Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Mohammed and Adel Zeidan - 1994-05-16
'?"6 (pop - 3.0 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STREET OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CONNIE BROCKWAY CITY CLERK December 19, 1997 Gary L. Granville, County Clerk -Recorder P. 0. Box 238 Santa Ana, CA 92702 CALIFORNIA 92648 Enclosed please find a First Amendment to Owner Participation Agreement between the City of Huntington Beach and Mohammed and Adel Zeidan to be recorded and returned to the City of Huntington Beach, Office of the City Clerk, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, CA 92648. Please return a conformed copy of the agreement when recorded and return to this office in the enclosed self-addressed stamped envelope. &XA'Ct'-4 Connie Brockway, CIVIC City Clerk Enclosures g:Ifollowupldeedltr.First Amendment to OPA Agreement - Zeidan J'reTephon e: 714-536-52271 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STREET OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CONNIE BROCKWAY CITY CLERK CERTIFICATION CALIFORNIA 92648 This is to certify that the interest in real property conveyed by the First Amendment to Owner Participation Agreement dated November 17, 1997 from THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH a public body corporate and politic to Mohammed and Adel Zeidan is hereby accepted by the undersigned officer or agent on behalf of the Agency pursuant to the authority conferred by Resolution No. 76 of the Agency adopted .tune 20, 1983 and the grantee consents to the recordation thereof by its duly authorized officer. Dated: December 19, 1997 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH CONNIE BROCKWAY, CMC CLERK By. eputy Clerk M (telephone- 714.536-52271 ,��I OvrrCr 600 fi'P REQUEST FOR r,,J:CDEVELOPM&TAGE�,,C.Y ACTION ED 9•i-18 Date: May 16. 1994 Submitted to: Honorable Chairman and Redevelopment Agency Members Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, Executive Directo � Prepared by: Barbara A. Kaiser, Redevelopment Director` Subject: Amendment to Owner Participation Agreement for 126 Main Street Nfain-Fier Redevelopment Project Area - • _ Consistent with Council Policy? [XI Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Lk}i'/7ecf. � 51-zlwl4I/ AV'ffVJ eV tan freccrr�irs�daJ /5�*•'or end Statement of Issue: ��r�� �d s f,� p,p pn� n "","n�71,' .n �/ •fJ,� rtJi� iL'QfiG�s nr 8Q74t P 7p�Y ; H / PrtsPi>> ,i, Ct'� nc; .. •tea -9 .�t 4►6te ta4l,.g r4, ^CZ 71, Gw•— c.4Z.:r V ,r r11—.404 410- "L� On February 6, 1989, the Redevelopment Agency entered into an Owner Participation Agreement with the property owners of 126 Main Street for the rehabilitation of their building. At this time, the property owners are requesting their Owner Participation Agreement be amended. Recommendation: 1) Direct staff to negotiate an amendment to the existing Owner Participation Agreement. 2) Direct staff to process a revised Precise Plan of Street Alignment reducing the ultimate right of ,%2y for Walnut Avenue between Main and Third streets from eighty to seventy feet. 3) Direct staff to prepare an amendment for Agency consideration by no Iater than August 1, 1994. 4) Direct the City Attorney to concurrently continue its prosecution for code violations. Fy Analyst On February 6, 1989, the Redevelopment Agency entered into an Owner Participation Agreement with the Adel and Mohammed Zeidan for the rehabilitation of their building located at 126 Main Street (formerly the Standard Market). That Agreement called for the Agency to provide a Rehabilitation Grant in the amount of $83,625 (without the participation of California Resorts). If California Resorts were to participate, as originally envisioned five years ago, they would have contributed an additional $62,500, providing for a maximum grant total of $146,125. California Resorts has since sold their interest in the adjacent Pierside Pavilion complex, and stated that they have no intention of contributing to this project. i�ory- Summer of 1989 - The participants determined that it is was not economically feasible to rehabilitate their existing structure. To qualify as a rehabilitation, they would be required to maintain their existing non -reinforced masonry walls. The participants concluded that the expense of shoring up these walls during construction would be cost prohibitive. City staff then informed the participants that if they demolished and built new, they would be required to dedicate 10 feet on Walnut Avenue and 5 feet on Main Street to comply with the adopted ultimate rights of way, just as the new surrounding developments have done. Fall 1989 - The participants also did not find the option of providing street dedications feasible, and proposed an alternative option. This third option entailed California Resorts purchasing the two, 25 foot lots owned by a third party, located between the Zeidan's parcels and California Resorts property (site map attached). The proposal would have California Resorts acquire the third -party parcel, and sell 10 feet of it to the Zeidan's at a discounted price (subsidized by the Agency), to make up for the 10 feet lost on Walnut . Avenue. California Resorts' architects would design the entire remaining 225 feet of frontage on Main Street so its facade was compatible with the design of the newly constructed Pierside Pavilion development. Agency staff conceptually agreed to the proposal, and committed to supporting it if the participants could agree upon an economically feasible land deal with the third -party parcel owners. After several months of unsuccessful good faith efforts to negotiate for the purchase of the third party parcel, the participants concluded that this option too, was not economically viable. On December 19, 1989, a fire occurred at the subject property, and the participants relocated to a new location for the Standard Market operation. They eventually moved their market (now called Ocean Pacific) to the 200 block of Main Street in the Oceanview Promenade project. 3 _.r Prosecution for Dangerous Building - Beginning in December of 1990, the city's Community Development Director began Noticing the property owners of the potential danger their building posed. He directed them to submit plans for either repairing or demolishing the structure in a timely fashion. Further Notices were sent on; March 15, 1991, January 9, 1992, and a "Final Notice" was issued on March 26, 1992. This Final Notice informed them to either submit drawings to repair the building or to pull a demolition permit within 30 days. The property owners did not perform, as ordered. The matter was referred to the City Attorney's office for further action. The Zeidan's were arraigned on Thursday, June 25, 1992, at West Orange County Municipal Court for violation of Huntington BeaQh Municipal Code, Section 17.12.010 and Uniform Code for Abatement of Dangerous Buildings, Section 302. The court granted a Disposition and Reset scheduled for July 23, 1992. Since that time, there have been at least six additional court appearances, and each time the Zeidan's have successfully obtained an extension. Their next court date is scheduled for June 9, 1994. If the Agency authorizes staff to initiate negotiations as recommended, the City Attorney Office will concurrently prosecute since the existing building poses ongoing exposure to the public. Notification of OPA Default - On October 16, 1992, Agency staff informed the participants that they were in default of their OPA with the Agency. The participants did not respond. On January 8, 1993, staff again notified the participants of their default, and enclosed a draft of a staff report requesting the Redevelopment Agency to take the appropriate actions to terminate their OPA. This Request for Action was never agendized. To date, the primary obstacle that keeps the participants from moving forward with construction of the new building is the requirement to dedicate 10 feet of their 50 foot parcel for widening Walnut Avenue. Recently, however, the participants contracted a traffic engineer to prepare a report which illustrates that with down scaling the development downtown, Walnut Avenue need not be ultimately widened to 80 feet in this location. (Report Attached). Preliminary indications from our Public Works Department is staff concurrence. The location of the participants' property is located at a key corner (Main Street and Walnut Avenue) in the heart of our downtown redevelopment efforts. It is, for this reason, that staff would like to make one last good -faith effort to negotiate a mutually acceptable amendment to the Zeidan's OPA. Hopefully, it will allow them to remove this dangerous and unsightly structure, and promptly rebuild a structure that will complement the surrounding new developments. Funding Source: None required as a result of this action. 3 Alternative Action: 1) Direct Participant to comply with the original OPA and/or Participant to terminate the OPA. Attachments: 1) Staff Report dated February 6, 1989. (w/OPA) 2) Assessor's Parcel Map. 3) Traffic Report dated May 5, 1994 MTU/BAK/KBB:ls zeidan � A VENUE • g ® 3 SITE MAP 1075 1175 75 --- — 28 27—�--— 2 160 q: 18' . --_ 26 25 ti TRACT � 24 23 i J - 24 --- ` -- — 22 21 �� 1175 -1 22 12 vo - - 1° 17 7 11747 N 21 _ C2 % o }7450 79 r R 15 LOT % 1 a PM 20 275—? LL r u710 7EC AC — o� 13 t _ {�� _ N (j) 12 11 19 �� 25 o f 64.� 6 51 4 32 1 0 '`� e I22 8L - i 10# ` 15 4 1 p I 1i 15 Y 114 -Z �� I 12 5J-1 BBAQH ryh� 105. NO. 13722 125 1 « . • . • - i 25, �176. 31>6• too 58 HJGHWA Y o — - ZEIDAN'S PARCEL \ THIRD PARTY PARCEL O - CALIFORNIA RESORTS, PIER INC. PARCEL (Former y) 1 CA cr , "XIVEE-7S s t-I G, ✓ 'v IN c"F --, C 28 T"Is MAP WAS PREPARED FOP ORAN;E �OUA'T v 4SSESSOR DEPT PURPOSES ONLY__ THE ASSESSOR MAKES NO GUARANTEE AS TO iT S ACfL.PACY NOR ASSUMES 4NY LIA31L•T Y rDR OT"ER USES NOT TO 9E REPRODUCED A L R G r "S RESERVED COPYr ;NT ORAN-z COUNTY ASS£SSOY 1993 ASSESSSr*S a ����24 15 REQU,..,ST FOR CITY COU.�AL/ - . REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ACTION RH 88-77 February 6, 1989 Date Submitted to: Honorable Chairman and Redevelopment I dency Members Submitted by: Paul Cook, Executive Director Prepared by: Douglas La Belle, Deputy City Administrator/Economic Developme yt Subject: OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AND MOHAM30D AND ADEL ZE DAN Consistent with Council Policy? Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception &S- *-'rW/ Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachmentx: Transmitted for the Redevelopment Agency's consideration is an Owner Participation Agreement with Mohammed and Adel Zeidan which will provide for the rehabilitation and improvement of property located within the "northeast portion" of the California Resorts Development Plan. Also attached are resolutions which provides for the execution of the Owner Participation Agreement. 1) Adopt City Council Resolution No. and Redevelopment Agency Resolution No. ha, authorizing execution of an Owner Participation Agreement. On June 27, 1988, the Redevelopment Agency entered into a second amended Di.po-:ition and Development Agreement with California Resorts (Developers Phase 1). The agreement provides that the developer will acquire all parcels within the "Project Area;' generally defined as the block bounded by Main Street, Walnut Avenue, Third Street, and PCH. The inclusion of the "northeast portion" along the Maln'Street edge of the development site is optional and requires authorization by existing property owners. The property owners who are the subject of the proposed Owner Participation Agreement (Zeidan) have agreed to sell their property located at 115 Third Stre.-t, and the property . at the corner of Main Street and Walnut Avenue will be retained and rehabilitated. As an incentive to the property owner to rehabilitate this site, the Redevelopment Agency is proposing to provide a rehabilitation grant in the maximum amount of $50,000, for the actual cost of the improvements. Improvements will be subject to design approval of t1 Redevelopment Agency. The property owner will be required to meet current building code and seismic standards for the existing building and any improvements. Further, the parking requirements will be deemed to be met for the existing commercial development only. Any increased space developed will require additional parking solutions. .5 ) The Owner Participation Agreement requires that the property owner maintain the site and all improvements in accordance with reasonable commercial maintenance standards and further agrees that the site shall be devoted to uses specified in the Redevelopment Plan and in the agreement. Residential use is speci"_tally prohibited. The rehabilitation of this property is in keeping with the development proposal included within the second amended Disposition and Development Agreement with California Resorts. California Resorts has agreed to provide an additional $62,500 for rehabilitation of the Zeidan property, bringing the total rehabilitation budget to $112,500. The proposed agreement further states that in the event a commercial rehabilitation grant program is approved for the second block rehabilitation demonstration project, additional rehabilitation funds to be provided will be increased to the level approved for the second block. Based on current projections, this would require an additional $33,625 bringing the total Agency expenditure to $93,625. In the event this subsequent action occurs, we will request an additional appropriation of funds. FUNDING SOURCE: The proposed agreement requires an expenditure not to exceed $83,625 by the Redevelopment Agency. The source of funding is Acct. #812631. ATTACHMENT: 1) Resolutions 2) Site Map 3) Owner Participation Agreement . PEC/DLB:lp 4228h 124-159 -FCO JfLE- TITZF 14 • l6 a. f 9AC I I rs�'. I? AWME �r vs I t�w". v AP* o I 60, Q elk h r.� HWY AJcti GL;z cza • -� IQe c�i� CA Ttg w WAS mEpnO F. N ,41 � � 4� Cou .'TY ASSESSOR OEPT. PI TI'.s Asss MOR " AKES vo G ITS ACCLigACY NON ASSUMI . M OTHER MS. NOT TO t ALL PUGHTS RESERVED. . cCOMGHT oWrE COUNT n I �A RESOLUTION NO. J&/ A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVEL(?MENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH APPROVING THE REHABILITATION AND IMPROVEMENT OF REAL PROPERTY PURSUANT TO AN OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT BY AND AMONG THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AND MOHAMMED AND ADEL ZEIDAN WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of the City or Huntington Beach (the "Agency") is authorized to conduct redevelopment activities within the Main -Pier Redevelopment Project Area (the "Project Area"), which activities include. the rehabilitation and improvement of real property; and The Agency desires to enter into an Owner Participation Agreement (the"Agreement") with Mohammed and Adel Zeidan (the "Participant"), which Agreement provides for the rehabilitation and improvement of certain real property in the Project Area generally situated along Main Street, all as set forth in greater particularity in the Agreement; and The Agency has reviewed the EIR for this project which was certified as being in conformance with CEQA requirements and approved as adequate by the City Council and the Planning Commission. NOW THEREFORE, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby resolve as follows: Section, 1. The Redevelopment Agency finds and determines that EIR 82-2 completed for the Downtown Specific Plan, certified and approved by the City Council in its position as lead agency, is adequate for this project. Section.2. The Redevelopment Agency finds and determines, that based upon the covenants and restrictions established by the -ft--a0.q -1- 1 Agreement, adequate consideration supports the provision of the financial assistance to the Participant. The City Council further finds that the rehabilitation. and ir.provements as provided for.in the Agreement are necessary to effectuate the purpose of the. Redevelopment Plan applicable to the -Project Area. Section 3. The Redevelopment Agency hereby approves the Agreement and all of its provisions, including without limitation, the attachements thereto and authorizes the Chairman of the Agency and the Executive Director to execute all documents referenced in the Agreement and necessary to effectuate the provisions of the Agreement. PASSED AND ADOPTED this _ day of January, 1989. Chairman ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Agency Clerk ( Agency Couns y Special Counsel REVIEWED AND APPROVED: I ITIATED AND APPROVED: Executive Director Di a for of Economic Development ao•5 -2- RESOLUTION NO.�1 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH APPROVING THE REHABILITATION AND IMPROVEMENT OF REAL PROPERTY PURSUANT TO AN OWNER -PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT BY AND AMONG THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AND MOHAMMED AND ADEL ZEIDAN WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Huntington Beach (the "Agency") is authorized to conduct redevelopment activities within the Main --Pier Redevelopment Project Area (the "Project Area"), which activities include the rehabilitation and improvement of real property; and The Agency desires to enter into an Owner Participation Agreement (the "Agreement") with Mohammed and Adel Zeidan (the "Participant"), which Agreement provides for the rehabilitation and improvement of certain real property in the Project Area generally situated along Main Street, all as set forth in greater particularity in the Agreement; and The City Council has reviewed the EIR for this project which was certified as being in conformance with CEQA requirements and approved as adequate by the City Council and the Planning Commission NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. The City Council finds and determines that EIR 82-2 completed for the Downtown Specific Plan, certified and approved by the City Council in its position as lead agency, is adequate for this project. -I- *�Wol Section 2. The City Council finds and determines, based upon the covenants and restrictions established by the Agreement, that adequate consideration supports the provision of financial assistance to the Participant as set forth in the Agreement. The City Council further finds that the rehabilitation and improvements provided for in the Agreement are necessary to effectuate the purpose of the Redevelopment Plan applicable to the Project Area. Section 3. The City Council hereby approves the Agreement and all of its provisions, including without limitation; the attachments thereto and authorizes the Chairman of the Agency and the Executive Director to execute all documents referenced in the Agreement and those which are necessary to effectuate the provisions thereof. PASSED AND ADOPTED this _ day of January, 1989. ATTEST: City Clerk REVIEWED ANri APPROVED: City Administrator Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney -2�- N IATED AND APPRO VED: / f Dir c or of Economic De%;:.opment -2- RECORDING REQUESTED BY ) AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO ) AND MAIL TAX STATEMENTS TO: ) Redevelopment Agency of the ) City of Huntington Beach ) 2000 .Main Street ) Huntington Beach, CA 9264E ) ATTN: I (Space above for Recorder's Use) REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH COMMERCIAL REHABILITATION PROGRAM OWNER PARTICIPATIO14 AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is entered into on this day of 19BB by and between the CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ("Agency") and MOHAMMED and ADEL ZEIDAN ("Participant"). The Agency and the Participant agree as follows: I. (§1001 SUBJECT.OF AGREEMENT A. (51011 Purpose of the Agreement The purpose of this Agreement is to effectuate the' Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") for the Main -Pier Project Area ("Project Area") by providing for the rehabilitation and improvement of a portion.of the Project Area as described herein. The rehabilitation and improvement of said portion of the Project Area pursuant to this Agreement, and the fulfillment generally of this Agreement, are in the best interests of the City of Huntington Beach ("City") and the welfare of its residents, and in accord with the public purposes and provisions of applicable federal, state and local laws and requirements. This Agreement furthers meeting the need to rehabilitate and revitalize commercial properties within the Project Area. B. (§1021 The Plan This Agreement is subject to the provisions of r-i_ i Redevelopment Plan which was approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach by Ordinance No. 2634. U _C�_o 1 9 C. 1§1031 The Site The Site consists of a pai;el of real property located within the Project Area shown on the Development Site Map attached hereto as Exhibit "A", and incorporated herein by this.reference. The Site is currently improved with a commercial building and business operation called Standard Market, with appurtenant parking facilities. The Site is commonly known as 126 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California. D. [§104) Parties to the Agreement 1. 