.333 Yes $4,622.00 KW 12-055 112-11812th 0.280 0.373 Yes $5,177.24 SB 13-001 414 10th 0.700 0.093 Yes $1,291.00 KW Staff calculation error i 13-006 7401 Center 4.210 2.044 %e% $28,372.00 KW Outside Agency 13-007 1111 Deleware 0.080 0.105 Yes $1,457.00 KW 13-018 101 Alabama 0.070 0.255 Yes $3,539.00 KW 13-022 301&303 2nd 0.140 0.285 Yes $3,956.00 BM _ 13-023 421 8th 0.130 0.187 Yes $2,596.00 5B 13-024 202 13th 0.130 0.298 Yes $4,136.00 KW 13-025 231-235 Alabama 0.240 0.290 Yes $4,025.00 SB 13-027 402&404 loth 0.140 0.326 Yes $4,524.89 KW 13-030 622&624 13th 0.140 0.186 Yes $2,582.D0 KW 13-034 603 8th 0.070 0.093 Yes $1,291.00 KW 13-035 52712th 0.130 0.280 Yes $3,886.00 1M 13-037 520&522 13th 0.140 0.181 Yes $2,512.00 SB 13-038 1814 main 0.180 0.255 Yes $3,539.00 KW 13-039 510 7th 0.070 0.093 Yes $1,291.00 KW 13-048 610&612 17th 0.140 0.195 Yes $2,707.00 1M 13-050 17052 Gothard 0.270 0.477 Yes $6,621.00 SB 13-052 727 Williams 0.230 0.284 Yes $3,942.00 SB 13-053 525&527 8th 0.140 0.298 Yes $4,136.00 1M 13-056 7802 Alhambra 0.130 0.166 Yes $2,304.00 KW 13-057 7882 Alhambra 0.130 0.165 Yes $2,290.00 KW 13-061 7762-7776 Liberty 0.270 0.344 Yes $4,855.90 SB 13-067 233-2391st 0.280 0.449 Yes $6,232.00 KW 14-003 210&212 Baltimore 0.160 0.220 Yes $3,054.00 1M 14-011 725 13th 0.130 0.186 Yes $2,581.68 BM 14-012 18504 Main 0.470 0.860 Yes $11,936.80 SB 14-014 7501 Yorktown 1.260 1.542 Yes $21,402.96 BM 14-016 17102 Ash 1 0.210 0.138 Yes $1,915.44 1M Staff calculation error 114-0221 621 Frankfort 0.070 0.099 Yes $1,374.00 SB 114-0241 8541 Edison 0.390 0.425 Yes $5,899.00 SB 2 Was Gross AC fir: Street Site Acreage Fee Acrerage Used? Fee Amount Reviewer Notes 14-026 220 Geneva 0.150 0.218 Yes $3,025.84 SB 14-028 31312th 0.070 0.093 Yes $1,291.00 JM 14-029 716 PCH 0.060 0.097 Yes $1,346.36 SB 14-030 7872 Edinger 1.850 2.890 Yes $40,113.20 SB 14-035 14382 Astronautics 2.440 3.091 Yes $42,903.08 SB 14-036 315 Huntington 0.110- 0.145 Yes $2,012.60 BM 14-037 6018th 0.060 0.205 Yes $2,987.00 1M 14-038 1830 Park 0.160 0.206 Yes $2,859.29 1M 14-043 16541 Channel 0.150 0.191 Yes $2,651.00 SB 14-045 7290 Edinger 8.360 10.097 Yes $140,146.36 BM 14-046 7822 Liberty 0.210 0.250 Yes $3,470.00 SB 14-0471 633 Hartford 0.120 0.160 Yes $2,220.80 JM 14-062 815 Alabama 0.100 0.227 Yes $3,150.76 SB 14-063 16001 Bolsa Chica 0.470 0.870 Yes $12,612.39 BM 14-065 31313th 0.070 0.093 Yes $1,290.84 SB 14-066 214 8th 0.070 0.093 Yes $1,290.84 BM 15-003 824 Geneva 0.140 0.179 Yes $2,484.52 JM 15-006 7761 Garfield 0.190 0.429 Yes $5,954.54 BM 15-011 70712th 0.130 0.186 Yes $2,581.68 SB 15-015 5171&5181 Pearce 0.310 0.391 Yes $5,427.08 BM 15-027 420 California 0.080 0.196 Yes $2,720.48 SB 15-031 5432 Heil 0.650 1,125 Yes $15,615.00 SB 15-033 418&420 loth 0.140 0.186 Yes $2,581.68 BM 15-034 808&810 California 0.160 0.198 Yes $2,748.24 SB 15-036 126 Adams 0.140 0.188 Yes $2,609.00 SB 15-042 426&428 7th 0.140 0.298 Yes $4,136.24 BM 15-047 122-124 Main 0.130 0.186 Yes $2,581.00 SB 15-055 17752-17762 Beach 1.800 2.230 Yes $30,952.00 SB 15-058 610&612 Huntington 0.160 0.196 Yes $2,720.48 BM 15-059 17021 Sims 0.170 0.227 Yes $3,150.76 BM 15-062 514&516 11th 0.140 0.189 Yes $2,623.32 SB 15-064 1206 Pine 0.130 0.175 Yes $2,429.00 SB 15-065 1119 Lake 0.130 0.317 Yes $4,400.00- SB 15-067 301&303 13th 0.140 0.298 Yes $4,136.24 SB 15-069 317 8th 0.070 0.093 Yes $1,290.84 BM 15-070 614&616 California 0.160 0.201 Yes $2,789.88 SB 16-001 17061 Sandra Lee 0.190 0.227 Yes $3,204.33 SB 16-004 1836 Park 0.190 0.248 Yes $3,442.24 BM 16-005 900 Palm 0.180 0.222 Yes $3,133.75 SB 16-012 622&624 14th 0.140 0.186 Yes $2,581.68 BM 16-018 1018&1020 Huntington 0.160 0.323 