HomeMy WebLinkAboutRedevelopment Agency - 278 RESOLUTION NO. .278
A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
APPROVING ITS REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
AND AUTHORIZING TRANSMITTAL OF THE
REPORT AND THE PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
TO THE CITY COUNCIL
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California("City
Council") did duly pass and adopt Ordinance No. 2576 on September 20, 1982, and did thereby
adopt and approve the Redevelopment Plan for the Yorktown-Lake Redevelopment Project; and
The City Council did duly pass and adopt Ordinance No. 2577 on September 20, 1982,
and did thereby adopt and approve the Redevelopment Plan for the Talbert-Beach
Redevelopment Project; and
The City Council did duly pass and adopt Ordinance No. 2578 on September 20, 1982,
and did thereby adopt and approve the Redevelopment PIan for the Main-Pier Redevelopment
Project, and amended said Redevelopment Plan by Ordinance No. 2634 on September 6, 1983;
and
The City Council did duly pass and adopt Ordinance No. 2582 on November 1, 1982, and
did thereby adopt and approve the Redevelopment Plan for the Oakview Redevelopment Project,
and amended said Redevelopment Plan by Ordinance No. 3002 on July 5, 1989; and
The City Council did duly pass and adopt Ordinance No. 2743 on November 26, 1984,
and did thereby adopt and approve the Redevelopment Plan for the Huntington Center
Commercial District Redevelopment Project; and
The City Council and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
("Agency") desire to consider the amendment and merger of the Redevelopment Plans for the
Yorktown-Lake, Talbert-Beach, Main-Pier, Oakview, and Huntington Center Commercial
District Redevelopment Projects ("Amendment/Merger"), establishing the merged Huntington
Beach Redevelopment Project ("Project"); and
A Proposed Redevelopment Plan for the Project as alnended by the Amendment/Merger
("Proposed Redevelopment Plan") has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of the
California Community Redevelopment Law, Health and Safety Code Sections 33000 et seq.
("Law"); and
1
SF/s:I'CD:Resol u lion:Hi3RP 1011
RLS 96-757
10/11/96-#i
tI
Pursuant to Sections 33352 of the Law, every redevelopment plan submitted by a
redevelopment agency to the legislative body shall be accompanied by a report on the proposed
redevelopment plan which contains all of the information set forth in Section 33352,
The Agency has caused the Report to the City Council for the Project to be prepared in
accordance with Section 33352 of the Law.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
hereby approves and adopts the Report to the City Council for the Huntington Beach
Redevelopment Project, in the form attached herewith as Exhibit"A"
Staff is hereby authorized and directed to transmit the Proposed Redevelopment Plan, in
the form attached herewith as Exhibit"B", and the Report to the City Council for review and
consideration at the joint public hearing on the Amendment/Merger.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington
Beach at a regular meeting thereof on the 21stday of October , 1996.
Chairman
ATTEST: ' , APPROVED AS TO FORM:
x�
Agency Secretary W Agency C unsel
REVIEWED AND APPROVED: INITIATED AND APPROVED:
r
Chief Administrative Officer Director of]-COD( Development
2
SFA TCDAesol uti on A B 10>101 1
RLS 96-757
10/1l196-#1
EXHIBIT "A"
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
FOR THE
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
3
SF/s:PCD:Resolution;HBRP 1011
RLS 96-757
I Oil l/96-41
REPORT TO'THE CITY COUNCIL
FOR THE
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION
;b SECTION A
General Characteristics................................................................................ .......A-I
Urbanization...................................................................................................................A-3
Background of Redevelopment Activities.....................................................................A-4
Reasons for the Amendment/Merger.....................................................................I.......A-7
A Description of the Projects Proposed by the Agency...............................................A-1 I
A Description of How the Proposed Projects will Improve and Alleviate the
Blighting Conditions Cited in Section B .................................................................A-12
SECTION B
Locations.of Blight in the Project Area .........................................................................B-2
Properties No Longer Blighted......................................................................................B-2
Existing BIighting Conditions in the Project Area........................................................B-2
SECTION C.......................
SECTIOND................................................................................................................................D-1
SECTION E
General Financing Methods Available to the Agency................................................... E-1
EstimatedProject Costs...................................................................................I............. E-4
Projected Tax Increment Revenues...............................................................:................ E-7
Economic Feasibility Analysis ...................................................................................... E-9
Reasons for the Provisions of Tax Increment.............................................................. E-10
SECTION F .......................................................... ....... F�-1
..............................................................
SECTIONG...............................................................................................................................G-1
SECTION H............................................................................. .......H-1
...........................................
SECTIONI ..........................I.............................................. .. 1-1
SECTION J................................................ .............J-1
....................................................................
SECTIONK.......................................................................................... ......................K-1
SECTIONL ......................................................................... ........... L-1
SECTION M............................................................................. ......M-1
..........................................
SECTIONN.................................................................... .........N-1
- i
REPORT TO THE CITY. .COUNCIL
FOR THE
HUNTINGTON BEACH
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
October, 1996
Prepared for:
Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, California 92648
(71.4) 536.5511 .
Prepared by: .
Rosenow Spevacek'Group, Inc.
540 forth Golden Circfl.e, Suit c 305
Santa Ana, California 9270.E
(` -14) 5414585 -
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
FOR THE
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
LIST OF EXHIBITS AND TABLES
EXHIBIT A-1 Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project Area Map
EXHIBIT A-2 Urbanization Maps
EXHIBIT A-3 Summary of Actions Proposed by Amendment/Merger
EXHIBIT A-4 Correlation of Proposed Programs and Projects to the Elimination of Blight
EXHIBIT B-I Quarterly Sales Tax Volurnes of Nearby Shopping Centers
EXHIBIT B-2 April 1996 Article Regarding Decline of Huntington Beach Mall
EXHIBIT B-3 Crime Statistics for Project Area
EXHIBIT B-4 Changes in Annual Assessed Values in Subarea No. 2
TABLE A-I Existing Land Use Character
TABLE A-2 Proposed Public Improvement and Facility, Housing and Economic
Development Projects
TABLE B-I Survey - Mall Shopping Frequency ,
TABLE B-2 Survey Reasons for Shopping Less Frequently at Huntington Beach Mall
TABLE B-3 Survey - Consumer Assessment of Huntington Beach Mall
TABLE B-4 Building Permit History
TABLE E-I Time Framc to Collect Tax Increment Revenue
TABLE E-2 Tax Increment Revenue Limits of Existing Redevelopment Plans
TABLE E-3 Outstanding Bonded Indebtedness Limits
TABLE E-4 Breakdown of Tax Increment Revenues Needs
TABLE E-5 Affected Taxing Entities With Whom Agency Entered Into Pass-Through
Agreements
TABLE E-6 Affected "faxing Entities to Receive Statutory Payments After Adoption of
Amendment/Merger
TABLE E-7 Tax Increment Revenue Projections Without Amendment/Merger
TABLI E-S Tax Increment Revenue Projections With Amendment/Merger
TABLE E-9 Development Assumptions Used in Tax Increment Projections
TABLE E-10 Economic Feasibility of Project
INTRODUCTION
Established by the City Council on March 1, 1976, the Huntington Beach Redevelopment
Agency ("Agency") is responsible for oversight of all redevelopment activities within the City of
Huntington Beach("City"). Presently, the Agency manages a variety of housing and nonhousing
programs in five separate redevelopment project areas; within each of these redevelopment
project areas, the Agency has targeted its projects to mitigate specific physical and economic
blighting conditions in the community.
Because many blighting conditions continue to persist, the Agency seeks to undertake a series of
technical amendments as a means to continue its redevelopment program within the five
redevelopment project areas.
On April 1, 1996, the Agency accepted and approved the Preliminary Plan for the.Huntington
Beach Redevelopment Project.' This action initiated proceedings to amend and merge the
existing Redevelopment Plans ("Existing Plans") for the Yorktown-Lake, Talbert-Beach, Main-
Pier,; Oakview, and Huntington Center ' Commercial' District Redevelopment Projects
("Constituent Projects") to accomplish the following:
• Merge the redevelopment,plans for the Existing Plans into the Huntington Beach
Redevelopment Plan ("Plan") for the merged Huntington Beach Redevelopment.Project
("Project") and Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area"),
• Increase the dollar limit on the cumulative amount of tax increment revenue the Agency
may be allocated from the Project and eliminate all preexisting annual limits,
• Increase the dollar limit on the amount of indebtedness that may be outstanding at any
one time,
• Extend the time frame within which the Agency may incur indebtedness on behalf of the
Project,
• On a selective basis, extend the time frame within which the Agency may employ
eminent domain proceedings on nonresidential properties in the Main-Pier and
Huntington Center Commercial District areas and rescind Resolution No. 48,
Roseuow Spevacek Group,Inc. Redeveloptueut Agency of the City of Hunthigton Beach
October, 1996 i Report to the City Council
• Extend the time periods within which the Agency may undertake redevelopment
activities and receive tax increment, and
• Expand the list of infrastructure and public facility projects that the Agency may
undertake within the Project Area.
Adopting the Plan will amend and merge all Existing Plans ("Amendment/Merger"); the Plan
will then guide all future redevelopment'activities; projects, and programs in the Project Area.
However,- the Amendment/Merger will not affect the Agency's outstanding obligations or
indebtedness nor will it add land to or remove land from the Project Area.
The California Community Redevelopment Law, Health and Safety Code Sections 33000 et.
seq., ("Law") provides the Agency with the authority to undertake revitalization efforts in
blighted areas within the City. As defined by the Law, redevelopment includes the rehabilitation,
reconstruction, and improvement of existing structures; the provision of public improvements;
and the replanning or redesign of blighted properties within a project area. The Law permits the
Agency to amend and merge the Existing Plans, subject to the preparation of documents by the
Agency to substantiate the need for the Amendment/Merger, convening of a joint Agency/City
Council public hearing, and consideration and adoption of an amending ordinance by the City
Council.
This is the Report to the City Council for the Project ("Report"), which outlines the reasons for
the Amendment/Merger, and details the Agency's proposed redevelopment program to be
implemented through the Plan. Prepared pursuant to Section 33352 of the Law, this Report
documents the following:
• the blight that remains in the Project Area;
• the portion, if any, of the Project Area that is no longer blighted;
• the projects needed to eradicate the remaining blight; and
• the nexus between the costs of such projects and the proposed amendments.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 ii Report to the City Council
This Report has been divided into the following sections:
SECTION A. The Reasons for the Selection of the Project Area and a Description of Specific
Projects Proposed and I-low These Projects Will Improve or Alleviate Blighting
Conditions Found in the Project Area.
SECTION B. A Description of the.Physical and Economic Blighting_ Conditions Existing in the
Project Area. f
SECTION C. An Implementation Plan that Describes Specific Goals, Objectives, Projects, and
Expenditures for the Next Five Years and a Description of How These Projects
Will Improve or Alleviate Blighting Conditions.
SECTION D. An Explanation of Why Elimination of BIight Cannot be' Encompassed by Private
Enterprise Acting Alone or Through Financing Alternatives Other Than Tax
Increment Financing.
SECTION E. Method of Financing and Economic Feasibility of the Project.
SECTION F. The Relocation Plan.
SECTION G. An Analysis of the Preliminary Plan:
SECTION H. The Report and Recommendations of the Planning Commission.
SECTION I. Public Participation,
SECTION J. A Statement of Conformance to the City's General Plan.
SECTION K. The Final Environmental Impact Report.
SECTION L. A Statement Regarding the Report of the County Fiscal Officer.
SECTION M. Neighborhood Impact Report.
SECTION N. A Summary of Agency Consultation with Affected Taxing Entities and a
Response to Said Entities' Concerns Regarding the Amendment.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, 111c. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 lEi Report to the City Council
Five noncontiguous areas constitute the Project Area as follows.
• Huntington Center Area (formerly the Huntington Center Commercial District
Redevelopment Project Area), The Huntington Center Area encompasses approximately 160
acres of retail and office commercial uses, and is located in the vicinity of Edinger Avenue,
Beach Boulevard, and the San Diego Freeway (Interstate 405). The Huntington Center Area
includes the 960,000 square foot Huntington Beach Mall.
• Oakview Area (formerly the Oakview Redevelopment Project Area).. Oakview Area is
generally located between Warner Avenue and Slater Avenue, from Oak Lane to Beach
Boulevard. The 68-acre Oakview Area includes general commercial, medium density, and
high density residential land uses.
• Talbert-Beach Area (formerly the Talbert-Beach Redevelopment Project Area). The Talbert-
Beach Area encompasses approximately 25 acres of low, medium, and high density
residential and general industrial land uses. The Talbert-Beach Area is located between
Talbert Avenue and Taylor Avenue west of Beach Boulevard and east of Huntington Street.
• Yorktown-bake Area (formerly the Yorktown-Lake Redevelopment Project Area), The
Yorkto, n-Lake Area includes approximately 30 acres of medium density residential and
public land uses, including the Huntington Beach Civic Center and Police Department
facilities. The Yorktown-Lake Area is located in the vicinity of Main Street, Yorktown
Avenue, Lake Street, and Utica Avenue.
• Main-Pier Area (formerly the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area). The 336-acre Main-
Pier Area is located along Main Street,.between Palm Avenue and the Huntington Beach
1
Pier, and along Pacific Coast Highway between Goldenwest Street and Beach Boulevard.
The Main-Pier Area includes retail, tourist, recreational, public, and residential land uses.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Hu'rtingto" Bench
October, 1996 A-2 Report to the City Council
SECTION A
Reasons for the Selection of the Project Area and a
Description of Specific Projects Proposed and How
These Projects Will Improve or Alleviate- Blighting
Conditions Found in the Project Area
This section of the Report describes the Project Area, highlights the Agency's redevelopment
activities to date, and outlines the reasons for, and benefits of, the Amendment/Mckger.
General Characteristics
Geographic Location
The Project Area is located within the City of Huntington Beach, Orange County ("County"),
California. The City is located approximately 45 miles'south of the City"of Los Angeles and is
bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the-southwest, the City of Seal Beach-to the northwest, the City
of Westminster to the north, the City of Fountain Valley to the northeast; and the Cities of
Newport Beach and Costa Mesa to the east. The total area of the City is approximately 27.7
square miles.
The Project Area.incorporates all of the five Constituent Areas an&istapproximately 619 acres in
size, or about 3.5% of the total land area of the City. The proposed Amendriient/Merger will not
add or delete property from the Project Area. Exhibit A-1 shows the boundaries'of the Project
Area.
Rosenow Spemcek Group, Inc. RedevelopntentAgency of the City of Huntington Reach
Oetoher, 1996 A71 Report to the City Council
i
1dY
Ml�COal'
o-
�t
n
r
—rra
r o,<tiav
c�Ya
cinen
Mrcia.
(� HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Project Area Boundaries
EXHIBIT A-]
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Project Area-Map
t •
s
WARNER AVE.
RR DRIVE
i A SYCJ+J 04ZE AA.
0
SELSITO DR.
OAKVlEW CYPRESS AVE.
PARX CYPRESS AVE.
W
W K
z ° w .Q
b
OAKVIEW ►tAr�u�aR A
SCH=
DAR?ONz [12F DR.
Q
> z
wKs2<Q
cd W
Q Q W
SIATFR AVE,
HUNI'INGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Subarea 2
(formerly Oakview Redevelopment Project Area)
' f
MCFADOEN AVE.
N
NOT TO SCALE
/.cd -
01
NOT A PART
HUNTZ4GTON ,
f YUAGE WAY
r CEMBt AWME
1 1
a c SON BEACH MALL
LLF
N p
} J
m
EDINGER AVE. - -
LU
3
N 0. A1DRKH AVp.
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Subarea 1
(formerly Huntington Center Commercial Redevelopment Project Area)
YOR1 OWN AVE
N ,
CMC CbNUR
,= '- N TA AVE.
Z
Q
V8,XE AVE.
v� vs
x z
°C Z
d �
U)CA AVE
1�
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Subarea 4
(formerly Yorktown-Lake Redevelopment Project Area)
• V
rc uJ
V V
oc
V
w
m m
YAfBEn AVE.
vd}
HAPPY DR.
N
f TERRY ' rxx 10 scup
PARK
1
t
TAYLOR f�4t.
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Subarea 3
(formerly Talbert-Beach-Redevelopment Project Area)
Land Use
In conjunction with the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report for the Project, LSA
Associates conducted a windshield survey in May 1996 to identify existing land uses within the
Project Area. Table A-I presents a summary of the major land uses found in the LSA Associates
survey. The Project Area is generally built out; the remaining vacant lots in the Project Area are
in-fill lots surrounded by developed property.
Urbanization
Under Section 33030 of the Law, a blighted area is defined as one that is in part predominantly
urbanized as that term is defined in Section 33320.1 of the Law. As the Law states,
"predominantly urbanized" means that not less than 80 percent of the land in the project area:
• Has been or is developed for urban uses,
• Is characterized by the existence of subdivided lots of irregular form and shape and
inadequate size for proper usefulness and development that are in multiple ownership, or
• Is an integral part of one or more areas developed for urban uses which are surrounded or
substantially surrounded by parcels which have been or are developed for urban uses.
The Project Area is 619 acres in size. The land use breakdown listed in Section B accounted for
589 acres of developed property and 30 acres of vacant, undeveloped property in the Project
Area. There are zero acres characterized by the existence of subdivided lots of irregular form and
shape and inadequate size for proper usefulness and development that are in multiple ownership.
All 30 acres of vacant properties are in-fill lots that are surrounded by developed property on
three or more sides. Therefore, because these lots are surrounded by developed property on three
or more sides, all 30 acres of vacant property are an integral part of an urban area. Exhibit A-2
depicts the location of developed properties and vacant properties which are an integral part of an
urban area.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 A-3 Report to the City Council
rl d u a d a[iij
y( ✓ O t�
ct
U JJ,
JjL
.ji lL
mm�m�mmmmmmma� O _. -.
mmmIDmm�mm i,��
mE1Jm®WmlUmm91IEWIfl__ E
P Pq pq?�P�Pq P�P Pq E
m
}t �IfO Mt'IMR •1 y •
1
. ADOI!>Q l+0►_4M to 1002 -
MO K OWN
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Subarea 5
(formerly Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area)
Reasons for the Selection of the Project Area
As cited in the respective Reports to the City Council for each of the Constituent Projects, the
Project Area was blighted at the time of its;adoption, as these conditions were then defined under
Sections 33030, 33031, and 33032 of the Law. These blighting conditions found in the Project
Area included the following:
+ Defective Design and Character of Physical Construction: Many residential and commercial
structures within the Project Area were of substandard design that inhibited their effective
use. These properties included the Huntington Beach Mall, various commercial and
residential structures facing Main Street, and diminutive single-family homes on Sycamore
Avenue, Cypress Avenue, and Ash Street.
• Faulty Exterior Spacinp,: A number of residential units within the Oakview Area featured
inadequate spacing from adjoining buildings, including parcels located along Jacqueline
Lane, Koledo Lane, Queens Lane, Barton Drive, and Ash Street. In addition, the Project
Area included many commercial properties within the Huntington Center Area that were
developed in an incohesive manner and lacked internal circulation. The lacy of on-site
cohesion between these uses forced patrons to utilize Edinger Avenue when shopping
adjacent retail stores. This circumstance complicated traffic patterns in the area.
• High Density of Population and Overcrowding: Many single-family homes on.Cypress
Avenue, Sycamore Avenue, and Ash Street were determined to be undersized as compared to
the number of occupants of each household; many dwellings were overcrowded.
* Inadequate Provision for Sanitation Facilities: The Main-Pier Area was largely characterized
with antiquated water, storm drainage, and sewer systems that were frequently susceptible to
failures and operated beyond designed capacities that threatened the health and safety of
Project Area residents.
Rosenow Spevacek Group,Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Reach
October, 1996 A-S Report to the City Council
• Age, Obsolescence, and Deterioration: Structures within the Main-Pier Area,,including the
Huntington Beach Pier, were determined to be dilapidated, obsolete, and seismically unsafe.
Within the Oakview Area, approximately 88% of the residential buildings were deficient, or
in need of some rehabilitation due to deferred maintenance and age— '
• `:Subdivided Lots of Irregular Form-Shave, and Size: The Main-Pier Area was characterized
with many narrow lots under multiple ownership that needed to be consolidated for effective
redevelopment. These problems were even more acute within the Talbert-Beach Area where
'a majority of the lots were diminutive Nvith fragmented ownership patterns that frustrated
'development in the area.
• .;Inadequate Public Improvements and Facilities: Throughout the Project _Area, the public
roads were congested due to insufficient,capacity and poor design. The' streets included
Edinger Avenue, Beach Boulevard, Gothard Street,. Pacific Coast Highway, Utica Avenue,
Lake Street, and most local streets in the Oakview Area. t
• Social and Economic Maladjustment: Sales at the Huntington Beach Mall had fallen, while
other portions of the Project Area were found to be dangerous due to high crime rates.
Agency's Accomplishments Within the Project Area
Although many of these conditions.continue to persist, the Agency has been successful in
mitigating some physical and economic conditions within portions of the Project Area. The
Agency's accomplishments include the consolidation and, redevelopment of-some small lots
within the .Talbert-Beach and Main-Pier Areas, the removal of many dilapidated and obsolete
structures from Yorktown-Lake and Main-Pier :Areas, the reconstruction of the Huntington
Beach Pier, and the upgrading and reconstruction of many streets, utilities, and drainage facilities
throughout the Project Area. Due to limitations.in the Existing Plans, the Agency has been
unable to completely mitigate many remaining blighting conditions. Recent declines in Project
Area assessed values have reduced tax increment revenues needed to meet current obligations.
Moreover, the funding shortfall and Existing Plans limits eliminate the Agency's prospects to
continue redevelopment programs without the Amendment/Merger. The next section describes
the needs for, and benefits of, the proposed Amendment/Merger.
Rosenow spevacek Croup, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 A-6 Report to the City Council
Reasons for'the Amendment/Merger
Section B of this Report delineates the blighting conditions that continue-to persist within the
Project Area. In order to correct.these physical and economic conditions, the Agency will need
additional financial resources, the ability to issue more bonded indebtedness, to expand the
Existing Plans' lists of public projects, and to acquire property. However, given the limitations
within the Existing Plans, the Agency will not have the ability to collect sufficient tax increment
revenue, issue bonds, undertake new projects, or acquire property through the use of eminent
domain as necessary to mitigate blight within the.Project Area. Further, the Agency desires to
enhance its ability to meet Project costs throughout the Project Area by merging the Constituent
Projects. Therefore, in order to continue the Agency's redevelopment program within the Project
Area, it is necessary for the Agency to pursue the Amendment/Merger that encompasses the
following activities:
• Increase tax increment limits: Each of the Existing Plans contain either an annual or
cumulative limit on the amount of tax increment revenue that the Agency may collect.
Presently, the Yorktown-Lake Redevelopment Project exceeds its annual $250,000 tax
increment cap. Given moderate growth projections, it is projected that the Talbert-Beach
Redevelopment Projects could also exceed its tax increment limit in 1999-2000, and the
Huntington Center Commercial District Redevelopment Project could exceed its cumulative
Iimit in 2018-19. Without an increase in the tax increment limits, the additional tax
increment revenue will not be available to the Agency to fund redevelopment projects and
programs. The Amendment/Merger would establish a single cumulative limit on the amount
of tax increment revenue of$850 million, and eliminate all preexisting limits. The proposed
limit would not exceed the maximum amount of tax increment revenue that the Agency could
collect over the duration of the Existing Plans.
Rosenow Spevacek Group; lnc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 A-7 Report to the City Council
0 Extend duration of Plan/Period to collect tax increment: With the exception of the Existing
Plan for the Oakview Area, the durations of the-.Existing Plaris are 35 years. The Law
;permits an Agency to extend this time period to 40 years from the date of adoption. (The
`-1'1989 Amendment extended the duration of the Existing Plan for the Oakview Area to 40
.years.) Section 33333.6 of the Law permits redevelopment agencies to collect tax increment
revenue for a period of 10 years beyond the duration of a redevelopment plan. The Agency
may collect increment beyond this time limit only to fund debts incurred prior to January
1994, or housing obligations. For the Existing Plans that contain a 35-year duration, the time
frame to collect tax increment is 45 years. Given the Agency's experience over the first 14
'years of its redevelopment program, projections of available resources in the future, and the
scope of the needed redevelopment projects, the Agency will need more time to implement
and collect increment for the Project. Without'an extension to the duration of the Existing
Plans and the period to collect tax,increment, the Agency would not be able to mitigate the
remaining blight in the Project Area, The Amendment9Merger establishes a 40-year duration
for the Plan, commencing from the date of adoption of each original redevelopment plan. In
accordance with the Law, the time frame to collect tax increment revenue would be 50 years
from the date of adoption of each original redevelopment plan.
• Extend'time frame to incur debt: With the exceptions of the added territory of the Main-Pier
Redevelopment Project and the Huntington Center Commercial District Redevelopment
Project, the Agency is prohibited from incurring debt in the remaining Constituent Projects
after 2002; the Existing Plan.'for the Main-Pier Project limits the Agency's time frame to
incur debt for.the added territoryrto.the year 2003 ,while the Huntington Center Project limit
is achieved in 2004. Amendments to extend these-limits are necessary.because the Agency
wishes to incur debt and pursue'new,projects to eliminate blight after these time frames. The
Amendment/Merger would extend these periods-for each Constituent Project to the year
2014.
Rosenow Spevacek.Group,lnc. ' -" Redevelopment Agency ofthe City of Huntington Bench
October, 1996 5 A-8 - Report to the City Council
• Increase bond limit: The Existing Plans contain separate limits on the amount of bonds that
may be outstanding at any one time. In conjunction with tax increment revenue limit
amendments, bond indebtedness limit increases are needed to permit the Agency to raise
additional capital to invest in new redevelopment projects and programs. The
Amendment/Merger would establish a $275 million limit on the amount of bonds that may be
outstanding at any one time for the Project.
• Extend cininent domain authority for nonresidential property: In order for the Agency to
implement redevelopment projects involving land assembly, eminent domain authority may
be a useful tool to acquire nonresidential property. Presently, the authority to use eminent
domain has expired in all but the Huntington Center and Oakview Areas. The Huntington
Center Redevelopment Plan's eminent domain provisions expire in November 1996 and the
Oakview Redevelopment Plan's provisions expire in July 2001..
Through.the Amendment/Merger, the Agency proposes to establish a new 12-year time frame
within which the Agency may use eminent domain, as a Iast resort, to acquire nonresidential
properties in the Main-Pier and Huntington Center Areas. The Amendment/Merger will not
affect the Agency's existing eminent domain authority with regards to the Oakview Area, nor
will the Amendment/Merger permit the Agency to use eminent domain in the Talbert-Beach
and Yorktown-Lake Areas.
The Existing Plan for the Main-Pier Area formerly permitted the Agency to acquire both
residential and nonresidential property through the use of eminent domain. This authority to
use eminent domain was subject to the provisions of Resolution No. 48, adopted by the
Agency on September 7, 1982, shortly before the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan for the
original five-block area of the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project. Resolution No. 48 set forth
specific guidelines for redevelopment implementation activities in the original territory of the
Main-Pier Area, as follows:
1) The Agency must solicit the participation of existing property owners, pursuant to the
Owner Participation and Reentry Rules,
Roseitow Spevacek Group, hie. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 A-9 Report to the City Council
2) The Agency, in consultation with participating property owners, is to identify and pursue
specific development projects for sites within the original territory, and
3) ;The,Agency must submit all specific.development proposals to the property owners of the
site for consideration and approval. Prior to the execution of any development agreement
p
a
involving acquisition by eminent domain, at least two-thirds of the property owners of the
site, both by number and land area, must approve the development proposal prior to the
initiation of eminent domain.
The requirement to receive a two-thirds approval from the property owners set forth in
Resolution No. 48 has severely limited the Agency's ability to encourage a property owner to
either redevelop or sell obsolete dilapidated properties because property owners that do not
approve of the Agency's development proposal for any reason can stop the Agency's
redevelopment effort. Other clauses within Resolution No. 48 are redundant with provisions
in the Law, the Existing Plan, and the existing Owner Participation and Reentry Rules, and
therefore do not serve any purpose.
The Amendment/Merger would rescind Resolution No. 48 and, with the exception of the
Agency's existing eminent domain authority in the Oakview Area, prohibit any use of
eminent domain to acquire residential property in the Project Area. Within the Main-Pier and
Huntington Center Areas, the Plan would provide the Agency a 12-year period to employ
eminent domain on properties on which persons do not reside.
• Expand list of public projects: The Law requires that redevelopment plans contain a listing
of infrastructure and facility projects that may be undertaken by a redevelopment agency. A
redevelopment agency is not permitted to deviate from the plan's listing of projects without
an amendment. Because the Existing Plans' listings of projects is too narrow and limited to
meet the needs of the Project Area-, the Agency desires to expand this listing as detailed later
in this Section.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 A-10 Report to the City Council
• Merge the Constituent Projects: The Agency's current redevelopment' programs have been
frustrated by an imbalance of resources and needs between the Constituent Projects. The
Law generally prohibits redevelopment agencies from transferring tax increment revenues
from one redevelopment project to another. In order to move funding resources between the
Constituent Projects, the Agency needs to merge the Existing Plans. By merging the Existing
Plans, resources from the Constituent Projects could be shifted throughout the Project Area to
enlarge the pool of funds available to mitigate specific blighting conditions. For example,
declines in tax increment revenues in the Huntington Center Area' have resulted in a
downgrading of the 1992 Bonds. By merging the Constituent Projects, resources from the
Agency's other Constituent Project Areas could be made available to the Huntington Center
Area.
Exhibit A-3 presents a summary of the Agency's objectives for the Amendment/Merger.
A Description of the Projects Proposed by the Agency .
One of the primary objectives of the Amendment/Merger is to refine the scope of public
>improvements of projects identified •in the Existing Plans. Section 3334.4.5(e) of the Law
requires that this Preliminary Report contain a description of the specific project or projects
proposed by the Agency.. his section.includes such a listing, identifying the nature, location,
and cost for all proposed public projects to be included in the Plan..
Implementation of the Project will occur gradually over the duration of the Plan. For the
purposes of the feasibility analysis of this Report, project costs below are.-indicated in current
1996 dollars, and include direct and administrative costs. Financing costs associated with Project
implementation are delineated in Section E.
Rosenow Spevacek Group,Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 A-11 Report to the City Council
A Description of How the Proposed Projects Will Improve and Alleviate the Blighting
Conditions Cited in Section B
Under the Plan, the Agency is proposing to undertake a comprehensive community development
program. The authorities and provisions of the Plan have been developed to permit the Agency
to enact redevelopment projects targeting the blight that exists within the Project Area. The
blighting conditions which continue to exist in the Project Area are.discussed more fully in
Section B of this Report.
Infrastructure Improvements. The traffic/circulation system improvements are those that have
been identified in the various studies that the City has commissioned to address circulation
deficiencies within the Project Area. These improvements will be designed to increase the
operational capacity of the major arterials within the Project Area through the addition of travel
Ianes, left-turn lanes, and intersection improvements. The public facilities listed on Exhibit A-2
will address the shortage of civic and recreational services to residents of the Project Area.
Through the construction of these various public improvements, the Agency will be effectively
removing many barriers to economic growth and vitality in the City and will be eliminating the
blight which exists in the Project Area due to inadequate public improvements which cannot be
remedied by private or governmental action without redevelopment.
Community Development Projects/Programs. These projects/programs are designed to address
the blighting conditions by assisting private enterprise with rehabilitation and/or expansion
activities, or through the acquisition of needed property. The Agency proposes to provide funds
to assist in land acquisition or the construction of on-/off-site infrastructure improvements, or
partially funding parking improvements. As existing residential and commercial structures age,
the Agency also proposes to provide assistance over the life of the Plan to facilitate the
rehabilitation of these structures. Such programs will enable the Agency to redevelop
nonconforming and incompatible properties in a manner consistent with the General Plan.
Rosenow Spevacek Croup, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of 11re City of Hundirgion Beach
October, 1996p A-12 - Report to the City Council
EXHIBIT 1
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project • .'
Report to the City Council
SUMMARY OF ACTIONS PROPOSED
BY AMENDMENT 1 MERGER
Huntington Center Main-Pier Oakview
Redevelopment Redevelopment Redevelopment
Plan Plan Plan
Talbert-Beach Rescind Resolution No. 48 Yorktown-Lake
Redevelopment Redevelopment
Plan Plan
HUNTINGTON
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
AMENDMENTS TO AMENDMENTSTO. AMENDMENTSTO
TIME LIMITS FINANCIAL LIMITS OTHER LIMITS
t"mrflet�t t3arrrairr t imlt nn:Arnourlt of Bond f�rttp►sed";3l2#3C Profects—,
. on-
.
Qr the Mann Mier and H [rhngton Ihcrse the amount Q€bonded debt Viand II833n9 of oubC�c ftlltY
Gente�Areas extent!by 12years _ that nayt�e ciu#s#andir3g at anet�me` u�trastrUcture ari
the priod idcvhzrne#sCE rrFfr�Qt]t too 25 rrr8litr e n d veEopment protects„
dorriain on p�a�ertyen w11i>sh � e
peons A unit do nQ#res3cte Mak nq nn Amorarit of
rs
changes#a the Agenc�+s�castTg Irlcrern riEnE
errsmertt datitaen Ut3�oCf€y ih the lricreM Etta GzirnU3attve�maUrit n1
L?akvtesu Area tax Increment to5t�tn�tlors
?0 _t6 Incur lnd,lbtedrir**s5 '<
x#end grri frame to Ippar
Ind ebtedness't�the gear ?14
E€#ectiye�ess ofPlal�z
Extersd a##ectlyer�esso�t'lantv:4¢
years except faI t�akvieW Areaia?'
L
Time to Cttect Iris erne»f'
lrxidnd tt31�.Y?ars filivwfir9 ..: '
terntaiaticn of Ptan......
Oakview Redevelopment Plan already features a 40 Plan duration,pursuant to the
1989 Amendment adopted on July 5, 1989 via Ordinance No.3002.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. 1
Summary of Actions 'Councsum 10/10/96 ,_� a 1 of 1
TABLE A-2
{
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project
Report to the City Council
PROPOSED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND FACILITY, HOUSING
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
Programs and Projects Proposed Possible Implementation Activities Direct
Cost
HOUSING PROGRAMS Increase and improve the community's supply of housing affordable to $ 60,000,000
very low, low, and moderate income households
Affordable Housing Development Projects Assist development of single-family, multi-family, and senior housing inside and
outside the Project Area pursuant to housing requirements.
Housing Code Enforcement Program Continue program throughout Project Area.
Housing Rehabilition Program Continue program throughout Project Area.
INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMS Improve pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular traffic flows, upgrade utilities $ 65,000,000
and drainage systems, enhance public safety, and promote recreational ss
opportunities.
Public Infrastucture•in Talbert-Beach area Monitor maintenance requirements of public infrastructure.
Storm Drain Improvements in Oakview Complete storm drain improvements.
Street Improvements Oakview Area
Complete improvements to streets, street lights, alleys, and landscape.
Center Avenue
Complete construction of Center Avenue street improvements and traffic signal,
and improvements to signage and landscaping at the Huntington Beach Mail.
Interstate 405
,Improve 1-405 off-ramp access to Huntington Center. Improve 1-405 cloverleaf
landscaping and widen McFaddenl1-405 overpass.
Edinger Avenue Street Alignment
ment
Seek adoption of the specific plan and construction of street improvements,
including consolidation of ingress/egress points, unified signage and
landscaping.
Gothard Street and Hoover Street Connection
Construct street improvements to connect Gothard and Hoover Streets to create
another north-south arterial alleviate traffic congestion on other north-south
arterials.
Rosenow Spevacek Group,Inc.
Councrpt Projects 10110/96
TABLE
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project
Report to the.City Council
PROPOSED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND FACILITY, HOUSING
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
Programs and Projects Proposed Possible implementation Activities Direct
Cost
PUBLIC FACILITY PROGRAMS Develop community facilities that meet the needs of the�community's $ 6,000,000
residents.
Branch Library Complete construction of a branch library.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Protect residential neighborhoods to enhance public safety and provide $ 10,000,000
PROGRAMS positive community development opportunities.
Neighborhood Plan Review plan and update recommendations as appropriate.
Community Services Police Assistance Continue assistance program for gang prevention in Project Area.
Operation LOGOS Continue youth employment neighborhood cleanup program in Project Area.
COMMERCIAL Revitalize deteriorating and substandard commercial facilities. $ 100,000 000
REHABILITATIONIECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT"
Huntington Beach Mall Prepare a market and development'strategy with the mall owner and facilitate
repositioning of the Mall.
The Waterfront Implement and monitor terms of development agreement, as they currently exist
or may be subsequently amended.
New Developmeni/Construction Encourage Project Area private development to recycle blighted properties, and
identify sites with the potential for consolidation for redevelopment.
Commercial Leasing Cooperate'and assist in leasing of commercial/office space in Project Area..
Rehabilitation Assist property owners with renovations and other improvements to deteriorating
commercial and industrial properties in the Project Area.
Planning--Activities Prepare and implement downtown parking master plan, downtown specific plan,
Pacific Coast Highwayllst Street property master plan, and other plans to
coordinate development in Project-Area.
TOTAL PROGRAM COST $ 241,000,000
Notes:
Costs are estimated.and may change upon implementation of the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Plan.
P�senm ,Speeacek Groin,Inc.
TABLE A-2,
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project
Report to the City Council
PROPOSED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND FACILITY, HOUSING
" AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
Programs and Projects Proposed. Possible Implementation Activities Direct
Cost
Costs are reflected in 1996 dollars and do not account for inflation or financing costs associated with these projects. (See Section D of
Preiiminary Report for Financing Costs)
Rownuw Spevacek Group,Inc.
Counapt Projects 10110/96
Housing/Low and Moderate Income Assistance. The expenditure of Housing Fund'revenues will
assist the City in implementing the goals and programs set forth in the Agency's Housing
Compliance Plan and the Housing Element of the City's General Plan and will allow the Agency
to enhance housing opportunities for very low, low, and moderate income households. Further,
the proposed housing projects will eliminate blight by repairing or rehabilitating substandard or
deteriorating residential structures. '
Exhibit A-4 presents a summary matrix of which blighting conditions would be alleviated by the
proposed programs and projects included in the Plan and listed on Table A-2.
rt
W�.
Rosenow Spevacek Croup, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 A-13 Report to the City Council
EXHIBIT A-4
Huntington Beactih Redevelopment Project
Report to the City Coucil
CORRELATION OF PROPOSED PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS
TO THE ELIMINATION OF BLIGHT
Programs and Projects Proposed Blighting Condition to be Alleviated
U)
N X
� U
O
a) co Q
E
`o U
L o a� o
❑ ❑ O uJ z O S Q ❑ Y
HOUSING PROGRAMS
Affordable Housing Development Projects • • • • • •
Housing Code Enforcement Program • • • • •
Housing Rehabilition Program • • • • •
INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMS
Public Infrastucture in Talbert-Beach area • •
Storm Drain Improvements in Oakview • • •
Street Improvements • • •
PUBLIC FACILITY PROGRAMS
Branch Library •
CQMMUNITY'DEVELOPMENT` , '.
PROGRAMS `
Neighborhood�Plan • • •
Community'Services Police Assistance • •
Operation LOGOS • •
COMMERCIAL
REHABILITATION/ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
Huntington Beach Mall 4 '• • • • • • •
The Waterfront • • • • . •
New Develop ment/Constructiori • • • • • • • • •
Commercial Leasing • •
Rehabilitation • • • • • •
Planning Activities • • • • • • • • •
Rosenow Spevacek Group,Inc.
cnuncrpt Frgjecls(3) IT19l96
SECTION B
A Description of the Physical and Economic Blighting
.Conditions Existing in the Project Area
This section of the Report describes the blighting conditions that continue to exist within the
Project Area.
At the 'time ,the Existing Plans were adopted, the City Council concluded that each of the
Constituent Areas were blighted; the blight analyses of these Constituent Areas are contained in
the Reports to the City Council for each of the areas listed below, and are incorporated into this
Report by reference:
Yorktown-Lake Redevelopment Project: "Report to the City Council on the
Yorktown-Lake Redevelopment Plan" documenting Might for the Yorktown-Lake
Redevelopment Project adopted on September 20, 1982;
• Talbert-Beach Redevelopment Project: "Report to the City Council on the
Talbert-Beach Redevelopment Plan" documenting blight for the Talbert-Beach
Redevelopment Project adopted on September 20, 1982;
• Main-Pier Redevelopment Project: "Report to the City Council on the Main Vier
1
Redevelopment Plan" documenting blight for the Main-Pier Redevelopment
Project Original Area on September 20, 1982 and the "Report to,the City Council
on the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project-Plan Amendment No:F' documenting
blight for the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Added Area adopted on
September 6, 1983; ! _,
• Oakview Redevelopment Project:' "Report to the City Council on'-the' Oakview
Redevelopment Plan" documenting blight for the Oakview! Redevelopment
Project adopted on November 1, 1982 and the "Report to the City Council for
Amendment No. One to the Oakview Redevelopment Project" documenting
blighting conditions for the July 5, 1989 Amendment; and
• Huntington Center Commercial District Redevelopment Project: "Report to the
Council-Huntington Center Commercial District Redevelopment Plan"
documenting blight for the Huntington Center Commercial District
Redevelopment Project adopted on November 26, 1984,
Rosetzow Spevacek Group, Me. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 B-1 Report to the City Council
Locations of Blight in the Project Area
The Appendix at the end of this Report depicts the geographic areas of the Project Area that
continue to be blighted.
";P.r'operties No Longer Blighted
' w
Section 33354.6(b) of the Law requires that a.redevelopment agency identify in a preliminary
report any portions of a project area that are no longer blighted. Due to the completion of
redevelopment projects within the Talbert-Beach and Yorktown-Lake Areas, the Agency has
removed physical and economic blighting conditions affecting approximately 55 acres, or 8%, of
the 619-acre.Project Area.
Although the Law does permit the Agency to remove nonblighted properties from the Project
Area, such a disposition would severely impair the Agency's ability to pay its obligations. These
obligations include debt service on four separate loan agreements with the Huntington Beach
Public Financing Authority with respect to the $33,495,000 1992 Revenue Bonds ("1992
Bonds"). The 1992 Bond indenture prohibits removing territory without bond holder approval.
Preliminary analysis indicates that if these are removed, tax increment revenues would drop and
impair the Agency's ability to meet bond revenue pledge commitments from these areas.
Further, the Plan includes road improvements, traffic signals, police facility renovations, and
other improvements that will benefit.the entire Project Area, including the Yorktown-Lake and
Talbert-Beach Areas. Therefore, .the Agency is unable to remove any territory from the Project
Area at this time.
Existing}alighting Conditions in the Project Area
Despite the Agency's best efforts, many blighting conditions that were evident when the Existing
Plans were adopted are still present today. These conditions include the following:
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 B-2 Report to the City Council
• Defective Design and Character of Physical Construction,
• Faulty Exterior Spacing,
• High Density of Population and Overcrowding,
• Inadequate Provision for Sanitation Facilities,
• Age, Obsolescence, and Deterioration,
• Subdivided Lots of Irregular Form, Shape, and Size,_., ., .�a a.;•3 � ��
• Inadequate Public Improvements and Facilities, and
• Social and Economic Maladjustment, i ,
Historically, redevelopment of the Project Area has been directly facilitated by the Agency. In
order to mitigate the remaining blight within the-Project Area, the Agency desires to intensify its
efforts through an expanded redevelopment program. The Plan enables the Agency-to enact new
projects and programs to remove remaining physical and economic conditions.
Huntington Center Area
The Huntington Center Redevelopment Project Area was established in November 1984 as a
means to improve deteriorating and substandard commercial properties. The Huntington Center
Area includes office and retail uses, including the 960,000 square foot Huntington. Beach Mall
("Mall"). The Mall comprises-58 acres, or 36.3%•of the total acreage of the Huntington Center
Area.'' A 23% drop of assessed values in this area between 1990 and 1996 has undercut. the
Agency's ability to fund needed improvements. This funding shortfall, coupled with an inability
to incur debt after November 1996, inhibit the Agency's ability to remove blighting conditions,
including:
• the increasingly obsolete and deteriorating Mall,
• traffic congestion on Edinger Avenue, Center Avenue, and Beach Boulevard, and
• awkward lot configurations on Edinger Avenue.
Rosenow Spevacek Group,Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Reach
October, 1996 B-3 Report to the City Council
In 1982, the Mall (then named Huntington Center) was found to be one of the poorest performing
regional malls in the Los Angeles basin. At that time, the Mall generated taxable sales as much
as 64% below shopping centers of comparable size. .Since that time, many regional shopping
centers,of the"same vintage iri Orange County have either undergone a major renovation or been
demolished and replaced with a different retail'development; many of these centers compete for
the same shoppers as the Huntington Beach Mall. In 1987, the Mall expanded by 13%, or
107,332 gross leasable square feet, adding a Mervyn's department store, a food court, and
additional in-line shop space. Despite this expansion, sales at the Mali have continued to fall. In
1983,'the.Mall generated $85,067,000 in taxable sales, or approximately $98 per square foot. By
1995,. sales volume declined to $82 per square foot.
According to an analysis of taxable sales trends of shopping centers in the market area compiled
by Hinderliter de Llamas and Associates ("HdL"), the Mall has steadily declined in the face of
other centers' solid performance. Exhibit B-1 presents a summary of the Mall's taxable sales
volumes versus that of nearby centers. Between 1992 and 1995, taxable sales decreased from
$116,272,400 to $78,743,800, or nearly 32.3%.
The Mall's declining sales also impact nearby retail uses along the Edinger Avenue Corridor
according to the Edinger Corridor Economic Market Study ("Edinger Corridor Study") prepared
by Cunningham and Associates in October 1995. The Mall, located on the north side of Edinger
Avenue, attracts shoppers to retail uses on the south side of Edinger Avenue. The Edinger
Corridor Study found that as sales declined by 34% at the Mall between 1992 and 1994, sales in
the Edinger Corridor declined by 21%. (Approximately one-half of the retail uses along the
Edinger Avenue Corridor are located within the Project Area.)
These sales statistics are indicative of the declining viability of the Mall as a location where
consumers shop. In 1995, the Orange County Re ig stcr conducted a survey of consumer attitudes
towards fifteen regional retail centers frequented by County residents. Tables B-1, B-2, and B-3
enumerate consumers' attitudes towards the Mall. The Register survey found that the Mall lost
Rosenow S'pevacek Group,Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beads
October, 1996 13-4 Report to the City Council
TABLE
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project
Report to the City Council
EXERPTS FROM 1995 ORANGE COUNTY CONSUMER ATTITUDE SURVEY
MALL SHOPPING FREQUENCY (1994 TO 1995)
Shopping Center, Location Shopped Shopped Net Gain
More Less ' or Loss
in 1995 in 1995 t
1. MainPlace, Santa Ana 12.5% 4.2% F 8.3%
2. Brea Mall, Brea 10.6% 6.5% 4.1%
3. Westminster Mall, Westminster 10,6% 7.1% 3.5%
4. Fashion Island, Newport Beach 3.6% 3.1%
5. Laguna Hills Mall, Laguna Hills 8.9% 6.0% 2.9%
6. Tustin Market Place, Tustin 11.8% 0.4% 1.4%;'
7. Buena Park Mall, Buena Park 6.6% 5.9% 0.7%
8, Crystal Court, Costa Mesa 0.5% k #6'14 0.4%'
9. Anaheim Plaza, Anaheim 1.6% 1.4% 0.2%
10. Los Cerritos Center, Cerritos 1.2% 2.1% -0.9%
11. South Coast Plaza, Costa Mesa 17.8% 21.1% -3.3%
.12. Mission Viejo Mall, Mission Viejo 5.2% 9.2% -4.0%
13. The City, Orange 0.6% 4.8% -4.2%
14'. Mall of Orange, Orange 2.8%, 8.2% -5.4%
15...Hurtt�ngtc�n Baic#� 1VEalt ? ./°
Source: Orange County Register
TABLE B-2
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project
Report to the City Council
EXERPTS FROM 1995 ORANGE COUNTY CONSUMER ATTITUDE SURVEY
REASONS FOR SHOPPING LESS FREQUENTLY AT HUNTINGTON BEACH MALL
Reason Huntington . Average Score Difference
Beach of Orange County
Mall Score Shopping Centers -
Variety of stores limited 48.3% 19.7% 28.6%
Favorite store location closed 28.1% 9.6% 18.5%
Location not convenient 20.2% 32.0% -11.8%
Getting run down ` 5.6% 52% 0.4%
Source: Orange County Register
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc.
Register Survey 13 Councrpt 10/10/96 1 of 1
TABLE
x' -'Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project
Report to the City Council
-EXERPTS FROM 1995 ORANGE COUNTY CONSUMER ATTITUDE SURVEY
CONSUMER ASSESSMENT OF HUNTINGTON BEACH MALL
Attribute Huntington Average Score Difference
Beach ; of Orange County (HB Mall Vs. OC Centers)
Mall'Score Shopping Centers 1995 1994
It's co6venient �_ 73.1% 77.2% -4.1% 2.5%
Convenient/adequate parking 69.4% 61.7% 7.7% 13.1%
Pleasant atmosphere 47.8% 64.0% -16.2% 1.2%
Has welt-lit/safe parking 43.6% 50.2% -6.6% 11.2%
Feeling of security/safety 40.9% 50.6% -9.7% -0.8%
Up-to-date, attractive appearance 39.6% 60.9% -21.3% -13.8%
Good choice of stores (1) 33.7% 58.5% -24.8% -22.7%
It's fun to shop 25.8% 39.9% -14.1% -9.3%
Convenient layout of stores (1) 24.3% 34.7% -10.4% -3.1%
Special mall events 21.5% 17.6% 3.9% 15.8%
Good restaurant selection 17.1% 37.9% -20.8% -11.4%
Activities for children 7:6% 15.9% -8.3% -8.3%
Notes: (1) Lowest score of all fifteen shopping centers in survey.
Source: Orange County Register
Rosenow 5pevacek Group, Inc.
Register Survey A Councrpt 10/10/96 1 of 1
. C
y ^S
EXHIBIT B-1
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT;
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Quarterly Sales Tax Volumes
of Nearby Shopping Centers
Vy;' i THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
l�i3rider d Mamas
MALLS - 13 QUARTER HISTORY
Chan Description: This charr'compares sales tar revenues within specified Geographic area(s)of the City to similar CEO areas
'in 6 other jurisdictions. The prior 12 quarters are shown for historical reference purposes.
Comparison Cities Quarters Shoran Reflect The Ptriod In Which The Sales Occurred $
1,310.+
' `
South Coast Plaza � � � 2,088.+`
Outlets=244
1.85b.
1.624.
1.392,
1
1,160.
Los Cerritos Center
•Oudeu= 192 • .. • '
Main PlaceA 928,CX
-Santa Ana
184
Fashion Island J
. . . . . .
Ourleu= 192 t�� �.ao�stty`r - '� 3 ` ►'� G
Westminster Mail
OwIeu=205' r.. .-. --� ✓
Buena Park Mall 232,a
Ourku=160 ...
Huntington Ctr o
Outlets= 76 4th Qtr 1 st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qv 4th Qtr I st Qtr god Qtr 3rd QV 4rh Qtr 1 st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qw 4th Qtr
92 I '93 '93 '93 '93 94 '94 44 94 9S 45 95 95
.h5
�r
more shoppers than any other center in the survey. The reasons why consumers shopped-less
frequently at the Mall included the following:
• variety of stores limited,
+ favorite store closed, and
• getting nan down.
Overall, consumers surveyed rated the Mall well below average in desired attributes of shopping
centers; the survey ranked the Mall last in two attributes, including good choice of stores and
convenient layout of stores.
Another reason for the continued decline of the Mall is its poor physical condition. In June,
1996, Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. ("RSG") conducted a parcel-by-parcel land use and blight
survey. At the Mall, the RSG field survey noted the deteriorating facade and parking lot. The
anchor spaces occupied by the Broadway and Montgomery Ward reflect a 30-year old design,
and the entire Mall is tired and uninviting by today's standards. Based on an analysis of building
permits, the original 823,000 square foot structure of the Mall has not undergone substantial
rehabilitation- since the Agency adopted the Existing Plan in 1984, Table B-4 itemizes the
building permits issued for improvements to the Mall over the past 12 years. .
Inside the Mall, the number of vacancies of the in-line stores is overwhelming. Of the 74 in-line
shops, 50% were vacant. In the Broadway wing of the Mall alone, 14 of the 19 in-line stores
were,vacant. Photo B-1 was-taken on a Friday, June 7, 1996, at about 5:00 p.m., and shows
numerous vacant store spaces and the Mall virtually devoid of any shoppers.
Rosennow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 B-5 Report to the City Council
PHOTO B-1
Picture taken at 5:00 p.m. on Friday, June 7, 1996, showing vacant stores in the
Broadway wing of the Mall. As of June 1996, one-half of the in-line-stores at the Mall
were vacant.
In addition to vacancies of the in-line stores, the Mall is faced with an uncertain future for the
Broadway anchor space. Following the acquisition of the Broadway department store chain and
subsequent consolidation of the Broadway and Bullock's department stores by Federated Stores
in 1995, the new owner announced plans to close the Huntington Beach location in August 1996.
This announcement marks the second anchor tenant to abandon the Mall in the past 36 months;
J.C. Penney closed its location at Huntington Beach Mall in favor of Westminster Mall in 1993,
The prospects of finding a new tenant that could utilize the Broadway space are discouraging,
given the consolidation trend of department stores, and a shift in consumer shopping preferences
towards open-air discount centers.
Exhibit B-2 is a copy of an April 1996 article from the Orange County Re ig stcr that describes the
µ' woes of retailers-at ihe-Mall. Accprdingzto the article, one tenant (Radio Shack) lost $30,000 last
year and has'signed'a short-term lease in the face of the Mall's uncertainty. According to City
staff, most of the in-line store spaces are leased on a month-to-month basis.
Rosenoiv Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 B-6 Report to the City Council
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project
Report to the City Council
BUILDING PERMIT HISTORY
IMPROVEMENTS TO HUNTINGTON BEACH MALL SINCE 1984
Date Permit No. Project Description Permit Value
1986 Proiects $ 3,281,001
n1a Addition of skylights to common area n1a
1/17/86 Retail addition of 82,927 sf Mervyn's anchor store n/a
3/17/86 Retail addition of Broadway entry n1a
8/25/86 Retail wing/food court addition (74,841 sf) $ 2,915,285
10/16/86 Construct decorative drywall $ 10,000
12/1/86 • Regional center expansion $ 355,716
1989 Projects $ 70,383
2/13189 Renovation of JC Penney exterior front enterance $ 24,533
6119/89 Reroof hot mop 30,000 sf $ 45,000 . '
6130189 Remodel food court n/a
8/30/89 Addition to Center Court stores (6 stores 300-800 so n/a
1215/89 One illuminated mail sign $ 850
1990 Proiects
9/6/90 Commercial improvements for administrative offices $ 40,000
10/2/90 Corridor extension $ 900
11/13/90 Channel letters - one sign $ 750
1991 Prclects $ 10,000
5/30/91 Repair exterior wall $ 10,000
1993 Proiects $ 10,000
4/5/93 Extending two shop's - tenant bulkhead extension $ 10,000
1995 Proiects $ 106,641
1/20/95 Seismic strengthing of outside store canopy $ 6,457
1/20/95 Seismic strengthing/roof repair of tire center $ 35,519
6/16/95 ' Tear off existing roof and reroof $ 64,665
TOTAL PROJECTS $ 3,478,025
Note: Excludes tenant improvements for anchors, shops and outlying pads.
