Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCalifornia Coastal Commission - Hold Harmless Agreement - Ac (2) INDEMNIFICATION, DEFENSE, HOLD HARMLESS The CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ("CITY") hereby agrees to protect, defend, indemnify and hold and save harmless the CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION, its officers, and employees against any and all liability, claims, judgments, costs and demands, however caused, including those resulting from death or injury to CITY employees and agents of the CITY and damage to CITY property and property of CITY' s agents directly or indirectly out of the obligations or operations herein undertaken by CITY, but save and except those which arise out of the active concurrent negligence, sole negligence, or the sole willful misconduct of the CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION. CITY will conduct all defense at its sole cost and expense. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the (-'4 day of !/[ , 1990 . i Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: dL -:-, -, GM „- CityClerk 1 .2-qe City torne ,;1.� 77y4) REVIEWED AND APPROVED: INITIATED AND APPROVED: ( PL /1, 1" City Administrator Director of Community Development REQUES i FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION Date August 6 , 1990 Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrate f A Prepared by: Michael Adams , Director of Community Developm:L ! Subject: AGREEMENT AND ACCEPTANCE OF SPECIAL CONDITION #1 ASSUMPTION OF RISK AS REQUIRED BY THE COASTAL COMMISSIONS APPROVAL OF PIER RECONSTRUCTION / APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL Consistent with Council Policy? [v1 Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception 1 �� Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions,Attachments: K5Z_.. 0-b_,CITY CLERK STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Transmitted for your consideration is a hold harmless agreement which states that the City of Huntington Beach accepts and agrees to an assumption of risk as required by the California Coastal Commission RECOMMENDATION: Motion to "Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the attached hold harmless agreement" . ANALYSIS: On July 12, 1990, the California Coastal Commission approved the City' s request to demolish the existing pier and build a new pier . As part of the approval, the California Coastal Commission has required the City to hold the Commission and Staff harmless from the liability associated with the demolition, construction, maintenance, operation or failure of the project . Staff has reviewed the requirement and recommends that the City Council authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the hold harmless agreement so that the pier project may proceed on schedule . FUNDING SOURCE: Not Applicable ALTERNATIVE ACTION: The City Council may modify the hold harmless agreement as desired . ATTACHMENTS: 1 . Hold Harmless Agreement 2 . Coastal Commission Staff Report dated July 12 , 1990 . MA/RLF/lp ! ( (6526d) oin tz/Qm I INDEMNIFICATION, DEFENSE, HOLD HARMLESS The CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ( "CITY" ) hereby agrees to protect, defend, indemnify and hold and save harmless the CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION, its officers, and employees against any and all liability, claims, judgments , costs and demands, however caused, including those resulting from death or injury to CITY employees and agents of the CITY and damage to CITY property and property of CITY' s agents directly or indirectly out of the obligations or operations herein undertaken by CITY, but save and except those which arise out of the active concurrent negligence, sole negligence, or the sole willful misconduct of the CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION. CITY will conduct all defense at its sole cost and expense . PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of , 1990 . Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: dc---;-t)e.L.L;-=7) City Clerk �J/76 7-zy l�...Q City torney��' 7./y_C�0 �i, REVIEWED AND APPROVED: INITIATED AND APPROVED: fl ,(1c., City Administrator Director of Community Development 47—mfat STATE OF CALIFORNIA—THE RESOURCES AGENCY O GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor " • CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION Filed: June 8, 1990 SOUTH COAST AREA 49th Day: July 28, 1990 �g 245 WEST BROADWAY, SUITE 380 180th Day: Decem P. 5, 1990 LONG BEACH, CA 90802 (213) 590-5071 Staff: V. Komie 1 Staff Report: June 25, 1990 Hearing Date: July 10-13, 1990 Commission Action: STAFF REPORT: REGULAR CALENDAR APPLICATION NO. : 5-90-490 APPLICANT: City of Huntington Reach/Public Works AGENT: PROJECT LOCATION: South of Pacific Coast Highway, terminus of Main Street, Huntington Beach PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Demolish pier and structures , construct concrete pier of approximately same size (54,000 sq . ft. beyond the mean high tide line) , 1 ,830 linear feet in length in total (approx . 