Yes $4,483.24 SB 16-022 1629610th 0.060 0.080 Yes $1,129.28 SB 16-023 1 1828 Main 0.180 1 0.242 Yes $3,416.07 BM 3 Was Gross AC PW# Address Street Site Acreage Fee Acrerage Used? Fee Amount Reviewer Notes 16-029 7742 Newman 0.220 0.246 Yes $3,472.54 BM 16-030 1021 Park 0.240 0.305 Yes $4,233.40 BM 16-032 1019 California 0.080 0.216 Yes $3,049.06 SB 16-033 301&303 12th 0.140 0.302 Yes $4,263.03 SB 16-036 1842 Park 0.190 0.247 Yes $3,486.65 BM 16-037 510 8th 0.070 0.178 Yes $2,512.65 SB 16-042 609&611 17th 0.140 0.196 Yes $2,766.74 SB 16-044 216&218 13th 0.140 0.186 Yes $2,256.00 SB 16-045 1110 England 0.080 0.102 Yes $1,439.83 BM 16-047 401 Main 0.250 0.826 Yes $11,659.82 SB 16-048 1825 Park 0.180 0.221 Yes $3,119.64 SB 16-052 807&809 Huntington 0.160 0.204 Yes $2,879.66 BM 16-054 1009&1011 California 0.160 0.207 Yes $2,922.01 SB 17-002 1002&1004 Huntington 0.160 0.318 Yes $4,488.89 BM 17-007 413&415 California 0.160 0.204 Yes $2,879.66 SB 17-008 817 Main 0.170 0.223 Yes $3,147.87 BM 17-010 53013th 0.150 0.320 Yes $4,S37.12 BM 17-013 311 Crest 0.180 0.244 Yes $3,444.30 SB 17-014 613&615 13th 0.140 0.187 Yes $2,639.69 BM 17-015 18796 Stewart 1.000 1.100 Yes $15,527.60 BM 17-018 316&318 3rd 0.135 0.135 Yes $1,905.66 SB 17-0191 502&504 16th 0.140 0.269 Yes $3,797.20 BM 17-022 18922 Deleware 1.030 1.137 Yes $16,049.89 BM 17-027 82711th 0.200 0.445 Yes $6,451.17 BM 17-030 512 8th 0.070 0.093 Yes $1,348.22 SB 17-036 16351 S.Pacific 0.060 0.071 Yes $1,029.29 BM 17-041 308&310 3rd 0.070 0.089 Yes $1,290.23 SB 17-042 312&314 3rd 0.070 0.089 Yes $1,290.23 BM 17-044 7792 Liberty 0.350 0.410 Yes $5,943.77 SB 18-002 84014th 0.180 0.247 Yes $3,580.76 BM 18-D03 17041 Beach 0.310 0.490 Yes $7,103.53 BM 18-004 16292-16470 PCH 6.847 6.847 Yes $98,594.00 BM 18-008 412&414 9th 0.140 0.187 Yes $2,710.94 SB 18-011 611 Geneva 0.120 0.152 Yes $2,203.54 BM 18-012 302 14th 0.130 0.298 Yes $4,320.11 SB 18-013 1101&1103 England 0.150 0.308 Yes $4,465.08 BM 18-015 805&807 Alabama 0.160 0.178 1 Yes $2,580.47 SB 18-016 18801 Beach 0.990 2.500 Yes $36,242.50 BM 18-019 209&211 Huntington 0.160 0.201 Yes $2,913.90 SB 18-020 1110 Park 0.160 0.207 Yes $3,000.88 BM 18-021 833 Frankfort 0.160 0.210 Yes $3,044.37 SB 18-028 1102 Main 0.180 0.385 Yes $5,581.35 SB 18-033 122&124 7th 0.140 0.187 Yes $2,710.94 SB 4 Was Gross AC JpWC: •VAddresS Street Site Acreage Fee Acrerage Used? Fee`Amount Reviewer Notes 18-043 324&326 3rd 0.140 0.178 Yes $2,580.47 SB _ 18-057 814&816 Huntington 0.160 0.205 Yes $2,971.89 BM 18-062 1029 Park 0.230 0.403 Yes $5,942.29 BM 18-066 610&612 13th 0.130 0.186 Yes $2,696.44 BM Dedicated Public Park area reduced acreage.Downstream storm drain 16733 Tract Pacific Shores 22.117 20.077 M $278,668.00 KW improvements constructed by developer in-lieu,as allowed by code. 17238 Tract Lamb 11.659 12.413 Yes $172,293.00 BM 17239 Tract Wardlow 8.350 8.350 Yes $114,540.00 BM 17716 Tract Costal Walk 2.556 2.860 Yes $3%696.00 BM 15377 Tract Parkside 44.988 44.988 Yes $624,433.00 BM 17930 Tract Monarch Walk 0.977 0.980 Yes $13,602.00 BM 5 • • Estanislau, Robin From: Estanislau, Robin Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2019 1:54 PM To: 'Jason Lopez' Subject: RE: Pegasus School City of HB Drainage Fee Letter Hello,Jason. Just sending a confirmation that your communication has been received and forwarded to the appropriate representations for follow-up. Sincerely, Robin Estanislau, CMC, City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 714-536-5405 A V Y Please consider the HB City Clerk's office for your passport needs! From:Jason Lopez<jlopez@thepegasusschool.org> Sent:Wednesday, August 28, 2019 6:55 PM To: Kiff, Dave<dave.kiff@surfcity-hb.org>; Estanislau, Robin<Robin.Estanislau@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: Pegasus School City of HB Drainage Fee Letter Please see electronic transmittal below. Jason Lopez Head of School `11 THE PEGASUS SCHOOL The Pegasus School 19692 Lexington Lane Huntington Beach, CA 92646 714.964.1224 x1107 000 NOTICE TO RECIPIENT: If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are prohibited from sharing, copying, or otherwise using or disclosing its contents. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and permanently delete this e-mail and any attachments without reading, forwarding or saving them.Thank you. 1 �1 THE ' PEGASUS SCHOOL August 21,2019 VIA ELECTRONIC TRANSMITTAL City Manager's Office Mr. Dave Kiff City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Subject: The Pegasus School—Appeal,by Protest,Development Impact Fees for Drainage Impact Fees Paid Under M.C. 14.48 Drainage Dear Mr. Kiff This correspondence shall serve as formal notice pursuant to Huntington Beach Municipal Code Section 17.17.030 that The Pegasus School, as the owner of the existing private school located on Lexington Avenue between Shangri La Drive and Shalom Drive at 19692 Lexington Lane, , is appealing the $202,958 drainage fee purported to be due under Chapter 14.48 of the Municipal Code in connection with our application to remove seven modular buildings and construct a new 18,000 sf classroom building. The permits associated with this appeal are; Building Permit-Plan Check#B2019002995 Building Electrical Permit-Plan Cheek#E2019002998 Building Mechanical-Permit# M2019002997 Building Plumbing-Permit#P2019002996 While we would like to acknowledge and thank the various City divisions who have assisted Pegasus School throughout this project, we do not feel the drainage fees adopted under Huntington Beach Municipal Code Section 14.48 are appropriate in this circumstance. As required by Huntington Beach Municipal Code Section 17.73.030, we will provide the full facts and circumstances providing this appeal in detail within ninety 90 days of the date of our payment of the protested$202,958 delivered concurrently with this correspondence. We believe the above information is sufficient to preserve our right to appeal the drainage fee. However, should additional information be necessary, please do not hesitate to contact me at (714) 964-1224x1105 or ilopezntheyegasusschool.org and I would be glad to be of assistance. Sincerely, THE PEGASUS SCHOOL ?-as'on L pez� Head of School c. Robin Estanislau, City Clerk i CASH RECEIPT CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH P.O. BOX 711 1pe,�,j9p9*O HUNTINGTON BEACH,CALIFORNIA 92648-0711 F,glT o www.huntingtonbeachca.gov/payments � y ?cF°�NTY Ca��oQ? DATE Issuing Dept. Vk)bL.1 L "fL" De t. Pho 3 - 7 City of Huntington Beach FUNDS RECEIVED FROM late: 8/28/2019 Cashier;caseye ADDRESS 40 2- ice: CITYH Tran #:17 tch: 2496 'A s 9 24.q b Phone#: _Cash Recess_— FOR 'Pt #: 00557292 ---- t-al #: AMOUNT RECEIVED Cash 6t Check# O Credit Card Payment Total: $202,958.00 Prepared Received Finance B �b By Approval IF OBJECT= 50000 THRU 90000,FINANCE APPROVAL REQUIRED Approval Date 'ansar..t i Or-, Tota 1 $202,95g_00 Business Unit Object Subs Sub-Ledger T Check Tendered $202,958.00 Zj1-oo2 1 • DLLs':-- • ———————— — Please visit us on the web www,surtity-hb,org ———————— ————— -- ———————— — -------- - ----- - -- - -------- -- -- --- --- - ----- - -- - -------- -- -- ------ - ----- - -- - -------- -- - ------- - ----- - -- - -------- -- TOTAL $ 20 Z� QS Stamped Validation Only Please do not write in the box below rri 110"MIACo r+n0V