Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOld Civic Center Buildings - Use of Studies - 1972 - 1979 - Or, 914S REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION ' Submitted by VINCENT G. MOORHOUSE Department HARBORS, BEACHES, RECREATION & PARKS Date Prepared March 12 , 19_a Backup Material Attached Yes a No Subject TO RFNT THE CITY OWN D R Ii DTNG AT 220 MAIN STREET, (REFERRED TO AS THE DOWNTOWN RFOFVFIOPMFNT OFF . ) City Administrator's Comments Approve as recommended. ®Y � �y CITY GOUNGiy L 197�_. .®..... GITcL Statement of Issue, Recommendation, Analysis, Funding Source, Alternative Actions: Q(1 46 Statement of Issue: The office building located at 220 Main Street has been vacant for over two years. It is our intent to rent the building for commercial use. Recommendation: The City Council instruct the staff to lease the building at a rate of $600 per month. Analysis: The office building was originally used for the Downtown Redevelopment Program. Since November, 1976, the City has taken a low profile in the redevelopment of the downtown area, and as a result of this slow down, the building has not been utilized. We feel that the building has the capability of providing a commercial need for the downtown area. We have communicated with Huntington Beach Realty and Charlie Davis, Real Property Representative, and they recommended that a fee of $600 per month be charged. Revenue per year would: be $7,200. ` Funding Source: Not required. Alternative Action: 1 . Rent-at a lower monthly rate through negotiations. 2. Do not rent the building and leave it vacant as has been done in the past. Plo 317E ` Daterrime 3/7/97 10:38:57 AM City of Huntington Beach Page 1 Office of the City Clerk Records Ref Category Subject Entered Status Document Expires Box ID Label 125.10 69 12/31/89 Inactive 250 5440 Public Facilities Corporation Development Projects- 1970- 89 125.20 69 12/31/86 Inactive 249 5438 Civic Improvement Corporation 1986 200.10 69 12/31/66 Inactive 143 3639 Municipal Buildings Lake Park Clubhouse 1962-1966 200.10 69 12/31/70 Inactive 143 3638 Civic Center Site#3 Opposite High School Reports& Recommendations 1963-1970 200.10 69 12/31/81 Inactive 250 5442 Municipal Buildings: Projections Capital Improvements Program Bldgs Personell Improvements 1964-81 200.10 69 12/31/65 Inactive 250 5441 Municipal Buildings: Remodeling 1964-65 Date/Time 3/7/97 10:39:05 AM City of Huntington Beach Page 2 Office of the City Clerk Records Ref Category Subject Entered Status Document Expires Box ID Label 200.10 69 12/31/71 Inactive 270 5569 Capital Improvements-Reports 1967, 1970& 1971 200.10 69 12/31/77 Inactive 270 5568 Civic Center-General 1977 210.20 69 12/31/74 Inactive CC 284 249 5436 Fowler Associations-Audio Visual Systems Central Library - CC-284 Central Library-1974 210.20 69 12/31/73 Inactive CC 268 249 5437 Public Facilities Corporation Honeywell Inc. -MSC 157/CC- 268 Civic Center/Library- 1973 265.10 69 12/31/89 Inactive 250 5439 Proposed Municipal Arts Center 538 Main Street- 1988- 89 430.10 69 12/31/88 Inactive 249 5435 City Housing Authority-Authorizatio to Proceed- 12/88 Daterrime 3/7/97 10:39:05 AM City of Huntington Beach Page 3 Office of the City Clerk Records Ref Category Subject Entered Status Document Expires Box ID Label 430.10 69 12/31/88 Inactive 270 5570 City Housing Authority- 1988 620.10 69 12/31/78 Inactive 270 5571 Historical-Election Returns 1964-78 Includes oversize documents 910.10 69 12/31/79 Inactive 270 5580 Old Civic Center Bldgs., Use of Studies 1972-79 910.10 69 12/31/88 Inactive 270 5579 Municipal Buildings-Civic Center Study- 1963-1988 910.10 69 12/31/66 Inactive 270 5577 Huntington Beach Company Historical File- 1924-1966 910.10 69 12/31/75 Inactive 270 5574 Antiquities Preservation - 1975 Date/Time 3/7/97 10:39:06 AM City of Huntington Beach Page 4 Office of the City Clerk Records Ref Category Subject Entered Status Document Expires Box ID Label 910.10 69 12/31/89 Inactive 270 5576 Historic Resources Survey Report Revision Report& Johnson Heumann Research- 1985-89 910.10 69 12/31/63 Inactive 270 5575 Douglas Missile-Space Division Historical File- 1962/63 Includes Oversize Document 910.10 69 .12/31/87 Inactive 270 5581 Municipal Buildings-City Gym& Pool 1981-1987 910.10 69 12/31/79 Inactive 270 5572 Municipal Buildings-Memorial Hall 1924-79 910.10 69 12/31/68 Inactive 270 5573 Municipal Buildings-Lake Park Clubhouse-Scout Cabin Recreation Dept. Control 1966-68 910.10 69 12/31/67 Inactive 270 5578 Municipal Buildings-Pavalon 1958-1967 Total Records Detailed: 24 • CITY OF HUnTInGTon BEACH DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES P. O. BOX 190, HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92648 (714) 536-5271 TO: Floyd G. Belsito, Citv Administrator FROM: James W. Palin, Acting Planning Director DATE: January 25, 1979 SUBJECT: JOINT SESSION: PLANNING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONS RE: SENIOR HOUSING ON OLD CIVIC CENTER SITE On September 18, 1978, the City Council endorsed the use of the Old Civic Center site for senior housing and a new senior citizens center and--authorized staff to request proposals from developers. The deadline for submitting proposals was December 22, 1978, and on that date staff received thirteen proposals for the project. The thirteen proposals have been reviewed by staff with the assistance of Urban Projects, Inc. acting as an economic feasibility consultant. The results of this review are now ready for presentation. To facilitate presentation of these proposals, a joint session of the Planning and Redevelopment Commissions is recommended. It is also suggested that the City Council (or a subcommittee of the Council) attend the joint session. At this meeting, the participants will receive a summary of all thirteen proposals and a presentation by the proponents of the top ranked proposals. The schedule of this project (see attached) calls for Council selection of a proposal in March 1979. It is therefore suggested that the joint session of the Planning and Redevelopment Commissions be scheduled for the earliest convenient date. Staff will coordinate preparation for the meeting and will transmit summary information as soon as a date for the joint session is established. Staff suggests a joint session be scheduled for February 13, 1979 or sooner. JWP:gc t7 � v CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM OLD CIVIC CENTER SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING TIME SCHEDULE September, 1978 . Council approval of RFP (9/18/78) . Final preparation of RFP . Compilation of RFP distribution list . Investigation of advertising . Order site appraisal October, 1978 . Meeting with City Departments (Library, Recreation Parks & Human Services) . Preparation of proposal review criteria Distribution of RFP Informational meetings with developers November, 1978 . Proposal preparation period . Arrange consultant economic review of proposals . Initiation of General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan December, 1978 • Deadline for submission of proposals (December 22, 1978, 12:00 noon) • Interdepartmental review of proposals (staff screening) January, 1979 . Presentation of acceptable proposals to Redevelopment Commission (developer presentations) . Formulation of Redevelopment Commission recommendations . Initiation of EIR process and Zone Change February, 1979 Presentation of Redevelopment Commission recommendations to City Council March - April, 1979 • Council selection of developer proposal • Initiation of negotiation with developer for participation/lease agreement • Begin 60-day period for preparation of final proposal \1 Page Two May, 1979 • Council approval of participation/lease agreement, EIR, and zoning • Developer begins working drawings June - September, 1979 Developer completes working drawings October - November, 1979 . Construction bid period . Demolition of buildings on site December, 1979 . Council approval of contractor January - September, 1980 Construction period October, 1980 Dedication and grand opening CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEAK CA 76-153 COUNCIL - ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH 'OI To The Honorable Mayor and From Richard A. Harlow City Council Members Acting City Administrator Subject OLD CIVIC CENTER GASOLINE Date September 27 , 1976 STORAGE TANK On September 3, 1976, the Huntington Beach Fire Department served notice to the City that the underground gasoline storage tank at the old Civic Center must be removed and the hole therefrom filled. This notice came in the form of a "Notice of Violation" and requires compliance within 30 days. Since that time, the City' s Purchasing Officer has obtained a quotation of $1,100 from G & W Maintenance Company to complete the necessary work. Mr. Bill Hartge, Public Works Director, has recommended that the City accept the quotation of G & W Maintenance Company. He further suggests that funds for the work be secured from the City' s contingency fund. As a follow up to Mr. Hartge ' s proposal, Earl Horton, Assistant Finance Director, has prepared an FIR on the matter assessing the impact to the contingency fund. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council accept the quotation of the G & W Maintenance Company and authorize the expenditure of $1,100 from the contingency fund to cover the project. Respectf lly subm' tte , CITY COUNCIL APPROVED BY / �� �O / 19�� Rhard A. Harlow / Acting-City Administrator RAH:bb ' ,, C� City of Huntington Beach �— P.O. BOX 190 CALIFORNIA 92648 FIRE DEPARTMENT September 3, 1976 Honorable Mayor and D City Council ��� c/o Floyd G. Belsito City Administrator City. OF HUNTINGTON BEACH City of Huntington Beach CITY COUNCIL OFFICE 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, Ca. OLD CIVIC CENTER PROPERTY - FIFTH AND PECAN During an .inspection of the above titled property by a member of the Huntington Beach Fire Department Fire Prevention Bureau on August 31, 1976, it was determined that the above property is in violation of Section 15.217 of the Huntington Beach Fire Code which requires that any underground tank which has been abandoned for a period of one (1) year shall be removed from the ground and the hole properly filled. At the time of the inspection it was noted that the gasoline tanks which serviced the police department were still in position. This letter should be considered a NOTICE OF VIOLATION and will require compliance within thirty days. A reinspection will be made by a member of the Huntington Beach Fire Department Fire Prevention Bureau at the conclusion of that time and if the violation still exists, such action will be taken as the law requires. If you have any further questions in this matter, please feel free to contact me at 536-5411. Sin erely, Gary Fir Protection Sp cialist Hu ington eac re Department .Z2ceJ_� -� /Fire es E. Gerspach Marshal Huntington Beach Fire Department GAG:ps �J City of Huntington Beach P.O. BOX 190 CALIFORNIA 92648 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT September 21, 1976 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Huntington Beach Attention: Floyd G. Belsito City Administrator Subject: Abandonment of Fuel Storage Site Dear Council Members: There exists a 10, 000 gallon gasoline storage tank and pumping unit on the ocean side of Memorial Hall close to 6th St. At one time this facility was used to fuel City vehicles . It has since been abandoned. The Fire Marshal has requested that the storage tank, pump, and appurtenant pipe lines be removed from the site. The Purchasing Officer has obtained a quotation in the . amount of $1,100 . 00 from G & W Maintenance Co. of Santa Ana for the complete removal .of all the facilities including backfilling. It is recommended that the City Council accept the quotation of G & W Maintenance Co. of Santa Ana . in the amount of $1,100 .00 and that the $1,100.00 be obtained from the City' s Contingency Fund. Very truly yours, H. E. Hartge 0' Director of Public Works HEH:MZ: jy CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH To Floyd G. Belsito From F. B. Arguello City Administrator Director of Finance Subject FIR - Underground Storage Tank Date September 30, 1976 Removal In response to your request, I hereby submit the attached Financial Impact Report concerning the removal of the underground gasoline storage tank at the old Civic Center site. There are presently funds available in the general fund contingency account (101593) • This does not take into consideration the amount of money necessary to fund the salary adjustments negotiated by the various employee groups. The budget staff is presently computing the cost of the adjustments on those associations that have settled but we do not know if the information is available yet. F. B. Ar4uello Director of Finance FBA/EH/cg CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH FINANCIAL `LMPACTItEPORT Project Name Underground Storage Tank Removal Description- Remove the underground gasoline tank used by the Police Department at the old Civic Center property - Fifth and Pecan and backfill the hole. 1 . DIRECT PROJECT COSTS 1.. 1 One-Time Costs Land Acquisition Construction. ties, Equipment. Other Total Cost 1 , 100.00 .1 , 100.00 1 .2 Recurring Annual Costs Additional Materials _&. Outsi-de Payroll Personnel 'Su" lies Services Revenues Total Cos 1 .3 Replacement/Renewal Costs The only additional costs will be the asphalt- used to repave the opening. 2. ..INDIRECT COSTS City patch crews that will patch the asphalt after the tank is. removed and the hole properly backfilled. I _ Financial Impact Reporu Page 2 3. NON-DOLLAR COSTS None - ---- - - - — -------- —.�._,._— _— 4. BENEFITS TO BE DERIVED FROM THE PROJECT We will be in compliance with the Huntington Beach Fire Code. 5. PROJECT USAGE Old Civic Center site. 6. EXPENDITURE TIMING About thirty days after approval and award. 7. COST OF NOT IMPLEMENTING THE PROJECT The City will be in violation of the Huntington Beach Fire Code which is a misdemeanor and subject to a fine if the City Attorney prosecutes. There would also be a question of code enforcement on others if the City does not meet its own code. Why should they if the City does not? How would the judge rule on that issue? CITY STAFF COMMITTEE REPORT TO THE HUNTINGTON BEACH CITY COUNCIL CONCERNING USE OF OLD CIVIC CENTER FACILITIES AND SENIOR CITIZEN PERMANENT AND INTERIM FACILITIES April 30 , 1974 TABLE OF—CONTENTS Recommended Council Actions . . . . . . . . . . . 1 I Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 II Permanent . Faci-l- ties A The Alternatives 7 B Financing' the Alternat`ive,s . - . : . 9 C Method for Approaching the . County 11 D Certification of Need 13 E Comparative Costs to the City 13 F' Downtown Redevelopment . . . . . 14 G - Recommendation for Permanent Senior., 15 Facility III Interim Facilities A The Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 B Recommendation for Interim Senior . . 