1 ,400 linear feet beyond the MHTL) in same location. The height of the pier deck is proposed at 38 feet above Mean lower Low Water level . Lot area : NA Building coverage: 54,000 sq. ft. Pavement coverage: NA Landscape coverage: NA Parking spaces : 0 Zoning: NA Plan designation: NA Project density: NA Ht ahv fin grade: 38 ft. above MI1W at pier end I OCAI_ APPROVAI S RECEIVED: Huntington Reach AIC SUBSTANTIVE FTI.E DOCUMENTS: Huntington Reach I CP SUMMARY OF STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval with condition for assumption of risk. -, 5-90-490(City of Huntington H ' h) Page 2 - STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the Commission adopt the following resolution: T . Approval with Conditions . The Commission hereby grants a permit, subject to the conditions below, for the proposed development on the grounds that the development will be in conformity with the provisions of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act of 1976, will not prejudice the ability of the local government having jurisdiction over the area to prepare a local Coastal Program conforming to the provisions of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act, and will not have any significant adverse impacts on the environment within the meaning of the California Fnvironmental Quality Act.. II . Standard Conditions . 1 . Notice of Receipt and Acknowledgment . The permit is not valid and development shall not commence until a copy of the permit, signed by the permittee or authorised agent , acknowledging receipt of the permit and acceptance of the terms and conditions , is returned to the Commission office. 2. Expiration . If development has not commenced , the permit will expire two years from the date this permit is reported to the Commission. Development shall he pursued in a diligent manner and completed in a reasonable period of time. Application for extension of the permit must he made prior to the expiration date. 3. Compliance. All development must occur in strict compliance with the proposal as set forth in the application for permit, subject to any special conditions set forth below. Any deviation from the approved plans must he reviewed and approved by the staff and may require Commission approval . 4. Interpretation. Any questions of intent or interpretation of any condition will he resolved by the Fxecutive Director or the Commission. 5 . Inspections . The Commission staff shall he allowed to inspect the site and the project during its development, subject to 74-•hour advance notice. 6. Assignment.. The permit may he assigned to any qualified person , provided assignee files with the Commission an affidavit accepting all terms and conditions of the permit. 7. Terms and Conditions Run with the land . These terms and conditions shall he perpetual , and it is the intention of the Commission and the permittee to hind all future owners and possessors of the subject property to the terms and conditions . •A 5- 490(City of Huntington Beach; Page 3 III. Special Conditions 1 . Public Agency Assumption of Risk Prior to issuance of permit, the City shall submit, for review and approval by the Fxecutive Director, a signed document which provides that the applicant understands that the site may he subject to extraordinary hazards from waves during storms and floods and the applicant assumes the liability from those hazards; the applicant indemnify and hold harmless the California Coastal Commission, its officers , agents, and employees against any and all claims, demands, damages , costs, expenses of liability arising out of the acquisition, design, location, construction, operation, maintenance, existence, or failure of the permitted project. IV. Findings and Declarations : The Commission hereby finds and declares: A. Project Description: The City of Huntington Reach proposes to demolish and reconstruct the Municipal Pier. The sire will he approximately the same as the existing pier (54,000 sq. ft. beyond the mean high tide line) with a length of 1 ,830 linear feet in total with approximately 1 ,400 linear feet beyond the mean high tide line. Some design changes to accommodate slightly different