Source: City of Huntington Beach Building Department Building Permit Records
•� _ { r r. r r.
r
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc.
a
Mall Improvements Councrpt 10/10/96 1 of 1
EXHIBIT B-2
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
April 1996 Article from Orange County Register
Regarding Decline of Huntington Beach Mall
r.
i
SEL
t �
MUST'
GO''*
4
_ Iq FAAax AVFrtYlltre Oru+ge Cow+ty Register
GIVING UP:A shoe store at the Huntington Beach Mall holds a going-out-of-bminess sale.A Macyi conversion could boost the ailing mall.
M AM
a NIMLeRTA FiRTURl"m
RETAIL: The rebuilding of Huntington Beach hull hinges on whether Federated will close Broadway.
By QUYEN DOrMe Orange County Register The mall is Huntington Beach's single
From Huntington Beach largest business and is second only to the
car dealerships in generating revenue for
the city.
he future of the Huntington David Biggs,the city's director of cco-
Beach Mall remains in limbo as nomics and redevelopment,said the mall
Federated Department Stores generated nearly S1.8 million in tax reve-
weighs whether to dose the nue in the early 1M.Last year,it brought
mall's Broadway store or con- In a record low 58W,000.
J JY_i taQ M+}VV,! t Ll�tue 11 ect the addition
�iio war tp{��p ''
ers and iity nfficia sf cag�cr 1n rsihui7 t e into the et Penney location at the end of
mall but needing Fedcrated's decision to September,and Barnes&Noble Bonksell-
point to a strategy.Federated acquired the �i ers in October,which filled the old Barker
Broadway chain in October and has an- Bros.location in a separate building next to
pounced the fate of all but four of its 82 Circuit City and Staples.
stores. Overall,sales tax provides S16 million or
Federated will announce its decision for the city's S%million operating budget.
the lone Orange County Broadway before Mail owners said they're working with
the end of the year,said spokeswoman the city but cannot move forward until Fcd-
Mary Ann Shannon.Previously,Federated WAITING fT OUT.Radio Shack manager crated announces the Broadway's rate.
Announced plans to convert 49 Broadway David Johnson,holding a sample of his wares, "1'm sure the city has a different opinion
itores to Macy's and five to Bloomingdales. says the Ftore lost$30,000 last year- on things,but the ownership of the mall has
Others were sold off or turned into warn experience in the industry,"Sonnonstine
houses. mall's ability to attract shoppers. said."Demolishing(the mall)is not an op-
A Macy's conversion in Huntington "The day Penney's left,the mall went tion that we're interested in or looking at
Beach would be a powerful selling point in downhill,"said Marsha Baumann,owner of this time.They don't own the mall."
nsuading traditional mall stores to repop. Cardo's Footwear,who is moving her busi- She said any changes to the mail must be
elate the ailing center,which is one-third ness Monday to a strip mall in tAguna approved by anchor stores Montgomery
'Vacant.However,the loss of another an- Beach."it's a shock to walk through.It's Ward,Mervyn's,Broadway and Burlington
chor would probably lead to a repositioning empty like a ghost town.It doesn't even Coat Factory,a discount outlet that seUs
of the mall,possibly as a discount and en• reel like a mall." linens and clothes.
tertainment mecca. Radio Shack,which usually signs up for "You must have anchor stores to be a
"We're hanging on the decision they have five.to layear leases,renewed for only one major player,"said Esmael Adibi,director
Jo make,"mall spokeswoman Linda Son- year in 1996,said store manager David of the Censer for Economic Research at
'non Stine said.The owner,MCA Huntington Johnson,whose store lost S9Q000 last year. Chapman University.He said anchor stores
&Associates,is considering adding restau- City officials want to see the mall re- _-_.draw sheppers and tenants.The hig stores
.rants and cinemas to bring back the vamped into a sales-tax powerhouse.Their build customer loyalty,while smaller stores
.crowds that deserted the mail after J.C. ideas range from simply filling vacancies give shoppers variety. -
pcnney moved to the Westminster Mall in and remodeling to demolishing the mall "For a mall to be successful it must ex-
?�ovembcr 1993. and turning it into a"power center'-filled pand its choices and make itself more
The threat of losing another big store has with big-box discounters such as Costco and
many merchants wondering about the Wal-Mart. Meow see MAtr.Page 2
_w MALL: wait is torturous for mean, city
f ROM 1
modern and come up with new
ideas to attract customers la„R ai. .,F ..eipl .
Adibi said,nolirig'lhit's been the ' `
strategy of shopping power- a ®Vacant MERVYN'S `e STILL IN
houses South Coast Plaza in Cos- spaces .- SECOND LIMBO
la Mesa and MainPlace in Santa uvEi..
Ana. �, �,.1 . NurrtVon Beach Mad
Employees and shoppers say r }_ owners are still waiting
secent renovations make them " r;,r.'' 'r: fW Federated Stores to
optimistic the slue will stay. ; r'
A nee, security sysicm waa „_. .• decide whether they'll
added and employees have been MONrGOMERY r + CanvertThe Broadway
- trained to operate on an updated WARD .r MEAYY�TS.r note into a Maws,
register system. said Roger r -
r r
Payne, an assistant cosmetics
department manager for the r r r
Broadway.
"U they're closing, I don't
IhinktheYwoUldbepouringmon-
;'FIRST++
ey into the store," he said. He r r r "• �FLx _• `.
added that the store has been re•
stocking merchandise regularly. ' , MONTCGQMERY
also said Broadway r WARD �- x.r'E'. •-t
Shoppers ,'.
r Nn i_-,�
employees have told them their r r -t'i,�: Z,
Broadway cards will soon con• r
vcrt to hlacy's.
The 30-ytar-oW mall,south of r fi'•'s !
the San Diego(1-4%) Freeway, +
has 960.WQ square feet of retail " BLIRLINGTON COAT '
space.In fiscal 1991 it thrived at FACTORY
full occupancy. By 19%, leased -
space has dropped to 65 percent. '!
Some shoppers say Barnes & '• i i
Noble, which also sells music tiny t
and has an adjacent Starbucks Astlnst ;Y y' ~
Coffce, has attracted new Gus•
tomers.
"I have an affinity for the mall
since Barnes A Noble started
here."said Howard Carlson,53, J;N�lt��tillsT I �, a
Of Tustin while waiting for his ,�; 'rA`y�-fit"' BROADWAY 1
friends near the Palm Court food �' Q It—a U.M. I
area in the mall."I used to not aw`' r�°
come here." a
The bookstore's manager,
Y Y Donna McCune,said the retailer � ` - -Qsbpr.s �1� .}ir�_w .Yt�;� "•'
has found its niche in Orange •`tr= A ,',}K-Y v}- } _
County.
"The concept is fairly new to
Orange County."she said."Our - The Or+rye Camty RegM1oto r
stare is doing phenomenally r
well.We've beat our initial sales
plan." economic director Biggs.He said complex to draw customers. between two successful malls, t
Mall owners say overall sales the city has identified a range of "'Mere may be some combina- Westminster is two miles away t
are on the rise,in part because of options to the owners,including tion(of the changes)in the mail and South Coast is about eight y
The improving economy in remodeling or reconstructing the to make economic sense," he miles." F
Orange County. mall,similar to Anaheim Plaza. said. Westminster Mall, a 1.2 mil- t
Sonnonsline, who provided Richard Bruckner, a redevel- If mall business doesn't pick lien-square-root regional mall i
year-to-date sales increases on opmcnt manager for Anaheim, up,the.citycan acquire the prop- with 17S stores,blossomed after r
more than a dozen merchants in said Anaheim Plaza faced a sim- e_rty under eminent domain,said a roll renovation in 1989. said s
the mall, said the increase ilar situation in 1992,when more Biggs, spokeswoman Stephanie Green,
ranged from 9 percent for Sees than half of the stores were "It's never our first prefer maintaining a 90 percent occu- f
Candy to 18 percent for Claire's closed after Robinson's left and ence,"he said."We're waiting to panty rate or better since 1990. c
Boutique.an accessory store. the Broadway was deciding see what the owners will do.It's a Green atlnbules the mall's e
The food court showed a toper- whether to stay. collaborative effort." success to having strong anchor v
cent increase,she added. r
Mall owners have an agree- The property owner and the Huntington Beach City Coun stores such as Robinsons May, F
ment to bring Romano's Macaro• city'decrded to demolish the mall Gilman Dave Garafalo disagreed Sears and J.C.Penney and a con-
ni Grill, a family style Italian and rebuild it as an open-air re- that city acquisition is an option, scant variety orpromol,, such r
tail renter anchored by Wal• saY{ng t�e-A��s�pro It utjc S Easier eggpuy apd�KI O lj
restaurant, to the corner of Mari. USA and Ross Dress million�6oifiAIl� 1 tS9 'r did`..` - ''
Beach and Edinger,formerlylhe p m e c celeb'ran
site of a Chevron gas station.The For Less.The plaza reopened in budget and would not be able to Adibi and Creea say the malls k
restaurant will open in July. late 1994. finance the property. can exist in hose proximity. c
Some say the improvement "Our sales have more than Biggs said another problem is "I think it's competitive but a
has been slow, doubled since the mall rt- the mall's Iocalion. also complementary," said
"1 don't think the city can af- opened,"Bruckner said. "It's not in a good competitive Green. "We have sheppers that b
ford to wait much longer to see Biggs said whichever direcuon' location in the market in terms of arc loyal to both centers since we I
the current owners do some- the mall takes,it needs more res- malls in the region," he said. don't have a large duplication of t
thing," said Huntington Beach laurams and a movie theater "Huntington Beach is squeezed stores."
F
Irrespective of the fate of the Broadway space, the Mall property is in dire need of a substantial
redevelopment effort to reestablish its viability as a regional retail location. The property owner
is constrained from making major modifications to the Mall structure to accommodate new
tenants due to the Mall's construction. Because the underlying expansive'soils do not support
major buildings or foundations, the Mall had to be constructed on pylons below the surface.
According to City staff estimates, expansion of the Mall outside of the current footprint would
require similar'engineering work that could increase construction.costs by 20%. Due to low
occupancy rates, the Mall cannot generate sufficient resources to fund these additional costs.
Given the Mall owner's limited ability to improve the Mall, the Agency desires to assist the
property owner with a major renovation of the Mall that will reposition the Mall and reestablish
its economic viability.
4 Section A of this Report indicates that the direct and financing costs associated with the Mall
j repositioning and other Project Area commercial rehabilitation/economic development programs
could be $250 million. As discussed in Section E, without the Amendment/Merger, the Agency
will only collect another $75.1 million of nonhousing tax increment revenue. Therefore,
repositioning of the Mall cannot be undertaken by the Agency in the absence of the proposed
Amendment/Merger because the cost of such a repositioning would exceed the amount of
revenues available to the,Agency under the Existing Plan. The Existing Plan also limits the
amount of bonded debt to $26.45 miilion.in'the Huntington Center'Area; the Agency has issued
$12.62 million of bonded debt for the Huntington Center Area to date. Thus, the Existing Plan
permits the issuance of another $1183 million. Because the costs of redeveloping the Mall
exceed the remaining bonding capacity, the Agency will need to increase the amount of bonded
indebtedness that can be incurred for the Huntington Center Area.
Another goal of the Existing Plan for the Huntington Center Area was to correct infrastructure
deficiencies which caused traffic congestion. In 1984, the intersections of Edinger Avenue and
Beach Boulevard, and Center Avenue and the Interstate 405 ramps were operating at or below
minimum standards; these conditions persist today. Traffic operation is measured using a level
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Ine. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 B-7 Report to the City Council
of service ("LOS") scale from LOS A, meaning free flow of traffic, to LOS F, meaning extreme
congestion and delays. As a general criteria, the City's acceptable level of service is LOS C for
arterial links, and LOS D for signalized intersections. According to a traffic study conducted by
the County Environmental Management Agency in 1994, this intersection continues to operate at
LOS E. The Center Avenue/Interstate 405 intersection has become more congested over the last
10 years, decreasing from LOS D in 1984 to LOS E in 1994. Also, Beach Boulevard is currently
operating at LOS P through this portion of the Project Area, according to the Draft
Environmental Impact Report ("DEIR") for the Project prepared by LSA Associates.
Lots on the south side of Edinger Avenue, between the railroad right-of-way and Beach
Boulevard, lack internal circulation and sufficient parking due to mixed ownership. The lack of
integration between these retail and office properties create excessive curb cuts on Edinger
Avenue for ingress and egress. Because vehicles must use Edinger Avenue when traveling to
adjacent stores, traffic on Edinger Avenue is congested. Mixed ownership also poses a barrier to
shared use of parking lots on individual parcels, causing some retail properties to be
underparked. Pursuant to conversations with commercial brokers in the area, lack,of parking, as
well as the underperformance of the Mall, cause prospective tenants to discard the vacant 50,000
square foot retail space as a viable location.
Section A of this Report includes a listing of the on-site and street improvements to improve
traffic circulation in this area. Due to the lack of tax increment revenues, the Agency has not
been able to work with property owners on the south side of Edinger Avenue to construct needed
on- and off-site improvements. Therefore, infrastructure projects have been deferred to the
future. The Plan will allow the Agency to utilize tax increment revenues from other portions of
the Project Area to improve traffic circulation in the Huntington.Center Area. Another benefit of
the Amendment/Merger is the extension of the time period to incur debt. Without the
Amend mentlMerger, the Agency will not be able to incur indebtedness to finance infrastructure
improvements because the Existing Plan prohibits the Agency from incurring debt after
November 1996. The Plan enables the Agency the ability to finance these improvements in the
fixture by extending the period to incur debt to 2014.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
Octoher, 1996 - B-$ Report to the City Council
Oakview Area
The Oakview- Area continues to need redevelopment to address the following conditions that
have not•been eliminated since the Existing,Plan was adopted in 1983:
+ Rampant crime,
• Widespread deterioration of residences. due to poverty, over-crowding, neglect, and
vandalism, and
• Inadequate public infrastructure.
The Redevelopment Plan for the Oakview Redevelopment Project has been amended once since
its adoption. The 1989 Amendment extended the duration of the original redevelopment plan,
established a 12-year period to commence ,eminent domain, and increased the bond and tax
increment financial limits. These amendments provided the Agency with greater capabilities to
enact redevelopment programs in the Oakview Area. Despite these,enhanced capabilities, blight
in the Oakview Area continues to constitute a physical and economic liability on the community
requiring greater redevelopment effort that can only be achieved if_the Agency adopts the
Amendment/Merger.
Crime continues to be a serious problem in the Oakview Area. In a study conducted by the City
Police Department in 1982, the Oakview Area had among the highest crime rates in the City. In
1989, the Police Department again found the Oakview Area to have the highest rate of crime.
' Today,' the Oakview Area continues to be victimized by the highest.crime ,rate in the City.
Exhibit 13-3 is a report on crime in the Project-Area pfepared by the,City's Police Department. In
the May 1996 report, the Oakview Area is identified as having among the City's highest rate of
calls for service of the City's 140 crime reporting districts. RSG's field survey noted that many
residents had installed security bars on all windows. This indicates a perceived public safety
threat' in the Oakview Area, The Amendment/Merger would enable ,the Agency to enhance
public safety in the Project Area through the provision of expanded and improved. police
Rosenow Spevaeek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 B-9' Report to the City Council
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN OUTLINE
1. Goals and Objectives
1.1 Goals and Objectives per Redevelopment Plan
1.2 Five Year Target Goals and Objectives
a) Prioritization of goals and objectives
b) Reasons for inclusion
2. Projects and Expenditures
2.1 Conditions of Blight
a) Summary of previous blight findings (Report to Council)
b) Overview of past projects/programs to eliminate blight
c) Summary of outstanding conditions of blights
d) Identification of locations of blight
2.2 Five Year Target Projects and Programs
a) Description of specific projects and programs
b) Estimate of project and program costs
c) Identification of potential funding sources
d) Prioritization of projects and programs
e) Linkage between blighting conditions and projects/programs
3. Low and Moderate Income Housing Plan
3.1 Five Year Annual Housing Goals
a) Identification of AB 315 annual housing production goals (units to be
developed, rehabilitated, price restricted, assisted)
b) Estimate of number of low/moderate units to be destroyed
c) Identification of replacement housing sites
Technical Appendix A
Cash flow and financing plan for the Agency including identified resources and expenditures,
Housing Set Aside Fund deposits, proposed bonding program, etc.
Technical Appendix B
Cash flow and financing plan for the Low and Moderate Income Housing Set Aside Fund
indicating deposits and expenditures and commitment of "excess surplus" funds.
(This is included for all project areas under "Housing Set-Aside Financing Plan").
4
1
1
REDEVELOPMENT IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1995-2000
Table of Contents
i
I. Outline of Each Implementation Plan
II. Main-Pier..
y ya
III. Huntington Center
IV. Oakview
V. Talbert-Beach
VI. Yorktown-Lake
VII. Housing Set-Aside Financing Plans
3
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF
HUNTINGTON BEACH
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
FORWARD
In October, 1993, the California State Legislature approved the Redevelopment Reform bill
known as Assembly Bill 1290. This new law required Redevelopment Agency's to amend all
existing plans to create uniform standards for the length of redevelopment plans and the time
allowed to incur debt and to collect tax increment. It also required the preparation and
adoption of "Implementation Plans" stating the goals, planned expenditures, housing activities
and blight alleviation planned for the'next five years. The following Implementation Plans
( cover the five redevelopment project areas of'Main=Pier;Huntington'Center, Oakview,
Talbert-Beach, and Yorktown-Lake. '
Y
2
SECTION C
An Implementation Plan that Describes Specific
Goals, Objectives, Projects, and Expenditures for the
Next Five.Years and a Description. of How These
Projects Will Improve or Alleviate Blighting Conditions
On October 17, 1994, the Agency adopted its Five-Year Implementation Plan ("Implementation
Plan") fox the Project Area which sets forth the Agency's specific goals and objectives for the
Project Area, the anticipated programs, projects and expenditures from the year 1995 to 2000,
and an explanation of how these goals, objectives, programs, projects, and expenditures will
eliminate blight and increase and`improve the supply of affordable housing. The Implementation
Plan is consistent with the goals .and objectives of the Plan and will guide,redevelopment
activities to be undertaken by the Plan through the year 2000.
all-
The Implementation Planis included in this Section.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 C-1 Report to the City Council
In many areas of the Main-Pier Area, property values have depreciated in recent years.
According to the County Assessor, 39.1% of the 951 parcels within the Main-Pier Area have
declined in assessed value between 1992-93 and 1995-96. Approximately one-fourth of the
depreciating parcels are located at a newer condominium complex on Pacific Coast Highway. At
this location, the Assessor reduced values of the individual units by as much as 48.2%. Other
areas where depreciation has been an acute problem include the 300, 400, and 600 blocks of Lake
Street, the 400 block of Townsquare Lane, and 6th Street. Overall the Assessor removed
approximately $18,500,000 of assessed value from the roll between 1992-93 and 1995-96.
The decline of values in the Main-Pier Area is, in part, due to a declining level of Agency
activity. Since 1989-90, the Agency has not implemented any housing or nonhousing
redevelopment projects in the Main-Pier Area due to a lack of funds. Since 1995, the Agency
has not had the authority to commence eminent domain activities in the Existing Plan for the
Main-Pier Area. Eminent domain and tax increment financing has played an important role in
the Agency's successful redevelopment projects in the Main-Pier Area. With the adoption of the
Amendinent./Merger, the Agency will have expanded financial and legal capabilities to initiate
new programs and projects to protect property values, renovate and rehabilitate deteriorating
residential and commercial buildings, and redevelop substandard and obsolete properties in the
Main-Pier Area. Section A of this Report contains a detailed listing of the projects and'programs
needed to eliminate blight in the Main-Pier Area.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 I3-26 Report to the City Council
PHOTO B-17
{ +� b -;&:� =
�'._: ....:_..-=:'a' __. .. ,� Lam.�„�L ..•i. ra
u.
•. _ .:
x�,�,y�w. �.;?,r�",�;Ai�`'M"+r �f, l� TY +i #rr t•r
sr a - s ati•• � ' F
-fey P"
Beach/Atlanta center. Note the poor condition of the parking lot and absence of
landscaping.
The Main-Pier Area continues to need improvements to a 70-year old storm drainage system.
Beyond projects facilitated by the Agency on the 100 and 200 blocks of Main Street and the
Waterfront Hotel property on Pacific Coast Highway, the Main-Pier Area's drainage system is
susceptible to failure. In addition,other public infrastructure serving the Main-Pier Area is also
deficient, including water, street, and sewer systems. Section A of this Report contains a listing
of public improvements needed to correct these conditions.
Economic blight is also present in the Main-Pier Area. According to a commercial leasing agent
in the area, older retail space in the Main-Pier Area is currently leasing at rates 60-75% below
newer adjacent retail space on the 100 and 200 blocks of Main Street. These lower lease rates
are indicative of Iocational issues and the lower quality of retail space available in the Main-Pier
Area, Low lease rates cause property values to decline. In comparison, higher lease rates are
being generated within Agency-facilitated redevelopment projects. Additional Agency
investment into the Main-Pier Area could cause some of these older retail uses to recycle and
generate higher lease rates.
Rosenow Spevacek Group,Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 13-25 Report to the City Council
The Main-Pier Area also includes properties along Beach Boulevard, between Atlanta Avenue
and Pacific Coast Highway. A bank and the 76,380 square foot Beach/Atlanta neighborhood
shopping center are located on the southeast corner of Atlanta Avenue and Beach Boulevard.
The Beach/Atlanta center is owned by four different parties; these owners have not coordinated
efforts to maintain and renovate the center. Consequently, the center's facades appear aged and
the store signage lacks consistency. Photos B-16 and B-17 depict the Beach/Atlanta center from
two vantage points. The center needs paint and rehabilitation to update the structure with current
design standards. The parking lot shared by the tenants needs to be resurfaced and restriped, and
the property is virtually devoid of landscaping. Also, a frontage road along Beach Boulevard
complicates access to the Beach/Atlanta center by forcing traffic onto Atlanta Avenue rather than
the higher volume Beach Boulevard. Further south on Beach Boulevard, the Driftwood mobile
home park contains many dilapidated mobile home units.
PHOTO B-16
p: tK" at i
� .7
ti +
Shopping center on Atlanta Avenue and Beach Boulevard. Note the inconsistent facade
treatments and signage.
Rosenow Spevacek Group,Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 13-24 Report to the City Council
xs 4'*° 'i�,l � �o 'i **yy ,.£§3w� , 1• `32 s � —"Y°.. ,' z
US
419" ram' •r
-F •.ter � � 'FC ` '. .�
Mid 1� r.l p�. 4
iji: i
Irk� - t. 1 � �� • {•
all
• I j
I I I i
PHOTO B-13
n.
.s
Abandoned and dilapidated grocery market on 100 block of Main Street.
The southern portion of the Main-Pier Area needs redevelopment to correct incompatible uses.
On the corner of 1 st Street and Walnut Avenue, an aging apartment complex and single-family
dwelling abut a property housing numerous 20-foot high oil storage tanks. The alleyway
between the dwelling units and the oil tank properties is used by residents to gain access to their
property. The small, narrow residential lots do not provide sufficient space between these
incompatible uses. Photos B-14 and B-15 show the relationship of the residential uses and the
oil tank properties.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington'Beach
October, 1996 B-22 Report to the City Canned
PHOTO B-12
x
3
;i
Dilapidated residence at Pecan Avenue and Lake Street.
,One Ailapidated commercial structure remains on the 100 block of Main Street. This building
has beer! vacant for many years. Photo B-13 shows the current physical conditions of this
property. The former grocery store structure has decayed due to neglect and the property lacks
sufficient delivery space needed for contemporary use. Also, the building does not meet seismic
safety codes and has been damaged.by fire.
Rosenow Spevacek Croup,InL Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
,.October, 1996 B-21 Report to the City Council
r
PHOTO B-11
a�fi
Residence on 500 block of Lake Street with deteriorating roof and siding. Note the lack of
a paved driveway and landscaping.
Other dilapidated structures are located on Pecan Avenue, just west of Lake Street. On the
northwest corner of Pecan Avenue and Lake Street, three single-family residences are badly
deteriorated. These units suffer from years of neglect. The conditions present include broken
windows, siding decay, aging roofing material, and trash and debris storage. The units are also
of substandard design; the unit facing an alley has an illegal addition and lacks windows for light
and ventilation. This unit is shown on Photo B-12. Across Pecan Avenue, another single-family
dwellin- needs roof and siding repairs, as well as repainting and landscaping.
Roseno►v Spevacek Croup, Inc. Redevelopment Agency•of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 B-20 Report to the City Council
PHOTO B-9
tiny.
f
s E
Residence of substandard original construction on 400 block of Lake Street. Residential
unit needs reroofing and siding repairs.
PHOTO B-10
4
r ~
I �
Adjacent parcel to Photo 8-9. Note the litter and debris accumulated at the rear of the lot,
and the back of the corrugated metal service bays depicted in Photo B-7.
'sRosenow Spevrrcek Group,,Inc., Redevelopment Agency of the City of 11untinglon Reach
'Oc'lober, 1996 B-19; Report to the City Council
PHOTO B-7
��":§:;ee^;....:?�::r.+arx, ,&'. 3a°::.<�+"�°OaeG�:;:wr�ur ��"'.��..'i.iaiea.�.�r stS�y-�'.aa',u^.a�°'.a�i.age...:mm...P:"_•. a.,.
�i h r ...
M 3z3
:»f
'a
e'&�"�
V�
ANI
of
3
ku
r =�
�d �
Corrugated metal construction of this old garage on Main Street is not consistent with
contemporary design standards.
PHOTO B-8
IN
e
i
4 E.
E
Aging residence on the 40D block of Lake Street.
Rose►tow Spevacek Group,Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 B-18 Report to the City Council
PHOTO B-6
no
mad.°¢
� �
^.y.�6�Yh ��Wd�<
4 9
.': SURFBOARDS-BUNKS-fbltt iul�ufV,41,1 �•
}
1Imp
P ;
.-
�E.
Gas station use on Pacific Coast Highway acquired by the Agency. In order to facilitate
the redevelopment of this parcel, the Agency will need to ensure removal of hazardous
waste.
Properties in the two hundred block area of Main Street, Acacia Avenue, Lake Street,,and Orange
Avenue are still blighted. On Main Street, an old, deteriorating auto service shop is not
compatible with adjacent residential and retail uses. Photo B-7 shows the current condition of
this.property. The repair bays and main structure need roof replacement. The corrugated metal
construction of the service bays is not consistent with contemporary building standards, and does
not provide an adequate noise buffer to adjacent dwellings. Other commercial uses located on
the 500 block of Main Street include a liquor store/residential structure and a restaurant. These
buildings do not reflect architectural and design elements compatible with newer commercial
uses. The two-story liquor store/residential structure also needs paint and facade repairs. The
east side of this block includes a mix of retail and residential uses that are in dire need of
renovation. Dwelling units located at 401, 405, 421, 431, and 435 Lake Street need paint, roof
repairs, landscaping, and maintenance to wood trim and siding. Photos B-8, B-9, and B-10
depict these conditions. Photo B-11 shows a single-family residence located at 533 Lake Street
that is also deteriorated and lacks a paved driveway.
Rosenow Spevacek Group,Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 - 13-17 Report to the City Council
PHOTO B-5
A
m
, y
Same location as Photo B-4. The block wall facade of this structure is cracking due to its
unreinforced construction.
On the 600 and 500 blocks of Pacific Coast Highway, older retail and mixed-use buildings are of
defective design and physical construction. The Agency recently purchased a gas station
property on the corner of Pacific Coast Highway and 6th Street. While the original underground
fuel tanks have been removed, the service islands still remain on site, as shown on Photo B-6.
This property had most recently been used as a surfboard shop. In order to accommodate a reuse
for this property, the Agency will need to facilitate the demolition of this deteriorated structure
and assure proper removal of the hazardous materials left behind by the underground storage
tanks. Within the same two block segment of Pacific Coast Highway, a restaurant structure and a
mixed retail/residential use are of substandard design and dilapidated. The two-story mixed-use
property lacks sufficient restroom facilities for each dwelling unit.
Rosettow Spevaceh Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agettcy of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 B-16 Report to the City Council
PHOTO B-3
3
.. I i
4 4
{ dry - LP¢.g • -j�3 �'..�
~ ggyy
rd.
wn
Dilapidation and decay of residence at'Wa€nut Avenue and 6th Street.
PHOTO B-4
e,3
• .rr
A que RA
Adjoining retail structure to residence in Photo,8-3. The wood siding is rotting due to
deferred maintenance.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 B-15 Report to the City Council
o k,.y
rr Fi
1 ` �
C t t 4}
PHOTO B-2
;tom., q:
9
Multifamily residence on 100 block of Gth Street adjacent to incompatible oil'storage uses.
Across the street, a lot on the corner of Walnut Avenue and 6th Street includes dilapidated
residential and retail buildings. As depicted in Photo B-3, an older single-family structure needs
substantial rehabilitation to repair rotted wood siding and porch, missing windows, and peeling
paint. The same parcel contains two commercial buildings and a two-story multifamily
residence. The two commercial buildings located along Walnut Avenue are also deteriorated due
to neglect and age. These buildings are shown on Photos B-4 and B-S. The physical conditions
present at these locations include rotting siding, missing windows and doors, paint decay, aging
roofs, and wood decay. Also, the block facade of the smaller of the two nonresidential buildings
is severely cracked and is unreinforced. The second floor of the larger commercial building is
apparently used for residential purposes, as is a two-story structure to the rear of the building.
These residential uses are also in very poor condition.
Rosenow Spevaeek Group, Inc. Redevelopr?tent Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
Oetoher, 1996 B-14 Report to the City Council
• Narrow lots under mixed ownership that complicate the ability of the private sector to
acquire and consolidate properties, and
• Antiquated street, water, storm drainage, and sewer systems.
To date, the Agency has initiated many redevelopment programs in the Main-Pier Area to
mitigate these blighting conditions. Unfortunately, this investment has not caused sufficient
private:sector investment in deteriorating properties. The Agency's role in redevelopment has
been substantial because needed redeveloprrient'activities, such as consolidation and assembly of
blighted properties of mixed ownership, are-costlytand complex for the private sector. Because
1
blight persists, the Agency needs to maintain the tools necessary to continue a high level of
participation in the Main-Pier Area. Adoptiom of the Amendment/Merger would further the
Agency's efforts to eliminate blight in the Main-Pier Area by extending the periods to incur debt
and'commence eminent domain,proceedings, and merging the Existing Plans to expand the pool
z
of resources_to undertakelthe Projectan the Main-Pier Area.
Much of the Agency's redevelopment program has focused on the 100 and 200 blocks.of Main
Street; outside of these areas, many commercial and residential structures are deficient. For
example, on the 100 block of 6th Street, a 3-unit multifamily residence lacks landscaping, a
paved driveway, and an adequate buffer from an oil storage tank on an adjoining lot. Photo B-2
depicts the proximity of the oil tank to.the residence. On the same block, a two-story multifamily
residence is deteriorating,due to deferred maintenance. This apartment building needs repainting
and repairs to'weathered eaves.
Roseitoiv Spevacek Group,Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 B-13 Report to the City Council
Another goal of the Existing Plan for the Oakview Redevelopment Project was to improve public
infrastructure and utilities serving the Oakview Area. Since adopting the Existing Plan, the
Agency has completed some street improvements to repair and replace inadequate local roads in
the Oakview Area. However, the Agency has not completed improvements to alley surfaces
north of Mandrell Drive, north of Barton Drive, and in the vicinity of Jacquelyn Lane, Koledo
Circle, Koledo Lane, Queens Lane, Keelson Lane, and Slater Avenue. Further, wheelchair
access ramps are needed to permit disabled persons to safely move through the Oakview Area.
Other public improvement deficiencies include congested traffic on Beach Boulevard and at the
intersection of Warner Avenue/Beach Boulevard. The DEIR classified Beach Boulevard
between Heil Avenue and Slater Avenue as LOS F. The DEIR also measured the evening peak
hour level of service for the intersection of WYrner'Avenue and'Beach;Boulevard. According to
the DEIR, this intersection currently operates at LOS F, and is the most congested'intersection in
the City.
Because of the Oakview Area's small size and limited growth potential, tax increment revenues
within the Oakview Area will not be sufficient to meet the costs of these improvements. By
merging the Constituent Projects to expand the pool of funds. available to carry out these
improvements, the Amendment/Merger will permit the Agency to fund infrastructure
improvements to streets, utilities, storm drains, and other facilities that serve the Oakview Area.
Main-Pier Area
The 336-acre Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area was established approximately 14 years
ago to enable the Agency to correct numerous physical and economic conditions in the City's
downtown. Despite the Agency's best efforts, many of these blighting conditions persist,
including:
• Deteriorating, aging, and seismically unsafe structures, including commercial
buildings and housing units,
Ro.seuow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agenq of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 B-12 Report to the City Council
professional office uses in the Oakview Area which abut these residential uses have depreciated,
including parcels located on Beach Boulevard and Warner Avenue. Overall, according to the
County Auditor-Controller, - assessed values in the Oakview Area have dropped from
$102,610,236 in 1990-91 to $63,352,500 in 1995-96, representing a decline of $39,257,736, or
38.3%.
According to a member of the real estate community who owns property in the Oakview Area,
two factors contribute to depressed values in the Oakview Area:
+ Demographic Character - Many of the dwelling units in the Oakview Area are
occupied by large households. Many dwelling units are overcrowded; these conditions
r '}, cause a higher than normal rate of wear and tear on the property.
+ High Level of Absentee Ownership-Historically, the Oakview Area has had a higher
proportion of absentee ownership than the rest of the City; generally, these absentee
r
owners tended to neglect their properties in the Oakview Area. As the value of these
neglected properties declined, the`property owners defaulted on the underlying
mortgages and the lenders became` the holders of the property title. These REO
(lender-owned) properties were sold at below-market prices to other absentee owners
that have not upgraded the units.
These factors are causing some property owners to abandon efforts to upgrade their properties.
The property owner with whom RSG spoke expressed frustration with the Agency's inability to
make an investment commensurate with the needs of the Oakview Area and indicated a desire to
sell his ;property, due to these circumstances. The Amendment/Merger will give the Agency a
longer period to incur debt within the Oakview Area and the ability to shift funds from other
Constituent Project Areas to the Oakview Area; these amendments will enhance the Agency's
ability to finance rehabilitation programs to improve dilapidated structures and fund housing
programs to expand homeownership opportunities for very low, low, and moderate income
residents.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 B-11 Report to the City Council
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project
Report to the City Council
CHANGES IN ANNUAL ASSESSED VALUES
IN SUBAREA NO. 2 OF PROJECT AREA
.. ..........
as
:X
F771
El akview Area
sm
s.:
1991- 2 1993-9 L-164-95 19954
®City
13 County
CU
'A
Area
FE100akvieMwAre in City OC y u nt
Cl)
smi
mor
as
:-2
Mr
Source: Orange County Auditor Controller
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc.
AV Change Councrpt 10/M96 1 of 1
�y11.4 Y
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
`'r INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION
t�
TO: David Biggs, Director FROM: hin Moore, Dept. Analyst Sr.
Economic Developinent Budget &Research
SUBJECT: Crime Statistics for Redevelop- DATE: May 16, 1996
meat Project Areas
To determine the incidences of crime for the specified redevelopment areas, a comparison of calls
for service by reporting districts (RD)was conducted from January 1, 1991 through_1994.
The reporting districts for the appropriate redevelopment projects are as follows:
Reporting District Redevelopment
242 Huntington Center
272 Oak-view Neighborhood
292 Talbert-Beach
431 Yorktown-Lake
451 „ Main -Pier
Huntington Beach is comprised of 140 reporting districts. The following matrix shows a
percentage of the total number of reporting districts with fewer calls for service than the four in
question.
Reporting District 1991 1992 1993 1994
242 2,158(92%) 2,102(90%) 2,221 (91%) 2,298 (890%)
272 5,923 (99%) 6,012(99%) 6,319 (990/.) 5,836 (99%)
292 1,382 (82%) 1,514(83%) 1,712 (84%) 2,038 (86%)
431 18,150 (99%) 18,161 (99%) 19,770 (99%) 17,869 (99%)
461 1,566 (86%) 1,920 (88%) 1,935 (870/6) 2,096 (88%)
As you can see, RD's 272 and 431 have the highest number of calls in the City. With the
exception of RD 431, these calls for service figures are very representative of workloads in the
respective redevelopment areas. Since the police department is located in RD 431,many desk
reports are filed with this RD number which reveals an erroneous calls for service figure.
If you have further questions regarding this study, please contact me at 5943.
EXHIBIT B-3
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Crime Statistics for Project Area
facilities as set forth in Section A of this Report. Expanded police services will be an essential
component of the City's efforts to reducing crime in the Oakview Area.
According to a housing conditions survey conducted by the City for its 1996 General Plan
Update, many of the structures in the Oakview Area are deteriorated or deficient. Multifamily
units at 17431 Queens Lane need rehabilitation and repairs to damaged sidings, weathered roofs,
deteriorating walkways and driveways, and old fencing. These same conditions were present at
17321 and 17432 Koledo Lane, 7751 and 7791 Slater Avenue, 7771, 7842, and 7851 Cypress
Avenue, 17192 Ash Street, and 7801, 7822, and 7832 Sycamore Avenue. The housing
conditions survey noted that another 159 units, located throughout the Oakview Area, were
deficient and need repairs. Vandalism was also present at many dwelling units. For,example,
residences on Queens Lane were tagged by graffiti vandals.
Since adopting the Existing Plan for the Oakview Area in 1983, the Agency has employed
housing set-aside monies, federal grants, and other resources to correct dilapidated conditions in
the Oakview Area. As the City's housing survey indicates, these efforts have not been sufficient
because many dwelling units remain in poor condition, while other units rehabilitated by the
Agency have reverted back to their original deteriorated state.
These physical conditions are a result of negligence, crime, and depreciating property values in
the Oakview Area. Exhibit B-4 identifies the annual changes in assessed values of the Oakview
Area, City, and County since 1990-91, as reported by the County Auditor-Controller. As shown
on Exhibit B-4, assessed values in the Oakview Area have consistently declined over the last five
years, while assessed values in the City and County have remained stable. This contrast suggests
that there are unique circumstances in the Oakview Area that cause values to be depressed. An
analysis of the 1992-93 and 1995-96 secured assessment rolls from the County Assessor
indicates that 48, or 25.8%, of the 196 parcels in the Oakview Area experienced a drop in value
during this period. These properties that declined in value include medium- and high-density
residential uses on Ash Street, Oak Lane, Mandrell Drive, Queens Lane, Jacquelyn Lane, Cypress
Avenue, Koledo Lane, Barton Drive, Slater Avenue, and Elm Street. Also, retail and
Rosenow Spevacek Grorrp, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 B-10 Report to the City Council
t. y MAIN - PIER
r,
. REDEVELOPMENT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
1995 - 2000
(ITY DT HUATIH6TOH BEACH
MAIN-PIER
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
INTRODUCTION
In October, 1993, the California State Legislature approved the Redevelopment Reform bill
known as Assembly Bill 1290. This new law required Redevelopment Agency's to amend all
existing plans to create uniform standards for the length of redevelopment plans and the time
allowed to incur debt and to collect tax increment. It also required the preparation and
adoption of "Implementation Plans" stating the goals, planned expenditures, housing activities
and blight alleviation planned for the next five years.
This implementation plan for the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project area complies with the
provisions of Section 33490 et seq. of AB1290. This plan is intended to provide policy
direction for the Agency activities during the'ensuing five years. The plan is organized as
follows and contains:
I
♦ Five year goals (prioritized), potential programs and projects with costs and funding
sources identified.
♦ Blight findings from the original Redevelopment Plan, past projects to eliminate blight,
outstanding conditions of blight and a map of these conditions.
♦ Five year housing goals and annual production goals, estimate of units to be destroyed and
identification of replacement sites.
♦ Five year strategy to alleviate blight.
♦ Appendices A & B identifying cash flow for redevelopment and housing programs.
6
MAIN-PIER
1. Goals and Objectives .
1.1 Goals and Objectives per Redevelopment Plan
General Objectives of Redevelopment Plan
"In creating the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency, the City
Council of the City of Huntington Beach declared its desire to improve,
upgrade, and revitalize all areas of the City and in particular those areas
within the City which have become blighted because of deterioration,
disuse and economic, physical and social maladjustments. As a part of the
City's ongoing redevelopment efforts, the Huntington Beach
Redevelopment Agency has prepared this Plan for the Main-Pier
Redevelopment Project Area.
Accordingly, the objectives of this Redevelopment Project are as follows:
+ Eliminating blighting influences, including deteriorating buildings,
incompatible and uneconomic land uses, inadequate public
improvements, obsolete structures, and other physical, economic and
social deficiencies; improve the overall appearance of streets, parking
areas and other facilities, public and private; and assure that all
buildings are safe for persons to occupy.
+ Encouraging existing owners, businesses and tenants within the Project
Area to participate in redevelopment activities.
+ Providing adequate parcels and required public improvements so as to
encourage new construction by private enterprise, thereby providing
the City of Huntington Beach with an improved economic base.
+ Mitigating development limitations which have resulted in the lack of
proper utilization of the Project Area to such an extent that it
constitutes a serious physical, social, and economic burden on the
community which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or
alleviated by private enterprise acting alone.
♦ Providing adequate public improvements, public facilities, open spaces,
and utilities which cannot be remedied by private or governmental
action without redevelopment.
{
7
♦ Providing construction and employment opportunities in the
development of these facilities and by providing employment
opportunities in the operation of the proposed commercial and
recreational facilities.
♦ Implementing the construction or reconstruction of adequate streets,
curbs, gutters, street lights, storm drwns, and other improvements as
necessary to assist development of the Project Area to conform to the
General Plan as a master-planneddevelopment and to correct existing
environmental deficiencies. ,
♦ Establishing development criteria and controls for the permitted uses
within the Project Area in accordance with modern and competitive
development practices, thus assuring the highest design standards and
environmental quality.
♦ Providing for relocation assistance and benefits to Project Area
residents which may be displaced, in accordance with the provisions of
the Community Redevelopment Law and the government code of the
State of California.
To obtain the objectives of this Plan as set forth, the Agency is authorized to
undertake most or all of the following implementing actions:
+ Acquisition of property.
♦ Participation by owners and tenants in the redevelopment project.
♦ Relocation assistance to displaced residential occupants as required by
law.
♦ Development of adequate parking, landscaping, public improvements
and facilities.
f '
8
x
♦ Demolition, clearance of properties acquired, and site preparation.
♦ Other actions as appropriate, including, but not limited to, actions to
assist property owners and tenants in the improvement of their
properties to carry out the objectives of the redevelopment plan.
♦ Assist in providing financing for private and public development in the
Project Area."
9
1.2 Five Year Target Goals and Objectives
1.2(a) Prioritization of Goals and,Objectives
Project Area Size: 336 Acres. '
Adoption Date: September 1982
Amended: September 1983
Life of Plan: 35 Years �~
Tax Increment Cap: $15,250,000 annually
PROJECT GOALS FOR 1995-2000
Achieve City and California Coastal Commission approval of Downtown
Specific Plan, Parking Master Plan and In-Lieu Parking Fee.
In conjunction with developer, create development scheme for next phase of The
Waterfront and seek approvals.
Encourage private development.
Encourage development of 4th Block East.
Encourage development of 6th Block East site.
Prepare Master Plan for Huntington Beach Company owned site at Pacific Coast
Highway and First Street.
Commence construction of:
Main-Pier Phase II (Coultrup)
Third Block West
�-South Beach Improvements
)-r Pier Plaza
' ,.New Maxwell's Restaurant
Complete sale of Town Square Commercial.
Continue to pursue redevelopment of Southeast corner of Main Street and
Walnut Avenue (Standard Market).
Investigate owner interest in renovation of Atlanta-Beach shopping center.
( Cooperate and assist in the leasing of new commercial and office space.
10
4
Corr plete renovation`and leasing of 438 Main Street.
Prepare plan to meet housing requirements (see "Housing Set-Aside
Implementation" section).
1.2(b) Reasons for Inclusion
These goals originated in the Agency's most recent Biennial Report published in
December, 1993 and have been subjected to public review and approval by the
Agency. Together they represent what can reasonably be accomplished within the
period of this plan.
2. Projects and Expenditures
2.1 Conditions of Blight
2.la Summary of Previous Blight Findings
(from "Report to City Council", September, 1982 PP 34)
"A. Approximately ten percent of the lots in this area (particularly along
Second and Third Streets) are developed as residential.. This is.
inconsistent with the existing zoning in the area which is C3, '
General Business District. The number of parking spaces for these
residential units is inadequate to satisfy parking requirements of
current residential zoning standards (i.e., Oldtown Specific Plan).
Some of these units do not meet the current Building Security
Provisions of the City's Ordinance Code which requires enclosed
garages for multiple dwellings. With respect to the existing
commercial units in the area, off-street parking areas are not
landscaped and screened in accordance with the standards of Article
979. Structural fire protection is lacking because of openings in
some of the structures at the zero lot line. There is considerable
dilapidation of the commercial and residential structures.
f B. The condition of structures, including the conditions of the
municipal pier, economic disuse, irregular subdivision, fragmented
ownerships and lack of capital improvements make the property
unsuitable for development by private enterprise acting alone.
These negative conditions can only be dealt with by the positive
powers of a redevelopment agency.
A more detailed description of each of the conditions contributing
to growing blight in the area follows.
3.1 Condition of Buildings and Structures
According to the Inventory of Existing Conditions, Downtown
Planning. Area. December, 1975, approximately 15 percent of the
structures are beyond reasonable repair, 33 percent are in need of
major repair, and 31 percent need minor repairs.
According to the Seismic Resistant Capabilities of Existing
Buildings for the City of Huntington Beach, February 8, 1980,
approximately 50 percent of the structures of the two blocks facing
Main Street are considered to be excessive hazards.
` ' 12
According to the Structural Survey of the Huntington Beach
Municipal Pier, completed in August 1979:
The current conditions of the main structural members in the older
portion of the pier is unacceptable. 'The reinforcing steel has
completely oxidized in some areas and the presence of large cracks
in most of the structural members indicates that this condition is
widespread throughout the first 57 bents in the pier.
The middle portion of the pier was virtually reconstructed in 1970
when the wooden deck structure was replaced by reinforced
concrete joist and deck. The existing pilings that were not replaced
in the 1970 rework are now beginning to show signs of
deterioration, as evidenced by longitudinal cracks and rust stains.
The end portion of the pier, consisting of wood pilings, cp beams
and deck, was found to be relatively undamaged. Minor repairs,
consisting of replacing hardware that shows excessive corrosion,
would be recommended.
3.2 Economic Disuse and Depreciated Values
The intensity of development within the Main-Pier Area is much
less than other beachfront areas such as Peter's Landing, Newport
Beach, Dana Point, Marina Del Rey and the Los Angeles/Long
Beach Harbor Areas. Because of the quality of available space,
rents are lower than they could be and lower than other more
modern facilities with similar locational characteristics.
Many studies have concluded that this area is not living up to its
full economic potential, The most recent summary, Downtown and
Pier Revitalization, indicated that "the first significant effort to
upgrade Downtown began in 1965 when the City contracted with
the Urban Land Institute to assess land use and economic issues on
a City-wide basis and make recommendations on the future
direction to be followed. The Urban Land Institute Study
concluded that the City's economic future lay in improving its
"Front Window" (the ocean front) and revitalizing the Downtown
area.
l
13
3.3 Irregular Subdivision and Multiple Ownership
Within the Main-Pier Redevelopment Area, approximately one-
third of the-lots.are 25 feet in:width: These narrow lots can be
found in each of the five blocks north of Pacific Coast Highway.
There are over forty different individual ownerships within the five
blocks of the downtown area within the Main-Pier Project. This
fragmented pattern of existing ownership prevents the development
of any modern retail, office or residential mixed-use development.
The Downtown Specific Plan, which is.currently in draft form,
indicates that the subject blocks north of Pacific Coast Highway
should be consolidated for new development.
3.4 Lack of Public Improvements
The Draft Downtown SMifc Plan indicates that the Main-Pier
Area is deficient in adequate water improvements; that sewer
facilities, while adequate today,. are 70 years old and may be a
problem in the near term future; that circulation improvements are
necessary to relieve congestion on Pacific Coast Highway; that
parking facilities are inadequate; and that the Huntington Pier is in
need of major repair.
3.5 Flooding
In 1979, L.D. King and Associates prepared a Master Plan of
Drainage for the City. This plan identified serious deficiencies in
the downtown and town lot areas which include portions of four of
the city's 34 drainage districts. These deficiencies are not primarily
in the project area itself, but reflect a more widespread problem in
the townlot area adjacent to the project area.
3:6 Stagnant of Improper Utilization
As documented in previous sections, the existing mixed land uses
have changed very little in the last twenty or more years, and the
structures are continuing to age. The existing land uses are well
below their economic.potential.
3.7 Increased Crime Rates
According to the Police Department, the crime rates in the project
are substantially higher than average reflecting one of the highest
rates within the City."
14
2,1(b) Overview of Past Projects to Eliminate Blight
♦ The new pier was completed July, 1992.
• Plan for beach improvements completed (parking; landscape, lighting,
concessions, restrooms, bike/pedestrian paths).
♦ New plan for Maxwell's Restaurant and Pier Plaza prepared.
+ Improvements in most sections of Main Street have been completed including
paving, sidewalk textures, pedestrian crossings, bollards, landscape lighting and
water features.
♦ Consolidation of parcels, relocation, demolition and construction for Pierside
Pavilion theaters, restaurants, retail and office totaling 90,000 square feet and
Pier Colony: 130 condominiums.
♦ Clearance, relocation and construction for Main Promenade, a 32,000 square
foot retail center and a 830 space public parking garage.
♦ Acquisition of approximately 80% of full block site for Third Block West,
project clearance and relocation on Agency owned parcels.
♦ Financial assistance for rehabilitation or new construction of buildings within the
Demonstration Block (Second Block West) to eliminate seismic hazards and
modernize.
Construction of alley improvements within Demonstration Block (Second Block
West) including undergrounding of utilities, landscape, street furniture, and
water feature.
• Clearance, relocation and financial assistance to Oceanview Promenade--a mixed
retail/office building of 47,000 square feet (in First Block West).
• Approval of Owner Participation Agreement for new construction on two block
site: Main-Pier Phase II (Coultrup) 40,OW square feet commercial with 80
residential units.
• Site consolidation, clearance, street abandonment, relocation and construction of
Town Square project was completed including 10,000 square feet of commercial
space and 89 residential units. .
15
• Acquisition, relocation of mobile homes and financial assistance to developer
was provided to allow construction of 296 room Waterfront Hilton Beach
Resort.
♦ Acquisition of 10 mobile homes each year to clear'the Driftwood Mobile Home
Park for future phases of The Waterfront continues. ,
♦ Acquisition and remodeling of vacant office building to become Municipal Art
Center
f
15A
2.1 (c) Summary of Outstanding Conditions of Blight
A. Substandard housing conditions present.
B. Deteriorated, unsafe, vacant/abandoned buildings present.
C. Substandard lots and multi-ownerships predominate.
D. Marginal retail uses remain.
E. Commercial and office lease rates are below standards of balance of the
community and region. '
F. Public improvements (streets, alleys; Pacific Coast Highway capacity, water
and sewer and overhead utilities) are aged and inadequate.
G. hazardous materials and oil operations inhibit redevelopment.
H. Flood protection is inadequate.
I. Beach improvements (parking, landscape, lighting, restrooms, and
bike/pedestrian paths) are outdated and inadequate:
4
J. Beach concessions are outdated and too small.
K. Maxwell's restaurant is outmoded, in physical disrepair, blocks views, and
lacks meeting and banquet space.
L. New pier lacks new public safety facilities (lifeguard tower), restrooms, and
concessions.
M. Pier entry creates auto/pedestrian conflict, blocks views, lacks design
statement.
N. Level of police resources at a level higher than the standard prevalent in the
balance of the community.
O. Economic Blight: Area does not contribute significantly to the city's tax base.
16
N
OO = a
OO - o
___IuaU as L�.]
"#<<, :, ' 'yr. .�ssEss•s
a a00a as as as a00a as
";st f�'' "`•�s't..z: O ss#�s•,' %#`,s ,ts{s:
iss is <s; 3, f#y"tr<:# sf'
as as as as as as as as as as a
a � O ns,/ s's,f`off'• %s �s x s"ir' s y
a � � sf{ f 's ��: •� -�' #��r;s,Sss��;�'�:s###:f,�i.s>. s#"' h's # s ,r l ��y#
ss ,# � s s�s�1#i ' �''sr,,'�""•tic's'#�y' .s ' S's`f` r# , ' ' ,sz.�E:
#i% s 'tz s' ` r � f : ts�`•ss#':• `'/' ftzY y ''s.
a as as as as as as as
as
as as as as a �
�� � 0�0 0 0 CI C]O C� "s`<' :i: •� sK#�.f#;,rr$� ���"s,t!, ,raft, '� � ,. _ � ,�:fit #' ;��",
r ss�stssszfz<zzs> : ;>s'siz,'s'{zziz.nss:t'sy>zsi,z,'rr ,s'rcz•zr:zit{s fs•'t tr: s.< ':#rs# ,.#s,#,;.. £' s,.>,�::
fhi#;zs zss<i�;:�..s,,:,,:.,>r,,,..sssssssi{s,i.::si;,s's>sss;�st#:z:",»:s,,,;,:�,,,::.:,<..rs»,##;:ss;'ss�::,,,rs» �tp5;; ,1„.,J 3 r�,r"s:fs`. ,:s •�sii##ns•r�'s:.s:,r.
.,.. ::.... :::.,.....,,..,...... .. ..:.........-..,......_- �fS'ftiSf::fS "fr..S
''?/./:. ::FS;:SSS,%i��ff: yl;:G�ryL-'� ,r,'u.»' `�.�•,S
#SS .,G,• ,{SaSistf56S 'K,
S;S, •,5,: .<.St„ .#, s{r. 'a' S+S•' 6:SSSft f.f :f#tsffssss„
#iCXs�s�###;s�#.'##r..:s;##�>
a '
f{{{5- 0#{j Areas of outstanding blight.
2.2 (a-d) Five Year Target Projects and Programs
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)
ams/Projects Estimated Funding Priority Blight*
Costs Source -C1-3} Addressed
: 1. Achieve City and California Nominal City 1 B,C,D
Coastal Commission General Fund
approval of Downtown
Specific PIan, Parking
Master Plan and In-Lieu
Parking Fee.
2. In conjunction with 100,000 T.I. 1 A,B,F,G,F,O,
developer, create
development scheme
for next phase of The
Waterfront and seek
approvals.
3. Encourage Private Unknown T.I. 2 B,C,D,F,G,N,O
Development/Redevelopment.
ncourage development of 40,000 T.I. 3 A,B,C,D,F,G,N,O
nth Block East.
5. Encourage development of 3.75M SAS/Developer I A,C,F,G,O
6th Block East.
6. Prepare Master Plan for 50,000 T.I./Developer 2 F,G,O
Huntington Beach Company
owned site at PCH and Ist Street.
7. Commence construction of: ,
- Main-Pier Phase II (Coultrup) 1.$M T.I./Developer 1 B,C,D,E,F,G,O
- Third Block West 1$M T.I./Developer I B,C,D,E,F,G,O
- South Beach Improvements 7M Unknown 2 I,1
- Pier Plaza 3.5M Unknown 2 L,M
- New Maxwell's Restaurant 4.5M Developer 2 K,M
8. Complete sale of Town Square None NIA 1 E,O
Commercial.