17 Facility IV Use of Other Facilities in Old Civic Center 18 V Appendix . . . .. . . . . . . . . 19 "Report on Huntington Beach Memorial Hall Conversion" - VTN . . . . . . . . V-a "Recreation Building 17th and Orange" - John Behrens . - V-b "Inspection of Recreation Building , 17th at Orange" - R. Picard . . . . . . . . V- c "Remodeling of Memorial Hall Building"R. Picard V-d RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS By City Council Appointed Staff Committee I Permanent Senior Citizen Facility: A. State intent to develop a new senior citizens ' facility at the old Civic . Center location contingent on successful application for County .revenue sharing funding and support from the VTN redevelopment study. B. Direct the City Administrator to contract for senior citizens ' needs and space allocation study. II Interim Senior Citizen Facility: A. Upgrade the Recreation Center on 17th and Orange at a cost of $40 ,000 to $56 ,000 to serve senior citizens ' needs . or B. Make no special provisions for an interim facility. III Use of Other Old Civic Center Facilities : A. Approve committee recommendation. as outlined on Page 3 in the introductory section of this report. B. Direct the City Adminis.trator to begin contract negotiations with organizations for which space has been recommended in the old Civic Center location. -1- I . INTRODUCTION The City Council , on February 25 , 1974 , approved a motion made by Councilman Shipley to adopt Alternate No. 1 in concept as proposed in a draft report entitled "Alternatives for Old Civic Center Use - February 15 , 1974. " Alternate No. 1 consists of the .following elements : (1) The creation of a large senior citizens ' facility on the southern section of the old. civic center property either by *renova.ting Memorial Hall or developing a new facility. (2) Temporary use of the -Administration Building , old fire station and the Detective Annex for: . (a) Community Services ` (b) Cultural Activities (c) Rentals The City Council also appointed a staff committee consisting of: Walter Johnson, Tom Moseley, Ed Seli-ch, and Norm Worthy to -consider the question . of temporary .use for cultural and/or community services in the oldCivic Center complex. Before the committee was able to develop its recommendations., the City Council leased the Detective Annex to the Free Clinic for a five-year period. Thus , the committee recommended temporary uses for .the Administrative Building and the old Fire Station. The recommendations as presented to the City Council on April 15 , 1974 , were as follows -2- RECOMMENDATION: Administration Building This building should house community services. Space should be allocated to manpower planning, community service organizations such as Legal Aid, Salvation Army, etc. , and for the planning staff of the Human Resources Council . Refer to Exhibit "A" for more detail. All services to be in the Administration Building would service the needs of the senior population as well as other age groups . Old Fire Station This . building should include the following community service. organizations : National Alliance for Family Life Foundation, National Alliance for Family Life Foundation, Inc. , Sir Thomas , More. Clinic. This building should also house the Kuska Museum exhibits . This cultural use appears to be an exciting addition to enrichment of the lives of the seniors . All activities to be `in the Fire Station would serve the needs of the senior population while not excluding other age groups . If the City Council chooses to accept these recommendations , then the creation of a well-integrated center will be assured. This center will provide at least the following services : Educational , cultural , counseling , leisure , medical , legal , long-range social planning, job-training, crisis prevention, recreational , and aid to the needy (Refer to Exhibit "B") . This center could stand as an example of Huntington Beach' s_ far sighted attempt to solve intricate people-oriented problems in a coordinated fashion. The preliminary report was considered inadequate by the City Council due to the assumption that Memorial Hall would be used on an interim basis by the senior citizens . Originally, the estimated cost to renovate Memorial Hall was not considered -3- , Legal Aid Salvation Army Family Service Association Catholic Social Services Jewish Family Services American Red Cross: Probation Department Visiting Nurses Volunteer Bureau Planning Staff of .Human . Manpower Program Resources Council I i EXHIBIT A - 4- LIBRARY L / ADMINISTRATIVE BLDG: FIRE STATION: Community Service — — — — _ _ Cultural Community Service — — — — — — NEW FACILITY Senior Citizens DETECTIVE ANNEX: Medical EXHIBIT B -5- to be as exorbitant as it later proved to be. This report attempts to establish alternatives for interim uses with their accompanying costs so the City Council may determine an interim facility for the senior citizens. This report also considers alternatives- for a permanent facility and details financial methods and strategies. Finally, certain alternatives are .analyzed in view of their affect on possible downtown redevelopment. -6- II . PERMANENT FACILITIES A. The Alternatives This report is considering alternative permanent senior- citizen facilities before investigating interim facilities because the choice of a permanent facility will tend to determine which facilities will be available for interim use. 1. Memorial Hall - According to a report entitled "Report on Huntington Beach Memorial Hall Conversion" (refer to Appendix Va) submitted to the City in January 1974 by the VTN Corporation', the total cost for upgrading Memorial Hall suitable ,to senior citizens ' needs could cost $526, 700. An escalation rate of to for each month delay in construction would increase this figure to approximately $622 ,000 if construction were delayed until January 1975 . Additional costs would include a seismic study (approximately $18 , 000) and the resultant remedial expenses . A study to determine the seismic safety of a building is a highly technical and expensive process and was , therefore , not included 7 in our arrangement with VTN. - City staff is of the opinion that Memorial Hall is seismically unsound and should be demolished. Estimates indicate an additional $200 ,000 to $400 ,000 to insure a structurally safe building. Consequently, the estimated cost ' of renovating Memorial Hall ranges from $800 ,000 to $1 , 000 ,000. 2. New Facility - Due to the high cost of renovating Memorial Hall , the possibility of constructing a new - 7- facility has been investigated. An initial project budget estimates the development of a new 11 ,850 square foot facility at -about -$600 , 000 ($27. 00 per square foot) . The costs include demolition of Memorial Hall as well as site development. The lower cost of a new facility along with the freedom to introduce special features necessary to senior citizens has convinced City staff that constructing a new facility would be more appro- priate than renovating Memorial Hall. 3. Recreation Center - Upon further investigation, the Recreation Center at 17th and Orange has been considered a possible permanent facility for the senior citizens . City staff estimates $30 , 000 to $40 ,000 to bring the facility into code compliance (refer to Appendix V-b c) . The Recreation Center is already operational and any costs incurred above $40 , 000 would add to the quality of the Center. The total cost to the City for providing the Recreation Center as a senior citizens ' facility would include the cost of relocation of staff and replicating present Recreation Department storage space elsewhere (appr6xi- mately $70, 000) . There are certain disadvantages to locating the senior citizen center at 17th and Orange. First , the old Civic Center site is close to the center of the senior population, whereas the Recreation Center is further removed. This is an important consideration as senior citizens are less mobile than other age groups . Second, along with a senior citizens ' facility in the old Civic Center complex, many important services and activities are planned which. senior citizens would use. If the senior citizens ' center were at the Recreation Center, -8- there would not be the space 'available in surrounding facilities for an integrated complex of programs . Third, the population near the Recreation Center is and will continue to be a. young population. Renovation of the Recreation Center more appropriately ought to be directed at this group rather than the senior population. Fourth, the No. 1 problem for senior citizens is transportation; therefore , any attempt to aid senior citizens ought to involve extensive trans- portation aid or programs and services which are easily accessible by foot. Thus , the City may have to consider subsidizing in some manner transportation for the senior citizens if the Recreation Center is renovated as a senior facility. Summation - The cost of locating the senior facility at 17th and Orange appears to be less than developing a new facility at the old Civic Center complex. Since County funds are available to aid construction at either site, the net cost to the City of either project may be comparable . A new facility at the old Civic Center or the utiliza- tion of the Recreation Center stand as the two most viable plans for locating a senior facility. $. Financing the Alternatives Financing of a new facility or renovation of the Recreation Center must be considered in depth. Some funds are already at the disposal of the City. The City could tap the General Fund or dip into General Revenue Sharing funds . However, City funds are limited and alternative sources of funds should be investigated. Title III of the Older Americans Act is funded and Orange County is or will be the recipient of approximately $230 ,000. On a per capita basis , Huntington Beach could expect only $18 ,400 from these funds. However, the funds ,to date have. been used to expand -the Orange County Council on Aging' s planning program with little funding going for services. Another possible source of funding is Orange County revenue sharing funds. The County of Orange is making available 25% of its revenue sharing funds for community service and social programs . Orange County has made funds available to different cities for various kinds of social programs . They have made available approximately $500 , 000 to the City of Santa Ana, $250 , 000 to the City of Garden Grove , and approximately $300 , 000 to the Cities of La Habra and Brea. These monies have been used for the development of centers and for the operation of various kinds of community service and social programs . If Huntington Beach establishes an integrated and well-conceived community services program, the City could reasonably ask the County for revenue sharing funds amounting to somewhere between $400 , 000 to $600 , 000. The City Council should keep in mind certain criteria the County is using to assess whether or not to fund various programs . The County is looking for heavy city commitment in whatever program the County funds . This commitment can take the form of cash or in-kind contributions such as staff, space and equipment. The City must be able to show the program is serving community needs . The kinds of programs the County encourages are : employment help and training, medical services to the needy, all kinds of aid to the seniors , counseling services (both personal and family) , legal services for the needy, and similar programs . -10- The recommendations of the Council appointed staff committee would establish the kind of Community Service Center which would maximize services to the citizens of Huntington Beach and enhance the City's chances of receiving funding from the County. C. Method for Approaching the County The County in evaluating a grant request would look at such factors as quality of program, reasonableness of service location, and city involvement. The Recreation Center would show great City involvement in comparison to the funds being requested, because City involvement is measured in dollars , and dollars can be in-kind. Thus , the value of the building and surrounding land could be considered the City' s in-kind contribution. Obviously, the building and land are worth more than the $40 , 000 requested. The City' s approach to the County for $400 ,000 to $600 ,000 for a new senior citizens ' facility is a much more compli- cated process . In order to have a reasonable level of City involvement, the City has two alternatives : (1) Actual substantial cash expenditures , or (2) the creation of a Community Services Center. The services would have to be invited to use our facilities (Administration Building , old Fire Station and Detective Annex) at very nominal rents .. The City Council has already taken appropriate steps in this direction in its contract with the Free Clinic. The true value of the rents would be estimated and used. as part of our in-kind contributions to the center. The following is an example of how the City might approach the County : County Funds Needed . . . . . . . . . . . $400 ,000 to $600 , 000 -11- Matching Plan 3 YEAR IN-KIND 1st YEAR PERIOD 1 . Free rent on Administration $ 33, 000 $ 99 , 000 Building and Old Fire Station 2. Free rent on Police Annex 9 ,000 279000 3. Land (estimated $170 ,000 to 200 ,000 200 ,000 $230 ,000) 4 Personnel 58 , 181 174 , 543 5. Operating expenses 113,930 35 , 790 6. Used furniture from "old ? ? Civic Center) TOTAL IN-KIND $312 , 111 $536 .9333 CASH 1. Capital Outlay 30 ,143 30 ,143 2 . Cash ? ? TOTAL CASH $ 30, 143 $ 303,143 TOTAL MATCHING 1. In-Kind 3125,111 536 , 333, 2. Cash 303,143 30 ,143 TOTAL MATCHING $342 ,254 $5663,476 The budget proposal i.s :just an example. Any category may be deleted, decreased, increased or new categories may be introduced. The first three and the sixth categories under "In-Kind" are key _in-kind contributions since they represent matching funds already under the City' s control and would not cause a further burden to the City' s tax- payers . The City is not required to match the County on a 50- 50 basis . The City need only show "substantial" involvement. Therefore, actual City involvement would reflect our -12- budgetary situation and could vary up or down according to the Council' s decision and the County' s interpretation of "substantial. " , During the review process of a grant proposal , the County would make its specific. desires known. D. Certification of Need Should the City pursue a grant request we would be ' required to provide our need. We must prove we have a population in need of services-, which should be a relatively simple task since our Manpower Analyst has compiled detailed data concerning the population of Huntington Beach. We must also interpret senior citizen desires into actual space allocations. Obviously, a City can declare the need for any space it feels the County will support. However, the County is attempting to insure the most utility for