Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutConditional Exception 70-40 - William E. Blurock - First Chr (Published Huntington Beach News Nov, seat sanctuary In lieu of the 317 51 1970) spaces required by ordinance by NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING allowing credit for the remaining APPEAL TO DENIAL required spaces as follows: CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION No. 70.40 a) Joint use of 49 parking spaces NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a provided for the residential public hearing will be held by the City tower. Council of the City of Huntington Beach, b) Joint use of 54 parking spaces In the Council Chamber of the Civic provided on adjacent school Center, Huntington Beach, at the hour property. of 7:30- P.M., or as soon thereafter as c) 83 on-street Nark►ng Spaces. ponsible, on Monday, the 16th day of roect The subject November, 1970, for the purpose of con- property is located on sidering an appeal to the denial by the the south side of Adams Avenue be. City. Planning Commission of a portion tween 17th and Main Streets, in the ' of Conditional Exception No. 7040, to RI-1 Single Family Residence Dis- permit the following: tract, combined witch oil production. I) A 17 story retirement tower having A legs! description is an file in the 287 residential units. Planning Department Office. 2) Off-street parking for the 17 story All interested persons are Invited to residential tower to be provided attend said hearing and express their at a ratio of one space for each opinions for or against said appeal to three residential units in lieu of CE 70-40. Further information may be the required 2 spaces per unit in obtained from the Office of the City the R1 Zone (one space per unit C'ierk. plus 112 guest parking space per Dated: 10/29/70 - unit is required in multiple fam- CiTY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Ily zones). By: PAUL C. JONES, j 3) 131 off-street spaces for the 950 City Ci� Published Huntington Beach News f"''- quired spaces as follows: OF ust 60 1970. j a)joint use of 48 parking spaces pro- LEGAL for the residential tower LFGJIL NOTICE b)Joint use of 54 parking spaces pro- CONDiTIONAL, EXCEPTION NO, 7A•i0- NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING .L ;•ided on adjacent school property c) 83 on-street parking spaces. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a pub- The subject property is locate. on the lic hearing will be held by the City Plan- ning Commission of the City of Hun- south side of Adams Avenue between tington Beach for the purpose of con gle family Residence District combined 17th and Main Streets In the R1.0 Sin- • . sidering a Cond.tianal Exception to per- with oil production. A .legal description milt the following:Construction of a church and rebated is on the in the Planning Department facilities as follows: a"ca a) drive-in church to accommodates ap- Said hearing will be held at the hour proximately �S cats ref 7:00 P.M.' .M. on August 18, 1970,' in the b) religious education structure Council Chaimber of they Civic Center, j c) 950 seat sanctuary. Huntington 0rw3ch, California, on 5th 2) A',17 story retirement tower hav!n.g 287 Street Wween Main Street and Change - @I'Wf-street esidenti�rl units Avenue.parking for the 17 story res- All interested persons are invited to Id6ntisl tower to be provided at a ratio attend said hearing : and express their of-one space for each three ra�sid+sntial opinions for or„agvinst tht pr4postd units' in lieu of.the required spaces Conditional;'Exception. .- per unit in the R1 zone (one iaace per Further_ Information , may be obtained unit prus ' 1/1 unit, is required in multiple tamely Telophwe No. ;�-5271.guest parking space pet from the City Planning Department. j , ; as). DATED this 6th''dar; of August, 1971 4) 31 .*off-street parking spam for the CITY PLANNING COMMISSION ^ R4 goat sanctuary in Iltu ,_of the 317 By RICHARD A. HARLOIN spices required by ordinance by al- krtinp Secretary lowing credit for the 'remaining re- -..--..--.....--�- -••--•----r it Huntington Beach Planning Commission P.17. BOX 1K) CALIFORNIA 92648 November 1.6, 1970 TO: , HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: Planning Commission SUBJECT: Conditional. Exception No. 70-40 - APPEAL ATTN: Doyle Miller, City Administrator Paul Jones , City Clerk Gentlemen: Transmitted herewith is a report regarding the Planning Com- mission ' s decision to deny that portir.-n of . Conditional Eaccep- ' tion No. 70-40 for a 17 story retirement tower and related uses . The Planning CouurissiQn' s decision was appealed by William E. Bluroc:k , apr1icant. Applicant : William E. Blurnek 1550 Bayside Drive Corona del Mar, Calif. Locution: South side of Adams Ave. between 17th and Main Streets . Present Zone: RI-a and RZ Master Planned : Low density residential. C.E. Request : To permit the following: 1 ) A 17 story retirement. tower having 287 residential units. 2) Off'atr' eet parking for the 17 story residential toweti to be provided at a ratio of one space for each three residentLal units in lieu of the required 2 spaces per unit in the R1 zone (one spece per unit plus � guest parking space per unit' is required in the multiple family zone) . 3) 131 off-street parting spaces for the 9W,seat sanctuary in lieu. of Lhe 317 spaces required by ordinance �b allowing credit for the remasining- re- quired spaces as i,zllows : a-I , joint use of '.48 parking spaces provided for the resi4intiai tower. b) ,joint use of 154 parking spaces' provided on adjacent school property. c) 83 on-street park- ing spaces Reason>w iyen oy the_ scr�nt; �Irr Brief � -_- 1. The sub ect property 19 . id+eolly~ suited: 'to- the pro ose use. , , The . re;�lationship and f 'xi' on Nit the pristine, and propoaed church '.would I Page 2 make an alternate location less desirable. 2. Tht ;Lower will upgrade the area and stimu- late other developments beneficial to the City; thus , increese land value. 3. Proposed development �lan will be compatible green belt corridor a.,t,,ng Main Street. Planning Commission Action: Denied. Reasons given by the Planning Commission for C e r action: 1 . The density and high rise structure is in cons! stent with the R1 neighborhood. 2 . Approval of the request would be a grant of speciAl privilege inconsistent with other RI Property. 3. Although surrounded by ad acent uses tW, are or will be high rise: -iri nature, this I is not sufficient justification. 4. Granting conditional exceptions for high density or high rise structures will sat a precedent for future requests . 5. The applicant failed to demonstrate a hardsh;p. ROLL CULL VOTE: AYES: Porter, Duke, Slates , Kerins NOES: Bazil , Miller ABSENT: None ABSTAINED: Higgins minority R2 ort: . Vae following report was submitted by 'C•m .sa uner Bazil with Commissioner Miller concurring: The Home Council and the tnNority of the Planning Commission .have expressed the opinion t at thhis is a desirable pro3ect but 1. . they did not approve of the location. For the following reasons I feel that this is a satisfactory location: i 1. 17th St. and Adams Ave. are both arterial streets. 2. The site is well buffered by a drilling island arrci"ss the street, a achool. between the site and Palm .Ave. and it is over 300 ft. from residential development . 3. 17th'. St. is zoned M2 from Palm .Ave. to Ocean. Ave. , -4itK the probability of commercial zoning as All attempts to zone ilt multiple residential have failed. i 4; Commercial - zoning .now exists on:,the drilling island at! the `corner of Palm and 1i th St. i Page 3 5. ZWo blocks no-theast, our Civic Center is Lo be located u�sking 17th St. a major connection to the beach area. b. All studies to date indicate office-professional zoning north of the Civic Center. 7 . Property north of the Hi h School is zoned commercial. This, with 17th St . , will provide more than adequate close-by shopping fer the development. 8. While not P. reason for approviAl. of the site , pertinent facts about the project are : a) At 3 public hearings , only one homeowner in the downtown area has voiced his objection; b) No objections were made by the condominium developer or land owner west of the project; c) It would seed that the City has a responsibility to allow sone ti low cost housing for senior citizens and I believe. that this approach is far better than cheapylow Level urban sprawl; and , d) There is a possibility that this develop- ment would satisfy the Federal Government as proof of providing low cost housing, if our housing element study shows it is needed . Additional Information: This case was originally heard by the Planning Cocm,ission on � August 18 , 1970, at which time, Mr. Blurock, applicant , stated that they were nod expecting a final decision at this time, but would like to present the concept and receive comments from the Comdi ssion and the audience. Mr. Rollo West, First. Christian Churc', , . spake on growth of their church and the need for housing ', .,r the elderly. lie stated that they estimate a church attendance of 1500 within . 