HomeMy WebLinkAboutVTN Consolidated, Inc - Robert Terry - Martha Holt - George Ingraham - 1973-07-16I
DONALD D. HARWOOD
DON. R. ADKINSON
DENNIS W. HARWOOD
THOMAS A, UERNAUER
JOHN M, MEINDL
JEFFERY J. CARLSON
DWIGHT J. GRIFFITH
November 18, 1976.
HARWOOD & ADK'INSON
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
550 NEWPORY CENTER DRIVE -SUITE 434
POST OFsICE BOX 1907
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92.663
TG
1
TELEPHONE (714) 644-1313
cAe LE="HARLAVV"
IN REPLY REFER TO:
City of Huntington Beach,
a Mun._cipal Corporation,
P. O. Box 190
Huntington Beach, California 92648
Re; Terry vs. City of Huntington_ Beach
Gentlemen:
As you know, this firm is co -counsel with Arthur D. Guy,
Jr., as attorneys of record for Plaintiff in the above -
referenced action. Having reviewed the Mc:ritorium and
Contract Agreement executed by the City of Huntington
Beach on July 16, 1973, it can be categorically stated
that Plaintiff and Plaintiff's representativen have fully
performed all of the terms, conditions, and ,ervices
requested thereunder, and that said Moritor°:um and Contract
Agreement will expire on December 9, 1976.
This letter is sent to you as formal written notice that at
the expiration of said Moritorium and Contract Agreement on
December 9, 1976, Plaintiff in the above -referenced action
will have no other recourse and wi111 in fact take all neces-
sary .steps to bring this matter to immediate litigation.
This action, immediate litigation, and the resulting trial
thereon will be a direct result of the City of Huntington
Beach having failed to honor and perform said Moritorium
Agreement for the last three years. In view of the fact
that the City of Huntington Beach has not adopted any develop-
ment plan for the downtown area of at least the five blocks
which are the subject of this class action, there is little
reason to believe that the City of Huntington Beach will ever
have the necessary municipal foresight, cooperation, integrity,
determination, or wisdom for the benefit of -the city as a
whole to provide the necessary leadership in completing the
task as outlined in said Moritorium and Contract Agreement.
With sadness but unwavering determination, the Plaintiff and
the class of persons represented by Plaintiff must now _again
I
A
1
City of Huntington Beach
November 18, 1976
Page Two
turn to the judicial system, after patiently waiting three
years for concrete and constructive development by the City
of Huntington Beach, which has failed utterly to materialize.
Very trumy yours,
HARWOOD & ADKINSON
T.�B erm Thofnas A. Bernauer
ARTHUR D. GUY, JR.
r
LAW OFFICES. ,
ARTHUR D. GUY, JR.
NEWP.ORT PLAZA, SUITE ISS
1601 DOVE STREET
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92660
City of Huntington Beach
P, 0, Box 190
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
T
i
I ..
3. DON P . BONF+'A, City Attorney
MICHAEL 11. MILLER, Deputy City Attorney
2 City of Huntington Beach
P. 0. Box 190 I
3 Huntington Beach, California 92648
4 Telephone: 536-5261
5 Attorneys for Defendant
fi
7
8 I SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9 FOR THE COUNTY OF ORANGE
10 ROBERT C. TERRY, Executor of the )
Estate of Elmyra Irene Terry, In ) CASE NO. 181 149
11. Behalf of Himself in a. Represent-)
ative Capacity and All other ) STIPULATION UNDER C.C.P. 583
12 Owners of 133 Parcels of Land, ` EXTENDING T.'.ME FOR BRINGING
ACTION TO TRIAL WITHIN FIVE
13 Plaintiffs, ) YEARS
14 VS. )
1.5 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, a )
municipal corporation, )
16 )
17 Defendant. )
28 WHEREAS, the above class action was brought against
19 the Defendant, CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, seeking damaged for di-
20 minution in property value; and
21 WHEREAS, the City and leaders of the class are desirous
22 of settling the class action 'without litigation and are exploring;
23 a plan of development of the ,owntown area by which the members of
24 the class will and
25 WHERF and implementation of a plan
26 to redevelop the downtown area which will benefit, the class and
27 thereby form the basis for a compromise settlement and dismissal
28 of the action requires that: the class action be held in abeyance
I
0,
for a period of time sufficient to accomplish this goal;
2 NOW, 'THEREFORE, the parties, through their respective
,3. counsel below, stipulate as follows:
4 The time for bringing the above action to trial, as set
5 forth in Code of Civil Pro-suures 583, is hereby extended for a
6 period of years subject to the following terms and con
7 ditionsr
8 A. This time moratoriuzr. shall continue so long as
9 genuine and realistic efforts, are mutually pursued by VTN and
10 City of Huntington. Beach which are directed toward the prompt
11 ^reat on of a plan of development in the five --block downtown
12 Huntington Beach area affected by the above class action (namely,
3.3 Blocks 101 through 105).
14 B. Any party to this action may bring, upon proper
15 notice, an Order to Show Cause hearing to have a determination of
16 whether or not the plan is being pursued in a reasonable manner Qo
17 as to achieve the goal of this stipulation.