9 Continue to pursue redevelop- Unknown T.I. 2 B,C,D,E,F,O
gent of southeast corner of
Main Street (Standard market
et al).
is
2.2 (a-d) Five Year Target Projects and Programs (Continued)
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)
Programs/Projects Estimated Funding Priority Blight`
Costs sources 11-3) Addressed
10. Investigate owner Nominal T.I 3 C,D,E,O
interest in renovation
of Atlanta-Beach
shopping center.
11. Cooperate and assist Nominal T.I. 2 E,O
in the leasing of new
commercial and office
space.
12. Complete renovation Nominal T.I. 2 E,D
and leasing of
438 Main Street.
l' Prepare plan'to meet- Nominal T.I. I A,C,F,O
housing requirements
(see "Housing Set-Aside
Implementation" section).
TI = Tax Increment
SAS = Set Aside
NA = Not Applicable
r -
ti
;fer to Section 2. 1(c) Summary of Outstanding Conditions of Blight.
19
3.0 Low and Moderate Income Housing Plan
. 3.1 Five Year Annual Housing Goals
3.1(a) Identification of AS 315 Annual Housing Production Goals*
PROPOSEDICONr1'RACTED PR07ECTS- All Units are Assisted
Date
Expected Units R UM Regd. UNI Provided VL R_egd. VL Provided
Third Block West 1997 6a 6 33 A 0
The Waterfront
Residential 1.996-2000 639 58 0 38 0
Main-Pier Phase U 1996 82 7 0 5 0
* The AB 315 Report for all project areas is included in the Housing Set-Aside Section.
20
_ 3.1(b) Estimation of Number of Low/Moderate Units to be Destroyed
and
3.1(c) Identification of Replacement Housing Sites
Main-Pier Project Area:
Destroyed:
Units Low Verb Low
Huntington Shores MH Park (PCH) -21 ,, , 710
Huntington Bay Shore (430 Lake Street) -1 -1 0
Pierside & Pier Colony (200 PCH) -19 ;2 -7
Main Promenade (200 Main Street East) -25 -24 0
Town Square (400 Block Main West) -4 -4 0
Driftwood (21462 PCH) -76 -8 -25
Main-Pier Phase 11 (500 PCH) -8 -1 -6
Planned Replacement Units:
Five Points Senior Villas 48 8 32
Main-Pier Phase II (Ronald Road) 4 4 0
313 11th Street 9 0 9
93 : .. .. . ' 38 .
21
Ten Year/Life of Plan Housing Program
i e
t
The estimated residential capacity of the Main-Pier Project Area is approximately 1600 new
units, of which 1100 remain to be built. The Agency may use tax increment, housing bonds,
other local, federal or state programs to finance these units. Sites for the required fifteen
percent production units (240 units) will likely be within the project area and may include
mixing production units with market rate housing.
Over the remaining life of the plan, it may be possible that as many as 100 additional existing
units may be destroyed. These units will be replaced within the project area within the 1100
unit capacity for new development.
l .
22
f a
1,
MAIN-PIER TECUMCAL APPENDIX A
23
I I
I
MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
CASH PLOW ANALYSIS 8�30/94
Base Ana"4
1995196 1996197 1997196 1998199 1999100 Total Souroes Goals&0Explanation
EST CASH BALANCE,PRIOR YEAR 668,467 908,358 1,021,508 1,525,954 2,058,550
INCOME
Tax Increment(100%) 2,350,000 2,400,000 2,450,000 2,5D0,000 2,550,000 12,250,000
Interact 0 0 0 0 0 0
T,0,T.(Waterfront) 525,000 551,250 578,813 807,753 638,141 2.WO,958
AbdelmutiLoan 333,555 333,555 333,555 333,555 '333,555 1,607,775
RLM Ground Lease 253,834 253,834 253,834 253,634 253,634 1,269,170
Lease Payments(438 Meln) 19,200 0 0 0 0 19,200
Land Sale(favor Sq.) 54,000 54.000 54,000 54,DD0 54,000 270,000
TOTAL INCOME 3,635,589 3,502,639 3,670,202 3,749,142 3,829,530 18,377.101 .
EXPENSES
Existing Bond Debt 1,176,W5 1,175,865 1,180,985 1,179,585 1,179,585 5,891,725 Tax Ina. Econ.Lbv. Project Area Admin.
Huntington National Bank We 100,000 95,000 00,000 90,000 -90,000 465,000 Tax Ino, Eoon.Dev, Project Area Admin,
City Debt 450,000 450,000 450,000 450,000 450,000 2,254,000 Tax Ina Econ.Dev. Project Area Admin.
N T.O.T.Reimb(Waterfront) 0 0 0 0 0 Tax ino. Soon.Dev. Project Area Admin.
p Operating 171,960 180,558 189,586 199,065 209,016 M.188 Tax Ino. Egon.Day. Project Area Admin.
Operating Admin Pardon(30%) 191,203 200,763 210,801 221,341 232,408 1,058,617 Tax Ino. Eoon,Dev. Project Area Admin.
Legal ServlOes 200,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 600,D00 Tax Ina. Econ,Dev. Project Area Admin.
Legal Sendoa Admin(30%) 23,370 23,370 23,370 23,370 23,370 116,850 Tax Ino. Eoon.Dev. Project Area Admin,
Buslneaa De"Iopment(30%) 67,260 0.133 69,014 89,904 90,603 445,114 Tax Ino. Eom Dev. Project Area Admin.
Captts,l Pro)atts:
Funded in
Third Bk>ck West Prior Yeam 0 0 0 0 0 Tax Ino. Eoon.Day, Eliminate Blight
Funded in
TBW$Me Remedlation Prior Yeam 0 0 0 0 0 Tax Ino, Econ.Dev, Eliminate Blight
Town Square Parking 0 270,000 0 0 270,000 Tax Ino. Ecom Dev. Eliminate Slight
Dmitwood$uy%x" 800,000 800,000 832,000 885,280 899,891 4,187,171 Tax Ino, Egon.Oev. Buy Coaches
Abdelmutl Rerd SubsYd&Iso. 96,000 98,D00 0 0 0 192,000 Tax Ina. Eoon.Day. Eliminate Blight
TOTAL EXPENSES 3,295,698 3,472,489 3,165,756 3,218,548 3,275,076 16,434,585
NET INCOME 239,891 113,150 504,445 630,598 554,454 1,942,537
160 EST CASH BALANCE, END DFYEAR 909,2S$. t,b"4Fs �:. i;d26,964, ::': Z,�td;dbbEd
MAIN-PIER
TECHNICAL APPENDIX �B
SET-ASIDE FINANCING PLAN
(See Housing Section)
25
HUNTINGTON CENTER
REDEVELOPMENT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
1995 - 2000
(ITY OF HUNTIN6TON BEACH
26
HUNTINGTON CENTER
D"LEM ENTATION PLANS
INTRODUCTION
In October, 1993, the California State Legislature approved the Redevelopment Reform bill
known as Assembly Bill 1290. This new law required Redevelopment Agency's to amend all
existing plans to create uniform standards for the length of redevelopment plans and the time
allowed to incur debt and to collect tax increment. It also required the preparation and
adoption of "Implementation Plans" stating the goals, planned expenditures, housing activities
and blight alleviation planned for the next five years.
This is the implementation plan for the Huntington Center Redevelopment Project area and
contains:
♦ Five year goals (prioritized), projects with costs and funding sources identified.
♦ Blight findings from the original,Redevelopment Plan, past projects to eliminate blight,
outstanding conditions of blight acid�a map of these conditions.
♦ Five year housing goals and annual production goals, estimate of units to be destroyed and
identification of replacement sites.
♦ Five year strategy to alleviate blight.
♦ Appendices A & B identifying cash flow for redevelopment and housing programs.
27
HUNTINGTON CENTER
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
1. Goals and Objectives
1.1 Goals and Objectives per Redevelopment Plan
General Objectives of Redevelopment Plan
"In creating the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency, the City
Council of the City of Huntington Beach declared its desire to improve,
upgrade, and revitalize all areas of the City and in particular those areas
within the City which have become blighted because of deterioration,
disuse and economic, physical and social maladjustments. As a part of the
City's ongoing redevelopment efforts, the Huntington Beach
Redevelopment Agency has prepared this Plan for the Main-Pier
Redevelopment Project Area.
Accordingly, the objectives of this Redevelopment Project are as follows:
t
♦ The elimination of environmental deficiencies including among others
aging, deteriorating and poorly maintained structures, relocation of
utilities, modification and improvements to the onsite and offsite
circulation, and increased and improved parking.
♦ The replanning, redesign, and development of underutilized areas.
♦ The elimination and mitigation of existing and anticipated visual,
economic, physical, social, and environmental blight within the Project
Area.
♦ The rehabilitation, recycling, and development of property within a
creative, coordinated land use pattern in the Project Area consistent
with the goals, policies, objectives, standards, guidelines, and
requirements as set forth in the adopted General Plan and Zoning
Ordinance.
♦ The implementation of techniques to mitigate blight characteristics
resulting from exposure to highway and public right-of-way corridor
activity affecting adjacent properties within the Project Area.
28 '
1
I
i
♦ Beautification activities to eliminate:those forms of blight including,
but not limited to, visual blight,in order to encourage community
identity.
♦ The encouragement, promotion, and assistance in the development and
expansion of local commerce.
♦ Providing construction and employment opportunities in the
development of these facilities and by providing employment
opportunities in the operation of the proposed new commercial
facilities.
4 -
♦ Mitigating development li"irritations which'result'in the lack of'proper
utilization of the Project Area of'such an extent that it constitutes a
physical, social, and economic burden on the community which cannot
reasonably be expected to be feversed or alleviated by private
enterprise acting alone.
♦ To provide for affordable housing as-requited by county, region, or
state law and requirements, as necessary and desirable, consistent with
the goals and objectives of the community, its General Plan, and
Housing Element.
♦ To encourage the coordination; cooperation, and assistance of county,
state, and federal agencies as may be deemed necessary to ensure that
projects undertaken by this Agency are implemented to their fullest and
most practical extent.
♦ The achievement of a physical enviro'ninent reflecting a high Ievel of
concern for architectural and urban design principles deemed important
by the community.
♦ To encourage community involvement and citizen participation in the
adoption of policies, programs and projects so as to ensure that the
Redevelopment Plan is'implemented in accordance-with the objectives
and goals of the Genei-al Plan.
• To provide a procedural and financial mechanism by which.the Agency
can assist, complement, and coordinate public and public and private
development, redevelopment, revitalization, and enhancement of the
community.
29
♦ To provide'a procedural and financial mechanism by which the Agency
can assist, complement, and coordinate public and public and public
and private development, redevelopment, revitalization, and
enhancement of the community.
♦ Provide for relocation assistance and benefits to Project Area
businesses in the event displacement is necessary, in accordance with
the provisions of the community redevelopment law and the
government code of the State of California.
To obtain the objectives of this Plan as set forth, the Agency is authorized
to undertake most or all of the following implementing actions:
♦ Acquisition of property.
♦ Participation by owners and tenants in the redevelopment project.
♦ Relocation assistance to displaced occupants as required by law.
♦ Development of adequate parking, landscaping, public improvements
and facilities.
( ♦ Demolition clearance of properties acquired, and site preparation.
♦ Other actions as appropriate, including, but not limited to, actions to
assist property owners and tenants in the improvement of their
properties to carry out the objectives of the redevelopment plan.
♦ Assist in providing financing for private and public development in the
Project Area."
30
1.2 Five Year Tairget Goals and Objectives `
1.2{a) Prioritization of Goals and Objectives
Project Area Size: .160 Acres
Adoption Date: November 1984 .
Life of Plan: 35 Years
Tax Increment Cap: $84.5 million
PROJECT GOALS FOR 1995-2000
In conjunction with owner, prepare a market and development strategy for the
Huntington Beach Mall.
Complete construction of:
Center Avenue improvements and traffic signal
Readerboard sign landscaping
Complete Public Utilities Commission review of Gothard-Hoover connection,
complete plans, formulate a funding plan and begin construction.
Seek adoption,of Edinger Avenue Specific Plan of Street Alignment.
Complete I-405 Cloverleaf landscaping.
Complete Mall pole sign. -
Complete plans for Modification of 1-405 off-ramp for access to mall.
Complete plans and construct McFadden 1-405 overpass widening.
31
1.2(b) Reasons for Inclusion
These goals originated in the Agency's most recent Biennial Report published in
December, 1993 and have been subjected to public review and approval by the
Agency. Together they represent what can reasonably be accomplished within the
period of this plan. _
32
2. Projects and Expenditures
2.1 Conditions of Blight
2.1(a) Summary of Previous Blight Findings
(from "Report to City Council", October,-1984 Part II, PP U-1
through 11-5)
Part H - A-3-b., P.P. II--6 through II-7
"b. Obsolescent Design and Lack of Physical Integration
The Project Area to the north and south of Edinger Avenue, Sub-
Areas D through G, are all retail and personal service oriented
businesses but there is a lack of physical integration that would give
shoppers the perception that the area is a cohesive and attractive
shopping district. There are no paths articulated to encourage
internal circulation or natural flow from one sub-area to another.
Each sub-area is a disparate separate unit, especially Sub-Area G
with its seven egress/-ingress points. The disjointed development
in terms of building size and shape, and the lack of sign controls
( and uniformity in the facade treatments, landscaping and street
furniture among the different blocks deters shoppers from viewing
the area as a pleasant, large commercial district offering many and
varied services. The contrasting character of the buildings (color,
materials, form) in the area south of Edinger Avenue, especially
Sub-Area F next to Sub-Area E, is particularly noticeable. The
development of this area occurred over time and does not meet
current standards; the physical layout can be considered obsolete.
The site plan of the Huntington Center, constructed in 1966
with the separate building of fourteen businesses some hundred feet
to the east is an obsolescent design by contemporary standards.
Shoppers prefer to remain in a climate controlled environment. To
cross an open parking lot subject to the elements to gain access to
additional businesses can contribute to an unpleasant shopping
experience.
With only 44 mall shops and 6 kiosk businesses to complement
its three anchor department stores, the Huntington Center is
obsolete and at a competitive disadvantage to other more modern
centers often containing over 100 shops.
33
There is also no physical integration of the Huntington Center
and One Pacific Plaza. The Southern California Edison right-of-
way prohibits the integration of these two areas. Although there
could be a symbiotic relationship of the office employees and
customers of the restaurants and service oriented businesses, and
the retail customers of the commercial area to the south, there are
no design features that physically link the two areas or convey a
relationship. Circulation paths between the two areas are indirect:
ingress/egress points on Center Drive are off-centered from each
other.
Part H - A-3-c., P.P. U-12 through U-13
The inadequate public improvements in the Project Area are
related to traffic circulation exclusively and can be summarized as
follows:
Intersections with present level of service ratings C. through E:
-- BeachlEdinger
-- Edinger/Gothard
Center/I-405 Ramps
-- Beach/Center
-- Edinger Avenue Deficiencies
-- Excessive (twenty-three) curb cuts
awkward circulation, especially between Huntington
Center and the businesses on the south side
-- One unnecessary traffic signal
-- Railroad tracks acting as a barrier between properties on
east and west; tracks can only be crossed on Center Drive
and Edinger Avenue
-- Center Drive: Huntington Village Way and driveways from
Huntington Center and One Pacific Plaza are not aligned.
-- 1-405 interchanges with Beach Boulevard and Golden West
Street suffer heavy traffic volumes which could be relieved
through construction of an additional interchange at Gothard.
I-405 southbound ramp at Center Drive has heavy traffic
r' volumes and awkward configuration for flow into Huntington
Center and One Pacific Plaza.
34
— Gothard Street dead ends at McFadden Avenue, rather than
continuing north to act as another north-south arterial serving
the area.
The above traffic circulation problems have a heavy impact
upon the Project Area in terms of its attractiveness to potential
shoppers. For the commercial businesses within the Project Area to
remain competitive, the traffic circulation problems must be
addressed. An essential element in solving such problems is the
need to anticipate and encourage growth within the Huntington
Center, One Pacific Plaza, and the area south of Edinger.
Huntington Center, in particular, must revitalize and grow to keep
pace with its trade area competition. The City of Huntington Beach
has a direct stake in such growth. As described in more detail
below, a decline in gross retail sales is reflected in a corresponding
decline in sales tax revenues.
Part H. A-3-c., PP 11-14 through U-15
C. Existinp, Economic Conditions
{
Land uses in the Project Area are devoted entirely to commercial uses
(including office), with the exception of the utility rights-of-way discussed
earlier and a small amount of light industrial use in Sub-Area A. The
Huntington Center shopping center,.containing 838,715 of gros's leaseable '
square footage, was built in 1966. Businesses to the south of Edinger
Avenue have developed over time. The mixed use development to,the
north of Center Avenue, One Pacific.Plaza, has been planned since 1976.
Construction of the first phase, an office building and two restaurants, has
been completed.
1. Economic Disuse Resultingf rom Faulty Planning
Faulty planning of the circulation,system in.the Project Area has impeded
full utilization of its economic potential. . Awkward access generally
contributes to discouraging retail shoppers from utilizing retail outlets in
the area. The intersection of Beach Boulevard and Edinger Avenue has a
service level of "E" as discussed previously. Both Edinger Avenue and
Beach Boulevard experience heavier traffic than would prevail if Gothard
Street was linked to Hoover and Street north of the San Diego Freeway,
and a partial interchange was available. The flow of traffic on Edinger
Avenue is interrupted by the eight eastbound left turn lanes, and 23 curb
35
cuts, with traffic entering into and exiting from the various curb cuts in an
uncontrolled manner.
Pedestrians are discouraged from moving from one portion of the
Project Area to another by the distances separating the various areas, the
lack of clearly articulated paths, and the absence of a unifying
architectural theme.
The right-of-way for.the high voltage overhead transmission lines
on the north side of Huntington Center is a Iand use that may be
inappropriate to current needs for a commercial area. It could be argued
-that the lit' hest and best use for the land occupied by the lines would be
for expansion of the area's commercial uses: The 200 foot-wide right-of-
way creates a significant barrier between the commercial development of
One Pacific Plaza to the north of Center Drive and the Huntington.Center
shopping mall, and contributes to the lack-of physical integration of the
two areas.
The barriers of distance, awkward street circulation and
uncoordinated physical design are responsible for the lack of physical
integration of the Huntington Center and the strip commercial
development south of Edinger Avenue. The,movement of shoppers from
one area to another is impeded, resulting in the loss of economic potential.
2. Existence of inadequate Public Improvements _
r
Details o.f.the•deficiencies in the street-system, and freeway interchange.
design", intersection'capacity'and'pedestrian access were described in the
preceding section. The economic impact-of these inadequate public
improvements is that businesses may be discouragedfrom locating in the
area due to the confusing circulation system, and the difficulties caused for
potential customers and employees. Similarly, the sales volumes of -
existing businesses may be reduced. If not corrected, the economic impact
of the inadequate public improvements would become greater over time
As conditions in the area get worse, the City would became forced to
impose conditions o6"new development in an attempt to alleviate the-
circulation problems Such conditions could result in increased
development costs that would serve to further discourage new development
and growth in the area.
3. Economic Maladjustment and Impaired Investments
Impaired investments in the Project Area have resulted from
( econornic'maladjustment. A key indicator of economic maladjustment is
sales performance figures for the Huntington Center over time. The
36
following discussion presents an analysis of retail sales and the loss of
potential sales. The deficiencies in the public improvements serving the
area are a key factor in inhibiting shoppers from utilizing the services
offered in the area.
The annual retail sales figures for the Huntington Center from 1978
to 1983 are exhibited in Table H-3, on file. While sales figures have risen
fairly steadily since 1979, the percentage increase from year to year has
declined'from 7.7% between 1979 to 5.1% between 1982 and 1983.
Given the rates of inflation during that period, and the resulting price
increases, although the sales figures have increased, such figures may
-reflect little growth in volume."
37
2.1(b) Overview of Past Projects to Eliminate Blight
♦ improved traffic circulation - Center Avenue was widened', repaved and
improved freeway signage was completed.
+ Improved traffic circulation - a plan for widening and relandscaping the Edinger
Corridor was approved.
♦ lmproved traffic circulation "plarni,are-being'prepared for the;McFadden
Overcrossing. `
♦ Improved traffic circulation - the intersection of Beach Boulevard and,Fdin_ger.
was widened via the Orange County Transportation Authority and the
Huntington Center Project contributed funds for undergrounding of utilities on
Beach Boulevard and Edinger Avenue.
♦ Improved traffic circulation - An electronic readerboard was constructed which
provides easier identification of this area by motorists.
+ Improved traffic circulation - Construction plans are near completion for the
Gothard Hoover connection, hearings were held before the Public Utilities
Commission and funding plans are being formulated. The Berge DDA assisted
l' in ensuring right-of-way acquisition for a portion of the project.
• Improved Public Transportation - The Orange County Transportation Authority
completed its transportation center which included 118 parking spaces in off-
load bus loading and unloading for the 57 buses that will use the facility on a
daily basis.
+ Obsolescent design and lack of physical integration - The Agency has purchased
an estimated 1.1 acres at the corner of Aldrich and Parkside and is working with
potential businesses to produce an integrated development in this area.
38
2.1 (c) Summary of Outstanding Conditions of Blight
A. Inadequate public improvements still exist relative.to traffic circulation
around the project on Edinger Avenue, Center Avenue and Gothard
5 :. Avenue.
B. Economic disuse is reflected in the Huntington Beach Mall and is reflected by
the loss of Penneys, Barker Bros. and many smaller businesses.
C. Obsolescent design and lack of physical integration of all businesses in the
project area still exists. The physical layout of the area is not designed to give
the perception to customers that the area is an attractive shopping district.
µ
h
l
39
2.1(d) Identification of Locations of Blight
HUNTINGTON CENTER
McFADDEN AVE.
I
141 NOT TO+SC.AIE
NOT A PARI 01,
HUNTJNGTON
YUAGE WAY
N -
0
p
r
m
Areas of outstanding blight.
40
2.2 (a-d) Five Year Target Projects and Programs
f
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)
Programs/Projects Estimated Funding Priority Blight
Costs Sources (1-3) Addressed
1. Center Avenue $200,000 T.I. 1 A
complete signal and Property owner
access improvements Street fiends
2. Gothard - Hoover $7 million T.I. 1 A
Street funds
i
3. Edinger Avenue $3 million T.I. 2 A
Property owner
Street funds
4. Huntington Beach Mall Unknown T.I. 1 B,C
Marketing & Development Property owner
Strategy
S. Southwest Comer of Edinger Unknown T.Z. 2 B,C
and Beach Boulevard Property owners
6. Berge DDA (vacant land) Unknown T.I. 3 B
Property owners
*Refer to Section 2.1(c) Summary of Outstanding Conditions of Blight
41
3.0 Low and Moderate Income Housing Plan
3.1 Five Year Annual Housing Goals
3.1(a) Identification of AB 315 Annual Housing Production Goals*
None required as per Table I Redevelopment Agency Housing Policy and Housin�'Compliance
Plan
* The AB 315 Report for all project areas is included in the Housing Set-Aside Section.
42
3.1(b) Estimation of Number of Low/Moderate Units to be Destroyed
and
3.1(c) Identification of Replacement Housing Sites
Huntington Center Project Area:
Destroyed: Units Low Verb w
Sher Lane 1 0 1
Planned Replacement Units: 1 0 1
Ten Year/Life of Plan Housinp, Program
There is no residentially zoned land within the project area and no additional units are expected to be
destroyed (one unit is identified in the AB315 plan). Therefore there is no production requirement over
the remaining life of the plan. The one replacement unit will be provided, likely in another project area
as part of a larger project.
43
HUNTINGTON CENTER TECHNICAL APPENDIX A
44
HUNTINOTON CENTER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
CASH FLOW ANALYSIS 9/30/94
1995188 1996197 1997198 1998/99 1999N0 Tota3 Sources Ooalt&ObJecttvea Explanation
EST FUND BALANCE,PRIOR YEAR
4,594,270 3,539,769 2,269,368 1,370,341 383,531
INCOME
Tax Increment(80%) 900,000 900,000 900,000 900,000 900,000 4,500,000
Interest 328,599 247,784 158,856 95,924 26,847 858,010
TOTAL INCOME
1,228,599 1,147,784 1,058,858 995,924 928,847 5,358,010
EXPENSES
Existing Bond Debt 1,040,073 1,043,313 1,13Q,230 1,041,163 1,041,163 5,205,942 Tax Inc. Eoon.Dev. Project Area Adman.
City Debt-(M.P.$450WH.C.3475k) 350,000 350,D00 350,000 350,000 350,040 1,750,000 Tax tno. Eoon.Dev, Project Area Adman.
School PawThrough 4,895 5,045 5,045 5,045 5,045 26,075 Tax Inc. EoDm Dev. Project Area Adman.
Operating 242.699 254,834 267,576 280,954 295.002 1,341,085 Tax Inc. Eoon.Derv. Project Area Adman.
Operating Admin Portion(30%) 191,203 200,763 210,801 221,341 232,406 1,056,516 Tax Inc. Eoon.Derv, Project Area Admin.
Legal Services 5,080 5,060 6,060 5,060 5,060 26,300 Tax Ino. Eoon.Day. Project Area Adman.
Legal SeRdces Adman Portion(30%) 23,370 23,370 23,370 23,370 23,370 116,850 Tax Inc, Eton.Dev. ProJect Area Adman.
X.
In BuCneta DevvkN r nt(40%) 65,800 55,800 65,800 55,800 55.800 279,000 Tax Ino, Eoon.Dom Project Area Adman.
Capkal Projictx
Housing Addl tonal Set-Aside-MP 470,000 480,000 0 0 0 950,000
TOTAL EXPENSES 2,383,100 2,418,185 1.957,882 1,982,734 2,007,549 10,749,750
NIFT INCOME •1,164,501 •1,270 401 -899 026 •986,810 •1,081,002 -5,391,740
EST FUND BALANCE,END OF YEAR 3 b3A,76A . 2;Z6A 388 1,37{};3A1 383,531 :.69?47 j
1 �
t
1
•1
i
HUNI'INGTON CENTER
TECUMCAL APPENDIX B
SET-ASIDE FINANCIAL PLAN
(See Housing Section)
46
OAKVIEW
REDEVELOPMENT F"LEMENTATION PLAN
1995 - 2000 .
MY Of HUKTIN61ON BEACH
47
OAKVIEW
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
INTRODUCTION
In October, 1993, the California State Legislature approved the Redevelopment Reform bill
known as Assembly Bill 1290. This new Iaw required Redevelopment Agency's to amend all
existing plans to create uniform standards for the length of redevelopment plans and the.time
allowed to incur debt and to collect tax increment. It also required the preparation and
adoption of "Implementation Plans" stating the goals, planned expenditures, housing activities
and blight alleviation planned for the next five years.
This is the implementation plan for the Oakview Redevelopment Project Area and contains;
♦ Five year goals (prioritized), projects with costs and funding sources identified.
♦ Blight findings from the original Redevelopment Plan, past projects to eliminate blight,
outstanding conditions of blight and a map of these conditions.
♦ Five year housing goals and annual,pioduction goals, estimate of units to be destroyed and
identification of replacement sites.
♦ Five year strategy to alleviate blight.
♦ Appendices A & B identifying cash flow for redevelopment and housing programs.
48
OAKVIEW
1. Goals and Objectives
1.1 Goals and Objectives per Redevelopment Plan
(From Oakview Redevelopment Plan, July 1989, PP 81, 83-84)
General Objectives of Redevelopment Plan
"In creating the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency, the City
Council of the City of Huntington Beach declared its desire to improve,
upgrade, and revitalize all areas of the City and in particular.those areas
within the City which have become blighted because of deterioration,
disuse and economic, physical and social maladjustments. As a part of the
City's ongoing redevelopment efforts, the Huntington Beach
Redevelopment Agency has prepared this Plan for the Main-Pier
Redevelopment Project Area.
Accordingly, the objectives of this Redevelopment Project are as follows:
♦ Eliminating blighting influences, that persist in the Project Area,
including deteriorating buildings, incompatible and uneconomic land
uses, inadequate public improvements, obsolete structures, and other
physical, economic and social deficiencies; improve the overall
appearance of streets, parking areas and other facilities, public and
private; and assure that all buildings are safe for persons to occupy.
♦ Encouraging existing owners, businesses and tenants within the Project
Area to participate in redevelopment activities.
♦ Providing adequate parcels and required public improvements so as to
encourage new construction by private enterprise, thereby providing
the City of Huntington Beach with an improved economic base.
♦ Mitigating development limitations which have resulted in the lack of
proper utilization of the Project Area to such an extent that it
constitutes a serious physical, social, and economic burden on the
community which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or
alleviated by private enterprise acting alone.
49
♦ Providing adequate public improvements, public facilities, open spaces,
f. and utilities which cannot be remedied by private or governmental
action without redevelopment.
♦ Providing construction and employment opportunities in the
development of these facilities and by providing employment
opportunities in the operation of the proposed commercial and
recreational facilities.
♦ Implementing the construction or reconstruction of adequate streets,
curbs, gutters, street lights, storm drains, and other improvements as
necessary to assist development of the Project Area to conform to the
General Plan as a master-planned development and to,correct existing
environmental deficiencies.
♦ Establishing development criteria and controls for the permitted uses
within the Project Area in accordance with modern and competitive
development practices, thus assuring the highest design standards and
environmental quality.
♦ Expanding the commercial base of the community through the
promotion of new and continuing private sector investment in the
Project Area.
♦` Providing opportunities and mechanisms to increase sales taxes,
business licenses, and other sources of revenue to the;City.
♦ Providing opportunities to increase and improve the City's supply of
housing on a Citywide basis, including housing opportunities for low
and moderate income-households. '
To attain the objectives of this Plan as set forth above, the Agency is
'authorized to use all of the powers provided in this Plan and alI the powers
now or hereafter permitted by law including the following implementation
actions:
♦ Installation, construction, reconstruction, redesign, or reuse of streets,
utilities, curbs, gutters, sidewalks and other public improvements.
Acquisition of property by gift, purchase, lease, or condemnation as
permitted by this Plan.
50
♦ Disposition of property by sale or lease at a value to be determined by
the Agency for reuse in accordance with this Plan.
♦ Redevelopment of land by private enterprise or public agencies for uses
in accordance with this Plan.
♦ Provide for relocation assistance and benefits to project area businesses
and residents who may be displaced, in accordance with the provisions
of the Redevelopment Law and the Government Code of the State of
California.
♦ Rehabilitation, remodeling, reconstruction, demolition, or removal of
buildings, structures, and improvements.
♦ Financing of the construction of residential and commercial buildings
and the permanent mortgage financing of residential and commercial
buildings, as permitted by applicable State and local. laws.
♦ Provide opportunities for owner participation and extend reasonable
preferences to owners, operators of businesses, and tenants.
♦ Negotiate with taxing agencies to address any financial burdens or
detriments caused to such entities as a result of adoption of this Plan.
♦ Such other action as may be permitted by law."
51
F
1.2 Five Year Target Goals and Objectives
1.2(a) Prioritization of Goals and Objectives
Project Area Size: 68 Acres
Adoption Date: 'November 1982
Amended: July 1989
Life of Plan: 35 Years
Tax Increment Cap: $90 million
PROJECT GOALS FOR 1995-2000
_Continue the Housing Rehabilitation Program with a production goal of 20 units
annually.
Continue the Housing Code Enforcement Program. .
Review Oakview Neighborhood Plan and update recommendations as'
appropriate.
Continue Community Services Police Assistance for gang prevention.
Continue youth employment neighborhood cleanup program-Operation LOGOS
r Complete construction of a branch library.
Complete storm drain improvements.
`. Complete improvements to streets, street lights, alleys and landscape.
1.2(b) Reasons for Inclusion
These goals originated in the Agency's most recent Biennial Report published in
December, 1993 and have been subjected to public review and approval by the
Agency. Together they represent what can reasonably be accomplished within the
period of this plan.
r
52
2. Projects and Expenditures
2.1 Conditions of Blight-
2.1a Summary of Previous.Blight Findings
(from "Repbrt to City Council", June 1089
PP. 9, 13-15, 17, 22, 25, 28-31, 37-38, 42, 4445, 50-52)
"Description of the physical, social and economic conditions in the project
area:
A. Existing Physical Conditions
The purpose of this section is to provide a description of the existing
conditions within the proposed Project Area for Amendment No. One
to the Oakview Redevelopment Project, which for the purpose of
analysis in this document is referred to as the "Project Area."
l. Proiect Location
The Project Area in its regional context is shown in Figure 1. Which
entails the overall location and boundaries of the approximately 68 acre
Project Area, is presented in Section 2.1(d). The legal description of
the Project Area is provided in Appendix A (on file).
2. Land Uses and Acreages
The breakdown of land uses within the Project Area by approximate
acreage is shown in Table 1. Figure 3 illustrates the existing land uses
throughout the project Area.
Table 1
Land Uses in the Project Area
Land Use Acres % of Project Area
Single Family Residential 8.04 11.82%
Multi-Family Residential 26.12 38.41%
Commercial 10.47 15.40%
Vacant 1.15 1.69%
Streets, Alleys, and R-O-W 22.22 32.68%
b800
Source: Urban Futures, Inc. 1988
53
The makeup of existing land uses within the Project Area clearly
differentiates the northern and southern portions,of the Project Area.
The northern portion is characterized by a mixture of older single
family houses, sometimes more than one,on the same-lot, and newly
constructed multi-family structures. Many of these older single family
houses are,in need of substantial rehabilitation and do not have '
adequate froth yard setbacks. The noriheast corner of the Project Area
contains the Charter Center, a 400,000 square foot commercial retail
and office complex. The southern portion of the project area primarily
consists of multi-family 4-plex structures, most of which are in need of
some rehabilitation.
3. Buildings and Structures
a. Deficiencies, Deterioration and Dilapidation
One of the causal factors evidencing the presehce of structural blight
within the Project Area is the existence of deficient buildings.
A windshield survey was conducted in December 1988 by Urban
Futures staff to determine the condition of structures in the Project
Area.
Structures within the Project,Area. were rated separately according to a
predetermined scale based upon criteria of structural integrity and level
of maintenance. Only primary structures capable of containing a major
land use activity were evaluated. Due to the nature of the survey, the
ratings were,derived from a visual evaluation and do not represent a
detailed,building by building structural analysis. Each structure
received one of four possible ratings. A structure was rated sound if it
appeared well maintained and no physically blighting characteristics
were evident. Structures displaying some degree of physical decline
were rated either deficient, deteriorated, or dilapidated, depending
upon the severity of the degeneration. The following is the general
guideline for these ratings, which are derived from nationally accepted
rating standards.
Sound
The structure is no more than 25 years old and has no noticeable
deficiencies in the structural.condition of roof, walls, or foundation. It
appears to have adequate plumbing and electrical service and is subject
to a regular program of maintenance. Exterior walls and other surfaces
are well painted and clean, and windows and doors are intact.
54-
r-�
■� ! 4 ' l
sm
�\ s � � Y4 '�✓9T
Yy[r L� L
_
'`i;
h'1�.1
''�.: ....•a.t��-`mac_ �_xc
A'
a� sr
a
Deficient
The structure could be.older than 25 years, however, has been
maintained adequately to eliminate any major structural defects. It may
show signs of deferred maintenance such as peeling paint, broken
windows, or cracked plaster. The roof may show. signs of minor water
leaks.
Deteriorated
The structure shows signs of structural deterioration such as sagging
roof or walls or crumbling foundation. It may appear to have leaky
plumbing or hazardous electrical service illustrated by exposed wiring,
and holes may be apparent in roof or walls. Paint may be largely
peeled or faded or even nonexistent, and broken windows are often
apparent.
Dilapidated
The building is structurally unsound and maintenance is nonexistent.
Its fitness for human occupation is highly questionable and the state of
deterioration and neglect is such that,it is a candidate for demolition.
Table 2
Structural Conditions In The Project Area
Raatom Number of Structures
Sound - 23
Deficient 122
Deteriorated 51
Di lapi dated 0
Source: Urban Futures, Inc. 1988
Out of the total 196 structures rated, -173 or 88.27A are at least
deficient and in need of some rehabilitation. It can be generally stated
that maintenance is irregular 'and such'conditions as peeling paint, loose
roof shingles, weathered facades,:and cracked foundations are
( common. A total of 26.02% of all structures are deteriorated such that
these structures require substantial upgrading. The existing structures
56
present the Project Area with an image problem which negatively
impacts potential development opportunities. When clustered together,
such structures create definite pockets of substandard quality and
blight.
The breakdown of this structural rating by existing land uses in
presented in Table 3. The.locations of all properties containing
deteriorated structures is shown in Figure 4.
Table 3
Structural Conditions In The Project Area By Existing Land Use
Single Family Multi-Family Commercial Total
Sound 3 11 9 23
Deficient 27 94 1 122
Deteriorated 23 28 0 51
Dilapidated 0 0 0 0
33.
.. .... 0 .
T£3TAT, 96 .
Source: Urban Futures, Inc. 1988
(Photographs are on file that depict blighted conditions of buildings.)
The existence of structural blight within a Project Area constitutes a social
liability upon the community because of the social problems associated
with living or working in deficient structures. These problems include
increased safety risks from fire, accidents, floods, and other unpredictable
events. It also creates unhealthy conditions resulting from poor heating,
ventilation, insulation, and sanitation, as well as personal alienation,
maladjustment, and the loss of community cohesion and pride.
The physical blight caused by structural deficiencies also constitutes an
economic liability for the City. Its presence depresses property values and
tax revenues as well as commercial/business sales tax revenues.
Additionally, such conditions negatively impact potential development
opportunities. The residential structures within the Project Area are
typically characterized by a lack of adequate maintenance such that
rehabilitation efforts are now required to insure the safety, health, and
welfare of Project Area residents. However, the Huntington Beach
Redevelopment Agency presently does not have adequate funds to finance
the needed rehabilitation programs.
57
WARNER AVE
FIR D ,
Y A R AVE
F BEL 51T x
a �
w
CYPRESS AVE
CYPRESS
<
a �
0
MANDRELL DR Od'STIN CR.
0
a
U
O ,, LU
t, \ w BARTON DR.
t O p
z - z
NAGONOR - - - -- _
- .. - Z -
3. Z
i
s
LLJa�La
SLATER AVE.
AMENDMENT NO: ONE TO THE OAKVIEW-REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Structural Deterioration Map N
�////� Project Area Boundaries
Locations of Properties Containing
Deteriorated Structures
SCALE 7F=I
58
.1 oil
b. Defective Design and Character of Physical Construction
Many residential structures within the Project Area clearly display poor
construction quality in terms of both physical size and structural
composition. This condition is.particularly evident in many of the single
family homes in the northern portion of the Project Area, particularly on
Sycamore Avenue, Cypress Avenue, and Ash Street. Many single family
structures are of such diminutive proportions that overcrowded living
conditions are likely to occur. Examples of such structures are shown in
photos #9 and #10 (on file). These structures also display defective
physical characteristics due to both low quality construction.materials and
deferred maintenance. Photo #11 (on file) illustrates a residential structure
characterized by roll-on asphalt roofing and deferred maintenance.
The southern portion of the Project Area also displays physical defects in
many of the multi-family residential structures. Many of these structural
deficiencies, such as cracked foundations and neglected exterior surfaces,
relate to deferred maintenance of such a prolonged period that some degree
of rehabilitation is now necessary. All streets in the southern portion of
the Project Area display these conditions, with the most notable examples
on Mandreil Drive, Koledo Lane, Queens Lane, and Barton Drive
(photo is on file).
c. Faulty Interior Arrangement and Exterior Spacing,
As previously mentioned, many Project Area residential structures are of
proportions that are likely to create overcrowded housing conditions.
Overcrowding not only diminishes personal privacy and the quality of life
for Project Area residents, but also provides an environment where
communicable diseases can readily-flourish.
In terms of exterior spacing, many single family residential structures in
the northern portion of the Project Area are characterized by inadequate
front yard setbacks. Many residential structures on Warner Avenue,
Sycamore Avenue, Ash Street and Cypress Avenue have front yard
setbacks'of only 10-15 feet. Photos#13 and #14 (on file) display the close
proximity of two single family residences to Sycamore.Avenue. The.house
in photo #13 (on file) has no continuous buffers between the structure and
roadway, and is further impacted by the parking structure located directly
across the street. Photo #15 (on file) displays a single family structure
with an inadequate front yard setback from Warner Avenue. This situation
creates congested living conditions by subjecting residents to higher levels
of noise, dust, air pollution, and visual impacts from passing motor
vehicles, particularly for those residents on or adjacent to Warner Avenue,
which is a major arterial for the City.
59
The southern portion of the Project'Area is characterized by multi-family
4-plex structures with rear garages containing two second floor dwelling
units. These garage/duplexes are located directly adjacent to the rear
alleys, without any provision for setbacks or other buffers that would
reduce the noise impacts of vehicular activities. Photo.#16 (on file)
displays a residential unit of a.multi-family structure fronting an alley, with
the structure and alley separated only by a series of bollards. The 4-plexes
on Jacquelyn Lane, Koledo Lane, Queens Lane,Barton Drive, and
Mandrell Drive are characterized by a lack of adequate setbacks or
landscape buffers between buildings,.thereby creating a congested
environment for local residents.
d. Age and Obsolescence
The'overall condition of a City's housing stock is determined by the
following factors: age, quality of construction, and regularity of
maintenance. Obsolescence applies mainly,to residential and commercial,
buildings where'size, layout; and other design features are no longer
suitable for current uses. The obsolescence of throughout the Project
structures and identifying blight.important implications for Area has
justifying redevelopment.
Residential structures throughout the Project Area are characterized by
declining structural conditions due to the cumulative effects of age and
deferred maintenance. Many Project Area structures which are over 25
years old have not been subject to an adequate program of maintenance.
These findings are essential,to'the community since residential structures
over 25 years in age are most likely to display- signs of deterioration
resulting fron-deferred' maintenance. The 4-plexes which characterize the
southern portion of the Project Area are generally 25-30 years.old and
clearly display signs of age and neglect, such as weathered facades and
cracked foundations. Mariy'of the single family structures in,the northern
portion of the Project Area, particularly on Sycamore.Avenue, Cypress,
Avenue, Ash Street, and the northern portion-of Oak Lane, are well over
25 years in age and display varying'signs of advanced deterioration. .
Although many Project Area residential structures are in .urgent need of
rehabilitation;'the Redevelopment Agency presently.does not have adequate
f6nas to support sock efforts.'
In terms of obsolescence,-the diminutive'size'and inadequate setbacks
characteristic of many single family structures in the northern portion of
the Project Area severely impair the ability of such structures to provide
safe, sanitary,'and decent-housing-for Project Area residents. These
` features negatively impact the functional usefulness of such residences,
thereby accelerating their structural obsolescence.-
60
Due to the age of the existing buildings located throughout the Project
Area and the high cost involved.in,maintenance and upkeep, it is very
likely that most of these structures will continue to decline in appearance
and structural soundness, further contributing to the blighting conditions
within the Project Area. Although there is a need to provide new
affordable housing for many Project Area residents, the Redevelopment
Agency does not presently have adequate funds to aid in the construction
of new replacement housing.
e. Mixed and Incompatible Buildings and Land Uses
There are portions of the Project Area which are characterized by an
incompatible mixture of residential and commercial land uses. Many
patrons of the Charter Centre complex use local Project Area streets for
access to the parlang garage on Ash Street, and sometimes park on local
streets such as Elm Street and Cypress Avenue. Residents adjacent to this
commercial/office complex are therefore subjected to higher levels of
noise, dust, air pollution, and visual impairments from non-resident
vehicular use of local streets. Conversely, business owners and patrons of
the Charter Centre are negatively impacted by the structural deterioration
evident in many adjacent residences. The physical decline of these
residential structures creates the potential for a negative experience due to
the unattractive visual impacts of this neighborhood, and may discourage
patrons from returning to the Charter Centre. Structural rehabilitation and
proper landscaping are needed to mitigate the negative visual impacts and
provide some level of noise insulation.
Conflicting mixtures of land uses and structures create a more difficult and
expensive need to establish mitigating measures to reduce and/or eliminate
incompatibility. Mixed and incompatible negatively influence property
values and the resultant quality of developments. In many cases,
maintenance of land and structures neglected due to the negative physical,
social, and economic atmosphere created by these conflicts. All of these
factors interrelate and result in reduced tax revenue to the community,
increased costs of public services (e.g., police, fire), and a decline in
public services and facilities.
In summary, the existing structural deficiencies, age, and conflicting land
uses all contribute to the blighting influences evident in the Project Area_
Redevelopment will provided the necessary mechanisms for alleviating
and/or reversing these deficiencies in a rational, comprehensive long-range
approach.
61
is
• ns------- mAVE '
• 1
FIR D
w
arc
i s
LY
C
x
• a
0
i
MANDRELL DR " KRISTLN CR.
_ ! S
• ` o Bl�(ifi••flR.• m
LW
J
p I a
U _ Z J
WAGON CRJ-— L��
--
3 v Z
' CrLZi 1 W
SLAM AVE
AMENDMENT NO. ONE TO THE OAKVIEW REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Street infrastructure Deficiencies ,Map
Project-Area Boundaries "
""•*' Locations of Inadequate Curb,
Cutter, and Sidewalk Facilities
•`•••••••• Locations of Inadequate Lighting Facilities SCALE
4 200 400 file
14-48181.1 Locations of Deteriorating Street Pavements
62 FIGURE
4. Properties
Some properties within the Project Area are suffering from economic
maladjustment, deterioration or disuse because of inadequate public
improvements, facilities and utilities, and parcels of irregular form, shape
or size.
a. Traffic Circulation Deficiencies
The Project Area contains portions of the following arterials: Beach
Boulevard, Warner Avenue, and Slater Avenue. All other Project Area
streets are considered to be local streets (60 foot right-of-way).As detailed
in a technical memorandum from POD, Inc., to City staff, Beach
Boulevard and Warner Avenue are classified as major arterials (120 foot
right-of-way) and Slater Avenue is considered a secondary arterial (80 foot
right-of-way). Beach Boulevard, which is also a State Highway under the
jurisdiction of CalTrans, is the heaviest traveled street in the City.
The internal circulation system within the Project Area is considered to be
an incomplete grid pattern which restricts access between the northern and
southern portions of the Project Area. Although four Project Area streets
intersect with Slater Avenue, only Queens Avenue enables passage to the
northern section via Barton Drive to Koledo Lane to Mandrell Drive,
which connects with both Oak Lane and Ash Street. The northern portion
of the Project Area is considered to be an incomplete grid system in that
access to Beach Boulevard is interrupted by the Charter Centre and access
to Nichols Street (a north-south-local street located west of the Project
Area) is interrupted by the Oakview School and Community Center.
As previously mentioned, local streets in the northern portion service not
only resident traffic flows, but also patrons of the Charter Centre utilizing
the parking garag6'located at the northeast corner of Sycamore Avenue and
Ash Street. Furthermore, due to the current traffic congestion at the
intersection of Warner Avenue and Beach Boulevard, many motorists
traveling east-bound on Warner Avenue who wish to turn south-bound on
Beach Boulevard by-pass this intersection by taking.Ash Street south-bound
to Cypress Avenue east-bound to the Cypress/Beach intersection. This
spill-over of through-traffic and the constant flow of Charter Centre
patrons results in significantly heavier traffic volumes than normally
experienced on local residential streets.
In addition to the heavy traffic volumes created by external pressures,
many streets in the Project Area, particularly in the northern portion, are
in substandard condition and require substantial improvements. Street
- widths range from the required 60 foot right-of-way for local streets down
63
to only 24 feet of street pavement. These narrow streets are also
characterized by deteriorating surfaces, incomplete lighting, and a lack of
curbs, gutters, 'and sidewalks. Project Area streets in this condition
include Sycamore Avenue, Ash Street, Cypress Avenue, and Elm Street.
The substandard widths and surfaces of these streets, along with the spill-*
over impacts of through-traffic and Charter Centre patrons,, impedes the
successful flow of traffic and creates higher levels of noise, air pollution,
and traffic delays. Emergency vehicles for fire, police, and health services
are also negatively impacted by impaired road access due to narrow and
congested streets. In summary, inadequate street capacity, poor
circulation, and inadequate access all create significant circulation
problems in traffic flow throughout the Project Area.
b. Deficient Street Curb, Gutter, Sidewalk, and Lightin Facilities
Deficiencies in the street system facilities the Project Area, as shown in
Figure S. Cracked street pavements and potholes characterize many street
surfaces in the Project Area, particularly in the northern streets such as
Sycamore Avenue, Ash Street, Cypress Avenue, and Elm Street.
Deteriorating street surfaces include many local streets, as shown in photos
along Warner Avenue, as shown in photo#18 (on file). The northern
portion of the Project Area'is•generally characterized by narrow,
t disintegrating streets that lack curbs,.gutters, and sidewalks, as evidenced
in photos#19 - #21 (on file). Photo #22 (on file) displays a portion of
Cypress Avenue characterized by cracked street pavement, potholes, and a
lack of curbs, gutters,and sidewalks. Photo #23 (on file) shows a cracked
and uneven sidewalk on Mandreli'Drive with inadequate asphalt
resurfacing:- Many Project Area,alley,s are also in need of resurfacing, as
shown in photo #24 (on file).
Specifically, Sycamore Avenue is characterized by clack of curbs, gutters,
_
and sidewalks, with the exception of the northern portion of the street
adjacent to the Charter Centre parking-garage. This street is very narrow
and the surfacing is in a state of almost-complete disintegration,
particularly west of the Ash Street iritersection.,,Street lighting on
Sycamore Avenue is incomplete'and inadequate. Ash Street north of
Cypress Avenue is also very narrow,and in a state of structural
deterioration. This portion 'of Ash Street is,lacking.in curbs, gutters, and
sidewalks, and also does not have adequate street lighting. Cypress
Avenue is a narrow and deteriorating street with curbs, gutters, and
sidewalks provided on only a few properties. Oak Lane lacks curbs,
gutters, and sidewalks along the east side of the street north of Cypress
Avenue. 'Elm Street is also lacking curbs, gutters, and sidewalks north of
Cypress Avenue, with the exception of the eastern portion which abuts the
Holiday Spa structure, and has an incomplete provision of curbs, gutters,
64
and sidewalks south of Cypress Avenue. Street surface cracking is also
} evident along Elm Street. Barton Drive is characterized by incomplete
street lighting facilities. Jacquelyn Lane is characterized by cracked street
pavements and cracked curbs.
The provision of adequate street surfaces is necessary for safe and smooth
flowing vehicular access. Narrow streets in an advanced state of disrepair,
coupled with the spill-over of non-resident traffic, tends to slow traffic
flows and thus extends the travel time of motorists on these local streets.
The lack of curbs, gutters, and sidewalks often results in standing water on
the roadside shoulders, forcing pedestrians to utilize street surfaces for
passage. The pedestrian use of street surfaces creates potentially hazardous
situations as motorists and pedestrians attempt to share local streets of
substandard width, This condition is extremely critical due to the fact that
most daytime pedestrian travel consists of small children coming or going
to school. The lack of sidewalks and adequate street lighting also creates
potentially dangerous night time travel conditions for pedestrians.
Substantial improvements are also needed for the Project Area alleys.
Cracked pavements, potholes, Standing water, and overgrown vegetation
are commonplace in many alleyways. The poor condition of these alleys
not only impedes vehicular circulation, but also imposes potential traffic
and pedestrian conflicts through the lack of proper lighting and haphazard
parking.
The Project Area in general is in.urgent need of substantial street surface
rehabilitation, along with the construction of adequate curbs, gutters,
sidewalks, and street lights. Although the provision of these street
infrastructure facilities is essential for the safety, Health, and welfare of
Project Area residents, the Redevelopment Agency does not presently have
adequate funding to provide these facilities.
c. Drainage System Deficiencies
The lack of curbs and gutters in the many portions of the Project Area
prevents storm water-from being effectively channeled off the street
surfaces, leading to health and safety hazards for local residents. Despite
the presence of underground storm drainage lines along Beach Boulevard,
Warner Avenue, Ash Street, and Sycamore and Cypress Avenues between
Ash and Elm Streets, the lack of above-ground drainage facilities results in
long-standing puddles of water which contribute to unhealthful living
conditions by providing a habitat for disease carrying insects. The
locations of storm drainage deficiencies throughout the Project Area are
65
WARNER AVF_
1
I ,
FIR D
8£iS[7 i— — —
_ g
w
CYPRESS
i f
KFOSTIN CR.
� d
J
m
2
U
w
V _J _.
xAGON OR �- - --
WLLJ
??
1 Y
LAJ
SLATER AVEm
z
AMENDMENT NO. ONE TO. THE OAKVIEW REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Drainage Deficiencies Map
Project Area Boundaries
Locations of sheets with
Inadequate Drainage Facilities
SCALE
0 200 400 kel
66 FIGURE
shown in Figure b. Photos #25 - #28 (on file) clearly display these
deficiencies along Sycamore Avenue, Cypress Avenue, and Elm Street.
As a result of the Project Area's lack of adequate above-ground storm
drainage facilities, even small amounts of rainfall can cause puddling along
street shoulders, becoming not only an inconvenience but also a health and
safety hazard. As the streets lacking curbs and gutters typically also lack
sidewalks, pedestrians are forced on to the street surface and must compete
with motor vehicles for the limited street pavement space.
These drainage system inadequacies are factors which contribute to both
physical and economic blight within the Project Area. These conditions
help promote physical blight since some properties are not being served by
adequate drainage facilities which meet public health standards. These
existing conditions also lead to economic blight by contributing to potential
depreciated property values and overall investment decline since existing
drainage facilities are not adequate to serve new development within the
Project Area.
d: Water Distribution Deficiencies
The Project Area is characterized by a number of water lines which are
only six inches in diameter. While six inch water lines are considered the
minimally acceptable size for single family residential neighborhoods,
modern construction standards call fora minimum diameter of eight inches
` for new water distribution lines,sin.ce six inch lines are not always capable
of providing needed fire flows during peak demand periods.' As shown in
Figure 7, Queens Lane, Barton Drive, Jacquelyn Lane, Elm Street, and
portions of Oak Lane, Cypress Avenue, and Sycamore Avenue are
characterized by-six inch water lines. Furthermore, some Project Area
residents must rely on private wells for their drinking water, which are
often characterized by inconsistent supplies and variable water quality.
Since the provision of adequate drinking water is essential to the public
health and welfare, the revitalization.of the Project Area cannot be fully
achieved without an adequate water supply and distribution system.
B_ Existing; Social Conditions
I. Project Area Population
The 1980 US Census reported a total population of 170,486 for the City of
Huntington Beach. According to the California Department of Finance,
the total Citywide population is now at 187,740 as of January 1988.
Therefore, the City's population has grown 10.1% from 1980 to 1988,
67
WARNER AVE
i
FIR D
Z.
AvE
a 8 L51 T s
w
1 �
AVE
CYPRES5�
— 1 ' MIT
MANDRE-L DR KRtSTW GR.
C]
J m
! 4
w=
J O
i
f r
KAGON OR - --
- Z
Ld
LLUJ
SLATER AVE
AMENDMENT NO. ONE TO THE OAKVIEW REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Water System Deficiencies Map
N
Project Area.Boundaries
�•�� Locations of Streets with
Substandard - Sized Water Lines
SCALE
68 o 200 Qooxe,
FIGL`R
' which translates into an average annual growth rate of 1.3%. The steady
growth in population experienced by Huntington Beach in recent years has
put increased pressure on Huntington Beach's public services and facilities.