15 years. Mr. Alurock stated that he feels the high rise tower would be compatible with the surrounding area because of plans for the ,, ci-tic center, the schocls , golf course , etc. Mrs. Lorraine Faber and Mr. Dingwall of the Home Council re- quested continuance to allow time for more public comments because they did not have corcnlete information prior to the meeting. At that time it was the consensus of the Commission Lo continue Conditional Exception No. 70-40 to the September t5, 1970 meet- ing to allow time For .the public to secure additional informa- tion on the proposed project . At the September 15th meeting , Thomas LaMont- nearby resident, stated that he feels the proposal would be more like a place of business and the nearby residents would suffer. because this { project may become rundown , being of a low income. nature. Mr. ,Dingwall stated 'that hi: feels theie will be inadequate piirking and the location should be investigated furtnere Lorraine Faber requested a continuance for two. weel.s, because i Page .4 , she is in the process of making a study of residential high rise developments for the elderly in Los Angeles and Orange County. It was the consensus of the Commission to continue Conditional Exception No. 70-40 to October 6, 1970 , for decision only. At L•he October 6, 1970 meeting, a motion was made by Bazil and seconded by Miller tr. 9pprove Part II "Tower Type Resid'-putial" with a condition that a precise plan shall be approved by the Planning Commission. That motion did not carry. A further motion was made by puke and seconded by Kerins' to deny Part II of said request for the following reason: 1. Said pror �sal is not in compliarjce with City Ordinances. That motion did not carry, thereby, Conditional Exception No. 70-40 Part II was auto►natically cunLLT-nied to October 20, 1970 for decision only. On October 20, 1970 the Planning Commission denied Conditional Exception No. 70-40 kor the reasons as stated on page 2. Respectfully submitted , K. A. Reyno ds , Secretary KAR:dr CITY OF HUNTINGT 8E CH � Ay P �� ebX i90 RE to �" UV _W ,1i Din E..31WM . ...._..,._ ...._.... DV .lU� A? 1970 APPLICANT OR AGENT ; 19SU beLYgidc n Lyg CorQr�&� del Mar. C�►].it. COMMISSION ACTION DATE W ��ir� MAILING ADORF3S to pAPPROVED _ (714) 6'13-6340 [] COWITK44ALLY APPROVED DENIED PHONE NO. ►*- Q WITHDRAWN First Christian Church x APPEALED M YES d No PROPERTY OWNER W COUNCIL ACTION DATE ' U07 Main Streets Huntington Beach, Calif. ~ .. _._ _ ..�_ [] SUSTAINED COMMISWO N MAILMIG ADDRESS [3 APPROVED WITH C0(0T OTHER THAN TO PERMIT A 17 story retirement tower and a z 0 OENED 950 seat sanctuary. g C3 WITHDRAWN EFFECTIVE OATS LOCATION OF PROPERTY (SOE OF STREET, STREET NAME, DISTANCE Ff7t>NI NEAREST INTERSECTING STREET) 17th Street at Adams, Huntkton Beach LEGAL DESCRIPTION See attached. JUSTIFICATION --- FILL OUT COMPLETELY ( IF KORE SPACE IS REOUiRED ATTACH ADDITIONAL PAGES ) A) WHAT , EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES APPLY TO TH13 PROPERTY (04CLUMG : SIZE ,SHAPE , T01*MAPHY, LOCATION OR SWROUMDiNGS) THAT DEPRIVE THE SUSJECT PROPERTY OF PRIVILEGES ENJOYED ON OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE VICINITY ANO UI4DER IDENTICAL ZONE CLASSIFICATION None. The subject property is ideally suited to the proposed use. As a Senior Citizonee Apastinent;• hpo'naored by the First Christian ChLxrch of Huntington Beach, the relationRldp' . and functiJn with the existing and proposed church would make an alternate location less de ; S) WILL THIS, CONDIT04AL EXCEPTION CONSTMTt.= A GRANT OF SPECIAL PRIYILEGE INCOMSTEI ' WITH LMTATIONS UPON OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE VICINITY AND UNM IDENTICAL ZgKE CLASSIFICATION 7 No,, it is believed the pii"eeed building will up-grade the area and stimulate additl*aal � dev4Ibpme'nts benefici,el to the City, thus in-ireasing land values. The proposed project will be Compatible with the green.bolt corridor developing along Mein'Street. C) WHY IS THIS CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NECESSARY FOR THE PRESER%ATIAN AND ENJOYMENT OF OFIE OR MORE SMTANTIAL PROPERTY RI%1HTS i Sanctuary is an extension of existing land use. The majority of the tenants for the pro- posed apartment will be members`of the First Christian Church of Huntington Bilkh, wha willspowur:this prcroect� It is de�eable tq have the bid as art ""Mm"emr O) '3TffE- REASONS VW iHE -.@RAN I'IM� OF THs CCWD IONAC EX MATE MALLY DETRMENtAL TO. THE PUBLIC WELFARE OR INJURIOUS TO PRoPERrY IN THE 3AME ZONE. CLASSIFICATION. The-retirement residentiia building Telates to church'"Uses :adjacent, to sited.lb char large open space surround gNg. in i naster,planed to tie with green open parse and achobl spaceeas on, either side. .;..'he tpxewr i wsllwr 300 ft. from 1 d r, wes yin,the vicinity:Mn p4m6d pray ,. wlLi beocxaeR'a of-tie green`bqpATM, OF PR0)M Q�MlMiR 0R AUtNOI�f�C N►®ttif'r � e ►n a t � ro Ord'in a rlatndtr :Vti_ pear irt ? P ! ' Iq'T Ito 3VP'1K.ebuff L *=T lt1111)11T K ftfMy AND 3140KD By TMIE �1PPt.11:AkT ' " eve 1 um a V HIGH SCHOOL ,_.. TlGA h PRDMED 449 u,'Vi l"S LOW DEN 51 jrV � h � o CONl, 011I N U M 54, _ CE 0 0 40' c o _. _ _ F-J-- LOMA _ AVE �/ Wall �tv all THIRTEENTH IF CV, @ ti rwE�f1 IRK PAR ♦ V �•L //�\\ �I yam. •�• `. a /` '., 1_.• _ ,�♦ J��� �.• rr 1 ��+�� ��5. ,. 1 Gf 070-'40 Location' S. side of Adama Ave . between 17th & Main sta . i .T - - Sol! I as (oft... i fill I 7 � �A♦yam • Z � ..� j � ` �. ,. fitME- 9�af� rTAFF REPORT CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO.� 70-40 t►ppli,cant : Wm. E. Rlurock ri-`- • Au at 18 1970 .-be staff has reviewed Conditional Exception No. 70-40 and offers the following information for your consideration: 1 . The applicant proposes to permit the following: A) Conatruction of a church and related faci- lities as follows : a) drive -in church to accommodate Migious roximatej.y 95 cars b education st:ruccure c� 950 seat sanctuary. B) A 17 story retirement tower ,having 287 residential units C) Off-street parking for the 17 story residential tower to be proviocJ at a ratio of one space for each three � residential units in lieu of the re- quired 2 spaces per uii.t in the R1 zone (one space per unit plus, guest parking space per unit is required in the multiple family zones), D) 131 off-street parking spaces for the 950 seat sanctuary in lieu of the 317 spaces required by ordinance by allow- ing credit for the remaining required spaces as follows: 1) point use of 46 parking spaces pro- �Aded for the residential tower 7.ei joint use of 54 parking spaces pro- vided on adjacent school property 3) 83 on-street parking spaces . .. The eubjict property is located on the south side of Adams Ave . between 17th and Main Streets, in the R1-0 Single Family Residence District combined with oil production. 2. This application was filed because neither the retirement tower nor the church facility am permitted in- the R1 District . Also, the parkM ins requirements for both uses .:are considerably► higher than proposed. 3 . A portion of this property is presently owned and used by the Firsts Christain Church, e s . e saoctuary and a religious instruction facility . The existing facility is situated on approximc+tely 1 . 899 acres of lend . 4 . Exfs%Lng and proposed uses in the surrounding area are as follows : e) A golf course upon which a 449 unit low density condgminium project is prop;.--, .d. b) 12 acre community park site c) High school d ) proposed civic center site e) Low density single family resident..ial homes f) An elementary and junior high school site A map dep4cting these uses is attached. for your review. 5. The applicant has indicated that the seventeen story retirement tower will be financed under a r • , the Federal Housing Administration' s program no . 236. This program supplements mortg&ges on rental housing for low income fami l iet . A copy of the program is Attached for your review. One important point for. the Commission to con- sider is chit the program is not spectfirally designed for a retirement tower, bmt. to sup- plement mortgages on rental housing for low income famMes . Lately, retiremnn.: towers for the -ziJerly have beet financed under this program. 6 . Parking for t1,t« tower is proposed to be pro- � vi.ded at a, reitio of 1 parL"..ng space for each : 'I 3 tini,ts resultinig in 96 'on -site parkisig space . The applicant has 111so request+:d that; � ' oi; the park.,'tg spacei for the '�60er , .` bE cred,tted to the sanctuary . Phis has been requested because the applicant feels that mane" of the persons living in the rower will be attending the sanctuary; therefore , will not require additional parkin& In addition, the applicant has requested credit for 83 on-stivet parking spaces and credit for joint use of 54 park- ing spaces zituated on the adjacent school property. The applicant has submitted information pertaining to parking requirements for existing senior citizens ' apartments across the country. This information has been enclosed for y-our review. With regard to parking for the sanctuary, it should be ti noted that in the past the Planning Com- mission has not gi,,ren credit for on-street, parking. Also, the parking proposed for joint use by the school and nanctuery is , situated in excess of 350 ft . from the sanctuary structure . 7 . With regard to the portion of the request , for a thrive- in church, the applicant pro- poses to park the cars on the grass; thu3 preserving the landscaping and eliminating a great amount of paved area . 8 . The Fire ! ,epartenent has indicated that no special equipment will be required because the 'personnel and egtA ment for this type of facility have been included in the Department ' s projected growth. 