18 C. In the event a determination is made that the plan
f
19) is not being diligently pursued, or if It appears that the plan
20 is incapable of producing a benefit to the class, then the Court
21 may, prior to the time by which trial has been extended, as set
22 forth herein, fix a reasonable date on or before which any pasty
23 may file a Certificate of steadiness, the matter will proceed to
24 trial (after all mot? ns pending and future are exhausted) in the
25 Kzsual course of Court business having only those priorities, if
26 any, provided by statute. If no Certificate of Readiness is f1l.ed
21 within the time permitter) by the Court, the matter shall be dis
28 missed for lack of prosecution unless the time for filing such
2
R
1AOL
I Certificate shall have been extended by the Court upon a shooing
f
of good cause therefor..
D. In the event a plan is developed which achieves the
4 purposes of this moratorium and produces a satisfactory benefit
5 to the class, upon ioticed motion by any party, the Court shall
6 set a hearing, upon such terms and conditions ac the Court shall
7 direct, for the purpose of considering the fairness of the com-
8 promise and -I:ssuing its order of dismissal of the class action
9 based thereon.
10 E. Nothing herein shall in any way prejudice the merits
11 of pending or future motions in this matter, nor constitute an ad-
12 mission of Liability by the parties hereto.
13 DATED: �6/. f 1973.
l 4 ter'
16 Attorne`y for P aintiff� {,
17
18
Rttox ney 4
or De 4ed agn
,9 City of Huntington E
20 APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
21.
City Attor. ey: Attorney Law
2v VTN, Inc.
2
25 So ordered this day of November, 1973•
26
27
TucCde of the Superior Court
2$
•
3.
ai
A G R E E M E N T
THIS AGREEMENT entered into at the City of Huntington
Beach, State of California, this 16th day of July, 1973, by and Y
between the CITY OF,HUNTINGTON BEACH, a municipal corporation,
hea°einafter referred to as CITY; VTN CONSOLIDATED, INC., herein-
after referred to as VTN; ROBERT TERRY, individually and as a
member and manager of the class; MARTHA HOLT, individually and
as -a member of the class, and MARTHA HOLT, Trustee of Martha
Holt Trust; and GEORGE INGRAHAM, individually and as a member of
-4I�e class,
WHEREAS, ROBERT TERRY, individually and as a member
and -manager of the class; MARTHA HOLT, individually and as a
member of the class, and MARTHA HOLT, Trustee of Martha Holt
Trust; GEORGE INGRAHAM, individually and as a member of the class;
and other owners of real property, have filed a class action,
Orange County No. 181 1119 (hereinafter referred to as "class
-,-,.action",) against CITY in confaectior with CITY' S proposed
development of the cowntown area and pier; and
WHEREAS., VTN is preparing a., development plan for the
downtown area and pier and
WHEREAS, it :is to the best interest of all parties that
an amicable settlement be reached so that further litigation will
_ ys"
NOW "THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual agree-
ments..cont:ained herein., it is .agreed by.and between ROBERT TERRY,
-ind�idually and as a -member and manager of the class; MARTHA
HOLT, individually and as member of the class, and MARTHA HOLT.,
Trustee of Martha Holt Trust;, GEORGE INGRAHAM, individually and -'
as member of the class, VTN and CITY as follows:
1. VTN shall prepare a development plan for the downtown:
area and. pier in Huntington Beach, California. The CITY will
cooperate with VTN in its preparation of a development plan for
the downtown area of at least the five blocks that is the sub-
ject of the class action and the pier. It is understood that the
cost of the preparation of the plan will be borne entirely by VTN
with the CITY cooperating in the preparation of the plan. The plan
will be reviewed by CITY staff and presented to the Planning
Commission as a proposed master plan amendment and will go
through the normal due process procedures as expeditiously as
possible.
2. It is the intent and objective of the parties to
this agreement that the class represented by ROBERT TERRY will,
if the development is carried out, be enabled to market their
property on a reasonable basis, except that CITY does not guar-
antee that it shall purchase said property:
3. The CITY will provide public parking facilities
where required by the VTN plan.
4. In conjunction with the VTN plan, the CITZ, VTN,
IYARTHA HOLT and ROBERT TERRY shall work out a detailed imple-
mentation plan,
5. Upon the execution of this!Agreement, Cedric White,
Appraiser, shall be retained by CITY Vo update the appraisals he
has heretofore made on the following described city -owned prop-
erties, and upon conclusion of such appraisals, an escrow shall
be opened by which. CITY shall sell to the below. -named parties,,
and the below -named parties shall buy such hereinafter described
properties at the Cedric White appraisal values, which shall be
at fair market value. Such escrow shall contain the following
contingencies:
(1) Approval by the City Council of the
VTN plan.
(2) The VTN plan, as approved by the City
Council, shows the following city -owned property to be not
needed for public parking purposes.
2.
(3) The dismissal with prejudice of the
class action.
(4) The below -named purchasers of said
property agree for themselves anti. their successors in in-
terest that such property shall le used only for the purpose
of implementing such council -approved VTN plan.