1§1051 ThewAgency The Agency is a public body, corporate and politic, exercising governmental functions and powers, and organized and existing under the Community Redevelopment Law of the State of California. The principal office of the Agency is located at 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648. "Agency", as used in this Agreement, includes any assignee or successor to its rights, powers and responsibilities. 2. [§106] The Participant The Participant is the owner of fee simple title in and to the Site. Whenever the term "Participant" is used herein such term shall include assignees and successors in interest to the Participant. - The principal office of the Participant is located at 18382 Patterson Lane, #1, Huntington Beach, California 92646. II. [62001 AGENCY FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE A. , [§2011 Agency Grant to Participant Subject to the Conditions Precedent to the disbursement Qf Agency Financial Assistance as set forth in Section 202k and as an incentive for Participant to rehabilitate and redevelop the Site and to maintain the entire Site in accordance with the Covenants to be recorded vursuant to this Agreement, which are attached hereto as Exhibit "13" and fully incorporated by this reference, and in consideration thereof, the Agency agrees to grant the Participant an amount not to exceed $112,500 to finance the construction and completion of the Improvements (as that term is defined in Section 301) to the Site (the "Agency Financial Assistance"). E -��O f 12/05/88 1513n/2460/04 -2- �koi �.'f The Agency Financial Assistance shall be disbursed as follows. The first $50,000 of the Agency Financial Assistance shall be disbursed by the %gency to the Participant in periodic payments during the progress and course of construction of the Improvements through an escrow account as released and arranged by the Agency. $50,000 shall be disbursed in the same manner from the Agency to the Participant but only if the Agency receives payment of $50,000 from California Resorts. The Agency has no obligation to disburse this additional $50,000 of the Agency Financial Assistance to the Participant unless and until California Resorts makes a payment of $50,000 to the Agency. An additional $12,500 shall be disbursed at completion of construction of the Improvements provided that the cost of construction of the Improvements requires the additional $12,500;-but only after the Agency receives payment of $12,500 from California Resorts. The Agency Financial Assistance.is and shall be limited to the actual cost of the improvements to the Site and the approved Plans and in no event shall such Agency Financial Assistance exceed $112,500. The amount of the Agency Financial Assistance is the maximum funds available from the Agency to the Participant for rehabilitation of the Site and may be authorized for payment to the Participant so long as the costs are incurred and attributable to the Improvements included in the approved Plans. The Participant may cause improvement to the Site at a cost in excess of the Agency Financial Assistance, but Participant acknowledges and agrees any and all excess costs shall be borne solely by the Participant. However, in the event a Commercial Rehabilitation Grant Program is approved by the City Council, additional Agency Financial Assistance in an amount not to exceed $33,625 may be provided by -the Agency. B. 1§202) Conditions Precedent Prior to and as conditions to the releaze and payment of the Agency Financial Assistance or any portions thereof, the Participant shall complete each of the following: (1) Participant shall remedy, cure and bring up to Uniform Code requirements all violations of the jiuntington Beach Municipal Code, Uniform Building Code, Uniform Housing Code, Uniform Fire Code, and other Uniform Codes adopted by the City and applicable to the Site, including meeting current seismic standards for the existing building avid Improvements on the Site, provided, however, thRL the parking requirement for the existing commerci4i development shall be deemed met; and 12/05/88 1513n/2460/04 -3- W (2) Participant shall obtain all necessary permits, allow inspection of the Site, and proceed to final inspection in completing "se work required by subdivision (1) above and said Code compliance shall be verified through Site inspections by the Agency staff or their designees; and (3) Participant shall have any contract for the construction of the Improvements approved by the Agency prior to execution of such contract by the Participant and its contractor; and (4) Participant shall permit a true copy of this executed Agreement to be recorded with the Official Records of the County of Orange; and (5j Participant shall obtain Agency approval of all Plans; and - (6) Participant shall obtain or have taken all actions precedent.to issuance of the building permits and other permits required by local or state law for the construction of the Improvements; and (7) Participant shall not be in material default under this Agreement. (8) Participant shall sell or cause to be sold to California Resorts Inc., a California corporation, that certain real property owned by..Participant• commonly known as 115 Third Street, Huntington Beach, California. The foregoing items numbered (1) through (8) above collectively are the Conditions Precedent to Agency Financial Assistance. C. [§203) Compliance with Law Participant shall comply with all local, state and federal laws relating to the uses of or condition of any and all improvements on the Site, whether said improvements were constructed a's part of the Commercial Rehabilitation Program, and this Agreement, or as now existing at the Site, or as later constructed by Participant or its lessees or agents. Participant acknowledges that, by granting permits for commercial rehabilitation, the'Agency is not approving, condoning, or accepting any building or structural conditio:.s, improvements, or modifications which may exist, lawfully or E 12/05/88 1 91 I n /> 490 /04. - 4- unlawfully, on any parcel of property within the Project Area, nor is the Agency approving or condoning or accepting as legal and/or accurate the location of any I.operty line or lot configuration. All existing and future improvements and/or construction, including, but not limited to, any and all exterior and interior alterations are the Liability and responsibility of the Participant. III. IMPROVEMENT OF THE SITE A. (§301) Construction of .Improvements The Improvements to be constructed by Participant and to be financed by Agency in accordance with the provisions of Section 201, consist solely of structural and aesthetic improvements necessary'to rehabilitate the exterior of the existing commercial, square footage on tho Site. All other improvements, including but not limited to expansion of commercial square footage, tenant'improvements or interior improvements do not constitute Improvements under this Agreement and shall be the sole responsibility of Participant. Expansion of commercial square footage on the Site (i.e. the addition of a second floor) shall -be subject to Agency approval. In the event that Participant enters into a written contract(s) for construction of the Improvements, such, contracts shall be submitted by the -Participant to the Agency for its review and approval which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. If any submitted contract has not been approved or denied by the Agency within fifteen (15) working days of submittal, it shall be deemed approved. The Participant agrees to complete the Improvements as promptll as practicable and in no event later than 180 days after issuance of building permits. The Participant agrees that the construction and installation of the Improvements will be in accordance with all the provisions of'this=Agreement. B. [§302] Plans for Improvements The Agency shall prepare, or in its sole discretion, approve architectural, landscape and construction drawings ("Plans") for the Improvements to the Site. The Plans shall be made available to the Participant. Any plans for the expansion of commercial'square footage on the Site shall be subject to Agency approval. 