9 . The staff contacted other c: i t 1 cis :111d persons knowledgeable about high- rise residential retirement towers . The following comments are offered as a result of these contacts : a) Transportation for persons residing in this Facility could become a pro- blem. Adequate public transportation is not avAilable; therefore, the de- veloper should provide a shuttle bus service or similar service to trans- port these people to shopping areas . b) The Department of Housing and Urban Development estimates that less t;ian 50% of the persons ,residing in the tower own automobiles . Parking for this facility varies from one park- ing space for each two units to one parking space for each five units . An average of one per three seems to prevail . 1'. should be not A, however , that many of the cities hawing these re- tirement towers also have a public transportation system that i more sophisticated than that provided 'in Rintington Beach. Therefore, it is difficult to compare the towers con structed in these cities with the one proposed in this application. c, Although FHA Program No. 236 i generally used for financing housing facilities for persons over 62 , it is possible that the building could be . sold. and ' P'ut ' to another type or,., rest» entiel use. In view' of 1 o this ross.i.- bi l i ty, it has been suap.rjted that the owners of the building enter into an agreement with the City specs- fying tho l; the building would not be used for any purpose other than a re- tirement tower for the elderly . d ) It has been pointed out that this type of facility is tax exempt , therefore , the cost of supplying services to this I� facility will be pl.accd an the overall coi=uni ty, rather than the property owner . In view of this, it has been suggested that an " in lieu" fee be paid to the City for these services. e) With reference to the transportation system, it has been suggested that the applicant submit a plan shoring how the people would be transported to various areas. Also , traMportation should be provided on a regular schedule . x) The City of Santa Monica has two faci- lities such as the one proposed in this application. In both cases , the parking has been provided at a ratio of one space for each three units . The City indicated that there are generally two persons residing in each unit . They also noted a special bus service is not required because local services meets this deainnd . The City of Costa Mesa has indicated chat they originally required one space for each three units and that garages were not required . However.. a parking pro- � blent resulted and additional parking was required, raising the ratio to oligbtl,y more than one parking. space for i i a..-. We each two units . They also indicnLed that: there are approximately two per- sons residing in each unit . The facility in Costa Mesa is within close proxh-M.ty to shopping. It was al;:o the consensus of several, city officials that. the persons resid - ing in the tower were cotaminity oriented and were an asset to the community. 10 . Them are sufficient recreatlon areas in close proximity to the proposed tower, however, shopping faciliti.(: s are limited and it will be some years before adequate shopping f sci.- lities are provided nearby. 11 . It is the consensuls of the s 4aff that th::s is not the proper location for the propo:ted retirement tctier because it is out of ctieracter with the Unediste area which is developed as low density residential . This trend is expected to continue with the construction of 449 units on the west side of 17th at. 100 ft . owny. This is not to say that the staff is opposed to the construction of a retirement Lower within the city. Only that tl;e location should be such thhat the tower will he in i;ce ping with the character of the surrounding area . 12 . With regard to the saxictuary and drive-In church , it is the consensu) of the staff that the preliminary plot~ plan is such that the uaes wi'1 be compact brie with the surrounding neighborhood . 13 , Vi.th regard to the portion of the request . For . the of:.wttreet parking, the. staff offers the following: a� The ratio of parking to dwelling units (one space for cacti three units , COM- parable to s-that has been provided in other areas) would probably prove to be inadequate in the City of Huntington Bench, :)ecause of the lack of public transporta t io:a . Just as a problem developed in the City of Costa Mesa , necessitating additional parking, the staff reels that a parking 'ratio of one parking space for each three residential units is inadequate And that a ratio of one space for each two units would prove to be more realistic . 'The requests for exceptions to park- ing for the sanctuary would probnb ly result in a critical parking problem in the vicinity of the church. The staff feels that some credit should be given to the sanctuary for parking Provided for the residential tower ant% thnt this parkins should not exceed 411 spaaces, as requested in the application. With regard to the joint use of 54 pa):k- ing spaces provided on the ad_jncent st:hool property, the staff f.ee l s t.ias this pil rk- i ing is t ou far away and would not serve the purpose for which it is intended . The staff does not feel that credit should ` be given for on--street parking and thst ` rov d the r.t_Qu i reed spaces should be p i e l , on-afte . °tn• , In the past , -the Planning Coimnii3sion has na., deviated from the pnrkl.ng requirements for new churches: and church facilities and the staff feels that the Commissinn should continue with this policy . In view of the above information, the staff recommends denial of that portion of the request for a high-rise residential retirement tower and for approval of that portion of the request for a sanctuary on the condition that all required off- street parking be pzvvided on-site and that the final plan be referred to the Board of Zoning Adjustments to establish such conditions of approval as deemed necessary. It the Planning Commission concludes that the high-rise residential tower is a proper use of this property, the following; conditions of approval are. offered for your i consideration: 1 . Use of the building shall be limited to a retirement tower For persons over 62 years I of age . In the event the owner or future owners of the property or building desire to change the proposed use , n new conditional exception application shall b e filed for consideration by the City . 2 . Parking for the tower shall be provided at a I ratio of one off-street parking space for each two residential units . Also, the Planning Commission shall review the park- ing si tua t:ioit two years from the date the building is completed, to determine whether or not additional parking is needed $ If additional parking is needed, the property owner shnl1, provide parking at a ratio required by the Planning Comrriisslon. OW - 3. Provisions: shall be made for n trnnsporta- tion system to shoppEng fncilit;ies . A plan for the transportation system and tentative time schedules shall be submitted to the .Planning Department, for approval . 4 The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City agreeing to pay an annual "in lieu" fee for aervices rendered by the City. Such Fee shall be negotiated prior to the fiscal year of each year and shall be approved by the City Council . 5 . Home Occupations shall be limited to those occupations which are compatible ' with the proposed structure . b . A final plot plan shall be submitted to the Board of Zoning Adjustments to establish such conditions of approval as deemed necessary. 7 . If the reti::ement tower is approved , credit for 48 off-street parking spaces shall be given to the church sanctuary. I, j i r •1 E�S ,J "�.� ° , �' 4 ''' - � r ' +•�-t r �• � is y j , tt yet F� 1 ;.;, •: '. ', ' ; , '. '. , - •`. 9;hO'- ilOAf-: Council Hf gh-i3i,a4 Study: `Cori ttea' rt . it +rirst meeting on r . louday, Svptcmiber 30th, addrQsved - itself to the " ' toli.owing qu9"stions (.1.1 ghat maximum height profile do ire desire' for.`our city? (2) a bare' a -noed'for ,low-coat senior citizen housing -in or will ouch. un ingtan Beach at fho prosont ti�ae e;Eod/ , need arise in the near. future? f' +. r: sponsor are is such a need, who ahou-%d be the providor or + rl onsor of such? 3 ,,�h (4) Is, it desirable 'and/or necosssry that such senior. citiacon hoo.sxnb be of a, high-rise nature?' Is the. proposed site for tho First Christian. Tower the best possible site for such? �. aha comnitteo included chairwoman Lorr'nine Faber and -aieiberg Fm. Den Lonaeret+ Villa.um K. Olson �Zos�ali.e i2ehlinA and, John.- H: S,ilve' r, , all either present or past officers of 2]0?ifldwAC+Ts ashes-;.' r iations vithin. Ilu.ntingtoa D'each. P i' The conclusions of the committee members are rosented below J` • ,.., for the` consideration of the IiUI►LL .Council general mombarship, (11) No consensus ytts reached as to n m,aximun height•, r • : , i limitation approlixi.ate for our dity, but . there waa agreement that some_ increase :ih :'3hQ ,ght 1lcni tation on multiple units wao -.desi rable if sua' h could be couplod' with inereise&' open space requirements, +; thereby maintaining the sere donsity factor-In t „ residential. zonos whother such were I2' »• 29, ',L or it — 4 Committee atPmbefis expressed thsir aonc ern regarding „ I the -visual , intrusion . fa ctor vhich must ,be considered. in developing standards for..olevator' type resideiatial ' ' 1 developments. Conwittea members recogaiaed that there.Jx s need',; t , �i for 1oY-cost : jerl.ior citizen housing iv. -the City:.af r E� :Huntiiiston�.Beach' and'. that-,tbe need• will. be.;fattn— ,••.�. s ied as tax pressure and the' as ain' of" Rxiitih, s . i strue'tures udje►cast o 'the- TOPiF- TH]s',PIgt2 , plaaning area iorc'e. .th0. oldir;:re ielenia�,'( x 'ttiis,� 'Erg` t srQao < . laaaty. Tbege -lortg'» i,�e raidets, ;may of, .whop. harp' h en' aat�.