As Huntington Beach's population continues to expand throughout the
City, there will be greater pressure to improve and expand upon the
infrastructure within the Project Area.
The current residential population of the Project Area is estimated to be
1,620 persons. This figure was calculated by multiplying the total number
of residential units for all single and multi-family structures (592 dwelling
units) by the average household size of 2.736 for the City of Huntington
Beach, as reported by the Department of Finance (although the average
Project Area household size is likely to be greater than the Citywide
average, a more specific average for the Project Area is not presently
available). Since the population of the entire City is 187,740, the Project
Area contains approximately 0.86% of the Huntington Beach population.
2. Prevalence of Social Maladjustment
Social maladjustment reflected in the forms of crime, juvenile delinquency,
welfare dependency, and unemployment, is another indication of blighting
conditions in the Project Area.
According to the statistical division of the Huntington Beach Police
Department, crime rates in the Project Area are among the highest in the
City. Although the Project Area represents less than one percent of the
total Citywide population, an average of about ten percent of all Citywide
homicides and assaults occur within its reporting district (the 272 reporting
district, which is bounded on the north-by Warner Avenue, on the east by
Beach Boulevard, on the south by Slater Avenue, and on the west by
Gothard Street). There were a total of 2,396 police calls in this reporting
district for 1986 and 2,577 police calls during 1987, representing a very
high 7.6% annual increase. Even more significant is the fact that the
average annual number of police calls for a reporting district in the City is
about 600 calls. Therefore, the Project Area reporting district had over
four times as many police calls in 1987 as the average reporting district.
Reports of crime in residential areas implies security hardware
deficiencies, poor physical design, obtrusive shrubbery, and deficient street
lighting. Crime occurring in commercial areas implies deficiencies in the
physical security of commercial buildings such as structural design, floor
plan layout, landscaping, .lighting, circulation systems, and parking
structures_ As previously mentioned, many Project Area streets have
inadequate lighting facilities. The lack of adequate street lighting coupled
with the mature trees and bushes surrounding many residential structures
69
provides convenient concealment for burglars. Furthermore, the narrow
and poorly paved streets throughout the Project Area results in patrolling
problems due to the incomplete circulation system.
Crime is often related to high unemployment and underemployment levels.
According to a recent status report prepared by the City, the percentage of
families in the Project Area falling below the poverty level is nearly double
the percentage for the rest of City. Female heads of household in the
Project Area are also nearly double the Citywide average, and the
unemployment rate is significantly higher for the Project Area in
comparison with the overall City rate.
The prevalence of social maladjustment is also determined by the existence
of vandalism and property neglect. Photos #29 - #33 (on file) display
vandalism in the form of graffiti on houses, fences, garage doors, and
..public signs. The presence of graffiti often indicates the existence of
juvenile delinquency and even gang-related activities. The Project Area's
high crime rate and predominance of graffiti throughout the Area appears
to verify the occurrence of juvenile related offenses.
Social maladjustment is also indicated by the lack of property upkeep
throughout the project Area. Photos on file clearly display this condition
in the form of discarded furniture, paint cans, various debris, and
landscaped open space areas used for parking automobiles. The
accumulation of discarded materials and debris on residential properties
may indicate a lack of neighborhood pride among some local residents.
This attitude often reflects a feeling of alienation from the community and
a sense of powerlessness towards any,effort to upgrade existing conditions.
-Redevelopment can provide the mechanism to help local residents
rehabilitate their-properties,and provide City officials with the funds for
infrastructure and public protection improvements, thereby increasing
community cohesion and improving the quality of life for Project Area
residents. At present, however, the redevelopment Agency.does not have
sufficient funding to initiate these needed improvements.
C. Existing Economic Conditions
Currently the City of Huntington Beach lacks the financial resources to
fully fund public improvements that could support the type of beneficial
development necessary for a healthy economic base. Therefore, an
amended Redevelopment Plan for the Project Area is proposed in an effort
to alleviate and/or reverse the blighting conditions described herein.
70
L. Prevalence of Depreciated Values and Impaired Investments
Two indicators of economic blight are defined as the prevalence of
depreciated land values and impaired investments. Briefly, depreciated
land values are simply the decline in the assessed value of property due to
many of the factors previously mentioned, including physical problems
such as inadequate public facilities and the prevalence of social
maladjustment. Impaired investments result from the same conditions and
are basically a socio-economic reaction to depreciated values. An impaired
investments a rented or leased residential, commercial, or industrial
property on which the values or the return on the owner's equity is
diminishing or has stopped altogether, and/or the equity itself is in danger
of being partially or totally lost.
One key indicator of impaired investments is a prevalence of deferred
maintenance the part of local property owners, as evidenced in photos
#1 - #8 (on file). Another indicator is the lack of public infrastructure
improvements such as street surfacing, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and street
lighting. This lack of public improvements tends to depress property
values and discourages local property owners from investing in structural
improvements to their properties. ;
These general conditions such as inadequate infrastructure and public
amenities or the inaccessibility of the parcel due to inadequate street
improvements deters the potential,developer from investment.
This discourages economic investments that would convert economically
underproductive or unproductive parcels into productive land uses. The
failure of the property owners to fully utilize these parcels is evidence,of
the impaired investments resulting!from inadequate public improvements
and public facilities'which cannot-be'reinediedaby.privaie or governmental
action without the'aid of redevelopment:. ; S k:,
Although-most of this underutilized land in the Project Area has the
potential for improvement through structural rehabilitation or new
construction, it is unlikely that this will occur without assistance from the
Redevelopment Agency. The lack of improvements on these parcels is
indicative of the inability the private market to bring about.their utilization.
The combination of the cost for needed pre-development improvements,
assembly or division of parcels, marginal economic activity and/or
inability of the parcel owner to invest make these parcels undevelopable
without public assistance._
71
Redevelopment Agency actions that will make these parcels viable for
development are essential in order to facilitate development of the vacant
and underutilized land within the Project Area. One such action would be
the establishment of a "land write-down pool" by the Redevelopment
Agency, These programs are described-in Appendix A (on file).
The existence of underutilized and unproductive parcels in the Project Area
is indicative of the prevalence of impaired investments, which is a factor
contributing to economic blight.. The end result is a serious social and
economic burden on the community caused by deferred structural
maintenance, overall property neglect, unsightly vacant lots, ,inhibited
growth in property values and tax revenues, and unrealized housing
opportunities."
72
2.1(b) Overview of Past Projects to Eliminate Blight
• Amended the Redevelopment Plan to raise the tax increment limitation.
♦ Studied land use options for implementation`of Guardian Center-Phase III:
♦ Rehabilitated 60 units in the south Oakview area. s
• Completed reconstruction of 10 alleys in the south Oakview area.
♦ Completed comprehensive Enhancement Project for Jacquelyn Lane.
♦ The Rehabilitation Loan Program for multi-family residential structures
represents one of the key activities of the Agency in this area and $467,000 in
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds were expended to bring
78 additional units to completion.
• A new program of Housing Code Enforcement using $45,000 in CDBG funds
has accomplished 172 inspections with 58 violations abated. Property owner
cooperation has been good and only one case resulted in prosecution.
♦ To cure a contaminated water well problem, the Agency provided a new water
line and service to 54 residential units in the north Oakview area at a cost of
over $234,000 in CDBG funds.
• The Learning, Organizing, Growing for Oakview Students (LOGOS) Program
continued to provide opportunities for twenty-three high school students to
improve the neighborhood by graffiti removal and trash clean-up.
The existing Disposition and Development Agreement between the Agency and
Phil Zisakis was being implemented by conveyance of Agency owned land on
Beach Boulevard north of Cypress for expansion of an existing commercial c
complex.
+ An earlier Exclusive Negotiation Agreement between the Agency and Guardian
Savings and Loan called for the conveyance of an Agency owned parcel on Elm
Street north of Cypress Street for use as a multi-level parking structure. The
Exclusive was terminated due to the takeover of Guardian by the federal
Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC).
• The Agency provided funds for a Police Substation in the existing Community
Center to better serve the residents of the area.
73
• The multi-story Guardian Center Iocated at the southwest corner of Beach
Boulevard and Warner Avenue was sold by the Resolution Trust Corporation
(RTC) for $21 million. LIU, Inc. is the new owner of the building, In 1993
staff was negotiating with LIU for the disposition of an adjacent Agency owned
parcel of .25 acres to be incorporated into the site plan of the mixed use center
for additional parking.
• Next door to the Guardian Center, the Leonard Lichter Office Building was
expanded during the period and benefited from exterior remodeling which makes
it architecturally compatible with surrounding buildings. This was done without
Agency assistance.
• The Agency also approved an amended Disposition and Development
Agreement (DDA) with Phil Zisakis, owner of National Auto Glass. The
Agreement provided for the use of Agency owned property for parking that
would allow expansion of the existing automobile glass business to 12,300
square feet. This expansion also provided the opportunity for this facility to link
architecturally with the adjacent office building. The amended DDA was
approved on May 18, 1992 and required the developer to pay $48,000 for the
parking rights to be offset by improvement costs of the fifteen spaces.
{ ♦ Through the Community Development Block Grant Program the City sponsors a
Code Enforcement Program to closely monitor building and housing codes
within the area. There were 712 active cases processed in 1991-92, and 648 in
1992-93.
♦ Also under the CDBG Program, the City continues its Rehabilitation Loan
Program, completing 40 residential units over the two year period at a cost of
over $440,000.
74
2.1 (c) Summary of Outstanding Conditions of Blight.
A. Residential units continue to deteriorate and rehabilitation is needed.
B. Streets are below community standards.
C. No alley improvements have been provided.
D. Storm drainage is inadequate.
E. Streetscape and landscaping is needed.
F. Overflow parking needs of adjacent commercial development create traffic
and circulation problems and impact the adjacent residential area.
G. Social issues of crime, juvenile delinquency, welfare dependency and
unemployment are more prevalent in this area than-in other residential areas of
the City.
H. Mixed and incompatible land uses still exist.
1
75
2.1(d) Identification of Locations of Blight
OAKVIEW
W ARN1 AVE.
z
FIR D
Y A R AVE
r
CYPRESS AVE
C PR£SS
z �
i 1
L u
j
CR-
x �
MANDREL-L OR 7w
m
\ w
n$ARTON OR 07
w ,
-' n
D 1
X
¢ J z J
J
xxcorF z
r
a 2
¢ rV
SLATER AVE
LI
AMENDMENT NO. ONE TO THE OAKVIEW
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
f
Matrix. Block Number Map
. N
Pro ject .Area Boundaries
1- 14 Block Numbers
SCALE
76
MATRIX 1
SUMMARY OF BLIGHTING INFLUENCES
WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA
BLOCK NUMBERS 1 2 3 415 fi. 7 8 9 1011111213141
DEFICIENT,DETERIOR ATE D X X X X X X X XXXXX X
AND DILAPIDATED STRUCTURES,
DEFECTIVE DESIGN
INADEQUATE ROADWAY CONDITIONS ' X X X X X X X X
INADEQUATE CURBS, x X X X X X X X X
SIDEWALKS AND GUTTERS
TRAFFIC AND X X X X X X X
CIRCULATION DEFICIENCIES
INADEQUATE INGRESS/EGRESS X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
INADEQUATE PARKING X X X X X X
cn
z .
INADEQUATE STREET LIGHTING X X X X X X X X
Q
O LACK OF LANDSCAPING, MEDIAN X X X X X X X X X X X X X
0 IMPROVEMENTS AND STREETSCAPING
CD
WATER SUPPLY DEFICIENCIES X X X X X X X T X
� ;
x
w
DRAINAGE SYSTEM DEFICIENCIES X. X X X X X X X X X X X X X
SEWER SYSTEM DEFICIENCIES
MIXED AND INCOMPATIBLE T X X X
LAND USES
PUBLIC FACILITY DEFICIENCIES
VACANT OR MARGINAL.BUSINESSES X
VACANT UNDERUTILIZED AND/OR X X X X
IRREGULARLY SHAPED PARCELS
77
MATRDC 2
- SUMMARY OF NEEDED PROGRAMS AND
IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA
BLOCK NUMBERS 1 2 3 4 15 6 71819 10 .11 1213 14
COMMERCIAL REHABILITATION X X X
-LOANS AND GRANTS
LIGHT INDUSTRIAL REHABILITATION
LOANS AND GRANTS
LAND POOL FUNDS FOR COMMERCIAL X X X
AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
RESIDENTIAL REHABILITATION, X X X X X X X X X X X X X
REPLACEMENT HOUSING POOL
REPAIR OR ADD STREET LIGHTING X XXX X X X X
REPAIR OR WIDENING OF ROADWAYS X X X X X X X
CONSTRUCTION OF
TRAFFIC SIGNALS
- rn
2 CONSTRUCTION OF CURBS, x X X X X X X X X
< GUTTERS AND SIDEWALKS
O ALLEY 'IMPROVEMENTS X X
c
a
INGRESS/EGRESS IMPROVEMENTS X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS X X X X X X X X X X
STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
SEWER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
PROVISION OF STREETSCP.pING,
STRIP IMPROVEMENTS X X X X X X X X X X X X X
AND LANDSCAPING
PARKING IMPROVEMENTS X X X X X X
PUBLIC FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS
78
2.2 (a-d) Five Year Target Projects and Programs
i
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)
Programs/Projects Estimated - Funding Priority Blight
Costs - Sources ,C1-31 Addressed
1. Continue Housing $ 350,000 HOME/CBDG X A
Rehabilitation loan
Program 20 units per yr
2. Oalcview Branch $ 25.0,000 CBDG 1 G
Library
3. Review Oakview $ 30,000 T.1. 3 A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H ,
Neighborhood Plan
4. Streets, Streetlights, Unknown CBDG 2 B,C,D,E
Alleys, and Landscape
. kt
5. Storm Drainage $35,0,000 CBDG 2 -D
V
. ,a
6. Community Services $125,000 CBDG 1 G_
Police Assistance
E
s
7. LOGOS Youth Employment -
Clean-up Program $350,000 &-ICBDG. _ 2.
8. 'Cade Enforcement $310,000 CBDG 2 A
* Refer to Section 2:1(c) Summary of Outstanding Conditions of Blight
79
3.0 Low and Moderate Income Housing Plan
3.1 Five Year Annual Housing Goals
3.1(a) Identification of AB 315 Annual Housing Production Goals*
Table 1
Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
Xnclusionary Housing Requirements
#Units Affordable Affordable Net Deficit/
R uired Provided Surplus
Oakview
Existing' '69 10 0 10
r Proposed 0 0 0 0
ota1 1 0QXX
a
NOTE: Tables from the Redevelopment Agency Housing Policy and Housing Compliance
PIan.
*The AB 315 Report for all project areas is included in the Housing Set-Aside Section.
60
3.1(b) Estimation of Number of Low/Moderate Units to be Destroyed•
and
3.1(c) Identification of Replacement Housing Sites
Qakview Proiect Area:
Table 3
Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
Replacement Requirement
Units Low VeQ Low
Demolished:
7921 Cypress -2 0
17122 Elm -1 0 0.
Planned Replacement Units:
17171 Elm 13 7 6
Ten Year/Life of Plan Housing Program
This project area is built-out and there is no expectation of a production requirement nor units to be
destroyed during the remaining life of the plan. The Agency's housing efforts in this project area will
C.
emphasize rehabilitation of existing units using tax increment, housing bonds or other local, federal or
state funds.
si
OAKVIEW TECUICAL APPENDIX A
82
OAKVIRW KIDEV&LOPMENT PROJECT AREA
CASH FLOW ANALYSIS 9/30/94
1995196 1 1996197 1997198 1998198 1999MO I Total 13ouroes Goals 8 Ob fives Expianatlon
EST FUND SALANCE,PRIOR YEAR 817,704 549,368 263,744 -27,150 -336,594
INCOME
Tax Increment(804A) 412,639 420.790 429,20-6 437,790 446,645 2,146,870
Intemat 57,239 38,456 18,462 0 0 114,157
TOTAL INCOME 489,778 459,246 447,668 437,790 446,545 2,261,027
EXPENSES
Padding Bond Debt 297,905 300,105 29d,905 298,655 296,655 1,492,226 Tax Inc. Econ.Dw. Project Area Admin,
Gty Debt 272,500 272,5W 272,5W 272,500 272,500 1,382,500 Tex Inc, Eoon.Dw, Project Area Admin.
School Pass-Through 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 6,000 25,000 Tax Inc. Eoon.Dw. Project Area Admin.
Operating 27,379 28,748 30,185 31,695 33,279 151,286 Tax inc. Eoon.Dev. Project Area Admin,
Operating Admin Portlon(10%) 63,734 66,921 70,267 73,780 77,469 352,171 Tax Inc, Econ.Dw. Project Are&Admin.
Legal Servloea 6,400 0,460 6,460 6,460 6,460 32,300 Tax Inc. Eoon.Dw. Project Area Admin.
Lsgai Servloes Admin Portion(10%) 17,790 17,790 17,790 17,790 17,760 88,950 Tax Inc. Eoon.Dw. Project Area Admin.
Business Dweloprrrsnt(10%) 47,346 47,346 39,455 39,455 39,456 213,057 Tax Ino. Eoon.Dw. Project Area Admin.
TOTAL EXPENSES 738,114 744,870 738,562 745,335 750,608 3,717,489
00
w
NET INCOME •268,336 -285,624 •290.894 -307,545 -304,D63 -1,456,462
EST FUND GALAHCE,END OF YEAR GA?,388 >. 283,7i�4 �2t,160: �334895 .: 640,96�
0
f
r, f
OAK'VIEW
TECHNICAL APPENDIX B
SET-ASIDE FINANCING PLAN
(See Dousing Section)
84
r'
TL $AJBER .L - BE/. i��
P,,..EDE'VELOPMENT LgPLEMENTAT'ION PLAN
1995 -- 2000
(ITT OF HUNTINGTON BEAN
85
TALBERT - BEACH
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
INTRODUCTION
In October; 1993, the California State Legislature approved the Redevelopment Reform bill
known as Assembly Bill 1290. This new law required Redevelopment Agency's to amend all
existing plans to create uniform standards for the length of redevelopment plans and the time
allowed to incur debt and to collect tax increment. It also required the preparation and
adoption of "Implementation Plans" stating the goals, planned expenditures, housing activities
and blight alleviation planned for the next five years.
This is the implementation plan for the Talbert-Beach Redevelopment Project area and
contains:
♦ Five year goals (prioritized), projects with costs and funding sources.identified.
♦ Blight findings from the original Redevelopment Plan, past projects to eliminate blight,
outstanding conditions of blight and a map of these conditions.
♦ Five year housing goals and annual production goals, estimate of units to be destroyed and
identification of replacement sites.
♦ Five year strategy to alleviate blight.
♦ Appendices A & B identifying cash flow for redevelopment and housing programs.
8�
1
TALBERT--BEACH
1. Goals and Objectives
1.1 Goals and Objectives per Redevelopment Plan,
(September 20, 1982, PP 119 - 121)
General Objectives of Redevelopment Plan
"In creating the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency, the City
Council of the City of Huntington Beach declared its desire to improve,
upgrade, and revitalize all areas of the City and in particular those
areas within the City which have become blighted because of
deterioration, disuse and economic, physical and social
maladjustments. As apart of the city's ongoing redevelopment efforts,
the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency has prepared this Plan
for the Talbert Beach Redevelopment Project Area.
R Accordingly, the objectives of this Redevelopment Project are as
follows:
♦ Eliminating blighting influences, including deteriorating buildings,
incompatible and uneconomic land uses, inadequate public
improvements, obsolete structures, and other physical, economic
and social deficiencies; improve the overall appearances of streets,
parking areas and other facilities, public and private; and assure
that all buildings are safe for persons to occupy.
♦ Encouraging existing owners, businesses and tenants within the
Project Area to participate in redevelop Tent,activities. . . 11.
♦ Providing adequate parcels and required public improvements so as
to encourage new construction by private enterprise, thereby
providing the City of Huntington Beach with an improved economic
base.
♦ Mitigating development limitations which have resulted in the lack
of proper utilization of the Project Area to such an extent that it
constitutes a serious physical, social, and economic burden on the
community which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or
87
♦ Providing adequate public improvements, public facilities, open
spaces, and utilities which cannot be remedied by private or
governmental action without redevelopment.
♦ -Providing construction and employment opportunities in the
development of these facilities and by providing employment
opportunities in the operation of the proposed industrial facilities.
♦ Implementing the construction or reconstruction of adequate streets,
curbs, gutters, street lights, storm drains, and other improvements
as necessary to assist development of the Project Area to conform
to the General Plan as a master-planned development and to correct
existing environmental deficiencies.
♦ Establishing development criteria and controls for the permitted
uses within the Project Area in accordance with modern and
competitive development practices, thus assuring the highest design
standards and environmental quality.
♦ Providing for relocation assistance and benefits to Project Area
residence which may be displaced, in accordance with the
.. provisions of the Community Redevelopment Law and the
government code of the State of California
To obtain the objectives of this Plan as set forth, the Agency is authorized to
undertake most or all of the following implementing actions:
♦ Acquisition of property.
Participation by owners and tenants in the redevelopment
project.
♦ Relocation assistance to displaced residential occupants as
required by law.
♦ Development of adequate parking, landscaping, public
improvements and facilities.
♦ Demolition clearance of properties acquired, and site
preparation.
ss
♦ Other actions as appropriate, including but not limited to, actions to
assist property owners and tenants in the improvement of their
properties to carry out the objectives of the redevelopment plan.
♦ Assist in providing financingdor p`rivate-and public.development in
the Project Area."
' s 5
1.2 Five Year Target`Goals and Objectives
1.2(a) Prioritization of Goals and Objectives
Project Areas Size.: 25 Acres
Adoption Date: September, 1982
Life of Plan: 35 Years
Tax Increment Cap: $350;000 annually .
PROJECT GOALS FOR 1995-2000
Implement the provisions of the Disposition and Development Agreement with
Sassounian Capital Ventures, Inc.,.for the construction of 38 condominiums.
Implement second trust deed program for 25 units in Pacific Park.Villas.
4 Continue to support and maintain the Emerald Cove senior housing project.
Monitor maintenance requirements of public infrastructure.
Monitor construction of balance of 50 units in Pacific Park Villas (not under
Disposition and Development Agreement).
1.2(b) Reasons for Inclusion
These goals originated in the Agency's most recent Biennial Report published in
December, 1993 and have.been subjected to.public review and approval by the
Agency. Together they represent what can reasonably be accomplished within the
period of this plan.
89
2. Projects and Expenditures
2.1 Conditions of Blight
2.1(a) Summary of Previous Blight Findings
(from "Report to City Council", September, 1982, PP 2-3)
"The Talbert-Beach Redevelopment Area is located between Talbert Avenue
and Taylor Drive west of Beach-Boulevard. The southernmost portion is
developed with the five-acre Terry Park and several single--family residences
occupy the central eastern portion. The balance of the site is vacant. The
Project is bounded on the north by existing industrial development and on the
south by approximately 64 single-family residential units.
As demonstrated in the Documentation of Blight Report, which is attached
hereto as Appendix F and incorporated herein, the Project Area is blighted in
numerous respects, including both buildings and property.
The blighting effects which are having a substantial negative and adverse
impact on the Project Area are as follows:
3.1 Condition of Buildings and Structures
Most of the single-family homes within the Project Area are in poor to fair
condition needing minor or major improvements. Studies indicate that the
property is lacking proper access for both residential and industrial
development.
3.2 Economic Disuse and Depreciated Values
That small lot subdivisions are a hindrance to development of the land and
especially difficult for industrial development. The small and/or irregular
shaped lots with fragmented ownership patterns reduce the suitability for
development.
These small lots make it impossible for modern development to take place and
result in a severe economic disuse of the property.
On April 16, 1968, the Planning Commission designated this are as part of the
"Non-Structural Blight Element of the Master Plan". The problem of the small
lots and their blighting effect has been recognized for numerous years.
go
3.3 Irregular Subdivision and Multiple Ownership P
Many studies have documented the problem of fragmented ownership as a
result of the "encyclopedia lots" and the fact that such has precluded
development of the site.
3.4 Lack of Public Improvements
There is a need to extend storm sewer,facilities into.the area and provide much
needed street and other public facilities and utilities which do not exist today.
3.5 Increased Crime Rates
According to the Police Department, the crime rates in the project area are
substantially higher.than City-wide average.
2.1(b) Overview of Past Projects to Eliminate Blight
♦ Acquisition of site, financing and construction of 164 unit senior apartment project
for low income households (Emerald Cove).
♦ Acquisition and disposition of a site causing the privately funded construction of
96 senior condominiums (Windward Cove).
♦ Sale of single-family mortgage revenue bonds to provide below market interest
rate first mortgages to first time home buyers to a share of buyers in 54 unit
condominium project (Capewoods).
♦ Acquisition of "encyclopedia lots" through eminent domain to assemble parcels,
♦ Preparation and processing of new.subdivision.map for entire project area.
♦ Relocation assistance to displaced households.
♦ Creation of streets, sewers, water, electrical and other infrastructure necessa y,to
serve new parcels.
♦ Acquisition and disposition of a five acre site and, through are agreement,
construction of a 120,000 square foot, single-tenant industrial building leased to a
quilted products manufacturer.
s:.
91
♦ Through an agreement, disposition of the .75 acre Agency-owned site to a
developer for incorporation in a larger site that will contain 88 condominium
units. The agreement covers 38 of the units and requires the Agency to make
available second trust deeds for up to 25 of the units to qualified moderate income
buyers (Pacific Park Villas).
2.1(c) Summary of Outstanding Conditions of Blight
The Construction of the entire Pacific Park Villas project (88 units) will
represent completion of the Talbert-Beach Redevelopment Project Area.
2.1(d) Identification of Locations of Blight
TALBERT - BEACH
v v
u
a
m .
{ TAIMI A&
w A
� a Essfx of.y LL
Sc I r d
j HAPPY DR.
I I �
r
r �
i
I
I
N
;! TERRY
PARK
it
a
1
TAYLOR OR,
r AREAS OF OUTSTANDING BLIGHT
92
2.2 (a-d) Five Year Target Projects and Programs
(a) { (b) (c) (d) (e)
Estimated Funding Priority Blight
Programs/Projects, costs Sources (L:3) Addressed
1. Implement the provisions of Nominal T.I. 1 NA
the Disposition and
Development Agreement with
Sassounian Capital. Ventures,
Inc. for the construction of 38
condominiums.
2. Implement second trust deed $750,000 T.I. 1 NA
program for 25 units in
Pacific Park Villas.
3. Continue to support and - $80,000 T.I. 2 NA
maintain the Emerald Cove
senior housing project. '
4. Monitor maintenance Unknown T,I. 3 NA
requirements of public
infrastructure.
5. Monitor construction of Nominal. T.I. 2 NA
balance of 50 units in Pacific
Park Villas (not under DDA).
* Refer to Section 2.1(c) Summary of Outstanding Conditions of Blight
93
3. Low and Moderate Income Housing Plan
3.1 Five Year Annual Housing Goals
3.1{a} Identification of AB 315 Annual Housing Production Goals*
Date Affordable Affordable Net Deficit/
Expected ##Units Required Provided Surplus
Talbert-
Beach
Existing Non- 151 23 0 -23
Agency
Existing -- 164 49 164 115
Agency
Proposed/ 1996 88 13 25 12
Contract
TOTAL — ....... . . . ..SS....... '. R9.... .:.. ... ...:1€�4..
*The AB 315 Report for all project areas is included in the Housing Set-Aside
Section.
94
t 3.1(b) Estimation of Number of Low/Moderate Units to be desiroyed
and
3.1(c) Identification of Replacement Housing Sites
f
Talbert. - Beach Project Area:
Destroyed:
Units Low Very Low
7872 Talbert Avenue -1 -- --
7842 Talbert Avenue -1 --
7862 Talbert Avenue -1 -- -- .
Planned Replacement Units:
Surplus Production Units
in Talbert Beach 90 49 41
N ....:: 87.... . >> ..... 9. .. .. 41.... .
Ten Year/Life of Plan Housing Program
The last remaining project in this project area is under construction and its units have
been accommodated in the five, one-year housing plans herein. No additional
production requirement will ensue and no additional units will be destroyed over the
remaining life of the plan.
95
TALBERT - BEACH
TECHNICAL APPENDIX A
96
9/30/94
TALSERT-BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
CASH FLOW ANALYSIS
199 m 199M7 I 1997198 1998199 19WIDO I Total Souroee Goals 8 Mee elvanatbn
EST FUND BALANCE,PRIOR YEAR 1,041,775 1,335,215 1,230,438 1,115,411 989,248
INCOME
Tax Increment(80%) 280,0()0 280,000 260,000 280,0W 280,000 1,400,000
interest 72,924 93,485 86,131 76,079 60,247 399,84E
Peclfio Park Villas Land Sale 416,000 0 0 0 0 416,000 Developer Eton.Dev. 38f25 Moderate Unht
-----------------------------------------------
TOTAL INCOME 768,924 373,465 30,131 358,079 349,247 2,215,846
EXPENSES
Exisllrig Bond Debt 163,495 162,095 160,645 159,145 159,145 604,526 Tax Inc. Eoon.Dev. Project Area Admin.
City Debt 2D0,000 200,DW 200,000 200,D00 200,000 1,000,D04 Tax Ino. £ocn.Dev. Project Area Admin.
Operating 19,425 20,396 21,410 22,487 23;611 107,335 Tax Eno. Evan.Day. Pro*-t Area Admin.
Operating Admin Portlon(10%) 63,734 66,921 70,267 73,700 77,469 352,171 Tax Inc. Eoon.Dw Project Area Admin.
Legal SeMoes 4,300 4,300 4,300 4,300 4,300 21,500 Tax Inc. Edon,Dev. Project Area Admin.
Legal Services Admin Portion(10%) 7,790 7,790 7,790 7,7W 7,790 38,950 Tax Inc. Eoon.Dev, P qfW Area Admin.
Business Development(10%) 16,740 16,740 16,740 16,740 16,740 83,700 Tax Inc. Econ.Dev. Project Area Admin.
PactAc Park Miles Land Acquisition _0___ 0_ 0 4 _ 0 _ 0 Tax Inc. Econ.Day. Project Area Admin,
TOTAL EXPENSES 475,484 A78,242 481,158 484,242 489,055 2,408,161
NET INCOME 293,440 •104,777 -115,027 -128,163 •139,808 192,335
EST FUND BALANCE,END OF YEAR 1 3S5 216 1 7J0 43�'`i 1 1!6 411. 989 248 . 1349 440
r
TALBERT - BEACH
TECHNICAL APPENDIX B
SET-ASIDE FINANCING PLAN
f..
(See Housing Section)
98
YORKT0"- - LAKE
REDEVELOPMENT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
1995 . 2000
CITY Of HIINTINGYON BEACH
99
r LAKE
YORKT WN -
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
e INTRODUCTION
In October, 1993, the California State Legislature approved the.Redevelopment Reform bill
known as Assembly Bill 1290. This new law required Redevelopment Agency's to amend all
existing plans to create uniform standards for the length of redevelopment plans and the time
allowed to incur debt and to collect tax increment. It also required the preparation and adoption
of "Implementation Plans" stating the goals, planned expenditures, housing activities and blight
alleviation planned for the next five years.
i
This is the implementation plan for the Yorktown-Lake Redevelopment Project area and
contains:
♦ Five year goals (prioritized), projects with costs and funding sources identified.
♦ Blight findings from the original Redevelopment Plan, past projects to eliminate blight,
outstanding conditions of blight and a map of these conditions.
♦ Five year housing goals and annual production goals, estimate of units to be destroyed and
identification of replacement sites.
+ Five year strategy to alleviate blight.
♦ Appendices A & B identifying cash flow for redevelopment and housing programs.
100
Y0RKT0"-,-- LAKE
1. Goals and Objectives
1.1 Goals and Objectives per Redevelopment Plan
General Objectives of Redevelopment Plan
"In creating the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency, the City
Council of the City of Huntington Beach declared its desire to improve,
upgrade, and revitalize all areas of the City and in particular those areas
within the City which have become blighted because of deterioration,
disuse and economic, physical and social maladjustments. As a part of the
City's ongoing redevelopment efforts, the Huntington Beach
Redevelopment Agency has prepared this Plan for the Yorktown--Lake
Redevelopment Project Area.
Accordingly, the objectives of this Redevelopment Project are as follows:
♦ Eliminating blighting influences, including deteriorating buildings,
incompatible and uneconomic land uses, inadequate public
improvements, obsolete structures, and other physical, economic and
social deficiencies; 'improve the overall appearance of streets, parking
areas and other facilities, public and private; and assure that all
buildings are safe for persons to occupy.
+ Encouraging existing owners, businesses and tenants within:the Project
Area to participate in redevelopment activities.
+ Providing adequate,parcels and required public improvements so as to
encourage new construction by private enterprise, thereby providing
the City of Huntington Beach with an improved economic base.
+ Mitigating development limitations which have resulted in the Iack of
proper utilization of the Project Area to such an extent that it
constitutes a serious physical, social, and economic burden on the
community which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or
alleviated by private enterprise acting alone.
♦ Providing adequate public improvements, public facilities, open spaces,
and utilities which cannot be remedied by private or governmental
action without redevelopment.
ioi
♦ Providing construction and employment opportunities in the
development of these facilities and by providing employment
opportunities in the operation of the-prdposed commercial and
recreational facilities.
♦ Implementing the construction or reconstruction of adequate streets,
curbs, gutters, street lights, storm drains, and other improvements as
necessary to assist development of the Project Area to conform to the
General Plan as a master-planned development and to correct existing
environmental deficiencies.
♦ Establishing development criteria and controls for the permitted uses
within the Project Area in accordance with modern and competitive
development practices, thus assuring the highest design standards and
environmental quality.
+ Providing for relocation assistance and benefits to Project Area
residents which may be displaced, in accordance with the provisions of
the Community Redevelopment Law and the government code of the
State of California.
To obtain the objectives of this Plan as set forth, the Agency is authorized to
( undertake most or all of the following implementing actions:
l + Acquisition of property
+ Participation by owners and tenants in the redevelopment project
+ Relocation assistance to displaced residential occupants as required by
law
+ DeveIopment of adequate parking, landscaping, public improvements
and facilities
♦ Demolition, clearance of properties acquired, and site preparation
+ Other actions as appropriate, including, but not limited to, actions to
assist property owners and tenants in the improvement of their
properties to carry out the objectives of the redevelopment plan
+ Assist in providing financing for private and public development in the
Project Area"
102
1.2 Five Year Target Goals and Objectives '
1.2(a) Prioritization of Goals and Objectives j
Project Area Size: 30 Acres
Adoption Date: September 1982
Life of Plan: 35 Years
Tax Increment Cap: $250,000 annually
PROJECT GOALS FOR 1995-2000
Monitor completion of Huntington Classics, private single-family home
development.
Obtain entitlements for development of 23 units senior housing project of which
a minimum would be provided for seniors in the very low income category.
Commence and complete construction of the 23 unit senior housing project.
1.2(b) Reasons for Inclusion
These goals originated in the Agency's most recent Biennial Report published in
December, 1993 and have been subjected to public review and approval by the
Agency. Together they represent what can reasonably be accomplished within the
period of this plan.
103
2. Projects and Expenditures
2.1 Conditions of Blight
2.1a Summary of Previous Blight Findings
(from "Report to City Council', September, 1982 )
"The blighting effects which are having a substantial negative and
adverse impact on the Project Area are as follows:
3.1 Condition of Buildings and Structures
The older metal structures within the project area represent a visual
blight as they are deteriorated to a dilapidated stage and evidence a
lack of on-going maintenance.
3.2 Economic Disuse and Depreciated Values
The scattered older oil pumping operations and storage facilities are
having an adverse operational aesthetic impact on the property
resulting in nondevelopment of the site.
3.3 Irregular Subdivision
The project site is divided in an irregular form by 17th Street and
Pine Street and the existing alley and parcel configuration.
3.4 Lack of Public Improvements
Certain streets within the project area should be removed, while
Utica and Lake should be improved to City standards. These
streets presently lack adequate curbs, gutters, sidewalks and street
lighting.
3.5 Flooding
The installation of adequate streets, curbs and gutters will improve
drainage within the project area.
' 104
3.6 Stagnant or Improper Utilization
As documented in previous sections, the existing fragmented lot
pattern has changed very little in the past, and the existing metal
structures are continuing to age. The existing land uses are well
below their economic potential.
3.7 Increased Crime Rates
According to the Police Department, the crime rates in the project
area are substantially higher than City-wide average, and are one of
the highest rates within the City. Since the Police Department is
located within the project area, many reports are not directly related
to the area itself."
2.1(b) Overview of Past Projects to Elirnbate Blight
♦ The older metal structures that were a visual blight due to their dilapidation and
lack of maintenance have been demolished.
♦ The scattered oil pumping operations and storage facilities have been consolidated
and/or removed.
♦ The project site has been re-subdivided resulting in a more standardized parcel
configuration.
♦ Utica Avenue and Lake Street have been improved to include proper curbs,
gutters and sidewalks, which has also improved drainage within the project area_
♦ The new land uses, mainly that of the Huntington Classics single family home
development, has maximized the economic potential for this project area.
105
2.1(c) Summary of Outstanding Conditions of Blight
The construction of the Huntington Classics and the Senior Housing Project
(104 total units) will represent completion of the Yorktown - Lake
Redevelopment Project Area.
2.1(d) Identification of Locations of Blight
YORKTOWN - LAKE
YOUTOWN AVE 0
N
"LA 10 ScAd
VvbCHTA AVE.
.n
Z
y1
Q
VENCE AVE.
w
N r w
H w
zY
d P.
Q
LFXA AVE_
= AREAS OF OUTSTANDING BLIGHT
106
2.2 (a-d) Five Year Target Projects and Programs
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e)
Program s/Prokc�U Estimated Funding Priority Blight
Costs Sources ^(1_-3� Addressed
1. Monitor completion Nominal Tax Increment 3 NIA
of Huntington Classics
private single-family
home development.
2. Complete design and $ 175,000 Tax Increment 1 N/A
obtain entitlements for
development of 23 unit
senior housing project of
which a minimum of 13 units
would be provided for seniors
in the very low income category.
Commence and complete $ 885,000 Tax Increment i NIA
construction of the 23 unit
senior housing project.
c
* Refer to Section 2. 1(c) Summary of Outstanding Conditions of Blight
1 '
107
r
i
1
3.0 Uw and Moderate Income Housing Plan
i
I
3.1 Five Year Annual Housing Goals
E 3.1(a) Identification of AB 315 Annual Housing Production Goals*
PROPOSED/CONTRACTED PROJECTS- All Units are Assisted
Date
Expect Units LIM Regd. L/M Provided VL Reod. VL Provided
Huntington Classics 1994 81 13 0 6 0
Yorktown-Lake 1996 23 4 23 2 23
Senior Project
'
* The AB 315 Report for all project areas is included in the Housing Set-Aside Section,
108
3.1(b) Estimation of Number of Low[Moderate Units to be Destroyed
and
3.1(c) Identification of Replacement Housing Sites
Yorktown - Lake Project Area:
Units Low Very Low
Destroyed: 0 0 0
Planned Replacement Units; 0 .0 0
Ten Year/Life of Plan Housing Pro Tarn
The last remaining project in this area is under construction. The production requirement of these 81
units will be accommodated within the project area and there is no replacement requirement.
Therefore, there will be no additional housing requirements over the remaining life of the plan.
i
YOR KTOWN - LAKE
TECMNIICAL APPENDIX A
y � t
110
YORKTOWN-LAKE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT ARK4
9/30184
CASH FLOW ANALYSIS
=1995M 1 1996M7 1 1997,90 1 1998r89 I 19991W I Total Sources Goals S ObjectNes JlExplanabm
EST FUND BALANCE,PRIOR YEAR -24,684 •17,013 -13.762 -15.163 -20,989
INCOME
Tex increment(80%) 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 1,181,587
Interest 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL INCOME ?00,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000. 1,000,000
EXPENSES
City Debt 80,000 80,000 80,D00 80,000 80,000 400,000 Tax Inc. Eoon.Dev. Project Area Admim
Operating 24,675 25,909 27,204 28,564 29,993 136,345 Tax Inc, Eoon.Dev. Project Area Admin.
Operating Admin Portion(10%) 83,734 66,921 70,267 73,780 77,469 352,171 Tax tnc. Eoon.Dev. Project Area Admin,
Legal Services 2.180 2,180 2,180 2,180 2.180 10,900 Tax Inc. Edon.Oev. Pnc ect Area Admin,
Legal Services Admin Portlon(10%) 7,790 7,790 7,790 7,790 7,700 38,950 Tax Inc. Eoon.Dev. Project Area Admin.
Buslness Development(10%) 13,950 13,950 13,950 13,950 13,9W $9,760 Tax Inc. Eoon.Dev. Project Area Admin.
Funded 4n
State Budget(ERAF) Pft Years 0 0 0 0 0 Tax Ira. Eoon.Dev. Project Area Admin,
r _ . .. __�_____.._. ______M . ___ .__..__. .____�.
F-
TOTAL EXPENSES 192,329 196,749 201,391 205,264 211,382 1,083,11a
NET INCOME 7,871 3,251 •1,391 -6,264 •11,382 -8,115
EST FUND BALANCE,END OF YEAR 17,013 ;13,782 # 115163 21,d48g�I1 4
YORKTOWN LAKE
TECHNICAL APPENDIX B
SET-ASIDE FINANCING PLAN
(See Housing Section)
112
HOUSING SET-ASIDE FINANCIING PLAINS
REDEVELOPMENT IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1995 - 2000
r"-
CITY bE HUNTINGTQN BEACH
113
I HOUSINOSET•ASIOE FUND ANALYSIS 1/30/94
CASK FLOW ANALYSIS ;
a
FundlrQ
1995M 1998197 1097M 1998/99 1999/m Total Source Goele a Nectives E netlon:Units/Aftordabie
EST FUND BALANCE,PRIOR YEAR -719,412 -1,346,605 -1.138,890 .921,324 -693,981
INCOME
"Tex Increment(20%) 918,855 046,421 974,813 1,004,058 1.034,179 4,878,326
Interest 0 0 0 0 0 0
in Lieu Fee Affordable Housing %
(rNR)------ b - 50,000 0 -----^ 0 0 50,000
TOTAL INCOME 918,855 948,421 974,813 1,004,058 1,034,179 4.878,326
EXPENSES
Operating 289,424 303.895 319,090 335,044 351,707 1,599,250
Operating Adminletralion Portlon
(10%) 63,734 66,921 70,267 73,760 77,wt89 352,171
Legal Services 30,100 30,100 30,100 30.100 30.100 150,500
Legal Services Admin Portion(10%) 7,790 7,790 7,790 7.790 7,790 38,950
Capital Fro}ects:
Fie Points Senor WV as Loan-
r, encumbered 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 0 400,000 Tax Inc. Repiaoe Unts M•P 184/48Very Low(Senior Hag)
i✓ Funded In
A Hsbttat for Humanity Prior Years 0 0 0 0 0 20%Funds Replace Units M-P 3/3 Very Love
Funded In
725 USkx Loan Agreement Prior Yeen 0 0 0 0 0 20%Funds Replace Units M-P 3WO Very Low
Third Block West 825,000 0 0 0 0 825,000 '20%Funds Replace Units M-P 68133 Moderate
Funded In
TatbarOkaeh Ssavfew 1 Prior Years 0 0 0 0 0 Tax Ino, Replace Units M-P 38/25 Moderate
Trender to Emerald Cove 80,000 80,000 60,000 80,000 80,000 400,000 Tar Inc.
Funded In
Yorktown-Lake Site Aoqulsllkxl Prior Years 0 0 0 0 0 Tax Ino. Replace Units M-P 23123 Very Law
Funded In
Brlsas del Mar Prior Years 0 0 0 0 0 Tax Inc. Replace Urdu M-P 44/14 Very Low
Funded In
313 111h Street Prior Years 0 0 0 0 0 Tax Inc. Reptace Unb M-P 9/9 Very Law
Funded In
ERAF 92-93 Loan Adjustment Prior Years 0 0 0 0 0 Tax Ina
Education Revenue Augmentatlon Furxted in
Fund Prior Yvan 0 0 0 0 0 Tax Inc,
Aoquisltion of two OV 11
Ocean View Estates 150,000 150,000 160,000 150,000 150,000 750,000 20%Funds Coacher Annually
Funded in
611 8th Street Prior Years ---- 0- 0 0 --_ 0 ^--0-,- C06O 818 Veryt.ow
TOTAL EXPENSES 1.548,048 736,706 767,247 776,715 697,156 4.515.872
NET INCOME -627,193 207.715 217.567 227,343 337,023 362.455
fill m I I I nlnin Im RAiwRrTifiil ra:�nnr�w I fi��l I r'tlwnCa�'�ii�1- C'pRfi
EST FUND BALANCE,END OF YEAR i381 J56,959
r
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF
THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
HOUSING COMPLIANCE PLAN
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACK
l
115
FORWARD
Redevelopment law requires redevelopment agencies to reserve
twenty percent of the tax increment collected annually for
the purpose of affordable housing. For some years
redevelopment agencies have been required to provide fifteen
percent of the units in a 'completed project area as
"affordable" .
Recently; legislation approved' and incorporated into The
Health and Safety Code requires redevelopment agencies to
provide. a plari' thrbugh which accomplishment of these housing
obligations ,can ;be"achieved, Such a plan is to be updated
every five years in conjunction with the jurisdiction's
housing element. Here follows the Housing Compliance Plan
for the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington
Beachi
l
116
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE `
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
HOUSING COMPLIANCE PLAN
TCS Redevelopment Associates
51 Southwind
Alisa Viejo, CA 92656
(714) 362-3842
117
HOUSING COMPLIANCE PLAN
FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
Section 33413 (b) (1) of the Health and Safety Codel requires that
3096- of all new or rehabilitated housing units developed by the
redevelopment agency (the "Agency") must be available at
affordable housing cost to low or moderate income households, 50%
of which must be available at affordable housing cost to very low
income households. Section 33413 (b) (2) requires that 15% of all
new or rehabilitated housing units developed within a project
area by entities or persons other than the Agency be available at
affordable housing cost to low or moderate income households, 40%
of which must be available at affordable housing cost to very low
income households. The collective requirements of both
33413 (b) (1) and (2) are referred to herein as the "Housing
Requirement" .
Section 33413 (c) requires that all units rehabilitated,
developed, or constructed in compliance with the Housing
Requirement remain affordable to each respective income level for
the "longest feasible time" , but in no event less than the period
of the land use controls established by the applicable
redevelopment plan. This provision is to be enforced pursuant to
Section 33334 .3 (f) which requires recorded covenants running with
the land..
Effective January 1, 1992, Section 33413 (b) (4) requires the
Agency to adopt a plan for each project area to ensure compliance
with the Housing Requirement every 10 years. The plan must be
consistent with the housing element and shall be reviewed and
amended, if necessary, at least every five years in conjunction
with the housing element.
The following housing compliance plan has been prepared and will
be submitted to the State of California Department of Housing and
Community Development in accordance with Health and Safety Code
Section 33413 (b) (4) .
lAll citations herein are to the Health and Safety Code unless
otherwise noted.
lie
MAIN PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
The Main Pier Redevelopment Project has a current deficit of 118
low-to-moderate income units and 47 very low income units. Upon
completion of the proposed projects, the deficit will be 133 low-
to-moderate income units,R and 1 very low income unit. The Agency
estimates that it will. neither develop nor rehabilitate any
residential units during the next 5 years. Estimates of new or
refiAbilitated residential units to be developed by a person or
entity other than the Agency, within this project area during the
next 5 years, and the percentage of such units to be restricted
with affordability covenants are set forth below.
Description of Proposed Projects _
Third' Block West: The Agency has , approved' a disposition and
development' agreement with Newcomb-Tillotson Development, Inc.
for the Third Block West project. This project , will .include 68
condominium units, 33 of which will be restricted to low-to-
moderate income households. In addition to housing, the
developer will} be providing " both commercial and office uses
. within the project. Construction should begin An 1993 .
Waterfront Residential: Negotiations continue with regard to. the
amendment of Phase II of the Waterfront Project. Included within
Phase II. will be 337 residential units; upon completion of the
Waterfront Project, 639 residential units will .. have been
constructed. The Agency is negotiating to obtain 112 off-site
housing units restricted to low=to-moderate income . households
(see Beach & Atlanta Project) .
Main Pier.. Phase II: The Agency is currently considering a
disposition and development agreement which will provide for
approximately 82 residential units, none of ' which will be
restricted with affordability covenants.
Beach Atlanta: Beach and Atlanta 'development goals 'Include 280
residential units. The Agency is currently negotiating to obtain
very low income restrictions on 112 units in fulfillment - of the
Waterfront Residential Project housing obligation.
119
OAKVIEW REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
The Oakview Redevelopment Project has a deficit of 10 low-to--
moderate income units and 4 very low income units. The Agency _ is
currently negotiating for the rehabilitation of 13 units within
this project area. However, these units are proposed for
replacement housing purposes and are therefore not being
considered in this report. The Agency estimates that there will
be no other new or rehabilitated residential units developed by a
person or entity other than the Agency within this project area
during the. next 5 years. With available residentially-zoned land
limited to one parcel of approximately .2 acres, there is a
maximum potential of 3 newly constructed units within this
project area. The Agency will attempt to obtain long-term
covenants in compliance with Section 33413 (c) on both existing
and proposed housing within the project area.
TALBERT BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
The Talbert..Beach Project is meeting its Housing Requirement, and
will continue to be in compliance upon completion of the proposed
housing project described below. The Agency estimates that it
will neither develop nor rehabilitate any residential units
during the next 5 years. Estimates of new or rehabilitated
residential units to be developed by a person or entity other
than the Agency within this project area during the next 5 years,
and the percentage of such units to be restricted with
affordability covenants are set forth below.
Proposed Projects
Seaview village: The Agency has completed negotiations with
Seaview Enterprises, 25 of the proposed 88 units will be
restricted for moderate income families.
HUNTINGTON CENTER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
There is no residentially zoned land within the Huntington Center
Project Area. However, the City's zoning ordinance permits the
construction of Single Room Occupancy (SRO) structures in any
commercial zone.
120
YORKTOWN-LAKE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
The Yorktown-Lake Project has a deficit of 13 low-to--moderate
income units and 5 very low income units. The Agency estimates
there will be no new or rehabilitated residential units developed
by the Agency or a person or entity other than the Agency within
this project area during the next 5 years. As there is no
residentially zoned vacant land available within the Yorktown-
Lake Project, the Agency is contemplating a plan amendment or
;verger of project areas to incorporate residentially-zoned ' land
into this project area. The Agency will then attempt to obtain
long-term covenants in compliance with Section 33413 (c) on both
existing and proposed housing within the newly incorporated area.
f
121
TABLE 1
Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
Inclusionary Housing Requirements
# UNITS Affordable' Affordable Net Deficit/
Required Provided Surplus
Main-Pier
Existing 784 118 0 -1 18
Proposed 1,069 160 145 -15
Total:83 278 T45 133
........... :.
Oakview
Existing 69 10 0 -10
Proposed 0 0 0 0
. : .."..-'.
Talbert-Beach
Existing Non- 151 23 0 -23
Agency
Existing Agency 164 49 164 115
. Proposed/Contract 88 13 25 12
Total: .:`. .. . ...- �. .r......... :..... ... ........ ', ..... ':........ ._ .. 104 . . ._..,'i
Yorktown-Lake
Existing 86 13 0 -13
Total ,
Huntington Center 0 0 0 0
Total:.
122
TABLE 2
Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
Inventory of Housing Projects
PROJCC # UNIS . .E.IM equlyd I,/�VI rovrded VL iieuirs 11k.` Pcovjded ':Goveant'
Existing Projects `
Main-Pier
Huntington Pier Colony/1990 130 12 0 8 - 0 nla
Town Square/1989 89 8 0 5 0 n/a
Huntington Bay Shore/1988 159 14 0 10 0 n/a
Villas Del Mar/1988 64 6 0 4 0 • n/a
Breakers 342 31 0 20 0.1 1999
W Oakuiew
Ash Street Projects/1985-89 20 2 0 1 0 n/a
Cypress Avenue 3 0 0 0 0 n/a.'
Elm Street Projects/1985 30 3 0 2 0 n/a .
Koledo Lane/1984 16 1 0 1 0 n/a '
Talbert-Beach
Windward Cove1985 96 6 0 6 0 n/a
Capewoods/1985 55 5 0 3 0 . n/a
Emerald Cove/1986 164 : 25 0 25 164 Perpetuity
Yorktown-Lake
Huntington Classics/1990-94 86 8 0 5 0 n/a
Proposed/Contracted Projects
Main-Pier
Third Block West 68 '6 33 4 0 n/a
The Waterfront Residential 639 58 0 38 0 n/a
Main-Pier Phase 11 82 7 0 5 0 n/a
Beach & Atlanta 280 25 0 17 112 n/a
Talbert Beach
Seaview Village 88 8 25 5 0 n/a
Redevelopment Project Areas
City of Huntington Beach
r
U!1 OF 10I119L[5t IfiC!
r rtL
�iosrwe[
A.
0* Rw
WE
SNZ6
� .
alx�O.C"MNeOi
iF,Wt
Vowd—
wx+v.
124
SECTION D
An Explanation of Why Elimination of Blight Cannot
be Accomplished by Private Enterprise Acting Alone
or Through Financing Alternatives Other Than Tax
Increment Financing
Continued Agency assistance through the tools of redevelopment and additional tax increment
financing capabilities are critical ingredients to the elimination of blight in the Project Area. Since
the adoption of a redevelopment program within the Project Area in 1982, some blighting
conditions have been alleviated as a direct result of Agency facilitated projects and tax increment
financing. Examples of Agency successes include the consolidation and redevelopment of small
lots within the Talbert-Beach and Main-Pier Areas, removal of many dilapidated and obsolete
structures from the-Yorktown-Lake and Main-Pier Areas, the reconstruction of the Huntington
Beach Pier, and the upgrading and reconstruction of many streets, utilities, and drainage facilities
throughout the Project Area.
Despite the Agency's successes to date, many blighting conditions continue to persist within the
Project Area, due to the Existing Plans' financial limits, and the relatively high cost and complex
nature of redevelopment that confront the private sector.
Redevelopment of the Project Area has reached a virtual standstill since the Agency's financial
resources were exhausted in 1989. Since that time, the sluggish economy and assessment appeals
have caused property tax increment revenues to decline, thereby eliminating discretionary funding
for new redevelopment activities. At the same time, the Agency has approached or already
achieved financial limits in the Existing Plans, forcing the Agency to, indefinitely postpone
redevelopment projects.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 D-1 Report to the City Council
The Amendment/Merger is essential.to the viability of the Agency's redevelopment program in
the future, because it proposes to expand,the Existing Plans' financial limits, thereby increasing
tax increment financing capabilities. If the Amendment/Merger is approved, the Agency could
generate an additional $29:6 million of housing set-aside revenues to facilitate affordable
housing activities such as the repair and redevelopment of dilapidated housing units in the
Oakview and Main-Pier Areas. The Amendment/Merger also could provide the Agency with an
additional $75.1 million of nonhousing tax increment revenues that could be employed to
facilitate the redevelopment of the Huntington Beach Mall and completion of the Agency's
redevelopment efforts in the Main-Pier Area. Without the ability to collect additional tax
increment revenues, the Agency will be forced to rely on outside financial resources and the
private sector to underwrite redevelopment activities.