configurations of the commercial developments to he placed on the pier are proposed . And a 10 percent increase in deck area is proposed. This application is for the pier structure only, development of the commercial facilities will need an amendment to this permit or separate permits for individual facilities . The height above Mean lower low Water will he 13 feet higher than the existing pier to a height of 38 feet above MIIW at the pier end. The proposed pier will use concrete as the building material . The proposed project is located at the terminus of Main Street, seaward of Pacific Coast Highway. The City of Huntington Reach has a certified Local Coastal Program and issues most of their Coastal Development Permits , however, part of the proposed project is below the mean high tide line and therefore is in the original jurisdiction area of the Coastal Commission. This requires a project to he evaluated and approved by the Commission. The City has approved a CDP for the part of the pier landward of the mean high tide line. land Use Designation for the pier is Visitor Serving Commercial . B. Hazards: Section 30253 of the Coastal Act states in part: New development shall : (1) Minimise risks to life and property in areas of high geologic, flood , and fire hazard. _5-90-490(City of Huntington Be-") Page 4 (2) Assure stability and structural integrity, and neither create nor contribute significantly to erosion, geologic instability, or destruction of the site or surrounding area or in any way require the construction of protective devices that would substantially alter natural landforms along bluffs and cliffs. (5) Where appropriate, protect special communities and neighborhoods which, because of their unique characteristics, are popular visitor destination points for recreational uses. Projects located in or near the water have the potential for damage from wave impact. This project also is located in a flood plain which has the potential for damage to life and property. The Coastal Act has policies that require projects to minimi7e risk to life and property in areas of high hazard. 1 . Wave Hazard The existing pier has been closed to the public since July 1988 as it is considered too deteriorated and unsafe. Age and wave damage are the principal causes of the original piers poor condition. Rather than repair, the City is proposing to replace the pier. The main design change proposed for the replacement structure is the elevation of the seaward end 13 feet higher than the original to a height of 38 feet above Mean lower low Water. The FIR states that this rise in height will "minimi7e the potential structural and related safety ha7ards associated wit.h storm wave crest elevations and overtopping related damage. " 7. Flood Hazard The pier, both proposed and existing, is located in a special flood hazard area with the potential for inundation by a 100-year flood . it is in a zone which has a velocity ha7ard to an elevation of 11 feet above MLLW. The City has received a variance in order to build the habitable structures (commercial ) on the proposed pier beyond the mean high tide line in a flood plain. Although the habitable structures themselves are not part of the application, the City felt that evaluating the ha7ard was appropriate because the building envelopes (locations and allowable total square footage) are part of the project. The main reasons stated in the findings for approval of the variance were the provision of visitor serving commercial and recreational facilities; and that no increases to public safety will he created. As stated above, the end of the pier is located at e.lvation 38 feet above MI LW, which is 77 feet above the predicted flood ha7ard level . Although the project seems to he adequately designed for the potential hazards from flood and wave impacts, no project in the water-can he said to be guaranteed to he safe from hazard . The pier has been damaged and repaired several times since it was built in 1914, indicating that a pier at this location is vunerahle to wave ha7ard . The latest damage occured in 1988. The Commission has commonly imposed a condition for assumption of risk in areas of high risk from ha7ard, in order to insure that the applicant understands and assumes the risk involved in the proposed development. Because this project has the potential hazards associated with development in or near the water, the applicant shall , as a condition of approval submit an assumption of risk agreement. Therefore, as conditioned for an assumption risk and having an adequate design , the Commission finds the project to he consistent with section 30753 of the Coastal Act for minimi7ing risk to life and property in high flood hazard areas . 