HomeMy WebLinkAboutApprove conceptual design plans for three permanent visitor- ��� f
Council/Agency Meeting Held:
Deferred/Continued to:
10 A prov d ❑ Conditionally Approved ❑ Denied City I k's Si nature
Council Meeting Date: 1/20/2009 Department ID Number: CS09-001
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNf,14 MEMBERS
SUBMITTED BY: FRED A. WILSON, CITY ADMINIST
PREPARED BY: JIM B. ENGLE, COMMUNITY SERVICE DIRECT
SUBJECT: APPROVE PIER BUILDINGS DESIGN CONCEPTS, VIEW THIRD
BUILDING FUNCTION, AND CONCESSIONAIRES SELECTION
PROCESS
Statement of Issue,Funding Source,Recommended Action,Alternative Action(s),Analysis,Environmental Status,Attachments)
Statement of Issue: City Council approval of design concepts for the new pier buildings,
review function of third building, and concessionaire selection process is needed to proceed
with the permanent pier building project.
Funding Source: Redevelopment funds of $700,000 are budgeted in the FY 2008/2009
Capital Improvements Program Budget, Fund 305, for two permanent buildings. Note: If
additional funding is required for a third building after the architect completes the construction
plans and provides the engineer's estimate, staff will return to City Council with options.
Recommended Action: Motion to:
1. Approve the conceptual designs for the three new permanent visitor-serving buildings on
the Municipal Pier with Option A with the slanted Tower Zero- type windows designated
for the two buildings on the first platform (Attachment 1) and Option B with the columns
and arches similar to the adjacent restroom designated for the building on the third
platform (Attachment 2).
2. Direct staff to negotiate a market rate lease with the current pier concessionaires, Surf
City Store, Kite Connection, and Let's Go Fishing, using the city's standard
concessionaire's agreement.
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
MEETING DATE: 1/20/2009 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CS09-001
Alternative Action(s):
1. Do not approve conceptual designs as recommended by Design Review Board, and
advise staff how to proceed.
2. Direct staff to proceed with the Design Review Board's recommendation of Option B with
the columns; arches, etc similar to the adjacent restroom building on all three new buildings
(Attachment 2).
3. Direct staff not to proceed with negotiations for city's standard concessionaire's agreement
with the Surf City Store, Kite Connection and Let's Go Fishing and, instead, proceed with a
Request for Qualifications (RFQ) to solicit proposals for these types of uses on the pier.
4. Direct staff to use one of the three buildings for a snack bar. This action would require the
Surf City Store and the Kite Connection to permanently share one building.
Note: There are limitations or constraints relative to this option that are reviewed within the
Analysis section of this RCA under the heading Snack Bar.
Analysis: City Council approved construction of two permanent visitor-serving buildings
on the Municipal Pier, in accordance with the existing Coastal Development Permit (CDP). In
addition to the previously constructed buildings (Tower Zero, Ruby's, and restroom) on the
pier, that CDP permits the city to construct two additional, permanent buildings: a 620 square
foot building and an 800 square foot building. Per City Council direction, staff has proceeded
to move forward with design for a third permanent building and processing of a Coastal
Development Permit for that third building.
Conceptual Design
At the December 15, 2008 study session, council requested staff to take the conceptual
design options to the Design Review Board (DRB) for its recommendation. DRB reviewed
the project on January 8, 2009.
Community Services staff recommended two concepts as depicted in Attachments 1 and 2.
Staff presented Option A for the first platform closest to the foot of the pier which included a
six-sided building reflecting the architectural design detail of Tower Zero with angled
windows. Option B was presented for the third platform; it is the six-sided design with
elements similar to the adjacent pier restroom building, including the columns, arches with
the addition of windows (not included in the restroom structure). Community Services staff
felt that two options allowed there to be symmetry of design at each platform, but by having a
different design for the third platform (that matched the other building on that platform), there
would be more variety overall. This would result in making the new pier buildings
aesthetically more pleasing, unique and interesting for the public.
Design Review Board felt that Option A with the slanted windows similar to Tower Zero was
potentially too bulky and the slanted windows are not functional. The windows are included to
add a unique architectural design element; they are not needed for light or viewing through.