� :3' t, ff , �. .F4w0u Dur a , avivaity deeiGrve tlxe uppoxtut�ityo reloCt,�i' our, eoau�nity►'.:preferably �e`'.di�gnif .e'd asi well- as it t2 �c auto rtable '�u.gita .'at ' 064.6-'their",ffxid ri i*60Mnt,? law •�y'7���.+l.,t 'r? E2 .�� � ,.,� I't. r ,• E r :� 4• ,,7 r .;.f ! •^ }. 1 > y �'�1{r ,,'rf'.E + .�•^ ..'(rrE / t 'i,. 4 i. ' F ' , ',A• 1 -(i �L , s yAllfii ,.'.:.ih!�a'•''•:.q l = r rri! i .,''� r •Fn .'i �. 1 ,,;-'i i'�^'� C ',E •`' Z' S� `'r4 i i� }S y�.� f +. �.:.-5�"t,�. r�fti '� !{ ' .�.t- r � ,.•`r r 'l- , f� •(. a -r;Y �:.: ,i'.: l� 1 f.i..Y .i, r `• ' �,r t t, •� 3_.1y ,_r ,.:{,:•, i_.rf.•.:rttt,,•,.: , i r°CL 7 :,';� t :; G. - rl. :��r � ' .,i � r $�I J ::, ai.i•!. C i.� r • ?/'ir( .i'it, t aj I���,:ri.1 '�, +..., t t ��l } : `� r3 , Y �.4.�. ; t .,`7,+ ..f,t t ti} � ' .�' �, r r `1 ;r,t L `,, , ,l Z Y,>+� , S� t7•r•� "a'j <: '112 Y,E1 r''-f � .,v i..;4i,�.. I�..« Ei '.,• ..�..re71.._•.,( + �i"1�' 4 ,,: .. '� ,�.re•. ,,,..,..' � .T ,�„rl -t �,�.t v•. ,..�•° .:��,• ,r.` t: cf �r,'�, .:1;..•,r" i., +ri rtlr'' � " . 'rj� t,� ri �:�•.'+ r," m a^'Zfj .�z >�': 1.'»,.,-,?y3 ,tt„•,., ,i, ,}. ,+V. .3 ; { •2i r�ti3 'r' i .r' .f;.. ,r. r .t ,,�1'ai d{1 �. .yel, t 3. L t 'tt.3<� 1 r�. �,,. ..�^'i• • ''':i}', � f;, ,..5 ./., .: r t' .. ', � r.tjf �.J, �'% i• }r. ♦, --.ti..; r',�...•;Ei r . �r (�•`. .�• i,., }.,t' �.'� .b n4�,4, ��•. ,4 .4.0_� ,S t il,pli «t.il r J ,,i. '. 2. i�.t: �. c: •,t.� ,.,,: ,.r, :7.r ,r •;i' t1 3.!— ,.�{';, f .'HY � .`'j ... p') .• .:� ," ,,, J A, t. �j;.! '., .'r.l �- "r .Yi,,}: .�i ti. r � � �?r,, ��f.:' , r t� .r,,'`7 ' ', •r•:; r ;1 �• , �, •� Ee{, ,� i 1 };�S e } 1 �•�t`'`�, r ��, �.1+ ': •:'.. ...+..{: -S�i. :.}. .l�' 7f 1 �;;' ;j_. ., 7.:'.Y�, f' ',P.: / n , ,,r, ^,.N 5..;',, �� "�(1�l ;;�5� � ''•�,. ' y,. ,�"„• .1'�.C,�,,;y,;rZ, >,';:�:�, _-,, J..'�.tf�: '+015' tL. 1. :�. >t1. �- t. � i , i '''S:�1. .i :, i «!t ,riF. t....=. �i 1 : t.'r_ �;.'.l::Ts.l� i /' :� .}. r!<.S.t••Y�.,fi t2 t `' }.,..,1\r,:j..t;t � . .�jf`.1�� i, '�'c '��� �' ,1 a!ti'�`J. �.r ,{t � .^.�,,. v ;'ll ,i ' •.1.. �2''.t�f i '.�}r° 1-i- 4.?�'�`' ! !'!: '�.r.. ,iti. ,�,�,;tr',t, -''S a t3±�., �f<.L,(r3S... d`t-,,j.t., ,1 1 t i rI r. a: � r, l � I,t:, ,, ,•sG c '.f:� -ir+ ,h . ,,.J'"R�l�',�'I1 CC:.Ii, �N" L 4:1'� � \L�' "�. 4'�'. ��I•� T.` .t'.;! I a � , ,�...+�:i `4i r' .s' 'f�}t ,y'J' r. ^ 4: r3r � „ ,,rt, r ,}r• 'la f'` '}tin` 9 ,:!�'Y.'� ,i. ,, Ir,;� �..,. •.!.ti ,. .. /f ..:�;''. ,, ,1 ->�; •,�: �'t {+ ^1} r_• :71:E�.S'r1^ •IY. ;ri �� 1.. -t.. g•,Cfri�j}i t. c'tY F 1 l 'LW�YI���Sl��f7:J'.T":!flhl{�r.1S?nZ1.11r'.'�L=:'U�E�.�YM rt?1��':+>,A:ll. ;�f•.,Y,,1?�rl:rl .,.f......_ie, r'...tom.�i.. �•., t_.t•r,;•E i1'r..iCi.<�4�;•,.:ti Z�:.1;4.%'`>tZ�'.S^:t.l•�a�`.1•.,i,.1/".l,a:'�. - _i.__i 71 (3} ' Since: -there is a nc}et3 fOr 1Qw•-ooet eoniar -citizen Y houoiat and the PHA SaotiaTi 236 prornm`' p'rovisdea ` a, m�. atbad Whereby cquraugities can mo,ot t2i:.3 Hoed at j� the Xox©at poasivle coat to taxpayors, reli�iouer denominmtions, :labor unions, fraternal orders and associations should be encourages: to ; meet ,his community 'chnll.eng0 through .their, sponsorship of of non-profit senior citizen housing, • lan an ' - (4J) It ions recognized -that -if sash senior citizen hausin g is to bo provided on appropriately zoned d d. Hoar lire ' s necessities, land costs will necessitate fry elevator type construction. (5) It is the unanimous decision of the committee that the proposed First Christian Tower is a case of an excellent project being proposed at the wrong , location." The committee concurred vith the Planning Depa.rtmeat staff recommendation that Conditional Excontion #70-40 be granted •to''allow the building of a now . sanctus:iy only, a)A that that part .of Conditional r. F.xcnption #rT0-4p relative to the proposed touter be . denied. e offers t �e rThe committ s � z their position: a. The building of a` nc�ta sanctuury, is a con- r tirtuation of the existing use "on the adjacent 1 property. b. The lend in question is zone it_ 1' and ' R t resideat.iul. development alydndy , encirclas the site an three sides with schools existing on. the 'fourth sido, i c . - The location of tie proposed toner Ritb in too far removed f:-om shoppingr medical and :t transportation SaGilities. d. the parhin,g requzremont9 of both ' the. snnctue.'ry,. and tho tower projects can not be adequately, provided on the proposed five, acre site • Gha iroan ....... t '' r Sort es bor 30'P1.1.1970 � � '.1. � t 3 rr�..r�wr�•V����1�'� slwu. I (t U, +. �. t Date �1 e f} 1 If , itl.. .`t. , �'� l•, y'.� .y 1• 1 1 �. 1 J /. 1 al '.t•�ll��.} .t r �. ,� T ! r 1 '� r i f,~ kr: '•� t + + r r tt ,� �' ���':. •t�_ 1. 1 ,' f• 1 -r. r.r+....i !r T1 1 i , 1,.t` + 1,rn�. A J 1 r.�'�Y,{_¢�. 1}h f '�+i .. .S{ 1 Tt�'�r•+'t t ..�!�•: \ �r,'! ,.,�; + t �,.jt � ;,."i I r,• •' '-,r }. � A + 1 "C'l+ rl t •'i,�' •t l }^ t T t - Y ill «t}',� 1 .�� 1r,t � .r. � + ± r t le. ,1.� f , 11 ' '� 'il.. I .t:. •/'h � +t I tt �r .e.��- + �Na Fi++�: C/T!5+ /eii r ti.� k � �y., 1 �Y, "t'�,t� } J ,t ..i,, J�• :5 1 � r'.`, t +( t LIy;1� :t' � .';� ,,�•.�'r'"ie r( `�',((L, Y,/ •y- r 1 Yr,T ,y 1 r - 'r �( l4 5� +r + r: ! •.('. �� I r!. 11 �i I l,�f �f+rA}`• } �)r } ?. 1s•!r,:i 41 t I^ .+J I', rt. / :rr i '-� ! •� IL, Y� .��-•}#5 � � 1) ;t ,l1 }u .• .� r tr ,t,. .t 1 �• • + r-, ,.r„�r 1> .� ••�{i, w' ,+ ' -t � .1 k ..c 1e�1'C'! i v.''�+••1, .rr t. :r!l; �,. J ^.r, ,"t� 1 ``e :rr ..tl .� •.r4t' -+rt. ,r... '1. P 1'Sr iti` �: d rr r \��y :�,1; �.' + -t.-.... �,1!•'�!c ,)vL'r '4':ft-,` is.L- �,✓.1 t_r .;'�Y �_,�. ,..1'wt J ._„„} \ �f },t` \}.,. � ' ,. at _4<'4� ,2 ,f• r. :;a::.�a ,;;:�Z�.:.. �.a�'� t 'J.f:w �t�. y +,. ��'+.St. �' k I.. 1�� f ..1 ':1{ 1) k.. `t- 1. (',y •� -`r+-+,i.r � St`k,..f.t „i el le. n.t.� ;�, t yt� ��..J �7 '��. } 1,. ,�:::e kk r .1;.. f s-;. R ';-.. ,♦M a l�i" . t- ;l.r 1 .y: ytr. -J 7:7,1n..s4,. ,Y .i t3 �' t. ti .• xt� �'`>:, _i r• •`,, (wTr... ., a 1 �.r.: a+ L;.' k, � r s;,:�;a .., � ;t., .� .:t.• t :.i.4:"1J�, ��.- :}": r '�.•� ': .. -, ..� n.l,�. i<-1� •1r,r 1 �,i �.+}�r1��, y.y.;,.. . . .!..,7, .� ... ,tJ:,�:�' �r{ .lit-1-; ',,.,� �. ,. ;!•j�{ :r!{ + 1 ,a^•.'il 'a'r:_j} '�� Jk-:'A'11 }� � y+� -iS��S-} \ � {, �.k�.l•; :.t: ,} LR... 'i..,t. �. .i ,I 17 S' ,1_.!. �.« f. :l 1, ,+,lF ..1., I f-,+ i� �• � c I 1., Yi•`�'.trl � 1 1, ��!�iS;•? yll��N+� .+s A1,., F �I:� t it„•p {..''rti'' 1) re.�f; '•�i�: i)�St� r •ti t.� a`t, }' .iti r'4 �(r� .t t,,r- 'tt .� r�,., Ff S!� ,t r'A• r `'1 k i t' h •!,''�,f�r.^ 1l r,,N1A yy �t� l k !/ tii'/, tf% l.v • �iS_ws.ti.t.11 K:2v}f }.1[1 ..,•:+lei„� - ''( + �r�-r..1'�tS1...•�, _ _ .•�,.l e, YJ_ rvr-,+S._ 'j1 _I(il,,•,r,�.,, . AIRST CHRISTIAN CHURc oft • ,. . '' ' _. �' ulAe., r�kVorlast 7I4/e36.sseti 1207 MAIN STREET, BOX S03 + • HUMINGTON BEACH. CAUFORNtA 92eR9 i 7ELLPHONt 714 036.20]fl � l r THOMAG W. OVERTON y µ 1 .r" ,. Ir o » V 1•i Aislrf�nr MlNlwieK (tfout�rl i � , ► ;�"�.•. 1`1�6'�1.•�!r'. ; ! f�'lk.- ,: 4i;Kp�',. �'. DAM J. NOSS .. ,«,�� ! � ..� F 4_-!..."L��1 EMI/ o..^.. p�� .�M�•��1�J��' •R9630r4Nr Mitsiar[r` (r4'/CATION ' a i2 M%, 1� SLC►[T�IIt :;► �rim: FLORA NAZON •—`"' � r� .« ter-. - September 11, 1970 I Hr. Richard Harlow City Planning Department .:untington Bench, California ? Dear Mr. Harlov: i Attached is a revised plot plan iur First Christian Church Towers and Park. We are also including our statements of acceptnnce of you; staff recLrimenda t ions. Your extensive researrl; devoted to this project In sincerely appreciated. Sincerely.. Orville hanson, Chairman Rollo D. Went, Chairman 'Donrri of Directorr, of. Board of Ui.rectors '. First Christian Cliurch First Christian .lowers by the Sea Flnclusures t, t 1 , r i jtl } 7 1 4 n.....1:�7.Sn.li i.. s. 1;•t4 ..�.._ i . . .S1'...j -.l .....•_{ .. . .. _.�.— _— ~'MANNING STAFF RECOXAMIDIC41CINSv • AND STATEME NTS Or s�CCEi�TA?iGt: 1. Use: of the building shall be limited to a ratirement towt:r for por.:,Ull t over 62 years of ache. In the event the crimer or f'ature oun:ers or th.• 1{roj:crty or buildil.4 desire to change the proposed use , a new conditional cxcopt lan appli- cation shall 1-- filad for consideration by the City. t , , ,�{ t� . r h r , , ,t-. YIc". agree.. he ui,tic 7vu of a1i�n. t;02Lltaar� Of FIrl?o 0U atiiin yow ra bu Lilt' ar,e1-2 t:mL_t Cho uu::' of ti;,G facilL t"i 147 S.Ilatc d abov)i - 2. ; Parking for the Towers shall b,-! pro.•ided at a ratio of one off-strr(:t parkin:q ' space for each two residential. units, Alpo, the Planning Cormnisa:ion shall review the parking rituat.ion two years fram the date the building is ca^pleted, to determine Nether or not additional parking is needed. if adLt:.ional park- ing is needed, the property owner shall provi.da par}:i-ng at a ratio require-4 by the Planning Commission. A 1A' t- of al, vtz; lzy IwS I'!"i=t.'.'.lt'it t hIt. On an 11Vk_-7:'tIC[7 ONW C,111 ahc'111.1 N dLZCL•t•::'i fi?I (:L'c2 t/ f'.,I)t: t:'...t'Gl:r::' .U:I tt;, thO iAl Jt:7 Ld� t.I t. �21iC);.� Y,7 Q r 2vr c i)t'>3 '1`G:Jt; 2va tc CYIt; ';.I' "Cl, e ;J('.ru t hri.,.t !_v1 :`1 ! fn up i t.;. At'►ached- is a Ixtter rro'" tht. Ar�7�:.rtiliCl•�It'L'1' Of F300".1 i?t iiiC%i �cI •t �) •1 , t T , t V, , , t •, • , , t ,,•r r j . , 1 ' • 1 krc. Q�71 c":B. 1%.c. wk. t((:G: 2 i:(�iE,.7 Of Z;rv. Lh�2 �:`L!`. .ti{•1::.+tr1•r•I :•ti Li.�i:(r(il t21.iZ 4 rtt�t�ollabZc. II l 3. Peovi lions shall be made for a transportation system to shopping facilities. A plan for the transportation !;yst:f n and tentative tit,, schedules ilhall he e Planning 1 npa r..,ent or approval. zn' tteti to the i n r f sub z. . g r-' 1'1 , , r t t , a Nt. (t�Ilr:�. to %i10� t-�It" .