Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCUP 90-43-DAVID LAUTNER/DOUGLAS M. LANGEVIN-Sustain PC & CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH IZIj 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK November 26, 1990 Douglas Langevin 8196 Pawtucket Drive Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Dear Mr. Langevin: This is to notify you that your CUP 90-43 was approved with conditions at the November 19, 1990, City Council Meeting. Please contact the Planning Department for further information. Sincerely, Connie Brockway, CMC City Clerk CB:pm (Telephone:714-536.5227) REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION w November 19, 1990 Date Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator z Prepared by: Michael Adams, Director of Community Deve ment C Subject: APPEAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-43rn AND DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ACTION Cfl „3 cc)m Ofmm l.0 � Consistent with Council Policy? Vf'�Yes ( ] New Policy or Exception � . r Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions, Attachmennfss: STATEMENT OF ISSUE• An appeal of the Planning Commission' s approval of Conditional Use Permit 90-43 was continued from the City Council meeting of November 5, 1990 . The Conditional Use Permit is a request to permit the sale of alcoholic beverages at a new restaurant/pub. RECOMMENDATION: Staff Recommendation Motion to: "Approve Conditional Use Permit No . 90-43 with findings and conditions with the proposed amendments listed in Attachment No. 1. ANALYSIS' The applicant proposes a neighborhood restaurant/pub serving food, beer and wine. The one-story, approximately 1000 square foot building will be rehabilitated with an additional eight (8) square feet added at the rear of the building for a janitor' s closet. The floor plan includes a main room with a bar and bar stools, and several tables with chairs . A food preparation area, storage room, dressing room, and restrooms are also proposed. The plans have been reviewed by the Alcoholic Beverage Control and the Huntington Beach Police Department and their recommendations have been included in the suggested conditions . The site is currently non-conforming with regard to on-site parking and front yard setback. This type of use would normally require 11 parking spaces . Two employee spaces (four (41 tandem. spaces) are provided at the rear of the building with access off the alley. A new structure on this block would be required to dedicate 2 . 5 feet along the alley, and an additional four (4) feet on Main Street for right-of-way purposes . The existing structure is situated at the existing front property line. Plo 5/85 The proposal is subject to the standard provisions contained in the Downtown Specific Plan for non-conforming uses and structures (Section 4 .2. 01[d] ) . The Downtown Specific Plan requires that non-conforming uses or structures meet all provisions of the code when floor area is expanded by more than 10%. However, as the existing building will be enlarged only by eight (8) square feet, full compliance with the code is not triggered. Another issue concerns the buildings proposed exterior design. The Downtown Design Guidelines call for a contemporary Mediterranean style of architecture. However, this building is part of a full block redevelopment project which granted the property owner the option of new construction or rehabilitation. The overall concept design was approved at the time of entitlement for the full block project . The applicant has subsequently responded to staff concerns about the adequacy of the design detail specification . Those plans are being recommended as the final submittal and therefore no additional Design Review Board action will be necessary. Staff recommends that the Council approve the proposed pub, and the building elevations, colors and materials as resubmitted. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS The proposed project is categorically exempt pursuant to Class 1 Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act . FUNDING SOURCE• Not Applicable ALTERNATIVE ACTION: The City Council may: A. Deny Conditional Use Permit 90-43 with the following suggested findings: 1. The proposed pub is not compatible with other existing and proposed uses in the vicinity due to the hours of operation and proposed alcohol sales . 2 . The proposed building rehabilitation is not in compliance with the Downtown Design guidelines and the intent of the rehabilitation block because it does not adequately reflect a combination of Mediterranean and historical building elements . 3 . The proposed use does not meet the intent of the General Plan, Coastal Element, or Downtown Specific Plan because it does not provide adequate on-site parking. RCA 11/19/90 -2- (7796d) B. Approve Conditional Use Permit 90-43 with findings and an amendment to the conditions of approval, requiring alternative building elevations, colors and materials . ATTACHMENTS: 1. Attachment No. 1 Findings/Conditions of Approval 2 . Memorandum to Richard Barnard dated November 7, 1990 . 3 . Request for Council Action dated November 5, 1990 . MTU:MA:LP: ss RCA 11/19/90 -3- (7796d) ATTACHMENT #1 STAFF RECOMMENDATION FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-43 : 1. The proposed use conforms with the General Plan Land Use designation of Mixed Commercial/Office and complies with the provisions of the Downtown Specific Plan with regard to non-conforming structures. 2 . The use is compatible with surrounding commercial development in the downtown core area. 3 . The proposed use meets the intent of Downtown Specific Plan District 5 by promoting a vital and interesting Main Street, compatible with the visitor serving uses along Pacific Coast Highway. 4 . The proposed use will not be detrimental to the general health, welfare or safety of persons in the vicinity, not injurious to the value of property or improvements in the vicinity. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-43 : 1. The site plan and floor plans received and dated September 13, 1990 shall be the conceptually approved layout with the following modifications : a. - The existing on site parking spaces (four [41 tandem spaces) shall be in full compliance with the code as to size and striping. b. The trash enclosure area shall be identified. c. The patio area shall be fenced from the adjacent park area. 2. The building elevations received and dated November 9, 1990 shall be the approved layout and material specification. Any modification to these plans shall be subject to review and approval of the Director of Community Development. 3 . Prior to submittal for building permits, the applicant/owner shall complete the following: a . Natural gas shall be stubbed in at the locations of cooking facilities, water heaters, and central heating units; and low-volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets . b. If foil-type insulation is to be used, a fire retardant type shall be installed as approved by the Building Department and indicated on the floor plans. c. If outdoor lighting is included, high-pressure sodium vapor lamps or similar energy savings lamps shall be used. All outside lighting shall be directed to prevent "spillage" onto adjacent properties and shall be noted on the site plan and elevations . d. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid. 4 . Fire Department Requirements are as follows : a. The applicant shall meet all applicable local, State and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards . 5 . The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department . 6 . All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material, shall be disposed of at an off-site facility equipped to handle them. 7. Construction shall be limited to Monday - Saturday 7: 00 AM to 8 : 00 PM. Construction shall be prohibited Sundays and Federal holidays . 8 . This conditional use permit does not authorize live entertainment . Any request for live entertainment shall be reviewed as a separate conditional use permit by the Planning Commission. 9 . Hours of operation shall be 10: 00 A.M. to Midnight, Monday through_ Thrusday and 10: 00 A.M. to 1: 00 A.M. Friday and Saturday. 10 . Beer and wine sales shall not exceed food sales . 11. No pool tables, pinball machines or other arcade games shall be permitted. 12 . The wrought iron patio fence shall be a minimum five (5) feet in height. 13 . An employee shall be on the patio when beer or wine is being served. 14 . Any expansion of use including but not limited to the outdoor patio area shall be subject to additional entitlement . 15 . The existing on site parking spaces four (4 tandem spaces) shall remain. 16 . The Planning Commission shall conduct a review of the project ' s compliance with the conditions and compatibility with surrounding uses nine (9) months after operation of the business commences . 17_„ Conditional use Permit No. 90-43 shall not become effective for any purpose until an "Acceptance of Conditions" form has been properly executed by the applicant and an authorized representative of the owner of the property, recorded with the County Recorder ' s Office and returned to the Planning Division. 18 . The Planning Commission reserves the right to revoke this conditional use permit if any violation of these conditions or the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code occurs . p r1 . .f• F _ _ <.. N - --4 r - •. -x .+c -'�.LS t77— v � CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH: INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION = {' HUNTINGTON BEACH To Richard Barnard From Adams , Director Deputy City Administrator Community Development Subject CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO 90-43 Date November 7, 1990 (LANGEVIN) The following is in response to Councilman MacAllister ' s memo dated November 5 , 1990 . The structure has not been designated as a historic structure by the Federal or State government . According to the most recent survey completed for the City by Johnson-Heumann Research Associates in 1988, the structure was assigned a National Register Category rating of 3D. This designation indicates that the structure appears eligible for listing only as a contributor to a potential National Register District, and not as an individual building . The removal of downtown historic buildings and the pier as a result of recent redevelopment projects has eliminated the potential for a Main Street Historic District. The City of Huntington Beach does. not have an ordinance for designating local historical landmarks or structures . The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has indicated to staff that no application for historic rehabilitation credit has been received for this building . SHPO was unable to confirm whether the construction would meet State and/or Federal Standards for rehabilitation without this information. Due to the fact that the existing structure utilized single wall construction, the rehabilitation required removal of the exterior walls . New materials will be used for the .walls, roof and floor . Staff does, not feel that the proposed window openings onto the mini-park will create an unsafe or unattractive situation. The openings would create aesthetically pleasing breaks in. the building facade and help develop a lively atmosphere along Main Street . The proposed use of a restaurant/pub with beer, wine, and food service is consistent with the intent of District 5 (Mixed Use) of the Downtown Specific Plan. The Specific Plan calls for a mix of retail , service, and visitor-serving uses along Main Street to create a pedestrian link between the pier and upper Main Street . f -.0 1. L Xi - - --t- < T3 rJ G f 4 .1]Y•tk-cl -�- Q�,`� r '- _ �`",•r <�i ern Rich .Barnard gage Two No video, arcade, or other types of games will be permitted on-site . There is currently no patio proposed for outside sale of beer and wine. Any such expansion of the service area would require review and approval by the Planning Commission, and provision of parking spaces . The last available Certificate of Occupancy for the building indicates the use as a meeting room, which has a parking ratio of 1 space per 35 square feet of building area . The applicant was allowed to conduct structural rehabilitation work on the building prior to approval by the Design Review Board . The work did not include exterior -finishes , which are contingent upon approval by the DRB, nor inte-rior tenant improvements , which are contingent upon approval of Conditional Use Permit No . 90-43 . The appeal concerned the DRB action and the Conditional Use Permit, and did not affect the structural rehabilitation in progress . The wood-frame structure as proposed can be constructed at the property lines as long as proper construction methods are used to meet Uniform Building and Fire Codes . In order to provide windows or other openings at the property line, however, it would be necessary to record a permanent non-buildable easement over the mini-park. •MA:LP: lp (7728d) r^ t Y _ t ` S. a f r.