The following described city -owned prop-
erty, located in the five -block area, bounded by Walnut Avenue,
Pacific Coast Highway, Sixth Street and -Lake Street, shall be
placed in escrow as described in this paragraph;
Block 101 to VTN
Block 102 and 103 to MARTHA HOLT as
Trustee of Martha Holt. Trust;
Block 104 to ROBERT TERRY; and
Block 105 to GEORGE INGRAHAM.
6. VTN will be responsible fox, the funding of the -
development and construction of the entire redevelopment project,.
including the CITY pier, in accordance with said VTN plan.
7 If a convention center is part of the plan, the
i CITY will encourage private development of the convention center.
However, if private development is not feasible, CITY will de-
velop a convention center, if it is feasible to do so.
8. The CITY agrees to install underground lighting
improvements in the aforementioned five -block area. However, if
the convention center is constructed through private development,
CITY, agrees to install all necessary underground utilities
in said five -block area.
9. The CITY will utilize the Community Redevelopment
Act to implement the plan, if required.
10 Commencing immediately and continuing for the
duration of the procedures and provisions contained herein, a
! moratorium shall be placed upon said class action pending
! against CITY, and the parties thereto shall so stipulate and such
a
3•
stipulation shall be submitted to the court forthwith for its
approval. Said stipulation will provide that the period of the
moratorium herein provided shall extend for an equal period the
time to obtain judgment pursuant to ,Section 583 of the California
Code of Civil Procedure; that the CITY shall waive the statute of
limitations to bring to trial for an equal period.
11. After the Planning Commission has adopted the
plan prepared by VTN and simultaneously with City Council ap-
pr'vi:l thereof, the class action shall be dismissed with prejudice..
12. All of the terms of this Agreement shall be sub-
ject to all legal requirements.
13 The City Administrator is authorized and directed
to take whatever steps necessary to implement the procedures
contained in this Agreement,subjecv to the approval of the City
Council.
14. Upon dismissal of said class action, CITY will
pay present Counsel of Record in said class action reasonable
attorney's fees to be determined as soon as possible after exe-
cution of this Agreement by the court in said class action for
legal services rendered in connection with subject class action;
and such fees shall Ve placed in escrow by CITY and shall be
paid over to said attorneys of record upon the dismissal o
said class acti.-in with prejudice in accordance with paragraph
11 of this Agreement.
I„
15. All parties heretoagreeto cooperate with all
other parties to this Agreement for the purpose of assuring the
successful accomplishment of the purposes of this Agreement.
16. By executing this Agreements none of the parties
hereto makes any admission against interest nor does any party
hereto waive any rights in and to the litigation and the subject
matter of such litigation except, as expressly provided in this
Agreement, and only so long as this Agreement remains in full
4.
..
ARL
force and effect. If at any time this Agreement terminates or
if the performance of unexecuted portions hereof become impos-
sible, the parties, at that time, may renew their respective
positions in such class action 0Lthout prejudice upon twenty
(20) days written notice to the other parties of this Agreement.
Nor shall this Agreement or any part or provision hereof be used
in evidence in any legal proceeding nor any of the events or
circumstances leading to the execution of this Agreement be used
in evidence in any legal proceeding including the class action
discussed herein for any purpose whatsoever, except that the
attorney's fee provision contained in paragraph 14 of this
Agreement shall be operable in accordance with the terms of
paragraph.14, and further except that this provision shall not
apply to any litigation whose purpose is the enforcement of this
Agreement. The intention and purpose of this Agreement is to
accomplish the successful redevelopment of the downtown area.
of Huntington Beach, California, and collaterally this Agreement
is intended to be in settlement and compromise of the class
(REST 0£ PAGE NOT USED)
I
5,
L1• a v
e,
action described herein.
IN WITN SS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed'
this Agreement the day, month, and year appearing below.
DATED 1973
CITY OF HUNTI_NGTON BEACH,
a nicipal corporation,
Mayor
ATTESTS APPROVED AS TO FORM:
, Ko i�60
City Clerk`" City Attox y
DATED: 6 , 1973.
VTN CONSOLIDATED, INC
B
ROBERT TERRY, indivi ually
and as member and manager of
the class
O T
MARTi-A HOLT, individually MARTHA HOLT, Trustee o
and as member of the classMartha Holt Trust
AYPROD AS TO FORT4
OR TNGRAH , indiv'idu lly A orney for P1a� nr a ff s
and as membe of the class
! 6•
e
%2 -
A G R E E M E N T
THIS AGREEMENT entered into at the City of .Huntington
BFach, State of California, this 16th day of July, 1973, by and
between the CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, a municipal corporation,
hereinaft referred to as CITY; VTN CONSOLIDATED, INC., herein-
after referred to as VTN; ROBERT TERRY, individually and as a
member and manager of the class; MARTHA HOLT, individually and
as a member, of the class, and MARTHA HOLT, 'Trustee of Martha
Holt Trust. and GEORGE INGRAHAM, individually and as a, member of
the c" asS,
WHEREAS, ROBERT TERRY, individually and as a member
and manager of the class; MARTHA HOLT, individually and as a
member of the class, and MARTHA HOLT, Trustee of Martha Holt
Trust; GEORGE INGRAHAM, individually and as a member of the class;
and other owners of real property, have filt,_d a class action,
Orange County No. 181 149 (hereinafter referred to as "class
action") against CITY in connection with CITY'S proposed
development of the downtcwn area and pier; and
WHEREAS, VTN is preparing a development plan for the
downtown area and pier; and
WHEREAS, it is to the best interest of all parties that
an amicable settlement be reached so that further litigation will
not be necessary,
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual agree-
ments contained herein, it is agreed by and between ROBERT TERRY,
individually .and as a member and manager of the class; MARTHA
HOL'', individually and as member of the class, and MARTHA HOLT,
Trustee of Martha Holt Trust; GEORGE INGRAHAM, individually and
as member of the class, VTN and CITY as follows;
1. VTN shall prepare a development plan for the downtown
III
1.
