Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEQCB Min 1976-09-23 ( ( . M I NUT E S ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CONTROL BOARD THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 1976 REGULAR MEETING 7:30 PJ1. The meeting was called to order by Chairman DeForest with Mr. Knuti leading the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present: DeForest, Biscoe, Knuti, Watkinson Absent: None MINUTES Minutes of August unanimously approved. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 9458 e The Secretary described the tract as 8 lots, each with a 9-unit apartment building consisting of an owner's unit and 8 rental units. The City Council had considered the proposed tract and had held it over until October 11, 1976, in order to obtain additional information from the Planning Commission and the Environmental Quality Control Board. There are two main items to consider. First, a recommendation to the City Council on the sufficiency of the initial study and Negative Declaration. Second, a recommendation of acceptance of park land dedication or fees in lieu. The Secretary asked if the developer would make a brief presentation. Chairman DeForest asked if anyone would like to speak in opposition to the proposal. [~o one came forward.) Henry M. Roberts, Vice President of State-Wide Developers, presented slides of the proposed project, including zoning maps, property map, photographs of the site and adjacent structures, architectural drawings and other projects by State-Wide Developers. Chairman DeForest asked what the lot coverage would be. Tom Mathew, architect for the project stated that the 1.88 acres is permitted 84 units; the project has 72 units. Buildinq heiqht permitted is 35 feet; 27 feet is proposed. Lot coverage permitted is-80%; proposed is 30% site coverage. Remainder of property is in driveways and courtyards between buildings. Chairman DeForest asked if anybody would like to speak for or against the issue. (None) / e Planning Director Bob Neprud indicated that the Initial Study and Negative Declaration had been prepared by the staff to evaluate the environmental concerns and are considered by the staff to be sufficient. He would like to address the issues raised by Mr. Bernard Solomon's letter of September 7, 1976, and by Mr. Solomon at several meetings. . e e ( ( Mr. Neprud discussed each of the 10 items presented in Mr. Solomon's letter. The 10 items are as follows: 1. Consistency with the General Plan: Mr. Neprud discussed the Plan, the allowable densities and the projected population and indicated that the proposed tract was consistent with the Plan. 2. Noise Problems: He discussed insulation to reduce noise inside the buildinq, and discussed traffic noise and construction noise. The Building Department would evaluate the noise and require insulation when the Building Permit is issued. 3. Traffic Generated by the Development and by the Library Expansion: He indicated the project would generate between 575 to 700 vehicle trips per day. The expansion of the library would add 100 vehicles per day. With the additional traffic, the street would still be below capacity. The increase would be less than 10%. Proposed State Guidelines indicate 25% would be a significant increase. 4. Soils Report: He said a soils report would be required before issuance of Building Permits. 5. Alterations to Storm Drains: The buildings will be designed around the storm drain, with no decrease in capacity. = ,';,~. - ...,. 6. Sewer Capacity: The letter from Los Alamitos County Water District's engineering firm was presented. 7. Recreational Facilities for Projected Number of Children: The projection of 52 children was theoretical. The project is adult oriented and the developer considers it an adult only project. Mr. Roberts indicated that they had been very successful in keeping the adults only concept since they manage many of the buildings after they are sold. 8. Consideration of Condominiums as an Alternative: The zoning ordinance does not distinguish between apartments and condominiums. The differences are primarily social rather than physical. The initial study now addresses that alternate. 9. Improperly calculated "in lieu" fees. The calculations have been V'o,,; ""',..""',., Mn m; r+=>>ill"!: h:.r honn -F'nllnrl ....;. ,_i".~u. .."" .11.""'...."".''''' I."".;, __t.:=.i ._""i._oiI 10. Proposed Library Expansion was not Mentioned: The initial study now considers the library. It is not perceived to be a major issue. Mr. Neprud concluded his remarks on the letter from Mr. Solomon. He then discussed the revised initial study. The original study was considered sufficient. The changes in the study are the additional discussion on the library, addition of condominiums as an alternative~ clarifying the language on traffic and other minor changes. None of the changes to date would change his recommendations. - e e ( ( Chairman DeForest asked if the changes in the initial report were extensive. Mr. Neprud said they were not. Mr. Neprud discussed the question of dedication of park land or payment of "in lieu" fees. Dedication of land cannot be required for developments of less than 50 units. The required dedication would be about 7/10 of an acre for the 72 unit project, over 1/3 of the land in the project. When land is taken for park, fewer units can be built. The results would be 59 units with a dedication of .56 acre. It is probable that the project would not be economically feasible if park dedication was required. Mr. Roberts concurred. The two condominiums to the north paid fees. The fee would be slightly over $30,000, and would be used with other such fees for recreational purposes. Very small parks tend to be a maintenance problem. Annual maintenance cost for a 1/2 acre park runs about $4,000. The Planning Commission recommended fees in lieu of dedication. Mr. Neprud concluded his presentation. Mr. DeForest asked if Board Members had any questions regarding the Negative Decl aration. - Motion by Mr. Knuti to find that the Negative Declaration and Initial Study are sufficient and to recommend so to the City Council. Second by Mr. Watkinson. Ayes: DeForest, Biscoe, Knuti, Watkinson Noes: None Motion unanimously approved. Motion by Mr. Watkinson to recommend acceptance of in lieu fees to the City Council. Mr. DeForest expressed his opposition to the motion, stating that he was concerned about the developer's ability to keep the project adult only. A shopping center is not much of a place for a child to play. It may be expensive to maintain, but the money is not an environmental consideration. Ms. Biscoe stated that the small area might not be worthwhile. Mr. Knuti stated that he would be inclined to go along with the fee so that it could be used for a good purpose. Mr. Roberts expressed his concurrence with all the views of the Board Members. He is trying to convert asphalt to residents. The criticism by those people who built up and closed in the area, and who did not provide a park, is that a park should now be required. The fee provides funds for the kind of park the city would like to have. The library is a recreational facility for the adult oriented area which has been supported by these fees. Ms. Biscoe asked if the fees go to the Recreation Dept. Mr. Neprud replied that it is intended for recreational use. He discussed the fees used to assist the County in the expansion of the library. The money would go into a fund for long range park and recreational purposes and would not be used to fund the Recreation Dept. / Motion seconded by Mr. Knuti. Ayes: Noes: Biscoe, Knuti, Watkinson DeForest Motion approved. e . e ( ( WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS The Secretary presented a notice of public hearing for the Environmental Impact Report for resumed offshore drilling in Huntington Beach. The date is October 14, 1976, the same as the next regular meeting of the EQCB. The Board discussed possibilities for attending the meeting. Written comments will be received until October 29, 1976. The Board decided to hold the next meeting on October 21, 1976, in order to allow the members to attend the hearing and to allow sufficient time for the Board to submit a written reply before October 29th. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Ms. Biscoe discussed the resumption of recycling in the shopping center. ADJOURNMENT By unanimous vote the Board adjourned to Thursday, October 21, 1976, 7:30 P.M., in the City Council Chamber. Meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m. A tape recording of the meeting is available from the City Clerk. , ~ ~/ ~/,/ /7 /. . 721)?'/1~ d 4<<' '~<Jr-- Norman S. Wi kinson Secretary