•r J - i - t _ -- Np � � 1 ;r -,f F. Legal Notice City of Huntington Beach Office of.the City Clerk P. O. Box 190 Huntington Beach,CA 92648 _TO - C�unlrCO - APR# 024 147 36 ORANGE COAST SPECIALTIES PROJECT #2 C/0 ROHM, JOHN H CHAP AVE �' Q Rug^rt.tt.a ;;' 636 E �. Insuliid :t. _..ems ORANGE CA 92666 No suc; oliico in sate /3 Do not remail in this envelope J� FIRST CLASS MAIL _ V Authorized to Publish Advertisements of all kinds including /public notices by Decree of the Superior Court of Orange County, California, Number A-6214, September 29, 1961, and A-24831 June 11, 1963 Ot - STATE OF CALIFORNIA � I. PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGr` County of Orange ,APPEAL'CONDITIONA`L,=:1 USE PERMIT NO.90-43(Request to per- am a Citizen of the United States and a Q um" P a restaurant/pub In i r resident of the County aforesaid; I am over the �_,�/ ;an_existing, v ! rehabilitated I structure,In age of eighteen years, and not a party to or conjunction with an appeal of the interested in the below entitled matter. I am a Planning Commission's ding principal clerk of the ORANGE COAST DAILY atheexte for of the PILOT, a newspaper of general circulation, NOTICEb IS InHEREBY .GIVEN that,the:Huntington, printed and published in the City of Costa Mesa, Beach City Council will hold County of Orange, State of California, and that I.a p-Ch-a fear:a In thethe Co_M- •cil:•Cnamber at the -Hunt- attached Notice is a true and complete copy as- 2000 Beach Civic Center; 2000 Main Street; Hunt- was printed and published in the Costa Mesa, the dateon anh,Calie time in- the date and at the time in- dicated below to receroe and; Newport Beach, Huntington Beach, Fountain consider the statements`of all persons who wish to be Valley, Irvine, the South Coast communities and, heard relative to the appli- cation described below,: Laguna Beach Issues of Said newspaper to wit 'DATE/TIME:Monday,No-, wember 5, 1990,7:00 P.NI r- the issue(s) of. APPL-_ICATION NUMBER: Conditional Use Permit No. j90-43/Appeal. of Design, jReviw;Board Action ' - APPLICANf. David' M: La'ut:nar/-D.QugIasi• October 25, 1990 Langevin LOCATION: 211 'Main S'treet (west side 'approz `imately 125 feet south of Olive Avenue) ZONE:Downtown Specific jPlan District 5(Mixed Use)` REQUEST: Appeal of the 'Planning Commission's ap= 06oval of a request to-permit a restaurant/pub in an exist=- ing, rehabilitated structure: The appeal also concerns the Planning Commission's action on the proposed building materials and eleva- Cions. ' i :ENVIRONM'ENTAL STATUS: Categorically ex- empt pursuant to Section 15301, Class 1 of the.Cali- fornia Environmental Quality Act. _-- COASTAL STATUS:_ empt pursuant to Section 9_69 5 3,1nof the Huhtington declare, under penalty of perjury, that the Beach Ordinance code -: .-ON FILE.A copy.of'the foregoing is true and correct. proposed request is on file In the Community Develop-_' nPent Department, 2000 October 25 0 Main Street', .Huntington Executed on 199 ' Beach,California 92648,for at Costa Mesa, California. inspection by-the public. •ALL INTERESTED PER SONS are invited.to-attend said.hearing.°and_,;Aexpressi opmibns or submit evidence' for or against the apphcatlon` as outlined above ,the ;.if re Sign re are any'further gd. .... please call Laura't Il Associate PlaYine,d; at 536-5271. .z Connie Brockway;, Clt' Clerk, City of Huntington Beach` Published Orange Coast PROOF OF PUBLICATION Daily Pilot October 25, t990 Th�„744 �z 6,v6 RECEIVED CITY CLERK Date: November 19 1990 CITY OF HUMTINL,i i j FE C4LIF. Submitted To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members ► ! � Submitted By: Douglas M. Langevin, Owner,217 Main St. Subject: Appeal-Conditional Use Permit No. 90-43 and Design Review Board(DRB)Action STATEMENT OF ISSUE: Letter Distributed to you as part of presentation bytouncilman MacAllister(see attachment A),contains many questions and statements, some of which are inaccurate. Because Councilman MacAllister's letter was distributed during the council meeting only to council and some staff,it was impossible for the applicant to address the questions raised and correct the inaccurate statements. ANALYSIS: Applicant: David M.Lautner/Douglas M.Langevin Appellant: Councilman MacAllister Location: 217 Main Street(west side, approx.125 feet south of Olive Ave.) ISSUES (Please refer to attachment A for each subheading) A. The Design Review Board did indeed deny the request for applicant's project by a 3-0 vote. However, the reasons cited were as follows: 1. "Due to the effort the city is making to upgrade the downtown area, the proposed materials,particularly the metal corrugated roof,are not compatible with materials used on adjacent buildings." 2. "The three elevations exposed to public view (front, side,rear) are not compatible with the structure across Main Street or with the proposed structure across from the mini-park." 3. "It is not appropriate to reproduce the original building at this location." 4. "The proposal does not comply with the downtown design guidelines." 5. "Changes to the building materials and architectural features may render the building more compatible with the surrounding area. For example, a heavier cornice, maintain transoms,incorporate doors and/or windows facing the mini-park,use stucco and fire proofed wood shingles, or painted metal roof." DISCUSSION: 1. The request for the metal corrugated roof has been dropped. The rest of the materials are,in fact, compatible with the surrounding structures. o3o 2. Point two is invalid because 217 Main St. is a locally-designated historic landmark, and this issue was mitigated as part of CUP 89-4 to allow the historic rehabilitation block project. 3. Point three is invalid because this is a reconstruction of the original structure using parts of the original, on the original site. It would be inappropriate to locate the structure on any other site. 4. The only downtown design guideline that 217 Main Street definitely does not comply with is primary materials (wood). An awning may be added later if a correct ERA mechanism can be found. 5. Changes in materials and architectural features would destroy the historical significance of the structure. A door facing the park might cause problems in uses proposed for the structure. The code has not allowed wood shingles of any type on a commercial structure in the downtown since 1971. Downtown design guidelines do not allow wood shingles,which would seem to be incompatible with the suggested stucco. B. This project is a reconstruction of a locally-designated historic landmark. 1. 217 Main Street has been locally recognized as a historic landmark, the first step to state and federal recognition. 2. 217 Main Street is a reconstruction of the original structure using the facade and floor. This work was required by code and is consistent with State Historic Building Code (SHBC) and the downtown specific plan, which supersedes Division 9 in this area. The reconstruction of buildings is allowed by the downtown design guidelines. The State Historic Building Code which applies to this building is mandatory and requires the use of original materials,colors, finishes, and architecture. 3. SHBC allows a 100%replacement in certain special instances. There is no percentage limit or line of demarcation in the SHBC. 4. Yes, absolutely. 5. In excess of$250,000 more than the current project. C. The Planning Commission denied the staff request to require a door on the park side (north side) of 217 Main Street, at the request of the applicant,who had opposed a door being added to the park side of the building since the DRB had recommended it during the 8/30/90 meeting(see paragraph A-5 of this letter). Indeed,the requirement to add a door on the park side was one of the primary reasons that the DRB recommendations were appealed. The applicant agrees that no door should be considered and has no interest in any door on the park side of 217 Main Street. D. 1. Applicant feels that a dart board is a game that is not disruptive or that will create the wrong image in the downtown. What restrictions have been imposed on other similar business in the downtown? Why is the applicant being treated differently? 2. What regulations apply to patio sales of food,beer, and wine for the restaurant uses in Main/Pier Phase 2? How will our application be different? E. 217 Main Street still has a valid Use Permit for a meeting hall. The fact that the tenant moved and the building was for lease does not affect the Use Permit currently in legal use. Only the granting of a new CUP will change the permitted use of the structure. F. 1. Applicant proposed a project which would not change the exterior of 217 Main Street, and pulled permits to do work which did not have to be reviewed by the DRB, because original materials would be used and there would be no change to the exterior. It was only when the restoration of the original 1904 facade was proposed was the DRB review triggered and by that time the work on 217 Main Street was well advanced on the previous permits. 2. The appeal only applied to the exterior materials,colors,and the restaurant use. Work not associated with these issues or inside work not associated with dedicated restaurant use was allowed under code. 3. Yes, definitely. G. 4. This building reconstruction is a mandatory application of the SHBC which takes precedent over the City's downtown design guidelines. It cannot be denied. 5. The city has allowed(if not encouraged) this type of use up and down Main Street. There is a 700 square foot "oyster" bar being installed at the present time in the 100 block. Applicant will have at least 2200 square feet of restaurant use--one of the larger restaurants in the downtown. 6. Definitely not--applicant opposed it every step of the process. Applicant still opposes it. Planning Commission opposes it. It should not be allowed. Windows are O.K. and were original to the building in 1904. SHBC requires the applicant to replace them in the structure. H. Yes, because the structure at 217 Main Street is a locally recognized historic landmark, which triggers the mandatory application of the SHBC to the structure,requiring the reconstruction to take precedent over local code. I. The SHBC would allow the building to continue to be historic even if 100% of the building fabric were replaced, as long as original materials,finishes,colors, and architecture are strictly followed. J. State and Federal standards are consistent with the SHBC in allowing up to 100% replacement of a historic building fabric under some conditions. SUMMARY* The applicant hopes that this document will explain and settle some of the issues brought up by Councilman MacAllister's letter, and provide a balanced view of the proposed project at 217 Main Street. Applicant feels that the proposed restaurant use of 217 Main Street is the best use available,and the only one which could make use of the 77.5 by 25 foot bare lot behind the structure. Use as a restaurant will allow productive application of this 1900+ square feet as a developed patio eating area with a BBQ pit. Any other use will result in an unsightly and useless area to the rear of the building,detracting from the goals of downtown redevelopment in general and the historic rehabilitation block in particular. The proposed project will blend nicely with the"Alley West" atmosphere planned for the current unsightly alley area. s _11� " . Dougl M. Langevin AMA M i � YOR JI Wes Bannister City of Huntington Eeaeh MAYOR PRO TEMPOF. Tom Mays P. O. BOX 190 • 2000 MAIN STREET • CALIFORNIA 92648 tft COUNCILMEMBERS John Erskine Peter Green Don MacAllister Jim Silva Grace Winchell TO: Mayor & City Co it 1 1/5/90 FROM: Don MacAlIiste -1 SUBJECT: D-5 Planning Comm ion 90-43 Appeal, 217 Main St. Design Review Board denied the request by a 3-0 vote, see page D5.2 of RCA. 1 ) Materials not compatible with adjacent buildings. 2) The 3 elevations were not compatible with the structure across Main St. (Parking structure and retail). 3) It is not appropriate to reproduce the original building at this location. 4) Does not comply with the Downtown Design Guidelines. $• Applicant claims this is a rehabilitation of a historic structure. 1 ) There is no evidence this has been designated a historic structure h��- _. (Federal or State), only speculation that it be so designated. 2) The facts are that it is a reproduction using new materials for the side and rear wails, roof and floor. The only portion of the building that is being preserved is the front wall or facade and that is inconsistent with Downtown Design Guidelines. 3) At what point does renovation constitute a new building; only a fraction of the old building will remain. 4) Does a wood frame building, constructed on the property line next to another commercial building, meet the Building and Fire Codes? 5) What would the difference in costs be between this building and a building designed to meet the Design Guideline? C., The Planning Commission permitted a door or other similar opening between this building (and use) and the mini-park. This is a bad situation. It will create a bad atmosphere in the park and outside the pub. In fact, the proposed use creates the wrong atmosphere and image for Downtown. We need to improve the.image of Downtown. Check page D5.3 of the RCA, it deals with the Police Department and Alcoholic Beverage Control Board concerns. 1 ) There should be no games permitted. 2) What regulations will apply to the use of the patio. Outside sale of beer and wine could creE�EP gNE417 I.536-5553 1 ` Parking: Why is this building being considered as a meeting room? Didn't the church group leave the building? if they did, then the building should be considered as a retail building, the same as other buildings on Main St. This building was for rent before the proposed use was requested. Questions to Staff: 1) Why did the applicant undergo extensive remodel work without Design Review Board Approval when it was known the DRB did not approve of the project? 2) Why was the applicant allowed to continue to work on the building after the appeal was filed? 3) Does a wood frame building, constructed on a common property line, meet Building and Fire Codes? GQuestions to Council: 4) Does the City want reproduced or reconstructed buildings of this type along Main St. or do we want to continue to enforce the Downtown Design Guidelines? 5) Should the City encourage or allow this type of use in Downtown? 6) Should an opening in the building be permitted to connect with the mini-park? If this building is not listed on any state or federal historic register, does city identification as n Possible historic building have any real meaning? Also, does the building continue to be historic if only a fraction of the original structure remains? QIs there a state or federal Standard that specifies what 9 of the building must remain? r� MAYOR Wes Bannister J� City of Huntington Beaeh 7 MAYOR PRO TEMPORE `.f r. .'r '.t"......:. Tom Mays 1 P. O. BOX 190 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 / COUNCILMEMBERS ' q John Erskine —_ -- - Peter Green lr Don MacAllister Jim Silva __ _----- Grace Winchell TO: Mayor & City Co i 1 1 1/5/90 FROM: Don MacAiliste �rsL SUBJECT: D-5 Planning Comm ion 90-43 Appeal, 217 Main St. Design Review Board denied the request by a 3-0 vote, see page D5.2 of RCA. 1 ) Materials not compatible with adjacent buildings. 2) The 3 elevations were not compatible with the structure across Main St. (Parking structure and retail). 3) It is not appropriate to reproduce the original building at this location. 4) Does not comply with the. Downtown Design Guidelines. Applicant claims this is a rehabilitation of a historic structure. 1 ) There is no evidence this has been designated a historic structure (Federal or State), only speculation that it La be so designated. 