r
area. and. pier in Huntii.gton Beach, California. The CITY will
cooperate with VTN in its preparation of a development plan for
the downtown area of at least the five blocks that is the sub-
ject of the class action and the pier. It is understood that the
cost of the preparat-Jon of the plan will, be borne entirely by VTN
with the CITY cooperating in the preparation of the plan. The plan
will be reviewed by CITY staff and presented to the Planning
Commission as a proposed master plan amendment and will go
through the normal due process procedures as expeditiously as
possible.
2. It is the intent an- objective of the parties to
this agreement that the class represented by ROBERT TERRY will,
if the development is carried out, be enabled to market their
property on a reasonable basis, except that CITY does not guar-
antee that it shall purchase said property.
3. The CITY will provide public parking facilities
where required by the VTN plan.
I{. In conjunction with the VTN plan, the CITY, VTN,
MARTHA HOLT and ROBERT TERRY shall work out a detailed imple-
mentation plan.
5. Upon tie execution of this'Agreement, Cedric White,
Appraiser, shall be retained by CITY .Vo update the appraisals he
has heretofore made on the following described city -owned prop-
erties, and ut:on conclusion of such appraisals, an escrow shall
be opened 'by which CITY shall sell to the below -named parties,
and the below -named parties shall buy such hereinafter described
properties at the Cedric White appraisal values, which shall be
ac fair market value. Such escrow shall contain the following
contingencies:
(1) Approval by the City Council of the
VTN plan.
(2) The VTN plan, as approved by the City
Council, shows the following city -owned property to be not
needed for public parking purposes.
2.
(3) The dismissalwith prejudice of the
class action_,
(4) The below -named purchasers of., said
property agree for themselves and their successors in in-
terest that such property shall be used only for the purpose
of implementing such council -approved VTN plan.
The following described city -owned prop-•
erty, located in the five -block area, bounded by Walnut Avenue,
Pacific Coast Highway, Sixth Street and Lake Street, shall be
placed in escrow as described in this paragraph:
Block .101 to VTN•
Block 102 and 103-to MART
Trustee of Martha Holt Trust;
Block 104 to ROBERT TERRY; and
Block 105 to GEORGE INGRAHAM,
6. VTN will be responsible for the funding of the
development and construction of the entire redevelopment project,
including the CITY pier, in accordance with said VTN plan.
7. If a convention center is part of the plan, the
CITY will encourage private development of the convention center.
However, if private 'development is not feasible, CITY will de-
velop a convention center, if it is feasible to do so.
8. The CITY agrees to install underground lighting
improvements in the aforementioned five -block area. However, if
the convention center is constructed through private development,,
CITY agrees to install all necessary underground utilities
in said five -,lock area.
9• The CITY will utilize the Community Redevelopment
Act to implement the plan, if required.
10. Commencing immediately and continuing for the
duration of the procedures and provisions contained herein, a
moratorium shall be placed upon said class action pending
against CITY, and the parties thereto shall so stipulate and such
' 3.
stipulation shall be submitted to the court forthwith for its
approval. Said stipulation will provide that the period of "she
moratorium herein provided shall extend for an equal period the
time to obtain judgment pursuant to Section 583 of the California
Code of Civil Procod.ure; that the CITY shall waive the statute of
limitations to bring to trial for an equal period.
11._ After the Planning Commission has adopted the
plan prepared by VTN and simultaneously with City Council ap-
proval thereof, the class action shall be dismissed with prejudice:
12. All of the, terms of this Agreement shall be sub-
ject- to all legal requirements.
1.3. The City Administrator is authorized and directed
to"take whatever steps necessary to implement the procedures
contained in this Agreement subject to the approval of the City
Council.
14. Upon dismissal of said class action, CITY will
pay present Counsel of Record in said class action reasonable
attorneys fees to ,be determined as soon as possible after exe-
cution of this Agreement by the court in said class action for
legal services rendered in connection with subject class action;
and such fees shall Ve placed in escrow by CITY and shall be
paid over to Said attorneys of record.,upon the dismissal Of
,paid class action with prejudice in accordance with paragraph
it of this Agreement.
