Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1976-11-22j%NNW I 11 MINUTES Council Chamber, Civic Center Huntington Beach, California November 22, 1976 A tape recording and transcript of this meeting are on file in the City Clerk's Office. Mayor Wieder called the adjourned regular meeting of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency to order. Said meeting being held to conduct the continuation of the public hearing with the Redevelopment Commission on the Proposed Redevelopment Plan for the Huntington Beach Downtown Project area, and to consider and act upon the final Environmental Impact Report for the project and the Redevelopment Plan, with the members of the Planning Commission to be in attendance. ROLL CALL - CITY COUNCIU REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Present: Bartlett, Pattinson, Coen, Shenkman, Wieder Gibbs (8:00 P.M.) Siebert (7:22 P.M.) Shenkman (8:15 P.M.) Absent: None ROLL CALL - REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION The Vice -Chairman of the Redevelopment Commission called the meeting of the ,Redevelopment Commission to order. ,J Present: Greenbaum, Milkovich, Perez, Garofalo, Klinge Absent: Granger, Bazil ROLL CALL - PLANNING COMMISSION The meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order by the Secretary. Present: Gibson, Finley, Newman, Parkinson Absent: Shea, Slates, Boyle The Assistant City Administrator presented a review of the redevelopment plan, plan options, plan modifications and opportunities for plan reduction. Deputy City Attorney Amsbary presented the rules by which the continued public hearing would proceed, whereby only those people who left their name with the court reporter at the November 18, 1976 meeting would be allowed to speak. Following discussion, a motion was made by Siebert that the ground rules for the meeting be as follows: That any member of the public be allowed to speak whether they signed up or not and that they be given unlimited time as previous speakers. The motion died for lack of a second. 5.13 Page #2 - Council Minutes - 117'22/76 A motion was made by Pattinson, second Coen, that the speaker be limited to those persons who signed up at the November 18, 1976 meeting, that the time be limited to a two hour time limit divided by those wishing to speak so that work can be done afterwards. Albert T. Boswell, 324 Camino San Clemente, San Clemente, addressed Council regarding thn procedure for hearing testimony. Councilmen Pattinson and Coen then modified their motion to limit the public testimony to two.hours, to allow initially those who have signed the list to speak, with the balance of the two hour period allotted to those persons not on the list. The motion was passed by the following vote: AYES: Bartlett, Pattinson, Coen, Gibbs, Wieder NOES: Siebert ABSENT: Shenkman Donald Hart, 509 loth Street, City, addressed Council and stated that he did not want his home encumbered by the Redevelopment Agency. He stated that he believed the Ci`y had laws which they could enforce to improve the area, and that the present businesses in the area were needed. He submitted a letter from a neighbor,'Gertrude Reilly, in opposition to the proposed plan which was recorded as Exhibit No. 26. Robert Stanko, 1401 Palm Avenue, City, addressed Council and stated that he was op;yosed to the destination resort concept. He stated that he did not believe the area was blighted and that the city had laws to enforce building violations and street conditions. He stated he was opposed to the redevelopment plan, however, if it were approved, he would recoffinend removal of the option areas and redevelopment in a low profile of the remaining minimum area. Gail Langenbeck, resident,400 block of 9th Street, City, addressed Council regarding the proposed plan and presented questions regarding eminent domain, and the Acting Planning Director reported on the matter. Mr. Kenneth Flint, 408 10th Street, City, addressed Council and presented reasons why he opposed the redevelopment plan, including what he believed would be increased density, traffic, noise and air pollution and relocation of residents and businesses. Mr. Richard Babiracki, 17091 Sandra Lee Lane, City, addressed Council and stated that he was not here to speak for or against redevelopment but on what he believed to be the immorality of it. He presented a letter from Mr. Bernard Adams, Civil Engineer, Garden Grove, regarding the soundness of the structure at 306 Pacific Coast Highway, known as the Golden Hear, Mayor Wieder requested that a statement from Albert Hoffman, 15115 Jeffrey Road, Irvine, Real Estate Broker, representing the Max Hoeptner Properties, located between Main and Second Streets, fronting on Pacific Coast Highway, be entered into the record. Said communication in favor of the proposed redevelopment project was recorded as Exhibit No. 27. Roger Bloom, 125 16th Street, Apartment 14, City, addressed Council and atated that he believed consideration of the plan should be withheld until the Legiolature provides property tax relief. Mr. L. D. Zender, 201 14th Street, City, addressed Council and presented reasons why he opposed the plan. He presented reasons why he did not believe the proposed fA 4; Page #3 - Council Min to es - 11/22/76 plan was viable, and submitted what he stated were 100 cards of persons in the area opposed to the project. Said cards were recorded as Exhibit No. 28. RECESS - RECONVENE The Mayor called a recess of Council at 9:07 P.M. The Council was reconvened by the