Where feasible, the Agency has employed, and continues to seek out, other financing
mechanisms to redevelop the Project Area. Unfortunately, these resources are neither sufficient
or appropriate to fund the entire scope of the Agency's redevelopment program. For example,
block grants have been utilized by the Agency to finance small rehabilitation projects in the
Oakview Area, but have not provided the Agency with sufficient resources to undertake a more
widespread effort. In addition, financing redevelopment projects with grants is usually difficult
because state and federal grant monies typically carry more restrictions than tax increment funds.
Another alternative means to fund infrastructure improvements is the creation of voter-approved
assessment districts. However, because the Project Area is built out, creating an assessment
district would likely not meet with property owner approval. The City General Fund also is
unable to bear the costs of redevelopment, due to budget cutbacks on operations and services.
Historically, the private sector has generally depended on Agency participation in redevelopment
endeavors. For example,.since financial constraints forced the Agency to suspend its active role
in the Main-Pier Area in 1989, there has been no substantive private sector redevelopment.
Section B of this Report documented why the private sector has been unable to undertake
redevelopment activities within the Project Area without Agency assistance. In summary, there
are three primary reasons why the private sector is unable to eliminate blighting conditions in the
Rosenow Spevacek Group, hie. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beaelr
October, 1996 D-2 Report to the City Council
Project Area: (1) the time-consuming'and,costly nature'of,assembling-parcels under multiple
ownership, (2) the high cost of undertaking rehabilitation activities in-the face of depressed
property values and low lease rates, and (3) the lack'of.participation from adjoining property
F owners. , ' 0.
For example, private enterprise redevelopment of the Huntington Beach Mall would be a high
risk venture without Agency assistance due to the high vacancies and low lease revenues
currently generated at the Mall. As documented in Section B of this Report, the property owner
has clearly recognized this high risk 'and has elected to only minimally invest in.Mall
improvements. Consequently, the Mall has continued to decline. Another example of the
inability of the private sector to undertake redevelopment in a Project Area 'is ;the neglected
Oakview Area. The high level of absentee ownership and high crime rates discourage individual
property owners from undertaking needed improvements to deteriorating single and multifamily
residences. Even if one particular property owner had the desire and financial wherewithal to
invest in a rehabilitation effort, there are no assurances that adjoining property owners would
follow suit. For this reason, there is little incentive for individual property owners in the
Oakview Area to embark on redevelopment without Agency assistance.
The Amendment/Merger not only provides the Agency with the financial tools necessary. to
further its redevelopment program within the Project°Area; but also proposes a variety of housing
and nonhousing- redevelopment programs that the Agency can undertake to. alleviate these
conditions. A complete listing of these potential programs and projects is incorporated into the
Redevelopment Plan and included in Section A of this Report. The programs proposed by the
Agency include facilitating the repositioning of the Huntington Beach Mali and an expansion of
the Agency's affordable housing rehabilitation program. These projects and programs, as well as
others proposed by the Agency,'target specific blighting conditions that continue to persist in,the
Project Area. Therefore, the Amendment/Merger provides.the Agency both the-tools and the
financial'means to complete its redevelopment program within the Project Area.
Rosenoty Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of 11urtirrgton Beach
October, 1996 D-3 Report to the Citv Council
SECTION E
Method of Financing and Economic Feasibility of
the Project
General Financing Methods Available to the Agency
Redevelopment of the Project Area is proposed to be financed with a combination of a variety of
resources, including:
• Financial assistance from the City, County, State of California and/or Federal
Government;
• Tax increment revenue;
• Bonded debt;
+ Proceeds from lease or sale of Agency-owned property;
• Loans from private financial institutions; and
• Any other legally available source.
The more typical sources of redevelopment financing that may be employed with the Project are
described below.
Financial Assistance from the City, County, State, and/or the Federal Government
Historically, the Agency has received loans and advances from the City for planning,
construction, and operating capital for administration of the Project until such time that sufficient
tax increment revenue is raised to repay loans and provide other means of operating capital. The
City has also deferred payments on Agency loans for land purchases, to benefit the Agency's
cash flow. '-typically, such monies are used to meet short-terns cash flow needs as the City's
General Fund cannot carry extensive levels of Agency debt at the risk of threatening the City's
own cash balances.
Rosenow Sperueek Group,Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beetch
October, 1996 E-1 Report to the City Council
As available, other'funds such as state gas tax funds and federal Community Development Block
Grants were, and will continue to be used, as appropriate, to pay the costs of Project
implementation. The Agency and City will also continue to work together to pursue other
available grants and loans. The City or.other public,agencies may also issue bonds on behalf of
the Agency and provide in-kind assistance.
Property Tax Increment
The Agency will continue to,use property tax increment as.provided for in Section 33670 of the
r
Law as the primary financing mechanism to implement the Project. Tax increment revenue may
only be used to pay indebtedness incurred by the Agency; indebtedness includes principal and
interest on loans, monies advanced, or debts (whether funded, refunded, assumed, or otherwise)
incurred by the Agency to finance or refinance, ,iri'whole or in part, redevelopment activities.
With the need to undertake further redevelopment,to. address blight, that.will include land
assembly through property acquisition, working with:property owners to fund rehabilitation
efforts, and underwriting some of the costs associated with needed infrastructure improvements,
the Plan will increase the current limits on the amount of tax increment revenues to fund Project
activities.
The Law sets forth a prescribed time limit on the collection of tax increment revenues for
redevelopment plans. Table E-1 contains'these limits-for the Existing Plans. Redevelopment
plans adopted prior to January 1, 1994 were required to contain a limit on the amount of tax
increment revenues that may be collected by a redevelopment agency. Existing Plans have
separate tax increment limits for each of the Constituent Projects; these limits are identified in
Table E-2.
The current combined tax increment -limit to Constituent Projects is $887,750,000. The
Amendriient/Merger would eliminate all preexisting limits to establish a new cumulative $850
million tax increment revenue limit.
Roseno►v Spemeek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
Octoher, 1996 E-2 Report to the City Council
TABLE E-1
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project
Report to the City Council
TIME FRAME TO COLLECT TAX INCREMENT REVENUE
EXISTING PLANS
Redevelopment Plan Date Duration Date Plan Last Date
Adopted Expires (1) to Receive
Increment
Yorktown-Lake 9/20/82 35 Years 9/20/17 9/20/27
Talbert-Beach 9/20/82 35 Years 9/20/17 .9/20/27
Main-Pier(Original Area) 9/20/82 _35 Years 9/20/17 9/20/27
Main-Pier (Added Area) 916183 35 Years 9/6/18 916128
Oakview 11/1/82 40 Years 11/1/22 1111132
Huntington Center 11/26/84 35 Years 11/26/19 11/26/29
Notes:
(1) Current redevelopment law permits agencies to collect tax increment for a
period of up to 10 years following the expriation of a plan.
Rosenow 5pevace%Group, Inc.
Existing Durations'Councrpt 10/10/96 1 of 1
TABLE E-2
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project
Report to the City Council
TAX.INCREMENT REVENUE LIMITS OF
EXISTING REDEVELOPMENT PLANS
Redevelopment Plan Tax Increment Limit Maximum Revenue
Limitation Current Amounts (see note)
Against Limits
Plans with Annual Limits
Yorktown-Lake $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $. 11,250,000
Talbert-Beach i 350,000 282,125 15,750,000
Main-Pier 15,250,000 2,317,698 686,250,000
Plans with Cumulative Limits '
Oakview $ 90,000,000 $ 6,097,797 $ 90,000,000
Huntington Center 84,500,000 13,012,472 84,500,000
TOTAL MAXIMUM REVENUES $ 887,750,000
Note:
Maximum Revenues are equal to the total tax increment revenues that may be
allocated to the Agency under the Existing Plans. For the Existing Plans with annual
tax increment revenue limits, the Maximum Revenues are determined by multiplying
the annual limit by the 45 year period within which the Agency may collect tax
increment.
Sources: City of Huntington Beach Finance Department-, RSG estimates
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. ;
Existing TI Limits Councrpt 10/10/96 1 of 1
Tax increment revenues from the Project Area are distributed to an array of obligations. As
required by Section 33334.2(a) of the Law, twenty percent (20%) of Project tax increment
revenue is deposited into the Housing Fund for the purposes of increasing, improving, and
preserving the community's supply of low and moderate income housing. Housing Fund
revenues have been used by the Agency to defray infrastructure costs associated with the
construction of affordable housing, to purchase and write-down the cost of land, and to subsidize
mortgage and rental payments.
The remaining 80% of the tax increment revenue has been used to pay for taxing entity
obligations, nonhousing programs, and bond debt service costs. Remaining nonhousing revenues
=wilI finance some `of-the proposed infrastructure' capital facility and economic development
`programs within the•ProjectsArea.
Bonded Debt
Under the Plan, the Agency would have d capacity to issue bonds and/or notes for any of its
corporate'purposes, payable in whole or in part from tax increment revenue. Historically, bonded
debt has been an integral component of the Agency's financing program to eliminate blight in the
Project Area. On May 1, 1992, the Agency, through the Huntington Beach Financing Authority
("Authority") issued.the $33,495,000 1992 Revenue Bonds. The 1992 Bonds funded certain
nonhousing and housing redevelopment programs in the Main-Pier, Talbert-Beach, Huntington
Center Commercial District, and Oakview Redevelopment Project Areas. (The Yorktown-Lake
Redevelopment Project has not been included on any Agency or Authority bond financings.) As
of June 30, 1996, the total 1992 Bond debt principal outstanding is $32.285 million.
The Law requires that all redevelopment plans contain a limit on the amount of bonded
indebtedness which can be outstanding at any one time. Table E-3 contains a listing of these
bonded indebtedness limits for the Existing Plans, and the amount of principal outstanding as of
June 30, 1996.
Rosenow Spevacek Group,lite. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 E-3 Report to the City Council
In order to advance the redevelopment of the Project Area; the Agency must be permitted the
capability of issuing additional bonds or notes. The Plan will establish a new $275.4 million
bonded debt limit. -
Lease or Sale of A enc -Owned Property
The Agency may sell, lease, or otherwise encumber its property holdings to pay the costs of
Project implementation.
Participation in Development
If the Agency enters into agreements with property owner''s,'tenants,'randlor'other''developers
which provide for revenues to be paid or repaid to the Agency, such revenues may be used to pay
Project implementation costs.
Other Available Sources
Any other loans, grants, or financial assistance from the federal govefnmdnt, orzany other public
or private source will be utilized, as available and appropriate. The Agency will also consider
use of the powers provided by Chapter 8 (Redevelopment -Construction Loans) of the Law to
provide construction funds for appropriate projects., Where feasible and appropriate, the Agency
may use assessment"district and/or Mello-Roos bond financing to pay for the costs of public
infrastructure, facilities, and operations.
Estimated Project Costs
The financial commitments of the Project fall into three categories: housing projects, nonhousing
projects/administration, and taxing entity payments.- Table .F-4 identifies the costs associated
with each of these categories.
Rosenow Spevacek Group,Inc. Redevelop►nent Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996' E-4 Report to the City Council
TABLE E-4
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project
Report to the City Council
BREAKDOWN OF TAX INCREMENT REVENUES NEEDS
Cost Category Revenue Needs % of Total
Housing Proiects 170,000,000 20%
Direct Project Costs 68,000,000
Project Financing Costs 102,000,000
Nonhousinq Proiects 452,000,000 53%
Direct Project Costs 181,000,000
Project Financing Costs 271,000,000 '
Existing Debt Service-for Nonhousinq Proiects 70,200,000
Debt Service for 1992 Bonds 70,200,000
Payments to Taxing Entities 157,500,000 19%
Per Pre-1/1/94 Agreement 34,600,000
Per Statutory Payments 122,900,000
Total Tax Increment Revenue Need 849,700,000 100%
Project Cumulative Tax Increment Limit 860,000,000
Rosenow 5pevacek Group, Inc.
Revenue Needs Councrpt 10110/96 1 of 1
TABLE E-3
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project
Report to the City Council
-OUTSTANDING BONDED INDEBTEDNESS LIMITS
EXISTING PLANS
Redevelopment Plan Bond Principal Outstanding
Limitation As of June 30, 1996
Huntington Center $26,450,000 $ 12,055,000
Oakview 30,000,000 3,635,000
Talbert-Beach 3,500,000 2,000,000
Yorktown-Lake ` 2,500,000 None
Main-Pier 77,500,000 14,595,000
TOTALS 139,950,000 32,285,000
Source: City of Huntington Beach Finance Department
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc.
Existing Bond Limits Councrpt 10/10/96 1 of 1
Housing Project Costs $170 000 000: The Agency is required to set aside 20% of its tax
increment revenues into the.Housing Fund. Housing Fund monies generated by the
{ Project will. be `erilployed 'by the,"Agency to finance affordable housing programs
described in Section A of this Report. These housing programs include, but are not
limited to, the following:
• Affordable Housing Development Projects
• Housing Code Enforcement Programs, and
Housing Acquisition and/or Rehabilitation
E •
The Plan permits the Agency to collect up to $850.0 million of tax increment revenue
cumulatively. Twenty percent of this amount, or $170,000,000 could be available to fund
housing program implementation. "Since housing projects contemplated by the Agency
could necessitate the issurance of.bonds, a portion of this amount could be employed to
fund debt service on such financings.
Nonhousing Project Costs, $522,200,000: Nonhousing projects include commercial
rehabilitation/economic development infrastructure and public facility programs
described in Section A. The total direct cost of these nonhousing programs is $181.0
million. Because many of these projects will be implemented over the duration of the
Plan, cost inflation will occur. The nature of these projects are such that a "pay-as-you-
go" financing would not be generally feasible. Thus, the Agency will finance many of
these projects and programs through the issuance of bonds or notes. Financing costs
associated with these debt issues are estimated to be approximately $271.0 million.
Finally, the Agency will continue to fund debt service on the 1992 Boards. The total
remaining principal and interest outstanding on these 1992 Bonds, as of June 30, 1996, is
approximately $70.2 million.
Rosettow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Iluntitigton Beach
October, 1996 E-S Report to the City Council
Taxing Entity Payments, 157 500 000: Affected taxing entities within the Project Area
are entitled to a portion of the Project's nonhousing tax increment revenue. As set forth
in the Law, taxing entities will receive a portion of the Project's revenue pursuant to
either: 1) the provisions and terms of a-tax sharing'agreement''executed prior to January
1, 1994 ("Pass-Through Agreement"), or42) the statutory'formulas set forthlin Section
33607.7 of the Law ("Statutory Payment"). Table E-5 identifies the taxing entities with
which the Agency entered into a Pass-Through Agreement. These Pass-Through
Agreements will remain in full effect undevihe Plan.
7
If the Agency adopts the Amendment/Merger, taking`entities that do not have a Pass-
Through Agreement with the Agency would be entitled to Statutory Payments. The
Statutory Payments would'be initiated after the year one of the limits proposed to be
amended would have been achieved in the absence of the Amendment/Merger ("Trigger
Year"): The Trigger Year will be different within each subarea of the Project Area
because each subarea is subjeci to different limits pursuant to'their respective plans.
Table E-6 indicates the limit triggering the Statutory Payments, year achieved, and the
taxing entities that would receive Statutory Payments.
. l
According to Section 33607:5 'of the Law; beginning in the year after the Trigger Year,
the Agency would share 251/o of its'nonhousing tax increment revenue exceeding amounts
in the Trigger Year with the applicable affected agencies. These Statutory Payments are
subject to two increases. Beginning in the l lth year after the Trigger'Year, in addition to
the first 25% share, Agency is to pay 21% of the incremental increase in no tax
increment revenues above the 10th year after the`Trigger Year. Beginning in the 31 st
year, these amounts are supplemented again, when the Agency is to share 14% of the
incremental increase in nonhousing tax increment revenue in excess of amounts collected
in the 30th year.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Reach
October, 1996' E-6 Report to the City Council
TABLE E-5
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project
�A
Report to the City Council
AFFECTED TAXING ENTITIES WITH WHOM s
THE AGENCY HAS ENTERED INTO A PASS THROUGH AGREEMENT •
Taxing Entity Date of Pass Through,Agreement (If Applicable)
Huntington Oakview Talbert- Yorktown- Main-Pier Main-Pier
Center Beach Lake (Original Area) (Added Area)
City of Huntington Beach n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a '
County General Fund Yes (5/4187) Yes (8/8189) n/a n/a n/a n/a
County Flood Control Yes (5/4187) Yes (8/8/89) n/a n/a n/a n/a
County Harbors, Beaches & Parks n/a Yes (8/8189) n/a n/a n/a n/a
County Transportation n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
County Water District Yes (11/14/84) Yes (11/14/84) Yes (11/14184) Yes (11/14184) Yes (11/14/84) Yes (11114/84)
County Sanitation n/a n/a nla n/a n/a n/a a
County Vector Control n/a Yes (6/19/89) n/a n/a n/a n/a
County Cemetery District Na sit sagain;an a
Educational Rev. Augmentation n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
County Dept. of Education Yes (8/18186) Yes (7128189) n/a n/a n/a n/a
Coast Community College n/a Yes (8/16/89) n1a n/a n/a nla
Huntington Beach HSD n/a Yes (6/19189) n/a n/a n/a n/a
Ocean View ESD n/a Yes (818/89) n/a
Huntington Beach ESD ;, . . - ...:Na .. . . . ....... n/a... ............... n/a
Westminster ESD n/a MINIMUM cost WINNER
Notes:
"n/a" means not applicable, the listed taxing entity does not have a pass through agreement with the Agency. Pursuant to Section
33607.7 of the Law, taxing entities with whom the Agency did not enter into a pass through agreement prior to January 1, 1994 would
receive statutory payments from future tax increment revenues.
Shading represents districts that do not have jurisdiction in such areas
Source: City of Huntington Beach, County of Orange Auditor-Controller
Rosenow Spevacek Group,Inc.
Taxing Entities Councrpt 10/10/96 1 of 1
TABLE
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project
Report to the City Council
AFFECTED TAXING ENTITIES TO RECEIVE
STATUTORY PAYMENTS AFTER ADOPTION OF THE AMENDMENT/MERGER
Taxing Entity Taxing Entities to Receive Statutory Payments (if Applicable)
Huntington Oakview Talbert- Yorktown- Main-,Pier Main-Pier
Center Beach Lake (Original Area) (Added Area)
Plan Limit Amended Incur Debt Incur Debt Increment Limit Increment Limit Incur Debt Incur Debt
Year Limit Would Be Reached 2004-05 2002-03 1999-00 1996-97 2002-03 2003-04
Year Statutory Payments Start 2005-06 2003-04 2000-01 1997-98 2003-04 2004-05
City'of Huntington Beach Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
County General Fund n/a n/a Yes Yes Yes Yes
County Flood Control n/a n/a Yes Yes Yes Yes
County.Harbors, Beaches & Parks Yes. n/a Yes Yes Yes Yes
County Transportation Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
County Water District n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
County Sanitation Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
County Vector Control Yes n/a Yes Yes Yes Yes
County Cemetery District Yes
:.<. ..- ......
Educational Rev. Augmentation Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
County Dept. of Education n/a n/a Yes Yes Yes Yes
Coast Community College Yes n/a Yes Yes Yes Yes
Huntington Beach HSD Yes n/a' Yes Yes Yes Yes
Ocean View ESD Yes n/a Yes
Huntington Beach ESD Yes ,Yes Yes:.. ... . .
Westminster ESD Yes .......'
Notes:
On/a" means not applicable, the listed taxing entity has a pass through agreement with the Agency. Such pass through agreements will
remain in full effect under the Plan. ,
Shading represents districts that do not have jurisdiction in such areas `
Source: City of Huntington Beach, County of Orange Auditor-Controller
Rosenew Spevacek Group,Inc.
5
l)
Assuming the Project generated $850.6 million of tax increment revenue allowed by the
proposed cumulative tax increment limit in the Plan, the Agency's total payments to the
taxing entities could be as much as $157.5 million. This amount consists of $34.6
million of payments pursuant to Pass-Through Agreements, and $122.9 million relating
to Statutory Payments. However, as described in the Economic Feasibility Analysis
section of this Section E, the Agency has conservatively projected that Project tax
increment revenues would be less than this amount. Therefore, payments to the taxing
entities may be lower than these amounts.
Projected Tax ;increment Revenues
Project implementation, and specifically new development throughout the Project Area, will
generate tax increment revenue. Tax increment revenue is generated by increases in the assessed
value over and above the base year assessed value of each Constituent Project Area. Tables E-7
and E-8 present projected tax increment revenues for the Project without, and with, the .
Amendment/Merger. Secured assessed values in the Project Area are assumed to increase by
1.011% in 1996-97, and 2% thereafter. Secured assessed values are also assumed to be increased
by new construction in the Project Area, as delineated on Table E-9. No growth has been
assumed for unsecured values.
Without Amendment/Merger
Table E-7 presents projected tax increment revenues for the Project without the
Amendment/Merger. Under this scenario, the Project's tax increment revenues would be stunted
by limitations in the Existing Plans, including:
• the annual $250,000 tax increment Iimit for the Yorktown-Lake Redevelopment
Project. This limit was achieved in 1995-96. The Agency may continue to collect tax
increment from the Yorktown-Lake Area, but only up to $250,000 each year.
Rosenon;Spev4cek Grbup,I1ic._ `. : Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, I996 ., ". E-7 Report to the City Council
• " the annual .$350,000 tax increment, limit for. the Talbert-Beach .Redevelopment
Project. Based on the growth assumptions described above, this-annual limit could be
achieved in 1999-2000: Once this limit is reached, annual tax increment revenues
will no't exceed $350,000 in any year.
• the, cumulative $84.5 million tax increment. limit for the Huntin ton Center
Commercial District Redevelopment Project. If assessed values increase at the
assumed growth rates, the cumulative tax increment revenue limit could be reached in
2018-19, or 10 years before the Existing Plan's time limit on collecting tax increment
revenue is achieved. Once the cumulative tax increment limit is reached,.the Agency
cannot collect any additional tax increment revenue to pay debt on nonhousing
projects:
• the 45-.fir period to collect tax increment revenue. Only the Existing Plan for the
Oakview Redevelopment Project provides the Agency with a 50-year time frame to
collect tax increment revenue, as set forth in Section 33333.6 of the Law. The four
other Existing Plans limit this time period to 45 years, rather than the Law's 50-year
limit. For the Existing Plans with a 45-year tirne limit, the Agency cannot continue to
receive tax increment revenue after 45 years (from the date each Existing Plan was
originally adopted), except to repay debt incurred prior to January 1994 or to fund
affordable housing obligations.
As a consequence of these constraints, the Agency will receive far less tax increment revenues
than it would otherwise receive if the Agency adopts the Amendment/Merger.. Between 1996-97
and the final year the Agency can collect tax increment revenue under the Existing Plans, the
Agency could collect $341.2 million. Of this amount, 20%, or $68.2 million, would be deposited
into the Housing Fund. In addition, $70.2 million would be used to fund debt service on the
1992 Bonds, and $11.7 million would be paid to taxing entities with whom the Agency entered
into a Pass-Through Agreement prior to 'January 1; 1994. (Note that without the
Amendinentl.Merger, the Agency will not be required to remit Statutory Payments to other taxing
Rosenow Spevaeek Group, Inc. �'' RerlevelopnzentAgency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 E-8 Report tolthe City Council
f
TABLE
.
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project SUMMARY
Report to the City Council WITHOUT AMENDMENTIMERGER
TAX INCREMENT REVENUE PROJECTIONS
Year Secured New,Construction Unsecured Total Incremental
Value Value Value Value Value
2% 0%
Base Year 133,797,870 26,087,714 159,885,584
1996-97 554,534,986 - 43,323,315 597,858,301 437,972,717
1997-98 565,625,686 - 43,323,315 608,949,001 449,063,417
1998-99 576,938,199 54,580,000 43,323,315 674,841,514 514,955,930
1999-00 644,148,563 79,995,000 43,323,315 767,466,878 607,581,294
2000-01 738,626,435 204,915,000 43,323,315 986,864,750 826,979,166
2001-02 962,412,263 24,000,000 43,323,315 1,029,735,578 869,849,994
2002-03 1,006,140,509 60,780,000 43,323,315 1,110,243,824 950,358,240
2003-04 1,088,258,919 39,000,000 43,323,315 1,170,582,234 1,010,696,650
2004-05 A,149,804,097 35,000,000 43,323,315 1,228,127,412 1,068,241,828
2005-06 1,208,500,179 - 43,323,315 1,251,823,494 1,091,937,910
2006-07 1,232,670,183 - 43,323,315 1,275,993,498 1,116,107,914
2007-08 1,257,323,586 - 43,323,315 1,300,646,901 1,140,761,317
2008-09 1,282,470,058 7 43,323,315 1,325,793,373 1,165,907,789
2009-10 1,308,119,459 - 43,323,3.15 1,351,442,774 1,191,557,190
2010-11 1,334,281,848 - 43,323,315 1,377,605,163 1,217,719,579
2011-12 1,360,967,485 - 43,323,315 1,404,290,800 1,244,405,216
2012-13 1,388,186,835 - 43,323,315 1,431,510,150 1,271,624,566
2013-14 1,415,950,572 - 43,323,315 1,459,273,887 1,299,388,303
2014-15 1,444,269,583 - 43,323,315 1,487,592,898 1,327,707,314
2015-16 1,473,154,975 - 43,323,315 1,516,478,290 1,356,592,706
2016-17 1,502,618,074 - 43,323,315 1,545,941,389 1,386,055,805
2017-18 1,532,670,436 - 43,323,315 , 1,575,993,751 1,416,108,167
2018-19 1,563,323,845 - 43,323,315 1,606,647,160 1,446,761,576
2019-20 1,594,590,322 - 43,323,315 1,637,913,637 1,478,028,053
2020-21 1,626,482,128 - 43,323,315 1,669,805,443 1,509,919,859
2021-22 1,659,011,771 - 43,323,315 1,702,335,086 1,542,449,502
2022-23 . 1,692,192,006 - 43,323,315 1,735,515,321 1,575,629,737
2023-24 1,726,035,846 - 43,323,315 1,769,359,161 1,609,473,577
2024-25 1,760,556,563 - 43,323,315 1,803,879,878 1,643,994,294
2025-26 1,795,767,694 - 43,323,315 1,839,091,009 .1,679,205,425
2026-27 1,831,683,048 - 43,323,315 1,875,006,363 1,715,120,779
2027-28 1,632,364,835 - 36,055,735 1,668,420,570 1,517,619,204
2028-29 694,856,126 - 28,619,739 723,475,865 622,989,822
2029-30 117,704,360 - 3,319,961 121,024,321 97,741,688
2030-31 120,058,448 - 3,319,961 123,378,409 100,095,776
bw 2031-32 122,459,617 - 3,319,961 125,779,578 102,496,945
,r 2032-33 -
�� 2033-34 -
_. Total. :; "; F ''498,270,000
NPV� 347,261,882
Rosencw Spevacek Group, Inc,
Revenue-No Amend Councrpt 10/10196 1 of 3
TABLE E-7
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project SUMMARY
Report to the City Council � ' WITHOUT AMENDMENT/MERGER
TAX INCREMENT REVENUE PROJECTIONS
Year Gross Unitary' Total Cumulative Housing Cumulative Nonhousing Cumulative
Tax Utility Tax Fund Fund
Increment (1) Revenue Increment Deposits (Gross)
1996-97 4,314,104 100,607 4,414,711 4,414,711 882,942 882,942 3,531,769 3,531,76
1997-98 4,418,389 100,607 4,518,696 8,933,707 903,799 1,786,741 3,615,197 7,146,96E
1998-99 5,070,560 100,607 5,171,167 14,104,874 1,034,233 2,820,975 .4,136,934 11,283,89
1999-00 5,989,924 ` .100,607 6,090,531 20,195,405 1,218,106. 4,039,081 4,872,425 16,156,324
2000-01 8,152,178 98,596 8,250,774 28,446,180 '1,650,155 5,689,236 6,600,620 22,756,944
2001-02 8,566,371 98,596 8,664,967 37,111,147 1,732,993 7,422,229 6,931,974 29,688,917
2002-03 9,356,648 98,596 9,455,244 46,566,390 '1,891,049 9,313,278 7,564,195 37,253,112
2003-04 9,944,929 98;596 .10,043,525 56,609,916 2,008,705 11,321,983 8,034,820 45,287,933
2004-05 10,504,977 98,596 10,603,573 67,213,489 2,120,715 13,442,698 8,482,858 53,770,791
2005-06 10,726,226 98,596 10,824,822 78,038,310 2,164,964 15,607,662 8,659,857 62,430,646
2006-07 10,951,899 98,596 11,050,495 89,088,805 2,210,099 17,817,761 8,840,396 71,271,044
2007-08 11,182,086 98,596 '11,280,682 100,369,488 2,256,136 20,073,898 '9,024,546 80,295,590
2008-09 11,416,877 98,596 11,515,473 111,884,960 2,303,095 22,376,992 9,212,378 89,507,968
2009-10 11,656,363 98,596 . 11,754,959 123,639,920 2,350.992 24,727,984 9,403,968 98,911,936
2010-11 11,900,640 98,596 11,999,236` 135,639,155 2,399,847 27,127,831 9,599,389 108,511,324
2011-12 •12,149,801 98,596 12,246,397 147,887,553 2,449,679 29,577,511 9,798,718 118,310,042
2012-13 12,403,947 98,596 A2,502,543 160,390,095 2,500,509 32,078,019 10,002,034 128,312,076
2013-14 12,663,174 98,596 12,761,770 173,151,866 2,552,354 -34,630,373 10,209,416 138,521,493
2014-15 12,927,587 98,596 .13,026,183'. 186,178,049 2,605,237 37,235,610, 10,420,946 148,942,439
2015-16 13,197,288 98,596 13,295,884 199,473,933 21659,177 39,894,787 10,636,707 159,579,146
2016-17 13,472,382 98,596 13,570,978 ' 213,044,911 2,714,196 42,608,982 10,856,783 170,435,929
2017-18 13,752,979 98,596 13;851,575 226,896,486 2,770,315 45,379,297 11,081,260 181,517,189
2018-19 13,754,307 . 65,452 13,819,759 240,716,245 2,763,952 48,143,249 11,055,807 192,572,996
2019-20 10,001,497 65,452 10,066,949 250,783,194 2,013,390 50,156,639 8,053,559 200,626,555
2020-21 10,202,296 65,452" 10,267,748 261,050,942 2,053,550 52,210,188 8,214,198 208,840,753
2021-22 10,407,110 65,452 10,472,56.2 271,523,503 2,094,512 54,304,701 8,378,049 217,218,803
2022-23 10,616,020 65,452 10,681,472 ' 282,204,976 2,136,294� 56,440,995 8,545,178 225,763,980
2023-24 10,829,109 65,452, 10,894,561 293,099,536 2,178,912 �58,619,907 8,715,649 234,479,629
2024-25 11,046,459 65,452 11,111,911 304,211,448 2,222,382 60,842,290 8,889,529 243,369,158
2025-26 11,268,157 65,452 11,333,609 315,545,057 2,266,722 63,109,011 9,066,887 252,436,045
2026-27 11,494,288 65,452 11,559,740 ' 327,104,797 2,311,948 65,420,959 9,247,792 261,683,837
2027-28 10,014,251 63,653 10,077,904 337,182,701 2,015,581 67,436,540 8,062,323 269,746,161
2028-29 954,338 '5,952 960,290 338,142,990 192,058 67,628,598 768,232 270,514,392
2029-30 977,417 5,952' 983,369 339,126,359 196,674 67,825,272 786,695 271,301,087
2030-31 1,000,958 5,952 1,006,910 340,133,269 201,382 68,026,654 805,528 272,106,615
2031-32 1,024,969 5,952 1,030,921 341,164,190 206,184 68,232,838 824,737 272,931,352
2032-33 - - - 341,164,190 - 68,232,838 ', - 272,931,352
2033-34 - - - 341,164,190- _ __ 68,232,838. ' r:�' '.`. - 272,931,352
Total 338,310,505 2,853,685 341,164,190 _ '` 68,232,838 _ _272,931,352
NPV 117,632,626 1,203,275 118,835,901 23,767,180 95,068,721
(1) Gross Tax Increment figures less than 1% due to annual tax increment limits.
Rosenow 5pevacek Group, Inc.
Revenue-No Amend Councrpt 10/10/96 2 of 3
TABLE E-7
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project SUMMARY
Report to the City Council WITHOUT AMENDMENT/MERGER
TAX INCREMENT REVENUE PROJECTIONS
Year Nonhousing Payments to Taxing Agencies Nonhousing Cumulative
Fund Per Pre-94 Per Statutory Total Fund
(Gross) Agreements Formula (Net)
1996-97 3,531,769 52,901 nla 52,901 3,478,868 3,478,868
1997-98 3,615,197 55,965 n/a 55,965 3,559,232 7,038,100
1998-99 4,136,934 59,442 n/a 59,442 4,077,491 11,115,591
1999-00 4,872,425 63,088 nla 63,088 4,809,337 15,924,929
2000-01 6,600,620 339,389 nla 339,389 6,261,231 22,186,160
2001-02 6,931,974 349,943 n/a 349,943 6,582,030 28,768,190
2002-03 7,564,195 360,796 n/a 360,796 7,203,399 35,971,589
2003-04 8,034,820 371,949 n/a 371,949 7,662,872 43,634,461
2004-05 8,482,858 383,404 n/a 383,404 8,099,454 51,733,915
2005-06 8,659,857 395,165 n/a 395,165 8,264,692 59,998,607
2006-07 8,840,396 407,235 n/a 407,235 8,433,162 68,431,769
2007-08 9,024,546 419,616 n/a 419,616 8,604,930 17,036,699
2008-09 9,212,378 432,312 nla 432,312 8,780,066 85,816,765
2009-10 9,403,968 445,328 n/a 445,328 8,958,640 94,775,405
2010-11 9,599,389 462,401 nla 462,401 9,136,987 103,912,392
2011-12 9,798,718 476,295 n/a 476,295 9,322,423 113,234,815
2012-13 10,002,034 490,524 n/a 490,524 9,511,510 122,746,325
2013-14 10,209,416 505,093 n/a 505,093 9,704,324 132,450,649
2014-15 10,420,946 520,007 n/a 520,007 9,900,939 142,351,588
2015-16 10,636,707 535,271 n/a 535,271 10,101,436 152,453,024
2016-17 10,856,783 550,890 n/a 550,890 10,305,893 162,758,917
2017-18 11,081,260 566,870 n/a 566,870 10,514,390 173,273,307
2018-19 11,055,807 552,163 n/a 552,163 10,503,644 183,776,952
2019-20 8,053,559 173,943 n/a 173,943 7,879,616 191,656,568
2020-21 8,214,198 181,569 n/a 181,569 8,032,629 199,689,196
2021-22 8,378,049 189,390 n/a 189,390 8,188,660 207,877,856
2022-23 8,545,178 197,407 n/a 197,407 8,347,771 216,225,627
2023-24 8,715,649 205,624 n/a 205,624 8,510,025 224,735,652
2024-25 8,889,529 214,042 n/a 214,042 8,675,487 233,411,139
.2025-26. 9,066,887, 222,666. n/a ; .., 222,666 8,844,221 242,255,360
,2026-27.N' 9,247;792 231,.497, nla 231,497 9,016,295 251,271,656
a 2027-28 .8,062,3231..• 240539s n/a 240,539 7,821,784 259,093,440
2028-29 : 768,232 249,795 n1a 249,795 518,437 259,611,877
2029-30 . 786,695 259,268 n/a 259,268 527,427 260,139,304
2030-31 805,528 268,962 n/a 268,962 .536,566 260,675,870
2031-32 824,737 278,879 n/a 278,879 545,858 261,221,727
2032-33 - - nla - - 261,221,727
2033-34 - - , .. . .. n/a - - 261,221,727
Total 272,931,352 11,709,6254'•, - 11,709,625 261,221,727
NPV., 95,068,721 3,926,644 - 3,926,644 91,142,076
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc.
Revenue-No Amend councrpt 10/10/96 3 of 3
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project SUMMARY
Report to the City Council WITH AMENDMENT I MERGER
TAX INCREMENT REVENUE PROJECTIONS
Year Secured New Construction Unsecured Total Incremental
Value Value Value Value Value
2% 0%
Base Year 133,797,870 26,087,714 159,885,584
1996-97 554,534,986 -- 43,323,315 597,858,301 437,972,717
1997-98 565,625,686 - 43,323,315 608,949,001 449,063,417
1998-99 576,938,199 54,580,000,- 43,323,315 674,841,514 514,955,930
1999-00 644,148,563 79,995,000 43,323,315 767,466,878 607,581,294
2000-01 738,626,438 204,915,000 43,323,315 986,864,750 826,979,166
2001-02 962,412,263 24,000,000 43,323,315 1,029,735,578 869,849,994
2002-03 1,006,140,509 60,780,000 43,323,315 1,110,243,824 950,358,240
2003-04 1,088,258,919 39,000,000 43,323,315 1,170,582,234 1,010,696,650
2004-05 1,149,804,097 35,000,000 43,323,315 1,228,127,412 1,068,241,828
2005-06 1,208,500,179 - 43,323,315 1,251,823,494 1,091,937,910
-2006-07 1,232,670,183 - 43,323,315 1,275,993,498 1,116,107,914
2007-08 1,257,323,586 - 43,323,315 1,300,646,901 1,140;761',317
2008-09 1,282,470,058 - 43,323,315 1,325,793,373 1,165,907,789
2009-10 1,308,119,459 - 43,323,315 1,351,442,774 1,191,557,190
2010-11 1,334,281,848 - 43,323,315 1,377,605,163 1,217,719,579
2011-12 1,360,967,485 - 43,323,315 1,404,290,800 1,244,405,216
2012-13 1,388,186,835 - 43,323,315 1,431,510,150 1,271,624,566
2013-14 1,415,950,572 - 43,323,315 1,459,273,887 1,299,388,303
2014-15 1,444,269,583 - 43,323,315 1,487,592,898 1,327,707,314
2015-16 1,473,154,975 - 43,323,315 1,516,478,290 1,356,592,706
2016-17 1,502,618,074 - 43,323,315 1,545,941,389 1,386,055,805
2017-18 1,532,670,436 - 43,323,315 1,575,993,751 1,416,108,167
2018-19 1,563,323,845 - 43;323,315 1,606,647,160 1,446,761,576
'2019-20 1,594,590,322 - 43,323,315 1,637,913,637 1,478,028,053
2020-21 1,626,482,128 - 43,323,315 1,669,805,443 1,509,919,859
2021-22 1,659,011,771 43,323,315 1,702,335,086 1,542,449,502
2022-23 1,692,192,006 43,323,315 1,735,515,321 1,575,629,737
2023-24 1,726,035,846 - 43,323,315 1,769,359,161 1,609,473,577
2024-25 1,760,556,563 - 43,323,315 1,803,879,878 1,643,994,294
2025-26 1,795,767,694 - 43,323,315 1,839,091,009 1,67.9,205,425
2026-27 1,831,683,048 ' 43,323;315 1,875,006,363 1,715,1.20,779
2027-28 1,868,316,709 - 43�323';315 1,911,640;024 1,751,754.440
2028-29 1,905,683,043 43,323,315 1,949,006,358 1,789,120,774
2029-30 1,943,796,704 '" 43,323,315 1,987;120,019 1,827,234,435
2030-31 1,982,672,638 - 43,323,315 2,025,995,953 1,866,110,369
'2031-32 2,022,326,091 - 43,323,315 2,065,649,406 1,905,763,822
2032-33 1,677,353,869 ` = 32,735,774 1,710,089,643 1,582,570,910
2033-34 639,770,325 - _ 25,299,778 665,070,103 587,866,693
Total '498,270,000
NPV 347,261,882
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc.
Revenue-W Amend Councrpt 10/10/95 1 of 3
TABLE E-81
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project SUMMARY
Report to the City Council WITH AMENDMENT 1 MERGER
TAX INCREMENT REVENUE PROJECTIONS
'Yea r Grass Unitary Total Cumulative Housing Cumulative Nonhousing Cumulative
Tax Utility Tax Fund Fund
Increment Revenue Increment Deposits (Gross)
1996-97 4,379,727 108,404 4,488,131 4,488,131 897,626 897,626 3,590,505 3,590,505
1997-98 4,490,634 108,404 4,599,038 9,087,169 919,808 1,817,434 3,679,231 7,269,735
1998-99 5,149,559 108,404 5,257,963 14,345,133 1,051,503 2,869,027 4,206,371 11,476,106
1999-00 6,075,813 108,404 6,184,217 20,529,350 1,236,843 4,105,870 4,947,374 16,423,480
2000-01 8,269,792 108,404 8,373,196 28,907,545 1,675,639 5,781,509 6,702,557 23,126,036
2001-02 8,698,500 108,404 8,806,904 37,714,449 1,761,381 -7,542,890 7,045,523 30,171,559
2002-03 9,503,582 108,404 9,611,986 47,326,436 1,922,397 9,465,287 7,689,589 37,861,148
2003-04 10,106,966 108,404 10,215,370 57,541,806 2,043,074 11,508,361 8,172,296 46,033,445
2004-05 10,682,418 108,404 10,790,822 68,332,628 2,158,164 13,666,526 8,632,658 54,666,103
2005-06 10,919,379 108,404 11,027,783 79,360,411 2,205,557 15,872,082 8,822,226 63,488,329
2006-07 11,161,079 108,404 11,269,483 90,629,895 2,253,897 18,125,979 9,015,587 72,503,916
2007-08 11,407,613 108,404 11,516,017 102,145,912 2,303,203 20,429,182 9,212,814 81,716,729
2008-09 11,659,078 108,404 11,767,482 113,913,394 2,353,496 22,782,679 9,413,986 91,130,715
2009-1,0 11,915,572 108,404 12,023,976 125,937,370 2,404,795 25,187,474 9,619,181 100,749,896
2010-11 12,177,196 108,404 12,285,600 138,222,969 2,457,120 27,644,594 9,828,480 110,578,375
2011-12 12,444,052 108,404 12,552,456 150,775,426 2,510,491 30,155,085 10,041,965 120,620,340
2012-13 12,716,246 108,404 12,824,650 163,600,075 2,564,930 32,720,015 10,259,720 130,880,060
2013-14 12,993,883 108,404 13,102,287 176,702,362 2,620,457 35,340,472 10,481,830 141,361,890
2014-15 13,277,073 108,404 13,385,477 190,087,839 2,677,095 38,017,568 10,708,382 152,070,271
2015-16 13,565,927 " 108,404 13,674,331 203,762,170 2,134,866 40,752,434 10,939,465 163,009,736
2016-17 13,860,558 108,404 13,968,962 217,731,132 2,793,792 43,546,226 11,175,170 174,184,906
;,_2017-18 14,161,082 108,404 14,269,486 232,000,618 2,853,897 46,400,124 11,415,589 185,600,495
2018-19-«; 14,467,616 108,404 •:; 14,576,020„ , 246;576,638•- 2,915,204 49,315,328 11,660,816 197,261,310
2019-20 , ,114;780;281 108,404% ',14,888,685., :261,465,322 2,977,737 52,293,064 11,910,948 209,172,258
2020-2f' F 15,099,199 108,404" ` A 5,20703 '` 276,672,925 3,041,521 55,334,585 12,166,082 221,338,340
2021-22 15;424,495 108,404 15,532,899 292,205,824 3,106,580 58,441,165 12,426,319 233,764,659
2022-23 15,756,297' 108,404 15,864,701 308-1070,525 3,172,940 61,614,105 12,691,761 246,456,420
2023-24 16,094,736 108,404 16,203,140 324,273,665 3,240,628 64,854,733 12,962,512 259,418,932
2024-25 16,439,943 108,404 16,548,347 340,822,012 3,309,669 68,164,402 13,238,678 272,657,610
2025-26 163,792,054 108,404 16,900,458 357,722;470 3,380,092 71,544,494 13,520,367 286,177,976
2026-27 1,7,151,208 108,404 17,259,612 37164982,082 3,451,922 74,996,416 13,807,689 299,985,666
2027-28 17,517,544 108,404 17,625,948 --392,608,031 3,525,190 78,521,606 14,100,759 314,086,424
2028-29 47;891,208 108,404 17,999,612 410,607,642 3,599,922 82,121,528 14,399,689 328,486,114
2029-30 18,272,344.. -106,404 18,380,•748 423,988,391 3,676,150 85,797,678 14,704,599 343,190,713
2030-31 18,661,104- 108,404" 18,769,508 447,757,898 3,753,902 89,551,580 15,015,606 358,206,319
2031-32 19,057,638 108,404 '19,166,042 466,923,941 3,833,208 93,384•,788 15,332,834 373,539,152
2032-33 15,825,709 90,845 15,916,554 482,840,495 3,183,311 96,568,099 12,733,243 386,272,396
2033-34 5,878,667 33,144 5,911,811 488,752,306 1,182,362 97,750,461 4,729,449 391,001,844 .
Total 484,725,773 4,026,533 488,752,306 97,750,461 391,001,844
NPV 135,657,905 1,423,035 137,080,939 27,416,188 109,664,752
Rosenow Spevacek Group,Inc.
Revenue-W Amend councrpt 10/10/96 2°t
TABLE E-8
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project SUMMARY-
Report to the City Council WITH AMENDMENT 1 MERGER
TAX INCREMENT REVENUE PROJECTIONS
Year Nonhousing Payments to Taxing Agencies Nonhousing Cumulative
Fund Per Pre-94 Per Statutory Total Fund
(Gross) Agreements Formula (Net)
1996-97 3,590,505 52,901 - 52,901 3,537,604 3,537,604
1997-98 3,679,231 55,965 1,324 57,290 3,621,941 7,159,545
1998-99 4,206,371 59,442 2,675 62,117 4,144,253 11,303,799
1999-00 4,947,374 63,088 4,053 67,141 4,880,233 16-1184,031
2000-01 6,702,557 . 339,389 13,517 352,906 6,349,651 22,533,682
2001-02 7,045,523 349,943 16,420 366,363 6,679,160 29,212,842
2002-03 7,689,589 360,796 19,381 380,177 7,309,412 36;522,254
2003-04 8,172,296 371,949 26;084 398,033 7,774,264 44:296,518
2004-05 8,632,658 383,404 125,202 508,606 8,124,052 52,420,570
2005-06 8,822,226 395,165 169,348 564,513 8,257,713 60,678,283
2006-07 9,015,587 407,235 214,378 621,613 8,393,974 69,072,257
,2007-08 9,212,814 419,616 261,664 681,280 8;531,534 77,603,791
2008-09 9,413:986 432;312 309,896 742,208 8,671,777 86,275,568
2009-10 9,619,181 445,328 359,093 804,420 8,814,760 95,090,328
2010-11 9,828,480 462,401 410,749 873,150 8,955,330 104,045,658
2011-12 10,041,965 476,295 463,438 939,732 9,102,233 • 113,147,890
2012-13 10,259,720 490,524 517,180 1,007,704 9,252,016 122,399,906
2013-14 10,481,830 505,093 575,768 1;080,861 9,400,968 131,800,874
2014-15 10,708,382 520,007 659,748 1,179,755 9,528,626 141,329,501
2015-16 10,939,465 535,271 758,767 1,294,038 9,645,427 150,974,927
2016-17 11,175,170 550,890 859,766 1,410,656 9,764,513 160,739,441
2017-18 11,415,589 566,870 • 962,785 1,529,655 9,885,934 .170,625,374
2018-19 11,660,816 583,215 t^1;067,865 1,651-,080 10,009,736 , .:,180,635,110,
2019-20 11,910,948 599,933 1,175,046 1-,7,74,978 10,,135,969 - 190,771,079
2020-21 12,166,082 617,027 1,284,370 ""1901,398 10,,264,684 201',035,764 .�
2021-22 12,426,319 634,506 b,395;881 2,030,387 10,395,932 W' 21+,431,696
2022-23 12,691,761 652,374 1,509,623 2,161,997 10,529,764 - 221,961,460 .
2023-24 12,962,512 670,639 1,625,639 2;296,278 113,666,234 232,627,694
2024-25 13,238,678 689,307 1,743,976 2,433,282 10,805,395 243,433,089 •,
2025-26 13,520,367 708,384 1,864,679 2,573,063 10,947,304 254,380,392
2026-27 13,807,689 727,879 "1,9871796 2,715,675 11,092,015 265,472,407
2027-28 14,100,759 747,797 2,114,719 2,862,517 .11,238,242 276,710,649
2028-29 14,399,689 768,147 2,244,161 3;,012,328 11,387,361oa 288,098,010
2029-30 14,704,599 788,937 2,376,231 _3J65;168 11•,539,431 299,637,441
2030-31 15,015,606 810,172 2,512,385 T 3;322,557 11,693,049:- 311,330,490
2031-32 15,332,834 831,863 2;651,261 3,483,124 11,849,710 323,180,200
2032-33 12,733,243 564,992 2,308,846 2,873,839 9,859,405 333,039,605
2033-34 4,729,449 577,241 811,234 1,388,475 3,340,974 336,380,579
Total 391,001,844- 19,216,296 35,404,970 54,621,266 336,380,579
NPV 109,664,752 4,865,093 5,733,001 10,598,094 99,066,658
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc.
Revenue-W Amend Councrpt 10/10/96 3 of 3
TABLE
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project
Report to the City Council
DEVELOPMENT ASSUMPTIONS USED
IN TAX INCREMENT PROJECTIONS
Project Name Location Assumed Scope Start - Completion Incremental
of Development Assessed Value
Increase
SUBAREA 1: HUNTINGTON CENTER
Huntington Beach Mall Edinger Av. and Construct new retail and 1997 - 1999 $150,000,000
Repositioning Beach Bl. entertainment uses that
enhance existing mall
property
SUBAREA 2: OAKVIEW
No projects assumed.
SUBAREA 3: TALBERT-BEACH
Pacific Park Villas Talbert Av. and Construct 16 new 1996 - 1997 $3,040,000
Joyful Ln. townhome units.
Seaview Project Happy Dr. and Construct 27 new single 1996 - 1998 $6,750,000
Joyful Ln. family detached units.
SUBAREA 4: YORKTOWN-LAKE
No projects assumed. rtw
SUBAREA 5: MAIN-PIER n
The Waterfront Pacific Pacific Coast Hwy. Remove existing mobile 1997 - 2004 $247,700,000
and Beach BI, home park. Construct 250
timeshare units, a 300
room luxury hotel tower,
and 356 move up single
family detached units.
Chevron Property{ ,+n Pacific Coast-Hwy. Remove existing 2000 - 2003 $66,780,000
and"Ist St'. structures. Construct
approximately 217,800
square feet of upscale
retail uses along Pacific
Coast Highway frontage.
Construct 150 move up
single family homes.
3rd Block West 301 Main St. Remove existing uses. 1997 - 1997 $24,000,000
Construct a mixed use
project consisting of
40,000 square feet of retail
uses, 63 condominium
units on upper levels, and
2 levels of subterranean
parking.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc.
Development Councrpt 10/10/96 1 of 1
entities because such payments are only required if the Agency extends the time period to incur
debt, increases the tax increment revenue limit, or extends the duration of the Plan.) After
subtracting the Housing Fund deposits, debt service on the 1992 Bonds, and Pass-Through
Payments, the Agency's available nonhousing revenues would be $191.1 million; these monies
would be collected by the Agency gradually over the next 36 years. As discussed earlier in this
Report, the total cost of financing the Project's nonhousing program is $452.0 million.
Therefore, less than 43% of the Project could be financed by tax increment revenues without the
Amendment/Merger.
With Amendment/Memer
The Amendment/Merger will remove the constraints in the Existing Plans that' stunt tax
increment revenues for the Project. As reflected on Table E-8, the Amendment/Merger enables
the Agency to collect more tax increment revenues under the same growth assumptions.
Between 1996-97 and 2033-34, gross tax increment revenues could be $488.8 million. Of this
amount, the Agency would deposit $97.8 million into the Housing Fund, remit $70.fmillion of ,
1992 Bond debt service and pay $19.2 million to taxing entities pursuant to Pass-Through
Agreements. Also, the Amend ment/Merger"would effectuate.an obligation to makeTStatutory
Payments of $35.4 million. After the Agency funds each of these four categories of debts, the
Agency would be left with $266.2 million to fund nonhousing projects.
Economic Feasibility Analysis > t
The Amendment/Merger enables the Agency to collect more tax increment revenue than what is
permitted in the Existing Plans. Table E-10 summarizes the fiscal benefits of the
Amendment/Merger. Given the growth assumptions, a total of $75.1 million of additional
nonhousing revenues could be available to fund the Project under the proposed Plan. Further,
another $29.6 million of added housing set-aside revenues could also be realized if the
Amendment/Merger is adopted:
Rosenow Spertteek Group, Iuc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 E-9 Report to the City Council
c . • / 1 - ilk ,.Y9:• ..
Table -E-10 delineated a total tax increment revenue need of $850.0 million to fund Project
implementation. Given the growth assumptions, tax increment revenues could fund
approximately $97.8 million of the $170.0 million housing program, and $266.2 million of the
$452.0 million nonhousing program. Consequently, the Agency would need to identify other
funding: sources,.such as those discussed'earlier in this Report, to meet the $72.2 million of
additional housing program costs and the $185.8 million of unfunded nonhousing program costs.
r
tN k
Reasons for the Provisions of Tax Increment
A recent analysis of the City's General Fund revenue structure has shown that the City cannot
support financing the costs of the needed public improvements. Typically, sales tax revenues
generate the majority of general fund revenues for cities. However, the City's per capita sales
tax revenues are among the lowest levels of any major city in the County. The majority of the
City's General Fund revenues are derived from property taxes, which have declined in recent
years due to a sluggish economy and successful assessment appeals. As these property tax
revenues declined, so did the City's general fund budget. These budget problems forced the City
to cut discretionary spending, eliminate programs, and layoff staff. Consequently, non-
operational activities, such as the public improvement and facility projects, cannot be undertaken
by the City.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, lnc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 E-10 Report to the City Council
TABLE E-10
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project
Report to the.City Council v, r,, f
ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY OF PROJECT
Breakdown of Projected Revenues" Projected Tax Increment
r ry Without With
Amend/Merger Amend/Merger
Gross Tax Increment Revenue $ 341,200,000 $ 488,800,000
Housing Set Aside (68,200,000) (97,800,000)
Debt Service on 1992 Bonds (70,200,000) (70,200,000)
Payments to Taxing Entities
Per Pre-111/94 Agreement (11,700,000) (19,200,000)
Per Statutory Payments - (35,400,000)
Revenue Available for Nonhousing Protects $ 191,100,000 $ 266,200,000
Nonhousing Project Costs (Table D-4) $ (452,000,009) $ (452,000,000)
Shortfall - Amounts from Other Sources $ (260,900,0� $ (185,800,000)
Additional Nonhousing Revenue
Due to Amendment/Merger: $ 75,100,000
Note:
The shortfall of tax increment revenues is based upon the growth assumptions
decribed in the Report to the City Council, and may increase or decrease should
actual growth differ. Assuming that assessed values grow as projected, other
funding sources described in Section E of this Preliminary Report would need to be "
identified.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc.
Feasibility Councrpt 10/10/96 1 of 1
4
'.SECTE0N ,F .-,
The Relocation Plan
In conjunction with the adoption of the Existing Plans, the Agency prepared and adopted the
attached Relocation Plan. The Relocation Plan ensures that the Agency will meet its relocation
responsibilities to any families, persons, or nonprofit local community institutions to be
temporarily or permanently displaced as a consequence of project implementation.