DRB recommended only Option B for all three buildings. Staff respectfully recommends both
-2. 1/13/2009 7:45 AM
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
MEETING DATE: 1/20/2009 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CS09-001
options for the reasons delineated above. DRB's recommendation is presented under
Alternative Action #2.
Both designs are in accordance with the Downtown Specific Plan for District 10, which states
all structures on the municipal pier are to maintain public access around the structure, which
would preclude any building abutting the pier railing. Also both of these options maximize the
usable square footage within the existing pier platforms.
Final City Council direction is needed regarding the architectural style and design elements
of the new buildings in order for the construction plans to be completed. The goal is to have
the three buildings partially constructed offsite and installation/assembly completed on the
pier in May, 2009. At this point, the public will see completed building shells. This
significantly shortens the time for construction on the pier and thereby reduces the impact on
the public. The concessionaires would then complete tenant improvements in June 2009. A
delay in the approval of the CDP for the third building could delay construction of the third
building until fall 2009.
Building Funding
The original council action approved funding of $700,000 for two buildings. Council later
added the third building. Once the construction plans and specifications are complete, the
consultant will be able to provide the engineer's cost estimate for all three buildings. At that
time, staff may need to return to City Council to request additional funds. Due to the
modular-type construction, it may be possible to construct all three buildings with the existing
funding for the two original buildings.
Signage and Building Height
Per council's request at the December 15, 2008 study session, staff directed the architect to
identify areas for signage on the buildings. This has been done. As with other city
concessions, the individual operators will be required to take their sign designs through the
city's standard sign review process in the Planning Department. Note: Signage on these pier
building roofs will not be considered to address council concerns expressed at the study
session.
At the study session, council asked the height of the proposed concession buildings. Option
A is approximately 20 feet at peak. Option B is 18 feet high. This compares to the current
trailers that are approximately 10 to 11 feet high. Tower Zero is 37 feet, the existing
restroom is 19 feet and Ruby's is 45 feet in height.
Potential Snack Bar
At the December 15, 2008 study session, there was some council discussion regarding the
possibility of having a food and beverage concession in one of the three permanent buildings
on the pier; no formal action was taken. Staff has researched the issue and provides the
following information to City Council:
-3- 1/13/2009 7:29 AM
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
MEETING DATE: 1/20/2009 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CS09-001
The current lease between the City of Huntington Beach and Ruby's Diner, Inc. states, in
Section 2.4: "Non-Competition: City covenants and agrees to allow only the following
products to be sold from any permanent or temporary concession on the pier: soft drinks,
hot beverages, bottled water, juices, pre-packaged snacks, muffins, cookies, candy
and pre-packaged sandwiches..." Further, the City Attorney has opined that alcoholic
beverages are excluded from the items allowable for sale per this term of the agreement. If
City Council directs staff to pursue a food concession that can serve alcoholic beverages or
other items not included above, then the city would be required to renegotiate the city's
existing agreement with Ruby's Diner. This could significantly delay putting a snack bar on
the pier. When Ruby's corporate office was contacted regarding this issue, they didn't
indicate an interest in eliminating or modifying this clause.
Staff has confirmed with Orange County Health Department that such a food and/or
beverage concession is allowable, but would require its own ADA-accessible restroom within
the premises, as well as a separate area with a mop sink. This limits the floor space within
the small 620 SF building that would remain to serve the public.
The goal is for this third building to be completed with the other two buildings, but would not
open until fall, 2009 after an RFQ process, council approval of the concessionaire and
contract, then completion of the tenant improvements by the concessionaire. This would
avoid any negative impact to the public during the peak summer season on the pier.
However, this option would require the Surf City Store and Kite Connection to share one
building on a permanent basis. This option is provided for City Council consideration under
Alternative Action #4.
Concessionaires Selection Process
City Council's previous direction identified three uses or services for the pier: bait & tackle
shop, kite shop and souvenir shop. Staff was also directed by City Council to have the
souvenir store and kite store share space in one permanent building on an interim basis IF
the first two buildings were constructed prior to the third building. Staff is endeavoring to
have all three buildings completed at the same time.
If the city utilizes the standard concessionaire's agreement and negotiates a market rate,
then City Council may chose to enter into said agreement with the Kite Connection, Surf City
Store and Let's Go Fishing. This has been confirmed through the City Attorney.