2) The facts are that it is a reproduction using new materials for the side and rear walls, roof and floor. The only portion of the building that is being preserved is the front wall or facade and that is inconsistent with Downtown Design .Guidelines. 3) At what point does renovation constitute a new building; only a fraction of the old building will remain. 4) Does a wood frame building, constructed on the property line next to another commercial building, meet the Building and Fire Codes? 5) What would the difference in costs be between this building and a building designed to meet the Design Guideline? The Planning Commission permitted a door or other similar opening between this building (and use) and the mini-park. This is a bad situation. It will create a bad atmosphere in the park and outside-the pub. In fact, the proposed use creates the wrong atmosphere and image for Downtown. We need to improve the image of Downtown. Check page D5.3 of the RCA, it deals with the Police Department and Alcoholic Beverage Control Board concerns. 1 ) There should be no games permitted. 2) What regulations will apply to the use of the patio. Outside sale of / beer and wine could create agr2g1Mm. TELEPH N 4� 536-5553 J _ l� h Parking: 'Why is this building being considered as a meeting room? Didn't the church group leave the building? if they did, then the building should be considered as a retail building, the same as other buildings on Main St. This building was for rent before the proposed use was requested. Questions to Staff: 1) ~Wily did the applicant undergo extensive remodel work without Design Review Board Approval when it was known the DRB did not approve of the project? 2) Whq was the applicart allowed to continue to work on the building after the appeal was filed? 3) Does a_wood frame building, constructed on a common property line, meet Building and Fire Codes? Questions to Council: =f) Does the City want reproduced or reconstructed buildings of this type along Main St. or do we want to continue to enforce the Downtown Design Guidelines? S) Should the City encourage or allow this type of use in Downtown? 6) Should an opening in the building be permitted to connect with the mini-park? If this building is not listed on any state or federal historic register, does city identification as a possible historic building have any real meaning? Also, does the building continue to be Historic if only a fraction of the original structure remains? Is there a state or federal standard that specifies what 9 of the building must remain? REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION November 5, 1990 Date Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members Submitted by: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Prepared by: Michael Adams, Director of Community Develop Subject: APPEAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-43 AND DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ACTION U yrJ-,s,vy,> Consistent with Council Policy? [ ] Yes [ ] New Policy or Exception -A!�, 14119/ 9 D Statement of Issue, Recommendation,Analysis, Funding Source,Alternative Actions,Attachments: STATEMENT OF ISSUE• Transmitted for your consideration is an appeal of the Planning Commission' s approval of Conditional Use Permit 90-43 submitted by Councilman MacAllister. The Conditional Use Permit is a request to permit the sale of alcoholic beverages at a new restaurant/pub. The Planning Commission, in their action on Conditional Use Permit 90-43, eliminated the Design Review Board' s recommendation on the proposed colors, materials, and elevations for the exterior of the building. Councilman MacAllister has also cited this issue in his appeal letter. RECOMMENDATION• Staff Recommendation . Motion to: "Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 90-43 with findings and conditions as outlined in Attachment #1 including a condition to include the Design Review Board' s recommendation. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission, on September 18, 1990, reviewed the retest:: and approved a motion to "Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 90-43 and overturn the Design Review Board' s action, with Findings ands= Conditions, " by the following vote: AYES: Mountford, Leipzig, Shomaker, Bourguignon, Ortega, Williams NOES: Kirkland ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None The findings and conditions of approval as recommended by the Planning Commission are included as Attachment #2 to this report. No 5185 ANALYSIS• Applicant : David M. Lautner/Douglas M. Langevin Appellant: Councilman MacAllister Location: 217 Main Street (west side, approximately 125 feet south of Olive Avenue) Issues : A. Background Conditional Use Permit No. 90-43 is a request to permit the sale of alcoholic beverages at a new restaurant/pub pursuant to Section 9636 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance code. The applicant wishes to rehabilitate an existing building on the west 200 block of Main Street for use as a neighborhood pub. As part of the Conditional Use Permit process, the applicant submitted proposed building colors, materials, and elevations to the Design Review Board for approval . The Design Review Board denied the request by a vote of 3 to 0 based on the following concerns: 1) Due to the effort the City is making to upgrade the downtown area, the proposed materials, particularly the metal corrugated roof, were not compatible with materials used on adjacent buildings . 2) The three elevations exposed to public view (front, side, rear) were not compatible with the structure across Main Street or with the proposed structure across from the mini-park. 3) It is not appropriate to reproduce the original 1904 building at this location. 4) The proposal did not comply with the Downtown Design Guidelines. 5) The Board felt that certain changes to the building materials and architectural features could render the building more compatible with the surrounding area. For example, a heavier cornice, maintaining transoms, incorporating doors and/or windows facing the mini-park, use of stucco and fireproofed wood shingles, or a painted metal roof . RCA 11/5/90 -2- (7567d) The building owner, Douglas Langevin, appealed the DRB' s decision to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission, in conjunction with their action on Conditional Use Permit No. 90-43, approved the applicant' s elevation with minor modifications, including a composition roof rather than a galvanized metal roof as originally requested, and included windows on the park side of the building, unless precluded by the Uniform Building Code. The effect of the Planning Commission' s action was to overturn the DRB' s decision and not require a design more compatible with adjacent buildings and the Downtown Design Guidelines . B. Proposed Restaurant/Pub The applicant proposes a neighborhood restaurant/pub serving food, beer and wine. The one-story, approximately 1000 square foot building will be rehabilitated with an additional eight (8) square feet added at the rear of the building for a janitor' s closet. The floor plan includes a main room with a bar and bar stools, and several tables with chairs . A food preparation area, storage room, dressing room, and restrooms are also proposed. The plans have been reviewed by the Alcoholic Beverage Control and the Huntington Beach Police Department. Among the conditions requested by these agencies to which the applicant has agreed are: 1. Beer and wine sales will not exceed food sales . 2 . Hours of operation will be 10:00 A.M. to Midnight, Monday through Thursday and 10: 00 A.M. to 1:00 A.M. , Friday and Saturday. 3 . There will be no pool tables or pinball machines . 4 . The wrought iron patio fence shall be five (5) feet high. 5 . An employee shall be on the patio when beer or wine is being served (Police Department requirement. No patio is shown on plans at this time) . These conditions will ensure that the establishment is a restaurant with alcohol service, rather than just a bar. Parking The site is currently non-conforming with regard to on-site parking and front yard setback. This type of use would normally require 11 parking spaces . Two employee spaces (four (4) tandem spaces) are provided at the rear of the building with access off the alley. A new structure on this block would be required to dedicate 2 . 5 feet along the alley, and an additional four (4) feet on Main Street for right-of-way purposes. The existing structure is situated at the existing front property line. RCA 11/5/90 -3- (7567d) The proposal is subject to the standard provisions contained in the Downtown Specific Plan for non-conforming uses and structures (Section 4 .2. 01(d) ) . The code requires that non-conforming uses or structures meet all provisions of the code when floor area is expanded by more than 10%, when height is increased, or when permitted density is increased. None of these conditions apply, however, as the existing building will be enlarged only by eight (8) square feet, no additional height is proposed, and the intensity of use, as determined by the parking code, will not increase. The code provisions for non-conforming structures also require that a changed use comply with off-street parking provisions when the new use will increase the parking requirement over the existing use. In this case, the applicant is changing from a meeting room use with a parking requirement of 1 space per 35 square feet, to a less intense use as a restaurant/pub with a parking requirement of 1 space per 100 square feet. Therefore, no additional off-street parking is required. Design _Issues The Downtown Design Guidelines call for a contemporary Mediterranean style of architecture. Uniform materials and consistent style must be evident in all exterior elevations, and the dominant exterior material of a building is to be either stucco, smooth block, granite, or marble. A harmonious color scheme is also suggested. Roof materials most indicative of Mediterranean architecture include clay or concrete shingle, tile, copper, and painted metal. Windows should be multipaned. The Design Review Board, since November, 1989, has reviewed a number of proposals on the subject block which involved rehabilitation of historic buildings . The goal of combining historic features of the period with Mediterranean features compatible with newer, surrounding development has been achieved primarily by the use of materials suggested by the Design Guidelines, and incorporation of historical architectural elements . Such elements may include multipaned windows and transoms, certain types of cornice treatments, certain types and locations of entry doors, use of awnings, etc. The Design Review Board has generally concluded that such combination of elements can result in an attractive structure that is successfully integrated with surrounding downtown development. Staff supports this conclusion, and recommends that the colors, building materials, and elevations be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Board prior to issuance of building permits. The plans should incorporate Mediterranean and historical elements, similar to other rehabilitation projects on the block. Rehabilitation vs . Demolition During the past several weeks, a series of stop work orders have been issued at the subject site. A Statement of Facts with regard to the orders is attached to this report. The primary issue has been the determination of what constitutes demolition and reconstruction, versus what constitutes rehabilitation. The Planning Division currently defines demolition and rehabilitation as follows: RCA 11/5/90 -4- (7567d) Demolition - The deliberate removal or destruction of the frames or foundation of any portion of a building or structure for the purpose of preparing the site for new construction or other use. Rehabilitation/Remodel - The upgrade of the interior or, as distinguished from a secondary or accessory use, exterior faces of a building or structure without altering to any degree the structural integrity. Remodeling may include the replacement of exterior walls according to the requirements of the Uniform Building Code, provided that such remodeling can meet the standard of the Zoning Code. It was determined by Staff that due to the single wall construction of the subject building, the work which had taken place was rehabilitation rather than demolition, and that the non-conforming provisions of the Downtown Specific Plan applied, as outlined above. Summary Staff recommends that the Council approve the proposed pub, and require that the building elevations, colors and materials be reviewed by the Design Review Board to incorporate appropriate historical and Mediterranean building features . ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS The proposed project is catagorically exempt pursuant to Class 1 Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act. FUNDING SOURCE: Not Applicable ALTERNATIVE ACTION: The City Council may: A. Deny Conditional Use Permit 90-43 with the following findings : 1. The proposed pub is not compatible with other existing and proposed uses in the vicinity due to the hours of operation and proposed alcohol sales . 2 . The proposed building rehabilitation is not in compliance with the Downtown Design guidelines and the intent of the rehabilitation block because it does not adequately reflect a combination of Mediterranean and historical building elements . 3 . The proposed use does not meet the intent of the General Plan, Coastal Element, or Downtown Specific Plan because it does not provide adequate on-site parking. RCA 11/5/90 -5- (7567d) B. Approve Conditional Use Permit 90-43 with findings and conditions of approval, with alternative building colors, materials, and elevations . ATTACHMENTS. 1. Attachment #1 - Findings and Conditions of Approval as recommended by Staff. 2. Attachment #2 - Findings and Conditions of Approval as recommended by the Planning Commission. 3 . Letter of Appeal dated September 20, 1990 . 4 . Letter from David Lautner dated October 22, 1990 .. 5 . Statement of Facts regarding stopwork orders . 6 . Staff Report dated September 5, 1990 . MTU:MA:LP: lp RCA 11/5/90 -6- (7567d) I ATTACHMENT #1 STAFF RECOMMENDATION FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 90-43 : 1. The proposed use conforms with the General Plan Land Use designation of Mixed Commercial/Office and complies with the provisions of the Downtown Specific Plan with regard to non-conforming structures. 