90-490(City of Huntington Be, ) • Page 5 i . 3. Special Communities The Coastal Act protects special communities or attractions which are popular visitor-serving recreational facilities because of their unique characteristics . The existing pier was placed on the National Registar of Historic Places in August 1989. The pier is significant under National Registar criterion because it is "distinctive, and perhaps rare, example of early reinforced concrete marine structures in the United States, and . . .as a structure that is locally significant for its place in the history of community development. " Locally, the pier is considered a landmark and a magnet for community use .and development. Controversy regarding whether the pier should he rehabilitated or demolished and rebuilt existed during the planning and approval stages . Only some form of rehabilitation is considered to be true preservation of a historic structure. However, the cost and time involved to rehabilitate versus rebuild were considered to he prohibitive by the City, particularly since the expected lifetime of the rehabilitated pier would only he 20 years versus 75 years for a new structure. The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 provides for situations where the historic property cannot he fully preserved. Documentation and reconstruction are two of the historic preservation techniques approved by the Act . The City has acted by resolution to add a Statement of Overiding Consideration to the FiR that states that the benefits provided by the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse impacts of demolishing a National Registar Historic Structure. The City is proposing to "recreate" to the extent possible the appearance and functions of the original pier. The existing pier had visitor-serving facilities, including restaurants of varying price ranges and recreational facilities such as fishing and sightseeing. The proposed pier will have these facilities when fully complete. Several conditions of approval regarding the reconstruction were required by the City, primary among them was "The project design shall include reconstruction of the pier to as exact as possible as to form and detail of the original structure, as approved by the City Council " . Ways of accomplishing this include preserving original elements, such as ornamental balustrades, maintaining the types and sizes of the original commercial establishments , placing the pier in the same location and designing the structure to look the same. The City' s approval in concept includes approval of the square footage of the proposed commercial uses (equal to the previous uses 6,370 square foot total) and the same approximate locations. As stated before, this permit is not for the commercial buildings planned, just the locations and the maximum square footage allowed . Review and approval by the Planning Commission and the Coastal Commission would be required for any location or sire changes. Separate permits will he required for the eventual development of the commercial structures. Mitigation for historical losses include; a detailed and comprehensive textual and pictorial historical documentary of the pier and memorialiration of the pier's history by means such as plaques . Because the applicant will be recreating the existing structure in both appearance and function and mitigating for the historical losses the community and visitors will be served with an adequate facsimile. Therefore, the Commission finds the project as submitted is consistent with section 30253 of the Coastal Act for preserving a unique visitor-serving recreational community/area . ^0-490(City of Huntington Bea'- Page 6 C. Habitat Preservation: Section 30230 of the Coastal Act states: Marine resources shall he maintained, enhanced, and where feasible, restored , Special protection shall he given to areas and species of special biological or economic significance. Uses of the marine environment shall he carried out in a manner that will sustain the biological ,productivity of coastal waters and that will maintain healthy populations of all species of marine organisms adequate for long-term commercial , recreational , scientific; and educational purposes . The proposed project has the potential to adversely effect the marine resources on and near the existing pier. The local biota consists primarily of sandy intertidal species and pier habitat species . Shorebirds feed nearby. The Department of Fish and Game in a comment letter to the NOP for the Draft FiR stated concerns