each dollar spent and, therefore , will not grant funds for projects without convincing supportive data. This aspect , plus the fact the City would be remiss if it built a senior facility without actually investigating senior citizen needs , prompts the recommendation that the City enlist the services of a consultant to establish the supportive data necessary for a grant application. Such a study would be included as an in-kind contribution. E. Comparative Costs to the City Unfortunately not all costs tol"the City can be immediately determined concerning either the alternative to build a new facility or to renovate the Recreation Center at 17th and Orange. However, certain elements are clear: (1) The City would have a good chance to receive a $40 ,OOO. grant from the County to renovate the Recreation Center as a -13- senior facility. (2) The City would have a good chance to receive a $400 , 000 to $600 , 000 grant from the County to construct a new senior citizens ' facility at the old Civic Center provided a Community Services Center is developed. (3) City cash expenses could be over $70 , 000 if the Recreation .Center becomes, a senior facility due to the relocation of the Recreation Department. These costs could be cut dramatically by moving the staff to the old Civic Center and using the old City Yard for storage. (4) City cash expenses , if a new senior citizens ' center is built in the old Civic Center complex, is a negotiable matter between the City and the County. No estimate would be appropriate at this time since the scale of the project is not finalized. F. Downtown Redevelopment One aspect which has been of great significance in all attempts to analyze possible alternative sites for a senior facility has been the possible redevelopment of the Downtown area. The Council appointed committee was concerned with two important aspects of the old Civic Center complex.. use. First , it was felt redevelopment may create a population shift forcing the senior population to leave the area, thereby making inappropriate the development of a senior facility at the old Civic' Center site. Subsequent discussions with VTN have convinced the committee no such shift shall take place . Second, the possibility that the . old Civic Center property could be used as a "seed area". to motivate the redevelopment of the Downtown was suggested. Our discussions with VTN substantiated this possibility. The committee was informed the development of a senior facility -was considered as an enhancement to redevelopment of the Downtown. -14- It is emphasized that these discussions were of a preliminary nature and the appropriateness of these conclusions is dependent on . the final plan submitted by VTN. G. Recommendation for a Permanent Senior Facility The committee recommends the development of anew senior facility at the old Civic Center site. This recommendation is dependent on supportive data from VTN on the Downtown redevelopment plan and successful application for funding from the County. The committee 's second priority is the renovation of the Recreation Center at 17th and Orange as a senior citizens ' facility. -15- III . INTERIM FACILITIES A. The Alternatives If the City Council chooses to develop ..a permanent senior facility :at, the Recreation Center, then the seniors could use , on a limited scale, the facility: immediately and during the renovation.' If construction proves to burden the senior' s use of the facility, the seniors could occasionally meet at Edison and/or Murdy Community Centers as they do already. If the City Council wishes to protect its option to establish a new facility, then there are several alternatives avail- able for interim use. The seniors could: Alternative 1 - Meet at the new City Hall and the Recreation and Community Centers in the same manner as presently exists . This alternative involves no use changes , therefore , no costs are involved. Alternative 2 - Create interim quarters for seniors in the Recreation Center. The Recreation Center could be slightly renovated to satisfy the needs of the seniors on an interim basis without necessitating the removal of the Recreation staff. However, such renovation may constitute a change of use thereby requiring that the facility. be brought up to code. Costs would vary between $30 ,000 to $40 , 000 for renovation with as much as another $16 ,000 for alternate Recreation Department storage space. Alternative 3 - Use most or all of Memorial Hall . The Memorial Hall could be used on an interim basis which -16- would constitute a change of use. Costs would be approximately $340,000 (Refer to Appendix V-d) . B. Recommendation for Interim Senior Facility. If the City Council chooses to renovate the Recreation Center, then the same could also be used on a limited scale as an interim facility. Since the facility is an existing building, positive steps toward renovation would sufficiently demonstrate to the senior citizens the City ' s intent to develop a senior citizen facility. If the City Council wishes to exercise its option to create a new facility, there will exist perhaps as much as a year between the time a final decision is made and the possible beginning of construction. This time period may cause some feelings of insecurity among the seniors as to the City' s intent. Nevertheless , the committee does not recommend Alternative 3 due to the .high cost. Alternative 2 is viable because the Recreation Center will be in use even if the seniors move to different facilities. Should events necessitate use of the old Civic Center site for activities other than a senior facility, the Recreation Center could be vacated by the Recreation staff and left to the senior citizens. Alternative 1 represents the status quo since the seniors are currently being served in this manner. The committee recommends either Alternatives- 1 or 2 ' for interim facilities usage. -17- IV. USE OF OTHER FACILITIES IN OLD CIVIC CENTER If--. the City Council decides to prolong and protect its option -for- developing a new senior facility in the old Civic Center, then a Community Services ,-Center should be 'developed. The staff committee has considered the question of cultural and/or community service use .of the -old Civic Center facilities. The committee' s recommendations were re-introduced in the introduction of this . report. r ° Iri developing its recommendations , the committee has attempted to develop a Community Services Center plan which would positively affect our chances of, receiving County funding for a senior facility and would serve the widest spectrum of Huntington Beach residents . The committee recommends that the City Council accept the Community Service Center plan with the understanding that until the VTN Downtown study becomes a viable plan, all uses should be considered as temporary. X C - 18- f V APPENDIX -19- e=� Report on HUNTINGTON BEACH MEMORIAL HALL CONVERSION for. CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH$ CALIFORNIA \ William Hartge:, Director- of Public .Works and .City fngi.neer VTN Job.No. 345-12 Marshall D. Collins Project Manager TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE u, I TASICSe AND PURPOSE 1 II ANALYSIS OF PRESENT BASIC STRUCTURES AND SYSTEMS 2 Description - South Building (Original) 2 Analysis - South Building (Original ) 3 Description -. North Building: (1931 Addition) 4 Analysis - North. Building (1931 Addition) 5 III CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6 Exiting 7 Second Floor .7 Fire Protection 9 Remov.al of Interior Walls 9 Rest Rooms 9. Kitchens 10 New $al cony in ,Main Auditorium 11 New ;Elevator 12 E1:ectrical 1.3 HeatYng,, Vent.ilation, Air Conditioning 13 ` Folding Partition Walls 14 x IV COST ESTIMATE 16 F�rimary 17 Secondary 17 Alternate 1.8 r: i t fl I 1 i 3 I I - TASKS AND PURPOSE e'i 1. TASKS AND PURPOSE We have been requested by the City to investigate the present Memorial Hall to determine feasibility of converting the building from its present use as city offices to the original condition as a public meeting hall, but upgrad- ed to meet present safety requirements. To this end we have conducted on- site investigations, review of what original construction documents were available, and met with various City personnel to learn existing conditions, maintenance problems, etc. The City requested that the following changes be considered in order to convey accomplish the ion: p s 1. A structural appraisal to determine whether conversion is practical. 2. Removal of interior non-structural walls and partitions that make up the present office complex, along with all built-in cabinets, counters, and related equipment. 3. Review of building, fire, and electrical codes as they apply to the proposed usage and configuration, and inclusion of alterations and additions necessary to meet these codes. 4. Addition of a mezzanine floor to north end of original building, 5. Addition of a passenger elevator to serve the second floor and mezzanine. Since the building is considered for use principally by Senior Citizens activities this is highly advisable. 6. Upgrading of existing first floor kitchen to "commercial" quality. Modernization of second floor kitchen to meet current standards. a 7. UpgrwW heatingg ventiliation,, and air-conditioning to modern sta 8. Install folding partitions ("accordion walls") to divide Main Auditorium into smaller meeting room, including separations on proposed balcony. 9, Prepare budgetary cost estimates for the above. i. In response to the above request we have made the following findings and recwowndationt II ANALYSIS OF PRESENT BASIC STRUCTURES AND SYSTEMS A Description - South Building (Original) Building shell consists of one section approximately 55 a 90 con- structed sometime in the 1924's. Exact information has thus far not been available. The structure comprises the limnAuditorium* now identified as the City CounaTil Chambers, along with a section used for city offices. Construction is of non-reinforced red btick masonry-having s timber trots roof with wood sheathing and built-up roofing. Trusses and bracing are exposed, being architecturally finished. The floor is _concrete slab with a hardwood flood on wood sleepers. A stage is located at the south end. One snarl rest room is located at each side of the stage. One 51 s 7• exit-entrance door is located do each side wall near the stage. 2 • 8. Analysis - South Building (Original) The masonry walls appear quite sound, there being very little evidence of cracks or repairs of same. The brick and mortar appear to have l been of excellent quality. Alterations in 1931 relocated the entrance- "it doors and some windows, and appear to have had no adverse effect on the structural integrity of the building in the subsequent earth- quakes. The timber trusses appear sound, as does the visible portion of the roof sheathing. We recommend, however, that a thorough inspection be performed for termites or dry rot, by a firm licensed to make such inspections, before further money is expended on the building. If the trusses are thereby found to be unsound we do not feel the cost of a complete new roof system would be compatible with retention of th e non-reinforced walls. Information given us by the City indicates that the building is in Fire Zone 11. The present roofing is old and deteriorated, and will require complete replacement. Lighting and electrical are all generally obsolete and substandard and should be completely reviewed to meet current electrical codes. This includes a new main incoming service panel, new lighting fix- tunes, increased light levels, etc. In many cases existing conduit may be re-used, but for this analysis complete replacement is con- sidered.s d. k I Heating and Ventilation units are located above rest POWs at ek h i of the stage, being quite old. Other H b g units area located above temporary office structures in north end of "®rigina " balding, `providing ventilation and heat for the " section and some for the "Original". These will be removed along with removal of tem- porary offices and new units must be figured to take over the bulk of tho Heating Ventilation of the main portion of the audi- torium area. Ptast .row facilities are obsolete and inadequate for this building. Plumbing is reported to have been a maintenance problem for the past several years. , r Wood flooring, in areas where visible* appear in useable condition,, but there are indications that the floor has buckled or ;heaved in Sam Areas (computer room, etc.), and based an this we would recommend removal of the present floor and installation ,of a contrete topping ' and no resilient floor tile. C. Description - North Building (1931 Addition) Building shell is try story construed in 1931 as an addition to the original section (I-A), consisting of small meeting roomss a lobby, a kitchen, and rest rooms on the first floor, and the American Legion Hall,, associated creation room, an office, a kitchen; and Small rest rooms on the second floor. A main stair well at the northeast corner, and a rear stairwell at the southwest corner provide access between floors. A vestibule provides general entrance at the north end'. 4 A narrow mezzanine balcony at third floor level outside the area of the Legion Hall opens on the south side of the Hall and is accesssble from the rear stairway. This appears to be used mainly for random storage. - A tower room at the north end center of the building is reached from the main stair well and does not appear to be regularly in use except 4 to house a small space heater. Construction is of non-reinforced red brick masonry having a timber truss roof with wood sheathing covered by built-up roofing. Trusses and bracing are exposed and are an architectural feature of the in- terior in the legion Hall. All other areas have plastered ceilings,, with suspended acoustic ceilings in some present first floor office areas. Trusses are supported on timber columns embedded in the walls. Interior construction consists of wood stud framing covered by wood lath and plaster. Second floor framing consists of wood joists supported by exterior masonry walls and interior north--south bearing walls. 0. Analysis - North Building (1931 Addition) As in the original building (I-A), the shell appears quite sound (refer I-8). The remarks on that portion would generally apply here. There is definite evidence in the tower room of termite infestation and the recommendation for such inspection is repeated here. Comments regarding Fire Zoning are also applicable here. The roofing likewise is in poor condition and requires replacement. 5 Comments regarding lighting are similarly valid although main service panels appear to be recent and adequate for proposed use. Heating and Ventilation units are principally located in the "old" building and will be discussed later. The principal problem appears to be presently inadequate or inoperative controls. Rest roan facilities are small and plumbing fixtures obsolete. Reports from City personnel indicate that the entire plumbing system in the ' building is leaky, a constant and serious maintenance problem. Floor is concrete slab on grade at first floor, covered with carpet. Second floor is hardwood over wood sheathing. III. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Prevailing building laws require that if the cost of alterations exceeds $ of the value of the existing building;, the entire structure would have to be modified to met present structural design criteria, This is impractical in this type of building, er so consideration must be given to limiting work of conversion to below this figure. Interpretation of the building value is given as the cost of replacement by a new building. In this case the cost of replacement is estimated to be $9969000. As this figure is of necessity based on many variables it is not a firm f l T building figure, but is a guide only.. he bu 1 ng must remain in the classification as "non-conforming", which is no different than its present status. 6 2. A thorough inspection for termite and dry rot damage should be made before commitment of any money to a conversion effort. Correction of any damage, if correctable within a reasonable cost, could be considered a part of the conversion cost. 3. Specific changes or problem areas will not be discussed and pro- posed changes put forth: a. Exiting 1. First Floor: Exiting as structure now exists is marginal. Potential occupancy (without mezzanine balcony) totals 578 persons. If the former lobby (in center of the 1931 addition) is to be used as a small auditorium the total occupant load of the first floor would be 690. Present exiting is in- adequate. We therefore propose addition of one 6` wide by 71 high entrance - exit door at each side wall at the north end of the Main Auditorium. These doors can be cut into the existing masonry walls without any loss of present strength. 2. Second Floor: Exiting from second floor is .barely adequate as far as stair width is concerned, but the length of the total escape route by the "back" stairway is not acceptable. 7 We therefore recommend a completely new rear stairwell. Since configuration of the first floor will not permit a stairwell within the present building shell which will met the requirements, we propose to erect an exterior stairwell at the southwest corner of the "Addition", framing in at the second floor to provide a rear lobby floor, and cutting a door to provide access to the stair. The stairwell enclosure should be a free-standing structure so as to impose no new loads on the existing building, and have an exterior to match the existing building. The base of the stairwell also provides a shelter for the new entrance-exit door at the rear of the Main Auditorium. Elimination of the present rear stairwell will thus free the area now occupied by the bottom flight next to the kitchen and permit expansion of kitchen use into this area. The wall between stair and kitchen appears to bear only stair loads and can therefore be removed if it suits kitchen arrangement. The added lobby area at the second floor occasioned by recovery of this floor space would. be mandatory if the mezzanine balcony were to be added to the Main Auditorium. 8 v �l • I t The new stairs need only be 3' wide for present occupant load or 4' wide to accommodate proposed balcony. b. Fire Protection: Due to the present Type III construction the most acceptable means of providing the required degree of fire protection is to install an automatic sprinkler system. The Huntington Beach Fire Department has also expressed itself as favoring this method. c. Removal of Interior Walls, etc: Removal would encompass the existing auditorium "secondary" stage (in front of and below main stage), removal of present computer rooms, office area and printing shop walls, ceilings, p P 9 p i etc. in "original" building, removal of miscellaneous walls 1 and ceilings forming the many offices and spaces in the 1 first floor of the "addition" building, including cupboards, shelves, file spaces, etc., - removal of existing kitchen sink, plumbing, p telephone cabinets, stairwell. Exact details of extent of removal and refurbishment would be a function of future design effort once the basic decisions have been made. With exception of removal of existing rear stairwell and present rest rooms there is little removal to be done at the second floor. d. Rest Rooms: Analysis has shown that the number of plumbing fixtures avail- able in the total building falls short of the number. required 9 v a for the potential occupancy. In addition the existing piping is reported to be in poor condition and has been a maintenance problem. Further, if the former lobby (in center of the "addition") were to be now used as a separate meeting room access from the main auditorium to present rest roans would be impractical. To alleviate the foregoing problems we propose that the former Check Room and Committee Room areas, now office space, be con- verted into adequate rest room facilities, both male and female, and the present rest rooms abandoned to office space use. The total cost for the new underfloor plumbing would be less than that required to bring the existing up to standard. Second floor rest room facilities are definitely inadequate for present occupant toad, and considering addition of the balcony in the Main Auditorium would be even more so. However, the addition of the balcony would help solve this questions as we recommend construction of new rest room facilities at the rear face of this balcony to serve the entire second floor. The present small and obsolete rest room space would then become available to other uses at second floor level. e. kitchens: Present First floor kitchen facilities would be stripped out and new arrangement installed to meet all present standards. Existing plumbing is obsolete and in poor repair. All new 1 sinks, cupboards, etc. are proposed, - new plumbing to extend thru west wall to connect with existing outside building and below ground. Elimination of existing stairwell would provide the much needed kitchen storage. Existing passt- hru window into Rain Auditorium would be re- habilitated, and kitchen arrangement would be designed to utilize modern equipment. Second floor kitchen would be completely stripped and re- furbished with modern equipment, but will maintain its present general configuration. Some expansion might be contemplated to utilize space recovered from existing rest rooms. f. New Balcony in Main Auditorium: As previously indicated, the .existing building structure can not be counted on to support any new leads, so such a balcony must be self-supporting structurally. The design must provide for both vertical loads and lateral seismic forces. A steel framed structure having lightweight concrete deck with resilient flooring is considered most satisfactory for this application. Location of required additional rest room facilities at the rear (north) of balcony would resolve the present inadequate condition as well as meet the added demand occasioned by the balcony occupancy itself. 11 Construction of this balcony would necessitate new foundations within the building, and erection of this structure under very difficult working and rigging conditions. The cost, of course, will be considerably higher than were it to be Constructed in the open. g. New Elevator: The original request was to include a new passenger elevator to serve the second floor and balcony, and it was proposed to be located somewhere in the southeast corner of the "addition" building, This location was found to be impractical for two basic reasons. First, the electrical main panels are located in the only really practical place for the elevator, and second, - present structural considerations would prohibit drillingfor a cylinder required for a hydraulic elevator, y req y , making a geared-cable type mandatory. Again the question of Imposing structural loads on the existing building would re- quire a free-standing load-supporting structure (the cab supports from the top of a cable-type system) which would be verycostly to build within the resent building. Y R 9 We therefore an exterior elevator shaft on the east propose side, exterior to be finished to match existing building. Being constructed in the open it can be a hydraulic elevator, and the shaft becomes only a guide and enclosure, reducing cost considerably. The enclosure would also house a vesti- bule at first and second floors. A canopy at the south would 12 a provide weather protection for the Main Auditorium entrance- exit door on that side. h. Electrical : General inspection of the building indicates that, although some recent installations are up to codes, the overall electrical distribution system is obsolete and in many cases appears dan- gerous. We therefore recommend removal of essentially all of the wiring, fixtures, panels, etc., and replacement with new. Inspection during construction work may allow re-use of some components, but we feel it is unrealistic to count on any significant savings tnru reuse. Our estimate is based on completely new wiring, conduits, fixtures, panels, etc. i. Heating, Ventilation, Air Conditioning (HVAC): General inspection of heating and ventilating equipment in- dicates to us that the present system is inadequate and controls have not been effective. Air conditioning is non-existent except in Computer Room. Since rehabilitation of existing units is generally not eco- nomically feasible we are considering complete replacement, along with a new and integrated control system. The present balcony above the second floor kitchen and open- ing onto the south side of the Legion ball is presently only partially used, mostly for storage. We recommend that the HVAC units be located in this bay. Penetrations thru the wall into 13 O the Main Auditorium would provide for the ducts leading to this area. Vertical ducts down thru a chase in the former rear stairwell and areas recovered from the second floor rest rooms would provide connection to ducts serving the first floor. Ducts to serve the second floor would route from this location. As Access would be from new exterior stairwell. The building water heater along with a circulating pump would also be relocated to this mechanical roam. The openings connecting the balcony with the legion Nall would be closed by studs and drywall and painted. Existing skylights in . balcony roof would provide penetrations for fresh-air inlets and exhausts. J. Folding Partition Walls: Several things are to be considered: 1 The height of the roof structure in Main Auditorium would cause one of two adverse conditions: a. If tracks were to be supported direct to trusses the height of curtain walls would incur excessive weight. It is doubtful if the trusses could carry this additional load, b. If tracks were to be suspended at say 10 feet height the weight M be reduced to a workable value, but the necessary 11 feet of suspension rods and sway bracing would be an eyesores defeating the entire 14 esthetics of preserving the architecture. Additionally, from the balcony these suspension members would present a sea of cables between viewers on the balcony and the stage. 2. Installation of these curtain walls both below and above the new balcony presents no problems, as long as exiting requirements are designed accordingly. . 9 �i 9 f is COST EVINAT£ a IV. COST ESTIMATE Instructions were to provide a budgetary estimate of costs based on a "first cabin" approach to the work, understanding that certain items would probably be eliminated, reduced, or down-graded in quality to meet funds available at the time work is to proceed. This estimate has been prepared on this basis, also considering allowances for the present unstable price situation. We have found, for instance, that over the past years 1973, there has been a general construction increase as high as 12%. We have, therefore, adJusted our cost basis to reflect the following influences. 1. Best quality construction, materials, etc. consistent with type of usage. 2. Costs have been ad3usted to reflect daunary 1974 dollars in the Los Angeles area. 3. Contractors profit, overhead, and taxes have been shown at . This figure appears a bit high for the present, but considering the trends, particularly those reflecting new governmental reporting, regulations, etc. (OSHA, EIR etc.) the figure is not unrealistic for the near future. A further consideration relative to "backing cut" specific pieces of work to reduce cost is the principle that some items of work are essential to be done in entirety in order for the building to be useable as projected, some also being life-safety requirements without which the conversion could not be made. We, therefore present the costs grouped in three basic categories: A. Primary: those items of work essential to basic conversion,, including life safety or code compliance items. 16 r 4 B. Secondary; those items desired but not essential as in A. C. Alternates: ` alternates to items contained in A&B which may be desirable. Based on the above considerations we present the following cost estimates: A. PRIMARY: ;. 1. Interior demol. and disposal $12,312 2. Interior rehab. (walls, ceilings., doors, hdwe., paint, etc.) 32,604 3. NW-rear stairwell 159960 4 Plumbing (incl. new rest roan fixts., etc.) 27,360 S. Electrical (ail new) 799800 6. Heat-vent air conditioning and controls 589140 7. Fire protection sprinklers (incl. valves, controls, main) 349200 8. Masonry cutting and reinforcement 2,166 9 New roofing 6,384 10. Kitchens (complete new - 1st & 2nd floors) 569430 11. Repair and refinish floors 9,462 12. Folding divider wall (between auditoriums) 14254 Total Primary $336,072 3 % ,for OH + P + TAX* 436 900 B. SECONDARY: I. Auditorium mezzanine (complete) 159390 2. New elevator & enclosure 429180 3 Curtain (accordion) walls in auditorium 39192 4. New sash and glass thruout 54244 Total - Secondary $66,006 + 30% for ON + P + TAX* 85 800 17 POW C. ALTERNATE: AM 1. New concrete and resilient floor in main aud. (add) $ 39078 + 30% for OH + P + TAXI' 4`000 TOTAL PROJECT (A + B + C) A526l7OO *: Overhead, Profit, and Taxes (contractor) Certain factors must be borne in mind while reviewing the foregoing cost estimates and in comparison with other factors: ` A. The project is of 1°rehab" nature. Costs are invariably high for this type f, of work in relation to comparable work being done "in the clear", often 150 to 200 percent. Because of the many unknowns in an existing building, `r particularly one which has undergone many changes, there must be a large "Contingency" factor. We have attempted to select an adequate factor and still remain realistic. 