-I..r:L� Ci1 r:it�iJ.{ , t ! r/..: Uilp l'I.! r<. tt� rl�_'; lth ,-: i (: t? ca?ul. I •.-(yrcat Ean z l chi (,..;r• h.lI r:Lri.2L a:.tO Uc./.Ct1i1Li' 1.13 Q . f I- Lt.(;;,%1: ;,/_'1:a. aI iZ2 c. ....,.,. J P.,,.. P722C:? O ^ 73.IU�LC3 7Tf t 1 t ' t:/ :rrr int Con- ) t te'3S', f4(x-:)? (^ant J Brook:1.'uriit. ;j1'.;,2 %)�:rj;J i�E'11~RI`� (�i:[:L:'iIu C4744:01'0 (111U. t h a PLCr- T } y. 1•i•f f r •1 T . .I y•.... ' 1 I, '7 �• • ",)It r 1 ,.-• jf1 1.�1!. (jJ L.r1L 4 1 lf'{+. i f, lt.' ••.rr1{tt,'�{12iiH .� IL{• i01'M11t� to1iVl ♦.t. •).t I, . TI'Cllicipoi-tat-41on 0i L1 b,�, 1'1'0L fa',.'j' tJ E'total Cf intF.rclft and t1('Ct:fa't RI ent.a. 4 . The applicant shall enter into ,an agr•coment with the City agr^eing t:o ray rYn annual "in lieu" fee for services rendered by the City. Such fee shall be � tlegot,lated prior to the fiscal year of each year and shall 13,, approved by the City Council. We agree 410 negotiatEr (,n1v and all fees legal and aillOW144>t . I w} S, Home Occupations shall lie limitea to those d::�up��tiona Nhlch ��rc: crxmI�at1 0 with the proposed structure . We agree. E. h final plot plan shall the submitted to the Board of zoning Ad,ustmentr, to establish such conditionm of approval as deemed necessary. We agrer'. ,r i. If the: retirement tower is approvuci, credit for 40 off-str-eet parking spaces shall be given to the church sanctuary. We agree to LtlEi .t t. �:..(l.J i of �Z 1. . •2 f.a L.� F:4I.i r�Z•�4M1.j 4, be 4-Y `.v� �l`. Z,.f�J M a the c hunch parki:%7. I i s i 1 . r r CONSIDURATIO;i OF LXATION FOR FIRST CHRIST IAA TO WI4(S - The total concept of the First Christian Church lower and Park Plait is realistic, feasible and an asset to the community. Elderly people need to be a part of a community and not set apart from the community. "I'liese people are res- idents and deserve to live in it residential area not a commercial and industrial area. They have reached the age level where driving is mast easily accommodated outside a busy commercial and industrial ,area, not within it. Locating the Towc-r in the vicinity of the church will make it possible for Y. the church family to meet many of the needs of the resident,. We feel this consider- ation for the location is of greater value to the residents than a site adjacent to a commercial and industrial cu na. The proposid project will Lie compatible with the green L,Filt Corridor developing along Main Street. The new Sanctuary is an extension of existing land use ; the prescnt church facilities will be converted to religious education fac- ilities; and the proposed senior citizens tower, as a natural adjunct to the church's total involvement in community problems , tics in hancionious:ly -..rich th(� "Gormunity-Center, Park-Plan" concept of the entire project. i This site is master planned to tie: in with the green open park and school spaces on either side, and is but a short distance from the project�:3 civic center. It will be across the :street from a city park. First Chri.tiara Towers , of pleasing design to complement the "Park Mari" concept of the entire project, will itself be enci*•clod with landsc:apt.d garden area. The entire complex, on its conynanding land elevation , will gain the attention and admiration of all as visual evidence of the emerging :stature of they City of Huntington Beach. i ; r w"IST .J *Q FYI 1"OWERS -,t 13Y "Aso ce,az 1207 ilA,IN HUNTINCTQN BEACW, CA1.IFORHIA 92646 PNOWE 536. 7660 Zoning Co=,-nt at the Planning Co=tission hearing indicated concern for the precedent netting conditional exception to the prescaiit R-1-U toning at the propooed site . There are several exceptions to the present zoning. I. The school just West of the site. 2. The church East of the site. 3. The oil drilling island south of the site . 4. The proposed high rise city hall b:iildings . Future plans for rezoning an area North of Main and West of RkI n for professional and business buildt';:ri cs to be cmisidered. The planned condiminiurn project has not brought forth any object- ions from the owner-developer, who in fact is selling; ass the land for our project with full knowledge of our intentions to build. Even though it is presently zoned R- 1 -Q, it is over 300 fret from any residential development. j Taxes In a meeting Wednesday Sept. 30, 1970 with hir. Jerry Strang, assist- ant to Mr. Gordon Hunt, head of I LID Los Angeles offices, the follow- information was gained. Th.e project Corporation may entcx- into an agreement wit-h' the City of Huntington Beach for ouch services as police, fire, trash, pzrka, etc, and pay "in lieu" feP.s. Stich agreements are now in force in the cities of-Long Bench and Santa Monica. ' W. Strang assured its this type of agreement woald n oT .Tc pro-entpted by thn tax exeMption It should be Ovd, as stated in they SoP tembei 770 lfornG Council re- Port that "said property for other than church trans; is unlikely con- sidering the church's need to expand and the small size of any part of this parcel that might remain available for R• 1 lots. " It. short, sai d ad property will never be developed as no« zoned. Parking We have requested 3 to 1 parking, the bearing seerned to favor 2 to 1 parkins. The attached letter verifies the appropriateness of the 3 to I ratio now in force, :et Bethel Towers , Costa hic•:►a. If the Commiss- ion continues to furl the 2 to 1 ratio is correct, %ve err prepared to meet it on site. We do request z 2 year review as rotated in our Sept- ember 1970 communication. Transportation As stated in detail in our September communicaLion, we will pro- vide adequate bus transportation. According ;o Mr. Strang it is possible to accommodate this service in the project funding;. Whose moving into the .facility have long established shopping habits and means of transportation, these will continue. The Comin-'slunitY Occupancy of this facility i;4 at least 18 to 24 or more months; awa, , It is anticiWlted that addi►ional shopping; arca3 will be cutr:pleted by this tim,z. A good example is that of thn project at N41anison and Main, within easy waking distance. The Recrcation Center containing a pubUc city Byrn and heated 1 swimming root Is only 1600 feet frurn this; property. The Senior Citixcnn Club now meets in thin Center. Rage: A in the Horne Council report carries the wording of the Architect's deMr_ription. It says, ". • . to make life easier and ,,., �. :nora mc�r.;tnenl-�IF� ; and, establiehi ient of senior citizens re0dence. and activities ir: one cc►:ttr,tl location, while yet nnaintli::ing that ,! location in the mainstream of life., to e: cpte an cnvirnntnent that p} '�• . is more su �oxti . ctyccti'rc and companionable for the '1esrants Per'Pet uitY Mr. Strang stated that as long as there is an FHA insured mortgage on the property; the use can not change. If i s in isold to .another sponsor, it ttiu,t be bold with the, as"rne t_tipulations and the new sponsor must be approved by FHA or HUD. The Value Air. Strang painted out that "the community that says it will not permit a 236 progr::zn would handicap itself with other Federal requesto such as the Open Land program. The presrn;.e of a 236 project indicates and illustrates the community's interest in low cost housing," The value of ,his project for these elderly people or. limited in- come is ob-, ,ous. The Top of the Pier pro;;..^t creates an acute need for this facility. It hill permit t`.-m to lire in the same general area. i I ;i i BETHEL TOWERS A !� '';' "For Retirement Living in California" ;tJ COSTA MESA., CALIFORNIA 92627 ft 666 West 19th Phone: 1114) 642.9941 Soptember 11, 1970 L E. HALVORSON Administrator Mx. Don Harlow I Assrt Planning Director City Hall, Civic Center Huntington Beach, Calif. 921SW3 Dear Hr. Harlow: Mr. Don Pate asked men to writs you relative to our parking situation at Both©1 Towers. I an happy to serri you this information. Bethel lower.= -ins 270 apartmonts; a little morn than 300 residents. (The tenants are worthy people, quid a credit to Costa Mosa, ) Thera are 100 outdoor, uncovered parking spaces for tenants, and 20 spaces for visitors. We have had no problems. The architect - or planners - calculates our need acurately. The 1.00 tenant cars parked at Bethel Towers add practically nothing to tits existing traffic of the vicinity. Rarely do we have as many as 25 cars leave the Towers on any one day. I an glad that you are in a position to help the First Christian Church of Huntington Beach in their desire to build a Senior Citir-on's 11orm. for there is a great need for this typD of 17ailding. It might interest you to know that four nonths after opening, Bethel Towers was filled to capacity, acid xamvitns full. At this nomont we hiLve Mora than 250 applications on file M good peoplo waiting to cone to us. I only rograt we are unable to holp more. Most of our tenants have com!i to the Tcvers from within a radius of 20 miles. i A fna have come from distant points. With evory kini wish to you, Hr. Harlow. X. /J 5,itticerq�l,Y. � L. E. HA.LVOtt50ti Owned and Qpa�ated by the Soithern California Distrit! Caun,il of the Amemb10 of God �� � � •. Aftnrp 1, 11oUSING ADMINIS'TRAT -i s Angelos, California 90 :r ;.S 'CVON 236 RE- *A1, HOUSING FOR hVR?,Rn111COME FAMILIES j section 23.g f the ,J;ational Housing Act provides assistance for rental and cooperati ye housing far 1owet- tneoWe families. Tho assistance is provi' ec In,the form of rronthly, payment6 to the mortgagee to reduce costito tliQ occupant by paying a part of the interest on a raarket rate , project portgage insurod by MA. ':o bring the monthly rental charges down •,t Je-vel which .1fr per income families can a€ford, the periodic asaii :ancp payments will reduce payments on the project mortgage from an amount required for principal , interest, and mortgage insurance priamig o ; um� n a market rate mortgage to an amount that would be required for prin`Tipa1 and interest if the mortgage bore an interest rate nf 1%. .J c.l c. ..,. . I ELIGIBLE MORTGAGORS >J! Unpro ,col �l a or r�}' x'g .