Staff is recommending this approach because all three concessionaires have been providing
service to the public on the pier for over a decade under special permits. They have also
acted as good ambassadors for the city to pier visitors. Council also acknowledged their
service to the community and commented on working with the three businesses when the
permanent buildings were constructed; Council did not take a formal action at that time.
City Council could instead direct staff to move forward with a RFQ process. This. option is
presented to City Council in Alternative Action # 3. Though the building exteriors would be
completed by summer, the advertising, negotiating, and preparation of the agreement would
-4- 1/13/2009 7:29 AM
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
MEETING DATE: 1/20/2009 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CS09-001
potentially not bring the new concessionaires on board to begin tenant improvements until
later in summer. Staff would then recommend postponing the tenant improvements until
after summer so as to limit the impact on the general public using the pier. The three
buildings (minus tenant improvements) would still be built prior to summer.
Strategic Plan Goal:
City Services, C-2: Provide quality public services with the highest professional standards to
meet community expectation and needs, assuring that the city is sufficiently staffed and
equipped overall.
Land Use and Economic Development, L-4: Create an environment that promotes tourism
to increase revenues to support community services and transform the city's economy into a
destination economy.
Environmental Status: The original entitlements for five (5) pier buildings, Conditional Use
Permit No. 91-19 and Coastal Development Permit No. 91-9, were covered under
Environmental Impact Report No. 89-8 adopted by the City Council on May 15, 1990.
Planning Department is processing the CDP now for the third building. It will be subject to
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act.
Aftachment(s):
City Clerk's
Page Number No. Description
1. Conceptual Design OPTION A
2. Conceptual Design OPTION B
3. Site Ma
-5- 1/13/2009 7:29 AM
2. Approve the Agreement of Parties Re: Disposition and
Development Agreement on the condition that there is no provision
of the final construction loan agreement that is inconsistent with the
DDA; and,
3. Authorize the Executive Director to execute any and all
agreements in furtherance of this request.
Approved as amended by Late Communication 7-0
ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS
21. (City Council) Approve projects to receive the highest level of focus for
funding efforts by the City's Federal Lobbyists during the 2009 legislative
session; and, approve support for Mayor Newsom's Advancement of
Renewal Ocean Power as recommended by the City Council
Intergovernmental Relations Committee (IRC) Members: Councilmember
Jill Hardy, Chair, Mayor Keith Bohr, and Councilmember Don Hansen.
Recommended Action:
a) Approve as submitted the 2010 Federal Funding Agenda; and,
b) Approve signing a letter in support of Mayor Newsom's efforts to advance
renewable ocean power.
Approved 7-0
022- (City Council) Approve the conceptual design plans for the three
permanent visitor-serving buildings on the Municipal Pier; review third
building function; and, direct staff to negotiate lease with the current pier
concessionaires, Surf City Store, Kite Connection, and Let's Go Fishing.
Recommended Action:
a) Approve the conceptual designs for the three new permanent visitor-
serving buildings on the Municipal Pier with Option A with the slanted
Tower Zero-type windows designated for the two buildings on the first
platform, and Option B with the columns and arches similar to the
adjacent restroom designated for the building on the third platform; and,
b) Direct staff to negotiate a market rate lease with the current pier
concessionaires, Surf City Store, Kite Connection, and Let's Go Fishing,
using the City's standard concessionaire's agreement.
1) Approved recommended action (A & B above) as amended to
include:
c) rooflines height of Option B to be the same as current
restroom at 19 feet
d) sliding or folding doors that disappear are to be used on
Options A & B
Approved 7-0
Council/Agency Action Agenda—Tuesday, January 20, 2009 Page 7 of 6
2) Approved to designate new concession building on 3rd platform
to be snack bar in addition to bait& tackle shop (utilizing same
concessionaire) and that the building would include windows on the
north side.
Approved 6-1 (Green No)
3) Motion was made to roof the buildings with blue metal on the 2nd
platform & green metal on 1st platform
Motion Failed 3-4 (Dwyer, Green, Hardy, Hansen No)
COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS (Not Agendized)
ADJOURNMENT— 8:39 PM
Council/Agency adjournment to a Special Meeting on Friday, January 30, 2009 at
8:00 AM at the Huntington Beach Central Library, Room C and D, 7111 Talbert
Avenue, Huntington Beach, California 92648, for a Strategic Planning Retreat.