_
15. All parties hereto agree to cooperate with all
other parties to this Agreement for the purpose of assuring the
successful accomplishment of the purposes of this Agreement.
16. By executing this Agreement', none of the parties
hereto makes any admission against interest nor does any party
.hereto waive any rights in and to the litigation and the subject
matter of such litigation except as expressly provided in this
Agreement, and only so longas this Agreement reTaaiii.5 in full
4'
f,
force and effect. If at any time this Agreement terminates or
if the performance of unexecuted portions hereof become impos-
sible, the parties, at that time, may renew theirrespective
positions in such Mass action without prejudice upon twenty
(20) days write�n notice to the other parties of this Agreement.
Nor shall fi;.is Agreement or any part or provision hereof be used
in evidence in any legal proceeding nor any of the events or
circumstances leading to the execution of this Agreement be used
in evidence in any legal_ proceeding including the class action
discussed herein for any purpose whatsoever, except that the
attorney's fee provision contained in paragraph 3.4 of this
Agreement shall be operable in accordance with the terms of
paragraph.14, and further except that this provision shall not
apply to any litigation whose purpose is the enforcement of, this
Agreement. The intention and purpose of this Agreement is to
accomplish the successful redevelopment of the dcvwntown area "
of Huntington Beach, California, and collaterally this Agreement
is intended to be in settlement and compromise of the class
(_REST OF PAGE NOT USED)
5•
action described herein.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed
this Agreement the day, month, and year appearing below.
DATED:_, 1973,
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH,
a municipal. corporation,
' it Mayo �- r
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Clerk , ZCWne
DATED: / 1973•
VTN CONSOLIDATED, INC.
By.
ROBERT TERRY, indiv' ually
and as member and manager of
the class
4,41
M A TH RLT, indiv-idually. MHA HOLT, Trustee of
and as member of the class Martha Holt Trust
APP D AS TO FORP4:
RG NGRAHAM, individually Attorney for Plaintiff las
and member of the class
6
RESOLUTION NO 3729
A RE,SOLU`i'ION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HUNTINGTON BEACH AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE
MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE CONTRACT WITH
CERTAIN PARTIES IN CONNECTION WITH THE CLASS
ACTION LAWSUIT FILED BY ROBERT TERRY
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Huntington
Beach that it hereby approves the attached contract, and author-
izes and directs the Mayor and City Clerk to execute same upon
execution of the contract by ROBERT TERRY, individually and as
manager of the class in that certain class action entitled,
Robert 0. Terry, Executor of the Estate of Elmyra Irene Terry, in
BeAalf of Himself in a Repre entative Capacity and A].1 Other
Owners of 113 Parcels of Land vs. G'itA of Huntington B-aa.ch, a
municipal corporation, et al., Case No. 181 1I19; ARTHUR D. GUY,
J JR , as attorney for the c:Ass MARTHA HOLT, individually and
as member of the class; GEORGE INGRAHAM, individually and as
member of the class; and VTN CONSOLIDATED, INC.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of
Huntington Beach at an adjourned regular meeting thereof held
on the 6th day of July, 1973•
May
ATTEST; APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ALICIA M. Y'aENTIgQRTH
City Clerk ow —12r'4
B Y
Deputy City Clemi� ' ire
%� Ole
loe
( 4,
i
,J
n
.r.s. No.. Jl G7
STAXE OF CAL I FORNTA )
COUNTY OF ORANCE.
CITY OF-IIUMi'INCTON IWAC11 )
I AIICIA M. dF NTdOTTH
the duly appointed, qualified Cit
y
Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach, and ex-officio Clerk of the
City Council of said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of
members of the City Council of the City of HuntingtonBeachis seven;
that the foregoing resolution was
passed and adopted by the affirmative
vote of more than a majority -w all the members of said City Council
at a regular meeting,
thereof held on the 6th day
of July 19 73 by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmen:
Shipley, Bartlett, Green,
Coen, Duke, Matney
NOES: Councilmen:
None
ABSENT: Cou,. ilment
Gibbs
'
City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk.
of the 'City Council o:U the City
of Hurtt .ngton Beach, California
t
by Deputy City -Clerk
4
i
DON P. BONFA, City Attorney
MICHAEL H. MILLER, Deputy City Attorney
2 City of Huntington Beach
P. 0. Box 190
Huntington Beach, Califorr,.ia 92648
4 Telephone: 536-5261
5 Attorneys for Defendant
6
7
8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9 FOR THE COUNTY OF ORANGE
1.0 ROBERT C. TERRY, Executor of the )
Estate of Elmyra Irene Terry, In ) CASE NO. 181 149
11 Behalf of Himself in a Represent-)
ative Capacity and All other ) STIPULATION UNDER C.C.P. 583
12 Owners of 133 Parcels of L,,nd, ) EXTENDING TIME FOR BRINGING
ACTION TO TRIAL WITHIN FIVE
13 Plaintiffs, ) YEARS
14 VS. }
1.5 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, a )
municipal corporation,
1�
17 Defendant.
1.8 WHEREAS, the above class action was brought against
lg the Defendant, CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, seeking damages for di-
20' minution in property value; and
21 WHEREAS, the City and leaders of the class are desirous
22 of settling the class action without liti.gatlon and are exploring
23 a plan of development of the downtown area by which the members of
24 the class will receive a benefit; and
25 WHEREAS, the development and implementation of a plan
26 to redevelop the downtown area which will benefit the class and
27 thereby form the 'basis for a. compromise settlement and dismissal
28 of the action requires that the class action be held in abeyance
1.