12/05/88 1 r,1 Zr 11ACn ina -S- kJ ti) C. 1§3031 Planning Approvals The Participant shall causes the construction of the Improvements in compliance with all zoning, planning, and design review requirements of the City of Huntington Beach, the Huntington Beach Municipal Code, the Redevelopment Plan, and other requirements under the law. D. 163041 Access to Property Representatives and employees of the Agoncy and the City of Huntington Beach shall have the right of access to the Property, without charges or -fees, at normal construction hours during the period of construction for the purposes of this Agreement, including, without limitation, the inspection of the work in the construction of the Improvements. E. 1§3051 Maintenance The Participant shall maintain the Site and all improvements thereon, including the Improvements to be completed pursuant to this Agreement, in compliance with the Plans, the design scheme, reasonable commerclsil maintenance standards, the Redevelopment Plan, and all applicable provisions of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code until the expiration of the Redevelopment Plan. The maintenance required under this Agreement shall include, without limitation: landscape maintenance to maintain a healthy, natural, clean appearance and safe road conditions and visibility; clean-up maintenance, including sweeping, watering down and keeping the exterior of the Site free of litter, dirt, trash, debris, or other matter which Site is unsafe or unsightly; exterior upkeep, including painting, touch-up, roof repair, window washing, and maintenance of signage on the Site in compliance with the City's Planned Sign Program. Agency agrees to notify Participant in writing if the condition of the Site or the Improvements does not meet with the Agency's :maintenance standards and requirements. If after fifteen (15) days from the date written notice of ' improper maintenance is mailed, Participant fails to remedy, correct, or commence to cure the maintenance problem, then the Agency or its designee may perform such maintenance. Participant,a4rees the Agency or its designee has full and complete access to the Site to perform such maintenance during business hours or at other reasonable times. Participant acknowledges and agrees it is and shall be solely liable and' responsible'for any and all -costs accrued in gaining proper maintenance of the Site and/or Improvements shah be paid nx Participant within fifteen (15) days after a written itemization of said incurred costs is mailed to the Participant by the Agency. If Participant fails to pay said billed costs E-aO -'3 12/05/88 1513n/2460/04 -b- `., ) �.,1 of maintenance, then Participant agrees and acknowledges that a lien for -said Monies shall be recorded against the Site by the Agency. Participant agrees to be lia'.ie for any and all attorneys' fees and other costs incurred in collecting said maintenance expenses. Iv. 1§4001 USE OF THE SITE A. 1§401.1 Uses The Participant covenants and agrees for itself, its successors, its assigns, and every successor in interest to the Site or any part thereof, that the Participant, such successors and such assignees, shall devote the Site to the uses specified in the Redevelopment Plan and this Aqreement for the periods of time specified therein. All uses conducted on the site shall conform to all applicable provisions of cne Huntington Beach Municipal and Ordinance Codes. The Participant further covenants not to use the site for residential or manufacturing purposes and not to.allow operation of any type of arcade on the site. The foregoing covenants shall run with the land. The Participant shall maintain the Site and all improvements thereon, including the subject Improvements, in compliance with the terms of the Redevelopment Plan and with all applicable provisions of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code until the expiration date of the Redevelopment Plan and as said expiration date may be extended by proper amendment to the Redevelopment Plan. The Participant covenants by and for itself and any successors in interest that there shall be no discrimination against or segregation of any person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, age, handicap, national origin or ancestry in the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure -or enjoyment of the Site, nor shall the Participant itself br any person claiming under -or through it establish or permit any such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location,.number, use or occupancy of tenants, lessees, subtenants, sublessees or vendees of the Site. The foregoing covenants shall run with the land. The Participant shall refrain from restricting the rental, sale or lease of the property on the basis of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, handicap, national origin or ancestry of any person. All such deeds, leases or contracts shall contain or be subject to substantially th- following nondiscrimination or nonsegregation clauses: E.- 0.14 12/O5/88 1. in deeds: "The grantee herein covenants by and for himself or herself, his or her heirs, executors, administr tors and assigns, and all persons claiming under or through them, that there shall be no discrimination against or segregation of, any person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, age, handicap, national origin or ancestry ;n the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure or enjoyment of the land herein conveyed, nor shall the grantee himself or herself or any person claiming under or through him or her, establish or permit any such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of tenants, lessees, subtenants, sublessees or vendees in the land herein conveyed. The foregoing covenants shall run with the land." 2. In leases: "The lessee herein covenants by and for himself or herself, his or her heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, and all persons claiming -under or through him or her, and this lease is made and accepted upon and subject to the following conditions: "There shall be no discrimination against or segregation of any person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, handicap, age, ancestry or national origin in the leasing, subleasing, transferring, use, occupancy, tenure or enjoyment of the premises herein leased nor shall the lessee himself or herself, or any person claiming under or through him or her, establish or permit any such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation ;with reference to the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of tenants, lessees, sublessees, subtenants or vendees in the premises herein leased." %3. in contracts: "There shall be no discrimination against or segregation of, any person, or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, age, handicap, ancestry or national origin_, in the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure or enjoyment of the premises, nor shall the transferee himself or herself or rs �-a0 12/05/88 kw) any person claiming under or through him or her, establish or permit any such practice or practices of discrimi ation or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of tenants, lessees, subtenants, sublessees or vendees of the premises." The covenants established in this Agreement shall, without regard to technical classification and designation, be binding for the benefit and in favor of the Agency, its successors and assigns, the City, and any successor in interest to the Site or any part thereof. The covenants, contained in this Agreement shall remain in effect until the termination date of the Redevelopment Plan. The covenants against racial discrimination shall remain in effect in perpetuity. V. (§5001 DEFAULTS AND REMEDIES A. [§501] Defaults - General Failure or delay by either party to perform any covenant, condition, or, provision of this Agreement to be observed or performed by such party within the time provided herein constitutes a default under this Agreement. The injured party shall give written notice of default to the party in default, specifying the default complained of by the injured party. Failure or delay in giving such notice shall not constitute a waiver of any default, nor shall it -change the times of default. The defaulting party shall immediately commence to cure such default and shall complete such cure within thirty (30) days from the date of the notice or such longer period if the nature of the default is such that more than thirty (30) days is required to cure such default. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, any failure or delay by either party in asserting any of its rights or remedies as to any default shall not operate as a waiver of any default or of any such rights or remedies or deprive either such party of its right to institute and maintaip any actions or proceedings which it may deem necessary to protect, assert or enforce any such rights or remedies. E-a0'1( 12/05/88 1 S 11 n /2460 /04 -9 - B. 155021 Legal Actions 1. 15503) Institutio• of Legal Actions In addition to any other rights or remedies, either party may institute legal action to cure, correct or remedy any default, to recover damages for any default, or to obtain any other remedy consistent with the purpose of this Agreement. Such legal actions must be instituted in the Superior Court of the County of Orange State of California, in an appropriate municipal court in that County, or in the Federal District Court for the Central District of California.. 2. 1§5041 Applicable Law The laws of the State of California shall govern the interpretation and enforcement of this Agreement- 3. 1§5051 Acceptance_of Service of Process In the event that any legal action is commenced by the Participant against the Agency or the City, service of process on the Agency shall be made by personal service upon the Secretary of the Agency, and on the City by personal service upon the City Clerk, or in such other manner as may be provided by law. In the event that any legal action is commenced by the Agency or the City against the Participant, service of process on the Participant shall be made in such manner as may be:provided by law, whether made within or without the State of California. C. 155061 Rights and Remedies are Cumulative Except as otherwise expressly stated in this Agreement, the rights and remedies of the parties are cumulative, and the exercise by either party of one or more of such rights or remedies shall not preclude the exercise by it, at the same time or different times, or any other rights or remedies for the same default or any other default by the other party. D. J §507] Conflicts of Interest No member, official or employee of the Agency shall have any personal interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement, nor shall any member, official or employee participate in any decision relating to the Agreement whiciL affects his personal interests or the interests of any corporation, partnership or association in which he is directly or indirectly interested. No member, official or employee of C 17 12/05/88 ri zr i?ar%n ina -10- the Agency shall be personally liable to the Participant, or any successor in interest, in the event of any default or breach by the Agency, or for any amo..nt which may become due to the Participant or successor or on any obligations under the terms of this Agreement. E. 1§5081 Non -liability of Officials and -Employees of the Commission No member, official or employee of the Agency or the City shall be personally liable tc the Participant, or any successor in interest, in the event of any default or breach by the Agency or for any amount which may become due to the Participant or its successors, or on any obligations under the terms of this Agreement. VI. 166bOJ SPECIAL'PROVISIONS A. (§601] Agency Cooperation The Agency agrees to cooperate with the Participant to achieve the timely implementation of the redevelopment undertakings set forth in this Agreement; provided that the Agency shall not be required thereby to incur costs or liabilities, and further provided that the Agency shall retain its governmental power and discretion as provided for in the Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33000, et se . ) and the Redevelopment Plan. B. 166021 Future Redevelopment Activities The Participant and the Agency hereby agree that the performance by either of the parties hereto of any of the obligations hereunder shall not prevent either party from implementing or participating in any .future redevelopment programs, whether voluntary or mandatory, with respect to the Site. ' C. 156031 Communications Between The Parties - Formal notices, demands and communications given under the Agreement shall be in writing and may be effected by personal delivery or by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested and shall be deemed communicated as of the date of mailing. In the event of a change of the mailing address of either party, written notice to the other party shall be given within five (5) days cl� the change. 