2 . The use is compatible with surrounding commercial development in the downtown core area. 3 . The proposed use meets the intent of Downtown Specific Plan District 5 by promoting a vital and interesting Main Street, compatible with the visitor serving uses along Pacific Coast Highway. 4 . The proposed use will not be detrimental to the general health, welfare or safety of persons in the vicinity, not injurious to the value of property or improvements in the vicinity. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 90-43 : 1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated September 13, 1990 shall be the conceptually approved layout with the following midifications : a. The elevations, colors and building materials shall reflect a combination of historical and contemporary Mediterranean elements as approved by the Design Review Board. 2 . Prior to submittal for building permits, the applicant/owner shall complete the following: a. Floor plans shall depict natural gas stubbed in at the locations of cooking facilities, water heaters, and central heating units; and low-volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets. b. If foil-type insulation is to be used, a fire retardant type shall be installed as approved by the Building Department and indicated on the floor plans . c. The Design Review Board shall review and approve the final exterior elevations, colors, and building materials . d. Elevations shall depict colors and building materials as approved by the Design Review Board. e. If outdoor lighting is included, high-pressure sodium vapor lamps or similar energy savings lamps shall be used. All outside lighting shall be directed to prevent "spillage" onto adjacent properties and shall be noted on the site plan and elevations . f . All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid. 3 . Fire Department Requirements are as follows: a. The applicant shall meet all applicable local, State and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards . 4 . The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department. 5 . All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material, shall be disposed of at an off-site facility equipped to handle them. 6 . Construction shall be limited to Monday - Saturday 7: 00 AM to 8 : 00 PM. Construction shall be prohibited Sundays and Federal holidays . 7. This conditional use permit does not authorize live entertainment. Any request for live entertainment shall be reviewed as a separate conditional use permit by the Planning Commission. 8 . Hours of operation shall be 10 : 00 A.M. to Midnight, Monday through Thrusday and 10 : 00 A.M. to 1: 00 A.M. Friday and Saturday. 9 . Beer and wine sales shall not exceed food sales. 10 . No pool tables, pinball machines or other arcade games shall be permitted. 11. The wrought iron patio fence shall be a minimum five (5) feet in height . 12 . An. employee shall be on the patio when beer or wine is being served. (7569d-3,4) ATTACHMENT #2 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 90-43 : 1. The proposed use conforms with the General Plan Land Use designation of Mixed Commercial/Office and complies with the provisions of the Downtown Specific Plan with regard to non-conforming structures . 2 . The use is compatible with surrounding commercial development in the downtown core area. 3 . The proposed use meets the intent of Downtown Specific Plan District 5 by promoting a vital and interesting Main Street, compatible with the visitor serving uses along Pacific Coast Highway. 4 . The proposed use will not be detrimental to the general health, welfare or safety of persons in the vicinity, not injurious to the value of property or improvements in the vicinity. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO, 90-43 : 1. The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated September 13, 1990 shall be the conceptually approved layout with the following modifications : a. The facade shall be in compliance with Exhibit A dated September 18, 1990 and attached herein. b. A composite material roof shall replace the proposed galvanized roof. c. Windows shall be incorporated in the park side elevation of the building, unless precluded by the Uniform Building Code. 2 . Prior to submittal for building permits, the applicant/owner shall complete the following: a. Floor plans shall depict natural gas stubbed in at the locations of cooking facilities, water heaters, and central heating units; and low-volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets. b. If foil-type insulation is to be used, a fire retardant type shall be installed as approved by the Building Department and indicated on the floor plans . c. If outdoor lighting is included, gas lighting may be used. All outside lighting shall be directed to prevent "spillage" onto adjacent properties and shall be noted on the site plan and elevations . f. All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid. 3 . Fire Department Requirements are as follows : a. The applicant shall meet all applicable local, State and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards. 4 . The development shall comply with all. applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department. 5 . All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material, shall be disposed of at an off-site facility equipped to handle them. 6 . Construction shall be limited to Monday - Saturday 7: 00 AM to 8 : 00 PM. Construction shall be prohibited Sundays and Federal holidays. 7. This conditional use permit does not authorize live entertainment. Any request for live entertainment shall be reviewed as a separate conditional use permit by the Planning Commission. (7569d) r ue in 13-19 217 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH Speculum 015-17P "r 7J I ' 7 b. ( Maio ram^ .'u•-:� .. �...vsrrars.,.^.e=ty_ �.y�.-��3��!��F+..,✓'�,?�..='��ir"lv;'.�a.i..t��•_'-::iC mC'b I, / f�7 !1 7 Me W Fa. i I David M. Lautner 1.6932 Pacific Coast Highway #1ol Huntington, Beach, CA. 92649 (714) 279-1155 work i (213) 592-2401 home October 22, 1990 Laura Phillips city of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, Ca. 92648 I Dear Laura, I I am trying to !open a small restaurant pub at 21.7 Main Street in Huntington Beach. The Conditional Use Permit, #90-43 that I applied for concerning this business was recommended by staff and approved by the Planning Commission by a vote of 6 to 1 in favor on 9-18-90. I understand this decision is now being appealed by Councilman Don iMcAllister. I hope this letter will clear up any concerns you or the Council Members might have concerning this business. I have heard s9me concerns., that my new establishment will not be a restaurant asl I have stated but just a bar. I can assure you that this is the fabthest from my intent. We hope to serve excellent food at this establishment. Please note from the attached menu that we will be preparing soups, salads, sandwiches and have an extensive oystir bar, in our kitchen. We will have a BBQ in the patio which allows us to prepare several charbroiled entrees and I have made an greement to have daily specials catered in from Jc McLins on Beac Boulevard. The kitchen i small due to the limited square footage of the building and Health Department requirements for a restaurant, such as; I 1. 24 linear feet of 3 tier shelving in an enclosed storeroom. 2. A janitors loset. 3. A dishwashi g sink. 4. An employee change room. 5. 2 handicapp d bathrooms. Much time was spent with Steve Hitchcock at NEo Enterprises, ( a restaurant design company in Huntington Beach that I contracted to do the design and layout of this space) in order to make it functional and; efficient, while meeting Health Department requirements for a restaurant. I have gone back to Neo since the Planning Commis ions decision was appealed and revised the plans in order to add. approximately 20 more square feet to the kitchen area, (the revised plans have been submitted to the council) . I also consulted 2 experienced chefs on this layout, who concurred with it's functionality. These plans have been accepted by the Alcohol Beverage Control in Santa Ana for an on sale beer and* wine eating establishment license. I havelagreed with ABC investigator Jack Viviano to the following conditions on this license to insure that this will not be just a bar. 1. Beer and wine sales will not exceed food sales. 2 . Hours will be loam to Midnight, Monday through Thursday and loam to dam Friday and Saturday. 3 . There will b no pool tables or pinball machines. I have also pres nted my plans and discussed them with Investigator Jeff Nelson, who handles ABC affairs for the Huntington Beach Police Department. He also accepted these plans if the ABC conditions are met, along with the following; the wrought iron patio fence is raised to 51' and there is an employee in the patio when beer or wiiie is being served. I intend to abide by these conditions which should insure to the people of Huntington Beach that my establishment will not be a bar but a restaurant pub which has been my original intent; a small, comfortable, fun place, with a lot of wood, local art and sunlight where people car, relax and enjoy good food with a glass of beer or wine. I live in Huntington Beach and I am a local entrepreneur with a goad track recotd. I would appreciate the opportunity to be given a chance to do; business in our newly developed downtown area. Please contact. rie if you have any questions and thank you very much for your consid ration. Sincerely, David M. Lautnex I _1Ii-3—CLn- - I t • A n AV P n 1 _-- VGI L3 7b 11 : 14 DYNRLEKTRIX - _ P.04 ' WE LO' g BOAJKp i 217 Marx Suet i i I HwtaWon i FR LIE Q. Oysters on the Ha!f Shef! 6.95 The Bar Steak 8.95 Clams on the Nalf Shell 6.95 served with .'arch Beans and Salad Clams steamed in 'Wine 795 The Bar Burger 4.95 One Third Pound Charbroiled Patty served Mussels steamed in Wine 8.95 on a ,Sesame Seed Bute with Ranch Beans and Salad 5mo4d Fish Platter 595 Smok;d A(bacor served with OLT s Chicl(gn Breast Sandwich 4.95 Water Crac4rs tr' Cream Cheese Boneless Breast Charbroiled served on Sesame Seed Bun with Ranch Beans and Shrimp Coct4,d 6.95 . Sald Q your own or let us do it I SOQIPS &SIDS ,�rfL`JII!D`WICX ".S Boston Clam Chowder Cup 1.95I Bow[ 2.95 ?Tuna-Ti$A 3.95 Fresh Albacore with Lettuce served on Soup of the Daly Cup 1.95 Bow[ 2.95 your choice of Bread or a French R;ff .'Roast Beef 3.95 Caesar Salad 3 95 Thinty steed Beef and Aged Swiss Cheese with Fresh Lettuce and Tmaw served on S6r*y Salad 4.95 your choice of Bread or a French ?toff Mked Greens Tossed with B Cheese Dressing of Topped with S&&* S&ed Breast of Tur4y 3.95 Boneless Breast of Turkey with Fresh Bar Salad 2.95 Lettuce, Tomato and Avocado served with your cfwire of Bread or a French doll Mixed Greens with Your choice] fD,.eming Sfoneyba4d Nam 3.95 Q unfy Sliced HoneybakFd Blame and Aged Swiss Chees with Fresh Lettuce and Tomato - served on your choice of Bread or a French Rol[ Pfease Checkthe Chalgfoard fqI r a List AffSandwiches are served with your cfsoire of of Today's Spedalties and Appktisers a small Bat'Salad or a Cup of Soup Catered from yC 9II LW Statement of Facts Subject: STOPWORK NOTICES AT Date: October 22, 1990 217 MAIN STREET Owner: Douglas Langevin 8196 Pawtucket Drive Huntington Beach, ��..CA�� Prepared by: Michael L. Gregory // A. Arnie Samardich Land Use Technician Land Use Technician On August 22, 1990, a Request for Investigation was received by the Land Use Section for demolition without permits . Michael L. Gregory was instructed that the removal of the existing exterior walls at the subject property required a demo permit. He reviewed the Building Department records and no Demolition Permit had been issued for this site. He was then instructed to stop the job and request that the owner obtain all applicable permits . On August 24, 1990 an inspection was conducted at the subject property by Arnold Samardich and Michael L. Gregory. This inspection revealed a one story wood structure with a new (partially completed) 2 X 4 wood stud frame, supporting the existing roof. This frame was replacing the support that was provided by the original exterior walls that had been removed and was being installed on both sides of the structure. At this time a Stop Work Notice was posted on site and we requested that the- owner do no more work until he had authorization from the Department of Community Development to continue. On September 18, 1990 The Land Use Staff was informed that the owner had obtained all required permits and that it was legal for him to resume work. On September 25, 1990, Mike Strange requested that Arnie Samardich issue another Stop Work Notice to the Owner at the subject property. The order stated that work must stop until an appeal of this project is resolved. The Stop Work Notice was issued by Arnie Samardich at approximately 1:30 p.m. on September 25, 1990 . (7487d) 0 CITY��VED MAYOR ERK Wes Bannister City of Huyltly- : n Beach MAYOR PRO TEMP.ORE Tom Mays ��, P. O. BOX 190 2000 MA EET8 CALIFORNIA 92648 v 'Q� COUNCILMEMBERS John Erskine Peter Green Don MacAllister Jiro Silva Grace Winchell 9/20/90 City of Huntington Beach Attn: City Clerk Connie Brockway P.O. Box 190 2000 Main St. Huntington Beach, CA 92648 SUBJECT- Appeal of Conditional Use Permit (CUP) *90-43/Appeal of Planning Commission's Design regarding Appeal of Design Review Board Action Dear City Clerk Brockway: 1 hereby appeal the Planning Commission's action to approve Conditional Use Permit (CUP) *90-.43 and their decision to overturn the Design Review Board's action regarding the exterior building design of the commercial structure located at 217 Main St. The basis of my appeal is: 1. The need to clarify the kind of use proposed and the amount of area devoted to restaurant use versus the sale of alcoholic beverages; 2. The applicant's proposed building design is inconsistent with Downtown Design Guidelines also, the amount of work being done to the exterior of this building reflects a reproduction of the existing building, not restoration; and 3. Approval of this request is a significant policy decision that should be made by the City Council. Yo , Cou cilman Don MacAllister DMA/pdn TELEPHONE (714) 536-5553 huntington beach department of community development 5rA f f REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Community Development DATE: September 18 , 1990 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-43/APPEAL OF DESIGN REVIEW (CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT) ACTION APPLICANT: David M. Lautner DATE ACCEPTED: P.O. Box 958 August 15, 1990 Sunset Beach, CA 90742 MANDATORY PROCESSING DATE: APPELLANT: Douglas M. Langevin October 15, 1990 PROPERTY Douglas M. Langevin ZONE: Downtown -Specific Plan OWNER: 8196 Pawtucket Drive District 5 (Mixed Use) Huntington Beach, CA 92648 GENERAL PLAN: Mixed Use- REOUEST: 1) To permit sale of Commercial/Office/Residential alcoholic beverages at a new restaurant/pub in an EXISTING USE: Christian existing rehabilitated Meeting Hall building . 