AM
I for a period of time sufficient to accomplish, this goal;
2 NOW, THEREFORE, the parties through their respective
3 counsel below, stipulate as follows
4 The time for bringing the above action to trial, as set
5 forth in Code of Civil Procedures 583, is hereby extended for a
6 period of years subject to the follow.ng terms and con-
7 ditions•
A. This time moratorium shall continue so Tong as
9 genuine and realistic efforts are mutually pursued by VTN and
10 City of Huntington Beach which are directed toward the prompt
17.creation of a plan of development in the five-blocY downtown
12 Huntington Beach area affected by the above class action (namely,
13 Blocks 101 through 105)
14 B. Any party to this action may bring, upon proper
15 notice, an Order to Show Cause hearing to have a deter-mination of
16 whether or not the plan is being pursued in a _°easonable manner so
17 as to achieve the goal of this stipulation.
18 C. In the event a determination is made that the plan
19 is not being diligently pursued, or if it appears that the plan
20 is incapable of producing a benefit to the class, then the Court
21 may, prior to the time by which trial has been extended, as set
22 forth herein, fix a reasonable date on or before which any party
23 may file a Certificate of Readiness. the matter ?%ill coed to
24 trial (after all motions pending and future are exhaua',.efl) in the
26 usual course of Court business <having only those prior it4.es, if
26 any, provided by statute. If no Certificate of Readiness is filed
27 within the time permitted by the Court, the matter shall be dis-
2s 1 massed for lack of prosecution, unless the time for filing such
2
i
0
Certificate shall have been extended by the Court upon a s.111owing'
of good cause therefor.
D. In the event a plan is developed which 'achieves the
purposes of this moratorium and produces a sati:sfactoi•y benefit
to the class, upon noticed motion by any party, the Court shall
set a hearing, upon such terms and conditions as the Court shall
direct, for the purpose of considering the fairness of the com-
promise and issuing its order of dismissal of the class action
based thereon.
E. Nothing herein shall in any way prejudice the merits
of penJing or future motions in this matter, nor constitute an ad-
mission of liability by the parties hereto.
DATED: 1973.
Attorney for Plaintiff. Gh
Attorney for Defendant
19 City of Huntington Beach
20 APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
21
22
City Attor ey Attorney Law
23 VTN, Inc
2Q
25 So ordered this day of November, 1973._
26
27
Nudge of the Superior Court
28
3'
A G R E E M E N T
THIS AGREEMENT entered into at the City of Huntington
Beach, State of California, this 16th day of July, 1973, by and
between the CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, a municipal corporation,
hereinafter referred to as CITY; VTN CONSOLIDATED, INC., herein-
after referred to as VTN; ROBERT TERRY, individually and as a
"member and manager of the class; MARTHA HOLT, individually and
as a member of the class, and MARTHA HOLT, Trustee of Martha
Holt Trust; and GEORGE INGRAHAM, i•':dividually and as a member of
the class,
WHEREAS, ROBERT TERRY, individually and as a member
I�
and manager of the class; MARTHA HOLT, individually and as a
member of the class, and MARTHA HOLT, Trustee of Martha Holt
Trust; GEORGE INGRAHAM individually and as a member of the class;
and other owners of real property, have filed a class action.
Orange County No. 181 149 (hereinafter r9ferred to uG ':class
action") against CITY in connection with CITY'S proposed
development of the downtown area and pier; and
WHEREAS, VTN is preparing a development plan for the
downtown area and pier and
WHEREAS, it is to the best interest of all parties that
an amicable settlement be reached so that further litigation will
not be necessary,
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual agree-
ments contained herein, it is agreed by and between ROBERT TERRY,
individually and as a member and manager of the class; MARTHA
HOLT, individually and as member of the class, and MARTHA HOLT,
Trustee of Martha Holt Trust; GEORGE INGRAHAM, individually and
as member of the class, VTN and CITY as follows: `
1. VTN shall prepare a development plan for the downtown
i
� 1•
i
area and pier in Huntington Beach, California. The CITY will.
cooperate with VTN in its preparation of a development plan for
the ,downtown area: of at least the five blocks that is the sub-
ject of the class action and the pier. It is understood that•the
cost of the preparation :of the plan, will be borne entirely by.VTN
with the CITY cooperating in the preparation of the plan.. The plan
will be reviewed by CITY staff and presented to the Planning
Commission as a proposed master plan amend...ant and will go
through the normal du( process procedures as expeditiously as
possible.
2. It is the intent and objective of the parties to
this agreement that the class represented by ROBERT TERRY will,
if the development is carried out, be enabled to market their
property on a. reasonable basis, except that CITY does not guar-
antee that it shall purchase said property.