}s�1- Ft, �o�-� pat�rpvs�e}s 9���er than making profit or gain for It- geYt' fo D sons .clenti "iec therewith. . LimitepZ Aistribution Mortgagor corporation restricted as to.., the distribution o,f_ ,i.ncome,. bar state ' C.UILv (-f 4 t mil• J,6 ; '.,.. t•,. �aw or a t-xast partners)ll association, individual, or, 9ther gsVictpd by law or1the Federal Housing Comm�saioner. Bui,ider-Seller Mortgagor, J A Q$ t;i Zr t i of limited d,iptributllon mortgagor. which 1 . ,t4,3�on �tx�u,et projects , h� �►•ing entered intq a written .agrg�oent with a private nonprofit corporation to sell the project upon completion to the nanpr:-ifit corporation at a purchase price not to ,exceed certified -actual cost ; or �2 . in the event a failure t:o convey to a nonprofit mortgagor upon . completion, to operate the pgo:,ect as a I .2. mited distribution mortrlgagor. - Investor wonsor Mortgagor A apecial type of limited distribution mortgagor which is , J 1 . to cpnstruct the project and transfer to a cooperative • .,.,i,j.,rnortgagpr within two years ,after completion; or . tlae eygnt 'the project ',is.. not conveyed to a , cooperaGi,v©, At continues to operate as a limited distribution mortgagor. Coo0eratiVe Mortgagor l?� .nonprofit.,caapexat_i,ve m-nership housii;q corporation which F5eatricts 'permanent occupancy to mer►iberB of the corporation. Il. MAXUM MORTGAGE AMOUNT l - ortgago may not exceed' xcQad'. the lowest of the foll(r�ring - zY:J-.,?., 500 0,004 2 ,0 9�.� (IM-' ih the case : of nonprofit or cooperative nor, gars) of .thot 79A estimate o£,: ,co,s-fi 3. The sum of�the ntututory tiler unit mortgage limits under ' ^mLion 221,,.uajng the per unit lip-it- ationa shown on the r� t t.ached sheet . -Tho ;grusa incomo wi.I.. b . c:al.rul.lt* . 'toy. ua#.n-f ,,�sr3cer rents for aril rr spaces. Estimation of rrArket residential rr_rts will give cone sideration , tp the ansentia.l cost of producing housiag for the markai to be garv*d. , , i , In eslt,Ylnat�:ng income ,from space other that 6%4ellinq waits, only two fkctora shbuld be considered ,, (a� tote olitairinLle rents in the mh#et and (b) whether the obtainable rents, which should be eaUimat©d -only �with regard to market demand will nu ort at PP Nast a pro rata share ( giving. e.f fect to the area^ couerod and any special cost considerations) of expenson , taxes, debt service at tM market rate,, and the mortgage insurance premium. if the 4 test set;forth in (b) above cannot be rr+et, the non-residential portion of the. pro jr-ct should be ol•iminzted or reduced to ail" paint,at .which .such: test can be '440 give e�'fect to the fact that interest reduction payments will be made for every duelling unit in Care `p>roject and. that there:10t. ' will be no vacancy, or rollection loan%OpplIcable to that- pdition of the funds available for debt service, vacancy ratios, which would in a nonassisted. project be . calcuTirtteci.,.st • 7%,will be cal- culated at 5 'Ami.larly, if the vaczndy' rf-AWic would be calculated at 5 in a no,nassisted prQ ject, 3-1j2% will b•a used for Section 236:'Prp jects The project sponsor, with prior approval , inu-t cst- 51ish monthly «•, rental q�arges • for each dwelling unit. k:�;;d on a reasonable dis- tribution ,qf cost and value of, ,the ind?.-idt.al writs: 1, A basic monthly rental charge �Ietermin`, ort the basis of apeiqating the project with' payrr.eritn of i---rincipal and interest on,.a ;level annuity plan at. 2.. A fair m;jrket monthly rental' charge detcr;,ined' b6 'the of operating the project with pay ►,ents of principal , interest, arid. mortgage insurance premiuM •ricMiirod oin a l uVe1I-•'+anfiuity mortgage. P t the market interest rat^. The actual monthly tenant rental,_. (which will include:!•O21 UU!'ities ex?ept .telephone) wil.l .,be equal'i to 25.,:; of -:ie ud juatcd fat,i,l.yP,; incopp,_ or the arr�oup�', of. tho-�basic rental charge, which©ter ;fib �r•• The tenant ' s payment ,may not exceed the fa-:r mArl:et rental and may _ Qt., ;l a less thane•,he basic rental or 2S . or t}-,a toff4ht' s ? c- incn ,- "Ichever iq:-greater. it is desiral l.e t"-at a tenant not pay more than 251a of his adjusted income as r:3t:t . i: :•:aver, it Mus�V be recognized that low-income fart lion-, p;:rticu.'.3rly, must sometimes pay a disproportionate amount of ':s:ei: incc.ma:: for smelter cost and mortgagors should take into accoUn�a G- 1�1 r ntr� u54nditions in determining. ,pi.igibility. of p,7&UZtry-icvnd4rn wsSt.t =3 �., the family' s present livimg accommodatic�-3 and : bount" .Peing paid for there. ;ubstanCial i.ncraasc:s �ci r::tio�;tar��a�t� �f�4� ,:�U:• ;firsy cause difficulty in meeting other fman.^ial ,aiidtlas►' ` ?' f,r cases which Mortgagors, should review cinraful.Ly. .,=V fill 3 lii3tiI:ti r 1:9Pt' t recertification of, a tenant' s �inco:rc (rcgvirc6!'tFveV ILWc.Z;. +, vests) , j ;mortgagor will adjust the r��anrh?1• r^.n+�a1 t , �.nto accotipt any : cnangen in tho , ta..t�nt s i.;.,.onc. 1' a IV. nCCTIPM]CY LSMITW,;NTIoti, NO. Of. BadrOCMS Minimum ►43Y.D^.:.,� 4 . 1 2 1 - 1* L �. c!_ �{ O4ts +"'i f nn ofEici'onc .cn ,are sun Spaces. Estimation of market residential rcntr;, will give con-- sideration too the essential cost of producing housti.ttq for the marker' to be v d ;� �, , • E t ,!D dr M In esltihiating• income ,from apace other than dwelling uaitn , only two fdctars ahbuld be conoicerad•= (a ) the obtainable rants. in � . the nftkke't•nnd (b) whether the obtainable rentu , which should be naU hated only with' regard to market demand, will support at least a pro rats. share ( giving: effect to th(. area• covered and any speciial- cost cons;.derations) of expensor., taxes, debt nervice at the 'market rate,; .and the mortgage insurance premium. if the test es�t :forth in (b) 4'3bove cannot be wet, thy: non-residential portion of the. projject should be., olininated or reduced to d ppin,t.,at; ,+.)-hich:.,sucbc.+ test can be me t-ic o r ... Crag - '�•o give effect to the fact that interest reduction payments will be made for every cbtelling unit in the, ptoject and. that thereat')J- will be no vacancy, or ,collection loss-%uppldcable to, that. pdttion of the funds available for debt service, vacancy ratios, which would. in a nonassisted. project be cal.cuThbod'at 4%,will be cal. cula* at 5"0. limi larl .i£ the vacand lzAbio would -be calculated � Y at: 5% in a nonassisted nrQjecr, 3-1/2% will r-2 used for Section 236 pia jects:. , The pro ject sponsor, with prior approval, oust est-.blish monthly rental Qfiaxges - for each dwelling unit tom,d on a reasonable dis-- tribution. ,of cost and value ofc+c•the individual vita: 1. A basic monthly rental charge tictermi.ne:_' on the ;oasis of operating the project: with- p�iyr antn of p-.inci pal and interest on, a ;level annuity plan at 'l;, 'int<t-rest , :.in-.! 2. a A ,fair market monthly rental ' charge d,,:tcTrArcci" on 'th6 'ba iRP-;j of operating the project with payments or principal, interest, and. mortgage insurance : premium +ratnvired on a luvdl'••;inMAty mortgageat.•the market interest rate . The actual monthly tenant rental-, (which will include-'J.-all uti'lit.ies exg pt telephone) will.-be equal Ito 35 :; of L; a acijuat�+d family r in5o(ne,, or the amou;tt.,, of, the_bpsi.c rental charge, whichever A6 7�•. The �encjnt' s payment m4Ly not exceed the : fa r m?.c1:Et rental and 1g may _t�4t re less than!.t.he basic rental or 25',' of the teri.4ht' s ?-t'' inc tyliichever is-,,greater. It is desiral:I^ t;�at .a tenant not pay more than 25'0 or his adjusted into►e- as re..w. l.U::ever, it _ .must',.be reacgnized that low-income fa7_:1ic:, , pa"ticularly, must sometimes pay a disproportionate amount of: i r..::c.at; for s}ieltcr cost and mortgagorq,,should take into acccuric�til:l �re]�`ent3 j,r7s+.cJonditions •in determining• .R�, gibYlity. O: i. �it�ar�r+l�r>ncrn wd�fFdg uu X� the family's present living accommodation.: and tl:c ­AhOtint ,,,..Pping paid for thee•. . ;ubstant:,ial. -increasou 5r. hcltor-�: f ps:: t pay cause difficulty in meet:inq other fa nanrizl' cases which mortgagors. should raviev, ca•:.�ftt1L •s=` 7 ��::���.t;,s 1 CO t,; ;;U�►on receXtification of, a tenan'W-s .Incomq (rcquirc�M'ffvet-y. WVIC-O y {fir ,I . , tin,-;mortgagor will ad just the; i,&znthj y ront al tO':;UA CG ;. ,:•G ittto account any , rhangea :in thattenant''s income. "V. CX:CUPANCY LIMITATIONS vo. of No. of Bedrooms AMinimtYm .f•axi+^�.:;-� 0 1 2 i 1 ti>r 2 �a effici�stt�r , r�a � a r�" a 1 r+ _ Ir •� .� �' S_2eTZQ'�d 2 3 G - .3 ;r. P.00RAM LIMITATIONS AND GENERAL REqUIRLM'ENTS i 1. Mortgaged initially endorsed for insurance under tjection 221 (d) (3) Below Market Interest Rate Program and %OAch have .; >,• �'' not been finally endorsed, may be insured under SecLto 1 236.- A request for such conversion will be made and the case re- examined under the feasibility requirements for Section 236. 