2) Appeal of the Design Review Board' s LOCATION: 217 Main Street denial of proposed building (west side, approximately elevations, colors, and 125 ' south of Olive Avenue) materials for the building rehabilitation. ACREAGE: 2937 . 5 square feet 1. 0 SUGGESTED ACTION: 1) Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 90-43 with findings and suggested conditions of approval; 2) Deny the appeal of the Design Review Board' s action with findings . 2 . 0 GENERAL INFORMATION: Conditional Use Permit No. 90-43 is a request to permit the sale of alcoholic beverages at a new restaurant/pub pursuant to Section 9636 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance code. The applicant wishes to rehabilitate an existing building on the west 200 block of Main Street for use as a_ neighborhood pub.. The appeal concerns the Design Review Board ' s action on the building owner ' s request to use certain types and colors of materials for the exterior building rehabilitation. The owner wishes to use colors and materials which were historically part of the building. The Design Review Board felt that the proposal did not conform with the Downtown Design Guidelines and was not k ftble with the surrounding area . mum A-FM-23C t3 -2 3 . 0 SURROUNDING LAND USE, ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATIONS: North, South, East and West of Subject Property: GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Mixed Use-Commercial/Office/Residential ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan District 5 (Mixed-Use) LAND USE: Mixed Commercial 4 . 0 ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The proposed project is categorically exempt pursuant to Class 15301, Section 1 of the California Environmental Quality Act . 5 . 0 COASTAL STATUS: This project is in a non-appealable portion of the Coastal Zone. It is exempt from Coastal Development Permit processing pursuant to Section 969 . 5 . 3 . 1 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, which exempts improvements to existing structures . 6_. 0 REDEVELOPMENT STATUS: This project is located in the Main-Pier Redevelopment Project Area. 7 . 0 SPECIFIC PLAN: The project is within the Downtown Specific Plan boundaries . 8 . 0 SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE: Not applicable. 9 . 0 DESIGN REVIEW REVIEW BOARD: Design Review Board Action: The Design Review Board, on August 30, 1990, denied the building owner ' s proposal for the exterior rehabilitation of the structure. The owner is attempting to complete an historic rehabilitation to the standards of the department of the Interior, in order to qualify the building for placement on the National Register of Historic Places; and to obtain Federal Tax credits for historic rehabilitation. The owner proposed to recreate the original building form, colors, and materials used when the building was constructed in 1904 . The following buildings elements were proposed: 1) Roofing material to be natural finish, galvanized steel corrugated roofing . 2) Rear building elevation to consist of painted wood boards,• and doors composed of six fixed glass panels . 3) Side elevation facing City mini-park to be natural redwood vertical board. Staff Report - 9/5/90 -2- (6975d) 4) Setback area between building and City mini-park to be natural redwood vertical board. 5) Setback area between building and City mini-park to be paved with bricks . 6) Front building elevation to be composed of painted wood board and trim, fixed glass windows, and main door. The Design Review Board denied the request by a vote of 3 to 0 based on the following concerns : 1) Due to the effort the City is making to upgrade the downtown area, the proposed materials, particularly the metal corrugated roof, are not compatible with materials used on adjacent buildings . 2) The three elevations exposed to public view (front, side, rear) are not compatible with the structure across Main Street or with the proposed structure across from the mini-park. 3) It is not appropriate to reproduce the original building at this location. 4) The proposal does not comply with the downtown Design Guidelines . 5) Changes to the building materials and architectural features may render the building more compatible with the surrounding area . For example, a' heavier cornice, maintain transoms, incorporate doors and/or windows facing the mini-park, use stucco and fireproofed wood shingles, or painted metal roof . Discussion• The structure is located on a block designated by the City and Redevelopment Agency for potential historic rehabilitation. This is further discussed in the Analysis Section, below. Environmental Impact Report No. 89-4 covered all rebuilds and expansions of more than 10% on this block, and although not applicable to this proposal, some general guidelines for buildings on this block may be found in the document ' s standard City policies and Mitigation Measures Section (Environmental Impact Report No. 89-4, Sections 6 .4 and 6 . 5) . Among the policies and measures relating to building design is the following: The Design Review Board shall ensure that all architecture within the project incorporated elements of the Downtown Design Guidelines and also incorporate elements of the historic period of the structure under review, prior to approval of building permits . Staff Report - 9/5/90 -3 � (6975d) The Downtown Design Guidelines call for a contemporary Mediterranean style of architecture. Uniform materials and consistent style must be evident in all exterior elevations, and the dominant exterior material of a building is to be either stucco, smooth block, granite, or marble. A harmonious color scheme is also suggested. Roof materials most indicative of Mediterranean architecture include clay or concrete, shingle tile, copper, and painted metal . Window should . be multipaned. The Design Review Board, since November, 1989 , has reviewed a number of proposals on the subject block which involved rehabilitation of historic buildings . The goal of combining historic features of the period with Mediterranean features compatible with newer, surrounding development has been achieved primarly by the use of materials suggested by the Design Guidelines, and incorporation of historical architectural elements . Such elements may include multipaned windows and transoms, certain types of cornice treatments, certain types and locations of entry doors, use of awnings, etc. The Design Review Board has generally concluded that such combination of elements can result in an attractive structure that is successfully integrated with surrounding downtown development. Staff supports this conclusion. 10 . 0 ISSUES AND ANALYSIS: Proiect Description - Restaurant/Pub: The applicant proposes a neighborhood restuarant/pub serving food, beer and wine. The one-story, approximately 1000 square foot building will be rehabilitated with an additional eight (8) square feet added at the rear of the building 'for a janitor ' s closet . The floor plan includes a main room with a bar and bar stools, and several tables with chairs . A storage room, dressing room, and restrooms are also proposed. Hours of operation will be 11: 00 AM to 2 :00 AM daily. The rear of the lot will be improved with textured paving and a wrought iron fence along the property line adjacent to the- public passageway to the alley. Two employee parking spaces (4 tandem spaces) are provided at the rear of the building with access from the alley. The site is currently non-conforming with regard to on-site parking and front yard setback. This type of use would normally require 11 parking spaces, and a new structure on this block would be required to dedicate 2 . 5 feet along the alley, and an additional four (4-) feet on Main Street for right-of-way purposes . The existing structure is situated at the existing front property line. Relationship to Rehabilitation Block: The building site is on the block designated by the City and Redevelopment Agency for potential historic rehabilitation. On November 6, 1989 , the City Council approved Environmental Impact Report 89-4, Conditional Use Permit No. 89-1, and Coastal Development No . 89-1, which authorized property owners on this block to enlarge or rebuild structures in accordance with the Downtown Specific Plan, subject to approval by the Design Review Board. The owners of Staff Report - 9/5/90 -4- (6975d) property in this block also had an option to enter into an Owner Participation Agreement with the Redevelopment Agency, wherein facade improvement funds were granted in return for upgrading structures to comply with City building and seismic codes, and continued property maintenance. As an incentive to participate in the facade improvement program, property owners who added square footage over the existing amount were credited the amount of parking required for the existing square footage (paid for by the Redevelopment Agency) . Owners could also purchase in-lieu parking credits for additional square footage at a reduced rate. The owner of this property elected not to participate in the Agency-sponsored facade rehabilitation program. Therefore, the proposal is subject to the standard provisions contained in the Downtown Specific Plan for non-conforming uses and structures (Section 4 . 2 . 01(d) ) . The code requires that non-conforming uses or structures meet all provisions of the code when floor area is expanded by more than 10%, when height is increased, or when permitted density is increased. None of these conditions apply, however, as the existing building will be enlarged only by eight (8) square feet, no additional height is proposed, and the intensity of use will not increase. The code provisions for non-conforming structures also require that a changed use comply with off-street parking provisions when the new use will increase the parking requirement over the existing use. In this case, the applicant is changing from a meeting room use with a parking requirement of 1 space per 35 square feet, to a less intense use as a restaurant/pub with a parking requirement of 1 space per 100 square feet . Therefore, no additional off-street parking is required. Compatibility of use with Surrounding Area : The proposed use is in conformance with the General Plan Land Use designation and Zoning of Mixed Use-Commercial/Office/Residential . Other uses on this block are primarily retail and office. Across Main Street will be new retail stores and the city parking structure. No live entertainment is proposed at the pub. Any such future request would require a public hearing before the Planning Commission. 11. 0 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission 1) Approve Conditional Use Permit No. 90-43 with the following findings and conditions of approval; and 2) Deny the Appeal of the Design Review Board' s action, with the following findings: FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-43 : 1. The proposed use conforms with the General Plan Land Use designation of Mixed Commercial/Office and complies with the provisions of the Downtown Specific Plan with regard to non-conforming structures . Staff Report - 9/5/90 -5- (6975d) 2 . The use is compatible with surrounding commercial development in the downtown core area . 3 . The proposed use meets the intent of Downtown Specific Plan District 5 by promoting a vital and interesting Main Street, compatible with the visitor serving uses along Pacific Coast Highway. 4 . The proposed use will not be detrimental to the general health, welfare or safety of persons in the vicinity, not injurious to the value of property or improvements in the vicinity. FINDINGS FOR DENIAL - APPEAL: 1 . The owner ' s proposal does not satisfactorly incorporate elements of the Downtown Design Guidelines with regard to building and roofing materials . 2 . The proposal is not compatible with newer, contemporary Mediterranean buildings, or with previously approved historical rehabilitations on the block, which combine Mediterranean and historical building features . CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - .CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-43 : 1 . The site plan, floor plans, and elevations received and dated September 13, 1990 shall be the conceptually approved layout. 2 . Prior to submittal for building permits, the applicant/owner shall complete the following : a . Floor plans shall depict natural gas stubbed in at the locations of cooking facilities, water heaters, and central heating units; and low-volume heads shall be used on all spigots and water faucets . b. If foil-type insulation is to be used, a fire retardant type shall be installed as approved by the Building Department and indicated on the floor plans . c. The Design Review Board shall review and approve the final exterior elevations, colors, and building materials . d. Elevations shall depict colors and building materials as approved by the Design Review Board. e. If outdoor lighting is included, high-pressure sodium vapor lamps or similar energy savings lamps shall be used. All _ _ outside lighting shall be directed to prevent "spillage" onto adjacent properties and shall be noted on the site plan and elevations . f . All applicable Public Works fees shall be paid. Staff Report - 9/5/90 -6- (6975d) 3 . Fire Department Requirements are as follows : a . The applicant shall meet all applicable local, State and Federal Fire Codes, Ordinances, and standards . 4 . The development shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Ordinance Code, Building Division, and Fire Department . 5 . All building spoils, such as unusable lumber, wire, pipe, and other surplus or unusable material, shall be. disposed of at an off-site facility equipped to handle them. 6 . Construction shall be limited to Monday - Saturday 7: 00 AM to 8 : 00 PM. Construction shall be prohibited Sundays and Federal holidays . 