8. Construction cost escalation has been far higher in the recent past than h, ever before. We have recently made an in-depth study of these effects and have found that 12% escalation per year is a valid rate. Therefore, con- sideration should be made for cost increases incurred by the time between this report and actual start of construction. Figures in this estimate are adjusted to January, 1974. A factor of 1% per moth would be advisable under present trends, C. Comparative cost estimate of $996,000 (previously noted) for providing a new replacement building was based on current construction costs for a new structure having the same building volume and built to current codes. 18 i The adjustment to 1974 dollars in Los Angeles area was included, as were a; demolition. and removal of old building and clearing of land, or acquisition of new land. D. Cost savings in specific areas can probably be made both in.design phase and construction phase. In design phase Judicious adjustment of various details can probably save a considerable amount, and during construction phase inspection of structural , electrical, or mechanical components may find re-use -and/or repair more economical than replacement with new at a considerable saving. This report, however, was based an the assw*tion of minimal reuse and first quality in design. 19 r. CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION . . . _ HUNTINGTON BEACH To David D. Rowlands, From John f4, ens, Director City Administrator Builommunity Development Subject Recreation Building Date Apri74 17th and Orange An inspection was .made of the subject building as instructed by the Council with the object of determining the status of the building and the alterations necessary to permit its use by the senior citizens organizations. The building is of wood-frame, non-fire-resistive construction, classified by the Building Code as Type V, N. Its present and proposed use is for assembly purposes involving a number of persons in excess of 300. The Building Code classifies this as• a Group B, Division 2 occupancy. The area of the building is approxi- mately 8,000 sq. ft. The building presently has a Certificate of Occupancy authorizing an occupant load of approximately 400 persons. Under this circumstance it -is likely that the building could be legally utilized for the proposed purposes without any major or significant changes. There are a number of conditions present which, under the provisions of the Building Code, are nonconforming and represent a level of safety significantly less than that required for new construction. Group-B, Division 2 occupancies are not permitted in Type V buildings having no general fire-resistive rating. Looked at through the eyes of the City's Dangerous Buildings Ordinance, however, there. are important considerations which would qualify under that ordinance as classifying the existing building as a Dangerous Building. In order to bring the building into reasonable compliance with the Building Code to accept the new proposed use the following changes are recommended: 1. The building be provided with a complete automatic fire-extinguishing system. This would correct the fact that the building is.not one-hour fire-resistive throughout as required. Section 508 of the Building Code permits the substitution of an automatic fire-extinguishing system for this one-hour fire-resistive construction throughout requirement. 2. Additional illuminated exit signs be provided based on the proposed occupancy in accordance with the Building Code. Both existing and additional illuminated exit signs should be provided with separate electrical circuits as required by Section 3312 (c) 2 A of the Building Code. David D. Rowlands Page 2 April 24, 1974 3. All nonconforming exit doors be made to comply with the requirements of Chapter 33 of the Building Code and, where serving an occupant load of more than 100, not be provided with a latch or locking device unless equipped with panic hardware as required by Section 3315 (d) and 3316 (a) of the Building Code. 4. Corridor walls be made one-hour fire-resistive where required. Openings into these corridors be protected by an appropriate fire assembly having a fire-protection time rating of not less than 20 minutes in accordance with Section 3304 (h) of the Building Code. 5. All finish materials in exitways and rooms and areas be made to comply with the flame spread requirements of Section 4204 of the Building Code. 6. An approved commercial range hood be installed in the kitchen or the commercial range be removed and replaced with a domestic type in accordance with Chapter 11 of the Mechanical Code. 7. The.central heating unit in the attic be separated from the rest of the building by a one-hour fire-resistive occupancy separation as required by Section 708 of the Building Code. 8. All electrical convenience outlets in the kitchen and bathroom areas be grounded in accordance with the. Electrical Code. 9. All obstructions in the exitways be removed in accordance with Section 3301 (i) of the Building Code. The inspection also reveals that, by virtue of the nature of the building and the materials of construction, no significant problem exists with relation to earthquake forces. It is estimated that the cost of achieving the work indicated above would be approximately $30,000. This report is being submitted in conjunction with that prepared and submitted by the Fire Department. The two reports result from a joint inspection of the building and the premises by these departments. JFB/vl cc: Chief Picard Norm Worthy council on fting ' CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH WMINGTON 81M.H Poet Office Box 190 • Huntington Beach, California - May 16, 1974 Mr. David Rowlands P.O. Box 19`0 Huntington Beach, Ca. Dear Mr. Rowlands : The Huntington Beach Council on Aging, Chairman Jordan Van Thiel, and all of the Senior Citizens wish to thank you for the use of the building at 17th and Orange. We are working with the Recreation and Parks staff to insure a smooth. changeover and to allow them a reasonable time to relocate their offices: We deeply appreciate a home of ,our own and will do our part to keep things going. Sincerely., �.•. � � 'J, ` �� ii..J1 Ll. 'w•�xLG.xJ Myrtle . S"tnson, Secretary Council on Aging D MAY 16 19i4 • CITY OF .HUNTiNGTON BEACH •ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE • CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 74-2 7 COUNCIL - ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH To Honorable Mayor and From City Administrator City Council Members Subject OLD CIVIC CENTER FACILITIES Date May 15 , 1974 J In response to the City Council ' s motion to establish a Community ' Services Center, I have contacted the Huntington Beach Human Resources Council and the United Crusade in order to ascertain the possible roles of each organization in the development and administration of the Center. It is my belief the Human Resources Council should ultimately administer the Community Services Center. Such a procedure would be less expensive to the City and yet would not undermine the City Council 's control as to which organizations will be included r._ in the Center. The Human Resources Council would be expected to ►` make recommendations to the City Council concerning possible future acceptance of organizations into the Community Services Center. The Human Resources Council is not presently incorporated; therefore , in the interest of speedily establishing the Center, the City Council should consider requesting the United Crusade to administer the Center. A .single lease agreement could be signed whereby the United Crusade would sublease to the organizations which the City Council approves . It should be remembered that the Junior Chamber of Commerce , now housed on Main Street , will also be located in the Center when its present quarters are ready for occupancy by the VTN planners . The United Crusade would administer the old adminis- tration building (except the offices where the Manpower Program is located) and the upper floor on the old fire station. A lease period of three years has been considered most appropriate with possible relocation should the old Civic Center site be needed for a specific use in the Downtown Redevelopment plan. The City would be responsible for initial refurbishment of the facilities , outside maintenance and major repairs . The United Crusade would be responsible for janitorial costs , utilities costs , and major alterations for the tenants. RECOMMENDATION Proceed to develop a contract with the United Crusade to administer some of the facilities in the old Civic Center for purposes of establishing a Community Services Center. . 'Respectfully submitted, David D. Rowlands City Administrator t DDR: eh -� HUNTINGTON BEACH COUNCIL ON AGING HUNTINGTON BEACH CALIFORNIA May 6, 1974 Information Only Council on Aging motion - May 6, 1974 - Agreed to accept entire Recreation Building as temporary until a new building is ready. Will meet minimum requirements for repair, with limited use by Recreation and Parks Staff. 0-�� I r 0 0 CA 74-20 6/ l [LJ] a CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH COUNCIL - ADMINISTRATOR COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH To Honorable Mayor and From y Cit Administrator City Council Members Subject REPORT ON USE OF OLD CIVIC Date May 2, 1974 CENTER FACILITIES (Agenda Item N-1) The City Council appointed a Staff Committee consisting of Walter Johnson, City Librarian, Norm Worthy, Recreation $ Parks Director, Ed Selich, Senior Planner and Tom Moseley, Administrative Aide to investigate the possiblb_tses of the former Civic Center facilities and also to evaluate and recommend the location of Senior Citizens permanent and interim facilities . This Committee considered reports from the Building & Community Development Director and the Fire Chief concerning the suitability for use by the senior citizens of Memorial Hall and the Recreation Center at 17th and Orange . As a result of these surveys the Committee was able to consider three courses of action relative to use of facilities by senior citizens : 1. Renovate Memorial Hall at an estimated cost of between $800, 000 and $1 ,000, 000 . 2 . Construct a new facility at the same site at an estimated cost of $600 ,000. 3 . Renovate the Recreation Center at 17th and Orange at an estimated cost of $40,000 . It should be noted that any of these alternatives could involve funding participation from Orange County Social Revenue Sharing. The Committee also considered the use of the remaining facilities at the former Civic Center site to house various community serviced organizations . It was the conclusion of the Committee that a Community Service Center plan be adopted with the understanding that until the VTN Downtown Study becomes a viable plan all uses should be considered temporary, therefore, the Committee recommends in its report the following courses of action: 1. Permanent Senior Citizens Facil1t - The development of a new Senior Citizens Facility at t e ormer Civic Center site . Should the City be unsuccessful in receiving County Revenue Sharing, the Committee ' s second priority is the renovation of the Recreation Center at 17th and Orange . 0 .000 CA_74-20 Page 2 Agenda Item N-1 May 2 , 1974 2. Interim Facility - If the City Council chooses" to develop a permanent Senior Citizens Facility at the former Civic Center site , the Recreation Center at 17th and Orange could serve as an interim facility during construction. 3 . Use of Other Facilities - The Committee recommends a Community Service Center in the remaining buildings ; however, such uses should be temporary pending the outcome of the VTN Downtown Study. RECOMMENDATION: 1 . The City Council should take action relative to establishing a permanent Senior Citizens Facility. 2 . If the City Council chooses to construct a new facility at the former Civic Center site then an interim facility should be provided fof senior citizens at the Recreation Center. 3 . The City Council should approve the Community Service Center plan with all uses to be temporary pending completion of the VTN Study. Respectfully submitted, David D. Rowlands City Administrator DDR/gbs LWCITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH L10-- " INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH To D. D. Rowlands From R. C. Picard City Administrator Fire Chief Subject INSPECTION OF RECREATION Date April 22 , 1974 BUILDING, 17TH AT ORANGE Accompanied by Captain Hosmer, Fire Marshal James E. Gerspach inspected the Recreation Building at 17th and Orange on April 19 . The following is submitted as a- result of the inspection. The present building has a certificate of occupancy issued as a B2 with an occupant load of 408 for dancing purposes and 250 for seating purposes . The building was found to be in violation of many items in the code as it presently exists. 1. A B2 occupancy is required to have one hour fire resistive construction throughout. The building is of non-rated construction throughout including the present exit corridors. Exit corridors have combustible obstructions in them now, in the form of furniture and trophy cases. 2. There are numerous non-conforming exit doors in the building (intervening non-rated doors) . 3. Additional exit signs are necessary with separate circuits. Separate circuits are also necessary for the existing exit signs. 4. The heating equipment is located in the attic with no rated separation between it and the rest of the occupancy. A one hour separation is required for heating units including dampers where duct work penetrates the separation. 5. The hood system over the present range in the kitchen does not have a fire protection system. A fire protection system is required. We could accept complete sprinklering of the building with an ordinary hazard system in lieu of the one hour construction requirement. The one hour requirement is the most significant factor of all the above. It is also the most costly in terms of correction. The automatic ' sprinkler system would run approximately $15 ,000 .00 and the entire project would probably run approximately $40 ,000 .00 . Raymond C. Picard Fire Chief RCP:v r " . 