Because no specific projects requiring relocation can be identified at this time, it is not feasible to
identify specific businesses, residences, or local community institutions which may need to be
relocated at some time during the implementation process. If relocation activities are
undertaken, the Agency will handle those relocation cases which result from project activities on
an individual case-by-case basis. As an Agency formed under the provisions of state law, the
Agency is required to adhere to the State Relocation Law (Government Code Sections 7260
through 7277) and follow the California Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition
Guidelines ("State Guidelines") as established in the California Administrative Code, Title 25,
Chapter 6. In 1989, the State Relocation Law was amended by Assembly Bill 324 to bring State
Relocation Law in'conformance with federal regulations.
Prior to commencement of any acquisition activity which will cause substantial displacement of
residents, the Agency will adopt a specific relocation plan in conformance with the State
Guidelines. To the extent appropriate, the Agency may supplement those provisions provided in
the State Guidelines to meet particular relocation needs of a specific project. Such supplemental
policies will not involve reduction but instead enhancement of the relocation benefits required by
State Law.
w .Rosenow,Spevacek,Group, Inc.. 1&leiWopmelttAgency of the City of Huntington Beach
October,1996 _ S '' F-1 Report to the City Council
Pursuant to Agency Special Counsel's advice, the existing Relocation Plan contains outdated
payment provisions, and will be amended to delete Section 7.2 ("Payment Amounts"). As stated
in Section 7.0 of the Relocation Plan, the Agency will. make relocation payments to eligible
families, individuals, businesses and institutions displaced by Project activities in accordance
with the regulations governing relocation payments as established by the State of California.
This Report incorporates the Relocation Plan.
Rosenow Speracek Group,Mc. � .,;'r: Redevelopment Agency,of the City of Huntingtorr'Beach
October, 1996 ` F-2 Report to-th'e'City Omizeil
RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR RELOCATION ASSISTANCE,
GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES AND REAL PROPERTY ACQUISITION
POLICIES FOR REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PROJECTS
1.0 STATEMENT OF POLICY:
California Relocation Assistance Act (Government Code Section 7260, et.seq.) requires that a
public entity shall provide relocation advisory assistance and make specified payments to those
persons and businesses displaced as the result of acquisitions of real property for public use.
Pursuant to Section 33411 of the California Community Redevelopment Law and Section 6038 b
(5) of the California Relocation Assistance Guidelines, a method and plan (advisory services)
must be provided for the relocation of families and persons to be displaced from designated
redevelopment project areas.
The plan which follows is in compliance with these sections of the law and guidelines and is
further intended to demonstrate both the City of Huntington Beach's and the Redevelopment
Agency's clear intentions to provide maximum relocation advisory assistance to persons who may
be displaced by the Huntington Beach redevelopment activities. Such professional assistance,
together with payment of relocation benefits as provided for in Section 7260 et.seq. of the
Government Code are purposefully intended to minimize the inconvenience caused by
displacement and the need to relocate.
2.0 DEFINITIONS:
2.1 Agency- means the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency, its staff and consultants and
contractors it employs. .
2.2 Acquired Dwelling - means a dwelling purchased by the Agency, a dwelling for which
purchase negotiations have been initiated, or a dwelling on which rehabilitation activities
or Participation Agreement activities have been required.
2.3 Average Annual Net Earnings -one-half of the net earnings of a business before federal
and state income taxes realized during the two tax years of the business immediately
preceding the tax year in which the real property on which the business is located is
acquired by the Agency, or during such other period the Agency determines to be mace
equitable for establishing such earnings. For businesses operated for a period less than
two tax years prior to the date of acquisition, a different period may be adopted as may be
determined to be equitable. Net earnings shall include salaries, wages or other
compensation paid by the business to the owner thereof, the owner's spouse, or the
owner's dependents.
2.4 Business - means any lawful activity, excepting a farm operation, conducted primarily:
For the purchase, sale, lease or rental of personal and real property, and for the
manufacture, processing or marketing of products, commodities or any other
personal property; or
r
'For the sale of services,to the public;
By a nonprofit organization.
2.5 City - means the City of Huntington Beach.
' r 1
2.6 Comparable Replacement Dwelling - means a residential dwelling which satisfies each of
the following standards:
— Functionally equivalent and substantially the same as the acquired dwelling,
including newly-constructed housing.
— Decent, safe, sanitary and adequate in size to meet the needs of the displaced
family or person. However, at the option of the displaced person, a replacement
dwelling has the same number of rooms or the equivalent square footage as the
dwelling from which he was displaced.
— Available in the open market to the displaced person and open to all persons
regardless of race, color, sex, age, marital status, religion or national origin,
consistent with the requirements of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title VIII of
the Civil Rights Act of 1968.
Located in an area not generally less desirable than the one in which the dwelling
acquired by the Agency is located with respect to:
Neighborhood conditions, schools and municipal services;
Public utilities;
Public and commercial facilities; and
Reasonably accessible to the displaced person's present place of
employment or potential place of employment.
— Within the financial means of the displaced family or person. A replacement dwelling is
within the financial means of a displaced person if the monthly housing cost (including
payments on mortgage, taxes and insurance) or monthly rental cost(including utilities and
other recurring expenses payable by the Tenant) including any replacement housing
payment available to the'displaced person does not exceed 25 percent of the displaced
person's or family's average monthly income.
— '.A replacement dwelling is within the financial means of a displaced person if the purchase
price of the dwelling, including related increased interest costs and other incidental
expenses, does not exceed the total amount of the eminent domain award or the
negotiated acquisition price paid by the Agency for the dwelling acquired and the
replacement housing payment available to the displaced person.
2.7 Conventional Loan - means a mortgage commonly given by banks, savings and loan
associations to secure advances on, or the unpaid purchase price of real property,
payment of which is not insured by any agency of the state or federal governments.
2.8 Date of Initiation of Negotiations for the Parcel - means the date the Agency makes the
first personal contact with the owner,or:his,representative,•and.furnishes him with a written
offer to purchase the property.
For purposes of establishing payment eligibility in the case of rehabilitation, code
enforcement and participation agreement activities, "Initiation of Negotiations" shall mean
the date on which a displacee moves from a displacement site.
2
2.9 Director- means the Administrator of the Agency's Relocation Assistance Program; i.e.,
Deputy Director for Redevelopment.
2.10 Displaced Person - means any person who moves from real property, or who moves his
personal property from real property as a result of the acquisition of such real property, in
whole or in part, by a public entity or by any person having an agreement with or acting on
behalf of a public entity, or as the result of a written order from a public entity to vacate
the real property for public use.
This definition shall be construed so that persons displaced as a result of public action
receive relocation benefits in cases where they are displaced as a result of Participation
Agreement or an acquisition carried out by a private person for or in connection with a
public use where the public entity is otherwise empowered to acquire the property to carry
out the public use.
Where only a portion of the real property is taken, a person who occupied all or a portion
of the remained shall be considered a displaced person only if the acquisition or
construction of the project made the displacement necessary.
For purposes of eligibility for advisory assistance and moving expenses (excluding the In-
Lieu and Replacement Housing Payments), a person is considered displaced if he
receives a written notice from the Agency to vacate other real property on which the
person conducts a business.
2.11 Dwelling - means any single-family house, a single-family unit (including a non-
housekeeping unit) in a multi-family building, a unit of a condominium or cooperative
housing project, a mobile home or any other residential unit.
2.12 Economic Rent-means the reasonable rental expectancy if the property were available
for rent or lease; the rent or lease payment being_paid.for comparable space as
distinguished from contract rent or lease payment. "
2.13 Eligible Person - means any displaced,person who is lawfully entitled to any,relocation
payment under state or federal'regulations.
2.14 Family - means two or more individuals who by blood, marriage, adoption or mutual
consent live together as a family„unit.
2.15 Farm Operation - means any activity conducted solely or primarily for the production of
one or more agricultural products or commodities, including time, for sale or home use
and customarily production such products or commodities in sufficient quantity to be,
capable of contributing materially to the operator's support.;`
2.16 Gross Income - means the annual income from all sources of each member of the family
residing in the household who is eighteen (18) years of age or over, except that income of
a head of household or his spouse who is under eighteen (18) shall be included. Gross
income is based on the 12-month period immediately prior to displacement. If the Agency
determines, on a case-by-case basis, that the use of the 12-month period prior to
displacement would result in a hardship to the claimant, an alternate period, actual or
projected, may be used in such exceptional situations.
3
2.17 Incidental Expenses - means expenses incurred by an eligible displaced person in
connection with the purchase of a comparable replacement dwelling which are
reasonable and limited to the following-.
Lender,.FHA or VA appraisal fees;
FHA or VA application fee;
— Certification of structural soundness;'
— " Credit report;
— Title search expense and title insurance policy premiums;
Sales, transfer taxes and revenue stamps;
— Escrow agent's fees,
— Notary fees;
Recording fees;
Fees for preparing documents relating to purchase of the replacement dwelling;
Loan service fee not to exceed one percent(1%) of the purchase price and
origination or discount points customarily charged.
Prepaid expenses and any fee, cost, charge or expense which is determined to be a part
of the debt service or finance charge under Title I of the Truth and Lending Act(Public
Law 90-321) and Regulations Z issued pursuant thereto by the Board of Governors of the
. Federal-Reserve.System,shall.not be deemed'an incidental expense.
2.18 Mobile Home - means a vehicle, other than a motor vehicle, designed or used for human
a ,habitation, for carrying persons and property on its own structure and for being drawn by
a motor vehicle. .A-'`„ -,
2.19 Monthly Gross Income- means the total monthly income of a family or individual'
irrespective of expenses and voluntary or.involuntary deductions and includes, but is not
limited to, salaries, wages, tips, commissions, rents, royalties, dividends, interest, profits,
pensions and annuities. •' '':
r
2;20`�—Mortgage.- means such classes of liens as are commonly given to secure advances on,
or the unpaid purchase'price of real property, together with the credit instruments, if any
secured thereby.
2.21 Nonprofit Organization - means a corporation, partnership, individual or other public or
private entity engaged in a business, professional or instructional.activity on a nonprofit
basis, necessitating fixtures, equipment, stock in trade;or other tangible property for the
carrying on of the business, profession or institutional activity on the premises.
2.22 Owner- means a person "owns a dwelling" if he-
Holds fee title, a life estate, a 99-year lease with not less than 50 years to run
from date of acquisition of the property for the project;
4
— Holds an interest in a cooperative housing project which includes the rights of
occupancy of a dwelling unit therein;
— Is the contract purchaser of any of the foregoing estates or interests;
— Has a leasehold interest with an option to purchase; or
— Owns a mobile unit which, under state law, is determined to be real property, not
personal property.
2.23 Person - means any individual, partnership, corporation or association.
2.24 Personal Property (Tangible, Personal Property)- means tangible property which is
situated on the real property vacated or to be vacated by a displaced person and which is
considered personal property and is noncompensable (other than for moving expenses)
under the state law of eminent domain, and in the case of tenant, fixtures and equipment
and other property which may be characterized as real property under state or local law,
but which the tenant may lawfully, and at his election determines to move and for which
the tenant is not compensated in the real property or acquisition.
In the case of an owner of real property, the determination as to whether an item of
property is personal or real shall depend upon how it is identified in the acquisition
appraisals and the closing or settlement statement with respect to the real property
acquisitions; provided, that no item of property which is compensable under state and
local law to the owner of real property in the real property acquisition may be treated as
tangible personal property in computing actual direct losses of tangible personal property.
2.25 Prepaid Expenses- means items paid in advance by the seller of real property and
prorated between such seller and the buyer of such real property at the close of escrow
including, but not limited to, real property taxes, for insurance, homeowners' association
dues and assessment payments.
2.26 Project Manager-the Project Manager(as designated by the Director) shall be the
person with primary administrative responsibility for the redevelopment project area from
which the displacement has occurred. $
2.27 Public User- means a use for which real property may be acquired by eminent domain.
2.28 Purchases (Replacement Housing)- means:-- ,-t
— The acquisition, construction'or rehabilitation of a dwelling, the purchase and
rehabilitation of a substandard dwelling, the relocation or relocation and
rehabilitation of an existing dwelling, or the entering into a contract to purchase,
or for the construction of-a dwelling to be constructed on a site to be provided by
a builder or developer or on a site to be provided by a builder or developer or on.a
site which the displaced person own or acquired for such purpose.
— Mobile homes must be registered,with the California Department of Motor
Vehicles in the name of the claimant in order that they be considered as
"purchased" replacement dwellings.
2.29 Relocation Subcommittee Agency - the Relocation Subcommittee of the Agency shall
consist of any two (2) members of the Agency and the Executive director of the Agency.
5
" 2.30 Relocatee - means any person who meets the definition of a displaced person.
2.31 Relocation Appeals Board -The Relocation Appeals Board shall consist of the director(or
one designee) from the City's departments of Administration ,Community Services, and
Redevelopment. No designee may be the same person which has previously rendered a
decision on the appealed case.
2.32 Tenan -means a person who enters and remains in possession of a dwelling (including a
sleeping room) owned by another with the express permission of that owner of his
representative.
3.0 ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION:
3.1 Responsible Agency
The Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency is the local public agency which is
responsible for the relocation of individuals, families, businesses and institutions that are
displaced as a result of redevelopment project activities. The Agency will meet its
relocation responsibilities through qualified staff or qualified relocation consultants that will
manage the complexities of providing relocation advisory assistance. Their services may
be supplemented with assistance from local realtors, social agencies and civic
organizations.
3.2 Staffing
The Agency shall ensure that staff who*are charged with the duties of providing relocation
implementation services are qualified and experienced in housing and urban
development; relocation procedures, social service programs, public housing and
property management. The Agency's relocation program shall be designed so as to
maximize the use of other City departments, as appropriate, as well as other social
service agencies which regularly provide counseling, referral and specialized programs to
those who qualify. Such relocation programs shall, to the extent feasible, be designed to
encourage relocation of families and persons into other neighborhoods in Huntington
Beach without interfering with the displacee's option to select a replacement house of his
choice, whether that choice is within or outside the city of Huntington Beach.
3.3,-: Agency Staff Functions rit :c�k
The functions of the Agency'S'relocation staff shall include the following:
Interpret the Agency's p�ogr=a'm to all site occupants about the redevelopment
project and its effect upon project area occupants.
Determine the relocation needs and desires of all site occupants through personal
interviews and to keep each irifo`rmed'of their rights and responsibilities under the
redevelopment program,-as'Well as to apprise them of the relocation resources,
special services and aids to which they are entitled.
- Erilist•the'cboperatio'n of real estate agents, home builders, property management
firms, social service agencies, civic groups and others in locating suitable
relocation accommodations for displacees and to provide other services deemed
essential for the successful relocation of project area occupants.
fi
- Locate, inspect and evaluate, or stimulate the development of, housing facilities
I to meet the needs of all project area occupants and refer and otherwise assist
said occupants in securing housing which they require.
Secure priority consideration for persons eligible for and desiring public housing
�I or any other housing to which displacees are entitled, and take other appropriate
steps as necessary to expedite their placement into such housing.
I -
Advise and assist owners and site occupants in understanding and utilizing the
"owner,.business, and tenant participation" opportunities provided for in the
Redevelopment Plan.
- Assist prospective home buyers in obtaining appropriate mortgage financing and
advise them of special FHA, VA and other financial aids available.
Make referrals to community social, welfare, and other similar agencies when
such referrals are deemed advisable and cooperate with these agencies on an
individual basis to assist in the solution of specific problems affecting the
relocation of individuals, or groups of relocatees.
Maintain liaison services between businesses, site occupants, and commercial
property brokers, realty boards, Chambers of Commerce, the Small Business
Administration, the economic development agencies, lending institutions, and
other appropriate resources for advice and assistance in effecting the satisfactory
relocation of site occupants.
Assist project area occupants in preparing all claims for relocation payments to
which they are entitled.
Establish records, maintain files, and provide ongoing reports to the Executive
Office and Agency on field relocation activities.
Coordinate relocation activities with other Agency operations.
4.0 REPLACEMENT HOUSING STANDARDS:
It is the Agency's objective that.all displaced residential occupants be rehoused, with a minimum
of hardship, into accommodations that are decent, safe, sanitary, and suitable to their individual
needs, located in areas no less desirable than housing which exists in the Project Area with
respect to public utilities and public and commercial facilities, and are reasonably accessible to
the project area occupants' places of employment; and are priced within their financial means.
The standards set forth below have been established by the Agency to achieve these objectives.
4.1 Standards for Dwellings
A decent, safe, and sanitary dwelling is one which meets all of the following minimum
requirements: "
4.1.1 Conforms with all applicable provisions for existing structures that have been
established under state or local building, plumbing, electrical, housing, and
occupancy codes and similar ordinances or regulations.
4.1.2 Has a continuing and adequate supply of potable safe water.
7
4.1.3 Has a kitchen or an area set aside for kitchen use which contains a,sink in good
working condition and connected to hot and cold water, and an adequate sewage
system. A stove and refrigerator in good operating condition shall be provided
when required by local code;ordinances or custom.'When these facilities are not
so required by local codes, ordinances or custom, the kitchen area or area set
aside for such use shall have utility service connections and adequate pace for
the installation of such facilities.
4.1.4 Has an adequate heating system in good working order which will maintain a
minimum temperature of 70 degrees in the living areas, excluding bedrooms,
under local outdoor temperature conditions. A heating system will not be required
in those geographical areas where such is not normally included in new housing.
4.1.5 Has a bathroom, well-lighted and ventilated and affording privacy to a person
within it, containing a lavatory basin and a bathtub or stall shower, properly
connected to an adequate supply of hot and cold running water, and a flush
closet, all in good working order and properly connected to a sewage disposal
system.
4.1.6. Has an adequate and safe wiring system for lighting and other electrical services.
4.1.7 Is structurally sound, weathertight, in good repair and adequately maintained.
4.1 .8 Each building used for dwelling purposes shall have a safe unobstructed means
of egress leading to safe open space at ground level. Each dwelling unit in a
multi-dwelling building must have access either directly or through a common
corridor to a means of egress to open space at ground level. In multi-dwelling
buildings of three stories or more, the common corridor on each story must have
at least two means of egress.
4.1.9'' Has 150 square feet of habitable floor space for the first-occupant in a standard
living unit and at least 100 square feet of habitable floor space for each additional
occupant. The floor space is to be subdivided into sufficient rooms to be
adequate for the family. All rooms must be adequately ventilated. Habitable floor
space is defined as that space used for sleeping, living, cooking or dining
purposes, and excludes such enclosed spaces as closets, pantries,'bath or toilet
rooms, service rooms, connecting corridors, faundries, and unfinished attics,
foyers, storage spaces, cellars, utility rooms and similar spaces.
4.1.10 Every bedroom shall contain not less that 80 square feet of habitable floor area
and at least one window opening to the outside. If more than two persons occupy the
room, an additional 60 square feet of floor area shall be required for each additional
person.
4.2 Standards for Sleeping Rooms fnonhousekeepina units
`Ey A decent,_safe, and sanitary sleeping room is one which includes the minimum
requirements contained iri Section 4.1, subparagraphs 2, 4, 6, 7 and 8 of this section and
the following:
8
— At least 100 square feet of habitable floor space for the first occupant and 50
square feet of habitable floor space for each additional occupant.
— Lavatory, bath and toilet facilities that provide privacy, including a door that can
be located if such facilities are separate from the room.
4.3 Standards for Mobile Homes
A decent, safe, and sanitary mobile home is one which includes the minimum
requirements contained in Subsection 4.1, subparagraphs 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 of this
( section except that it may have 70 square feet of habitable floor space for each additional
occupant and bears the insignia of approval issued by the State of California, Department
of Housing and Community Development, pursuant to the California Health and Safety
Code, except those manufactured prior to September 1, 1958.
4.4 Ability to Pax
The Agency's relocation staff will give consideration to the particular financial situation of
each family or individual and will seek the occupant's concurrence in the final
determination of what he can afford to pay for housing. Every effort will be made to
maintain the lowest possible housing cost-income-ratio, which at the same time provides
the relocateee with adequate housing.
As a general rule, displacees should usually be able to pay gross monthly rentals based
on the following criteria:
— Families and individual -25% of gross income.
-- Displacees eligible for public housing —rents as established by the Housing
Authority, which are graded to income.
— Incomes, assets and debts are to be evaluated in determining the relative price
which is approximately two and one-half times annual gross family income,
combined with monthly payments not exceeding 25% of gross monthly income,
will be considered as being within the financial means of those contemplating
home ownership.
Displacees may voluntarily relocate to units exceeding these standards in price, but such
units may not be used as referrals by the Agency.
4.5 Miscellaneous
Additionally, units used for referral or feasibility purposes may not be allocated in areas
subject to unreasonable environmental influences and must be available on a
nondiscriminatory basis.
4.6 Exceptions
Exceptions to housing standards may be granted in emergency or other unusual
situations. Such exceptions will be limited to items and circumstances that are beyond
the reasonable control of the relocatee. Exceptions will not be granted for items which
render the dwelling hazardous, unsafe, or unsanitary.
s
4.7 Environmental Standards
It will be the Agency's policy to refer families and individuals to housing in areas not less
desirable in regard to public utilities and services,,and commercial facilities than presently
available in the Project Area. Furthermore, such housing shall, to the extent possible, be
within a reasonable distance for daily commuting to the displacee's place of employment.
4.8 Temporal Housing Standards
Housing not meeting the Agency's established standards for permanent relocation may
be used for temporary housing only when it becomes necessary to relocate a project area
occupant pending the availability of permanent quarters; to facilitate commencement of
demolition or site improvement operations;.to vacate premises which are unsafe; and/or
to effectuate reductions in overall redevelopment project costs.
In no event will the temporary housing offered by the relocation staff be of less desirable
character than that from which the project area occupant is being moved; further, such
temporary housing shall be ima safe and habitable condition.
Temporary relocations made by the Agency will be kept to a minimum both as to number
and duration, and will not diminish the Agency's obligation with respect to the displacee's
permanent relocation. The necessary costs incurred in temporary on-site moves made at
the direction of the Agency will be paid by the Agency.
If a self-relocatee moves into temporary housing and declines without satisfactory reason
to accept standard housing to which he is referred, it will be considered that the Agency's
responsibility to the relocatee has been discharged.
4..9 Obtaining Relocation Housing
The Agency will establish a working relationship with owners, operating managers,
realtors, multiple listing bureaus, property management firms, and others offering a wide
variety of private standard housing for rent or sale. Based principally on this relationship,
an ample supply of replacement housing will be made available in order to carry out the
Agency's relocation program.
The Agency will obtain, inspect, and maintain current listings of standard rental and sale
properties which are appropriate for relocation and are available on a nondiscriminatory
basis. Information on the size, rental or sale price, financing terms and location of
available units will be given to displacees seeking referrals and, as necessary, the
relocation staff may provide transportation or otherwise assist the displacee in obtaining
such housing.
5.0 ASSURANCE OF RELOCATION RESOURCES
Before actual displacement is to occur, the Agency will assure that, within a reasonable period of
time, there will be available comparable, decent, safe and sanitary housing-sufficient to meet the
needs of displacees and available at prices they can afford.
In order that the Agency make such assurance, it will, prior to any displacement, undertake
surveys if the needs of displacees and of the nature and extent of available standard housing
suitable to meet the needs of those families and individuals to be displaced.
5
a. I
Adequacy of housing resources will be judged on the basis of such factors as vacancy rates,
actual availability within applicable unit size and price ranges, degree of choice available within
the housing supply and relationship of available units found to the needs of displacees as
determined by occupancy surveys.
The Agency will document a finding of adequacy of housing availability after completion'of the
required surveys and upon demonstration that resources will be available at least 60 days before
displacement occurs.
No family or individual will be required to move until or unless suitable replacement housing is
available at a price they can afford; no family or individual will be required to move unless or until
at least three such suitable units have been offered to the displacee and rejected by the
displacee.
6.0 RELOCTION ADVISORY ASSISTANCE
6.1 General
The Agency will provide advisory assistance to all persons displaced or to be displaced
as a result of acquisition by the Agency of real property, to all persons displaced as a
result of property rehabilitation or code enforcement activities carried out by private
persons in conformance with adopted Redevelopment Plans, and to all persons who,
because of the acquisition of real property used for a business or farm operation are
required to move their personal property from such other real property.
In addition, relocation advisory assistance will be offered to any person occupying real
property immediately adjacent to property being acquired by the Agency; if the Director
determines that such person has been caused substantial economic injury as a result of
the Agency's acquisition.
The Agency's relocation assistance advisory program is designed to:
— Fully inform displacees of the availability of relocation payments and assistance
and the eligibility requirements.
— Through a personal interview, determine each person's need for relocation
assistance.
— Provide current information on the availability of comparable sales and rental
housing and location of comparable commercial properties.
— Assure that, within a reasonable period of time prior to displacement, there will be
adequate replacement housing available for persons who are to be displaced.
-- Provide other advisory services, such as counseling and referrals, with regard to
financial, employment, training, health, welfare, and other problem areas in order
to minimize the hardships of relocation.
— Assist persons in completing required applications and forms.
-- Inform all persons who are expected to occupy Agency property about rental and
property management policies to be used in the project.
11
— Insure adequate inspection of all relocation replacement housing.
6.2 Information Material
k tr The Agency will distribute inforrriational materials to every area occupant to be displaced
or otherwi'SE�'affectdd by'the project. Written information will be given to each owner and
occupant of property to be acquired at the time the Agency acquires the property. A
notification that occupants are eligible for relocation payments as of the date of the
Agency's first offer to purchase the property shall be given to each occupant as soon as
possible after the first offer has been made.
Separate information material will be made available to business concerns (including
nonprofit organizations) and farms, when appropriate. In addition to distributing written
material, the Agency will conduct personal interviews and maintain personal contacts to
the maximum extent possible. Informational materials will be written in the language(s)
most easily understood by the persons affected. Site occupants will be informed of
project activities and timing through meetings and other means.
6.3 Listings Referrals. and Assistance in Obtaining Housing
Listings
The Agency will provide information to residents on the availability, prices, and rental
rates of comparable, decent, safe, and sanitary housing. The Agency will provide
residents to be displaced with listings of available dwelling units of appropriate size to
.kw
meet their needs, and which are within their financial ability to pay. Listings will be
available in accordance with the Federal Fair Housing Law (Title VIII of the Civic Rights
Act of 1968) and other applicable fair housing laws. Listings will be maintained on a
continuing basis as derived from frequent reviews of newspaper ads, street searches,
contacts with owners, brokers, managers and agents.
Referrals
Relocation housing will be inspected prior to being provided as a referral to assure that it
meets replacement housing standards. Units to be referred may not be in a
neighborhood slated for governmental action unless that action is related to rehabilitation
or improvement of neighborhood amenities. In no case will referrals be made to housing
from which it is reasonably anticipated that the family or individual may again be
displaced. In making referrals, the Agency shall give consideration to the proximity of the
housing to the displacees' employment or potential employment, including proximity to
public transportation and the other public facilities essential to successful adjustment.
The Agency shall refer all interested persons to local housing authorities and sponsors of
assisted housing. When appropriate, staff will assist in filling out appropriate applications
for occupancy.
Assistance in Obtaining Housing
Families and individuals shall be advised to tell the Agency of problems experienced in
obtaining housing or other accommodations. It is the obligation of the Agency to assist in
resolving these problems. The Agency has the responsibility to provide prompt
information on the availability of housing and to assist displacees in obtaining the units of
their choice. The Agency shall provide assistance, at the prospective homeowner's
12
request, in obtaining mortgage financing, including helping in the preparation and
submission of purchase offers,,obtaining credit reports, and verifying employment, and
making any other appropriate arrangements with lending institutions to facilitate the
obtaining of loans, particularly for minority-group.and low,income families and individuals.
6.4 Social Services 4
All families and individuals will be provided with access to needed social services and
counseling in order to minimize hardships in the relocation process.
6.5 Assistance to Business Concerns, Nonprofit Organizations and Farms
The Agency will provide relocation advisory assistance to all business concerns,:nonprofit
organizations, and farm operations to be displaced by a project. The Agency will'also
provide advisory services and assistance to any business concern or nonprofit
organization occupying property which is immediately adjacent to: (1) the Project Area, or
(2) any real property acquired, when the business is determined to have suffered
substantial economic injury as a result of project activities.
The specific services which the Agency will provide to business concerns, nonprofit
organizations and farm operations are the following:
Consultations
The Agency will consult with the owner or operator to determine the need for
relocation assistance and nature of replacement site requirements. The
consultation will include discussions of such items as space, traffic patterns,
market and other requirements, and the total number of employees.
Current Information on Relocation Sites
The Agency will provide current information the availability, costs, and square
footage of comparable locations and make referrals to real estate brokers who
may be able to assist in obtaining suitable accommodations. In making referrals
and providing information, the Agency will provide maximum assistance but avoid
involvement in the business operation itself.
Economic Information
The Agency will provide information relative to property values, growth potentials
and economic information which may assist in enabling the business to make
informed decisions relative to relocation.
Referrals to SBA
Where appropriate, business concerns will be referred to the Small Business
Administration (SBA) for managerial, financial and technical assistance.
6.6 EqualOpportunitX
In carrying out relocations, the Agency shall take affirmative steps in providing displaced
families and individuals maximum opportunities in selecting housing. The following are
affirmative actions that the Agency may take:
13
Make full'use of government housing programs and normal real estate
management and brokerage services:
I t, ix = 'Inform members,of�min6rity groups of the opportunities in neighborhoods and
provide services necessary to familiarize them with those neighborhoods.
Provide escort services to real estate offices in all neighborhoods.
Cooperate will all fair housing groups interested in equal opportunities in housing,
6.7 Self-Relocation and Inspecting'-
X,, The Agency will make every effort to inspect the dwellings of self-relocated families and
_ individuals prior to their move.'When displacees'move without notifying the Agency,
' every reasonable effort will be made to relocate the displacee and inspect the
replacement dwelling. Such search activities will continue until the family or individual is
found, or twelve months' time has elapsed, whichever is sooner. Upon inspection, if a
dwelling is found to be substandard, the Agency must offer assistance in securing
standard accommodations. Should the family or individual decline a minimum of three
offers of standard dwelling units and its present dwelling unit does not meet standard
housing criteria, the Agency shall notify the displacee in writing of his ineligibility for
replacement housing payments.
6.8 Relocation Records
The Agency will maintain a relocation record, beginning with the information obtained
during the first interview to assess relocation needs- A•separate record shall be prepared
for each family, each individual maintaining a unit, each business concern, nonprofit
organization, and farm operation. The record shall contain all data relating to dates and
types of services provided, the type and amount of relocation payments made, and the
location to which those displaced relocated, including a description of the
- accommodation.
6.9 Agency Evaluation
The Agency will periodically evaluate the relocation program to determine its
effectiveness in assisting persons affected by its projects and its conformance to
provisions of state and federal laws. Both the quality and quantity of services provided
will be considered.
7.0 RELOCATION PAYMENTS
The Agency will make relocation payments to all eligible families, individuals, business and
institutions displaced by project activities in accordance with the regulations governing relocation
payments as established by the State of California.
An information statement will notify the site occupant of his eligibility for relocation payments and
generally instruct him on procedures for filing claims. Complete rules and regulations will be
carefully explained individually to each displacee and copies of ail instructions given to him.
Disp#acees may cons uit with Agency staff whenever prob#ems arise, and through recurring visits,
Agency staff will-attempt to anticipate problems and plausible solutions.
7.1 Qualifications and Conditions for Payments
14
The Agency will pay reasonable and necessary moving expenses and/or storage costs;
actual direct loss of personal property for which reimbursement or compensation is not
otherwise made by the Agency (through purchase, etc.), or a combination of both.
Under certain circumstances, some families and individuals may qualify for replacement
housing payments and certain businesses may be eligible for an alternate payment in lieu
of moving expenses and certain other expenses. Former owners will be reimbursed for
certain settlement costs and related charges incurred the sale of property to the Agency.
Eligibility for payments will be'based,upon the provisions,of pertinent sections of the State
of California Government Code and Relocation Rules and Regulations as adopted by the
Agency.
f
x
7.2 Filing Claims
— All claims for relocation payments must be submitted on forms which will be
provided by the Agency. .
— Special Conditions for Business Concerns
— A business concern must give the Agency at least thirty (30)'days, but
not more than ninety (90) days written notice of its intention to move and
must permit the Agency, at all reasonable times, to inspect the personal
property to be moved.
— Self-moves for business will be allowed.
7.3 Documenting Claims
A claim must be supported by the following:
— If for moving expenses, except in the case of a fixed payment, an itemized
receipted bill or other evidence of expense.
— If for actual direct loss of personal property, written evidence thereof, which may
include appraisals, certified prices, copies of bills of sale, receipts, canceled
checks, copies of advertisements, offers to sell, auction records, and such other
records as may be appropriate to support the claim.
— Documentation may be required by the Agency; and may include income tax
returns, withholding or informational statements, and proof of age.
All claim papers and related evidence will become permanent records in the Agency's
files. The reason for disallowing any portion of a claim will be stated in writing to the
claimant.
8.0 ASSISTANCE TO BUSINESSES AND OTHERS
8.1 Individuals
All services to be offered displaced families will be equally available to individuals
occupying separate housekeeping or nonhousekeeping accommodations,
8.2 Others
15
The agency will cooperate fully with an owner of any property in the project area which is
not proposed to be acquired by the Agency but which must be vacated in order for the
owner to participate in the redevelopment program. If he and/or his tenants are so
vacated, then the Agency's relocation advisory services will be offered to them,
8.3 ' Businesses and Institutions
Representatives of business and institutions located within a project area will be
personally iriterviewed to'defermine their relocation needs and preferences, provided
general and special informational'material, assisted in preparing relocation claims, helped
in finding other suitable locations within or outside the projected area, and referred to
other groups or agencies for assistance in completing a satisfactory relocation.
As the situation requires, the relocation staff will refer these displacees to, and maintain
liaison between, the Small Business Administration, the Economic Development Agency,
trade associations, Chambers of Commerce, lending institutions, real estate agencies,
brokers, and multiple listing realty boards in order that they may be assisted on a
nondiscriminatory basis in obtaining suitable relocation premises; financial help, and
—guidance in reestablishing their operations.
Y The office+of the Small Business Administration and economic development agencies will
be made aware of the project and, hopefully will work closely with the Agency and
displacees in extending their assistance. Information about these agencies will be
available from the relocation staff, and referrals to them and to others who can assist
commercial displacees will be made with the same consistency and comprehensiveness
as referrals of residents to social service agencies.
9.0 NOTICES TO VACATE
9.1 General Policy
No person or business lawfully occupying real property acquired by the Agency shall be
required to move from a dwelling or to move his business or farm without at least ninety
(90) days' notice in writing, except in unusual emergency situations or where the public
health and safety require immediate possession. No person shall be required to vacate a
dwelling unless comparable decent, safe, and sanitary replacement housing is available,
except in public health and safety emergencies.
9.2 Ninety-Day Notice
A ninety-day notice to vacate may not be issued before the Agency has control of the
property to be vacated: Such control may be any of the following:
Where property is acquired through negotiation, control by the Agency will accrue
to the date of recordation of the deed;
Where property is to be acquired through eminent domain proceedings and
possession is granted by an Order of Immediate Possession, control is taken to
mean the date on which such Order is granted, provided that the effective date of
the Notice coincides with or falls later than the effective date of the Order; or
16
— Where property is to be acquired through eminent domain proceedings but no
Order of Immediate Possession is taken, control accrues to the date of
recordation of the Final Order of Condemnation.
Any ninety-day notice to vacate shall contain a firm specific date by which the relocatee
must vacate the property and shall include a statement that the relocatee will not be
required to move from a dwelling, or to move his business or farm before ninety days from
the date of the Notice. Such notice shall inform the relocatee that he also will be given a
thirty-day written notice specifying the date by which the property must be vacated.
9.3 Thirty-Day Notice
At least thirty days prior to the effective date of any ninety-day notice to vacate, the
Agency will issue to each occupant a thirty-day notice which reconfirms the specific date
established for vacation of the property.
9.4 Extensions of Notices
On or before the effective date of a Vacate notice, but`subseguesit`to issuance of a thirty-
day notice, a written extension of time maybe granted should conditions or lack of° '
available replacement housing or commercial sites warrant. Such extension may not be
granted for more than thirty days at one time; additional thirty-day extensions may be
granted as necessary to the successful relocation of the site occupant.
9.5 Execution of Notices
All notices to vacate and extensions thereof shall be signed by the Agency Executive
Director or his designee.
10.0 APPEALS PROCEDURE AND ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
10.1 Purpose
The purpose.of this section is to set forth rules for processing appeals from Agency
determinations as to eligibility pursuant to a relocation claim, the amount of payment, and
for processing appeals from persons aggrieved by the Agency's.failure to refer them to
comparable permanent or adequate temporary replacement housing.
10.2 Right of Review
Any complainant, that is any person who believes himself aggrieved by a
determination as to eligibility, the amount of payment, the failure of the Agency to
provide comparable replacement housing or adequate temporary replacement
housing, or the Agency's property management practices, may, at his election,
have his claim reviewed and reconsidered in accordance with the procedures set
forth in this section.
A person or-organization directly affected by the relocation plan may petition the
Agency to review the final relocation plan as provided for in the Guidelines.
10.3 Notification to Complainant
If the Project Manager denies or refuses to consider a claim, the complainant shall be
notified within 15 days of such determination and shall be informed of the reasons for
17
such denial or refusal, and the applicable procedures for obtaining review of the decision.
If necessary,_such notification shall be in a language most easily understood by the
complainant,. -
10.4 Stages of Review by the Agency
Request for Further Written Information: A complainant may request the Project
Manager to provide him with a full written explanation of the Agency's
determination and the basis therefor, if he feels that the explanation
accompanying the payment of the claim or notice of refusal inadequate. The
Project Manager shall provide such an explanation to the complainant within 15
days after receipt of his request.
— Informal Oral Presentation: A complainant may request an informal oral
presentation before seeking formal review and reconsideration. A request for an
informal oral presentation shall be filed within the period described in subsection
(4) of this section, and within 15 days of the request, the Project Manager shall
afford the complainant the opportunity to make such presentation. The
(complainant may be,represbnted by an attorney or other person of his choosing.
'd[This bra] presentation shall enable the complainant to discuss the claim with the
Director or a designee (other than the person who made the initial determination)
having authority to revise the initial determination. The right to formal review and
reconsideration shall not be conditioned upon requesting an oral presentation.
Written Request for Review and Reconsideration: At any time within the period
described in subsection (4) a complainant may file a written request for review
and reconsideration. -The'complainant may include in the request for review any
statement of fact within the complainant's knowledge or belief or other material
which may have a bearing on the appeal.
Time Limit for Requesting Review: A complainant desiring either an informal oral
presentation or seeking a formal review and reconsideration shall make a request
to the Agency within eighteen months following the date the move from the
property is completed or the date final compensation for the property is received,
whichever is later.
10.5 Formal Review and Reconsideration by the Relocation Appeals Board
The Relocation Appeals Board (as defined in Section 2.32 hereof) shall consider
their request for review and sha=1 submit its findings to the Agency staff with a
recommendation whether a modification of the initial determination is necessary.
The Relocation Appeals Board shall consider every aggrieved claimant's request
and inform him that he has the right to be represented by an attorney, to present
his case by oral or documentary evidence, to submit rebuttal evidence, to conduct
such cross-examination, as may be required, for a full and true disclosure of
facts, and to seek judicial review once he has exhausted administrative appeal.
Scope'of Review: The Relocation Appeals Board shall review and reconsider the
initial determination of'the complainant's case in light of:
All material upon which the Agency based its initial determination
including all applicable rules and regulations, except that no evidence
shall be relied upon where a claimant has been improperly denied an
opportunity to controvert the evidence or cross-examine the witness.
`18
— The reasons given by the claimant for requesting review and
reconsideration of the claim.
— Any additional written or relevant documentary materials submitted by the
claimant.
--- Any further information which the Relocation Appeals Board, in its
discretion, obtains by request, investigation, or research, to ensure fair
and full review of the claim.
Evidence: The hearing shall be formal but need not be conducted according to
technical rules relating to evidence and witnesses. Any relevant evidence shall
be admitted if it is the sort of evidence on which responsible persons.are
accustomed to rely in the conduct of serious affairs, regardless of the existence of
any common law or statutory rule which might make improper the admission of
such evidence over objection in civil actions.
Hearsay evidence may be admitted for any purpose but shall not be sufficient in
itself to support a finding unless it would be admissible over objection in civil
actions. The rules of privilege and of official orjudicial notice shall be effective to
the same extent as in civil actions. Irrelevant and repetitious evidence shall be
excluded. Oral evidence shall be taken only under oath or affirmation.
Burden of P of: The burden of proof shall be.on the,claimant in all cases. >s-
Counsel: At all hearings held before the�Relocation3Appeals Board, complainants
may be advised by an attorney at law, licensed to practice in the State of
California. A separate counsel so licensed may also advise the Relocation
Appeals Board, on matters of law.
The Relocation Appeals Board shall exercise all powers relating to the conduct of
the hearing. In no case shall the Relocation Appeals Board's counsel participate
in the decision of the ultimate issue.
Time Limits: �.
— The matter shall be set by the Relocation Appeals Board, and'the
claimant shall be given at least five business days' notice in writing of the
date and place of such hearing either by registered or certified mail,
postage prepaid.
— The determination of review shall be issued as soon as possible, but in
any event, no later than six seeks from receipt of the last material
submitted by the claimant for consideration, or the date the hearing is
terminated, whichever is later.
— In the case of the claimant's dismissal for untimeliness or for any other
reason based on the merits of the claim, a written statement shall be
furnished to the claimant stating the reason for the dismissal of the claim
as soon as possible, but not later than two weeks from receipt of the last
material submitted by the claimant or the date .he hearing is terminated,
whichever is later.
i9
10.6 Appeal to Relocation Subcommittee of Agency
If any claimant is unsatisfied by the decision rendered by the Relocation Appeals Board,
the claimant may appeal this decision to the Relocation Subcommittee of the Agency
within ninety (90) days of receipt of the Relocation Appeal Board decision. The
Relocation Subcommittee of the Agency (as defined in Section 2.30 hereof) shall abide by
all the rules of evidence, procedures, time limits and all other provisions defined in Section
10.5 hereof. -
10.7 Appeal to Agency
If any claimant is unsatisfied with the decision rendered by the Relocation Subcommittee
of the Agency the claimant may appeal its decision to the full membership of the
Redevelopment Agency within ninety (90) days of receipt of the decision of the Relocation
Subcommittee. The Agency shall abide by all the provisions of Section 10.5 hereof and in
addition to this appeal will be heard at a regular meeting of the Agency and shall be
conducted as a public hearing of the Agency following not less than ten (10) calendar
days public notice in a newspaper of general circulation.
10.8 Requests to Waive Time Limitations
A complainant may request a waiver of time limits provided, by filing a written request for
a review of a decision in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 10.4 and
10.5, except that such written request for review shall be fled within ninety (90) days of
the claimant's receipt of.fhe•Agency'stdetermination.
o;r"°�•�' i,10.9 Extension of Tim`etimits ' t
t'The time limits specified in Section=l 0.4'may be extended for good cause by the Director.
10.10 Recommendations by Third Party
Upon agreement between the claimant'and the Board, a mutually acceptable third party
or parties may review the claim and make advisory recommendations thereof to the
Agency for its final determination, In reviewing the claim and making recommendations,
the third party or parties shall be guided by the provisions of this Grievance Procedure.
10.11 Review of'Filds by Claimant
Except to the extent the confidentiality of materials is protected by law or its disclosure is
prohibited by law, the claimant shall be permitted to inspect all files and records bearing
upon his claim or the prosecution of the cfaimant's grievance. If a claimant is improperly
denied access to any relevant material bearing on the claim, such material may not be
relied upon in reviewing the initial determination.
10A2 Effect of Determination on Other Persons '
The principles established in all'determination by the Agency shall be considered as
precedent for all eligible persons in subsequent similar situations regardless of whether or
not such person filed or has filed a written request for review. All written determinations
shall-be kept on file and available for public review:
10.13 Right to Counsel
20
Any aggrieved party has a right to representation by legal or other counsel at his expense
at any and all states of the proceedings set forth in these sections.
10.14 Joint Complainants
Where more than one person is aggrieved by the failure of the Agency to refer them to
comparable permanent or adequate temporary replacement housing, the complainants
may join in filing a single written request for review. A determination shall be made by the
Agency for each of the complainants.
10.15 Judicial Review
The determination made by the Agency shall be considered final for purposes of
exhaustion of administrative remedies. Nothing in this Article shall in any way preclude or
limit a claimant from seeking judicial review of a claim after exhaustion of such
administrative remedies as are available.
11.0 ADDITIONAL RELOCATION REQUIREMENTS
State law and regulations do not prescribe relocation assistance and benefit requirements that
exceed those provided for herein; however, the Agency shall follow and comply with all such
requirements prescribed.
s
E
21
SECTION G-
An Analysis of the Preliminary -Plan .
The Preliminary Plan for the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project ("Preliminary Plan") was
approved by the City of Huntington Beach Planning Commission ("PIanning Commission") on
March 26, 1996 by Resolution No. 1513 and accepted by the Agency on April 1, 1996 by
Resolution No. 272. The Preliminary Plan described the boundaries of the Project Area and
included general statements of-the proposed land uses, layout of principle streets, population
densities, building intensities, and building standards. It also addressed how the Redevelopment
Plan would attain the purposes of the Law. It discussed the conformance with the City's General
Plan. and discussed the impact upon residents and the surrounding neighborhood. The
Redevelopment Plan conforms with the standards and provisions of the Preliminary Plan.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 G-1 Report to the City Council
SECTION H
The Report and Recommendations
of the Planning Commission
The Planning Commission adopted its report and recommendation on the conformity of the Plan
with the City's General Plan on September 10, 1996 by Resolution No. 1517 ("Resolution"). A
copy of the Resolution is incorporated into this Report by reference. Pursuant to the Resolution,
the Planning Commission found that the Plan is in conformity with the City's General Plan and
recommended that the Agency and the City adopt the Plan.
' r
Rosenow Spevacek Group, luc. RedevelopmentAgency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 H- Report to the City Council
r .
RESOLUTION NO. 1.517
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE HUNTINGTON BEACH
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND MAKING ITS REPORT AND
RECOMiMMNDATION AS TO THE CONFORMITY OF THE
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN TO THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN
(GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE NO. 96-6)
WHEREAS, the Huntington Beach.Redevelopment Agency (" the Agency") has
established boundaries and formulated a Redevelopment Plan for the Yorktown-Lake
Redevelopment Project as approved by Ordinance No. 2576 of the City of Huntington Beach
("the City"); and
The Agency has established boundaries and formulated a Redevelopment Plan for the
Talbert-Beach Redevelopment Project as approved by Ordinance No. 2577 of the City; and
The Agency has established boundaries and formulated a Redevelopment Plan for the
Main-Pier Redevelopment Project as approved by Ordinance No. 2578 of the City, and amended
said Redevelopment Plan by Ordinance No. 2634 of the City; and
The Agency has established boundaries and formulated a Redevelopment Plan for the
Oakview Redevelopment Project as approved by Ordinance No. 2582 of the City, and amended
said Redevelopment Plan by Ordinance No. 3002 of the City-, and
The Agency has established boundaries and formulated a Redevelopment Plan for the
Huntington Center Commercial District Redevelopment Project as approved by Ordinance No.
2743 of the City, and
The Agency and the City desire to consider the amendment and merger of the
Redevelopment Plans for the Yorktown-Lake, Talbert-Beach, Main-Pier, Oakview, and
Huntington Center Commercial District Redevelopment Projects, establishing.the merged
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project ("Project"); and
A draft Redevelopment Plan for the Project ("Redevelopment Plan") has been prepared in
accordance with the provisions of the California Community Redevelopment Law; and
Section 33346 of the California Community Redevelopment Law requires that before the
Redevelopment PIan is submitted to the City Council, the Planning Commission shall have the
opportunity to review and report on the conformity of the Redevelopment Plan with the City's
General Plan ("General Plan") and pursuant to such review may recommend for or against the
approval of the Redevelopment Plan, and
hi.^idchlresrept
The Redevelopment Plan provides that the land uses within the Huntington Beach
Redevelopment Project Area will be those uses permitted within such areas by the General Plan as
they may be amended from time to time,
NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Huntington Beach does
hereby resolve as follows.
1. That the Planning Commission, having reviewed the contents of the proposed
Redevelopment Plan for the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project, incorporated herewith as
Exhibit A, hereby reports, finds and determines that the Redevelopment Plan is in conformity with
the City's General Plan, and specifically conforms to the following Goals, Objectives, and Policies
of the General Plan-
Land Use Element
Policy LU 1.1.1 Establish incentives for the development of uses to support the needs and
reflect the economic demands of City residents and visitors The proposed merger will maintain
and improve the ability of the Redevelopment Agency to assist in the attraction of business,
merger of parcels, improvement of infrastructure, and recycling,of underutilized or blighted
properties. By increasing the amount of debt that may be incurred and allowing a sharing of tax
increment revenue between project areas, the proposed merger increases the Agency's ability to
help implement public improvements which may attract new businesses or stimulate existing
business to improve.
Policy LU 1.1.2 Promote development in accordance with the Economic Development
Element. The proposed merger will maintain and improve the ability of the Redevelopment
Agency to assist in the development of property so that it meet the needs of the community and
conform to the land uses stipulated in the Land Use Element, and design criteria stipulated in the
Urban Design Element. Through the ability to acquire property, the Agency is able to help create
attractive commercial properties and stimulate economic development.
Policy LU 2.1.1 Plan and construct public infrastructure and service improvements as
demand necessitates to support the land uses specified in the Land Use Plan. The proposed
merger will maintain and improve the ability of the Redevelopment Agency to assist is the
creation or public improvements, such as landscaping and street furniture, as well as
infrastructure. These improvements may be required to provide quality service to existing and
proposed developments as well as create an attractive place to conduct business.
Policy L U 4.3.3 Provide economic assistance, as funds are.availab,le,for th'e "
improvement of physically deteriorated structures in the City. The proposed merger will
maintain and improve the ability of the Redevelopment Agency to assist in the imprrovement of
deteriorated structures. By increasing the amount of debt that may be incurred and allowing-a
sharing of tax increment revenue between project areas, the merger increases the Agency's ability.
to help implement public improvements which may attract new businesses or stimulate existing
business to improve.
2
4:PCD:Rcsolutioo:combine
RI S 96-642
i
k
Policy LU 10.1.13 Encourage the long-term physical maintenance and economic vitality
i of Com,-iercial General areas, including the consideration of the use of pro-active programs of
economic reinvestment, code enforcement and redevelopment The proposed merger will
maintain and improve the ability of the Redevelopment Agency to pro-actively address concerns
of business owners in each project area. This includes business attraction and retention programs,
development assistance, and the recycling and improvement of deteriorated or underutilized
properties.
Urban Desizn Element
Policy UD 1.3.1 Require a consistent design theme and/or landscape design character
along the community's corridors, that reflects the unique qualities of each district. Ensure that
streetscape standards for the major commercial corridors, the residential corridors, and primary
and secondary image corridors provide each corridor with its own identity while promoting
visual continuity throughout the City. The proposed merger will maintain and improve the ability
of the Redevelopment Agency.to create or assist in the creation of coordinated street scenes and
improve,the corridors in project areas. By increasing the amount of debt that maybe incurred,
and allowinga sharing of tax increment revenue between project areas, the Agency increases its
g p J
ability to,help implement public improvements.
Policy.UD 1.3.2 Provide for the implementation of streetscape and landscape
improvements along the major commercial corridors, through public capital improvement
programs, business district improvements, or other techniques as funding is available.
a. Develop or enhance the pedestriaai environment in those parts of the corridors
where there is existing or the potential for pedestrian activity, this includes the use of.•
• sidewalkfurniture;
• shade frees;
• shade structures;
• special paving; and
pedestrian walkway linkages
b. Consider using special corridor oriented public signage,public art, or median
monuments at prominent intersections.
C. Discourage the excessive use of temporary signage-including bunting and
commercial banners. The proposed merger will maintain and improve the ability of the
Redevelopment Agency to assist in implementation of public improvements, as listed above, by
increasing the amount of debt that may be incurred, allowing a sharing of tax increment revenue
between.project.areas, and by providing a longer period for the Agency to undertake projects.
.. .Economic Development Element _ .
Policy ED 1.1.1 Maintain and expand economic and business development programs
that encourage and stimulate business opportunities within the City: The proposed m drger will
improve the ability of the Redevelopment Agency to assist in the attraction of business, merger of
parcels, improvement of infrastructure, and recycling o£underutilized or blighted properties. By
3
4:PCD:ResoIL,ion:cornbenc
RLS 96-642
t
increasing the amount of debt that may be incurred, extending the life of each project area, and
allowing a sharing of tax increment revenue between project areas, the Agency increases its ability
to help implement public improvements. The public improvements may attract new businesses or
stimulate existing business to improve. In addition, the Agency's ability to help assemble parcels
and improve underutilized or deteriorating properties is similarly improved.
Policy ED 2.1.1 Provide technical assistance and outreach services to the existing and
prospective businesses in terms of site locations, City permits,financing, and other services as
needed The proposed merger will maintain and improve the ability of the Redevelopment
Agency to provide technical assistance to existing and prospective businesses. The increased
ability to help improve the individual project areas may increase the attractiveness to prospective
and existing businesses. En addition, by increasing the amount of debt that may be incurred,
extending the life of each project area, and allowing a sharing of tax increment revenue between
project areas, the Agency may be able to help assemble parcels and improve underutilized or
deteriorating properties.
Policy ED 2.4.1 Encourage and assist existing and potential commercial owners to
modernize and expand their commercial properties. The proposed merger will improve the
ability of the Redevelopment Agency,to assist in the physical improvement of businesses within
project areas by increasing the amount of debt that may be incurred, extending the life of each
project area, and allowing a sharing of tax increment revenue between project areas.
Housinz Element
Policy Number 2 To ensure the adequate provision of housing for all economic segments
of the community, the City of Huntington Beach shall.
Encourage the provision and continued availability of a range of housing types
throughout the community,
Encourage both private and public sectors to produce or assist in the production of
housing with particular emphasis on housing affordable to lower income households By
increasing the amount of debt that may be incurred, extending the life of each project area, and
allowing a sharing of tax increment revenue between project areas, the Agency increases its ability
to aid in the creation of affordable housing within the project area. The agency is required to
provide affordable housing within the project area. State law requires that 20% of all tax
increment financing must be set aside for affordable housing.
Policy Number 4 In order to preserve housing and neighborhoods, the City of
Huntington Beach shall:
Encourage the maintenance and repair of existing owner-occupied and rental housing to
prevent deterioration,
Encourage the rehabilitation of substandard and deteriorating housing where feasible,
Where possible, take action to promote the removal and replacement of those substandard units
which cannot be rehabilitated ,
Improve and upgrade community facilities where necessary . . . By increasing the
amount of debt that may be incurred, extending the life of each project area, and allowing a
4
4_ MRcsolutiou:combinc
RLS 96-642
sharing of tax increment revenue between project areas, the Agency increases its ability to aid in
the rehabilitation and improvement of housing stock within the project area, The Agency is'
required to provide affordable housing within the project area. State Iaw requires that 20%of all
tax increment financing must be set aside for affordable housing.
2. That the PIanning Commission hereby recommends that the Agency and City
Council approve and adopt the Redevelopment Plan. ,
3. That this Resolution shall constitute the report and recommendation of the
Planning Commission on the Redevelopment Plan to the Agency and the City Council pursuant to
Section 33346 of the California Community Redevelopment Law and pursuant to Section 65402
of the Government Code.