12/05/68 . w -. �- #^ w y y D. [§604] Planned Sign Program Participant shall comply v*.th the City's "Planned Sign Program" and shall insert in any and all leases relating to the Site that any and all lessees of the Site shall comply• with the "Planned Sign Program." E. [§6051 Successive Owners The Improvements to be constructed on the Site touch and concern the Site, and inure to the benefit of any and all present or successive owners of the Site. Therefore, whenever the word "Participant" is used herein, it shall include the owner as of date of execution of this Agreement, and any and all successive owner(s) or assign(s) of the Site, and the provisions hereof are 'expressly binding upon all such successive owners and assigns, and the parties agree all such provisions shall run with the land. F. [§6061 Notice to Lessees of Participant After execution of this Agreement, Participant agrees it will immediately notify all present lessees of the Site of Participant, if any, of the rights, obligations and requirements of this Agreement which may in any manner affect such lessees. In addition, Participant agrees that in any and all renewed or new lease agreements for the Site to which Participant is a party, Participant agrees to include provisions therein that said lessees will comply with this Agreement, particularly the Planned Sign Program and the Maintenance Provisions contained in Section 305 herein. G. 1§6071 Waiver Failure or delay by either party to perform any term or provision of this Agreement constitutes:a default under this Agreement. The aggrieved party shall give written notice of 'the default to the party in default. The defaulting party must immediately commence to cure, correct, or remedy zuch default, and shall complete such cure, correction or remedy with reasonable and due diligence, and during such period of curing shall not be in default. The waiver by one party of the performance of any covenant, condition or promise shall not invalidate this Agreement nor shall it be considered a waiver by such party of any other covenant, condition or promise hereunder. The exercise of any remedy shall not preclude the exercise of other remedies Agency or Participant may have at law or at equity. 12/05/88 1513n/2460/04 -12- k.% H. (§608] Modification This Agreement maybe modi.ied only by subsequent mutual written agreement executed by Participant and Agency. I. [§609] Attorney's_Fees In the event of litigation arising out of any breach of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable costs and attorney's fees. J. [5610] Indemnification and Insurance During the period of construction of the ' Improvements to the Site, and until such time as Agency notifies Participant in writing that the construction of the Improvements is completed, Participant hereby agrees to protect, defend, indemnify and hold and save harmless, the City of Huntington Beach and the Agency, and all their officers, employees and agents against any and all liability, claims, judgments, costs and demands, however caused, including those resulting from death or injury to Participant's employees and damage to property, arising directly or indirectly out of the obligations herein undertaken by Participant, or out of the operations conducted by Participant, including those arising from the passive concurrent negligence of the City or Agency, but save and except those which arise out of the active concurrent negligence, sole negligence, or the sole willful misconduct of.the City or Agency. Participant will conduct all defense at its sole cost and expense. Any costs of defense or attorneys' fees incurred by the City or Agency in enforcing this obligation will be reimbursed to the City or Agency by Participant or may be awarded to the City or Agency by a court of competent jurisdiction as costs pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1021. The Participant acknowledges'and agrees the'Agency makes no representations or warranties concerning the condition or quality of the Plans, or the Improvements to be completed by the Participant or its contractor, if any. The Participant knowingly waives and releases the Agency and the City of Huntington Beach and their officers, agents and employees for any interruptions, delays, or claims of whatever nature concerning the day-to-day operation of the Site and the occupants and businesses thereon due to construction of the Improvements and any work connected With the Site. F_-;ia, as 12/05/88 In accordance with Resolution No. 5835 of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, Participant shall provide at its own cost or cause to 'a provided and keep in full force and effect during this Agreement liability insurance coverage as shall protect the Agency and the City from claims for damages with the Agency and the City of Huntington Beach and -their officers, employees and agents as additional named insureds for policy amounts not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) single instance injury to person, including death, and with not less than Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) in the aggregate, with not less than Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000) property damage. Participant shall provide at its own cost or cause to be provided and keep in full force and effect during this Agreement workers' compensation and employers' liability insurance coverage in an amount of not less than $500,000 bodily injury by accident, each accident, $500,000 bodily injury by disease each cmployee, $1,000,000 bodily injury by disease, policy limit, as approved by the City Attorney. Participant shall provide proof of insurance to Agency in certificate form or other form issued by the Participant's liability carrier and in such form satisfactory to the Agency. Certificates of insurance shall provide for a thirty (30) day written notice of cancellation of any coverage to Agency. VII. 1§7001 ENTIRE AGREEMENT, WAIVERS This Agreement is executed in three (3) duplicate originals, each of which is deemed to be an original. This Agreement includes pages 1 through 14 and Exhibits "A" and "8" which constitute the entire understanding and agreement of the parties. This Agreement integrates all of the terms and conditions mentioned herein or incidental hereto, -and supersedes all negotiations or previous agreements between the parties or their predecessors in interest with respect to all or any part of the subject matter hereof. All waivers of the provisions of this Agreement must be in writing by the appropriate authorities of the Agency and the Participant, and all amendments hereto must be in writing by the appropriate authorities of the Agency and the Participant. Z E clo,af 12/05/88 1513n/2460/04 -14- W 09 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Agency and the Participant have signed this Agreement on the respective dates set forth below. 19� THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY By Its ATTEST: Agency Secretary PARTICIPANT MOHAMMED ZEIDAN � �- e is- ADEL ZEIDAN Approved as to Form: Agency Special o sel Approved as to Form: '4L' /,- -�a% gency Gen al. Counsel City Attorney 22/05/88 EXHIBIT "B" COVENANTF RECORDING REQUESTED BY ) AND WHEN RECORDED NAIL TO: ) Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency ) 2000 Hain Street ) Huntington Beach, California 92648 ) Attn: ) Space above for Recorder's use WHEREAS, MOHAMMED'ZEIDAN.and ADEL ZEIDAN, (the "Covenantor"), and the HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (ft a "Agency") hive entered into a certain owner Participation Agreement dated , 19 (the "Agreement", a copy of which is on file with the Agency at its offices and which is incorporated herein by reference) pursuant to which the Covenantor has agreed to subject certain real property belonging to the Covenantor (which property is referred to herein as the "Affected.Property," anA is described in the "Legal Description of the Affected Property," which is attached hereto as Exhibit No. 1 and incorporated herein) to certain covenants;.and WHEREAS, the enforcement of said covenants will ensure proper implementation of the Redevelopment Plan for the Nain4fer Project Area approved by ordinance No, of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach (the "Redevelopment plan"),'and will, therefore, benefit the Covenantor, the -City of Huntington Beach (the "Covenantee"), and the property owners located within. the Project Area affected by the Redevelopment. Plan; aril WHEREAS,, the Covenantor and the Agency desire and intend that these Covenants shall be enforceable by the Agency to the greatest extent allowable by law; and WHEREAS, the Community Redevelopment Law (California Health & Safety Code Section 33000, et seS.) provides