14 ' CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER=DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH To . David D. Rowlands From Raymond C. Picard Subject REMODELING OF MEMORIAL Date April 19 , 1974. HALL BUILDING Attached to this report is a memorandum from J. E. Gerspach, Fire Marshal to R. C. Picard, Fire Chief dated April 15, 1974. This report pursues to greater depth the points raised in the previous memorandum. Those issues are also dealt with in greater depth .in the "Report on Huntington Beach Memorial Hall Conversion" prepared by VTN in February 1974 . The cost figures quoted here are taken from VTN's report and are based on January 1974 cost estimates. Paragraph 1 OPENING THE INTERIOR TO AN AUDITORIUM The occupant load as calculated by us is 341. This was based on 15 square feet per occupant, . which is used for a less concentrated use. In a more concentrated use, such as a dance floor or with fixed seating, the occupant load would in- crease to that described on page 7 of the VTN report based on 7 square feet per occupant. Exiting requirements change when the occupant load is over 500 and with an occupant load of 500 there are insufficient exits as pointed out in the VTN report. Paragraph _2 SEISMIC QUESTION The VTN report indicates the probability of a sound building from a seismic standpoint. I am, however, not qualified to comment one way or the other on this issue. Paragraph 3 , 4 & 5 ELECTRICAL AND HEATING SYSTEMS The VTN report on page 13 uses such words as "obsolete and in many cases appears dangerous" , "inadequate. " Cost of replacement of these items is covered in the cost section of this memorandum. Paragraph 6 EXISTING EXITING FROM THE SECOND FLOOR As pointed out in the VTN report on pages 7 and 8, the existing exiting does not meet code. Reference is again made to the VTN report pages 7, 8 and 9 . Cost estimates are in the cost section of this memorandum. ,El plaip,x � e. i Page 2 Paragraph 7 AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEMS Page 9 of the VTN report recommends , and the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code- requires, installation of an automatic sprinkler system in the occupancy as proposed. Cost estimates are in the cost section of this memorandum. COST SECTION The following cost estimates are based on the items .on page 17 of the VTN report. From a very "minimum" standpoint, I am referencing items 1 through 8 "PRIMARY" costs estimated by VTN. 1 Interior demolitions and disposal $12, 312 2 Interior rehabilition (walls, ceilings, doors , hardware, paint, etc. ) 32, 604 3 New rear stairwell 15 ,960 4 Plumbing. (includes . new restroom fixtures, etc. ) 27, 360 5 Electrical (all new) 79 , 800 6 Heat-vent air conditioning and controls 58,140 7 Fire protection sprinklers (includes valves, controls, main) 34 ,200 8 Masonry cutting and reinforcement . 2, 166 Total - Primary $262, 542 - +30o for OH + P + TAX $ 78 ,763 $341 , 305 Items 9 through 12 of the "PRIMARY" section are not relative to basic building safety and have not been included in this estimate. Raymond C. Picar Fire Chief RCP/JEG:rmn MAYOR City of Huntington $each Jerry A. Matney -3 -- -A COUNCIL MEMBERS Ted W. Bartlett P. O. BOX 190 CALIFORNIA 92648 Alvin M. Coen Henry H. Duke Norma Brandel Gibbs Jack Green -Donald D. Shi ley r April 4, 1974 Alicia Wentworth \� City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, Calif. Dear Alicia: ` I would appreciate your cooperation in placing on the Council Agenda for the regular meeting of April 15, 1974 the matter of the City Council taking a formal action on permitting the Council on Aging to use, on an interim basis, Memorial Hall and the furnishing of said facility to enable the senior citizen organizations to comfortably use said facility. Very tMily yours, 4A . ALVIN M. COEN AMC:j w r� 1�, PROPOSED USES for OLD CIVIC CENTER Huntington Beach, California .March, 1974 INTRODUCTION The City Council on February 25th created a staff committee consisting of: Walter Johnson, Tom Moseley, Ed Selich, Norm Worthy to consider the question of cultural and/or community service use of the administration and "old" fire station faci- lities in the abandoned civic center. The committee has analyzed the situation with certain assumptions in mind. Basic Assumptions : 1 . Old City Hall and Memorial Hall will both eventually be torn down. 2 . The Administrative Annex will be removed. 3 . Senior Citizen needs will be served by construction of a new facility on the southern section of the civic center site . 4. Until the new facility is constructed, the senior * citi- zens will be allowed to use Memorial Hall on an interim basis . S . The Free Clinic will be using the Detective Annex on an interim basis for 5 years. The committee feels , due to the City Council ' s apparent desire to service the senior citizen population, the old civic center' s facilities ought to house the kinds of services which can be of benefit to the seniors , while not excluding the needs of other age groups . Thus a facility such as the library is a fine example of a service which serves the seniors well without abandoning the needs of other age groups . RECOMMENDATIONS ADMINISTRATION BUILDING - This building should house community services . Space should be allocated to man-power programming , community service organizations such as Legal Aid, Salvation Army, etc. , and for the planning staff of the Human Resources Council . Refer to Example "A" for more detail. , Proposed Uses for _ Ld Civic Center March, 1974 Huntington Beach., California page- 2 1 All services to be in the Administration building would service the needs of the senior population while not excluding other age groups . OLD FIRE STATION - This building should include some community service orientation as well as provide cultural benefits . The Old Fire Station is a relic and should, therefore , rather appro- priately, include the Kuska Museum exhibits . This cultural use appears to be an exciting addition to an enrichment of the lives of the seniors ._ Naturally, the exhibits would serve other age groups -as well. The Kuska Museum would be located on the ground floor with the possibility of some space on the second floor . Basically, the second floor would provide space for family edu- cation and counseling services . Refer to Example "B" for more detail. All activities to be in the Fire Station would serve the needs of the senior population while not excluding other age groups . CONCLUSIONS If the City Council chooses to accept the recommendations of this committee, then the creation of a well-integrated center will be assured. This center will provide at least the following services : Educational , cultural , counseling, leisure , medical , legal, long-range social planning, job-training , crisis preven- tion, recreational , and aid to the needy. (Refer to Example "C" . ) By creating a center where a wide range of services are available, an arena will be created which will be conducive to the creation of new integrated programs to better serve the population of Huntington Beach. This center could stand as an example to the fragmented field of human services , of Huntington Beach' s farsighted attempt to solve very 'intricate problems . 0 C Legal Aid Salvation Army. Family Service Association Catholic Social Services Jewish Family Services American Red Cross Probation Department Visiting Nurses Volunteer Bureau Planning Staff of Human Man-power Program Resources Council i EXAMPLE A National Alliance for Family Life Foundation National Alliance for Family Life Foundation Inc. Sir Thomas More Clinic Second Floor •Kuska Museum Exhibits Ground Floor EXAMPLE B LIBRARY i FIRE STATION: ADMINISTRATIVE BLDG : Cultural Community Service— — — — Community Service NEW FACILITY: Senior Citizens DETECTIVE -ANNEX:_ Medical EXAMPLE C ! v /.65 ALTERNATIVES FOR OLD CIVIC CENTER- USE rFR I 97 �l R r • N ' SU�i%1 ARY MJOR POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVES 1 . Creation of a large Senior Citizen facility on southern section with other buildings (except Library) to be used as : A. Community Services Center B. Cultural Center C. Rentals 2 . Create an open space park on southern section .,;itz other buildings (bxcept Library) to be used as : A. Senior Citizen Center B. Community Service Center C . Cultural Center D. Rentals 3 . Sell the southern section; all previously stated .uses of northern section possible , 4 . Sell the southern section, build a m ajoI• senior cztizen ' s facility on northern s Ction , r I • D r , y LIBRARY i r r r TV 00 loo SEftVI:'7 CULTURAL OR RENTALS ol F—ACILITL FOR i SR, r—a,.,IZENS i_- r s n �I r FnP.,,-. .'.�. C i_E71.0 ✓ I J ya� T f1 LrLT Le i?i�..!1�1 1.V 1', 4.'l c; a- LIBRARY rI ♦ u0'..'i'J ;1 OR C -'U'U:AL OR RE`�;`' LS l } l ALTE RS ` 'ITrE 1`2 s• LTBTlriRY r+ r+' AL'; 'l f l. .� S T.,.,L L {T.r F 1 A ALTRRP•dATI:' i;3 P , LIBRARY � FACILITY FOR FOR 3 SR. CITIZENS SELL LAND 1 1 ALTERNATIVE it 1 t a 1 i f q 1 D a C, INTRODUCTION The City of FUntington Beach will have the unusual oppor- tunity in the . near future of deciding on the use -of the "Old Civic Center ;Many variables must be taken into account before deciding on the final disposition of the facility. One- of these. variables is the availability of buildings . Certain bu.ildirigs such as the-.old city -hall and the jail structure are not sate for inhabitation and should be leveled. The Administratiie Annex should be removed and .the open area restored (perhaps the Annex could be used fob' a spaying and neutering clinic) . The 14--morial Hall can be restored, but at considerable cost as iril_l be details ( later. The Library will remain a library and therefore is :�o-t being considered in this stu:'y. The rest of thy buildings in- eluding the administration buildi-ng, the old fire station_ , and the police annex can be utilized. Another variable to be considered for future old ci-t._ic center use ax-e the groups who desire using I the biJ?ldinos . Such groups as the Coui:cil: on Aging ,. the Frew Cliitic , the C-Inamber of Commerce, various community service organizations , and the His- torical Society (including the Kulslk:a ha- £ showa an L (.'::Cc�St lit using the buiid_ingTs InttirB^.5t?d cr rC7�l S w ?gin £a t£` C?r 1Z2Ci ?.?ito three gencral types : business organ L- ,sit as community service or,,,FniZ ons , nd cul -_! rwl or- gani nations . Th'_- problem for the City Cou;zc i 1 t`'en is to clievids i 3 ` ( which of these uses if any or what combination_ of these uses are to prevail in the old civic center . A further variable the City Council should consider ..,,hen deciding on the final disposition of the civic center is the problem of funding. The City Council and the Recreation and Parks Commission have shown iliterest . >n creating some kind of senior citizen' s facility in the old civic center. The 'Mie:;iorial Hall has been looked upon as the possible facility for such a center . ty'hether the Memorial Hall is renovated or replaced with: a new center for the senior citizens , the .problern of funding rust be faced. Estimates for renovating Memorial hall range somewhere between $600 , 000 and $900 ,000 and estimates for creating a new community center including the cost of demolishing "ie,;:oria l :{all and the old city hall range between $600 , 000 a-nd $700 , 000 . If the seniors are to have a center in the old civic center co-1 - plex, then the problem of funding will have to be solved. One possible source of funding is Orange County revenue sharinU funds . The County of Orange is snaking available ';; of all of their revenue - sharing funds for co1;mu,-it • service and social programs . The County .is also marking availa blo - of their revenue sharing funds for the development and acquisitio.1 of parks . (Huntington Leach has been very fortunate to c, piurc over J. . 1 1ni1- lion in revenue sharing; funds from the County for our parks pro- gram. However, since Huntington Leach has bee:] so fortunate r, this area of endeavor , we can 01:pect only nominal future grants from the County :for our parks program and thus could not .,:_sect t any appreciable parks revenue sharing money to be used it, the Olt!- civic center area. Therefore , the only 1. g^ sur-S of r�oiiC . the County can make available to the City is fro-:i their social pro- rrams revenue sharing money. COUNTY FUNDING Orange County has made funds available to various cities for various kinds of social progra-ms . They hav-_- jTlade available approximately one half million dollars to the City of Santa An,a , 25-01, 000 to. the City of Garden Grove, appro:.iiately3CU , 000 to the Cities of La Habra and Brea. These monies haire been used for the creation of centers and for the staffing and, running of various Rinds of community service and social programs . 'There is appi mately three million dollars left in this section of the Ora:i�:e County revenue shaping funds and if the city is capable of creat- ing an integrated and well conceived cormur_ity services progr.a:;!, the City could reasonably ask the County for revenue sharin "unds amounting to somewhere between S400 , 000 to $600 , 000 . The City Council should keep in mind certain criteria the County 15 using 1n judging wi'1?thex Or not . tO :iuiid Va2'iOuS pr0grams . The County is looking for hea' y city co.i?mJi er.t In Zti}13t' 'e7' Tiro-g-ram the County funds . This corumi tment can take th.z, form of dash or in-kind contributions such as st«ff , sp ace and ec{uiT; .�nL . City must be able to show the pro raT:, is ser;Tin cOl!"Imu1:L t-y .-eedS . i`h kinc IS of pro?, a.:,s the Co ur_t} is i, terest. d in se :in,; 0"I _` 4 in the clues are : eT�ployment help and trc.i-min„ medical s c r vice;+ to the nerdy, all kinds of aid to the senlors , c0upsS-Iii;`; Ser:'li e o - r. both personal and .family, legal services for the needy, and other similar programs . There are alternatives to county fund:it;g for a senior cit- izens facility. These alternatives include the possible use of rental fees collected from the use of the administrative annex and the old fire station. Another possible source of funds should Council decide to use the buildings for cultural purposes would be the fees collected from visitors attendin^ the Kuska :Museum exhibits ._ Ti�.o other sources of funds alxe�dy in City caffe-rs , include the park development and acquisition fund and city rev_- enue sharing funds . Of course with either or the latter taro funds , priorities would have to be shifted fTam their present status in order to fund the possible renovation of `•_-- or.ial I'a'' or the construction of a new center. The feasibility of funding possibilities will be discussed 1n as paper progresses . USES POSITIVELY AFFECTING. CHA,}CES OP CCUN;TY FU?D.1NG As has been. previously stated, a co: miun.Ly s0 vises ce:,ter concept , including vaTiOUS 1:1;1dS Of appropriate :'-g^nC1eS , ::. is be created lri order 'to 1!,sure County fun:1i; :i0: a se D iOL Zen' s facility . Th-cre are , as has been note,!, , .I::.=st bul ldln >, In the OIC Cll%iC Cr P. t �t?1C} COu. -r- ;1. „ ':,- c% the Police Anne_ , ')hr Old fi rc sta--ion , :?nd LJI- buildir-7 . Community Servic.—s Center A tentative plan has been created for the .use of t;,o CerL-�_ 0 - 6 - as a community service center. Th.i.s is just a preliminary pL!n and has not been reviewed by various interested ;coups such as the .Recreation :and Parks Commission and the Countil on Aging . P This list has been compiled for the City Couricil ' s edification so that they may know what kinds of groups have been in contact with the City. Interested groups which could be housed in t}1e . present facilities include : Jewish Family Service, Salvation Army, the planning staff for the Human Resources Council , Legal. Aid of Orange County , family education and" counseling agencies sucli as the Sir Thomas More Clinic and the National Alliance ' for Family. Life, Inc. ,, Catholic Social Service ; Visiting Nurses , 1Vol- un-teen Bureau, Orange County Probation Department , Free C1ihic ,: and the Well Baby Cl:in ic. City staff i s - i rive stigat-i.ng the- po.,si bi.lity of, creating .a manpower employment program .to be run. ,f r66 some of the available space in the o.ld civic center. The i,nten . tion would be to fund this pro,ram from. the future manpower. re��`e :nue sharing .funds . The creation of such a :'.ommunity services center ,would clef_ hitely enhance the posslbil.i.t - of- toto.iVing County revenue sh �r`.i:nr" :Funds for• devel.oprient of a sen .or cati:ze.ns ' faciIit' A possible deviat:i.on from ,--,Lich a strictly defined cor1l]lUf]it,.y services center could be c;;p:lor r.,. Such a change 'mig}]t include. t cillturc center such as the Kuska Musei ;n in one of the buildings.:- if the Kuska ;plus; u:n here to co�r�e� into t,�c co�i2P1��:� in or.e bt:� Ldii]i,Jl the old fire station could suffice . 