4. That the Planning Commission hereby requests that the Staff to take any and all
actions that .may be necessary to effectuate the purposes of this Resolution, or as are appropriate
or desirable in the circumstances, including but not limited to the preparation of documents, and
the fiiing and transmittal of documents.and information.
5_ That the Planning Commission requests that Staff to submit the Resolution to the
Agency and the City Council.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this tenth day of September, 1996, by the
fol3owing roll call vote:
AYES: HOLDEN, LIVENGOOD, KERINS,_ BIDDLE, TILLOTSON, SPEAKER
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: wRrAN
ABSTAIN: NONE
ATTEST:
paurdZeleksky�cret Chairperson, Planning Commission
ATTACHENT:
r
Exhibit A-Redevelopment Plan for the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project
T,n,ttct,',resreyc
SECTION I
Public Participation
Pursuant to Section 33385.3 of the Law, formation of a Project Area Committee was not required
because the Amendment/Merger does not propose to either extend the authority of the Agency to
acquire by eminent domain property on which persons reside, or add territory in which low and
moderate income persons reside.
In lieu of a Project Area Committee, the Agency convened two public forums to solicit
community input on the Amendment/Merger. The first forum was held on September 11, 1996
at the Civic Center. Despite the posting and publishing of a notice for this meeting, only one
resident attended the first community meeting. The attendee offered no comments to the
proposed Amendment/Merger. The poor turnout prompted staff to schedule a second community
meeting on October 29, 1996 at 6:00 p.m. Notice of the second meeting will be included in the
mailed notice of joint public hearing, which will be mailed during the week of October 14, 1996.
The community may also provide input on the Amendment/Merger at the Agency/City Council
joint public hearing scheduled for November 18, 1996 at 7:00 p.m.
k
Rosenow Spewacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 I-1 Report to the City Council
SECTION J
A .Statement of Conformance to the
City's General Plan
As set forth in Section H of this Report, the Plarining Commission adopted Resolution No. 1517
on September 10, 1996, which established that, pursuant to Government Code Section 65402, the
proposed Amendment/Merger and implementation activities-described in Section A are in
conformity with the General PIan of the City.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 J-1 Report to the City Council
SECTION K
The Final Environmental Impact Report
An Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") entitled "Final Environmental Impact Report for the
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project" (State Clearinghouse Number 96-041-075) was
prepared in connection with the proposed Amendment/Merger by LSA Associates, Inc. The EIR
reviewed all potential environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the
Amendment/Merger. As analyzed in the EIR, the proposed Redevelopment Plan is consistent
with the provisions of the City's General Plan, for which the City has adopted policies to
mitigate impacts caused by its implementation. Consequently, the EIR determined that
implementation of the proposed Amendment/Merger would not result in significant unavoidable
adverse impacts. On October 7, 1996, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 96-93, certifying
completion of the EIR for the Amendment/Merger. A copy of the Final EIR, the comments
received, and responses to the comments are included under separate cover and are incorporated
herein by reference.
Rosenow Spevacek Group,Mc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 K-1 Report to the City Council
SECTION L
A Statement Regarding the Report
of the County Fiscal Officer
Concurrent with the adoption of the Constituent Projects between 1982 and 1984, the Orange
County Auditor-Controller prepared six separate base year reports pursuant to Section 33328 of
the Law ("Base Year Reports") that established the then last equalized assessment roll as the base
year roll for the purposes of the calculation of tax increment revenue. Because the
Amendment/Merger does not propose to either add or delete territory from the Project Area, the
Base Year Reports are not subject to any changes and continue to be effective in connection with
the allocation of taxes from the Project Area under the Plan.
Rosenow 4evacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 L-1 Report to the City Council
SECTION M
Neighborhood Impact Report
The Law requires that the following topics be addressed in the Neighborhood Impact Report:
relocation, traffic circulation, environmental quality, availability of community facilities and
services, effect on school population and quality of education, property assessments and taxes,
and other matters affecting the physical and social quality of the neighborhood. The
Neighborhood Impact Report must also discuss the impact the Plan will have on low and
moderate income persons or families in the following areas: the number of dwelling units to be
removed or destroyed; the number of low or moderate income persons or families expected to be
displaced; the general location of housing to be rehabilitated or constructed; the number of
dwelling units to house persons and families of low or moderate income are planned for
construction or rehabilitation; the projected means of financing the aforementioned dwelling
units; and the projected timetable for meeting the Plan's relocation, rehabilitation and
replacerri nt�housing objectives.
Relocation
Agency staff estimates that as many as 18 households could be relocated as a consequence of
Project implementation activities over the 'remaining 28 years of the Plan's effectiveness.
Because no specific projects requiring relocation can be identified at this time, it is not feasible to
identify Specific businesses, residences or local community institutions which may need to be
relocated at some time during the implementation process.
If relocation activities are undertaken, the Agency will handle those relocation cases which result
from project activities on an individual case-by-case basis, in accordance with its Method of
Relocation. As an Agency formed under the provisions of state law, the Agency is required to
adhere to the State Relocation Law (Government Code Sections 7260 through 7277) and follow
the California Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Guidelines ("State
Guidelines') as established in the California Administrative Code, Title 25, Chapter 6. In 1989,
Roseiiow Spevacek Croup,file. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 M-1 Report to the City Council
the State Relocation Law was amended by Assembly Bill 324 to bring State Relocation Law in
conformance with federal regulations.
Prior to commencement of any acquisition activity which will cause substantial displacement of
residents, the Agency will adopt a specific relocation plan in conformance with .the State
Guidelines. To the extent appropriate, the Agency may supplement those,provisions provided in
the State Guidelines to meet particular relocation needs of a specific.project. Such supplemental
policies will not involve reduction but instead enhancement of the relocation benefits required by
State Law.
Traffic Circulation
Traffic circulation impacts resulting from the Project are discussed in Section 4.6 of the EIR
included in Section K of this Report. The EIR's analysis .of future,circulation system
requirements concluded that the following segments serving the Project Area are expected to
operate below acceptable levels of service:
• Beach Boulevard: Yorktown Avenue to Garfield Avenue = ,�
• Gothard Street: Heil to Edinger Avenue
• Gothard Street: Edinger Avenue to Center Avenue
• Gothard Street: Center Avenue to,McFadden Avenue
• Orange Avenue: 17th Street to 6th Street
• Pacific Coast Highway: Warner Avenue to Goldenwest Street ,
• Pacific Coast Highway: Delaware Street to Beach Boulevard
In addition, the following intersections are estimated to;be operating below acceptable levels of
service:
• Edinger Avenue and Beach Boulevard
• Slater Avenue and Beach Boulevard
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 M-2 Report to the City Council
• Warner Avenue and Beach Boulevard
• Talbert Avenue and Beach Boulevard
Because land use designations and intensities of the proposed Plan would be identical to those of
the General Plan, the impact- of the Amendment/Merger will not be locally or cumulatively
significant. The Amendment/Merger will not affect land use changes, traffic generation, traffic
levels of service, or intersection capacity. As a result, no traffic or circulation impacts were
forecast that were not considered by the General Plan EIR. Policies in the circulation element of
the General Plan will lessen traffic and circulation impacts resulting from implementation of the
Amendment/Merger.
The'Amendirment/Merger'•will"allow'the Agency to construct road improvements that would
otherwise,be'delayed indefinitely without Agency assistance. Several projects related to
circulation and traffic improvements are proposed in the Plan; these projects are listed in Section
r A
A of this Report. These improvements include, but are not limited to, street improvements in the
,Oakvie,w and Talbert-Beach Areas, Center.Avenue improvements, Interstate 405 improvements,
the' Edinger Avenue street alignment, and the Gothard Street/Hoover Street construction.
Generally, the pimprovements proposed by the Plan will address circulation and traffic
deficiencies and will provide general benefits to the Project Area and the City's roadway network
consistent with the circulation element of the General Plan.
Environmental Quality
Implementation of the Project will enhance the environmental quality by alleviating blighting
conditions and improving deficient public infrastructure and facilities, and facilitating housing
and nonhousing redevelopment. The EIR reviewed the impacts of the Amendment/Mcrger,
including the potential new development and public iinprovenients that could be facilitated by
the Agency. 'The EIR studied a variety of areas, including land use, population and housing,
earth resources, water quality, air quality, transportation and circulation, biological resources,
public health (hazards), noise, public services and utilities, aesthetics, cultural and scientific
resources, and schools. The EIR found that no significant, unavoidable adverse impacts would
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Reach
October, 1996 M-3 Report to the City Council
arise as a consequence of the Amendment/Merger. Because the Amendme'nt/Merger does not
propose uses or intensities beyond the General Plan,'adherence to adopted General Plan policies
will ensure that Project implementation will lessen or avoid potential impacts. Where applicable,
the FIR outlines mitigation measures-which will be required of future development in order to
assure that the quality of the environment is maintained. Additionally, where required; more
specific environmental analysis will take place as required by the California Environmental
Quality Act Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et seg. ("CEQA").
Availability of Community Facilities and Services
Section 4.10 of the FIR addresses issues related to the provision of public services and utilities.
Because the Project Area is generally built out and constitutes less than 3.5% of the entire area of
the City, the FIR determined that implementation 'of the'Project would not create sigiificant
impacts on police services, fire and emergency medical services, parks and recreation, road
maintenance, library services, public health care, water, sewerage, solid waste, storm
drainage/flooding, electricity; natural gas,j'or telecommunications. As outlined in Section A of
this Report, implementation of the Plan and'its proposed projects are expected to significantly
improve the City's existing community facilities and services. 'The Plan'wiI!7a11ow`the Agency to
utilize tax increments, a financial mechanism necessary to provide for the upgrading of existing
and construction of new community facilities which will be of benefit to the Project Area.
Effect on School Population and Quality of Education
The Project Area is served by three elementary and one high school school districts ("School
Districts"):
• Huntington Beach City School District
• Ocean View•School District
• Westminster School District -
• Huntington Beach Union High School District
Section 4.13 of the FIR describes the direct and cumulative impacts of the Amendment/Merger
on the School Districts. Redevelop fnent•of the Project Area will not caused significant impact
Roseirory Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 M-4 Report to the City Council
on •the school facilities. Adoption of the Amendment/Merger could effectuate additional
redevelopment activities, including the construction of as many as 610 housing units and thereby
generate as many as 70 additional high school students, 13 additional middle school students,
and 156 additional elementary school students to area schools. To the extent that a project under
the Plan results in families with school age children moving into the Project Area, there may be
an impact on local schools from the increase in the number of students. The scope of the
.potential'impact would depend on. the number of additional students generated to area schools
and the enrollment capacities of the schools afthe time of development.
y
Implementation of the Project will not result in development in excess of that allowed by the
City's General Plan. Therefore, the adoption of the Amendment/Merger will not cause the
'Project to generate more students than could occur in connection with development allowed in
the General Plan. Since the City has adopted policies in the General Plan to mitigate impacts of
General Plan-,buildout on schools, implementation of the Project will not create significant
unmitigated impacts.
The potential impact of additional students on area schools can be more accurately determined
once specific redevelopment proposals are formulated. Any impacts on student capacity at the
local schools in connection with the Redevelopment Plan will depend on a given project, the type
of use and whether or not a project results in additional students relocating into the Project Area
and attending area schools. The measure of the significance of impacts on the School Districts
will depend on the scale of a project, the number of students generated and the existing
enrollment at the time. The impact of new development under the Plan upon the School Districts
will be offset by the required payment of development impact fees to be applied to additional
school facility costs associated with the increased development. In addition, the overall impact
of the Amendment/Merger on school facilities will be positive, as redevelopment activities will
result in enhanced economic viability of the Project Area and thus a larger tax revenue.base for
the School Districts.
Additionally, pursuant to the Law, the Agency is required to make tax sharing payments to the
affected taxing entities, including school districts, from its annual allocation of tax increment
Rosenow Spevacek Group,Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Ituntington Beach
October, 1996 M-5 Report to the City Council
"revenues. The payments are designed to alleviate any financial burden or detriment that the
affected taxing entities may incur as a result of the adoption of-a redevelopment plan.
Property Taxes and Assessments
The Plan calls for various methods of financing its implementation. Because redevelopment
agencies do not have the authority to levy taxes, implementation of the Project will not cause an
increase in property tax rates. Rather, the principal method of"fihdricing will be the utilization of
tax increment revenues generated by the Project-'Area.' Tax increment'fnancing realiocates
existing property tax revenues generated by increases in the assessed value of property in the
Project Area. Although development of the Project Area will increase the assessed'valuation,
Project Area property owners will not experience increases in property taxes beyond those
normally allowed by state law. r
Low and Moderate Income Housing Program i
A. Number of Dwelling Units Housing Low and Moderate Income Households Expected to
be Removed by the Redevelopment Project
The Project Area currently contains approximately 1,973 dwelling units. Of these, the
Agency estimates that implementation of the Project could cause' the removal of
approximately 18 units, or less than 1% of the total Project Area housing stock. Because
the Plan will remain in effect until November 2024, or approximately 28 years, the rate of
removal is less than one unit'a year.'''At this time; because site specific redevelopment
proposals have'not been formulated, the Agency cannot ascertain whether these units are
occupied by low and moderate income households. Consequently, as few as or as many
as 18 low - and moderate income households could be displaced by Project
implementation. To the extent that specific implementation activities cause the removal
ofunits occupied by low and moderate income households, the Agency will comply with
all provisions of the Law, the Redevelopment Plan and its Method, of Relocation
regarding the construction of replacement units and the relocation of existing residents.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 1 1. M-6 Report to the City Council
B. Number of Persons and Families of Low and Moderate Income Expected to be Displaced
by the Redevelopment Project
As discussed above, the Agency estimates that between 0 and 18 households of low and
moderate income could be displaced by the implementation of.the Project over the next
28 years. Based on the City's average persons per household average of 2.7, between 0
and 49 persons of low and moderate income could be displaced by Project activities. To
the extent such displacement is necessary, the Agency will be responsible for relocation
of such households as discussed in the Method of Relocation in Section 1" of this Report.
C. General Location of Replacement Low and Moderate Income Housing to be
Rehabilitated"Developed and Constructed
Replacement housing could be located on residentially designated areas in the Oakview,
Yorktown-Lake, Talbert-Beach, or Main-Pier Areas of the Project Area, as well as other
areas in the City designated for residential uses in the General Plan. The General Plan
does not permit residential uses iri the Huntington Center Area; therefore, replacement
housing could not be located in the Huntington Center Area. The Agency is required to
replace-affordable housing destroyed or removed as a consequence of a redevelopment
project. Section 33413(a) of the Law provides that, whenever dwelling units housing
persons and families of low or moderate income are destroyed or removed from the
affordable housing market as a part of a redevelopment project that is subject to a written
agreement with the agency, or where financial assistance has been provided by the
agency, the agency shall provide, or cause to be provided, an equal number of
replacement dwelling units. The replacement dwelling units must have an equal or
greater number of bedrooms as those destroyed or removed and shall be affordable to
persons and families of low or moderate income. Further, replacement dwelling units
must be available for occupancy within four years of the destruction or removal of any
affordable dwelling units.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, hic. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 M-7 Report to the City Council
D. Number of Dwelling Units Housing Persons of Low and Moderate Income Planned for
Construction or Rehabilitation Other than Replacement Housing
The EIR estimates that approximately 610 new dwelling units`could be developed in the
Project Area. ' The Agency also estimates that approximately 700 dwelling units could be
rehabilitated over the remaining 28 years of the Plan. None of these are considered to
need substantial rehabilitation. Section 33413(b) of the Law requires that at least 30% of
all new or substantially rehabilitated units developed by the Agency shall be affordable to
persons or families of low and moderate.income. For units developed or substantially
rehabilitated by public or private entities or persons other than the Agency, at least 15%
shall be affordable to low and moderate income households' Because the Agency has not
yet formulated specific housing development or rehabilitation proposals, it is not possible
to determine the exact- number of low and moderate income units expected to be
developed or rehabilitated at this time. Based.on the requirements of Section 33413(b),
the Agency estimates that as many as 92 inclusionary affordable units could be created by
entities or persons other than the Agency.
E. Projected Means of Financing Rehabilitation and New Construction of Housing for Low
r ,
and Moderate Income Households
The Agency intends to utilize not less than 20% of the Project Area's tax increment
revenues to finance the rehabilitation and construction of housing for low and moderate
income households, in accordance with the provisions of the Law as it now exists or may
hereafter be amended. The Agency will also cooperate with the City to pool funds and
resources beyond the tax increment set aside funds if it is determined to be necessary by
both bodies in order to improve the City's housing stock.
Rosenow Spevacek Croup, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 11I-8 Report to the'City Council
F. Projected Timetable for Meeting; the Plan's Relocation, Rehabilitation and Replacement
Housing Objectives
Any relocation needs will be met prior to displacement as required by law. All relocation
activities will comply with the Method of.Relocation contained in Section F of this
Report. It is anticipated that the Agency will implement a housing; rehabilitation program
on an annual:basis asp funds are available. Construction of any replacement housing units,
;.
if necessary, Will-dchievO or "exceed the required four-year requirement described in
Subsection "A" above.
-' V *.
Rosenoiv Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 M-9 Report to the City Council
SECTION N
A Summary of Agency Consultation with Affected
Taxing Entities -and a Response to Said Entities'
Concerns Regarding the IAmendment
According to the Orange County Auditor'=Controllers office, the:following,16 taxing entities levy
taxes within the Project Area: = 1
Yt.{
City of Huntington Beach Orange County Sanitation District
County of Orange Huntington Beach Union High School District
Municipal Water District Ocean View School District
Orange County'Water District Huntington Beach City School District
Orange County Department of Education Westminster School District
Coast Community College District Orange County Vector Control District
Orange County Transit Authority Orange County Cemetery District
Orange County Flood Control District Orange County Harbors, Beaches, and Parks
On April 2, 1996, these entities were notified, via certified mail, of the Statement of Preparation
of the Amendment/Merger. On August 21, 1996, also via certified mail, the Preliminary Report
and Draft Redevelopment Plan for the Project were transmitted to these entities; as a part of that
transmittal, the Agency offered to consult with the affected taxing entities pursuant to Section
33328 of the Law. In addition, these entities were provided with notification and copies of the
EIR and were notified via certified mail of the joint public hearing on the Plan and were given all
other notices required under the Law.
The following is a summary of the consultations between the Agency and the affected taxing
agencies.
April 29, 1996: Agency staff and the redevelopment consultant met with representatives from
the Huntington Beach Union High School District ("HBUHSD"), the Ocean View School District
("OVSD"), and the Huntington Beach City School District ("HBCSD"). The topics discussed at
this meeting included the purpose and objectives of the Amendment/Merger, the scope of the
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
Octoher, 1996 N-1 Report to the City Council
41R, and the-.tax,sharing provisions of the proposed Plan. At the District's request, Agency staff
-,agreed to prepare a specific analysis of the projected tax increment revenues that would be paid to
the School Districts operations and facilities.funds. This information was transmitted to each
-District on June 7, 1996. °
r, July 30, 1996: Agency staff, the redevelopment consultant and Agency.Special Counsel met with
administrative staff from FIBUHSD and the HBCSD to discuss the Draft EIR. At this meeting,
the Districts'. conveyed their concerns regarding the Draft EIR's conclusions regarding classroom
capacities, General Plan conformity, and cumulative impacts. Following this meeting, the both
HBUHSD and HBCSD submitted written comments to the City on the Draft EIR. These
comments were addressed in the Response to Comments to the Draft EIR, and are included in
Section K of this Report.
September 24, 1996: Agency staff and the redevelopment consultant met with administrative
staff and consultants representing the Coast Community College District ("CCCD") and the
Orange County Office of Education ("OCOE"), The purpose of this meeting was to discuss the
purpose and objectives of the Amendment/Merger, as well as the administration of statutory pass
through payments. The representatives of the CCCD and OCOE expressed their support for the
'Amendment/Merger, and presented the Agency with a independent analysis of the potential tax
increment revenues that would be shared with these taxing entities. The district's representatives
.provided the Agency staff with a series of concerns regarding the procedure for the disbursement
of statutory payments. Also, CCCD and OCOE representatives indicated their desire to amend
the existing pass through agreements between the Agency and CCCD and OCOE with regard to
the Oakview Area. Agency staff is currently reviewing the districts' analysis and will be preparing
a written response with regard to their concerns,
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 N-2 Report to the City Council
October 2 1996: Agency staff, the redevelopment consultant, the EIR consultant, and Agency
Special Counsel met again with representatives of the HBUHSd and' HBCSD to! discuss the
Agency's Response to'Comments on-the Draft EIR*''The'districts'°'r`epr`esentatives'"conveyed their
concerns regarding the accuracy of the capacity figures, the consideration WMternatives to
providing year-round schools, and the effects of the HBCSD's class-size reduction program.
Agency staff, the EIR consultant, and AgencyrSpecial Counsel explained that the purpose of the
EIR was to only assess the impacts of the-Amend'ment/Merger in'aggregate, and that-future
implementation activities would be 'subject to a specific reassessment of impacts with the then
current data and circumstances. Thin explanation was incorporated into a revision to the
Introduction of the Response to Comments, included in Section K of this Report.
Rosenow Spevacek Croup, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
Octoher, 1996 h1-3 Report to the City Council
ID EPf "T TOTHE CITY COUNCIL
}��P�7 FOR THE
'
ON
EACH
',, REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
October, 1996
APPENDIX
Blight Maps
r
WFADDEN AVE.
NOT TOO SCALE
a�
N07 A PORT
HUNTINGTON
VILLAGE WAY
CENTER AVENUE
po¢
a HUNTINGTON BEACH MALL
a pp
Z 7
w
W
EDINGER A
ALDRLCH AVE.
LOCATIONS OF REMAINING BLIGHTING CONDITIONS
Hunfingt-on-Center Area
LEGEND
Inadequate Public High Vacancies and
Improvements Obsolescence
Substandard Design
WARNER AVE.
HR DRIVE
k�w SYCAMORE AVE
z
0
BELSITO DR
OAKVIEW CY AVE.
PARK CYPRESS A
Y _
Q'
20
m
C
m
OAKVIEW hu1DRE K251*4aeaE
SCHOOL
wr N
Cs DR
LU
a ,gZ z
r N
CX
y
_�SIATER AVE.
LOCATIONS OF REMAINING BLIGHTING CONDITIONS
Oakv#ew Area
LEGEND
Inadequate Public Dilapidation &
Improvements Deterioration
High Crime Rates
' • "k
i
uwsn3��B®B
_ nwrauIE3B®®®
" 7B®BBB
ururmuati�3
n uumucvl B H®®®
EE
n w+mar+J3HE3888 EC _
nr¢av ]BH®BB
v mr�aa�u3
•no4vginuw El
I El
n m. ro
LOCATIONS OF REMAINING BLIGHTING CONDITIONS
Main Pier Area
LEGEND
Inadequate Public Dilapidation &
improvements , , T, ,Deterioration
Low Lease Rates
EXHIBIT "B"
PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR THE
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
SFIs:PCD:Resolution:l[BRP1011
RLS 96-757
1 011 1196-91
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR THE
HUN'T`ING°JTON BEACH
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
October, 1996
e
{
p, Prepared for:
Redevelopment'Agency of the City of Huntington Peach
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, California 92648
(714) 536.5511
Prepared by:
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc.
540 North Golden Circle, Suite 305
Santa Ana, California 92705
(714) 541-4585
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION I. (100) INTRODUCTION.......................................... ................................I
A. General..............................................................................................................I
SECTION 11. (200) BACKGROUND................................................................... 2
,SECTION 111. (300)!' -GENERAL,DEFINITIONS ...................................3
SECTION IV. (400) PROJECT AREA BOUNDARIES...............................................5
SECTION V. (500) REDEVELOPMENT PLAN GOALS..........................................5
SECTION V1. (600) REDEVELOPMENT ACTIONS .................................................6
A. General........................... ........... ........ ...................6
B. Property perty Acquisitiod......... 8
v ..........................................:—.......
C. Participation by Owners and Persons Engaged in Business.............................9
D. Implementing Rules...................................................................6.................—10
E! Co6peration with'Public Bodies.........................-...........................I..............10
.F. Property Management...............................................................I................
G. Payments to Taxing Agencies ........................................................................I I
H. Relocation of Persons Displaced by a Project................................................12
1. Demolition, Clearance, Public Improvements, Site
Preparation and Removal of Hazardous Waste ................. .................4..........13
J. Rehabilitation, Moving of Structures by the Agency and Seismic Repairs....14
K. Property Disposition and Development..........................................................15
L. Provision for Low and Moderate Income Housing ........................................17
SECTION VII. (700) USES PERMITTED IN THE PROJECT AREA.....................17
A. Map and Uses Permitted..................................... ...........................................17
B. Major Land Use Designations .......................4................................................18.
C. Public Uses. ...........................I-....I........I..................... .................11-............18
D. Nonconforming Uses.........................................!..I............I.......I....................19
E. Interim Uses....................................................................................................19
F. General Controls and Limitations.......4...........................................................19
G. Design for Development.................................................................................22
1-1. Building Permits.............4........................................I......................................22
SECTION VIII. (800) METHODS FOR FINANCING THE PROJECT ....................22
A. General Description of the Proposed Financing Methods..............................22
B. Tax Increment Revenue......................................... ...................................6.....23
C. Agency Bonds......................... ............. ..........................................................25
D. Other Loans and Grants..................................................................................25
E. Rehabilitation Loans, Grants and Rebates............................... ......................25
SECTION IX. (900) ACTIONS BY THE CITY..........................................................25
SECTION X. (1000) ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT......:..................26
SECTION XI. (1100) PLAN LIMITATIONS................................................................27
A. Amount of Indebtedness Outstanding At Any One Time...............................27
B. Amount of Cumulative Tax Increment Revenue......................................:....27
C. Time Frame to Incuf lndebtednessk..s..:...... ........d.....................27
D. Duration of This Plan....................
E. Time Frame to Collect Tax-Increment Revenue.............................................28
SECTION XII. (1200) PROCEDURE FOR AMENDMENT.........................................29
Exhibit A: Project Area Maps
Exhibit B: Legal Descriptions
Exhibit C: Public Facilities and Infrastructure Improvements Projects
Exhibit D: Oakview'Public Acquisition Map,
E
f-S.ECTION I. (100),'INTRODUCTION;}
A. `(101) General
This is the Redevelopment Plan for the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project
("Plan"), located in the City of Huntington Beach, County of Orange, State of California
It consists of the text (Sections 100 through 1200), the Project Area Map of Huntington
Beach Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area") (Exhibit A), the legal description of
the Project Area boundaries .(Exhibit B), a listing of the proposed public facilities and
infrastructure iinprovement projects (Exhibit C), and a map of the properties potentially
subject to acquisition by eminent domain (Exhibit D).
This Plan has been prepared by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington
Beach (the "Agency") pursuant to the California Community Redevelopment Law
(Health and Safety Code Section 33000, et sec.), the California Constitution and all
applicable laws and ordinances. It does not present a specific plan for the redevelopnrient,
rehabilitation and revitalization of any area within the Project Area; instead, it establishes
a process and framework for implementation. This Plan is based upon the Preliminary
Plan for the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project formulated and adopted by the
Huntington Beach Planning Commission and the Agency on March 26, 1996, and April
1, 1996, respectively.
This Plan amends and merges the Redevelopment Plans for the Yorktown-Lake, Talbert-
Beach, Main-Pier, Oakview, and Huntington Center Commercial District Redevelopment
Projects ("Constituent Projects"). This Plan is a compilation 'and continuation of the
Redevelopment Plans for the Constituent Projects and will amend the preexisting
Redevelopment Plans as follows:
1. Merge the redevelopment plans for the Constituent Projects into a single
redevelopment plan ("Plan") to be designated as the merged Huntington Beach
Redevelopment Project ("Project") and Project Area,
2. Increase the dollar limit on the cumulative amount of tax increment revenue the
Agency may be allocated from the Project and eliminate all preexisting annual limits,
3. Increase the dollar limit on the amount of indebtedness that may be outstanding at any
one time,
4. Extend the time frame within which the Agency may incur indebtedness on behalf of
the Project,
5. On a selective basis, extend the time frame within which the Agency may employ
eminent domain proceedings on nonresidential properties in the Main-Pier and
Huntington Center Commercial District areas and rescind Resolution 48,
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redeveloptnettt Agency of the City of lluutiugtotr Beach
October, 1996 1 Redevelopment Platt
6. Extend the time periods within which the Agency may ,undertake redevelopment
activities and receive tax increment, and
7. Expand the list of infrastructure and public facility projects that the Agency may
undertake within the Project Area.,
SECTION 11. (200) BACKGROUND
The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach. activated the Agency on March 1, 1976.
Since that time, the Agency has created five redevelopment projects; all five of these projects are
involved in the proposed Amendment/Merger, -The profile of each'of.the Constituent Projects is
as follows:
1. Yorktown-Lake Redevelopment Project: The Yorktown-Lake Redevelopment Project was
established via Ordinance No. 2576 adopted on September 20, 1982. The Yorktown-Lake
Redevelopment Project encompasses.approximately 30 acres of medium-density residential
and public land uses such as the Huntington Beach Civic Center and Police Department. The
Yorktown-Lake Redevelopment` Project Area is located in the vicinity of Main Street,
Yorktown Avenue, Lake Street, and Utica Avenue.
2. Talbert-Beach Redevelopment Project: The Talbert-Beach Redevelopment Project was
established via Ordinance No. 2577 adopted on September 20, 1982. The Talbert-Beach
`Redevelopment Project Area is:located between Talbert Avenue and Taylor Drive, west of
Beach Boulevard. The Talbert-Beach Redevelopment Project encompasses approximately 25
acres of low-, medium-, and high-density residential,and general industrial land uses.
3. Main-Pier Redevelopment Project: On September 20, 1982, the City Council adopted
Ordinance No. 2578 which created the original 5-block Main-Pier Redevelopment Project
Area. On September 6, 4983, the City Council amended the Redevelopment Plan for the
Main-Pier Redevelopment Project via Ordinance No. 2634, enlarging the Main-Pier
Redevelopment Project Area to'approximately 336 acres. The Main-Pier Redevelopment
Project Area is located along Main Street, between Palm Avenue and the Huntington Beach
'Pier, and along Pacific Coast Highway, between Goldenwest Street and Beach Boulevard.
The Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area includes retail, tourist, recreational, public, and
residential land uses.
4. Oakview Redevelopment Project: The Oakview Redevelopment Project Area of
approximately 68 acres was initially established on November 1, 1982 by City Council
Ordinance No. 2582: The Oakview Redevelopment Project Area is generally located
between Warner Avenue and Slater Avenue, from Oak Lane to Beach Boulevard. On July 5,
1989, the City Council amended the Redevelopment Plan for the Oakview Redevelopment
Project via Ordinance No. 3002 to extend certain time and financial limits. The Oakview
Project Area includes general commercial, medium-density and high-density residential land
uses.
Roseiiow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redeveloptnent Ageircy of the City of Huntington Beach
Octoher, 1996 2 Redeveloprttent Plan
y m wt t
5. Huntington Center Commercial District'Redevelopment Prot: Established via Ordinance
No. 2743 adopted by the City Council on November 26, 1984, the Huntington Center
Commercial District Redevelopment Project encompass es'approximately 160 acres of retail
and.;office B commercial, uses, .and is located in the vicinity of Edinger Avenue, Beach
oulevard, and the San.Diego Freeway (I-405). The Huntington Center Commercial District
Project Area includes the 960,000 square foot Huntington Center regional mall.
SECTION I11. (300) GENERAL DEFINITIONS
The following definitions will be used generally in the context of this Plan unless otherwise
specified herein:
A. "Added Main-Pier Area" means the territories originally added to the Main-Pier
Redevelopment Project Area by Ordinance No. 2634 adopted by the City Council
on September 6, 1983.
B. "Agency" means the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach,
California.
C. "Annual Work Program" means that portion of the Agency's annual budget that
sets forth programs and goals to be accomplished by the Agency during the fiscal
year.
D. "City".means the City of Huntington Beach, California.
E. "City Council" means the legislative body of the City.
F. "County" means the County of Orange, California.
G. "Disposition and Development Agreement" means an agreement between a
developer and the Agency that sets forth terms and conditions for improvement
and redevelopment.
H. "General Plan" means the City's General Plan, a comprehensive and long-term
General Plan for the physical development of the City.
1. "Huntington Iuntington Center Commercial District Area" means the territories included in
the Huntington Center Commercial District Redevelopment Project Area adopted
by Ordinance No. 2743 on November 26, 1984.
J. "Map" means the Map of the Project Area attached hereto as Exhibit A.
Rosenow Spemeek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
Octoher, 1996 3 Redevelopment Plan
K. "Method of Relocation" means the methods or plans adopted by the Agency
pursuant to Sections 33352(f) andy,33411 ,of,the Redevelopment Law for the
relocation of families, persons and businesses to be temporarily or permanently
displaced by actions of the Agency. �c ,
. j
L. '. "Oakview Area" means the territories included in !he Oak view Redevelopment
Project Area adopted by Ordinance No. 2582 one November 1,k, 1982, . and
subsequently amended by Ordinance No. 3002 on July 5,1989: f
M. "Original Main-Pier Area" means the territories included in the Main-Pier
Redevelopment Project Area by.Ordinance No. 2578 adopted by the City'Council
on September 20, 1982.
N. "'Owner" shall mean and include the owner of real.property located in the Project
Area or business owner of property located in the Project Area.
O. "Owner Participation Agreement" means an agreement between the Agency and
an Owner which sets forth terms and conditions for use of property, and/or its
improvement and/or its redevelopment as to a specific property.
P. . "Person" means an individual(s), or any public or private entities.
Q. "Plan" means the redevelopment plan for the Huntington Beach Redevelopment
Project as amended.
R. "Project" means the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project.
S. "Project Area" means the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project Area,
comprised of the Huntington Center Commercial District Area, .the Original
Main-Pier Area, the Added Main-Pier Area, the Oakview Area, the Talbert-Beach
Area, and the Yorktown-Lake Area, which is the.territory_this Plan applies to, as
shown on Exhibit A.
T. "Redevelopment Law" means, the California Community Redevelopment Law
(Health and Safety Code, Sections 33000, et seq.) as it now exists or may be
hereafter amended.
U. "State" means the State of California.
V. "Talbert-Beach Area" means the territories .included in the Talbert-Beach
Redevelopment Project Area adopted by Ordinance No. 2577 on September 20;
1-982.
Rosenow Spevacek Croup,Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
Octoher, 1996 _ 4 Redevelopment Plan
W. "Yorktown-Lake Area" means the territories included in the Yorktown-Lake
Redevelopment Project Area adopted by Ordinance No. 2576 on September 20,
1992.
SECTION IV. (400) PROJECT AREA BOUNDARIES
The boundaries of the Project Area are illustrated on the map attached hereto and incorporated
herein as Exhibit A. The legal description of-the boundaries of the Project Area is as described
in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein. .
SECTION V. (500) REDEVELOPMENT PLAN GOALS
Implementation of this Plan is intended to achieve the following goals:
• Eliminate and prevent the spread of conditions of blight including: underutilized
properties and deteriorating buildings, incompatible and uneconomic land uses,
deficient infrastructure, and facilities, obsolete structures, and other economic
deficiencies in order to create a more favorable environment for commercial, office,
industrial, residential, and recreational development.
• Expand the commercial base of the Project Area.
• Improve public facilities and public infrastructure.
• Improve inadequate drainage infrastructure.
• Improve and/or provide electric, gas, telephone, and wastewater infrastructure to
both developed and undeveloped properties within the Project Area.
• Promote local job opportunities.
• Encourage the cooperation and participation of residents, businesses, business
persons, public agencies, and community organizations in the
redevelopment/revitalization of the Project Area.
• Implement design and use standards to assure high aesthetic and environmental
quality, and provide unity and integrity to developments within the Project Area.
• Address parcels of property that are: of irregular form and shape, are inadequately
sized for proper usefulness and development, and/or are held in multiple ownership.
• Remove impediments to land disposition and development through the assembly of
property into reasonably sized and shaped parcels served by improved
o infrastructure and=public-facilities. "
Rosen ow Spevaeek Group, fire. ' Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 5 Redevelopment Plan
• Recycle and/or-develop underutilized parcels to accommodate higher and better
economic uses while enhancing the City's financial resources.
• Promote the rehabilitation of existing housing stock.
• Increase, improve, and preserve the community's supply of housing affordable to
very low, low and moderate income households.
SECTION VI. (600) REDEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
A. -(601) General
The Agency proposes to eliminate and prevent the recurrence of blight, and improve the
economic base of the Project Area by:
1' Acquiring, installing, developing, constructing, reconstructing,
redesigning,-replanning, or reusing streets, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, traffic
control devices, utilities, flood control facilities and other public
improvements and public facilities.
2. Rehabilitating, altering, • remodeling, improving, modernizing, or
reconstructing buildings, structures and improvements.
3. Rehabilitating, preserving, developing or constructing affordable housing
in compliance with State law. „
4. Providing the opportunity for owners and tenants presently located,in the
Project Area to participate in redevelopment projects and programs, and
extending preferences to occupants to remain or relocate within the
redeveloped Project Area.
5. Providing relocation assistance to displaced residential and nonresidential
occupants, if necessary.
6. Facilitating the development or redevelopment of land for purposes and
uses consistent with this Plan.
7. Acquiring real property by purchase, lease, gift, grant, request, devise or
any other lawful means (including eminent domain on a limited basis,
after the conduct of appropriate hearings).
S. Combining parcels and properties where and when necessary.
9. Preparing building sites and constructing necessary off-,siie improvements.
Rosenow Spevacek Group,Inc. RedevelopmeniAgeircy oytle 00,oyHuntington Bench
'October, 1996 6 Redevelopment Plan
10. Providing for open space.
11. Managing property owned or acquired by the Agency.
12. Assisting in procuring financing for the construction of residential,
commercial, and office buildings to increase the residential and
commercial base of the Project Area, and the number of temporary and
permanent jobs in the City.
13. The disposition of property including, without limitation, the lease or sale
of land at a value determined by the Agency for reuse in accordance'with
this Plan.
.14. Establishing controls, restrictions or covenants running with the land, so
that property will continue to be used in accordance with this Plan.
15. Vacating or abandoning streets, alleys, and other thoroughfares, as
necessary, and dedicating other areas for public purposes consistent with
the objectives of this Plan.
16. Providing replacement housing, if any is required.
17. Applying for and utilizing grants, loans and any other assistance from
federal or State governments, or other sources.
18. Taking actions the Agency determines are necessary and consistent with
State, federal and local laws to make structural repairs to buildings and
structures, including historical buildings, to meet building code standards
related to seismic safety.
19. Taking actions the Agency determines are necessary and consistent with
State, federal and local laws to remedy or remove a release of hazardous
substances on, under or from property within the Project Area or to
remove hazardous waste from property.
To accomplish these actions and to,implement this Plan, the Agency is authorized to use
the powers provided in this Plan, and the powers now or hereafter permitted by the
Redevelopment Law and any other State faw.
TIN
Roseuow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
Ocroberp i996; '� :d 7 Redevelopment Plan
B. (602) Proper Acquisition
1. (603) Acquisition of Real PropgrtY .
Without limitation, the Agency may acquire real property, :any interest in
property, and any improvements on such property by any means authorized by
law including, without limitation, by gift, grant, exchange, purchase, cooperative
negotiations, lease, option, bequest, or devise.
In addition, the Agency may acquire real property, any interest in property, and
any improvements on such property by eminent domain, with the following
exceptions:
a. Within the Yorktown-Lake Area and Talbert-Beach Area, the Agency shall
not have the,authority to acquire property by eminent domain,
b: Within the Original Main-Pier Area and Added Main-,Pier Area, the Agency
shall not have the authority to acquire, by .eminent domain, property on
which any persons legally reside; and this new limitation shall supersede any
and all previous limitations on the Agency's powers of eminent domain
within the Original and Added Main-Pier Areas including, but not limited to,
Resolution No. 48, and
C. Within the Oakview Area, the Agency shall not have the authority to acquire,
by eminent domain, property which is excluded from the Oakview Public
Acquisition Map, incorporated herein as Exhibit D.
Except for the Oakview Area and as otherwise. provided herein, or otherwise
provided by law, no eminent domain proceeding- to acquire property within the
Project Area shall be commenced after twelve (12) years following the date of
adoption of the ordinance adopting this Plan. With respect to properties identified
on Exhibit D, no eminent domain proceeding to acquire property in the Oakview
Area shall be commenced after twelve (12) years following the July 5, 1989
adoption of Ordinance No. 3002, amending the Redevelopment Plan for the
Oakview Redevelopment Project, This Plan does not amend, or otherwise
change, the Agency's eminent domain authorities established by the adoption of
Ordinance No. 3002. Such time limitations may be extended only by amendment
of this Plan. Fl r
To the extent required by law, the Agency shall not acquire real property on
which an existing building is to be continued on its present site and in its present
form and use without the consent of the owner, unless: (1) such building requires
structural alteration, improvement, modernization or rehabilitation; or (2) the site
or lot on which the building is situated requires modification in size, shape or use;
or (3) it is necessary to' impose upon such property any of the standards,
kosenow Spevacek Group;Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntiirgton Beach
October, 1996 8 ,Redevelopment Plan
i
restrictions and controls of this Plan and the owner fails or refuses to participate in
the Plan pursuant to Sections 605 to 609, inclusive of this Plan and applicable
provisions of the Redevelopment Law.
2. (604) Acquisition of Personal Property
Where necessary in the implementation of this Plan, the Agency is authorized to
acquire personal property in the Project Area by any lawful means.
C. (605) Participation by Owners and Persons Engaged in Business
1. (606) Owner Participation
This Plan provides for opportunities for participation in the redevelopment of
property in the Project Area by the owners of all or part of such property if the
owners agree to participate in the redevelopment in conformity with this Plan.
Opportunities to participate in the redevelopment of property in the Project Area
may include without limitation the rehabilitation of property or structures; the
retention of improvements; the development of all or a portion of the participant's
property; the acquisition of adjacent or other properties from the Agency;
purchasing or leasing properties in the Project Area; participating with developers
in the improvement of all or a portion of a participant's properties; or other
suitable means consistent with objectives and proposals of this Plan and with the
Agency's rules governing owner participation and re-entry.
In addition to opportunities for participation by individual persons and firms,
participation, to the extent it is feasible, shall be available for two or more
persons, firms or institutions, to join together in partnerships, corporations, or
other joint entities.
`. The Agency, desires participation in"redevelopment activities by as many owners
r and business tenants as possible. However, participation opportunities shall
necessarily be subject to and limited by such factors as the provision or expansion
of public improvements and/or public utilities facilities; elimination and changing
of land uses; realignment of streets; the ability of owners and business tenants to
finance acquisition and development activities in accordance with this Plan;
whether the proposed activities conform to and further the goals and objectives of
this Plan; and any change in the total number of individual parcels in the Project
Area.
• • R n.
0
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Mc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 9 Redeveloptnew Platt
2. (607) Reentry Preferences for Persons Engaged in Business in the Project Area
The Agency shall extend reasonable preferences to persons who are engaged in
business in the Project Area to relocate and reenter in business in the redeveloped
area, if they otherwise meet the requirements prescribed by this Plan and the
-Agency's rules governing owner participation and re-entry.
3: (608) Owner Participation Agreements
Under an Owner Participation Agreement, the participant shall agree to
rehabilitate, develop, or use the property in conformance with this Plan and be
subject to the provisions hereof In the Owner Participation. Agreement,
participants who retain real property shall be required to join in the recordation of
such documents as are necessary to make the provisions of this Plan applicable to
their properties.
In the event a participant breaches the terms of an Owner Participation
Agreement, the Agency may declare the Agreement terminated and may acquire
the real property or any interest therein, and may sell or lease such real property or
interest therein for rehabilitation or development in accordance with this Plan. If
conflicts develop between the desires of participants for particular sites or land
uses, the Agency is authorized to establish reasonable priorities and preferences
among the owners and tenants.
Where the Agency determines that a proposal for participation is not feasible, is
not-in the best interests of the-Agency or City, or that redevelopment can best be
accompli shed"without,-affording a participant an opportunity to execute an Owner
Participation Agreement, the Agency shall not be required to execute such an
'J.
agreement.
D. (609) Implementing Rules
The provisions of Sections 605-608,of this Plan shall be implemented according to the
. .rules adopted by the Agency-prior to the approval of the ordinance amending this Plan,
_r !_which may be amended from'time to time by the Agency. Such rules allow for Owner
Participation Agreements with the Agency.
E. (610) Cooperation with Public Bodies
Certain public bodies are authorized by State law to aid and cooperate, with or without
consideration, in the planning and implementation of activities authorized by this Plan.
The Agency shall seek the aid and cooperation of such public bodies and shall attempt to
coordinate the implementation of this Plan with the activities of such public bodies in
order to accomplish the purposes of redevelopment and to achieve the highest 'public
good.
Rosenory Spemeek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 10 Redevelopment Plan
Property of a public body shall not be acquired without its consent. The Agency shall
seek the cooperation of all public bodies which own or intend to acquire property in the
Project Area. Any public body which owns or leases property in the Project Area will be
afforded all the privileges of owner and business tenant participation if such public body
is willing to enter into an Owner Participation Agreement with the Agency. All plans for
development of property in the Project Area by a public body shall be subject to Agency
approval.
The Agency may impose on all public bodies the planning and design controls contained
in and authorized by this Plan to ensure that present uses;and any future development by
public bodies will conform to the requirements of this Plan. The Agency is authorized, to
the extent permissible by law, to financially (and otherwise) assist public bodies in the
cost of public land, buildings, facilities, structures or other improvements (within or
outside the Project Area) where such land, buildings, facilities, structures, or other
improvements are of benefit to the Project Area.
F. '(611) Property Management
During such time as property, if any, in the Project Area is owned, by, the Agency, such
property shall be under the management and control of the Agency. Such properties may
be rented or leased by the Agency pending their disposition.
G. (612) Payments to Taxing_Agencies_
The Agency may pay, but is not required to pay, in any�ryearr,during which it owns
property in the Project Area directly to°,anyrCitygCounty or district, ,including, but not
limited to, a school district,Qr other public corporation for whose benefit a tax would
have been levied upon such property had it not been tax exempt, an amount of money in
lieu of taxes.
The Agency may also pay to any taxing agency with territory located within the Project
Area, other than the City, any amounts of,money which the Agency found prior to l/l/94
to be necessary,and appropriate to alleviate financial burden or detriment caused by the
Project pursuant to an agreement executed prior,to January 1,?1,994,,Jhe payments to a
taxing agency pursuant to such an agreement in ,any single,year shall'Anot exceed the
amount of property tax revenues which would have been received by that taxing agency if
all the property tax revenues from the Project Area had been allocated to all the affected
taxing agencies without regard to the division of taxes required by Section 33670 of the
Redevelopment Law, except that a greater payment has been established by agreement
between the Agency and one or snore taxing agencies, except a school district, if the other
taxing agencies agreed to defer payments for one or more years in order to accomplish the
purposcs of the Project at an"earlier time than would otherwise be the case. . The amount
of any greater payments shall not exceed the amount of payment deferred. The payments
shall have been approved by a resolution, adopted by the Agency, contained findings,
Rosenow.Spewcek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Humingtorr Beach
October, 1996 1 l Redevelopment Plan
supported by substantial evidence, that the Project will cause or has caused a-financial
burden or detriment to the taxing agency and that the payments are necessary to alleviate
the financial burden or detriment.
In the event that such an agreement described in the above paragraph does not exist
between the Agency and an affected taxing agency, the Agency shall remit payments to
any such taxing agency in a manner consistent with Section 33607.7, Section 33676(b),
and any other pertinent sections of the Redevelopment Law.
All such amounts shall be calculated after the amount required to be deposited in the Low
and Moderate Income Housing Fund has been deducted from the total amount of tax
increment funds received by the Agency in the applicable fiscal year. Such payments
shall be reduced in accordance with the provisions of Section 33607.5 or any other
applicable statute. Such payments shall be the exclusive payments that are required to be
made by the Agency to affected taxing entities for the duration of this Plan. Such
payments may be subordinated to loans, bonds, or other.Agency indebtedness as provided
by Law.,:
H., (613) Relocation of Persons Displaced by a Project
j .1. (614)''Relocation Pro�graf
• w t •9 1
F In accordance with the provisions of the California Relocation Assistance Law
(Government Code Section 7260, et seq.), the guidelines adopted and
promulgated by the California Department of Housing and Community
Development (the "Relocation Guidelines") and the Method of Relocation.
adopted by the Agency;: the Agency shall provide relocation benefits and
assistance to all persons (including families, business concerns and others)
displaced-,by Agency acquisition of property in the Project Area or as otherwise
required by-flaw.' Such relocation assistance shall be provided in the manner
required by the Method of Relocation. In order to carry out a redevelopment
project with a minimum of hardship, the Agency will assist displaced households
in finding decent, safe and sanitary housing within their financial means and
otherwise suitable to their needs. The Agency shall make a reasonable effort to
relocate displaced individuals, families, and commercial and professional
establishments within the Project Area. The Agency is also authorized to provide
relocation for displaced persons outside the Project Area.
2. (615) Relocation Benefits and Assistance
The Agency shall provide all relocation benefits required by law and in
conformance with the Method of Relocation, Relocation Guidelines, Relocation
Assistance Act, the Redevelopment Law, and any other applicable rules and
regulations.
Rosenow Sperncek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 12 Redevelopment Plan
1. (616) Demolition, Clearance, Public Improvements, Site Preparation and Removal
of Hazardous Waste
1. (617) Demolition and Clearance
The Agency is authorized, for property acquired by the Agency or pursuant to an
agreement with the owner of property, to demolish, clear or move buildings,
structures, or other improvements from any real property as necessary to carry out
the purposes of this Plan.
2. (618) Public Improvements .
To the extent permitted by law, the Agency is authorized to install and construct
or to cause to be-installed and constructed the public improvements and public
utilities (within or outside the Project Area) necessary to carry out the purposes of
this Plan. Such public improvements include, but are not limited to: over or
underpasses; bridges; streets; curbs; gutters; sidewalks; street lights; sewers; storm
drains; traffic signals; electrical distribution systems' natural gas distribution
systems; cable TV and fiber optic communication systems; water distribution
systems; parks; plazas; playgrounds; motor vehicle parking facilities; landscaped
areas; schools; civic; cultural; and .recreational facilities; and pedestrian
improvements. A list of proposed public facilities and infrastructure improvement
projects is set forth in Exhibit C and incorporated herein by reference.
The Agency, as-it deems necessary to carry out the Plan and subject to the consent
of the City Council, may pay all or part of the value of the land for and the cost of
the installation •and construction= of any building, facility, structure or other
improvement which is publicly owned.either.within or outside the Project Area,
upon both the : Agency Board. and ,,the City., Council making the applicable
detenninations required pursuant to the Redevelopment Law..
When the value of such land or the cost of the installation and construction of
such building, facility, structure or other improvement, or both, has been, or will
be, paid or provided for initially by the City or other public corporation, the
Agency may enter into a contract with the City or other public corporation under
which it agrees to-reimburse the City or other public,corporation for all or part of
the value of"sucMand or all or part of the cost of such building, facility, structure
or other improvements, or both, by periodic payments over a period of years. Any
obligation of the Agency under such.contract shall constitute an indebtedness of
the Agency for the purposes of carrying out this flan.
Rosenow Spevacek Croup,'Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 13 Redevelopment Plan
3. (619) Preparation of Building Sites
The Agency may develop as a building site any real property owned or acquired
by it. In connection with such development it may cause, provide, or undertake or
make provisions with other agencies for the installation, or construction of streets,
utilities, parks, playgrounds and other public improvements necessary for carrying
out in the Project Area this Plan.
4. (620) Removal of Hazardous Waste
To the extent legally allowable, the Agency may, in its sole discretion, take any
actions which the Agency determines are necessary and which are consistent with
other State and federal laws, to remedy or remove a release of hazardous
substances on, under, or from property within the Project Area.
J. (621) Rehab ilitation,"Moving of Structures by the Agency and Seismic Repairs
l. (622) Rehabilitation and Conservation
The Agency is authorized to' rehabilitate and conserve, or to cause to be
rehabilitated and conserved, any property, building or structure in the Project Area
owned by the Agency. The Agency is also authorized to advise, encourage, and
assist (through a loan'program or otherwise) in the rehabilitation and conservation
of property, buildings or structures in the Project Area not owned by the Agency .
to the extent permitted by the Redevelopment Law as it exists now or may be
hereafter amended. The Agency is authorized to acquire, restore, rehabilitate,
move and conserve buildings of historic or architectural significance.
The Agency is authorized to conduct a program of assistance and enforcement to
encourage owners of property within the Project Area to upgrade and maintain
their property consistent with this Plan and such standards as may be developed
for the Project Area.
The extent of rehabilitation in the Project Area shall be subject to the discretion of
the Agency based upon such objective factors as:
a.. Compatibility of rehabilitation with land uses as provided
for in this Plan.
b. Economic feasibility of proposed rehabilitation and
conservation activity.
C. Structural feasibility of proposed rehabilitation and
conservational activity.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, hie. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 14 Redevelopment Plan
d. The undertaking of rehabilitation and• conservation
activities in an expeditious manner and in conformance
with the requirements of this Plan and such property
rehabilitation standards as may be adopted by the Agency.
e. The need for expansion of public improvements, facilities
and utilities.
f. The assembly and development of properties in accordance
with this Plan.
The Agency may adopt property rehabilitation standards for the rehabilitation of
properties in the Project Area.
2. (623) Moving of Structures
As necessary in carrying out this Plan, the Agency is authorized to move, or to
cause to be moved, any building structures or other improvements from any real
property acquired which can be rehabilitated to a location within or outside the
Project Area. U-
3..' ' (624) Seismic Re airs . E
For any project undertaken by the Agency twithin the:Project Area for building
rehabilitation or alteration in construction, the Agency may, by following all
applicable procedures which are consistent with local, State, and federal law, take
those actions which the Agency determines are necessary to provide for seismic
retrofits.
K. (625) Property Disposition and Development
1. (626) Real Property Disposition and Development
a. (627) General -
For the purposes of this Plan, the Agency is authorized to sell, lease,
exchange, subdivide, transfer, assign, pledge, encumber by mortgage or
deed of trust, or otherwise dispose of any interest in real property. To the
extent permitted by law, the Agency is authorized to dispose of real
property by negotiated lease or. sale without public bidding. Except as
otherwise permitted by law, before any interest in property of the Agency
acquired in whole or in part, directly or indirectly, with tax increment
moneys is sold or leased for development pursuant to this Plan, such sale
or lease shall be first approved by the City Council after public hearing,
together with a finding that, except as otherwise permitted by law, the
Roseno►v Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopinent Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
Octoher, 1996 15 Redevelopsteut Plan
consideration is not less than its fair market value at its highest and best
use in accordance with this Plan, or the consideration is not less than the
fair reuse value at the use and with the covenants, conditions and
development costs authorized by the sale or lease.
The real property acquired by the Agency in the Project Area, except
property conveyed to it by the City,-shall be sold or leased to public or
..pri,�ate .persons or entities°>for improvement and use of the property in
r t conformance- with this- Plan. Real property may be conveyed by the
k Agency to the'City, and where beneficial to the Project Area, to any other
'n'-'• -
'' f public body without charge or for an amount less than fair market value.
All purchasers or lessees of property from the Agency shall be obligated to
1 use the property for the purposes designated in this Plan, to begin and
a,. complete improvement of such property within a period of time which the
Agency fixes as reasonable, and to comply with other conditions which
the Agency deems necessary to carryout the purposes of this Plan.