2 . Up to 20;b of the units in a section 23G project may be occupied by tenant9 receiving rent supplement assistance. j 3. Section 236 projects may be placed in localitierr which do not have a Workable Program far Co=.sjnity improvement approved by gpt,:c:.No ,spIcific apprc'ml of the, local gover pent body i9 required, except where the occupants: will, receive rent supple went assistance. In this case,. the project must be part of 'a workable program or be approved by, Local authorities.. for participation in, the 'tent Supplement Program.,. ;. . �. 4 . The Fees and premiums reauired for ;cction 236 transactions , area the same as,; for .mortgages insured under section 207 of ;the,:Na.tional Housing Act. .... , . 5. A,project may include non-dwelling;•commercial faeilities :as e deemed adequate and appropriate to serve the occupants are . P a n � ro P P and the surrounding neighborhood, as long as the project is predominantly residential , and any -nan-&gelling fac} lity included in the mortgage is found to contritute :to. the ecgnomic feasibility of the project. j .6. -2ha sponsor' s architect is urged to make every ef•::ort to achieve modest but attractive design consistent with the .needs of the; market and 'reasonable expenses of maintenance pnd operation. _ c . :•� V1. SPECIAL UI.REM£NT 1 . Eligible Tenants occupancy by subsidized to-nants and cooperative occupant: in rEction 236 projects is limited to those meeting the :specified income reouirements and, who are me of the following: (a) a family (two or more persons:selated,- by: blood, rpaF age or operation of law who occupy- ,the sumet u!Lit)-. f.!• r (b) ' a single r,-erson at least E2 years of age .(c) a single ,person leas than 62 .years . of age,:•.provided,i than occupancy- by this category of tenants :is lira-itedito;. 10% of the.-dwelling units in the project ,,(d) a hand�capped person. A person .is .handi.capped if •he has a physigal,.impalrm.�-nt which: . ,, 1. : is v-ted, �,o,•be ofa larir.• continuod-.:andAndefinite durations r :f 2. substanti; Iy :i.mpt:ies his abil tty :to live independent is ' of, such nature that his : tAlity to live indepond-, ent.ly .could be. :improved b�, ,rloje nu itable housing ronditions. - or + 10 y,. 39C1'ION 236 - 4 f �"- r. ' 2 7ncome Limits Eligibility for assisted admission in primarily limited to families whose adjusted incomes do not exceed 135" of the income, limits established, for; initial occupancy of public. ve o o the funds 1 same Z 00 Q • h ftl s housing n the ,e area . H e" r, up t 2 ,� authorized for, ,^,+ecti.on 236 may be used to contract for assistance, payments ir, connection with,, projects, to,•be occupied during the initial rent--up period by families whose i comes exceed_ 135". of, the public housing limits but do not ee�sceed . 90,:4 of� the c•arrent l rescribad 1'jnits for fJ ; 221 (d) BY,IR p:~oject. This 2(Y limitation will not be applicable ,to t nants -admitted after the initial. rent-up. Such tenant¢ :rmaet aye i-}ep q} .q not excaeding,•thq%bi.gher•,of the two limits. These restr .ct3.ons do not Apply.,to tenants who pay •the fair market rental. 3 . r^amil.y Housing No mortgage .wsll be insured unless,-.,the, martgagpx r.qerti,fies that lip will not discriminatro, ,against ,f:amilips ?llith •ch.i, c gen and will, not sell the property while the mortgage is in effect to anyone who will so discriminate,.,. 4 . Ettua importunity in Housing _ J Neitfber- .the sp sor nor anyone authorized to act for him will dedline to sell, rent, or otherwise make available any of the •--pro rt22es .too, a,-prospective purchaser or tenant because of his race, color, creed, or national origin . The sponsor must furt.be a,gre to comply with state and local law sand ordinances prOh b'tins idiscri.mination. T', _ I�A2- T765jc -teauirements YO will not insure a mortgage unless the principal con- tractor certifies, that all laborers and mechanics will be Paid not less than the prevailing_wage in the project; area and accepts,,tfie responsibi.l ity for such pay by. all sub tractors . � 6. ^hers shall 'be ,'no discrimination against any emplo;ee •who . is employed in carrying out work receiving ?HA assistance, or against any applicant for such employtrent, because of race, - creed, ;'color, or national origin. 7. Cost Certification After the project is completed, :the sponsormust certify to the actual cost ,of, the project, inc•luding � foes,, charges, ; and ofr--cite' cgnstruction cost. ?or most non-•profit:moiFtgagote and .all identity of interest builder-.sponsors, ,•the-,.contractor,; an ;mat .tc ago must certify to" the actual, cant of. the_ project.. . u t Ito v. 3/7U • � U .iVi�i�{• t` 1fi ,U.i -'13,, M,•r.l: i �- �.1'C-C. k,. - J , INTER114 PPLEMENTS ON MORTGAGES FOR 41koPULARPl itA`1M1 RENTAL HOUSING FOR LOWER INCOME NAME *fRLE FAMILIES �. 'I•llis prograul i,tl►>,t,lrs wt4ami, to i,►v.rr ►stoner rr.. Owl Ili Inwrritlg" c4fntt (tit ctrtar . and t:vr►orritl�r, lu►,ltiufl t'In� riailrc It lfrf,ti►iccl tl►r iurrn of tnunlil!}' fsaytncnrr , mortgagee nn Irchall of Ills min, .:or ►►f :1 I.it t r►f tFr i• ,c%t m) a ltlarkrt rate pmject v. insured by FI IA. i ntcrc•, ,n r>,1}„ . .ti may l:• be mair or. a rcat:tl ur tx CK" housing project owllyd In a }no- • it, unity Oil, lllrlir • .l►•'idrod, or crY)perativc clit,t, is financed under a Smtr -or Icx.• oro raf lfrovitli;I: • ;-dunce through luaru, tote „ti t or tax abatemcnm. Neturr and Purpose of '1:'ltc pr:riodic interest reduction u► si,votimoo, r►ic:L.;s i�• -51=s on the •,, jcct lnortttnste ; Program amount required for principal, tf• -rr,t, .rI u+ucta;.►' ,4.irance pret. itim on a tttA . t mortgage to all .11110Ullt that wol'Id tK' left , • d for itiv. ',..At and rote-rclt i( thr m(xtx.' ti an interest Late of I pereent. 'me pm K)sr: eft f.• payne-1 brir►g thr rem, duvm to a level which loAer incomr. fanul►rr can allf► }xrrcut .l the imant's monthly income). f Noupmlit, limited dividend and coopersuva rru+.zies apply for " .K,eagv inoow interest reduction payments. E AppppliLation for mortgage insurance is mode thrmigh ►tA•al�prn..,t lefuler log t F}Ir1 Insuring Office. . Wha CGn Apply and Application for interest reduction lulyrnents where no t I t "Irnlmr •• ttmr►tvtu is tit.. Now To Apply lotto! F11A Iruuring Office. Federal Housing Administration or: Local FHA Inafuutl 011icc r Department of Hotaing and UrLmri a bevelopme n t For Washington, I1 G 20410 Inforsnatton ' ` Cantdct Printed t Iniormction ^ Avatlabt• 12 U.S.C. 17151 •1, NatiotA Housing Act, Sec. 231), as jidded by thr ,Homing anti Fkvclopmcnt Act of 1968, Src. '201(a), Public Law 90-448, 62 Scat. 476. 493 Authorliliq tsyi:lcr4lore - - Afswi!4stttrin� Frderol !looting Administration Arne Gclimuncm of Hats Ong and Urban Dcvdolrrreent WL f` i •4 try ► e' 'ra'. t t e : tip` t "► f S 1. � : _ FEDERAL MUSING ArMISISTRATIOD1 Los ,AMeles, C*liforzia 90013 Regular Income Limit8 for Ssctions 235 and 236 Based on 13S% of the inci ame limits established for initial occupancy. _ of public housing or rent Warea__ _ yi,pre:nt• housing in the indicated -' = ---- County limits apply except within the indented localities. ,,,t +-* � • sI U • 'ie h TPARR OF PSMOSS ni IL 1 _ 4 5 6_.....-- - 7 Locality , ., , , . . _ , . , _. • -. , - • • • Ir. _*a C 590 5, 130 ` •s,'o?0 6, 210 6, 480 6, 750 7, 020' 7, 290 • `7, 560 7 , 6 Kern 30915 4,860 5,400 ; 5,670 6,1210 - 6, 615 7, 02.0. 7,42S_.? 70830 719 Vasco 4 , 86©` 5,265 •5•, 670 6,075 6,4130 6, 895 7,290 ' 7, 695 8, 100 Ci, 5 i :,as Angeles 4 , 455 5, 130 6, 210 6, 750 7, 290 7. 830 8, 37P _ 8. 775, 9,045 9. 3 Los Angeles 42,05d 40860 6, 345 6, 750 7,r290 7, 695 8, 100 ' 8,1505 80•910 9, 3. Pasadana 41725 5,400 _ _ 6,480. 6, 750 7, 290 7, S 40 7,84 8,, 1M , 80 370 8, 6- Maaa t , 59d 5, 130 15`, 670 6, 210 6, 480 6, 75`0 7,020 7, 290 7, 560 7, 8_ . Orange 4,725 5, 130 6, 345 6, 750 7, 290 • 7, 695 81100 8: 370 8, 640 8, 91 Riverside 44-320 4, 860 5. 535 6, 075 6, 615 -7, 020 7, 560 7, 965 7, 965 7, 96 San aernaruino 4, 050 5, 130 6, 210 6,750 78020 70, 290 7, S60 7,830 7 , 830 7,83 Needles 4, 860 4,860 5 , 265 5, 265 51805 5.805 5,805 5, 605 5, 805 5, 80! • Upland 41050 4, 320 4, 860 5, 400 5. 805 6, 210 60615 7,020 7, 020 7, 02t ,gar: Luis Obispo 4f 320 4,860 6, 210 6, 750 7, 290 7 , 830 8, 370 8, 370 8, 370 89 37C San Luis Obispo 4,050 5, 130 5, 670 6, 210 6, 750 7, 290 70 836- r 6, 370 8, 640 6, 910 Satnta, Barbara 4, 320 5,400 6, 210 6,480 6, 88!# 7,1290 7, 695 80100 80100 8, iao Vfintura 5,400 5, 700 6,480 7,020 7, 560 78965 8, 370 8, 775 90180 9, ses Ventura 4, 590 5,400 5, 805 6, 210 6, 750 7, 290 7,830 8. 370 8. 370 8, 370 KbsnZz� 4, 590 5, 130 516,70 6,210 61750 7. 290 7,830 8, 370 8, 370 8, 370 Fart Ifteneme 4,590 50130 5,670 6. 210 6. 750 7, 290' 7.830 8. 370 8. 370 8, 370 a' FEDtRAL HOIIgIN13- litDNINISTRATIOW MULTIFAMILY DIVISION Los Angeles, California 90013 SECTION 236 HOPTGAGE LIMITATIONS (PER LYVIM UNIT) NON-ELBVATO�R CONST11UMION v SANTA RIVERSxb$ &ND SAN LUIS BEV- LOS ANGTLES ORANGE VENTUP.A BARBARA SAN BERNARDINO KERN OBISPO S COU'rfY COUNTY _ _C� COuh ---COUNTIES COUNTY tijb"TY 0 •12, 890 12. 512 12, 512 13. 156 12, 236 12,420 13, 340 1 18, 112 17, 594 17, 594 18, 500 17, 206 17, 465 18,756 21, 735 2 = �.14 2i, 114 22, 301 29,•649 20, 959. 22, 511 3 ;•77, 374:' 26, 598 26, 588 27, 957 26.Ob2, Z15, 3n3~ 28, 347 4 30; 992'-1° _ 30, 106 30,106 -31,656 29,442 29,885 32,O98 (See reverse for regular incom 13saits) Rev. 3/70 r -Data on fttomobile Ownership - units At: Least 90% Ocou 'ied 'f - r s f December1 b =_ A o31 97 - - ReFion'. E er_y ousing ro F cts Fi�o3tc i�ocation Id��. of t1o . of No. of Autos � of Residents %: of Units Residents Units O med by Res . with Autos with Autos Ptioenix, Ariz. 211 153 70 33.2 45.8 San-Mateo, ealif. 68 56 12 17 . 6 21. 4 Sang Monica Calif. 108 150 17 10 . 1 11.3 Norwalk., Calif. 53 47 12 22 . 