The next regularly scheduled meeting will be Monday, February 2, 2009 at 4:00 PM
in Room B-8, Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California.
INTERNET ACCESS TO CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA AND
STAFF REPORT MATERIAL IS AVAILABLE PRIOR TO CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS AT
http://www.suffcity-hb.or_g
Council/Agency Action Agenda—Tuesday, January 20, 2009 Page 8 of 6
ATTACHMENT #1
OPTION A
I -Him § s "
s r
w
s w 4x•i� � +� �m`v
✓w�
ATTACHMENT #2
OPTION B
77
ME
r y
ate, ;x
w.
'a n':..""..',. '.��' �•��. «��r`,st-«tip ,..
m/a
� t �
� � r
.,r '
ATTACHMENT #3
y.
s
1 CQ
,
Y t
A
� � Kits Cot�nec>rron(P�
r,777-,
,:,'' ."��y
r � fit ��'� �♦ Surf City,Store,(PP)
c
41 a 4�
sr ,ga TcawerZero '
t.
a
y«.
1 �
LO's Q9 Fishing(P) "I ,P �' �r,:x
Proposed Permanent Structures
r Public Re for Huntington Beach Pier
straont
. +� •` � O Exist�at9 StruCte�r2S +
CFj inditatgs.Partab[e
'4'fr `r�� F�euna6�ene57AuMCFr�s ``
,u RUby'S Rhr3r c�,(3Liblic Re---RI
SXr,:.. •.1" 'ra >:+.F• ,. ;:i_ S .}.?S +kid^., ,.S£��. :'��i"aU �'
RCA ROUTING SHEET
INITIATING DEPARTMENT: Community Services
SUBJECT: Pier Buildings Concepts/Concessions
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: January 20, 2009
RCA ATTACHMENTS STATUS
Ordinance (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Attached ❑
Not Applicable
Resolution (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Attached ❑
Not Applicable ❑
Tract Map, Location Map and/or other Exhibits Attached
Not Applicable ❑
Contract/Agreement (w/exhibits if applicable) Attached ❑
(Signed in full by the City Attorney) Not Applicable
Subleases, Third Party Agreements, etc. Attached ❑
(Approved as to form by City Attorney) Not Applicable
Certificates of Insurance (Approved by the City Attorney) Attached ❑
Not Ap licable
Fiscal Impact Statement (Unbudgeted, over $5,000) Attached ❑
Not Applicable
Bonds (If applicable) Attt achedNoAp plicable
Staff Report (If applicable) Attached ❑
Not Ap licable
Commission, Board or Committee Report (If applicable) Attached ❑
Not Ap licable
Findings/Conditions for Approval and/or Denial Attached ❑
Not Applicable
EXPLANATION FOR �iIiISSING ATTACHMENTS
REVIEWED RETURNED FORWARDED
Administrative Staff ( ) ( )
Deputy City Administrator (Initial) ( ) )
City Administrator (initial)
( ( )
City Clerk ( )
EXPLANATION FOR RETURN OF ITEM:
Only)(Below Space For City Clerk's Use
RCA Author: L. Brunson
Replace 3 trailers on Pier
CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
JANUARY 20, 2009
:PERMANENT PIER BUILDINGS
Follow up to 12/15 Study Session
PERMANENT PIER BUILDINGS FUNDING
Issues ➢$700,000 in RDA funds for two buildings
Approve Pier Buildings Design ➢City Council direction to pursue third building
Concepts
➢ Review Third Building Function ➢After Council design approval, consultant will
provide engineer's estimate for three units
);-Concessionaire Selection Process ❑ Modular construction potentially reduces
costs
If additional funds required, staff will return
to City Council for additional allocation
�j�
EXISTING STRUCTURES
Tower Zero
-Colors,concrete wood shake roof&angled windows
Approve Pier Buildings
Design Concepts
DESIGN REVIEW CRITERIA EXISTING STRUCTURES
Ruby's—UNIQUE LANDMARK w/Red Tile Roof
Design Review Board(DRB)looked at other Columns,arches&colors
structures in the area for design elements.