that a redevelopment agency shall establish covenants running with the land in furtherance of the redevelopment plan; NOW, THEREFORE, the Covenantor agrees and covenants as follows: 1. Covenantor agrees for itself, and its successors and assigns, and every successor in interest to the Affected Property, or any part thereof that the Covenantor. and such successors and assigns shall: (a) Devote the Affected Property to those uses permitted uy the Redevelopment Plan (which covenant shall run with the land); 13 E-a a 12/05/88 EXHIBIT "B" 1513n/2460/04 Page 1 of 2 �,Or (b) Maintain the Affected Property and all the improvements thereon in compliance with the terms of the Redevelopment Plan and with all applicable provisions of the Huntington 7.each Municipal Code and in conformity with commercial maintenance standards within the County of Orange. (c) Not unlawfully discriminate against or segregate any person or group of persons on account of race, color, origin, sex, marital status, national origin, religion or ancestry in the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure, or enjoyment of the premises herein conveyed, nor shall the Covenantor itself or any person claLrning under or through the grantee, establish or permit any such unlawful practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of tenants, lessee, subtenants, sublessees, or vendees in the premises herein conveyed. All deeds, leases, or contracts for the sale, lease, sublease or other transfer of the Aifected -Property shall contain such non-discrimination provisions. The foregoing covenant shall run with the land. 2. Agreements and covenants contained herein shall be covenants running with the land and shall, in any event, and without regard to technical classification or designation, legal or otherwise, except only as otherwise specifically provided in the Agreement, be binding, to the fullest extent permitted by law and in equity with the benefit and in favor of, and enforceable by, the Agency and its successors and assigns against the Covenantor, its successors and 'assigns and every successor in interest to the Affected Property, or any part thereof or any interest therein. 3. The agreements and covenants contained herein pertaining to the uses and maintenance of the Affected Property shall remain in effect from the date hereto until the expiration date of the Redevelopment Plan as said expiration date may be extended by proper amendment to the Redevelopment Plan. Covenants regarding discrimination shall remain in effect in perpetuity. i "COVENANTOR" . Mohammed Zeidan XAdel Zeida Saoo 11614 12/0s/8a EXHIBIT "B" 1513n/2460/04 Page 2 of 2 OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) j ss. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) On December 21 , 1988 before tree, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared MOHAMMED Z EIDAN , personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be.the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged that he executed the same. WITNESS my hand and official seal. OFFICIAL SEAL ELEANOR J SMITH m NOTARY PUBLIC - CALtFORNIA ORAI�IGE GOWN ELEANOR J. SMITH Idly Comm. mires KkY 11. 1991 1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA } ss. COUNTY OF ORANGE } on December 21 , 1988 before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared ADEL ZEIDAN personally known to me or proved to me on the basis tf satisfactory evidence to be the person Whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged that he executed the same. WITNESS my hand and official seal. OFFICIAL SEALSmas �: f NOTANf PUBLIC CAL1F0 ELEANOR J. SMI . 14 y oom'YY 11. 199t 12/05/88 1S13n/2460/04 • : Lots 26 and 28 of Block 103, Map of Huntington Beach, In the City of Huntington Beach, County of Orange, State of California as shown on a map recorded In Book 3, Page 36 of Miscellaneous Maps in the office of the County Recorder of said County. E;LO ,aka 12/05/88 1513n/2460/04 EXHIBIT NO. 1 OF EXHIBIT "B" PAUL E. COOK AND ASSOCIATES TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING May 4,1994 Louis Sandoval Director of Public Works City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Re: Downtown Specific Plan - Updated Traffic Analysis Dear Louis, During the last several years, the property owners of the old Standard Market located on the southwest corner of Main and Walnut have been trying to redevelop their property. Their preference has been to tear down the existing building; which was badly damaged by a fire and construct a new two story building. However, because of the City's current requirement for dedication of 10 additional feet of right-of-way for Walnut Avenue, the property owners are unwilling; and financially unable to give up 10 feet of their total SO feet of Main Street frontage for street widening. The following traffic study was done to determine if even lower traffic volumes resulting from the City's further downsizing of the: Downtown Specific Plan would justify a removal of the designation of secondary arterial highway from that portion of Walnut Avenue or, for that matter, from other designated arterial highways in the downtown area such as Sixth and Orange. �3AMGR—OUND On May 12, 1988, traffic engineering; consultants, Greer and Company, submitted to City Engineer, Les Evans, an update of earlier traffic analyses they performed for the Downtown Specific Plan. That analysis reflected a change in the downtown land uses to a less intense village center. A copy of the 1988 study is enclosed. Since that time the Downtown Specific Plan reflects further reduced land use intensity which should further reduce projected traffic volumes in the downtown area. 211 Main Street 0 Huntington Beach, California 92648 6 (714) 960-8298 k,.) During the early stages of the redevelopment process in the downtown area when Proposed land uses were quite ambitious, the City adopted a master plan for arterial highways which upgraded previously designated local streets to secondary arterials with 80 foot right-of-ways, most notably; Sixth Street from Main Street to Pacific Coast Highway, Orange Avenue from Lake Street to Sixth Street, and Walnut Avenue from Lake Street to Sixth Street. The intent was to form an arterial loop system around the downtown core area. However, the 1989 Greer study showed projected traffic volumes that are borderline at hest for justifying four lanes of traffic capacity on any of those streets. MMIIODOLOGY Land use densities were examined for the newest version of the Downtown Specific Plan and were compared to those densities used in the 198E Greer study. The results are shown in Table 1. The overall lower densities in the 1994 Plan result in 10,S00 fewer daily trips than the 1989 study or a reduction of 16% in daily traffic volumes in the downtown core area. In order to simplify the Process, all assumptions of trip generation rates, directional distributions, and assignment to the street system were the same as the Greer study. All PM peak hour traffic volumes in the Greer study were reduced by 16%. The results are shown on Figure 1. This overall reduction of 16% is considered to he a conservative approach with regard to Walnut Avenue since most daily trips were reduced in Downtown Specific Plan zones 3, 4, 5, 6 and 10, which represent the downtown core area, and in zone 9, which assigns a significant percentage of traffic volumes to Walnut Avenue. FIN_LINQ5 As can be seen from Figure 1, two way PM peak hour volumes on Walnut Avenue south of Main Street total 540 vehicles. Assuming the peak hour is 10% to 15 % of the 24 hour daily traffic volume, the daily volume on Walnut Avenue south of Main Street would only he 3,600 to 5,400 vehicles in year 2010. In no case would this he considered daily volumes that would justify widening to four lanes. Furthermore, analysis of this study may show that four lanes are not needed on other downtown core arterials such as Sixth Street or Orange Avenue. Attached is a copy of page 500 of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' "Transportation and Traffic Engineering Handbook, Second Edition". Table 16- 19 shows the estimated capacity of four-way stop intersections of two-way, two- lane streets which are of the type in the downtown area. This table shows that the estimated capacity of the total approach volumes from all four directions ranges from 1,900 to 1,550 depending upon the cross volume split. An analysis of this study shows the approach volumes at Main and Walnut total 1,040. Even in the 1988 Greer study, approach volumes totalled only 1,240. The highest current four-way stop approach volumes projected for year 2010 in this study total 1,355 at Main and Orange which should give the City cause to reconsider the need for any secondary arterials in the core area other than Orange/Atlanta Avenues southeast of Third/Lake Streets. I would be pleased to discuss this study with you and members of your staff at any time. Sincerely, 0-111. Paul E. Cook President cc: Michael Ubcruaga Ray Silver Barbara Kaiser Melanie Fallon Howard Zelefsky Keith Bohr Richard Harlow Adel Zeidan Mohammed Zeidan y v �`Jt9 CJVIL ff OF CAtNi TABLE 1 PROPOSED USES - YEAR 2010 HUNTINGTON BEACH DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN Zone Land Use 1 Commercial 2 Residential 3-6 7 8 9 Commercial Office Restaurant Theatre Residential Commercial Office 1101c1 Residential Commercial I lotcl Commercial Commercial Residential 1988 1994 1988 1994 Daily Daily Density_ Density Volume Volume 60,000 sf 60,000 sf 1,943 1,943 600 du 600 du 3,660 3,660 414,575 sf 330,0(H) sf 13,424 10,685 110,925 sf 110,925 sf 532 532 13,500 sf 13,500 sf 1,011 1,011 1,750 st 1,750 st 2,330 2,330 1,389 du 830 du 8,473 5,063 50,000 sf 50,000 sf 1,619 1,619 150,0(H) sf 150,000 sf 720 720 400 rm 400 rm 3,480 3,480 1,800 du 1,900 du 10,980 11,590 140,000 sf 50,000 sf 4,533 1,619 1,200 rm 1,200 rm 10,440 10,440 87,500 sf 15,0(H) sf 2,833 486 7,000 sf 7,000 sf 227 227 106 du 106 du 647 647 Qhangc 0 0 (2,739) 0 0 0 (3,410) 0 0 0 610 (2,914) 0 (2,347) 0 0 66, 552 56,052 (10, 000) PALM Y s�4 S 4 ACACIA PECAN sa/ # N S� � � II ORANGE ape-,► �ILSw 5;a--+► S`o OLIVE A z 11P � ; if �-4-185-a-\v 1a gnsV1LNUIo � Zoo .