relating to California grunion spawning and Pismo clams . The FIR states that grunion avoid lighted areas as spawning ground , so that the areas around the pier would not he prime spawning ground. However, during construction the beach areas will he disturbed and the potential loss of the spawning area would he considered adverse hut insignificant. Short-term impacts on Pismo clams are considered to he adverse, but insignificant also. Two rare, endangered or threatened bird species (California least tern and California brown pelican) may he dispersed from the feeding area near the pier during construction. This is also considered to he a short -term adverse, but insignificant impact. The only long-term impact of the pier reconstruction on the hiotic communities is expected to he a 5 to 10 year time span to recoloni7e the pier and surrounding suhtidal areas to the current levels. Mitigation measures include removal of the existing pilings in a manner to facilitate habitat restoration, increasing the surface area of the pilings and maintaining the artificial fishing reefs adjacent to the pier to facilitate habitat restoration for sport fishing. This recoloni7ation time span is not considered significant. No permanent adverse impacts are expected from the project. As stated above, the main impacts of the project on the marine environment/ habitat are short-term and insignificant, and the long-term impacts are mitigated and will he insignificant. Because the proposed project is in all important aspects essentially the same as the existing pier, within a relatively short time span the local species communities should reestablish themselves . Therefore, the Commission finds the project as proposed with mitigations regarding habitat restoration consistent with section 30230 of the Coastal Act for protecting and maintaining marine resources . D. Public Access : Section 30710 of the Coastal Act states that maximum public access and recreational opportunities he provided . '. _ )-490(City of Huntington Beac , Page 7 Section 30213 of the Coastal Act states in part that ; Lower cost visitor and recreational facilites shall he protected, encouraged,and, where feasible, provided . Developments providing public recreational opportunites are preferred . The Coastal Act encourages lower -cost visitor and recreational facilities . Public recreational facilities have preference. Historically, the Huntington Beach Municipal Pier has provided recreational opportunities and visitor— serving commercial facilities . The reconstructed pier will have similar facilities when the project is complete. • The commercial structures , including restaurants and a bait and tackle shop, will he set back from the edge of the pier in order to provide a continuous public walkway along the perimeter of the pier. The buildings will not cover more than 75 percent of the surface or he at no more than 75 percent of the perimeter. The commercial structures will he located on areas of the pier which are wider than the 30 foot wide walkway. Provisions for fishing off of the pier include fish cleaning areas and abundant rail area . The length of the pier is approximately 1/4 mile, which will provide strolling opportunities and other passive recreational activities such as ocean watching. No auto traffic will he allowed on the pier. The proposed pier will allow a lost public recreational opportunity to reestablish. Most of the activities which will he available once the project is completed, will he low -cost, a high priority of the Coastal Act. Therefore, the Commission finds the proposed project as submitted is consistent with sections 30710 and 30213 of the Coastal Act for maximizing public access and providing lower"-co^t visitor and recreational facilities. F. Local Coastal Program: The City of Huntington Beach has a fully certified local Coastal Program. The project before the Commission is in the original jurisdiction area , over which the Commission retains permitting authority. Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act is the standard of review for original jurisdiction areas . 53320 • / �1.; a�� / `/ /// ,,. , . I ;/. ANKroais`J• -uu r=.-.� / --_.._... I - 1 • 0, - `. t._ it„ ;•�• 1 :� ' 516;; V :1 E IDISTRI�I II I '. .. ee ./ , 4,.--...,..,::,-_-- rIF.t`.i (. '' ((yy tig (12 rM.L1_Hort 1__ _ 1 7.i:J. ...0 0.! . • \ .4re,,V4 L I - IMS0 0 IVor AA. 111*,., •♦ �.� ),e ' t• 70.♦ \ RCN CAc9� .�.. - io, 4S 4. .. AV*,\,,,,(1;" D•• : ir# IC>o, sit, 004. SW* . At,.** % `9T�fi.,e O • 4. \ '` i berm-a-rn •[a-ro-crrn ::.'J qi:?: ''. liOt4F. ..0V.• . tlf:] ; . '•.,..,.•it„: ref..:.. ! /..46:,z,t, ..