These include:
➢ Type of architectural design
➢ Colors
➢ Type of materials
➢ Specific design elements � z
➢ Compatibility with surroundings
I
i
ii
2
I
EXISTING STRUCTURES OPTION L°A"ANGLED WINDOW DESIGN
Restroom @ 3rd Platform Staff recommendation for 1 st platform
•6 sided, columns arches, colors xh�
�� £�`�d�ly 'L.`�f1. 2, y � S„�� `�'� �.�'f F � „'�<>r�:,,� chlr 'a ,✓'I"«�,`
NEW BUILDING LOCATIONS OPTION "All ANGLED WINDOW DESIGN
Pier Platforms = 6 sided = design element View with Tower Zero in background'
k i
VIEW DOWN PIER
3
OPTIONiQB"COLUMN AND ARCH DESIGN RELATIVE HEIGHT OF PIER BUILDINGS
Staff recommendation for the 3rd platfoim
z a ao Fa
25
20
10
\ �. •(Heigh in feet)
� e a
COLUMN AND ARCH DESIGN Building Design Elements
6-sided bldg.fits 6-sided platform
Third Platform shape k
i Smooth stucco sides
Accent band at bottom of bldg.
k ---, Window&door frames wl accent
Fcolor
i Wail signage(not on roofs)
-- T'k�� Same exterior color scheme as
f �
other pier buildings
w� r 1S'Platform:Angled Windows under
eves;same for both sides of pier=
��
symmetry
3rd Platform: Columns&arches— � i
symmetry w/existing restroorn
j ➢Art/mural wall facing into pier
— -
Concrete"wood shake"roof tiles
(alternative=blue/green metal.roof)
4
CONCEPTUAL DESIGN'ELEMENTS
Jenysis Della Rib metal roofing
Standard Roofing
Metal Roof Color Selection
Review Third Building
,
Function
"OPTION
Design Review Board THIRD BUILDING FUNCTION
City Council has approved three uses for the
• Recommended using Option B for all three three buildings
new buildings ➢Souvenir store
-Felt Option A is too bulky at top with the ➢Kite store
angled windows,which are not functional
➢Bait and Tackle shop
Staff recommends Option A at 1 st platform and
Option B at 31d platform because two options Staff researched possibility of a snack bar
add architectural interest overall,while on the pier
providing symmetry at each platform
5
THIRD BUILDING FUNCTION
(on 15t platform) Additional Option for Snack Bar
Originally Neptune's Locker on 1`5t platform
over the water with no setback Offer permitted pre-packaged foods and non
Current view=over the sand; setback required alcoholic beverages at Bait&Tackle concession
• Similar to services offered at lake-side bait&
tackle shops
• Larger building at 31d platform than 1st platform
�w s
,,� • Add stools at window to look at ocean, surfers,
etc.(similar to Neptune's Locker)
• Current concessionaire willing to provide service
ori9rnal v�ev+"--� ,Current view
THIRD BUILDING FUNCTION
POTENTIAL SNACK BAR 1st PLATFOR
o Per Ruby's agreement, only pre-packaged
snacks and non-alcoholic beverages could be offered Concessionaire Selection
o Require an internal, ADA-accessible restroom; Process
reducing public internal space
o Requires souvenir store and kite store to
share one building on a permanent basis
o Originally, pier snack bar existed, but no
Zack's Pier Plaza
6
CONCESSIONAIRES CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDED ACTION
• Current pier concessionaires: 1 Approve Option A conceptual design for
Surf City Store first platform, and Option B for third
Kite Connection platform
Let's Go Fishing 2 Direct staff to negotiate market rate
Each has been operating,with special leases with the current pier
permits, for over a decade concessionaires using city's standard
agreement
Each has been providing service to
residents and visitors
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
Concessionaires Selection Process 1. Do not approve conceptual designs as
recommended and give other direction
2. Direct staff to proceed with Design Review
-.'-City Council may direct staff to negotiate Board's recommendation of Option B for all
directly with current concessionaires, three buildings
using the city's standard agreement 3.Advise staff to proceed with Request for
Qualifications process for concessionaires
o This would provide continuity of service to the 4. Direct staff to use one of the three buildings for
community and preserve community partners a snack bar
Other Alternatives:
o Alternative Action: Direct staff to move Use metal roofs instead of concrete"wood
forward with RFQ process shingle'(specify color)
• Designate new concession building on 3rd
platform to be snack bar in addition to bait&
tackle shop(utilizing same concessionaire
7
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
PERMANENT PIER BUILDINGS
JAN UARY 20, 2009
8