-w -Lao -W 3ab� a �3-• �zoe~ea'1' � PCI I # 2010 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES FIGURE 1 (REVISED 1994) LEGEND- , 1-Visitor-serving Commercial with residential 2-Residential t, ; 3-Visitor-serving commercial 4-Residential, with office(10% incidential commercial) 5-Commercial with office and residential 6-General commercial/residential/office 7-Visitor-serving commercial 8-Residential 9-Commercial/recreation 10-Pier commercial 11-Beach open space I I I minis IN 1 �III oil M in I @minim 2 i a C t r I C �I-J U Ll U U am Waal 7 O C ( • M I r HUNTINGTON BEACH C4LIFORNI0. Specific Plan Zoning Districts r ; PLANNING DIVISION FIGURE 1 f' 21 t8 N 15 3 0 Two-way stop sign Oil ical lag - 5$ sec Side street volumes in vehicles pet hour (two lanes) are shown on lines 363 ■ 251 125 0 X 84 x sc x - o 40 e - 43 e o $ o 300 600 900 1.200 1.500 Main -street volume in vehicles per hour (tour lanes) c 21 V 0 Two-way stop sign Critical tag - 4.8 sec 522 Side street volumes in vehicles per hour 83 3837 (two lanes) are shown on lines 7 25t ti 125 - x 00, 64 ,• 411,000 e 43 300 600 900 1,200 1.500 %fainatreet volume in vehicles per hour (tour lanes) Flgttre 16.20. (a) Average total delay to all vehicles at slop-sign-control:ed intersection (critical lag - 5.9 a). (b) Average total delay to all vehicles at slop -sign -controlled intersection (critical lag - 4.8 s). Sourtm Russell M. Lewis and Harold L. michaet, "simaisaor, or Traffic Mw to Obtain Volume Warrants fur Intersection Control," Traffic Flew Theory, Highway Research Record 15, Washing'on, D.C.: Highway Research Board, 1963. p 35.36. estimate service volumes at levels of service which are better than level of service F. (capacity). Four -way -stop intersections The it teraction of vehicles at a four-way stop is complex. The criteria of gap acceptance are no longer appropriate since vehicles on all approaches of the intersection will be at a stop or expected to stop. Departure headways of 4 s can be expected for single vehicles (900 veWh) and op- proxima-ely 4.5 s for pairs of vehicles entering together (1600 vehllt). When traffic is present on all approaches, median headways of 7.32 s have been observed at four- way -stop intersections of two-way, two-lane suburban streets aid median headways of 8.03 s for vehicles crossing a four-l:me intersecting street.=` Based on these values and a tendency for the median headway to decrease on the major street when the split of traffic deviates from 50:50, the capacit) of an intersection (all approaches) has been cont- puled an shown in Table 16-19. The capacities in Table 16- 19 would be obtained only with nearly constant queues on all approaches. left turns do not appear to affect these values adversely, and a high percentage of right turns prob- ably acts to increase them. 3-1W 500 Transportation and Traffic Engineering Handbook �i l a4 d'�`jaI T 9 7y t TABLE 16-19 Esllreated Capacity of four -Way Stop lntersecllon of Two-way, Two-L&M Sim*" Cross Capacity (Tout from An volume Approaches) Split (VehickA) StV50 1900 $5,4s 1800 6&4o 1700 693S real 7090 3550 souarE: Aghts-ay Caparity ifanuaf,1965, spec. Report 87 (Washington. D.C.: Highway Aesearch Dowd. 1963). P. 1". Signalized intersections Genera!iy, those intersections that are significant from a capacity standpoint are either already signalized or prime candidates for signalization. Therefore, most current inter- section -capacity criteria apply to signalized intersections. The capacity and service volumes that a signalized in- tersection can accommodate are dependent on the intersec- tion geometries, signal operation, and traffic factors. In the first category, the approach width is most critical. The ex- istence of parking, one-way vs. two-way operation, and lane configuration are also important. Other factors, such as grades and turning radii`, are undoubtedly significant, but L` tT 721 South Magnolia Avenue Anaheim, California 92804 (714) 952-2886 FAX No (714) 952-3175 IGINEERS & PLANNERS May 12, 1988 Mr. Les Evans City Engineer City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Hunttnngton Beach, CA 92648 RE: , Downtown Specific Plan — Traffic Analysis Lla -date for the Core Area Dean' Mr. Evans: As authorized, we have cmgnleted an up -date of our earlier traffic analyses for the Downtown Specific Plan. This analysis reflects a change in the Downtown uses to a less intense village center. Significant reductions in c=ercial and hotel uses and increases in residential uses have been proposed The pry uses are listed in Table 1 for each of the zones illustrated in Figure 1. Pro3ected daily and p.m. peak hour trip generation for each zone with buildout assumed for the year 2010 is also presented in Table 1. The trip generation rates utilized for each use is presented in Table 2 and represents the most recent trip generation rages available from the Institute of Transportation Engineers. The projected trips for the Specific Plan area were assigned to the area - -street system using the following general distribution: north 40 percent east 25 percent West (_"') 15 percent -ICE east (PCH) 20 percent .The existing p.m. -peak hour trips on the downtown core area street system are shown in Figure 2. 9Me 2010 projected p.m. peak hour trips for the downtown core area street system are illustrated in Figure 3. -i7 - Mr. Les Evans City of Huntington Beach Dmmtown Traffic Analysis Up -date May 12, 1988 - Page 2 TABLE 1 PROPOSED USES - YEAR 2010 Beach Specific an • Daily P M. Volumes Zone Proposed Uses Volumes In Out 1 60,000 sq.ft. cmunercial 1,943 85 89 2 600 d.u. residential 3,660 24 12 3* Main Pier 35,000 sq ft. commercial 1,133 50 52 Phase 2 (35,000 sq ft. existing ccffimeiclal) (1,133) (50) (52) 15,000 sq.ft. office 72 5 28 250 d u. residential 1,525 100 50 Main Pier 1,750 seat theaters --- 233 233 Phase 1 15,925 sq ft. office 76 6 30 23,575 sq ft. commercial -- 770 34 - - 44 13,500 sq ft. restaurant 1,011 51 32 3,000 sq.ft. nightclub -- - (24,000 sq.ft. existing ccumercial) (770) (34) (44) 180 d.u. residential 1,098 72 36 60 d u residential 366 24 12 - -4 226 d.u. residential 1,378 90 45 - 5 280,000 sq.ft. ccmnercial 9,066 398 414 40,000 sq.ft. office 192 14 74 170 d.u. residential 1,037 68 34 c 6 17,000 sq.ft. ecmTexclal 550 24 25 40,000 sq ft. office (192) (14) (74) 10,000 sq.ft. institutional --- - - 503 d.u. residential 3,068 201 100 (continued) Mr Les Evans City of Huntington Beach Downtown Traffic Analysis Update May 12, 1988 - Page 3 TABLE 1 PROPOSED USE'S - YEAR 2010 HWitjngton Beach Specific Plan Daily P.M. Volumes Zone Proposed Uses Volumes In Out 7 50,000 sq.ft. commercial 1,619 71 74 150,000 sq.ft. office 720 52 279 400 room hotel 3,480 144 124 8 1,800 d.u. residential 10,980 720 360 9 140,000 sq.ft. ccnm*-rclal 4,533 199 207 1,200 room hotel 10,440 432 372 10 87,500 sq.ft. ccmD=ial 2,833 124 129 11 7,000 sq ft. ccmierclal 227 10 10 106 d.0 residential 647 42 21 TIOTAL 67,978 3,439 3,125 f LEGEND =Y� r 1-Visitor-serving commercial with residential 2-Residential I 3-Visitor-serving commercial 4-Residential, with office(10% incidential commercial) 5-Commercial with office and residential 6-General commercial/residential/office 7-Visitor-serving commercial 8-Residential 9-Commercial/recreation 10-Pier commercial 11-Beach open Space UCIL7��0 ❑ 000000d00000r�❑ 0 000000000000�0 ❑ o00000000000no ❑ o0000000aoa000 U UUUUU 11 ��wri� 1Qr�w�r P ► C 1 ! C r tl r HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIK PLANNING DIVISION 7 O C ( • N Specific Plan Zoning Districts r ; r7TMIDC 1 Mr. Ies Evans City of Huntington Bead Downtown Traffic Analysis Up -date May 12, 1988 - Page 5 TABLE 2 TRIP GENERATION RAIESS _ Huntington Beach Specific Plan ' P.M. Rates Use Daily Rates In Out Commercial 32.38 1.42 1.48 (per 1,000 sq. ft. ) Hotel 8.70 0.36 0.31 (Per room) - Residential 6.1 0.4 0.2 (per d.u.) Office 4.8 0.35 1.86 (per 1,000 sq.ft.) Restaurant 74.9 3.80 2.34 (per 1,000 sq. ft. ) ` Source: "Trip Generation, An Edition, Informational Report", Fourth Institute of .Transportation Engineers, Washixrjtcn, D.C., 1987; Greer & Co.; Engineers and Planners. s EXISTING P.M. PEAK HOUR a TRAFFIC VOLUMES cHc,�ccu � ruw.cu FIGURE 2 A If 1 I� 20 10 P.M. PEAK HOUR FIGURE a TRAFFIC VOLUMES 3 Mr. Les Elan City of HLmtingtcn Beach Downtown Traffic Analysis Up -date May 12, 1988 - Pace 8 The downtown stet apt Bald provide an arterial loop system to serve the village concept within the core. The arterials misting of Orange/Atlanta, Sixth Start, Lake Stet and Walnut Avenue would provide access to village parking, and provide primary mates through the downtown, yet axed the village core. The loop system would serve as feeder streets to the village and carry through traffic to the beach and pierside developnentso The local streets internal to the core area would provide direct access to village vial and residential uses, and would allow for local on -street parking. The projected traffic volumes were analyzed to determine the future street requirements within the core area. The loop system would consist of Orange Avenue between Sixth Street and Lake Street, Fake Street between Orange/Atlanta and PCH, Walnut Avenue between Sixth Street and Fake Street, and Sixth Street between PCH and Orange Avenue. Orange Avenue and Walnut Avenue connect arterial streets to the east — Orange connects to Atlanta, and Walnut will be extended east of Lake Street as a four -lane arterial. Lake Street north of Orange Avenue will be realigned to connect to Orange at Third Street, and Sixth Street north of Orange will be realigned to connect to Again Street at Frankfort The loop system of Orange, Lake, Walnut and Sixth will be widened to provide four lanes with left turn lams and medians and with no on -street parking, Walnut Avenue should be widened to the proposed 60-foot roadway in an 80-foot right of way, but projected traffic volumes may not require four operational travel lams for its entire length. For operational _'ems, -'four ;lanes should be provided with no on -street parking on Walnut between Nain Street and Lake Street. This section of Walnut provides -`direct amass to the _ pry entertainment center project and to the r ' r_1ty®s pry -parking `-parking str�reo Between Sixth Street and Again Suet, rAt may be possible to configure Walnut