'rh(- Coontv hss - furtdrd <► museum in Santa Ana and. is considering pllrchasi.ng .aii arc-'4. 6lo,t W. C. site which would rival the I.�i . I3re:i Tar Pits tn,`: npcirta tic e However, in each of these cases , the County his or wi I I us its parks revenue sharing funds . County funds were not 1.ivies easily for the museum in Santa Ana, nor does the County expr:,ct to give easily any monies for any future museum. In any case , these monies have come from County park revenue sharing funds and these are the funds the City of Huntington Beach already has grabbed a lion' s share compared to other cities in the County. If the Kuska Museum were to use the entire old fire station . then certain services such as Tamil} education and counsellsn;; services and, more importantly , employment related service: and training would have to be dropped from the community service cen- . ter. Both of these services are particularly well suited for use in the old fire station . Consequently , by inclusion of a cultural fuse in one of the buildings , the City would seriously lower is possibilities of receiving County revenue sharing funds for a senior citizens ' facility . USES HAVING NO POSITIVE AFFECTS ON COUNTY FtWING` Cultural Center The City could decide to create a cultural center in t1-ie old civic center. A senior citizens ' facility could still be included -is part of the over-all cultural c.cnte.r plan . (Since the O.t} Council has stated they will. try , if possible: , to. fund aci :lit:ie.-, for the Frue Clinic, the Detective Annox could still be u d for the Free Clinic without seriously hampering it.ho concept of ci cul- tural center. ) The cultural center , - s a pre:limin.ary Plan , Would contain the Kuska Muse= in the old fire station and 'tlic d,-il,ns- trative bu ] ding Wouldk)ecoltrh ;r callce~t:iorl nxc:a ; cat the a fiistorical Society. The concept of the cultural center could b^. expanded or remain static throughout th- ;years ,is llcvds dict.:ate . 11owever, the possibility exists that a cultural center cc,i.;'ldl 1.rN created in the area of the Huntington Central Park next, to the central library where the huska Museum could be moved at some future date . If such an event occurs , then the problem of e.: -tab- lishing uses for the old civic center will reoccur. All possi - bilities previously mentioned plus some others iv+Jl;ld have to be reassessed. Such possibilities laii;ht include : a Senior cit i - zens ' facilities into the Administrativeiiuilciii:r; and the ral.d -; fire department building , the selling of the land , rental Lor i fair market value , evolution ofth- ci:itu:-a1 center concept , .artil 1 iiit_�'reased open space :in the f()rrl o-E' a If the administrat:Lan and f'iro department h!iildin gs are a5 a cultural center ,. tilerl a fundirig problem :for the senior %:.i ti - zens ' facility wi.11 occur. One j)ossiblc alternative for rund.iii the facility might be t:ho use of whatever fees are co'.11ected from visi-ors to the cultural center for. pa)'izi-erit to-,r-:ard 'tni' creat-ion of the senior citi ells ' 1= !cili 1�) . As i:.i. r.;i 1.1 ;,11.:ornati.ves t:iolied in this paper , th,_ p:z r ;; deve�io,lrr � it: E171:a could help bS1c 1111)' (' xl.t:t: ^.i le oc f devs1C,li)!1 -,1 . fl'1c: <<:i:1c i t r t 1-.e f c i f, oV-Z nee sha-Hiji ; funds . t)n FO r t u na t c I y iv iU !l[lt. ivh;vt ni.!uiber of l :i l 't0 rz; l I L 1):, r t )•.i.:1 ty cents ver 1 i.5it:ov -!s i'% li'i:1; cons.ide-VOID of visitation . SOi11e 591-t Of tl In 1j1(.', 1.1S.. . (''':3f1 ;C,L,ei7t e 9 - to be arranged whereby the fees collected from the Kuska :Museum visitations would pay back the cost or financing the senior citizens ' facility. Of course , at best , this is a nebulous e possibility because there is no data available suggesting how many visitors will come to the Kuska Museum attraction. Rent to business. enterprises z The City could decide to rent the buildings at fair marl:e.t value as office space to various business enterprises . At 35q. per square foot , if the administration building and the fire de- partment building were rented completely for a year, the City could realize $33 ,600/year gross income. ' The -police annex is not mentioned as a facility to be rented since this paper presumes the City Council would allow the Pree Clinic to use the buil(i) ng at nominal or for no rent . This pr" esuTnption is based on the tact the Council has stated they will try to find a :facility fo"l- :a Free Clinic in the "old civic center and , secondly, that the police: ` annex appears to be the most suitable building for a r::ed:ical- typ " operation. The problem with i•.enting "Old Civic Center" facilities are they could have to be upgraded to meet the needs of those to whom we Would. like to rent . The costs involved in upgrading the facilities is now kno,..�' because they do1-,end su-.mewhat on which organizations would e1SC thew. 1101�:cvcr• , rvire rest:roor•.is -ou d p-ro- bably have to be added in the downstairs and. upstairs r, E the o d; iire department building and sore form of i.nst il.la.- ion WOL11;� i1.1 C. to be created whereby the heating :From the downstairs - 10 - could be separated from one another. The 0111Y alternat i v,. to :anit oL the problems that will be created by renting the old fire de- . partment building to various different groups would be to r4nt ' to one, organization only . However, by taking such an approach , the City would probably have to give a discount to such an or- ganization. Therefore , the City :could probably not collect total of $33 ,000 a year . As with the collection of fees, from the F:uska ;iuseum, tite fees collected from the rentals could he used toward financings the development of a senior citizens ' facility . The rentals col- lected, for instance , could litz, used to reimburse funds used from the- park development and acqui:,ition fund. lio. ever , .tie have tea l approached by very few potential pa .inn and are not in a position to j ud,ge: trio v is b i .! i.t.y o:; such OTHER MAJOR ALT.I;ItN'aT IVE' OF OLD CIVIC CUNITER Do not build a major tacilit� for senior c.iti n use One possible solution 'to the problem offunding fire cre a �.it)rl of a senior citizens ' faci.l:ity is not I:r} create sti;:h a faci t2L at all . The City cOLlid C}:GOSH' to c�'; Ali tr ::ill open Sl?F1Ci' pi.I'�; i h the southern half cF the uld civic certt.er and 1..::e })uildin,_;_- 1) the old !1(iI"t}1:'rIl SOCC1011 Oi the Civic (7"jllti'.r .Eoi a? iy UscL v.iotisIy tictaiI--d. I n th:L:_ t.£!'ie , Lf t:il kC Cy is it-ill .. t Lladinp ct tac.i .} ttti' 0. ?:f10 hI'c` _ clin"Ci lrt d hQ 10 al h is ( ur ti ` dl C.1 1 department building could be Oisod .a_ a .011101' 't0I'S althOLIgh it is 1.7;1Lo(ju to ll both -si -z ;Inn! 11' 1i.al;li.r a::t`1 lit:ies for our ser.:iur:. . Or- t ht Old E 't'iL' could be used for the Kuska Museum , o-r for community services . Funding could possibly be acquired from the County to either renovate. these buildings for the Free Clinic and senior citiZeri use; or Free Clinic and community service use . However, this kind of center would. not constitute the all encompassing , wel.L thought out type of community services center that the County is looking to fund and may, therefore , be less l.i ;ely to be funded than the previous concept of a cor:!munity Center. Sell the Southern Section Ad adjunct to the previous alternative would be to sell ti e :southern half of the old civic center'. The City could expect to receive approximately $170 , 000' to "30 , 000 -"-or the land if :iz 4 ,.:ere empty. . However, the City l ly 'W!ve tb s 7�ii.i as i:itilch :,ts r. a100 ,000 to level 1:'l1 '01--morial iall airic: t?1e oa,l city h 111 : Th<= rc,- fore, the actual not profit for thO 1I111d weiulci he very „UCh .ieSS than $170 , 000 to $230 , 01DO . All previously stanod uses :for the northern section could' be consitdlered as poss 'ble . BuiId a 111.1jor senior Citizon i:.!i: i1:it�' i; One fur thor 111:d 1)e Y_o I ve ] j h!.! isii: s except the Lib Cary , sc 1.1 ti: S Cr11 11,111 --)f tht'. w ro i si_ Ci�t;� �!n f t1,1,. •)o 'J)R'-; C��:..Zi:y no net p rri; crC'-ate a senior C].'i:l._. 'i S i:.?CJLJ_t p1 ("Id civ1L en%t,l' . fir1.:;?1-i.T' tt:'.. _: ii 1e_ 1 i:iCi Ui C<�::':": l ; . ': -vices concept the loaki'l• to i '..1C1ii i:'� ;itiV ill_:`; i!`• ib' , �'O unfunded by the i'h(', t.,... t 5;i) i.':: rt?;- •11thw .'1! :';t - i for $230 ,000 and leveled all buildings except the 1,i111rary for approximately $120 ,000 , thoji $111) .000 would hL• :lva11 :111le to build a senior citizens ' facility. Other funds would .h:ive to cover the difference between the cost of a senior citizens ' facility and the $110 ,000 made available by the sale . 4 j PROPOSED PLAN FOR MATCHING COUNTY FUNDS TO BE USED FOR A SENIOR CITIZEN'S FACILITY February 2S, 1974 COUNTY FUNDS NEEDED. . . . . . 600,000 - 700,000 . MATCHING PLAN IN-KIND 1st YEAR 6 YEAR .PERIOD 1. Free rent on Administration Building and old fire station $ 33,000 19 ,000 2> Free rent on Police Annex 9,000 54,000 3. Land (estimated $170,000 to 200,000 200,000 $230 ,000) 4® Personnel 58,181 306,907 S. Operating expenses 11,930 71,500 64 Extra furniture from "old Civic Hall" Total In-Kind 312 ,111 830,487 CASH 1. Capital outlay 30,13 30,14 2. Cash. ? ? Total Cash 300143 30,143 TOTAL MATCHING 1. In-Kind 312 ,111 830,487 2. Cash 302143 30, 143 Total Matching 342,254 8600630 COUNTY OF ORANGE REVENUE SHARING REQUEST QUESTING ACEN(-Y: City of Garden Grove JUM OF PROJECT: . West Orange County Senior Citizens Center IFT LIESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: A 10,000 sq. ft. building to include a large multi.-purpose room, a room for special activities, game room, small meeting K rooms, offices for Senior Citizens services and general business. A landscaped park-like mall is also included adjacent to the building, as well as a patio area in the center of the building. LOCATION OF PROJECT:` The building will be located in the Community Center District in Garden Grove. ESTIMATED TOTAL COST OF PROJECT: $500,000.00 Comm REVENUE FUNDS REQUESTED: $250,000:00 a PROJECT COMPONENTS, INCLUDING ESTIMATED COST: a, city's Revenue Estimated `' Contri- Sharing Camponent .. Cost butioz Funds Orepare plans and specifications for building, $ $ parking and landscaping 40,000 40,000 -0- �F Cost of land for building, parking, land. 5 - scaping and park-like mall 175,000 1150000 0.. Construction of parking lot 7,000 7,000 . -(- Landscaping patio, building, park-like mall 20,000 21100,000, f Interior .furnishings 5,000 5,004 ` -0- .Contingencies 301-000 301000 -0 Building construction 280,000 - , 250,P00 Estimated Totals $ 500�,000 $ 250,000, I ' s 25 . PROJECT START DATE: December 1913 PROJECT COMPLETION DATE: December 1974 - s; tom, ,,,5r • � i City of La Habra Cit)o�f Brea County of Orange Cash In-Kind Cash In--K nc� ( ro osed Grant) a. Transportation 32,587 11,500 5,700 15,000 b. Older American Service Center 909 10,000 1,300 42,256 c. Senior Employment Program -Expanded/Proposed 7,849 6,974 1,980 1,374 97,396 d. Senior Employment Program -current 7,000 350 e. Office of Social Services 32,765 375 14,100 705 82,138 f, Service Center .. 32,600 1,600 10000 g. Gary Center - La Habra 1,452 3,600 231504 -- Center 7,500 144,439 h. Nutrition Program 1,000 4,600 i. .Youth Employment Program La Habra 40,000 16,715 J. Youth Employment Program • Brea 31,800 1#840- 16,000 k. Assessment & Treatment Center - La Habra 7,478 1. Mental Health Drug Abuse Team Offices - La Habra 3,325 500 m. Well Baby Clinic r La Habra 300 n. County Consumer Affairs La Habra 600 ; o. Emergency Medical Service -- La Habra .116,338 p. Social Services Element c La Habra & Brea (1) 20,000* 5,060 26,000 50000 20 000 q. Other Brea programs (see item # 10) 15,120 'TOTALS 301,894 172,197 8$,700 10,560 32101.669 , * Proposed "701" Grants For Cities. a INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION a ' "sxvrenGrcur atatA , To Mx. Daze Rowlands, City From Recreation Parks Commission ' ' Administrator and City Council Subject Old Civic Center - Uses Date February 20, 1974 The Recreation and Parks Commission reviewed the "Draft" of Alternatives for Old Civic Center Use as presented by staff at their last regular meeting. ; Upon motion by Mr. Jim Shepard and second by Mr; Rudy Lozano, the Commission recommended that staff create a large new senior citizen's facility on the southern portion of the property and to use the existing administrative buildings for community services and cui ,. : tural purposes. . Y Respectfully submitted, r v f Noma ort y, ecre ar, Recreation and Parks Ct ssn s' NW:'ac ct� . Recreation $ Parks Commission Mr. Dick Harlow Mr Bill Hartge x# Mr. Walter Johnson S L S3 , s sa , a WEST ORS'- 'E COUNTY It t L "I r it Formerly the WEST ORANGE COUNTY UNITED FUND COMMUNITY CHEST OF HUNTINGTON BEACH A411)!%� CRUSADE OFFICE BRANCH OFFICE 4 1 1 412 STANFORD AVE. 15=62 BEACH BLVD. T T . A GARDEN GROVE. CALIF. 92640 HUNTINGTON BEACH. CALIF. 92646 (714) 530-467C (7 14) 962-5505 , February 20, 1974 Mr. David Rowlands , City Manager City of Huntington Beach P. O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, Ca. 92648 Dear Mr. Rowlands : As you know, Crusade and City staff have been working closely regarding use of the soon to be vacated Civic Center Complex. I understand that the disposition of these buildings will be decided at next Monday's Council meeting, or soon thereafter. As Crusade President, I would like to use this letter to express our sincere interest in establishing services in that complex; our serious intent to develop a first class service center for the benefit of the citizens of Huntington Beach and the area; and to -share with you some pertinent data,. to assist you in making your pre- sentation to the City Council. 1. There is no guarantee that the 25% (15 million dollars) of County revenue sharing, which has been allocated this year to social services, will be duplicated in following years. It is clear that now is the time to present a social service package to the revenue sharing office. 