Mayor 9:20 P.M. Brian Hudson representing the American Civil Liberties Union, 1704 E1 Camino Real, Tustin, and resident of Sector C of the project area, addressed Council regarding the function of the A.C.L.U. He presented reasons why he believed the proposed plan violated civil liberties, addressing such areas as tax increment financing and relocation by reason of eminent domain. John Manning, 410 9th Street, City, addressed Council and added his card to the previously submitted list opposing the plan. He also submitted a clipping from the Daily Pilot dated November 19, 1976 dealing with the fire on the 32nd story Occidental Tower - downtown Los Angeles which he stated demonstrated the necessity to commit funds for fire fighting. He stated that he did not believe the detrimental aspects of the plan had been presented. He stated that he was opposed to tax increment financing. Mr. Donald Weir, 401 20th Street, City, addressed Council and stated that he opposed the Redevelopment Plan. He informed Council of his areas of concern and also stated reasons why he believed oil operations were a valuable asset to the city. Mr. Jim Hensley, 6902 Seaway Circle, City, addressed Council on behalf of his wife and himself and urged the Council to carry out the wish of the community -regarding redevel- opment. Mr. Robert Stamp, 421 10th Street, City, addressed Council in opposition to the plan stating that he believed Redevelopment would cause the area to suffer from density related problems and increased taxes. Mr. Robert Terry, 19711 Quiet Bay Lane, City, read a resolution prepared by the C.A.N.T. organization (Citizens Against New Taxes) supporting the establishment of a Redevelop- ment plan. He reported on the history of efforts to redevelop the downtown area and spoke regarding reasons why he believed redevelopment was necessary. Mr. Robert Shupe, 25255 Cabot Road, Laguna Hills, addressed Council regarding the Montoya Legislation and presented a copy of the bill to the court reporter. He also read portions of the California Senate Local Government Committee Staff Analysis of said bill. He referred to an article from the Register newspaper dated November 26, 1972 relative to the "Top of the Pier" plan. He stated that he believed private enterprise would.develop the area. Mr. Ray Cooper, 9392 Breakwater Circle, City, President of District Educators Association of Huntington Beach Union High School District, addressed Council and stated their concern with the tax increment financing feature and its impact on the school district. He then.read the resolution adopted by his association opposing the adoption of the proposed redevelopment plan in its present form. Mr. Ernest Oldfield, 1011 Park Street, City, addressed Council in opposition to the laww proposed plan and spoke regarding the history of the city's development. Page #4 - Council Minutes 11t,�4/76 Debbie Dickerson, 19301 Waterbury Lane, City, addressed Council and presented a petition listing approximately.141 signatures of students and faculty of Fountain Valley High School opposing the proposed Redevelopment plan. She then presented photographs of the project area to the City Council. Marie Buckland, 21771 Kiowa Lane, City, addressed Council and stated that she believed a specific plan was needed. She then stated her concerns relative to various aspects of the plan. Brian Trela, 8832 Dolphin Drive, City, addressed Council regarding the financial aspects of the plan. He then read from Title 24 of the Code of Federal Regulations 1976 and also commented on the plan, sub -areas, and Coastal Commission guidelines. Lance Jacot, 215 Crest Avenue, City, addressed Council and stated that Denise Jacot had a petition with approximately 3,000 signatures in opposition to the proposed plan which should be entered into the record. He then referred to a City agreement dated July 16, 1973.relative to the Terry litigation, which was recorded as Exhibit No. 29. He stated that he did not believe the. Redevelopment plan would help the area and that he believed the general plan should be revised. He questioned the relationship of the Terry litigation to the Redevelopment plan and the Deputy City Attorney reported on the matter.' Councilman Shenkman left his chair and addressed the Council and audience. He spoke regarding the proposed Redevelopment plan stating that he believed that rehabilitation and restoration of the areas that are blighted is desirable. He stated that Plan A was not favored by the City Council and that he was opposed to a high density plan. He stated he was prepared to continue, with staff help and community input, the development of a plan which encompasses the Montoya Legislation, low density in nature and keeping the character of the City as the community desires. Councilman Siebert and Commissioner Perez then presented their comments on aspects of the plan. PLMLiC HEARING RECESSED T4 JANUARY 31, 1977 On motion by Pattinson, second Gibbs, joint public hearing was recessed to Monday, January 31, 1977, at 7:40 P.M. in the Council Chamber by unanimous vote. The Redevelopment Commission then recessed to their joint public hearing with the City Council/Redevelopment Agency to Monday, January 31, 1977, at 7;00 P.M. in the Council Chamber by unanimous vote. ATTEST: ity Cler �anAx-of�ficio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California and Clerk of the Redevelopment Agency �l F, Alicia M. Wentworth City e _�/Clerk of Redevelopment Agency 1'.lT4 Harriett M. Wieder Mayor/Redevelopment Agency Chairman