with two lanes, left turn lanes and a median, and permit oft parking on both sides until such time as the dour travel lanes Bray be required. At that time, the on -street parking could be removed to provide the four travel lanes. There is some hesitancy in suggesting the two lane section on Walnut between Sixth and Ham ailt]oLgh it would cperate acceptably under projected traffic volumes. In order to emphasize the loop arterial system and to provide its continuity and clear designation to the driver, it would be appropriate to improve Mra Les Evans City of Huntington Beach 0ownt,o;n Traffic Analysis Up -date Fay 12, 1988 - Page 9 Walnut as four lanes from Sixth to Iaks right from the start. The difficulty of subsequently removing the on -street parking after it is cake installed in order to ultimately provide the four travel lanes would be avoided if improved as four lanes initially, I The reccmmended roadway improvererits are consistent with the proposed right-of-way and roadway cross -sections as presented by City staff. The reccmnended improvements for each roadway are illustrated in Figures 4 and 5, and are described below: Sixth Street — PCH to Orange 4 lanes, no parking; 80' ROW/60' roadway Sixth Street — Orange to Pain 2 lanes, on -street parking; 77.5' ROW/55o5' roadway Pain Street — Sixth to PCH 2 lanes, angled on -street parking; 75' PVW/50' roadway Lake Street — PCH to Orange 4 lanes, bike lanes, no parking; 95' ROW/79' roadway Lake Street — Orange to -Frankfort 4 lanes, bike lanes, rxo parking; 90' ROW/74' roadway - Take street — north of Frankfort 2 lanes, bike lanes, on -street parking; 90' ROW/601 roadway Orange Averme — Sixth to ` ii d Y 4 lanes, no parking; 80' IOW/601 roadway OOrange Avenue — Mu-rd to Take 4 lanes w/right turn lane, no parking; 90' ROW/74' roadway . Walnut Avenue — Sixth to Lake 4 lanes, no parking; 80' R+OW/60' roadway I'll 1 , ^ F 1 1 ♦ �M, � 11�i"1 � I d, J 1r � 4 0 � z It Si lob � I�L J *r t� F' r � 7 w a L LL z �z LL LLI 00 0 � a: Lu LU z x Mr. Les Evans City of Huntington Beach Downtown Traffic Analysis Up -date May 12, 1988 - Page 12 In addition to these roadway improvements, traffic signals will be r off i re at Orange/Atlanta/Lake, Orarxge/Sixth, and SixUVMain. Initially, 4-way stop control will be required at Orange/Main and Oraixge/Lake/Murd. Either of both of these intersections may require signalization in the future. A 4-way stop control 'should also be provided at Main/Walnut. In order for the loop arterial concept to operate effectively, all other stop signs should be roved from Orange, Lake, Wa]nut, Sixth and Main with cross -streets being stop sign controlled. A detailed striping plan, intersection control plan, on -street parking details, and an overall core area traffic operations plan should be prepared to program unprovements in a consistent and orderly mariner. We appreciate this opportunity to have been of assistance to the City of Huntington Beach in implementing the Downtown Specific Plan. If these are any questions or comnents, please contact me at your convenience. Sincerely, GREER & OD. Larry E. Greer, P.E. Principal _ IEG: st V � to _ I i Q�Oylss/p�q • �(�No 766 a EzDi _ t Y ' • fi Y3 I gW ' REQUEST' FOR CITY COUNCIL AMON Date: June 6,1994 Submitted to: 1Ionorable Mayor and City Council Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator ezePrepared by: Luis F. Sandoval, Director, Public Works Department Subject: Reclassification of Walnut Avenue between Third Street and Alain Street Consistent with Council Policy? [ X ] Yes [ j New Policy or Exception Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions, Attachments;/ "iP/ ��� UA1TAff NT QFF,ISSUE: Walnut Avenue between First Street and Sixth Street is Currently classified as a secondary arterial on the adopted Circulation Element and the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways. Walnut Avenue between Third Street and Sixth Street should be reclassified as a collector street. RF,,rQ-M,% ENDEDCO19VCiL ACTION: 1. Direct staff to proceed with the process of reclassifying Walnut Avenue between Third Street and Sixth Street from a secondary arterial to a colI©ctor street on the City's Circulation Plan of Arterial Streets and Highways and the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways. 2. Receive and file this report. ANAI.Y I In 1988, the City hired Greer and Associates to complete a traffic circulation study of the Downtown Specific Plan Area in association with the Environmental Impact Report No. 89A (Second Block West Facade Improvement Demonstration Project). At the time of the traffic circulation study, approximately 1,000,000 - 1,500,000 square feet of commercial, office, and restaurant floor space was anticipated to be constructed and ultimately occupied within the Downtown Specific Plan Area (DSPA). As a part of the anticipated circulation system improvements in the DSPA, Walnut Avenue was anticipated to be a four lane secondary arterial between First Street and Sixth Street (please see Attached Circulation Plan of Arterial Strects and Highways). Walnut Avenue between First Street and Beach Boulevard (which is now know as Pacific View Avenue) is classified as a primary arterial. Walnut Avenue becomes Hamilton Avenue as one travels east across Huntington Beach. Hamilton Avenue is a primary arterial with one of the three existing bridges crossing the Santa Ana River south of Interstate 405. Hamilton Avenue becomes Victoria Avenue in Costa Mesa, extending easterly across Costa Mesa to State Route 55 (the Newport Freeway). Victoria Avenue has direct access to the Newport Freeway via on and off ramps. The traffic analysis performed for EIR 89-4 anticipated an arterial street system utilizing Walnut Avenue between First Street and Sixth Street as an alternative route to Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) during periods of traffic congestion on PCH. This conceptual circulation system was patterned after Glenneyre Street in Laguna Beach, which parallels PCH. It should be noted that the type of existing development in Laguna Beach and Huntington Beach adjacent to PCH are markedly different, thus it is staff's opinion that the analogy between Glenneyre Street and Walnut Avenue is inappropriate and incorrect. The current anticipated amount of commercial, office, and restaurant square footage to be constructed and occupied is 500,000 square feet. This amount of availablelanticipated floor space is between one-half to one-third of the floor space anticipated when the traffic analysis was performed. The net result is one-half to one-third of the anticipated traffic volumes on streets in the DSPA. Last but not least is the practical consideration of pedestrian traffic along the Main Street corridor. The intersection of Main Street and Walnut Avenue is arguably the second busiest intersection, from a pedestrian traffic standpoint, in Huntington Beach (Main Street at PCH is likely the busiest intersection for pedestrian traffic). It is staffs considered opinion that a four lane arterial street crossing Main Street at Walnut Avenue will not function efficiently and will likely be the site of many autolpedestrian accidents. If Walnut Avenue is classified as a secondary arterial street between First Street and Third Street, easy access to the 21Un Promenade Parking Structure will be insured. It is very likely that, in the future, visitors to the Downto%m area will utilize Walnut Avenue/Pacific View Avenuefflamilton Avenue to get to the parking structure from Brach Boulevard and the Newport Freeway. FUNDING SOURCE: No finding source is required for this action. LENN'IRONNMENTAL�UAM t Pursaant to the California Environmental Quality Act §15378, this request for direction from City Council is not a classified as a project at this time. If the segment of Walnut Avenue under consideration is to be removed from the Circulation Plan of Arterial Streets and Highways and the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways, the proposed reclassification will be subject to environmental review. ALTERNATIVE, ACTION'S: 1. Provide staff with direction regarding the Council's desired classification of arterial status for Walnut Avenue between Third Street and Sixth Street. ATTACITNI . M: Currert Adopted Huntington Beach Circulation Plan of Arterial Streets and Highways MTU:LFS:REE:7DO ado .f/ 0 AwENDuENTS R w•. do a'rnf� Part e[�n�er MrI >�t�Oq rrn ule 1 1sl. rvi• Is!! f•i� alit MO•ai Ilan yya leaf 1•f-fi i0r• % r �4p CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ORANGE COUNTY CALIFORNtA VA CIRCULATION PLAN OF ARTERIAL STREETS AND HIGHWAYS ADOPTED BY CITY COUJCL RESOLUTION NO 43bt3- DEC.12.19TS LEGEND: FREEWAY STREET CAPACITY MAJOR 45= PRIMARY 30.000 K SECONDARY 20.000 [ I NOTE: $MID L"S PALATE ExlS704 AGHY Of vjW \ P001 MCCESSARAT ULTIMATE R-004T a WAY DASKD LIKS PALATE AREAS vK*E NO 1 W."T Of War EsRTf r wR l e i Q„ I ' ' I •Y • -V PAUL E. COOK AND ASSOCIATES 'L-m June 6, 1994 RECEIVE ND MADE X PART OF THE RECORD AT ktM1EETING �7 Honorable Mayor and City Council ' 25� City of Huntington Beach IT£+4l NO. F —S 2000 Main Street OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK Huntington Beach, CA 92648 CONNIE BROCKWAX Re: Reclassification of Walnut Avenue between Third Street and Main Street, City Council Agenda Item No. F 5 Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council, We represent the owners of the property at 126 Main Street on the southwest corner of Main Street and Walnut Avenue known as the old Standard Market. It came to our attention today that the subject item is on the City Council agenda for June 6, 1994 as Item No. F-5. It was our understanding that this matter was continued from your May 25th meeting to June 20, 1994. Although we agree with City staffs recommendation on this item, we are unable on such short notice to arrange for our clients to be present when you discuss this issue which is critical to their efforts to redevelop this property. We are respectfully requesting that you continue this matter to your June 20, 1994 meeting as planned. cerely, �j l� Paul E. Cook ichard A. Harlow cc: Michael Uberuaga, City Administrator Connie Brockway, City Clerk 211 Main Street a Huntington Beach, California 92648 (714) 960-8298