2. The Crusade is prepared to deliver the services to augment the Senior Citizen Center and Free Clinic to insure the County Funds needed to develop a viable Community Center on that site. 3. Crusade Agencies prepared to provide services in that Center are: 1. Catholic Social Services 2. Family Service Association 3. Jewish Family Services 4 . Salvation Army Serving the communities of FOUNTAIN VALLEY - GARDEN GROVE- HUNTINGTON BEACH - LEISURE WORLD - SEAL BEACH- SUNSET BEACH WESTMINSTER - :MIDWAY CITY Page 2 4. Non-Crusade Agencies which are sincerely interested in providing services through a Crusade Service Center are: 1. American Red Cross 2 . National Alliance for Family Life Foundation 3. National Alliance for Family Life, Inc. 4 . Orange County Legal Aid 5 . Probation Department 6 . Sir Thomas More Clinic Other Agencies have approached us regarding inclusion in the master service delivery plan, but they are not committed to the point of naming them. 5 . We would hope to headquarter the staff of West Orange County Human Resources Planning Council tzere. Huntington Beach has already demonstrated its leadership in this area in being the first city to adopt the proposal. 6 . We would like to maintain field offices for Crusade (and other) agencies not located in Huntington Beach to enable them to improve services to your city, such as: 1. Visiting Nurses 2. Volunteer Bureau 7 . Although the above represents many agencies, we would like to leave room for future development of even more services as circumstances indicate. 8. In addition to the much needed assistance programs offered by Legal Aid, Salvation Army and Counseling Agencies, we intend that an important thrust of this center be the develop- ment of extensive Community Education Programs in Marriage and Family Life. This latter is a unique focus which can put Huntington Beach on the map as a center for the study and re- inforcement of the American Family. 9 . We estimate conservatively that more than $1,000 ,000 in cost free services are provided each year in our Garden Grove Service Center. The proposed -Huntington Beach Center, which will ultimately be larger and better known, should exceed that cost figure for low cost services to citizens . 10 . To optimize our potential -o develop a first-rate service delivery system (as well as assist your efforts to obtain the currently available social service revenue sharing funds) we respectfully request consideration for use of: Page 3 1. Tile entire Administrative Building 2. The top floor of the Planning Building I dope this information will be useful to you. Attached is a copy of our Huntington Beach Board of Directors to demonstrate that we are not outsiders offering these services. We are a local group, an integral part of this City for nearly 50 years, who are requesting that the City make possible this ambitious and extensive service package to our citizens. Attached also are copies of tilis letter and our Board list for distribution to the Council. Thank you for your continuing co-operation with the Crusade in its efforts to render greater service to our city. Steve Holden, President 3C 1974 WEST ORANGE COUNTY UNITED CRUSADE HUNTINGTON BEACH COMMUNITY BOARD OF DIRECTORS TERM NAME ADDRESS PHONE EXPIRES DEC. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE FOSTER WILLIAM Vice-Pres.&Gen.Mgr. 536-6581 197.5 President Huntington Beach Co. 2110 Main St. Huntington Beach 92648 DUNN DALE Huntington Harbour Co. 846-1361 1974 1st Vice-Pres. P. 0. Box 1160 Huntington Beach 92648 CARVELL JAMES Superintendent 847-2551 1975 2nd Vice-Pres. Ocean View School Dist. 7972 Warner Ave. Huntington Beach 92647 BAUER, DARLENE(MRS. ) 1737 Park St. 536-6021 1976 Treasurer Huntington Beach 92648 STEWART, HEL•'N(MRS. ) 7501 •Rhine Drive 847-2623 1975 Secretary FLANAGANr SCOTT Asst. Superintendent 847-1273 1975 Nominating Committee H.B.Union High School Dist. Chairman 1902 17th St. Huntington Beach 92648 Campaign C a rman BURBANK,, ROBERT Area Manager 835-3833 1974 Ex Off1cio So.Calif. Edison Co. 538 Main St. Huntington Beach 92648 DIRECTORS ASELTINX, DALE H.B. Flower Market 847-9614 1976 17731 Beach Blvd. Huntington Beach 92648 BAILEY, RUTH 5641 Marshall Drive 846-6108 1975 Huntington Beach 92649 BELSITO, FLOYD Asst. City Manager 536-5511 1974 P. O. Box 190 Huntington Beach 92648 BOYCE, DR. DUDLEY President 892-7711 1974 Golden West College 15744 Goldenwest Huntington Beach 92647 HUNTINGTON BEACH BOA, OF DIRECTORS PAGE 2 i� TERM NAME ADDRESS PHONE EXPIRES DEC. CARLSON, C. WILLIAM Attorney 847-2574 1976 18080 Beach Blvd. Huntington Beach 92648 FEEHAN, JACK District Manager. 536-6526 1976 So.Calif.Gas Co. 311 Main St. Huntington Beach 92648 GRUNDY, DICK Administrator 842-1473 1976 Huntington Inter.Comm. Hospital 17772 Beach Blvd. Huntington-Beach 92647 HAMMARQUIST, MARK Huntington Valley Stationers 1623 Alabama 536-8844 1976 Huntington Beach 92648 HOLDEN, STEVE F. South Shores Ins. Co. 963-5647 1974 19014 Brookhurst St. Huntington Beach 92646 KISER, RALPH Manager 962-6661 1974 Chamber Of Commerce 18582 Beach Blvd. Huntington Beach 92648 MILES, TOM Manager 962-2491 1976 Bank of America 10121 Adams Huntington Beach 92646 NOEL, PAUL A. Admin.Div.Ass 't. 896-2315 1976 McDonnell Douglas Astronautics-Dept.A--3-300-8 5301 Bolsa Ave. Huntington Beach 92647 PETERSON, WILLIAM S. Manager 847-3541 1974 Bank of America 18691 Main St.-P.O.Box 1099 Huntington Beach 92646 ROBITAILLE, EARL Police Chief 536-5311 1975 P. O. Box 190 Huntington Beach, 92648 SANDERS, PHD, 16897 Algonquin 846-2022 1975 ELLA MOPE Huntington Beach 92649 SCHULTZ, MONTANA R. Attorney 847-2521 1976 17612 Beach Blvd. Huntington Beach 92647 HUNTINGTON BEACH BOA_ . OF DIRECTORS PAGE 3 TERM NAME ADDRESS PHONE EXPIRES DEC. SILVERMAN, AL Vice-President 842-2566 1975 Beach City Dodge 16555 Beach Blvd. Huntington Beach 92648 SUNDALI, ARNOLD Manager 536-9371 1975 Security Pac.Nat'l :yank 202 Main St. Huntington Beach 92648 WALL, CAROLE 9382 Nautilus Drive 962-4078 1974 Huntington Beach 92646 TIEST, GEORGE Manager 892-7771 1976 J.C.Penney Co. , Inc. 10 Huntington Center Huntington Beach 92649 WOODS, C.E.BILL Signal Oil and Gas Co . 1974 P.O- Box 2828 Long Beach, CA 90801 YOUNG, WALTER 10154 Ascot Circle 962-8477 1975 Huntington Beach 92646 ZARET, GREG Manager 8+46-1341 1974 Security Pac.Nat'l Bank 16911 Algonquin Huntington Beach 92649 City ®f Huntington Beach 0... P.O. Box e90 CALIFORNIA 92SQ _' . OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Dear Citizen: I need your lhelp in deciding wnat position the city should take on location of the proposed north-south Huntington Beach Freeway.. We are troth taxpayers and we both must drive to get to work or to shopping, and at the same time we want to make sure that any freeway will be of the greatest value to the community. Take a look at the map and at the facts and after you read about the freeway, I would ask you to fill in the enclosed postcard and mail it. It is stamped and self addressed. incerely, T•� Jerry A. Matney, Mayor JAM:lw i r y FACT SHEET Under study now are hvo possible routes through Hunting on Beach and Fountain Valley for a north-soitti► freeway which would ue a part of a freeway from tite coast to the Foothill Freeway in _1"LUSa. Tids sheet contains a map of the two proposals through this area and some facts de%-eloped'Ly tite State Division of liijltways. Please study the reap and consider the offered facts, then fill out the enclosed postcard and mail it. No postage stamp is required. N ROUTE A ROUTE B Length (miles) 3.16 3.83 1'ibiit-of-ivay costs $29,209,000 $34,866,500 . Construction Costs $40,644,000 $47,900,000 Total Costs $69,853,000 S82,766,500 = v Cost per mile $22,105,380 $21,610,052 Num."ber of parcels required cap lluntina on Beach 306 206 Fountain Valley 178 4 Fyr- Westminster 1-44 177 628 337 Fleil ' Living units required Huntington Beach 291 496 dater Fountain Valley 159 0 Westminster 159 352 B 1 A 609 848 Acres required Talber 4 Huntin-on Beach 113.1 171.0 Fountain Valley 37.2 3.0 Westminster, 50.7 70.8 T 201.0 244.8 ll!isinesses directly affected fIuntinoton Beach. 4 31 Fountain Valley 4 0 Westminster 6 0 14 31 �V ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF A FREE!�'AY: A convenient freeway vvill make vacant or deteriorating industrial and commercial areas in the south part of Huntington Beach more desirable for development, resulting in a stronger tax base. Residents of south Huntington Brach vvho novv travel Beach, Brookhurst or other north-south routes to work or shopping will avoid signals and local _ traffic. l ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF ROUTE A: The cost is less by over 10 million dollars, and has a lesser impact on business and residential units in the city. ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF ROUTE B: Vacant industrial land adjacent to Gothard St. will be more desirable for development, which will improve the tax base of the city. v _. CITY OF HUNTINGTON "EACH IL INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION IfUNINGTON Of A(11 'fo David D. Rowlands From Director of Public Works City Administrator Suh.ject Old Civic Center Buildings Date September 11, 1972 The Committee met. on August 2, and discussed the disposition of the buildings on the present Civic Center site. This loci to a discussion of the future use of the property. This report will present the conclusions and -ecommendations in that order'. The ground rules agreed upon by the Committee were, (a) that none of the existing structures were of�a quality that would permit their use at anotb. - location, .(b) that, while somR bf the structures alight i)e put to an interim use, they should eventually be razed and, (c) that :i.n deciding to make use of any existing building earthquake safety must. he :insured and that: remodeling costs be sufficiently detailed.'to economically justify the intended use. Because the. alternative 00 selling a portion of the property muss considered the site was arbigrarily divided with Pecan Avenue (restore;) separating the two parts. BUILDING DISPOSITION Norh of Pecan This area is now occupied by the Library, r:dministrative Building, Admini- strative Annex and the old Fite Station which houses Planning, Building and Personnel. The property is triangular; bounded by Main and fifth Streets and Pecan Avenue. The property could best be used to complement: the library by providing additional outdoor areas developed to a compatible public use. Removal of non-essential structures would make this possible and allow for the d=e:•elopment of outdoor reading, resting and recreational. facilities. Such an area could complement the service to our senior citizens by being in proximity of utility offices and shopping. LIBRARY: This building would 'remain as a branch facility. Transfer of the stored material housed .here would provide for restoration to its original use or moderate expansion to meet the needs of the increased population of the town lot area. A.D';INISTRATI.VE ANNIEN: This building would be -removed and the open area restored. It should be sold or cl-i.sposed •of by some means. It is not suitable, architec- tu:-al.ly, for further use on public property. Memorandum - David D. Rowlands September 11, 1972 Page 2 ADMINISTRATION BUILDING: This budding should be demolished except for the original brick "Horseshoe Building." The old building was devoted to a recrea- tional use and was popular with the adult community. Restoration would be reasonable in cost except for duplicating the slate roof. This would provide a resting and meeting place, a refuge in inclement weather and restroom facili- ties for our citizens. It is not suitable for large groups and should be devoted to general use. No special facilities should be provided, it should be a casual place with the minimum of amenities. FIRE STATION: This is a sound old building and can be converted to a place to house our local heritage. Ae downstairs -can be opened up again to provide an area for display of artifacts and items of historical significance. The second floor would be devoted to storage and work areas. This use would be of an interim nature with the museum beiig relocated to the Main Library and Cultural Center as soon as a building could be provided. At the time this building Js vacated it should be demolished and the final work performed to accomplish the rest and recreation adjunct to the library, including an adequate parking facility. SOUTH OF PECAN 1 This area is now occupied ly the old City Hall and is shared by the Police and Public Works Departments, the Police Annex, the Jail and Memorial Hall which houses the Council. Chambers, Finance and Purchasing and the City Treasurer. A portion of the latter building is set aside for the American Legion. The attached Attorneys Opinions .discuss the rights of this occupant. It is not within the purview of thetommittee to make any recommendation in this matter, however, it must be considered if and when the building is demolished. This block, bounded by Fifth, Pecan, Sixth and Orange could either be cleared and offered for sale, cleared and put to public use or partially cleared and put to public use. The latter would depend upon the practicality of preserving Memorial Hall. OLD CITY HALL: Upon relocation of offices to the new Civic Center, this building should be demolished. Visible evidence of its unsuitability for occupancy has been observed, notably the foundation failure of the interior columns which have resulted in.` floor settlement in the second story. POLICE ANNEX: These buildings,are not suitable for relocation to any other city property. The interior framing does not lend them to practical remodeling. It is recommended that they be sold for relocation outside the city or razed. 1 Memorandum - David D. Rowlands } September 11, 1972 f Page 3 i i JAIL: With the opening of the new facility this structure becomes obsolete. It is recommended that the jail be demolished. MEMORIAL HALL: This building is the only one for which there was a lack of accord as to its disposition. Amongst things suggested were its restoration to a meeting hall, its being seasonally devoted to hostel use, to its being set aside for senior citizens. Before any serious consideration can be given to a future use it must' be determined if the building i,s safe for public use under the most recent engineering standards. The comatittee concurred that a structural engineer should be engaged to determine the condition of the building and, if not, to recommend and estimate the cost pf 'remedial work. Only this wil.l provide the information needed to permit further, detailed, consideration of whether it will continue in service or be demolished. THE Tj,AN6 SOUTH OF PECAN It was agreed that the land here is quite valuable and that this, in itself, could be important in deciding what should be done with Memorial Hall. Y. RECpMMENDATIONS If, after consideration by the Administration and Council, the foregoing is approved, it is requested -that authorization be granted for the engagement of a structural engineer and an appraiser. es R. Wlrieelerl Director of Public Works JRW:ae cc: Reynolds Worthy Johnson ✓Jones Back