3. The CITY will provide public parking facilities
where required by the VTN plan.
4. In conjunction with the VTN plan, the CITY, VTN,
MARTHA HOLT and ROBERT TERRY shall work out a`detailed imple-
mentation plan.
I 5. Upon the execution of this'Agreement, Cedric White,
Appraiser, shall be retained by CITY Vo update the appraisals he
has heretofor,a made on the following described city -owned prop-
erties, and upon conclusion of such appraisals, an escrow shall
be opened by which CITY shall sell to the below -named parties,
and the below -named parties shall buy such hereinafter described
properties at the Cedric White appraisal values, which shall be
at ,fair market value. Such escrow shall contain the following
contingencies;
(1) Approval by the City Council of the
VTN plan.
(2) The VTN plan, as approved by the City
Council, shows the following city -owned property to be not
needed for public parking purposes
2.
(3) The dismissal with prejudice of the
class action.
(4) The below -named purchasers of said
property agree for themselves and their successors in in-
terest that such property shall be used only for the purpose
of implementing such council -approved VTN plan.
The followingdescribed city -owned rop-
erty, located in the five -block area, bounded by Walnut Avenue,
Pacific Coast Highway, Sixth Street and Lake Street, shall be
placed in escrow as described in this paragraph:
Block 101 to VTN;
Block 102 and 103 to MARTHA HOLT as
Trustee of Martha Holt Trust,
Block 104 to ROBERT TERRY; and
Block 105 to GEORGE INGRAHAM.
6. VTN will be responsible for the funding
diog of the
development and construction of the entire redevelopment project,
including the CITY pier, in accordance with said VTN plan.
7. If a convention center is part of the Plan, the
CITY will encourage private development of the convention center.
However, if private 'development is not feasible, CITY will de-
velop a convention center, if it is feasible to do so.
8. The CITY agrees to install underground lighting
improvements in the aforementioned five -block area. However, if
the convention center is constructed through private development,
CITY agrees to install all necessary underground utilities
in said five -block area.
9. The CITY will utilize the Community Redevelopment'
Act to implement the plan, if required.
10. Commencing immediately and continuing for the
duration of the procedures and provisions contained herein, a
moratorium zhall be placed upon said class action pending
against CITY, and the parties thereto shall so stipulate and such
3.
stipulation shall be submitted to the court forthwith for its
approval. Said stipulation will provide that the period of the
moratorium herein provided shall extend for an equal period the
time to obtain judgment pursuant to Section 583 of the California
Code of Civil Procedure; that the CITY shall waive the statute of
limitations to bring to trial, for an equal period.
11. After the Planning Commission has adopted the
plan prepared by VTN and simultaneously with City Council ap-
proval thereof, the class action shall bedismissedwith prejudice.
12. All of the terms of this Agreement shall be sub-
ject to all Legal requi•t�ements .
13. The City Administrator is authorized and directed
to take whatever steps necessary to implement the procedures
contained in this Agreement subject to the approval of the City
Council.
14. Upon dismissal of said class action, CITY will
pay present Counsel of Record in said class action reasonable
attorney's fees to be determined as soon as possible after exe-
cution of this Agreement by the court in said class action for
legal services rendered in connection with subject class action;
and such fees shall Ve placed in escrow by CITY and shall be
paid over to said attorneys of record,upon'the dismissal of
said class action with prejudice in accordance with paragraph
11 of this Agreement
15. All parties hereto agree to cooperate with all
f other parties to this Agreement for the purpose of assuring the
successful accomplishment of the purposes of this Agreement.
16. By executing this Agreement, none of the parties
hereto makes any admission against interest nor does any party
hereto waive any rights in and to the litigation and the subject
matter of such litigation except as expressly provided in this
Agreement, and only so long as this Agreement remains in full
4.
°^
force and eff ct Tf at any time this Agreement terminates or
if the performance of unexecuted portions hereof become impos-
sible, the parties, at that time, may renew their respective
positions in such class action without prejudice upon twenty
(20) days written notice to the other parties of this Agreement.
Nor shall this Agreement or any part or provision hereof be used
in evidence in any legal proceeding nor any of the events or
circumstances leading to the execution of this Agreement be uzed
in evidence in any legal proceeding including the class action
discussed herein for any purpose whatsoever, except that the
attorney's fee provision contained in paragraph 14 of this
Agreement shall he operable in accordance with the terms of
paragraph.14, and further except that this provision shall not
apply to any litigation whose purpose is the enforcement of t'-__Qs
Agreement. The intention and purpose of this Agreement is to
accomplish the successful redevelopment of the downtown area
of Huntington Beach, California, and collaterally this Agreement
is intended to be in settlement and compromise of the class
(REST OV WAGE NOT USED)
5
action described herein.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed
thi* Agreement the day, month, and year appearing be];ow.
DATED: 1973.
CITY OF HUNT NGTON BEACH,
a nicipal rerporation,
Mayer
ATTEST: - APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Clerk Ci y Attor y
DATED. _, 1973.