,r
`During the period of redevelopment in the Project Area, the Agency shall
ensure that all provisions of this Plan, and other documents formulated
pursuant to this Plan, are being observed, and that development of the
Project Area is proceeding in accordance with applicable development
documents and time schedules.
All development, whether public or private, must conform to this Plan and
all applicable. federal, State, and local laws, including without limitation
the City's planning and zoning ordinances, building, environmental and
other land use development standards. Such development must receive the
approval of all appropriate public agencies.
b. (628) Purchase and Development Documents
To provide adequate safeguards to ensure that the provisions of this Plan
will be carried out and to prevent the recurrence of blight, all real property
sold, leased, or conveyed by the Agency, as well as all property subject to
Owner Participation Agreements, shall be made subject to the provisions
of this Plan by leases, deeds, contracts, agreements, declarations of
:restrictions, provisions of the planning and zoning ordinances of the City,
conditional use permits, or other means. Where appropriate, as
determined by the Agency, such documents or portions thereof shall be
recorded in the office of the Recorder of the County.
Rosenow.Spevacek Gforrp, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 16 Redevelopment Plan
Leases, deeds, contracts, agreements, and declarations of restrictions of the
Agency may contain restrictions, covenants, covenants running with the
land, rights of reverter, conditions subsequent, equitable servitudes, or any
other provisions necessary to carry out this Plan.
The Agency shall reserve such powers, and controls in Disposition and
Development Agreements or similar agreements as may be necessary to
prevent transfer;retention, or use.of,property for speculative purposes and
to ensure that redevelopment is carried out pursuant to this Plan.
The Agency shall,obligate+Iessees and purchasers of real property acquired
in redevelopment projects and owners of property improved as part of a
redevelopment project to refrain from discrimination or segregation based
upon race, color, creed,Jeligion, national origin, ancestry, sex, or marital
status in the sale, lease,:.sublease, transfer, use occupancy, tenure or
enjoyment of property in the Project Area. All property sold, leased,
-conveyed, or subject to Disposition and.Development Agreements shall be
expressly subject by appropriate documents to the restriction that all
deeds, leases, or contracts for the sale, lease, sublease or other transfer of
land in the Project Area shall contain such nondiscrimination and non-
segregation clauses as are required by law.
2. (629) Personal Property Disposition
For the purposes of this Plan, the Agency is authorized to sell, lease, exchange,
subdivide, transfer, assign, pledge, encumber, or otherwise dispose of personal
property.
L. (630) Provision for Low.and Moderate Income Housing .
The Agency shall comply with all of the Low -and Moderate Income Housing
requirements of the California Community Redevelopment Law which are applicable to
this Plan, including applicable expenditure, replacement, -and inclusionary housing
requirements; and in connection therewith, the Agency shall.have all of the powers and
authorization to act as may, from time to time,. be provided by the Community
Redevelopment Law and other applicable provisions of law.
SECTION VII. (700) USES PERMITTED IN THE PROJECT.AREA
•A. (701) Map and Uses,Permitted
The Map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein illustrates the location of
the Project Area boundaries, the immediately adjacent streets, and existing public
rights-of-way and public easements. The land uses permitted by this Plan.shall be those
permitted by the General Plan as they now exist or may hereafter be amended.
Rosenoiv Spevacek Group, lire. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 17 Redevelopment Plan
13. (702) Major Lan'&Use Designations (as now provided in the General Plan)
The following land use categories are presently permitted by the General Plan:
RESIDENTIAL
Low Density
Medium Density
High Density
INDUSTRIAL '
General Industrial
COMMERCIAL
General Commercial
Visitor-Serving Commercial
OTHER USES
Public, Quasi-Public Institutional
Planning Reserve
OPEN SPACE
Recreation
MIXED USES
Mixed Development
Office/Residential
Commercial/Support Recreation
C. (703) Public Uses
1. (704) Public Street Layout. Rights-of-Way and Easements
The public street system and street layout for the Project Area is illustrated on the
Project Area Map identified as Exhibit A. The street system in the Project Area
shall be developed in accordance with the Circulation Element of the General
Plan.
Certain streets and rights-of-way may be widened, altered, abandoned, vacated, or
closed by the City as necessary for proper development of the Project Area.
Additional easements may be created by the Agency and City in the Project Area
as needed for proper development and circulation.
Rose►tow Spevacek Group, hic•. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Hunti►rglan Beaeh
Octoher, 1996 B Redevelopment Plat
The public rights-of-way shall be used for vehicular, bicycle and/or pedestrian
traffic as well as for public improvements,,. public and, private�utilities,.land
activities typically found in public rights-of-way. In addition, all necessary
easements for public uses, public facilities, and public utilities may.be retained or
created.
2. (705) Other Public and Open Space Uses
Both within and, where appropriate, outside of the Project Area, the Agency may
take actions to establish, or enlarge public, institutional, or non-profit uses,
including, but not limited to, schools, community centers, auditorium and civic
center facilities, criminal justice facilities, park and recreational facilities, parking
facilities, transit facilities, libraries, hospitals, educational, fraternal, philanthropic
and charitable institutions or other similar associations or organizations. All such
uses shall be deemed to conform to the provisions of this Plan provided that such
uses conform with all other applicable laws and ordinances and that such uses are
approved by the City. The Agency may impose such other reasonable restrictions
as are necessary to protect development and uses in the Project Area.
D. (706) Nonconforming Uses
The Agency is authorized but not required to permit an existing use to remain in an
existing building in good condition if the use does not conform to the provisions of this
Plan, provided that such use is generally compatible with existing and proposed
developments and uses in the Project Area.
The Agency may take actions to, but is not required to, authorize additions, alterations,
repairs or other improvements in the Project Area for buildings which do not conform to
the provisions of this Plan where, in the determination of the Agency, such improvements
would be compatible with surrounding Project Area uses and proposed development.
E. (707) Interim Uses
Pending the ultimate development of land by developers and participants, the Agency is
authorized to use or permit the use of any land in the Project Area for interim uses not in
conformity with the uses permitted in this Plan. Such interim use, however, shall
conform to all applicable City land use regulations and requirements.
F. (708) General Controls and Limitations
All real property in the Project Area is hereby made subject to the controls and
requirements of this Plan. No real property shall be developed, redeveloped,
rehabilitated, or otherwise changed after the date of the adoption of this Plan except in
conformance with the goals and provisions of this Plan and all applicable City land use
regulations and requirements. The land use controls of this Plan shall apply for the
Hosenow.Spevacek Group, 111c. Reelevelopinent Agency of the City of Huntington-Reach
Qctoher, 1996 19 Redevelopment Plan
-r
5 ,
- periods set forth in Section 1100 below. The type, size, height, number and use of
buildings within the Project Area will be controlled by the applicable City land use
>a regulations and requirements as they now exist or may hereafter be amended from time to
.time.
1. (709) New.Construction
All construction in the Project Area shall comply with all applicable State and
local laws in effect from time to time. In addition to applicable City land use
regulations and requirements in the Project Area, additional specific performance
and development standards may be adopted by the Agency to control and direct
improvement activities in the Project Area.
2. (710) Rehabilitation
Any existing structure within the Project Area which the Agency enters into an
agreement for retention and rehabilitation shall be repaired, altered, reconstructed,
or rehabilitated in such a manner that it will meet the following requirements: be
safe and sound in all physical respects, be attractive in appearance and not
detrimental to the surrounding uses.
3. (711) Number of Dwelling. Units
The total number of dwelling units in the Project Area shall be regulated by the
General Plan. As of the date of adoption of the Plan, there are approximately
1,973 dwelling units in the Project Area.
4. (712) Open Space and Landscapes
The approximate amount of open space to be provided in the Project Area is the
total of all areas so designated in the Land Use Element of the General Plan and
those areas in the public rights-of-way or provided through site coverage
limitations on new development as established by the City and this Plan.
Landscaping shall be developed in the Project Area to ensure optimum use of
living plant material in conformance with the standards of the City.
5. (713) Limitations on Type, Size and Height of Buildings
The limits on building intensity, type, size and height, shall be established in
accordance with the provisions of the General Plan and the zoning ordinances, as
they now exist or are hereafter amended.
Rosenow Spevacek Group,Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 20 Redevelopment Plan
6. (714) aign sr
All signs shall conform to the City's requirements. Design of all proposed new
signs shall be submitted prior to installation to the appropriate governing bodies
of the City and/or the Agency for review and approval pursuant to the Municipal
Code of the City and procedures permitted by this Plan.
7. (715) Utilities
The Agency, in conformity with municipal code and-City policy, shall require that
all utilities be placed underground whenever physically possible and economically
feasible on projects funded in whole or in part by the Agency or subject to a
Disposition and Development Agreement or an Owner Participation Agreement.
8. (716) Subdivision of Parcels
No parcels in the Project Area, including any parcel retained by a participant,
shall be consolidated, subdivided or re-subdivided without the approval of the
City.
9. (717) Variations
The Agency is authorized to permit variations from the limits, restrictions and
controls established by this Plan. In order to permit any such variation, the
Agency must determine all of the following:
a. The application of certain provisions of this Plan would result in
practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the
general purposes and intent of this Plan.
b. There are exceptional circumstances or conditions applicable to the
property or to the intended development-of the property which do
not apply generally to other properties having the same standards,
restrictions, and controls.
c. Permitting a variation will not be materially detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the area.
d. Permitting a variation will not be contrary to the objectives of this
Plan.
No such variation shall be granted which permits other than a minor departure
from the provisions of this Plan. In permitting any such variation, the Agency
shall impose such conditions as are necessary to protect the public health, safety,
or welfare, and to assure compliance with the purposes of this Plan.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 21 Redevelopment Plan
G. (718) Design for Development
Within the limits, restrictions, and controls established.in this Plan, and subject to the
provisions of Sections 701 and 708 herein, the Agency is authorized to establish heights
of buildings, land coverage, setback requirements, design criteria, traffic circulation,
traffic access, and other development and design controls necessary for proper
development of both private and public areas within the Project Area.
No new improvement shall be constructed, and no existing improvement shall be
substantially modified, altered, repaired, or rehabilitated except in accordance with this
Plan and any such controls approved by the Agency. -In the case of property which is the
subject of a Disposition and Development Agreement or an Owner Participation
Agreement with the Agency, such property shall be developed in accordance with the
provisions of such Agreement. One of the objectives of this Plan is to create an attractive
and pleasant environment in the Project Area. Therefore, .such plans shall give
consideration to good design, open space and other amenities.to enhance the aesthetic
quality of the Project Area. The Agency shall not approve any plans that do not comply
with this Plan except as permitted by Section 717 of this Plan.
H. (719) Building Permits
Any building permit that is issued for the rehabilitation or construction of any new
building or any addition, construction, moving, conversion or alteration to an existing
building in the Project Area from the date of adoption of this Plan must be in
conformance with the provisions of this PIan, any design for development adopted by the
Agency, any restrictions or controls established by resolution of the Agency, and any
applicable participation or other agreements.
The Agency is authorized to establish permit procedures and approvals required for
purposes of this Plan. A building permit shall be issued only after the applicant for same
has been granted all approvals required by the City and the Agency at the time of
application.
SECTION VIH. (800) METHODS FOR FINANCING THE PROJECT
A. (801) General Description of the Proposed Financing Methods
Upon adoption of this Plan by the City Council, the Agency is authorized to finance
implementation of this Plan with assistance from local sources, the State and/or the
federal government, property tax increment, interest income, Agency bonds, donations,
loans from private financial institutions or any other legally available source.
Rosetrow Speweek Group,Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996' 22 Redevelopment Plan
The Agency is also authorized to obtain advances, borrow funds, issue bonds or other
obligations, and create indebtedness in carrying out this Plan. The principal and interest
on such indebtedness may be paid from tax increment revenue or any other funds
available to the Agency. Advances and loans for survey, and planning and for the
operating capital for administration of this PIan may be provided by the City until
adequate tax increment revenue or other funds are available to repay the advances and
loans. The City or other public agency, as it is able, may also supply additional
assistance 'through issuance of bonds, loans and grants and in-kind assistance. Any
assistance shall be subject to terms established by an agreement between the Agency,
City and/or-other public agency providing such assistance..
As available, gas tax funds from the State and sales tax funds from the County may be
used for the street system.
The Agency may issue bonds or other obligations and expend their proceeds to carry out
this Plan. The Agency is authorized to issue bonds or other obligations as appropriate
and feasible in an amount'sufficlent to finance all or any part of Plan implementation
activities. The Agency shall pay the principal and interest on bonds or other obligations
of the Agency as they become due and payable.
B. (802) Tax Increment Revenue
For the purposes of the 'collection of property tax-revenue pursuant to this Plan, the
effective date of the ordinance shall mean and refer to:
• For Yorktown-Lake Area.adopted by Ordinance No. 2576: September 20,
1982.
• For Talbert-Beach Area adopted by Ordinance No. 2577: September 20, 1982.
• For Original Main-Pier Area adopted by Ordinance No. 2578: September 20,
1982.
• For Oakview Area adopted by Ordinance No. 2582: November 1, 1982.
• For Added Main-Pier Area adopted by Ordinance No. 2634: September 6,
1983.
• For Huntington Center Commercial District Area adopted by Ordinance No.
2743: November 26, 1984.
All taxes levied upon taxable property within the Project Area each year by or for the
benefit of the State, County, City or other public corporation (hereinafter called "Taxing
Agency'' or "Taxing Agencies") after the effective date of the ordinance, shall be divided
as follows:
Roseito►v Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopttient Ageney of the City of Hulttington'Beach
October, 1996 23 RMeveloptttent Plan
I. That portion of the taxes which would be produced by the rate upon which
the tax is levied each year by or for each of said Taxing Agencies upon the
total sum of the assessed value of the taxable property in the Project Area
as shown upon the assessment roll used in connection with the taxation of
such property by such Taxing Agency, last equalized prior to the effective
Awe of the ordinance, shall be allocated to and when collected shall be
paid to the respective Taxing Agencies as taxes by or for said Taxing
Agencies on all other property are paid (for the purpose of allocating taxes
levied by or for any Taxing Agency or Agencies which did not include the
territory in the Project Area on the effective date of the ordinance but to
which such territory has been annexed or otherwise included after such
effective date, the assessment roll of the County last equalized on the
effective date of the Ordinance shall be used in determining the assessed
valuation of the taxable property in the Project Area on said effective
date).
2. That portion of said levied taxes each year in excess of such amount shall
be allocated to, and when collected shall be paid into, a special fund of the
Agency to pay the principal of and interest on loans, monies advanced to,
or indebtedness (whether funded, refunded, assumed, or otherwise)
incurred by the Agency to finance or refinance'in whole or in part, the
Project and this Plan. Unless and until the total assessed valuation of the
taxable property in the Project Area exceeds the total assessed value of the
taxable property in the Project Area as shown by the Iast equalized
assessment roll referred to in paragraph (1.) hereof, all of the taxes levied
and collected upon the taxable property in the Project Area shall be.paid to
the respective Taxing Agencies. When said loans, advances, and
indebtedness, if any, and interest thereon, have been paid, all monies
thereafter received from taxes upon the taxable property in the Project
Area shall be paid to the respective Taxing Agencies as taxes on all other
property are paid.
3. That portion of the taxes in excess of the amount identified in paragraph
(1.) above which is attributable to a tax rate levied by a Taxing Agency for
the purpose of producing revenues in an amount sufficient to make annual
repayments of the principal of and interest on any bonded indebtedness for
the acquisition or improvement of real property shall be allocated to, and
when collected shall be;paid into,the fund of that Taxing Agency. This
k paragraph ;(3.) ,'shall , only rapply to taxes levied to repay bonded
indebtedness approved by the voters on or after January 1, 1959.
The" Agency is authorized to make pledges as •to specific advances, loans and
indebtedness as appropriate in carrying out the Project. The portion•of taxes allocated
and paid to the Agency pursuant to.subparagraph (2.) above is irrevocably pledged to pay
r the principal of and interest on loans, monies advanced to, or indebtedness (whether
Roseriow Spevacek Croup, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October,11996 , 24 Redevelopment Plan
z
funded; refunded, assumed, or otherwise) incurred by the Agency to finance or refinance,
in whole or in part, the redevelopment program for the Project Area. This section is
intended to be a compilation and continuation of the tax increment provisions of the
Constituent Projects. ,
C. (803) Agency Bonds
The Agency is authorized to issue bonds'and other obligations from time to tirne, if it
deems it appropriate to do so, in order to finance all or any part of Plan implementation
activities.
Neither the merribers of the Agency nor any persons executing the bonds are liable
personally on the bonds or other obligations by reason of their issuance.
The bonds and other obligations of the Agency are not a debt of the City or the State; nor
are any of its political subdivisions liable for them; nor in any event shall the bonds or
obligations be payable out of any funds or properties other than those of the Agency; and
such bonds and other obligations shall so state on their face. The bonds and other
obligations do not constitute an indebtedness within the meaning of any constitutional or
statutory debt limitation or restriction.
D. (804) Other Loans and Grants t
Any other loans, grants, guarantees or financial assistance from the federal government,
the State, or any other public or private source will be utilized, if available, as appropriate
in carrying out this PIan. In addition, the Agency may make loans as permitted by law to
public or private entities for any of its redevelopment purposes.
E. (805) Rehabilitation Loans, Grants, and Rebates
The Agency and the City may commit funds from any source to rehabilitation programs
for the purposes of loans, grants, or rebate payments for self-financed rehabilitation work.
The rules and regulations for such programs shall be those which may already exist or
which may be developed in the future. The Agency and the City shall seek to acquire
grant funds and direct loari allocations from State and federal sources, as they may be
available from time to time, for the carrying out of such programs.
SECTION IX. (900) ACTIONS BY THE CITY a = x: ►�=r •'1c � �r�
The City shall aid and cooperate with the Ag'e'fi y in 'carrying out this'Plan and shall take all
reasonable actions necessary to ensure the continued fulfillment of the purposes of this Plan and
to prevent the recurrence or spread in the Project Area of conditions of blight. 'Actions by the
City may include, but shall not be limited to, the following:
' arflr ,
Rosenow Spemcek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of•Humington Beach
October, 1996 25 Redevelopnreitt Plan
1. Institution and completion of proceedings for opening, closing, vacating,
widening, or changing the grades of streets, alleys, and other public rights-
of-way, and for other necessary modifications of the streets, the street
layout, and other public rights-of-way in the Project Area. Such action by
the City shall include the requirement of abandonment and relocation by
the public utility companies of their operations in public rights-of-way as
appropriate to carry out this Plan, provided that nothing in this Plan shall
be deemed to require the cost of such abandonment, removal, and
relocation to be borne by others than those legally required to bear such
costs.
2. Institution and completion of proceedings necessary for changes and
improvements to.,publicly-owned parcels and utilities in the Project Area.
3. Performance of the above, and of all other functions and services relating
to public health, safety, and physical development normally rendered in
accordance with a schedule which will permit the redevelopment of the
Project Area to be commenced and carried to completion without
unnecessary delays.
4. Imposition, whenever necessary, of appropriate design controls within the
limits of this Plan in the Project Area to ensure proper development and
use of land.
S. Provisions for administration/enforcement of this Plan by the City after
completion of development.
6. The undertaking and completion of any other proceedings necessary to
carry out the Project.
7. The expenditure of any City funds in connection with redevelopment of
„ ;,, the Project'Area pursuant to this Plan.,
- 8. ' Revision of'the City zoning, ordinance, adoption of specific plans or
execution of statutory devclbprnent agreements to permit the land uses and
facilitate the development authorized by this Plan.
SECTION X. (1000) ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT
Upon adoption, the administration and .enforcement of this Plan or other documents
imp]ern entingjj-iis Plan shallbe,perforn�ed by the City and/or the Agency, as appropriate.
P
Rosenow Spevaeek Group, hte. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 26 Redevelopment Plan
The provisions of this Plan or other documents entered into pursuant to this Plan may also be
enforced by litigation or similar proceedings by either the Agency or the City. Such remedies
may include, but are not limited to, specific performance, damages, re-entry onto property, power
of termination, or injunctions. In addition, any recorded provisions which are expressly for the
benefit of owners of property'in the Project Area may be enforced by such owners.
SECTION XI. (1100) PLAN LIMITATIONS
The following financial and time limitations shall apply-to this Plan:
A. (1101) Amount of Bonded Indebtedness Outstanding At Any One Time
The amount of bonded indebtedness, to'be repaid in whole or in part from the allocation
of taxes pursuant to Section 33670 of the Redevelopment Law, which can be outstanding
" at one time shall not exceed $275.0 million, except by amendment'to this Plan.
B. (1102) Amount of Cumulative Tax Increment Revenue
The number of dollars of taxes which may be divided and allocated to the Agency
pursuant to Section 33670 of the Redevelopment Law, inclusive of payments to taxing
agencies, shall not exceed $850.0 million, except by amendment of this Plan.
C. (1103) Time Frame to Incur Indebtedness
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Plan; and except as provided in this Section
and Section 33333.6(a), (g), and (h) of the• Redevelopment. Law, or as otherwise
permitted by law, no loan, advance or indebtedness to be repaid from such allocations of
taxes established or incurred by the Agency to finance in whole or in part the
Redevelopment Project shall be established or incurred after January 1, 2014. Such loan,
advance or indebtedness may be repaid over a period of time longer than such time limit.
This limit shall not prevent the Agency from incurring debt to be drepaid from the Low
and Moderate Income HousingfFurid or establishing='more-debt-in order to fulfill the
Agency's housing obligations under Section 33413 of the Redevelopment Law. In
addition, this limit shall not prevent the Agency j from refiriancing, refunding, or
restructuring indebtedness after January l;'2014, if the indebtedness is not increased and
the time during which the indebtedness is to be repaid does not exceed the date on which
the indebtedness would have been paid.
D. (1104) Duration of This Plan
With respect to the Yorktown-Lake Area,'-except for the nondischmination and
nonsegregation provisions which shall run in perpetuity, the provisions of this Plan shall
expire on September 20, 2022. After this time limit, the Agency shall have no authority
to act pursuant to this Plan except to pay previously incurred indebtedness, collect tax
increment revenue, and enforce existing covenants, contracts, or other obligations.
Rosenoiv Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 199G 27 Redevelopment Plan
With respect to the Talbert-Beach Area, except for the nondiscrimination and
nonsegregation provisions which shall run in perpetuity, the provisions of this Plan shall
expire on September 20, 2022. After this time limit, the Agency shall have no authority
to act pursuant to this Plan except to pay previously. incurred indebtedness, collect tax
increment revenue, and enforce existing covenants, contracts, or other obligations.
With respect to the Original Main-Pier Area, except for the nondiscrimination and
nonsegregation provisions which shall run in perpetuity, the provisions of this Plan shall
expire on September.20, 2022. After this time limit, the Agency shall have no authority
to act pursuant to this Plan except to pay previously incurred indebtedness, collect tax
increment revenue, and enforce existing covenants, contracts, or other obligations.
With respect to the Oakview Area, except for the nondiscrimination and nonsegregation
provisions which shall run in perpetuity, the provisions of this Plan shall expire on
November 1, 2022. After this time limit, the Agency shall have no authority to act
pursuant to this Plan except to pay previously incurred indebtedness, collect tax
increment revenue, and enforce existing covenants, contracts, or other obligations.
With respect to the Added Main-Pier Area, except for the nondiscrimination and
nonsegregation provisions which shall run in perpetuity, the provisions of this Plan shall
expire on September 6, 2023. After this time limit, the Agency shall have no authority to
act pursuant to this Plan except to pay previously incurred indebtedness, collect tax
increment revenue, and enforce existing covenants, contracts, or other obligations.
' 'With respect' to, the Huriiington Center Commercial District Area, except for the
nondiscrimination and nonsegregatioh provisions which shall run in perpetuity, the
" provisions of this Plan shall expire on November 26, 2024. After this time limit, the
Agency shall have no authority to act pursuant to this flan except to pay previously
incurred indebtedness, collect tax increment revenue, and enforce existing covenants,
contracts, or other obligations.
F. (1105) Time Frame to Collect Tax Increment Revenue
x- -
Notwithstanding.any other provision of this Plan, and except as provided in this Section
and Section 33333.6(a),. (c), (g), and (h) of the Redevelopment I-aw, or as otherwise
permitted by law,'the Agency shall not pay indebtedness with the proceeds of property
taxes received pursuant to Heath and Safety Code Section 33670 or receive property taxes
pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 after ten (10) years beyond the
duration of this Plan pursuant to Section 1100. These limitations shall not be applied to
limit the allocation of taxes to the Agency to the extent required to eliminate project
deficits created under subdivision (g) of Section 33334.6 of the Redevelopment Law in
accordance with the plan adopted pursuant thereto for the purpose of eliminating the
deficits or to the extent required to implement a housing program requirement pursuant to
Section 33413 of the Redevelopment Law. In addition, these limitations shall not affect
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 28 Redevelopment Plan
the validity of any bond, indebtedness, or other obligation, including any mitigation
agreement entered into pursuant to Section 33401 of the Redevelopment Law, authorized
by the City Council, or the Agency pursuant to the Redevelopment Law, prior to January
1, 1994, or the right of the Agency to receive property taxes, pursuant-to Health and
Safety Code Section 33670 to pay the bonds, indebtedness, or other obligation.
SECTION X11. -(1200) PROCEDURE FOR AMENDMENT
This Plan may be amended by means of the procedure established in Sections 33450-33458 of
the Redevelopment Law or by any other procedure hereafter established by law.
- - 44
70 -
' r
r
Roseno►v Spevacek Group; lire. RedevelopmentAgency of the City of Huntington Beach
October, 1996 29 Redevelopment Plan
EXHIBIT A
PROJECT AREA MAPS
'M
s3
� 3
a
3
.o,,.
M
fG IOYµ(
Yl�IhIR
art:
_ uute�c�a
er:s
i
�alaaw,...rr
K
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Project Area Boundaries
h&FADDEN AVE.
avft
'F00 N
Fly} NOT TO SCAif
NOT A PART
HUNTINGTON
VILLAGE WAY
CENTER AVENUE
a
d
a HUNTINGTON BEACH MAIL
4
K d
� m
U
N Q
JJ ! m
L J L
EDINGER AVE
w
w
„z� a ALDRICH AVE,
14UNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Subarea 1
(formerly Huntington Center Commercial Redevelopment Project Area)
WARMER AVE.
FiR DRNE
w .SYCAMORE AVE.
z ,,
BELSfTO DR,
On1MEw CYPRESS AVE.
r ?ARK CYPRESS AVE.
w .
w
r r
u O Q
z
1• �m
m
OAKVIEW MA CRELI DR. MSINae01
SC}10bL'
w 0
KT NSCAZ
(BBAAR�rO'4 DDR-
w
Z w
n Z g Z
J � z
w
Lfu
4 Q Y
SLATER AVE,
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Subarea 2
(formerly Oakview Redevelopment Project Area)
i
}
}E
I
LL!
V �
V
a w
00
TALBERT AVE.
w a 3
Q 5 E SS(5 DR
m
S I II 0 V
1z r
0 I EYE
I 13!
a j HAPPY DR.
I
O!.f MEE
CRQF
I,
N
TERRY NOT to w�E
PARK
I
i
TAYLOR DR.
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Subarea 3
(formerly Talbert-Beach Redevelopment Project Area)
k �
i
YORKTOWN AVE.
+y NOT to sGuf
i 3
I
I
CIVIC CENTER
i
WICHITA AVE.
Z_
g h1-
Q
VENICE AVE.
Y w w
oc Z x
a � g 0. g
a
LITICA AVE.
1V
I-IUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Subarea 4
(formerly Yorktown-Lake Redevelopment Project Area)
Because all 619 acres of the Project either are developed or an integral part of an urban area,
100% of the Project Area is urbanized pursuant to Section 33320.1 of the Law.
w Background of Redevelopment Activities
On March 1, 1976, Elie City Council established the Agency to carry out community
redevelopment projects and programs within the City. Between 1992 and 1984, City Council
and Agency established five separate redevelopment projects:
• The Yorktown-Lake Redevelopment Project, established via - Ordinance No. 2576 on
September 20, 1982;
• The Talbert-Beach Redevelopment Project, established via Ordinance No. 2577 on
September 20, 1982;
• The Main-Pier Redevelopment Project, established via Ordinance No. 2578 on September 20,
1982-3
• The Oakview Redevelopment Project, established via Ordinance No. 2582 Oil November 11
1982; and
• The Huntington Center Commercial District Redevelopment Project, established Ordinance
No. 2743 on November 26, 1984.
On September 6, 1983, the City Council amended the Redevelopment Plan for the Main-Pier
Redevelopment Project via Ordinance No. 2634, enlarging the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project
Area to 336 acres. On July 5, 1989, the City Council amended the Redevelopment Plan for the
Oakview Redevelopment Project via Ordinance No. 3002 to extend certain Financial and time
limits within the redevelopment plan.
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. Redevelopment Agencv of t11e City of Hun lington Beach
Ocloher, 1996 A-4 Report to the City Council
TABLE
{ Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project
r F -Report.to,the City Council
EXISTING LAND USE CHARACTER
Land Use Category Acres % of Total
Commercial 208.00 33.6%
Residential 192.50 , 31.1%
ParkslB each eslOpen Space 145.00 23.4%
Vacant ' ' `' ' . 30.00 4.7%
Public (Civic Center) 27.25 4.4%
Industrial 8.25 1.3%
Right-of-Way (Caltrans and Railroad) 8.00 1.3%
TOTAL 619.00 100.0%
Source: Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Huntington Beach
Redevelopment Project, prepared by LSA Associates in July, 1996
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc.
Existing Land Use Councrpt 10/10/96 1 of 1
- ., i. r of .. •.
. 1
f '
Ef Li R ti p tt bi '? Q VC
jJjjL_j0.4
��j,
m®mmmmmmm® I L__j 1
[Emmf� Q �
®m9lEDmm[EI7mmIEm 000
®mm
mmmmmmmmmIam ® O
to[E m oo[o[E[E[0[0[E ID IE IE 11 mmmm
mmmmmmm 31
mm t�
icrK�t M�r
w - pIM/Lx"."A&KnM
f rlll/MM N]
AAME, p1LMw fAOK0"
PAOKOCIM
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
Main-Pier Area
Developed Properties
Undeveloped Properties, integral
Part of an Urban Area
YORK-TOWN-AVE.00—
'
N
?�KATOSCAa
CNK CWTER
WICHTTA AVE.
Z_
VENlCE AVE.
N
Y w uj
r Q
Ul1CA AVE.
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
Yorktown-Lake Area .
Developed Properties
-
Undeveloped Properdes, integral-Part-of an;Urban Area
v ' m
Y;
Li G
-
���L-"L "-j L--J L--J L—J L---f L--J O
CDM91 [E I[E I[D IE IE I
�m�mmmaammmmmmm � O �� -
91m[amm[a[a[091mmmIEaa O
mm�m��aa��mmmaam m ImmIT]
mm mm mmmm mm
WWIEm[EIE[0 Jm i I�
IKrX[A'�?7 HGn"�/.Y
P�PIE PH P�P�P�P�P�P�
21
T 41�4
El
CpA I wAY Y4Ii��'K+70N IIrC„MNOIN k/�
IAp}I[OCEAN
$V7Z%8Q 10.1111 TKO ORµ
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
. Subarea 5
(formerly Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area)
ti '
EXHIBIT B
LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS ;
4
T 1
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Subarea 1
(formerly Huntington Center Commercial Redevelopment Project Area)
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Beginning at the northwest corner of Parcel 2 as shown on a map recorded in Book 107, page
18, Parcels Maps, Records of Orange County;
thence North 47° 28' 13' West 20.57 feet along the northwesterly prolongation of the
northerly line of said Parcel 7 to the True Point of Beginning;
thence South 00° 39' 18' East 421.27 feet along the west line of the southwest quarter of the
northeast quarter of Section 14, Township 5 South, Range 11 West, as shown on said parcel
map to a point, said point being the center of Section 14, Township 5 South, Range 11 West
as shown on a map recorded in Book 169, pages 45 and 46, Parcel Maps, Records of Orange
County.
Thence South 89" 32' 08' West 301.00 feet;
thence South 00" 39' 35" East 5,45.82 feet to a tangent curve, said curve being concave
northwesterly and having a radius of 500.00 feet;
thence southerly and westerly along said curve through a central angel of 44° 59' 42' an arc
distance of 392.66 feet to a point on a tangent line;
thence South 44' 20' 07' East 94.24 feet along said tangent line to a tangent curve, said
curve being concave southeasterly and having a radius of 5W.00 feet;
thence southerly and westerly through a central angle of 45° 00' W , an are distance of
392.70 feet to a point, said point being the southeast corner of the west half of the northeast
quarter of the southwest quarter of Section 14, Township 5 South, Range 1 i West Parcel
Map 81-571;
thence North 89' 32' 15' East 395.47 feet to a point, said point being the southeast corner of
said Parcel Map 81-571;
thence South 00° 39' 35' East 150.00 feet;
thence North 89' 31' 55' East 109.00 feet;
thence South 0Q° 39' 35" East 1320.67 feet;
thence North 89' 32' 04' East 156.00 feet to a point, said point being the South quarter
corner of Section 14,Township 5 South, Range 11 West as shown on a map recorded in Book
22, page 18, Parcel Maps, Records of Orange County;
thence South 00° 44' 25' East 660.00 feet;
thence North 89° 24' 50' East 45.00 feet to a point, said point being the northwest corner of
Tract 5894, as shown on a map recorded in Book 23, pages 18 and 19, Miscellaneous Maps,
Records of Orange County,
thence North 89' 24' 50' East 1004.93 feet along the north line of said Tract 5894 and the
easterly prolongation of said north line to a point, said point being on the centerline of Sher
Lane;
thence North 00' 44' W West 130.00 feet;
thence North 89° 24' 50' East 376.00 feet;
thence South 00' 44' 25' East 100.00 feet;
{.
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Subarea I
(formerly Huntington Center Commercial Redevelopment Project Area)
LEGAL DESCRIPTION (con't)
thence North 89' 24' 50' East 528.96 feet;
thence North 00° 44' 25' West 180.00 feet to the centerline intersection of Parkside Lane and
Aldrich Avenue;
thence north 89° 16' 15' East 685.03 feet to a point on the section line of Huntington Beach
Boulevard per Tract 417; as shown on a map recorded in Book 16, page 47, Miscellaneous
Maps Records of Orange County,
thence North 00' 16' 46' East 1275.36 feet;
thence North 49° 16' 37'West 900.00 feet;
thence North 00° 27' 57" West 125.00 feet;
thence North 46' 55' 24'West 572.85 feet;
thence North 46' 19' 32' West 501.21 feet;
thence North 50' 25' 56' West 329.65 feet;
thence North 54' 14' 34' West 1196.05 feet to the True Point of Beginning.
Excepting herefrom that portion described as follows:
Beginning at the center of Section 14,Township 5 South , Range 11 West, as shown on a map
recorded in Book 169, pages 45 and 46, Parcel Maps, Records of Orange County;
thence South 00° 39' 35' East 1220.82 feet along the west line of the southeast quarter of
Section 14,Township 5 South, Range 11 West, as shown on a parcel map, recorded in Book 81,
pages 12 through 14, Parcel Maps, Records of Orange County to a point, said point being on
the north right-of-way line of Center Drive;
thence North 89° 32' 03' East 650.41 feet along the south line of Parcel 3 of said ParcebMaps
to a point on a tangent curve, said curve being concave to the northwest and having a radius of
34.00 feet, a radial bearing through said points bears North 37" 53'39' West;
thence northerly and easterly along said curve,through a central angle of 52° 45' 42', an are
distance of 31.31 feet to a point on a tangent line;
thence North 00° 39' 21' West 22.68 feet along said tangent line to a point on a tangent curve,
said curve being concave to the southeast and having a radius of 405.00 feet;
thence northerly and easterly along said curve through a central angle of 27° 23' 14', an are
distance of 193.59 feet to a point of reverse curvature, a radial bearing through said point bears
North 63° 16' 07' West; said curve being concave to the northwest and having a radius of
345.00 feet;
thence northerly and westerly along said curve through.a central angle of 34° 21' 52', an arc
distance of 206.92 feet to a point on a tangent cure, a radial bearing through said point bears
North 82° 22' 01'East; said curve being concave to the southwest and having a radius of
345.00 feet;
thence northerly and westerly through a central angle 10° 27' 01',an are distance of 62.93 feet
to a point on a tangent line;
T .
i
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Subarea 1
(formerly Huntington Center Commercial Redevelopment Project Area)
LEGAL DESCRIMON (con't)
thence North 18° 05' 00" West 241.00 feet to a point on a tangent curve; said curve being
l concave to the southwest and having a radius of 270.00 feet;
thence northerly and westerly along said curve through a central angle of 72' 34' 35', an arc
distance of 342.00 feet to a point on a tangent line;
thence South 89' 20' 25" West 160.28 feet along said tangent line to a point on a tangent curve,
said curve being concave to the northeast and having a radius of 175.00;
thence westerly and northerly along said curve through a central angel of 90° 00' 00', an arc
distance of 274.89 feet to a point on a tangent line;
thence North 00° 39' 35" West 64.64 feet along said tangent line to a point on a tangent curve,
said curve being concave to the southwest and having a radius of 34.00 feet;
thence northerly and westerly along said curve through a central angle of 49' 09' 22', an are
distance of 2917 feet to a point on a non-tangent curve, a radial bearing through said point
bears North 40° 11' 03' East, said curve being concave to the south and having a radius of
60.00 feet;
thence westerly along said curve through a central angle of 00° 24' 45', an arc distance of 4.03
feet to a point on a non-tangent curve, a radial bearing through said point bears North 47° 38'
14" East, said curve being concave southwest and having a radius 35.00 feet;
thence northerly and westerly through a central angle of 65' 01' 29', an arc distance of 39.72
feet to a point on a non-tangent line, a radial bearing through said point bears North 170 23'
15' West;
thence North 00* 39' 35' West 30.12 feet;
thence South 89' 32' 00' West 15.00 to the Point of Beginning.
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Subarea 2
(formerly Oakview Redevelopment Project Area)
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
OAKVIEW AREA PROJECT
That portion of Section 26,Township 5 South, Range 11 West in the Rancho La Bolsa Chica
and the Rancho Bolsas, City of Huntington Beach, County of Orange, State of California, as
shown on a map recorded in Book 51, page 13 of Miscellaneous Maps in the Office of the
County Recorder described as follows:
Beginning at the east one-quarter corner of said Section 26,
thence South 89' 24' 16' West 463.11 feet to a point on the southerly prolongation of the east
line of Keelson Lane, a street being 60 feet in width, 30 feet either side centerline, said point
being the True Point of Beginning;
thence along said southerly prolongation South 0' 45' 06' East 40 feet to the south line of
Slater Avenue, a street 80 feet in width, 40 feet either side of centerline;
thence South 89' 24' 16' West 1187 feet along said south line to the west line of Tract No.
4091;
thence along said west line North 0° 44' 31' West 700 feet to the north line of said Tract 4091;
thence along said north line North 89° 24' 39'East 300 feet to the southerly extension of the
west line of Oak Lane, a street being 60 feet in width, 30 feet either side of centerline;
thence.North 0' 44' 46' West 2041 feet along said southerly extension, the west line of Oak
Lane and its northerly extension to a line parallel with and 60 feet north measured at right
angles from the centerline of Warner Avenue;
thence along said parallel Gne North 89° 25' 46' East 1386 feet to the centerline of Beach
Blvd., said street being 132 feet in width, 66 feet either side of centerline;
thence along said centerline South 0° 45' 14' East 996 feet;
thence South 89" 25' 00' West 283 feet;
thence South 0° 45' 14' East 288 feet;
thence South 89° 25'00' West 20 feet;
thence South 0° 45' 14' East 96 feet to the easterly extension of the north line of Tract No.
8916;
thence along said north line South 89' 25' 00' West 576 feet to the east line of Ash Street, a
street being 60 feet in width, 30 feet either side of the centerline;
thence along said east line South 0° 44' 46' East 100 feet to a curve concave northeasterly
having a radius of 50 feet;
thence along said curve southerly and southeasterly thru a centeral angle of 36' 52' 12' an arc
distance of 32.20 feet to a point on a reverse curve concave westerly having a radius of 50 feet,
a radial from said point bears North 52' 23' 02' East;
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Subarea 2
(formerly Oakview Redevelopment Project Area)
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
OAKVIEW AREA PROJECT(cont.)
thence along said reverse curve southeasterly,southerly,and southwesterly thru a central angle of
78'54'35'an are distance of 68.86 feet to a compound curve concave northwesterly having a radius
of 35 feet, a radial to said point bears South 48' 42' 23" East,
thence along said compound curve southwesterly and westerly thru a central angle of 48' 11'23',an
arc distance of 29.44 feet to a point on the south line of Mandrell Drive being 60 feet in width,30 feet
either side of centerline;
thence along said south line South 89° 29' 00" West 11.8 feet to the east line of tract No. 4301;
thence along said mentioned east line South 0' 44' 46' East 270 feet to a point on a non-tangent
curve concave southwesterly having a radius of 70 feet,said point being on the north line of Barton
Drive and the east Une of Queens Lane;
thence along said curve and east line southeasterly and southerly thru a central angle of 77'44'59'
an arc distance of 95 feet;
thence South 0" 44' 52' East 22 feet to a curve concave northeasterly having a radius of 70
feet;
thence continuing along the east line of Queens Lane and said mentioned curve southerly and
southeasterly thru a central angle of 27'38'00'an arc distance of 34 feet to a reverse curve concave
southeasterly having a radius of 130 feet, a radial to said point bears North 61' 37'08' East;
thence along said reverse curve southeasterly and southerly thru a central angle of 27°38'00"an arc
distance of 63 feet to north line of Tract 4153;
thence along said north line North 89' 24' 35' East 125 feet to the east line of Tract 4153;
thence along said east line South 0' 44' 58' East 500 feet;
thence North 89' 24' 16' East 197 feet to the east line of Keelson Lane;
thence along said east line and its southerly prelongation 160 feet to the True Point of
Beginning.
F:
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Subarea 3
(formerly Talbert-Beach Redevelopment Project Area)
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
TAL-BERT-BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
Those portions of Sections 35 and 26,Township 5 South, Range 11 West,in the Rancho La Bolsa
Chica and Rancho Las Bolsas in the City of Huntington Beach,County or Orange,State of Califor-
nia, as shown on a map recorded in Book 51, page 13 of Miscellaneous Maps in the Office of the
County Recorder of said County described as follows:
Beginning at the southeast corner of said Section 26;
thence South 89' 54'23"West 1320.10 feet along the south line of said section,said south line also
being the centerline of Talbert Avenue, to the True Point of Beginning;
thence North 00'01' 16'East 50 feet to a line parallel with and 50 feet north measured at right angles
from the centerline of Talbert Avenue;
thence along said mentioned parallel line North 89' 54'23'East 8W feet to the intersection with a
line parallel with 10.00 feet east,measured at right angles from the east line of Lot No.3,Block C of
Tract No. 172 as shown on a map recorded in Book 12,page 21,of Miscellaneous Maps in the office
of the County Recorder of said County;
thence along said mentioned parallel line South 0°5'37"East 300 feet to a point on a curve concave
easterly having a radius of 273.00 feet;
thence southerly along said curve through a central angle of 15°33'49'an arc distance of 74.00 feet
to a point on a tangent reverse curve concave westerly having a radius of 327.00 feet,a radial to said
point bears North 74' 20' 34' East;
thence southerly along said reverse curve through a central angle of 15° 33' 49'an arc distance of
88.82 feet to a line parallel with and 32 feet east measured at right angles from the west line of Lot
No. 82, Block C,of said mentioned Tract No. 172;
thence southerly along last said mentioned parallel line South 0° 05'37'East 249 feet to the inter-
section with the easterly prolongation of the north boundary line of Tract No.8197 as shown on a
map recorded in Book 452,page 44 of Miscellaneous Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of
said County;
thence along said mentioned prolongation and northerly line South 89*55'44'West 822 feet to the
west boundary line of said Tract No. 8197;
thence along said west boundary line South 0°01'16"West690 feet to the south right-of-way line of
Taylor Drive, a street being 60 feet in width, 30 feet either side of centerline;
thence along said south right-of-way line South 89'56'05'West660 feet to the intersection with the
southerly prolongation of the east line of Parcels Nos.7-10 as shown on a map filed in Book 79,page
15 of Parcel Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said County;
thence along said prolongation and east line North 0° 01' 15'East 1014 feet to a line parallel with
and 335 feet south measured at right angles from the centerline of Talbert Avenue;
thence along last said mentioned parallel line North 89° 56'37'East 660 feet to the west line of
Tract No. 172;
thence along said west line North 0' 01' 16' East 335 feet to the True Point of Beginning.
HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Subarea 4
(formerly Yorktown-Lake Redevelopment Project Area)
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
YORKTOWN-LANE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
That portion of Section 2,Township 6 South, Range 11 West, in the Rancho La Bolsas, in the
City of Huntington Beach, County or Orange, State of California, as shown on a map recorded
in Book 51, page 14 of Miscellaneous Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of said
County described as follows:
Beginning at the centerline intersection of Yorktown Avenue and Main Street;
thence west along said centerline of Yorktown 60 feet to the west line of Main Street;
thence along said west line North 50 feet to the westerly extension of the north line of
Yorktown Avenue, said point being the True Point of Beginning;
thence along said mentioned north line East 420 feet to a curve concave southwesterly having
a radius of 850 feet;
thence easterly and southeasterly along said curve thru a central angle of 38° 14' 40" an arc
distance of 567 feet to a reverse curve concave northeasterly having a radius of 750 feet; a
radial to said point bears North 380 14' 40' East;
thence along said reverse curve southeasterly and easterly thru a central angle of 35' 46' 09"
an arc distance of 455 feet to the intersection with the east line of a 40 foot wide strip of land
shown on the map of said'Fact No. 12 recorded in Book 9, page 13 of Miscellaneous Maps in
the Office of the Orange County Recorder as S.P.R.R. right-of-way;
thence South 1054 feet along said east line to the easterly extension of the southerly line of
Utica Street being 60 feet in width, 30 feet either side of centerline;
thence West 1383 feet along said easterly extension, southerly line and its westerly extension
r of Utica-Street to the most westerly line of Main Street as shown on said mentioned map of
Tract No, 12;
thence North 1396 feet along said west line to the True.Point of Beginning.
• r.
I-iUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Subarea 5
(formerly Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area)
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
That portion of Huntington Beach, County of Orange, State of California as shown on a map
recorded in Boole 3, page 36.of Miscellaneous Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of
said County described as follows:
Beginning at the center line intersection of Pacific Coast Highway and Lake Street shown as
Ocean Avenue and First Street respectively on said mentioned map;
thence along the center line of Pacific Coast Highway South 48' 21' 42' East 37.50 feet to the
intersection with the southwesterly extension of the southeast line of Lake Street;
thence along said mentioned extension South 41° 38' 18' West 50 feet to the True Point of
Beginning, said point being distant Southeast 48' 21' 42' East 1655 feet along the southwest
line of Pacific Coast Highway to the intersection with the southwesterly extension of the
northwest line of Sixth Street;
thence continuing South 41° 38' 18" West 525 feet more or less along said extension to the
High Tide Line of the Pacific Ocean;
thence northwesterly 910 feet more or less along said High Tide Line to a line parallel with and
35 feet southeasterly measured at right angles from the southwesterly extension of the line of
Main Street as shown on said Map of Huntington Beach;
thence along said mentioned parallel line 41° 38' 18' West 1470 feet to a line parallel with and
60 feet southwesterly, measured at right angles from the southwesterly end of the Huntington
Beach Municipal Pier;
thence North 48 21 42 West 145 feet alongsaid ase!!el line to a line parallel with and 35 feet
P
northwesterly measured at right angles, from the southwesterly extension of the northwest line
of Main Street
thence North 41° 38' 18' East 1470 feetto`the,High Tide Line of the Pacific Ocean
thence northwesterly 600 feet more or less along said High Tide Line to the southwesterly,
extension of the northwest line of Sixth Street;
thence along said extension and northwest line of Sixth Street North 41° 38' 18' East 10351feet
more or less to the intersection with the northeast line of Walnut Avenue, being 60 feet in
width, 30 feet either side of center line, said point being distant North 41° 38' 18" East along
said northwest line 510 feet from the southwest line of Pacific Coast Highway,
thence along said northeast line of Walnut Avenue South 48' 21'42" East 1330 feet to an angle
point in said line, said point also being on the southeast line of Second Street being 60 feet in
width, 30 feet either side of center line;
thence continuing along said northeast line South 10' 09' 04' East 414 feet to the southeast
line of Lake Street;
thence along said southeast line South 41' 38' 18" West 254 feet to the True Point of
Beginning.
EXHIBIT C
PUBLIC FACILITIES AND
INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECTS
a
� d ,
L'
9f`
a'
I
I HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
r Subarea 5
(formerly Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area)
i
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
MAIN-PIER REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
PROJECT AMENDMENT NO. 1
A parcel of land situated partially in Sections 10, 11, 12, 13, 14,Township 6 South, Range II West,
San Bernardino base and meridian,County of Orange,State of California.Said parcel being more
particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the intersection of section corners, Sections 11, 12, 13 and 14,
thence North 89' 37' 06" East 20 feet to the True Point of Beginning;
thence South 0' 40' 00' East 1,320.00 feet to the point;
thence South 89' 43' 00" West 1,955.76 feet to a point;
thence North 0' 43' 15' West 1,350.04 feet to a point;
thence South 89' 43' 00" West 670.00 feet to a point;
thence North 0° 00' 11' West 2,640.00 to a point;
thence North 89' 58' 15' West 262.10 feet to a point;
thence South 0° 00' 00" East 294.10 feet to a point;
thence North 89' 57' 13' West 375.15 feet to a point;
thence South 41' 38' 18' West 419.76 feet to a point;
thence South 48' 21' 42' East 190.00 feet to a point;
thence South 41' 38' 18'West 1880.00 feet to a point;
thence North 48' 21' 42'West 15.00 feet to a point;
thence South 41° 38' 18'West 125.00 feet to a point;
thence North 48' 21' 42' West 750.00 feet to a point;
thence North 45' 12' 51' West 400.66 feet to a point;
thence North 48" 21' 42' West 4255.00 feet to a point;
thence South 41' 38' 50'West 326.00 feet to a point;
thence South 46' 30' 00' East 5,628.00 feet to a point;
thence North 41' 38' 18' East 990.00 feet to a point;
thence South 48' 21' 42' East 1,330.00 feet to a point;
thence South 10' 09' 04' Fast 414.00 feet to a point;
thence North 41' 38' 18'West 690.00 feet to a point;
thence South 52' 54' 19'East 4,618.03 feet to a point;
thence North 0° 40' 00'West 1,947.92 feet to a point;
thence North 89' 36' 56' East 469.56 feet to a point;
thence North 0° 40'00'West 2,029.66 feet to a point;
thence South 89° 37' 06' West 469.56 feet to a point;
thence South 0' 40'00' East 50.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning.
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project
Redevelopment Plan
PROPOSED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND FACILITY, HOUSING
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
Programs and Projects Proposed Possible Implementation Activities
PUBLIC FACILITY PROGRAMS Develop community facilities that meet the needs of the community's
residents.
Branch Library Complete construction of a branch library.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Protect residential neighborhoods to enhance public safety and provide
PROGRAMS positive community development opportunities.
Neighborhood Plan Review plan and update recommendations as appropriate.
Community Services Police Assistance Continue assistance program for gang prevention in Project Area.
Operation LOGOS Continue youth employment neighborhood cleanup program in Project Area.
COMMERCIAL. Revitalize deteriorating acid substandard commercial facilities.
REHABILITATION/ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
Huntington Beach Mall . Prepare a market and development strategy with the mall owner and facilitate
repositioning of the Mall.
The Waterfront jmpiement and monitor terms of development agreement, as they currently_ exist
or may be subsequently amended.
New Development/Construction v .,Encourage Project Area private development to recycle blighted properties, and
4dentify sites with the potential for consolidation for redevelopment.
Commercial Leasing Cooperate and assist in leasing of commercial/office space in Project Area.
Rehabilitation Assist property owners with renovations and other improvements to deteriorating
commercial and industrial properties in the Project Area,
Planning Activities Prepare and implement downtown parking master plan, downtown specific plan,
Pacific Coast Highwayllst Street property master plan, and other plans to
coordinate development in.Project Area.
Rmenow Spe—Ick Group,Inc.
Prelipt projcas(2) IM0196
Huntington Beach Redevelopment Project
Redevelopment Plan
PROPOSED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT,AND FACILITY, HOUSING
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENtT PROJECTS
Programs and Projects Proposed Possible Implementation Activities
HOUSING PROGRAMS Increase and improve the community's supply of housing affordable to
very low, low, and moderate income households
Affordable Housing Development Projects Assist development of single-family, multi-fami€y, and senior housing inside and
outside the Project Area pursuant to housing requirements.
Housing Code Enforcement Program ,Continue program throughout Project Area.
Housing Rehabilition Program Continue program throughout Project Area.
INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMS Improve pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular traffic flows, upgrade utilities
and.drainage systems,Anhance public safety,.and promote recreational
opportunities.
Public Infrastucture in Talbert-Beach area Monitor maintenance requirements of public infrastructure.
Storm Drain Improvements in O_ akview Complete storm drain improvements.
Street Improvements -Oakview Area
Complete improvements to streets, street lights, alleys, and landscape. -
Center Avenue
Complete construction of Center Avenue street improvements and traffic signal,
and improvements to signage and landscaping at the Huntington Beach Mall.
Interstate 405
Improve 1-405 off-ramp access to Huntington Center. Improve 1-405 cloverleaf
landscaping and widen McFaddenl1-405 overpass.
Edinger Avenue Street Alignment
Seek adoption of the specific plan and construction of street improvements,
including consolidation of ingress/egress points, unified signage and
landscaping.
Gothard Street and Hoover Street Connection
Construct street improvements to connect Gothard and Hoover Streets to create
another north-south arterial alleviate traffic congestion on other north-south
arterials.
Rosen Spevacek Group,Inc.
Prr.lrn Prnirrw f71 t0110l9fi
EXHIBIT D
OAKVIEW PUBLIC ACQUISITION MAP
k
FIGURE 1
82 Oakview Redevelopment Plan
PROJECT AREA MAP*
WARNER AVE.
FIR DWVIE
AREA EXEMPY FROM
BELSfTO DR. ACQUISITION FROM
EMINENT DOMAIN
OAKVIEW GlFRE55AY� ...:
PARK CYPRESS AVE. :.
N yy y� F- K
W
V O N
z a g
>.
m
s
v
OAKV3Ew hAANDRELI pR. rT+o.af
Sa+oa
w
z N
NOf p YJ1!
� BARTON DR.
O
z z
3
r z z
� OU LfL
J11
u
SLATER AVE.
'This map has been graphically enhanced.
The map originally adopted is
available upon request
Res. No. 278
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF ORANGE )
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH )
I, CONNIE BROCKWAY, Clerk of the Redevelopment Agency of
the City of Huntington Beach, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the
foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the Redevelopment Agency of the City
of Huntington Beach at an adjourned regular meeting of said Redevelopment
Agency held on the 21st day of October, 1996 and that it was so adopted by the
following vote: .
AYES- Members:
Harman, Leipzig, Bauer, Sullivan, Dettloff, Green, Garofalo
NOES: Members:
None
ABSENT: Members:
None
Clerk of the'Redevelopment Agency
of the City-of Huntington Beach, Ca.
G/reso1uti/resbkpg2