6 25 .5 Ssrkeley. Calif. 154 150 12 7. 8 8.4 Gar. Diego. Calif. 70 65 13 18. 0 20 .0 Cctntoa, Calif. 25 21 3 12 .0 14 .3 San Diego , Calif. 272 202 16 5 . 9 7 .9 San Mateo, Calif. 2211 200 37 16 .5 18.5 San Francisco, Calif 35 32 3 6. 8 9 . 4 _Vallejo, Calif. 82 75 15 18. 3 20 .0 Altadena, Calif. 23 25 z 8.? 8. 4 capa, Calif. 108 100 21 1y" 4 21.0 'Freano Calif. . 37 32 2 5 . 4 6 . 3 LonS-"Beach, Calif. 332 297 43 12 .9 14.5 Pasadena, Calif. 169 I;0 38 22 . 5 25 . 3 Sar: Diego, Calif. 91 $C 12 13. 2 L San Diego, Calif. 297 169 50 25 .jt 29 .5 Sale Lake City , Utah 224 198 90 40 . 2 45-4 Plentywood, Mont . 32 31 11 34 . 4 35 .5 r Billings, Mont-. 124 117 6 1 . 8 5 .1 Corvallis , Oregon 89 84 25 28.1 29 . 8 P�rtZard, Oregon 32$ 3E30 67 20. 4 22 . 3 Seattle , Wash. 224 112 2 . 89 1 . 8 Vancouver, Dash. 189 470 24 12 . 7 111 .1 Seattle, mash. 155 144 4. 6 . 4 6 .9 t TOTALS 26 nejects 3,08!: 3,160 613 16 .6 19. 4 rof slow rhoenx s .San Mfiteo t Santa 'Mo'nica f ? Av - •rlor.rralk pe rl;e ley ' Ssin Diego ' .Compton ; San Dien il '.San Mateo `- ;Valle]o k1Rr... , • , aqa Fresno raaP Beach A :i Pasadena San D1 ego 'IAn Diego Bait Lake CIVYI Plentywrood -�..- Portland wwwaw wncouver rn ; Beattie V RECE 46 1 CITY CLERK y or iItINTiNGrgM BIrACt1►CAL l!",4. tiQNOVlb A" g 2------------- i .� A Win -or ,e ,_e. v ' !cp 'o'44 e /LAC/'L.��rr"_�`A9 • � .�'���LI�'►+.f � f� �,,.t�.•ti. .�d� �~ ..tom' �+r�+.P � i� 1 ) �� .04 ti I t 1 •r Or too AL I cloc, ON t ,1 It d !► �• ,/j71,�lKlW'w J ! D t • 4 i � ! ! ✓tom! ,�/� � � ` , T ; 1 pr- i ov,$4t� 2 7 r ,. x t III ro- A Joe 3659 RECEIPT Date 9� tj Received Fro _..4'.., Address v c c.' x Dollars -r- m ... cc) Fo r a CL PAID C2 HCn' ACCl1U' f Alt:, fli C"4 ;: AMf. ►alA 04104 1 �JA E' O�Eir S axles •.alums+ ....1.h...a.W,rs.w�...r.ww.w.w.r....r-�+rr�H'•L:•t/7�-t14.�jC 4��1: I I' OFFICE OF :THECITYATTORNEX OPINION NO. 72-5 . . .. . 17• February 1972 ;: SUBJECT: Conditional Exception 70-44 First Christian Church Development REQUESTED BY: City Council PREPARED BY Don P. Bonfa, City Attorney Michael. H . Miller, Deputy City Attorney QUESTION : Is the granting of Conditional Exception 70--40 legal in view of the case law on the subject , particularly the case of Knox vs Huntington Beach? ANSWER : No. DISCUSSION: The recent decision In the ca :c of Knox vs . City or Huntington Beach took Into consideration several cases in California deal-- t ing with the subject of land use variance (conditional ' exception) . Considering legal precedent in California , the court :held as follows 1. The City Council must state its reason for affirm ing (or overruling) the Planning Commission 's granting of a variance 2 . The stated reasons must be in the form of evidentiary . find:Ings of facts relevant to the standard of hardship . Section 9830 of the Huntington, Beach Code sets forth. this standard: "When practical difficulties , unnecessary hardships .,, oi, results inconsiotent with the general purpose. and -intent*of applicable provisions of Division 9 occul' . . .a conditional , ; exception to the provisions of applicable provisions of Division .9 may be granted, prov.ded that so doing will not de feat its general purposes . " Regarding Conditional Exception 70--40, t•he Planning Corrmisslon In denying the conditional exception specifically found that "the applicant railed to demonstrate a hardship . " (Huntington Etsach Planning Commission transmittal to the Mayor and City Council dated ,'November 16, 19,0. ) , Office of the City Attorney 1.7 February 1972 r ~' Opinion: No . .72--5 Page 2 In overruling the planning Commiss.i on, the ' City Council nevcr p over, nothing was. . expressly, overruled �Lhi� fiilding. ':,,More stated or - found b the council to Indic - y � ate a hardship'_' .(Council proceeding re CE 70"40) The '.1.Ack of a statement by the council ,'of reasons, required by 'the Code, cannot be supplied by a presumption. Brgad�wa,�, Laguna, etc. - Association vs . Board of Permits A eals , . 66; CaL,. 2d77 . " In discussing the matter of hardship , the court in the. Knox ; case pointed out that the hardship requirement its apparent in the conditional exception' application which must ,crntai,n , the showing of "exceptiona.l. rireumstarces which, when Applied to the ro� ert deprive the subject property ofprivileges P P y � P - �' P P y •; enjoyed by other property its the : same district`.' . (Huntington {; Beach Code Section 9832 . 1. ) ' In response to this question on the application for 76-110 as to 'what exceptional circum3tances apply to this property , applicant stated "none . " rr Thus , the applicant stated "no hardship, " the 'Planning Com- mission found "no hardship" and the City Council made no finding on "hardship . " r CONCLUSION :,.:.. :t If the matter of Conditional Exception 70-40 went to' a `court , iL is most :likely , in view of the case law on this subject including the recent case of Knox vs . City or Huntington 5 e a h, that said conditional exception would be set aslde . AUTHORITY Tuin , Hei hts Association vc .r o c �errisv rs,ry17i Cal 2dt 61 . Stoddard vs . Ede2on, ax2d Knox v lty of Runtin tots ,Beach , Superior Court '00 . M--,1561, memorandum .decision written by . Superior Court Judge Oeens" in" May , - 19?1 . DON P . 90111FA3 City raey s and eel MICHAEL !11. XILLE;1, Deputy City Attorney A "DFH :MHM: 2m i OFFICE OF THE CITY, ATTORNEY ; J f OPINION M 72_it f 16 February 1972 f • SUBJECT: Vacation of Shipley Street REQUESTED BY City Council PREPARED BY: Don P. BonPa , City Attorney Michael H . Miller, Deputy City Attorney QUESTION : Is there a proper legal basis for the vacation of Shipley Street:' ANSWER : yes . DISCUSSION : The power to vacate a city street is vested solely in . the munici- pality . The act of vacating can be done upon a f inding, th'at the + ;, property in question is unnecessary for present or future . uses as ; a street . Streets and Hi ways Code , Seations 8300 83311 citz � of Lcs Angeles v. Fi.ske 1953 255 Pac , Rd 449 . Courts are powerless to. interfere with municipal control (regard- ing vacated streets ) except upon convincing evidence of fraud,, az- bitrary action or art abuse of discretion . .See People ex rel . Webb - v. City of San Rafael , 95 Cal . Ap . 733 , 273 Pac . 1,31J. ,If the munic- ipality finds that the public interest will be benefited by a vaca- tion , the mere fact that private interest may also be served-, does, not vitiate the exercise of the oower . Heals v . Los Angelbs , 23' Cal. 2d 3813, 144 P c . 2d 8?9 (1,Q4,3) . The public interevt is served b;; exercise of the power of vaca&:3on where It is to , rel.leve t;h'e pub- lie from the charge of maintaining a street which is no longer use- f!il or convenient to the public . Los Angeles v. Piske , Supra • A resolution oJ' the cite vacating a street so that; realtiy ,,c:ould 'be used for private use was .not void, In absence of fraud or 'collu- aion between the city and private land owners . National , Cit;y v. D_unlop (1948 ) 194 Pac . 2d 7889 86 Cal. Ap . 2d t330 . R.esolution 11a. . 34110 .ordering the vacation of a portion of Shipley Street was passed after compliance with the legal prerega1sites ,et out by the St;z• e C 5 and Hi g?�waya Codtc� , and aft— a public hearin� � Said re.solutl.on made the required declaration "that the portion of ' Shipley Street proposed to be vacated was no longer neees;sa_ry . Vor public street purposes , and it was found by the city .,council from the evidence subt~:itted2 that said pc►rl,lan of Shipley Street, herein after o.cscsribed Is not neoes3ary for present: or prospective public -lie Pub iSc. _street purposes . . " : this is 3uppot•t•�ed try a rop, rt from office .of the G o ity, Attorney - 16 Fen ru;ary 19 721 • . Opinion No . 72_y Pale ? s Works Department ,. nt, that: vacation of. said atr�:c�i;. we�ald.,' at be de,tri- •. ,' .. ' mental. to the street 'system in . Huntington Beach and that "sald ,street is 'not necessary. The declarations and findings are consistent with;; the aforementioned legal. precedents : CONCLUSION : The, City Counc,il ' s action in vacating Shipley Street is consistent with all legal requirements A subsequent court -.action * could b,e brought to nullity said vacation, but a court would not`� act without a strong showing of fraud or collusion and abuse of discretion. by the city body . Rhyne, Municipal Law , . page 440 and cases cited. therein . In view of the required findings and supportive evide—hee ; the mere fact that a private entity will benefit fz-cin tree vacation does not nullify this ci ty 's action . See Corsa ntie. �. or' �Sunnyvale (1949 ) 204 Pac . 2d 922, Al Cal Ap . 2d72B D014 P. BONFA, C tt ornev and r 1,111CHAEL H. MILLER, Deptity City Attorney DPB/r.rr[M/eb i a of t :; •• , - � 77 ;1 STUDY OF ; 3SIDENTIAL HIGH-AIS D,EN`CI�QPMENTS Jk LO5 ANGL'LGS AND CF` IMB COIJNTI�S �. . ,; •fir,, with particular emphasis on Non--Prof3.t Senior Citizen Housing and .. The Proposefi First Christian Tower of 'Huxitxngton Aeech s. 1 7 " Sent mbd' ' 147d `�� 7P � • ° a .. f � 6 .t .r ''t i` t� � 1. r• � I ti�., �1f�t 11 L , �r.•1� ! � t,� ;<f( t: , � "`.� t f {�� ` 1 1 f >> 11i 1 Sr�}S�,,Jii f�'jt,��rtc,, �?.i' �Ic } ;f { ! l{ is ,•Y .+.� i ? t. t :�•t 1.'` 1 ��1 -(. i., ;` + �t. S, ; �l ll� T��4� .�''�{ � r4 i� 1.- ! !�Y ,11 r� �,',•IJ s:, 11 {1 t � { A 1. �li t� t f, f t � f i 't, ! , �ft 1 r.'.f f1, �j };n'�+ �S.,ift t ,`Yil�♦ i;;l .•(la5ii�a �,: T,i. �i ,ti.-:;�� 4 �i;i.l.t ��i ic '�,�'Vc � �. 11 r { �+ ��� �; ��'�� t"'�• � - - - ' `'i �� ��1�{ :.hun,. l . '}1! '.f;..'i'�1tl7 t r:�., �� :.U; c 1 ..W, A •�':`r4 --