VTN CONSOLIDATED, INC. _..
l
r � `
p � r
". .J By
ROBERT TERRY, indivi(Yually
and as member and mapager of
the class
MARTHA HOLT, individually MARTHA HOLT, Trustee o
and as membeo of the class Martha Halt Trust
APPRO D AS TO FORM:
OR INGRAH , individually A orney for Plaint 711s
and as membe of the class
The foregoing instrument is a correct co,:
of the original on file in this office.
Attest
City Clock un,d Ex -office,) CkA� of the C'.
Council of the Ci.y of M ,: ' on Qeecli,CM
x- n^n+ '
I
Eel
. CITY OF HUNTI� GTON BEACH CA 73-29
COUNCIL -ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNICATION
HUNTINGWN BEACH
To Honorable Mayor and From City Administrator
City Council Members
Subject LETTER FROM THOMAS M. Date February 27, 1973
WHALING
Attached is a letter from Thomas M. Whaling regarding
redevelopment of the downtown Main Street area. He has
requested on behalf of the downtown property owners the
City Council to consider at its March 5th r;teeting the
matter of redevelopment of the Main Street area.
Mr. Whaling has requested additional information and
material to assist them in .their study of the area.
Recommendation;,
It is my recommendation that the City Council continue
action on Mr. Whaling's request to April 2, 1973 to allow
time for the staff to prepare a response to Mr. Whaling's
request. I would like to point out that the Building
Department and Fire Department will be conducting a survey
of this area in the very near future and the Council should
be aware of their findings prior 10 making any determination.
in this area.
Respectfully submitted,
David D. ,)wlands
City Administrator
�r
DDR:eh
Attachment
MHALING AND HANSEN TO:
ATTOP.N—'S AT LAW i .
THClMAS M. WHALING `�re t�fi� M'Yiii�(i9�a ill) L1�t4l3tS DANK OF • AMERICA TOWS.
RALPH L.HAN5EN��a SU'-iE 403. TkE CITY "+1`
1a ONE CITY BOULEVARD WEST
ORANGE, CALIFORNIA 92668
TELEPHONE (714) 83S-7422
of°'^ Februa_26•,- .1,973
RE: Redevelopment41of Downtown Main
Street Area;'Huntington Beach
TO: DAVID ROWLANDS Attention`: City Council
City Administrator
Fp3M THOMAS M. WHALING
1.
I, on behalf of the Downtown propertyowners, am requesting that the
city council put on its agenda for. March 5, 1973 the matter of the
redevelopment of the Downtown Main Street Area. As a representative
of the property owners in that area, I am formally requesting the city`s
cooperation and involvement in improving the quality of life in this
area.
2.
There area number of reasons why this area should be redeveloped.
The obvious need not be stated. However, we believe that the
increased sales tax revenue that would result from redevelopment would
greatly benefit Huntington Beach as a whole. We also know a redevelop-
ment ::ill drastically improve the environment and we are aware that
a development of a Specialty Commerciai Center is the best way to
recoup many of the tax dollars spent by the city from which out-of-
towners benefit.
3.
While some of us have some very definite ideas about how the redevelop-
ment of this area should be accomplished, we have learned that in the
past the city has purchased resed:.eh and participated in studies for
the redevelopment,oE this area and we are, very desirous of learning
just what was learned from these studies. We are also desirous of
acquiring a large scale aerial photograph and a scale n.odel mockups
of this area. The reason we seek the above items is that in one of
our meetings this month, Mr. Rex Link, an authority in solving parking
problems, advised us that these are the very basics from which to start
a plan for redevelopment.
. cont'd
RE: Redevelopment of Downtown Main Street Area
Huntington Beach
February 26, 1973
page two
4.
We are also desirous of learning how the .city views the impact of
the Coastline Initiative. We will need guidance in that area, even
if what is eventually conceived by the property owners is not a
substantial change to the environment. We are specifically asking
for your guidance because initially the property owners thought they
would like to change some of the vehicularandpedestrian traffic
patterns in that area.
5.
It has tome to our attention that possibly the city may consider it
untimely to participate in redevelopment because of the class action
initiated by the Terry Family. I would like to address the council.
and make some suggestions relative to a plan of improvement that will
benefit all the property owners in that class action, and as such,
it will have a. dollar value that would accrue to them. Mr. Terry
is one of those property owners in the group I've been meeting with
and he is very desirous of going forward with redevelopment immediately.
6
We would also like to know what the current conceptual thinking of
the city is with respect to the following
A. A freeway route into the beach city area.
B. Zoning for this area.. (We are desirous of participating in
formulating the master plan for this area.)
C. Development of properties owned by the city in this area.
D. Requesting revenue from anyone currently benefitting from the
use of city properties at the taxpayers' expense.
E. Use of revenue sharing (State & Federal) dollars for this area.
F. Allowing the property owners to develop a name for the area that
will be officially recognized by the city.
G. What projects are planned for the pier and related parking areas.
H. What the city plans to do with the old civic center.
I. 14hether a specialty commercial center for Downtown Main Street
is the most advantageous redevelopment in the city's eyes
...cont'd