„,,,F-- .. • v / . l Jt 1'v'uRJ1rQG1-;: ",, 1. ••S> 4" -••..N410i '44'":• •• owN -.-: ,FIC poZ,: .'60 j i 1,-.4?;;Z:-----A0 ' / 1. ~b.Ci • ♦� ��///' DIST'ICI NBa `{ 1•:�+�. R2-PD-CZ-FP2 m : 0 e/ ,- , ,,, / "1 - �; �♦♦�:♦ //V. 1 i R2_pD C2 R2-PD-CZ-ini l / •�i 4 i 4• CY" \ +c ✓�. '♦'♦'. aY s,, Ai.yr � \� r.�_��L. .-.xmwrr-_•••- /�/c `_��rV ♦♦♦�♦♦i.STR/CT c/�/�•�l /'�•H�': �Y R2-PD- — \ RZ-PD-Cr 1 t ? `. r • - H,VY ./: .A/ -D co- MMTOMM SPECIFlC PLAN • . 1 • N1.A el Ip1 or `\ OAN(1 1),„ I .I ss CfA4 J /u / r t , hsi ,� •". -n/�///i. a m G `; c _ ‘I'" o =� UP89-52/CDP89-29/FV90-01/EIR89-08 AI ..CIO '.' Vt0.;..git, • •.. w z Z • Al n NUMM/GTON MACH 3 Q HUNTINGTON BEACH PLANNING DIVISION , • i t . . . '. ,',,, , ‘, , _. ,.-.., . _. :,,.. ',l IR • 1 . . • - - • I >F g • - • tS° 1d F i b m k s a 3 = i li o . W- 1 79 7 Fe. m Z O - TIL r0 7 < • i z ` 8-1 -- �_ig9g: Ygrigr i W• • i Z o )i§ , S £ 166id�d gN.I4d gL 5. �^ 1 .-. LL ul < „,:,< "a z px� u O I a .II <hgli�Oa$OhYWWWY§ ' Vim_ Z SI11� 111 • ° ( d _ hi11I 1!i _.� -� � � ���i1J1ij liiji;iJ11 >I II b� .-a1t -. ; . 4 i, !f! 1 * E 9 a.11 ON:::: 7 .11 • 10" • MINIM p--► -- 1 ,'- MIINIM I i' i �$ N-• C i 6 A -•a _ o Q8• 1 J. . 1 ;41 1 0 illgqi 1 g hi ig IN E v wig i. li , thq i 11 it ° 1'7 t $ Y 0D--- „....l III 51" re5 i wd ill w2 14 • • d d .: .a J 'M .JAA ^.I .(• E A v d Y ®-1 • .. li ! 3.it � _ a b €- ♦�� 1 111 T li IIIi ! .I § R ffi� °°V ! - O` , '1 ire; i 6i ;R C I, � ); Z "I 1 %I gligX4g0g i EXHIBIT NO. 2 I. 1 i9; gg.§ 1/1:1 $ ; APPLICATION NO. ) N\.'' . $' 1 ' 4 et Al P S - 90 - 49a `i ; 1 p R. ! I a di jj , S,+e PIR h anh, California Coastal Commission 7] 0 T Q0 SS SD • `( O .• •- -_ I •...•... (KRAL(PIER•.te36.0r O t , ... - !.37--� 2$SCANS 0 24.0'.621.0' t ` a • e.o. 217 .e.o I I '/ I\\ I 1 t e� OP BUILDING I a' II • a �I I \ t ,� I I I I I I I b E---- i, n / I I u I I I MOW.EVACC uTILLTT TREVOI i(I f III I I s;i .1\ I \ SH RUAHILRo TT/S-ELONO MEW-ASS COVERS 1 1. . i / I Y Illi7i1 /�sw+c-TIP. MEAL SEEKER PILE CAPS I �s11.----lkiI \ i III (� 'fY1O1 I I1 I I t — 1 I— —IT T{ 1 I— — {1 — 11y —IT — T rzI�IX,,040.„.11 1 I l 1 I 11 .11 — 11— —1 1 1I1 11...LLLLI�Omq�,�{ai�� =-�_!�... .... ®®�1Y.1�14��tI.1I�-f�. ��1.k \,]IIII L II I1J jry . J ' _ " Af3PA31�s\ 1•,I I . 11„, • I PLATFRRM i I Curie ecv BOAT PILE CAI-TM. CONTINUOUS HAUNCHED I 1 I 1 I/ ACCESS PAwTr EDGE OEM N\ s Il•----1• -LouTtON s ruTUllc I I TOE er MUNE • TLAN • I_ _I RES2$C I eCIIDINO I I RESTALIRAUT tuILDeO I ..10 u . • • • O p 7. ED fur. © uera air now Ilte afar ar© fw ©ar r-r0 r-re\ r..•. r-re` r-.•i r-rs .� EINESPEMEIN . -t a rrY-O' T N Vr* Y-r•1 \ r sr-N!/r0 r-r 1 ,��r-r rr-HI;Ali r-r11 •. -- - • f+ O PILE CAP f TWILL III es RRAaRs 1 C III i es MOILR T1TRUa •DECK MEMO-TT►. ' • ItC [LLVA SQUTH . ELEVATION S—E ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION TION OPO4R NNIO N-V•ELEVATION SMEAR VEST ELEVATION SH&AR NORTH t SOUTH ELEVATORS OPP091E NANO m Tf faor Me © utaCD CD NEO RRAMA toir© 21.r 24.r 21.r �al_I r 7 e(LPA Nil a EaI zuptimaimaigisisaix i• 4.,,,P4 ):. ri, 3111AOUE TTPRAL ' --- II • I III „ i; lr$JJI TfRerL III III 1 X YAT1oN ► PARTIAL S—E ELEVATION (APPROACH) N-W ELLVAVCN OPPOSITE HAND PAR71AL S—E ELEVATION (APPROACH) 0 r = OP►Op1t lima APPROAOIES S1114AR OR OPP09TE NANO _ "�a _c _ATFORM 4 ELEVATIONS PLATFORM 3 ELEVATIONS ye--t•-O• 1/e--t'-O A _ 0 REFERENCES .... DECK PLAN - BENT 50 TO BENT 78 O Si .(Z Z PLATFORM ELEVATIONS - u S Z O CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH fat to e i 30 . - 0 -- " Snmr►rar enr,... eVAIAON CIe..uc oaf • • INDEMNIFICATION, DEFENSE, HOLD HARMLESS The CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ( "CITY") hereby agrees to protect, defend, indemnify and hold and save harmless the CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION, its officers, and employees against any and all liability, claims, judgments, costs and demands, however caused, including those resulting from death or injury to CITY employees and agents of the CITY and damage to CITY property and property of CITY' s agents directly or indirectly out of the obligations or operations herein undertaken by CITY, but save and except those which arise out of the active concurrent negligence, sole negligence, or the sole willful misconduct of the CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION. CITY will conduct all defense at its sole cost and expense. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the day of , 1990 . Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: (::Kde4r3/7 - // City Clerk City Attorney64paqaQ4d 7-21-9a REVIEWED AND APPROVED: INITIATED AND APPROVED: City Administrator Director of Community Development Otta