7. This conditional use permit does not authorize live entertainment . Any request for live entertainment shall be reviewed as a separate conditional use permit by the Planning Commission. 12 . 0 ALTERNATIVE ACTION: The Planning Commission may 1) Deny Conditional Use Permit No . 90-43 with findings; 2) Grant the appeal of the Design Review Board' s action with findings . ATTACHMENTS: 1. Area map 2 . Narrative 3 . Site plans, elevations, and floor plans dated September 13, 1990 4 . Draft Design Review-Board Minutes dated August 30, 1990 5 . Letter of Appeal dated September 7, 1990 HS:LP:kjl Staff Report - 9/5/90 -7- � (6975d) CF-C _v RA—FORT OLDTflLE) PECIFIC(DISTRI AVE. nc w DM H—FP21100 -AVE . j r r� o oI c J; 'O A O \'� —avE - -FP2 V�`•+� 4 IFIC -i f - I�• Rz ro-cz R2-PD-CZ-FP2 O o� - IIrrI ro FPz i�l•fmIg' °tCSd. a 'R2-PD-CZ•N .yT \ ry \., p' a lfnll naRF. AVE C O N U °/ST�^/�/C. :R2-PD-CZ-FP2 ':Q:R2-PD-LZ-FP2 S a \ 1 R2-PD-CZ-FP2 / tis e oC oe�p` /6 Lzao G^ ur ;i::.' R2-PD-CZ-FP2 1 DOWN TDWN S..EC�IFIC PCt�N. -01 ' E` in�-n��• :.. R2-PD-CZ-FP 2DISTPIICT#8, Al \ �9 �• 'yK.-.r-_-._::�;..ag`:. :gSo4pyctsr-.PD.. -,.CtaZ.=_ F,I P2 yt' �41 , S° 2 Sp O/o OO O/ST /0 _ r r;s �;' R2 PD CZ FP2 R2 PD C2_�,2 �' :x� MH SO CZ-FP2 :.. / p ) .p � R2-PD-CZ-FP2''•°'igvo.Y°' ,1`v(/�%/i•-0 DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN-0 \•�� ! T �-er l O DIST T 1t 8b-FP2 v. T O , 041 STq/ CUP90-43 .,l - '. ' HUNTINGTON BEACH �,,1 .`',.�4 HUNTtNGTON BEACH PLANNING DIVISION David M. Lautner P.O. Box 958 Sunset Beach, CA 90742 (714 ) 279-1155 work (213 ) 592-2401 home July 20, 1990 City of Huntington Beach Department of Community Development 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach CA. 92648 Dear Ladies/Gentlemen I own Mothers Tavern in Sunset Beach and I am interested in expanding to a second location in the downtown Huntington Beach area. I am also a Project Engineer for a small engineering firm. This letter is to briefly describe to you my plan for opening a second establishment at a downtown Huntington Beach location. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, David -M. Lautner David M. Lautner P.O. Box 958 Sunset Beach, CA 90742 (714 ) 279-1155 work (213 ) 592-2401 .home July 20, 1990 City of Huntington Beach Department of Community Development 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach CA. 92648 Dear Ladies/Gentlemen The original Mother's is a pub that was established in Sunset Beach in 1953. I have managed Mother's since 1986, I then purchased it from the previous owner in 1988. Since I have owned the business I have made marketing, management, maintenance and cliental improvements that have increased profit and reduced operating expenses . At the same time my priority has always been to keep it a relaxing and fun place to be. Mother's has a good rapport with The Orange County Sheriff, the Alcohol Board of California, The Orange County Health Department and our neighbors. I expect the business to continue to grow and improve under my leadership. I have enclosed articles about Mother's as seen in the Long Beach Press Telegram, Sunday, May 14, 1989 and also the Los Angeles Times, Saturday, June 24, 1989. With the cleaning up and redevelopment of downtown Huntington Beach, I foresee a new market of young professional people moving into the area. To target that market I am proposing a small fun place with good food, and a variety of select beer and-wines . A place where these people can relax and enjoy themselves . I am aware that there are some food and drink establishments in downtown Huntington Beach now. However, from first hand research I feel these places can not cater to this new cliental. I am also aware that the new stores and theaters associated with the downtown redevelopment project will help anchor that cliental. I am i proposing a casual, comfortable decor, with a lot of wood, local art and sunlight. I have made a tentative lease agreement with a property owner to lease a location at 217 Main Street in Huntington Beach. This is the oldest building in the downtown area, (built in 1904 by Thomas Talbert) . It is located in the heart of the redevelopment but it will be saved and the exterior restored as part of my plan. This is an ideal location for the business I am proposing, and the lease is very favorable. I would appreciate the opportunity to do business in the newly developed downtown Huntington Beach area. I am a local entrepreneur with a good track record looking to expand my business and I have the project management experience from my engineering background required to see this plan through. Please contact me at your convenience with any further questions or if any additional information is needed. Thank you again for your consideration. Sincerely, David M. Lautner 51 B . CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 89-1 : APPLICANT: Dave Lautner REQUEST: Review rehabilitation elevation LOCATION: 217 Main Street ACTION: Request denied Laura Phillips , staff planner, informed the Board that the proposal is ready for final review by the Design Review Board . All questions related to the zoning code had been answered and the applicant would need the approval of the elevations in order to get a complete set of drawings approved. Doug Langevin; building owner, was present to discuss the project . Mr . Langevin explained that he is trying to do a historical building restoration with the proposed material . He will try to get the building included into the National Register of Historical Buildings and in order to achieve such purpose he needs to follow the Secretary of the Interior guidelines for restoration of historical buildings . The order of discussion was as .follows : 1) Roof material - galvanized steel corrugated roofing as his natural finish. 2) Building rear elevation, painted wood boards and doors composed of six fixed glass panels . 3) Building elevation facing the mini-park is proposed. to be composed of a natural redwood vertical board wall and natural galvanized corrugated steel . 4) Finish of setback area - between the building and the mini-park is proposed to be paved with bricks . 5) Front building elevation is proposed to be composed of a combination of fixed glass windows and the main door and painted wood boards and trims . Concerns expressed by Board Member Kirkland: Due to the effort that the City is making to upgrade the downtown area he feels the proposed material especially the metal corrugated roof proposed are not compatible with those being used on the adjacent buildings . r aF a .. _ -3� _ - - - - 3- Ott `s•�x.F c f - _ Concerns expressed by Board Member Higgins : He feels that it is not appropriate to reproduce the original. building at this location. It will be not compatible with the buildings being erected across the street and across the mini-park. The proposed restoration will be exposed at the front and side.. elevation to direct view from Main Street . The rear elevation will be exposed to direct view of proposed improved alley area connecting the existing mini-park with Fifth . Street . Concerns expressed by Board Member Adams : When he analyzed the proposal he could not find its compatibility with other buildings in the rest of the block. Also, he could not find proper application of the Downtown Design Guidelines . Some changes on the elevations are needed to accommodate such guidelines . Mr . Langevin expressed his disagreement with Board Member ' s comments . The change of material will eliminate the historical significance of the building . KIRK KIRKLAND MADE A MOTION TO DENY THE PROPOSAL AS PER THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1) THE PROJECT AS PROPOSED FAILS TO COMPLY WITH THE GUIDELINES ESTABLISHED BY THE APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 89-1. 2) THE BOARD SHOULD BE MORE INTERESTED IN OBTAINING A PROJECT COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING BUILDINGS IN APPEARANCE AND BUILDING MATERIALS. FRANK HIGGINS SECONDED THE MOTION AND IT PASSED. BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: Kirkland, Higgins, Adams NOES: None ABSENT: Daryl Smith ABSTAIN• None Design Review Board -2- (7048d) 1 ,v«.r Do•uGt-A M E� IVED __:.C_7y_C SEP n ? 1990 ..` DEPARTMENT OF ---------------.____ OQD_C����-5 -.-.-------COMM UNITY-DEYELOPMENT---------- ------- PLANNING DIVISION TOO_- 2 a_v_i w_�6AQ D t)L-C ITIOA) — -- .-.. - - ---" ----- - -------------- -------- -- o k)- - /v� Z--A_K__A.7T MP Il_N�x O _... - ,AR a.�tl-©N_Y- -3U_l��n?G 1 a--�r�-��'r�y- �ltiG_Q?_.v�2­._�.AT�ti.A�_... 2esT2._c�. __ �s.��nr_c_-- .................... _._ 71.Aw _co�o2S'� - -- - o_(.?.___�►S1�NG�---_���2_ 11 S_�'?_ ASo .._�_ w occ�b L ice77 .-- - -- TrY _P�Aa14U_rtJG'__C0 MN��s1'rQ_N_.2-i1�� c�J/_D�cl..__ R E_vIF_ J P- -A �--A-----M`r �'��- ��C,9`7io� SpT-/8Tr� l�_;.__.. .. ----------------- --- --- -- ---- - ---- - - ------- - - -- 09/20/90 16: 17 SEEVID INC P.01• MAYOR J T ity • Wt:3 Ritrrniraur my MAYOR PRU TE!1MPORE = ti P. O. BOX 190 • 2000 MAIN STREET • CALIFORNIA 92648 COUNCIL141ENIBERS 'av1' John EiOcine Peter Green Don MacAllizAer un ilvn raccs 1Ninch01 9/20/90 �..� - ,• i r" City of Huntington Beach p � Attn_ City Clerk Connie Broekw6y P.O. box 190 200'0 Main St. Huntington beach, CA 9264E SUBJECT: Appeal of Conditional Use Permit (CUP) -*90-43/Appeal of Planning Cotrimission's Design regarding Appeai of Design Review Board Actiori Dear City Clerk Brockway: i hereby appeal the Planning Commission's action to approve.Conditiohal Use Permit ILCUP) 190-43 and their decision to overturn the Design Review Board's action regarding the exterior building design of the commercial structure located at 217 Main St- The basis of my appeal is: I. The need to clarify the kind of use proposed and the amount of area devoted to restaurant use versus the sale of alcoholic beverages; 2. The applicant's proposed building design is inconsistent with Downtown Design Guidelines also, the amount of work being done to the exterior of this building reflects a reproduction of the existing building, not restoration; and 3. approval of this request is a significant policy decision that should be - mode by the City Council. CouAcilman Don'MacAlIistar - DMA/pdn TELEPHONE (714) 536.5553 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK October 26, 1990 Douglas M. Langevin 8196 Pawtucket Drive Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Pursuant to your request dated October 25, 1990 is a certified copy of the appeal filed by Councilman MacAllister to the Planning Commission action on Conditional Use Permit No. 90-43, time-stamped on September 20, 1990. Councilman MacAllister has filed no further communications other than the original (not faxed) appeal filed on September 21, 1990. The Community Development Department transmitted the legal notice to the Office of the City Clerk for the public hearing on October 22, 1990. Sincerely, Connie Brockway, CMC City Clerk CB:ln 899I cc: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Gail Hutton, City Attorney Councilman Don MacAllister (Telephone: 714-536-5227) 7� CRECEIVED MAYOR 1 City of Hinatil '�cL n Beach Wes Barinister J y , v '•' !' MAYOR PRO TEMPORE ..•N. t;�LIF Tom Mays �j P. O. BOX 190 • 2000 MA EE-8 �9• , QCALIFORNIA 92648 COUNCILMEMBERS 9U John Erskine Peter Green Don MacAllister Jim Silva Grace Winchell 9/20/90 City of Huntington Beach Attn: City Clerk Connie Brockway P.O. Box 190 2000 Main St. Huntington Beach, CA 92648 SUBJECT: Appeal of Conditional Use Permit (CUP) *90-43IAppeal of Planning Commission's Design regarding Appeal of Design Review Board Action Dear City Clerk Brockway: I hereby appeal the Planning Commission's action to approve Conditional Use Permit (CUP) *90-43 and their decision to overturn the Design Review Board's action regarding the exterior building design of the commercial structure located at 217 Main St. The basis of my appeal is: 1. The need to clarify the kind of use proposed and the amount of area devoted to restaurant use versus the sale of alcoholic beverages; 2. The applicant's proposed building design is inconsistent with Downtown Design Guidelines also, the amount of work being done to the exterior of this building reflects a reproduction of the existing building, not restoration; and 3. Approval of this request is a significant policy decision that should be made by the City Council. Vo , Cou ci 1 man Don MacAllister DMAlpdn TELEPHONE (714) 536-5553 �o tcGG,A�M • LANCE VI 14 8!Q(o P,4W c cct�t�tl' .D2 i ('7 l q '?COola-514 , Gt`rY CL 2K Co6- ,jI 7 2oClCWAY l u�T. aeN c,i y xs 0 � c� p,0. box �000 M A!N Z , I WouLS7 Llttr: ?b o A(N C��I rr�'r�N ,6 I C=PJ(,-ILA-AN /y1A_-e_A-L)=,/�z,,>'S_—�1_fPEA1, oFr ��g PLRu���r 'o/YINI/SS'ip�t/ loN_PAM ' A�cG. 3O C)O M—Y PQ)8 2l 4�� I'7 MAIAJ S!: i C2E_A-R— Lwo CoP��,-�N -z t,�duc.b l��lr F'•�/ k o _ IOC sTANFAl�_4zp Y FIVE ti l�• g. C��Q 'orElc-E �- gzoTN 4'3.2 P.M_ d?oKAx fro M �14 . So D D `Cyu, 1 114AAJ MAC' ALUS?gA r_,4`i' AaUY �,��� wP,T� 1 -- 4 1T_,D-2 ����►U�WA, 7-i-l� �LS�IO� i (rz -Y' C30��a`� :R�Qu,20A IN �i�iflloAl _ I g 9 4 .Ad'1(oAJ 01r APP� - Fr,u L-Ly (!: N w�Ia`JPLA 1 C�C�k'X's of�(?��� AN):) CAN Z_g�5'o IyA VL GX2Trr r�1� OF= 7ff AT A-e l,ok( � —tl&AJ LNG d' U (-a At, Lr = > 06, d 51130 _ 'dtlY�`M3�y8 yL'?9Nt1Nt}M Jo Clio k�i3'1�-k11J — j Q3t73�3?I Iolas NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING APPEAL- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-43 (Request to permit a restaurant/pub in an existing, rehabilitated structure, in conjunction with an appeal of the Planning Commission' s action regarding the exterior of the building) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold. a public hearing in the Council Chamber at the Huntington Beach Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. DATE/TIME: Monday, November 5, 1990, 7 : 00 PM APPLICATION_ NUMBER: Conditional Use Permit No. 90-43/Appeal of Design Review Board Action APPLICANT: David M. Lautner/Douglas M. Langevin i APPELLANT: Councilman MacAllister LOCATION: 217 Main Street (west side, approximately 125 feet south of Olive Avenue) ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan District 5 (Mixed Use) REQUEST: Appeal of the Planning Commission' s approval of a request to permit a restaurant/pub in an existing, rehabilitated structure. The appeal also concerns the Planning Commission' s action on the proposed building materials and elevations . ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15301, Class 1 of the California Environmental Quality Act . COASTAL STATUS: Exempt pursuant to Section 969 . 5 . 3 . 1 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the Community Development Department, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the public. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit evidence for or against the .application j as outlined above. If there are any further questions °please call Laura Phillips, Associate Planner at 536-5271 . Connie Brockway City Clerk (7476d) i RECEIVED CITY CLERK CITY OF HUNTING i"N BE-ACII.CALIF. September 28, 1990 SEP ZO 4 39 PM Q9 Douglas M. Langevin 8196 Pawtucket Drive Huntington Beach, Ca 92646 City of Huntington Beach Atten: Connie Brockway, City Clerk Huntington Beach, Ca 92648 SUBJECT : Councilman MacAll.ister' s Appeal of CUP #90-43/ Appeal of Planning Commiss.icn"s Design Zegarding appeal of ?.esign ^ev=e%-. Board. action, dated, September 20, 1D90. Dear City Clerk Brockway: I question the validity of Councilman 'AacAllister ' s appeal for the following reasons: T . CI FLICT 0T TI.-TF,SST A. Does this appeal use his official position to influence a governmental decision? Definately. B. Will the resulting decision affect his economic interest? Absolutely. C. Will the effect on his economic .interest be 'a material one? Currently, the Redevelopment Agency rents to Huntington National Bank, (for whom Councilman Yackllister sits on the 3oard of Directors , and of whom Councilman 7acA11.ister ovins a substantial amount of stock..) a building in the third block of 'Hain St. , Westside , for use as a bank office. The Redevelopment agency .is negotiating a D.P.A. for devel- opment of the entire block as a single project as I write. This project will require the Huntington rational Bank_ leased building to be demolished and the bank to relocate. At this time, there is no property on ^main St. in the Business District ( 1st three blocks)for sale.. Additionally, with block consolidation projects ongoing or proposed for five of the six existing blocks , the only block where a lot less than full block size could concieveably be bought is the block in which the subject property is located (2nd block west--the "Demonstration Block". ) . page 2 - Letter from Langevin to City of HB,9-28-90 I have never concealed from anyone that 217 "lain :St. (the subject property) is my sole source of income. To delay or stop my project places me .in great financial risk. Huntington National 13ank could conc.ieveably benefit by my financial distress , either by forcing a new construction project or by land acquisition. Additionally, Huntington National Bank has a loan with the �edevelopment Agency on the former Terry' s Buick Agency site .in the downtown project area. I believe these two .issues to form a direct conflict of interest for councilman MacAllister. An effect of 1250. or more is sufficient. D. '.1lill the effect of this decision on his economic interest be distinguishable from the effect .it will have on the public generally? If Huntington rational Bank profits by council- man Niackllister' s decision, then it follows that Councilman MacAllister, himself, shall also, either by cash dividends. by stock appreciation, or by asset enhancement. This does not have to be certain to be foreseeable , and is therefore a conflict. See: Attorney General 's0pinion: 61 Ops Atty. Gen. 243 II. Appeal Directed to the Wrong Department The Towntown Specific plan--Revised ,Tan. , 1989 edition, under 4. 1 ADS?INSTRATIOV states : 114. 1 .05 Appeals Decisions by the director on non-zoning matters may be appealed to the City Administrator; Decisions on zoning matters may be appealed to the Planning Commission and City Council:" Also, Division 9, Article 985 (rev 3017-12/89) Design Review Board states : Appeals. Any-action of the Board May be Appealed o the anning Commission as provided in this code. (3017-12/89) " Since the subject of this appeal is an aesthetic matter, not a zoning one , it would appear that the appeal should be directed to the City Administrator, not the City Council. In addition, Article 985 of Division 9, does not provide for an appeal to the City Council, only to the Planning Commission, thus supplying further evidence to support this view. -page 3 - Letter from TJa.ngev.in to City of HE, 9-28-90 For the above reasons , T think that `an appeal to the City Council is inappropriate, and Councilman vacAll.ister should have directed his appeal to the City Adm.instrator within the ten day appeal period. Ms failure to do so seems to have invalidated his "Appeal of the Planning Commission' s Design regarding appeal of Design 'review Board action, " and his Conflict of Tnterest in the entire downtown_ Redevelcpment area would seem to invalidate this entire action of Appeal. Sincerely, Douglas M-.--langevin 714 960-5872 .J .`; t •i,. _ :, ,a ::�'<.. un�e r 2'r e�rt t)+' 2`t M;C T'�.'; y�,t� i `a?<•�3�.r t '.r:`kk` U��r. Ph ;l,J"'.. yit'4 t 1, .tit J, s cue , NTr36 ' J sr� :. S=. .r `'r�..t$,ti-vri�YJ f.Sri ,J,}. ri:i1'` v�at,r,!. i' �' � , 'J ,.r _ .• ,L. ,i :�i.;.s. , •+• 4,t• ,,,r. „it•"L: '�(r' 'itis fiT :�k / ^¢'s� �•F"I"u ) F"y'-�i..-:r: =g S f e t.,.dr i rL,r ie .. .. + ,. . ..'•. .• • >� J:,u a ^L 1•'',is + ,�+M1 y+M k .,.'1 + ..,. +�' t t:n, .. .,. j I ,a.,.,r ;�' n)Fi r�•1'fh. +.+N', t •q, t. 1 per.t,ptr, t ,r7 ,y,v�.�`{it. Lr� T�' �5� a". •y } �I�F,:C ';'1-;/„'' '�,•.^;.; .; .._... W ': .... -,..._.J F 4'' r..+: ("fT 1�, t 1�t �+� .•..t t�'i r'�I z% s 1 4 r� °'. 7 '��t,��� �t / J.c e u. <,i i rJ: .� .7,!:tj4s7,;s.,�. �,, A•t .'• m .l r 'YFr( 5 ^`..a.�. �,�, "�it:r;".' v'• ,� �� �r�lr",jn •S• , .J � �; �r' !! �s,l:: ".7 i, ,�� .�''i:rt xv rs. '.7 i,...• ���,: .rs',q.. 1 :,'i�•w• �a i •�•;_ C: ('•00„C.i� )-llol ,yf8 '4',A,;}3.., .,y; }}� k"1'Ir^ p wd'�Ett6R-s ,r 3 �'� t~. �>�:': a - /, t,+c:ai '.ilF:.�y' flr;ri:' �,�:<t.t ,Ir.t v„�K,• � sr,t....f:`•.�a 7 +�1 ,,:e. M a. 11 I' :t 1• '••j` 'r t + ,{. �a'i ,(.a S"-' -kit5.. z('.. .:r,.'^ 'u f, � }, ;a t•t f• 'r- •"r' r'.t.""'t.,�.r,•t. r�','/y v .ttf , i,, �•. e® 7 j ��iiyy •,t, 1' � .Qr:ar•.s.Y T •v: n t: _ ,-tici �'• S .A' :'tixT' r ;d ,. r� M,• S' ,�'�>• � ,i r.• �S' siS,'+„ ,� >r .; .'i7rX,:t`}� cf'G py��4 lei •xaL:, to ?� {.$,.+; ,�.. 1 `.:may r•. '� ri', r Ih f � 1'�:.•"•� P t .I",' \`a�:.■ I I i J` J t,'.i v t !L: 3',a�.S•. J M, %t iV'( ,.I''f .r� .,•Y 'q.�q �:S y .iii "�1 s •� � :, 1�: 1. ..�. r .,^6'. 7�.'d 03�Qi�•r A 1 r, � n„�,w )).q ';,' ..t' .t •!. :1:� .y.+.F 3 rL 1111(jjY� C ,1 .,:r ,Y. a., Y:y.;': '�-.i( 3 t,:. :•� i. c.,:t+-7F•�;;t+'. C� � "" 1 1: t� y ti: Z r .4 �r �.'!.: q II •:C.y'r+kyn.Y"�.yl .u+" 'f ti 4..F-n•'�1% Re rit ?,j;'r, :�{,• ~ il. Z �fil v;4. /�P I fn 'S , •��.r,.t,",tJ":+#•u ''�. .�.. r, t e-1 M1,.a r},�i.i:,->•'�' '+ `'WF.W:a. },�5• } # rll 1 :y �, 2',�9 t' ,v.. j i .a, au-r.r}4,.. ::.y,. '.c. '�i r : :Y k n. 3 .s, n �,,,,a, , •t.•• Ji. ,F-a:r..tc.. i.W Ls'v'�F.• 1 t �,'�•,{�.{.� FI' , �j.®®�.��^.�,}�''..��,,}}�� 1 .+,t•�"• W tit _ {"y+..( F, , c•a,• •:rFiy1 4ry nf';7^-y:a}:'- .ro �L :+;,. pt N k4 i�+•�- .;•, ,i •,' ..- : I ::::.:^ ..I•::, - N;}.;�� Y Y,.. ," ,Z ra, >� ar );e,=,i C,�} $-& t $n I <..• .n - - - C f$x .+„q I.�,� rJ�t" .,a�,: .� ) •r t ,{, t�.3 `t„`��.p� I:f 1. p.,;A :µ•` - - - - - - '.f. f,'t�., r�':� n.+r.i,9iS,J�i� r Il, dA ',X "�' li :��+r;,t :', ".-' .' � 1 _: ,.}_- - __ - - - _ - - __ a'f.,, �`::t' i t hr/ ice`^ "" „'S �tG.._ ate$ •��;?`t• .:r ,•..,(.....^' (•'� r 'S iN ,: Y, '.,. ; .v. 1.. __ , , - - - - 4 ,t!Sys - :/S 'l,,..6-, ilT Y�i '.1,1_ �'y' •'�,_,{L _ '!I�ar(?, ..t rt'r •/ 1. :I.I t::.J ', ,r:ll.,..Gt51`/ r�) ti.}�'� ,.J� .ri..-.r.•'rn i._.. '. :G :,1:,: �. ta x. S,S •.1 aU r .^!^tl 'tr c �. Ir 1 a W I r. F:a�, ..1, yy �pr h. Mal: L l �e`� *�t.�! ,_'x�)' <'! ,F�•, ",,"�/:� 714 5•Y'I!i KF .i.F. `•r� ,�L w�xL" �i,F .1�� i ti" •.Ir ;•••'. is - �vt n' vt• i i• S�,i 'A•��' t i - � s .v .r.,'. .;LF'r L.r"• t. ,'�", ' '.., �,;.,f'{•s a :{';:1 t, ,1 y J t - o art' :•rt; .u::^ ..�• : ', ,.+,:„'$ , „ ;- ' , -- :,; .,:I:. :sir .f•3 .::n +r •�'�• i]}r'• z:.;;ir.:i. i' '!. •,M,r s'•' _ _..-I •'�+ '?iF,;,, /, r t' 3t- 4 :,tl'. T* .:iri,rr, ;;t'a -Y}C "iF° l"r •. ,(y..E t �r. "1. ,fir• 15 s +t xA%.Rr,' :.Sk •„ti ,�, `r,„9, ,t' ) tyltl,- }•.nl,�n..:7.. .�. ::+t•,.' 7 Ii. L A.I{'L t L f .4• •.rs' 'i i •�i ,, M R 1 v .Ar ar• "CJ,�. ,r � •n t t s ; ,its ^ .af:, a la..�'' t, •`a S i t.��„i :T:'„��rF�� f.� �y',"kr`4:r•f' �5.�?�. ;��4.'a�� •:'tl+tt, _•.,. 1. ( , U ,ji. .,,,, •r. ;.�.�yw.1t ,F;,xt.,t. „i '4 t a 4.: '7: { .,1'� � ?+r,. i {I; s" r,'g It,�.>',rr+f••'•ir,••.. +� 1`� ice, .t es �.,,-y•. vFR:r:�' ,O L., .ry f„•.r+.._ 1 { E F) '•r J1 .d�: '.: :1 ..I• •':,, �t.'J I r ,'lY.." {� �`•�,... _.Ja t �r y' n�t -yx r:• •S°N 4 :t[> t ^"'i+�` dj' :tom• d r '4i.. r '..y;, :5:• ..r,' ''� :�i5!r, .f-�', ' {'• 4 •r`,� '•; `J"'': tr.: ,.{. 'X L r , .ti,fti. r.. �','., ..sv, t .Ct."+'car...,., - �e4: . 'Itl,' /.• ,:�^� ti :, 'A.. '� ,t a�} tk?d. {�; .o-,.,ik I ,.tri;i •J 7; i d r �. ,�i ''!' rs- .,tom,,, �,yr., �C •.+1. s -r<' .:'�. � I�'�: ( :;If:,• :,1M �. F'r' 'A: d, iC:�^*' '':r,•„:to '. � t z� •i" pr P.' tt•.,x,�. p i_i,,^3a-�:�•''/ r ,fi "Pti:o-',''.,'t'.a t t; P ti.u�j..�7;r-r,. k' 1' -..t>J I: ,�. !!. a0�-'_ - _.�t,,if+ •'. .,.�0t• ~t +,-s:.' M. N{•L.t"'C.l' .* ,. .:irY �!'::, >C..,� O�.:�r x-1' vl R 7:- !t'' ✓ u' it ,: '"'t:,'.- i .,r�,�R 'h... ;€" � .:,.S• `fig,. .•�. f a ix. + c 4 4.'t'. "r•,f .�., i+t+i .r � .'J-�: t ,t, „4,. A �'' �• ,1 1<a r � � .•r+. +,,, a. 44.;,;.,! I: (• t?..�L';j+,5, .• p lr i;••(+.l,°h., ,d d '.v+ 'q� I. 'ti-r: •;�•�1.r .•e t.- d ;t ,"i1 t ( ,.' �1 :'L�+ T•+•lis•,'I -..,, F 4 ,:� 1�._ y':t,:.� i•1'' r1� r1p'' •� j,a '',' ,}r- t+'�.Z �.R, .'f'= a:,�' .Ll+^=,y, £c•r:i.�.<...fL• �' s,y I`^:�,, +:7.6. •5+ - �G .t '':F. •d.rj.-. ].L.. ,.•.+''l tt.:� qJ. �. r h t' ( a "i+�'� , � +t.d• ..3.n %' it .ri•:':.,,: ,. � rM +. var..� . ,},i�� h''}!,y� ra' S, - � lif`i•;_ � - r.. s :`t5.r.'wc:+,.:f"'n,'a•./��T:';` �:rr�,'�?.,..<+,,{�', '3k, ':Gar. ll.ti4i�•1,3�i}...,q;ri} - a - t 4 b •m� ��''},it �' .'}`''1;: n,AF`".. ..+•`Y F.w..''(j,L:Y �.• $ -} r'{^Y:- 'R"':,, l cfi,, r4 a�- �`{, � 4 r." q j J .,st,fi n�r4� i Ir�.d� 9�pr•e i,�r� s� t,,.�;z� -ate��'SfeR.� r '.r s) rr •4 '; y ,'tr% - ;'r",. '{i•s ti: {,.n�;K. � Y{�h 1,� 1+/ .;�� tk,u'.� r �+1 I ''?. I ,.' 4 t r '' = 7 L ,\•. "to �s,!t< '!` h g}' i �F, �'. l.`jy'4 t'", ! rL' L i :.. ,� r I ,' \ 4 N 1 ''a�' J-��� 1 tiJ•., a.4�v y a' ��•}1-Y•,•>,;'�.t try��-� i�1 �,, , i I 'IlE" .6�h 7 s, R `r � ', � '�• r : ?w. •ea. '` '�Y• 'r•�,s♦. � 45,�,kTF �� Mm+,'+X aFi`, i�,f �;. HC t s:7• .�� M t i f:� I •` :,'1X k f' + ��:) a, �: •i.U}�;n �„�`'P � ti;Zy''x'w� .tj;.�: ,� '';d:(y i:' r' '� ,,'��' !. i ! �, t 'Fr.•i. ,ir' t,f3 •,, i S 'tt'l. '� ils 1 > l _ I...; a }.. , : 't n «l ' +��s •r .a�,•� 'raj=n• '•".A '} .'�. I y ♦ f'� Jf', :<1r• f' .,tiT-1�,,,, r.,- �W i+•y� A 1' i,K -.3 V{� ,,� h )-» 5 � J ;(� s4 i./ �'' ••`� {f�'...,. ,r't :•'i'� "'�t�' r r 4 'F�:�;F 0�6+�,, G-r$'ti'. iF' '.I t 4. 7. I'� , ".:(.' "`;.`..° ^•'•-t,�- �; '.� ,-�I'+r,(��r/].,r,. } ).: p d n '✓...'!" :J �' `.t `•, 't'+';.,r''.. '+Vy.'7.+ Ih'r2 �y''4r a."�„t+$..:h' ,&,��. .'�''' '(=N ;r-��i` 1a1- N t�''' 'y'.-h ,!I. ° tN? ,�,• _L Jk t•:A:' •1 �i r•,n,...A,r.l,a'}.�(..k�' :1* gnm sr;$� t�s'�: 1, 11 ':1• dC b .ti 'ir•' .1. } ..p ..r. {.,r id! iF: tls; i•f:' t,rS ,.i' ( 1•, i '+ s,is.,r7r ,;<, ^°uai-.�=-.;1•y,.',1.=, Jprf.' ',', ,rd,+.�'�ta I. >,''U;2 tz'�', .�. s '�'•, i 'L. E` :�,.5 ,: -i_ '+ ':1"''i� O.S- :iN a t. .it. >; a r µk• .*L•4,� .t � � / 'tY a'tir t' .s.8-t.' a .1,•_..:"v; •.`7�--'¢i+`_ .'ij,....M- ,.. ,, •.. � .�•.," •1'r .y. 14,r f.. � ,;i,-, :,J.� t t :d;L..l,; t a"' W+r+.••+�- +ry y:f•Y: , ,m- f�i:` z„ I �,.r�r a � ,� •t' :ss"J:• ,. '' •�', 't ,w ls�,'' t. i ,r%:.,Y",,�1 �;'.u7F'.rv"-, el�,F.� �,n�I:il��.v,•''Li2a �p. }'^ .�' �;���,is J y :�{ r.'r , r Y" .: I Ir. x.' ,iy�' Y f �,[I '� }, .L,r. , "a ;, •at's.. �` h .¢ d;u@',; � :�":`,.�,�. � .r. J 4 .Ft'�'t'.'1�. .t.`1 a S'xiS. ,.-yi.+y:'�i..�.-ry }.Tyt.�''- r�' !tI/,.,cr'•:: p :.,,Y.';i�•,r,, K•`. riT�•,�1 -iFr7✓s., r x.. ,~�;p�ri�,..,, >4�,s..; )�,. -;n._..,f?iii�>-:t'^l�",i,<it,F- w ?rr ':.i}*4': �+' 1J {rs I- s< -yl rc. '.' :A,,, ,•,', .'�'.:,. � 7_i`I "r:,h .x: �•a,, };. •�^o h`, a.., g,,..:, J... ,n3 1 Z •L '1' }.jt +:;I a . �'. .y, .,'!:.{ I;." 7,r •}, ..z; ;L,.,.+ c4��. r�av�'e•'�e, •:�� ,y{ /., +•�•,k`• t. .�i�,�' a ,' ° :t •r. l..a' 4. •"M. s;. ,§:•. '4y. •;.. �*'� `i�aL�Ec �r {'. S�:V�.I`�j:d, ='`Y�;'•'�1; s v,,f "P• ,�• g7 M 1 �• Ell a� w:4r; ;'! un��5:'!�,+.•,'SYq.•l,i'.• ;�•" 4O `• r ' f I C(:. ,f.rE ,, •.�... .,: •�,. ,,;ya. ,#I,,t-{{� t"_' `S ;A t ,t ,.x4•.1W, 14 .`''�:.ht ..t ,_,<,.--�� ter''? 'Y,Ct .r'nl( .»k .�'.:'<.1.-' ,s •I .� ,r •..},. + 'R��/ rp11, .i`vrirr, .J.v,�•. i tr•Y J C;.r,j I aM1-.`•j3 P �t t ' '�,,, .r rp :'1• ir-dr y, �� v;, �� .:? 'i.,,4t} y:., r�, A :f� t %,. ,1= +i1}' 'i ,:rx;J',l �.y�i�s,,:f':'r;. ,ftth t;, -'�•!f'ry,iP r��y�t4 �-.? r �'' ..�;. �.. �. / C�.1.5. ,ry.• r+r+ t rp3ti�1.,,4�j 4ty ~t�.;i t r>r + : .,r, r*a..K.,t�:k}• , •A +. . d ,i5,. , Y_.r'. ��h�:?+'C•'+,;r a.@!;t;F e .re,•) ��•p�.:•R:° ?hs,' 'E''?i''+t.�r''+',l.-rti,' ���, J�.�'�' r�,':�" � a �, ,.: .T�r',--'� t{.a"'a.• :7^ Sy .y;y it ..!ti , .!•�„ t :S..,a i �*... .d,>, .f" _ i7," •w.'r'„uKR;i+".�r '[,�"i-�:.:i:s£. :�;'Y^_ yS C• 3�:'':�,� "'1!' �' l ¢ a.r.{:•r s� } W, ,+ i i (. y.4� � r.� ,;w :;ry-a e ! r, �,w 5 �r� 7j •;f ae.r.` ; t• „� r,,s $ t �.., T� i''1f�tt��e" � t. "`h '� .:'�, i ti� y �;1r jr s '-,v N:';,+• �_ Y:.t.,_�� •�'�y„iai � rF,; ev �C ,✓�� '}�.fjti � ".�i+`3y„�t`a;.+• tl`� f ',f,.jl+': ••t -?t,e�3d" .•.,. r n Z.! j' .,0. Z,; ,1 '. t cF, y,c "a. �t:7+i;r.5>t.'ra,.{{s 'r K.:> +t•, tvJA2i� r?. ,a:R. a•F„, ',' „ti 1 •'{ .c` rh,�l. ✓... -,.i:, :;ik; I„ yy •Zi�:r, s;l 6:•7"54Yr„_ 'si,"l ltr: :tX,%t r .Y,": sT•,i-+.;,4s�...,,fii "•i"i;s:, '+,#":, y ..' + +( � V'' � i}.�r T S •, �Y,M1 -.� Y..l,a>?>T,, .J'1 j,. -�(t. ';•,.� t� ',sI'�. 'Y. :4 / rut�`Iw rat ;.s".�,'ft,,•��.. }I tl � q r�. a' ,,.n� vt . i d , r�s,.s< u f 4 1r,t,:;.'3. 'r+r a. ;, T1' ` J:' m tr : 1 6 ,r Y, +rrt? 1"5..L3: `""",ftipr o:K' L 'r;,;f' a ,. ,.ur,,• ,,a}st .t;�,P r „•fR i„ t.' H rI, ' i I 's � rFl,;� �i.. d r5�;�i'.��; ` p.?.•�, a ,� 'a' �! .ty t ,w':r y', f• A .rU .,'{4'}'p+1 i'.q: tls.;t�fS''^r, 'i 41,t'S d / .+ .RI4y C,'3'..;.f.-..d 7. 1•iri'':,i=':;3M E:F". ,:'�.r 1.,'S.,` :a}`�': y , "� ,� ?$ �fF4' N�'r„G..°t• ,t `y:� ',"5" +w .r'." r�S'�xs A;a� ,��..�? ll tr�L"axe 4' '� 4 ,..et 1r. .r,.�i,t S.s sI; c'r�t-' ,�L:" '"�i' c:h_ 4�,q ,raM1.:.e"' }�.;.:'x?'rn r<ivs; h,-,y, �E $ +F-��"' �•a.. �, ! '� � •E"?i:".9r ( 1, t, .J.-V :., 1:,. '�� ZS�T; 1, T ':t fy' ,,,, Ti .sOrr an.i, :,.r' {, {,.r :±:;.'R .:S Jtn ?.):J.�,�, i 'a' t '� ���� •As.l��, +tr a. ,r ,!. 'i +:,,1 i !< ( t 'r.' ,,:yN. :(..,,;•yi'�q rla1� t3' Ypt;`•� �",3Fy7;_ ,='�y'.;r,'' �'�� 1' '���� ,,�, f, �,s ;;sail �f;. ,..:�; � b�`k ,r 'n '}+ ir,,,,,,+,..: { sl ty. - .�' +• -.9; y,�`. ,�, 'S +}t., Fi, '.n.tom. ,. :L{,t M1 < ...� T. .:•. ,. .�. Ij tC'i'�i..:p I ri[ t., �i L '.)� `'� -y+rr P', r�bJ 4r ( �:i:.iC'd'1�.0 aF:�}, �' y,'F '�r� 4JrY' �+ef ,.,9 ,c:' yl +«1}i^''��r�"�J fir.{ M4.;. s .tr. .(f;+ y.i:. > �: .�. :n,-^•I+' ,:'� ,:�.-t�:�Pr"aY. -.r,. n,r �' ICih£s' �� tl" ,yts.•, t,' 4 tf,,..r..,�. r );•':I t ';;, :: ,: •, ;, - f' ,�,.,J` :^9..._k.h; s; 91 hw'r s'1," a,.,e'•x.�' ... i t:'+k 1;Ef•` '? -Y:'r t tlr r % � 1 `4r'-, f � �. '•+,�. \ .•�'j'Z 1 tii A e"'. 7' } J. ' :.+t`" °,v.:� .r :a b `3i,, r'-•r .v , a.." �'' -t.: ,r , 4 ',,�4 ,•ry �. >;i:M1r �; J AS •31 i' �' ttf�k��}� %la• t r 1 ' ��' �� ,4��E �J"�`� ty,��� i'v s'"'t''sN`t••F �A�:; ` t' ,,t b' ,Y -4;.r, J'. i ', �o/. ,c t..Yr. .;n:• 4?'•'`',. -..i ittr L r�I � i�, F{„- ,!i �j�'a,r.�'", t i'};+7;.'�, 7�\ .ie :i( t �..i;'#t'�1 k" ,�•y'�`„;k'�., :rti�xlaf,p,�,,: ,i 1J. • � i 1, , ,, r ! .p � S s � t r � �,,'',"� '...,•�-.ir ,',�. .. ,, n �� .... _ /r,�., Lt.,3 , « � t11�•��Fh'2'j�,y��.';; "�a �i,,�,i��.�{�rs,r`, ..-It••e. 1:�'> ,�.,t'r4,,:�;• J+F' l •a.,t,. ' - .< r Fr't } gir 'r ,t t.y.:. t s er ,k rr�:tl., 1 tituJ•lA (' y, �.r�zt. a�r?a.i�." L.' ::7'.,5'¢ I L '.,,�. } ., :. .C�.. ::( ':• A ,', ��'•, .'.S '' +,f J,# S1rv::-.`•.,t:(,,:r'.�; l.'. � -t'V1:' fi'.4r.,;Ky,s++ j ZS:C{i. f'J +{ +'p,� �1s7.. u4� (3" •F. ,�. :.:N, i :Jr,...,.;e'•y: ,�.�,e ar..` .�L'"7 e�� .:� a.,F'u•.i,y�•',,:'. ,:, r `I �, r.;•;:,,i,..{,,..,tip ,: rC _r:4hi� n ! t , ..irF`t i a � � at„ l aS{ �a( i�'•?.c,� „� '! .'b. x'�t a•,'r � +., i .�@'1."� �Lr'� A,... 1 •:i, '� .'1,fS �t t CC � :' � �'Lt" �ef' ser:+,-,. •Y '" ,- .tas,:.' , .' ai., a+:r. d +,;.: ,17; e'. „_•... +,;.i ,.{ � •1, s.r .�.' '.�. :� t !,.t•,,y. X i',:a,.q ?, 4:a. 5...35;,, 3• 7 �''': ..-^ .,�, �. •., iS.(arI'I, P.?'¢.iF` u'.,Y. ',,: � .,-7 .: ., . '� 4., ::.., .. Jf". .#'` _7 a 2�^� .,(",<,5 `r �.e per. ,1 9 4i, .t. 1 y ti, rr''J��;, tC " t t .I •:,A .,i ry'Y' .� '<, .°.a}� .v a 7�vt?' ,u�§'tq,,ay>;, h �. .�: � }:n xq: <t :+.: 9r. ;f. „ , � � x r.i .r:..' •'�,,,-.q''t; :;.' 'f rr.t '�c::,r. ,+r,:, S# 'If' � "+[ r V ra� 'I,..�•/.,.Ir,7 , rt': .j. iy. ::�Ir N. ..), r. i, 5 rj. .a' r, r�.�. „*' .': �n�(d�r,t' �� r <-,=Ft '-,'r.=:s`' � •.:;i.e:. ..,,:•,,: ,� a ,�, �.=j-' ,.,:'Sr 3; 5 s,?•,:;a.r;� ;�s.za.:.�_�•��9t. t.. �•St '�i~� ,.�..yry sy�t 'r 'r ti��>4*:r�,,*$ 34 ,< tq , � � � - - '�'':_._ .-_ _ _... v .r.=. -ti�• a�-- 4.1 ADMINISTRATION 4.1.01 Approvals Required All development within the Downtown Specific Plan shall be subject to one or more of the following, as identified in each district: a Conditional Use Permit-, and/or the Design Review Board provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. All physical development shall be required to be reviewed by the Design Review Board prior to processing additional entitlements if required. The Historical Resources Board shall provide recommendations for structures considered to be historically significant. In addition, a Conditional Use Permit shall be required for any residential cooperative subdivision, mixed-use development, or any project which requires a special permit (Section 4.1.02). The Design Review Board, Planning Commission or the City Council shall also comider the following before approving a project: (a) Projects shall be in conformance with the adopted Design Guidelines for the area. E (b) Architectural features and k general appearance of the proposed development shall enhance the orderly and harmonious development of the area or the community as a whole. (c) Architectural features and complimentary colors shall be incorporated into the design of all exterior surfaces of the buildings in order to create an aesthetically pleasing project. (d) Particular attention shall be given to incorporating signs, including their colors, into the overall design of the entire development in order to.achieve uniformity. (e) Vehicular accessways shall be designed with landscaping and building variation to eliminate an alley-like appearance. 4.1.02 Special Permit i The Downtown Specific Plan development standards are designed to encourage developments creating an aesthetically pleasing appearance, enhancing the living environment,.and facilitating innovative architectural design. and adaptation of the development to the unique surrounding environment. i 73 _._- Deviations from the development regulations of this Specific Plan, may be granted at the time of project approval for unique architectural siting or S" features, including but not limited to parcel size, building height, site coverage, setbacks, opens ace and landscaping. g P P g• A .special permit may not be granted.for deviations from maximum density , or parking requirements or deviation for building heights in Districts 1, 2, 4, 10 and 11 or from requirements of the Conservation Overlay. Such deviations shall only be allowed when, in the opinion of the Planning Commission, significantly greater benefits from the project can be provided than would occur if all the minimum requirements were met. Some additional benefits which may make a project eligible for exemptions include: greater open space, greater setbacks, unique or innovative designs, public parking, public open space, and the use of energy conservation or solar technology. The developer may request a Special Permit at the same time as the filing of an application for a Conditional Use Permit and shall be heard concurrently. The Planning Commission may approve the Special Permit in whole or in part upon a finding that the proposed development, in addition to providing greater benefits as required above, will also: (a) Promote better living environments; (b) Provide better land planning techniques with maximum use of aesthetically pleasing types of architecture, landscaping, site layout and design; (c) Not be detrimental to the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of the neighborhood or City in general, nor detrimental or injurious to the value of property or improvements of the neighborhood or of the City in general; and (d) Be consistent with objectives of the Downtown Specific Plan in achieving a development adapted to the terrain and compatible with the surrounding environment. (e) Be consistent with the policies of the Coastal Element of the City's General Plan and the California Coastal Act. I (f) Comply with State and Federal law. 4.1.03 Coastal Permit Developments within the Downtown Specific Plan area will be subject to the requirements pertaining to Coastal Development Permits (CDP), in addition to the other provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 4.1.04 Severability j If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this title, or any future amendments or additions hereto, is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this title, or any future amendments or additions hereto. The Council hereby declares that it would have adopted these titles and each 74 /4.1.105 sentence, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion or any future amendments or additions thereto, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, clauses, phrases, portions or any future amendments or additions thereto may be declared invalid or unconstitutional. Appeals Decisions by the Director on non-zoning matters may be appealed to the City Administrator; decisions on zoning matters may be appealed to the Planning Commission and City Council. r i i i I i i 'I j 75 �ip RECEIVED CITY CLERK CITY OF HUNTINt ,014 BEACH, CALIF. September 28, 1990 SEP 28 4 35 PH °g0 Douglas M. Langevin 8196 Pawtucket Drive Huntington Beach, Ca 92646: City of Huntington Beach Atten: Connie Brockway,- City Clerk Huntington Beach, Ca 92648 SUBJECT: Councilman MacAll.ister's Appeal '-of CUP #90-43/ Appeal of Planning Commission"Is Design Regarding appeal of Design Review Board action, dated, Septemb er .29, 1990. Dear City Clerk Brockway: I question the validity of Councilman MacAllister's appeal for the following reasons: I . . CONFLICT-.OF INTEREST A. Does this appeal use his official position to influence a _ governmental"decision? Definately. B. Will the resulting decision affect his economic interest? Absolutely. C. Will the effect on his economic interest be a material one? Currently, the Redevelopment Agency rents to Huntington National Bank, (for whom Councilman MacAllister sits on the Board of Directors, and of whom Councilman MacAllister owns a substantial amount of stock. ) a building in the third block of Main St. , Westside, for use as a bank office. The Redevelopment agency is negotiating a D.D.A. for devel- opment of the entire block as a single project as I write. This project will require the Huntington National Bank-- leased- building to be demolished and the bank to relocate. At this time, there is no property on Main St. in the Business District ( 1st three blocks)for sale. Additionally, with block consolidation projects ongoing or proposed for five of the six existing blocks, the only block where a lot less than full block size could concieveably be bought is the block in which the subject property is located (2nd block west--the "Demonstration Block". ). page 2 - Letter from Langevin to City of HB,9-28-90 I have never concealed from anyone that 217 Main St. (the subject property) is my sole source of income. To delay or stop my project p aT ces-me in greafinancial risk. Huntington National Bank could concieveably benefit by my financial-distress , either. by. forcing a new .construction project or by land acquisition. Additionally, Huntington. National Bank has a loan with the Redevelopment Agency on the former Terry' s Buick Agency site in the downtown project area. I believe these two .issues to form a direct conflict of interest for councilman MacAllister. An effect of d$250. or more is sufficient. D. Will the effect of this decision on his economic interest be distinguishable from the effect it -will have on the public generally? If Huntington National--Bank profits by Council- man MacAllister' s decision, then it follows that Councilman MacAllister,_ himself,- shall also, either by cash dividends.. by stock appreciation, or by asset enhancement Th.i.s does not have to be certain to. be foreseeable, and is therefore a conflict. See: Attorney General'sopin.ion: 61 Ops Atty. Gen. 243 II. Appeal Directed to the Wrong Department The Downtown Specific plan--Revised Jan. , 1989 edition, under 4. 1 ADMINSTRATION states : "4. 1 .05 Appeals = Decisions by the director- on non-zoning matters may be appealed ' to th'e ` Gity�AdTIAIS. ator;.`-Dec`rsion's 96 zoning,' mat�ers`. may be Epp"e"aTd'd to the Planning` Camin: ss.iori an'd City Coiincll:" Also, Division 9, Article 985 (rev 3017-12/89) Design Review Board states : ppea s. ny .action of the Board May be Appealed o the PLanning Commission as provided .in this code. ' (3017-12/89)" Since the subject of this appeal .is an aesthetic matter, not a zoning one, .it .would appear that the appeal should be directed to the C.ity. Admin.istrator, not the City Council. In addition, ,Art.icle 985 . of Division 9, does not provide for an appeal to the City Council, only to the Planning Commission, thus supplying further evidence to support this view. page 3 - Letter from Langevin - to City of HB, 9-28-90 For the above reasons , Z think that an appeal to the City Council is 'inappropriate, and Councilman MacAllister should have directed his appeal to the City Administrator within.. the ten day appeal period. His failure to do so seems to have invalidated his "Appeal of the planning Commission' s Design regarding appeal of 'Design Review Board Action, " and his Conflict of Interest in the entire downtown Redevelopment area would seem to invalidate this entire Action of Appeal. Sincerely;. Douglas M. angevin 714 960-5872 oz as �21319.1l1;t: 4:50 p.m. , Thursday Doug called (Longevin) . 960-5872 The State Office of Historical Preservation with send copy of Historical Building Code and the Enabling Act to use to include with the material for the 11/5 Council packet with his Building 217 Main Street item. He will be giving you more material for that so he will need to know when the packet deadline for that meeting is. Chris i CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH To Connie Brockway From HowWig fsky City Clerk Plarector Subject Date LABELS FOR October 15, . .1990 CITY COUNCIL HEARINGS It is the Planning Division' s policy to require that the applicant for an entitlement provide all mailing labels for public hearings . This includes labels for appeal hearings held by the City Council, even if such appeal is filed by a Council member. Planning Staff requires that the labels be accompanied by a letter from a title company, certifying that the names and addresses are those listed on the latest available assesor ' s tax rolls . Should you have any questions with regard to this policy, please call me. HA:LP: lp (7458d) I I �D�as NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING APPEAL- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-43 (Request to permit a restaurant/pub in an existing, rehabilitated structure, in conjunction with an appeal of the Planning Commission' s action regarding the exterior of the building) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that- the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chamber at the Huntington Beach Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California, on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. DATE/TIME: Monday, November 5, 1990, 7: 00 PM APPLICATION NUMBER: Conditional Use Permit No. 90-43/Appeal of Design Review Board Action APPLICANT: David M. Lautner/Douglas M. Langevin APPELLANT: Councilman MacAllister LOCATION: 217 Main Street (west side, approximately 125 feet south of Olive Avenue) ZONE: Downtown Specific Plan District 5 (Mixed Use) REOUEST: Appeal of the Planning Commission' s approval of a request to permit a restaurant/pub in an existing, rehabilitated structure. The appeal also concerns the Planning Commission' s action on the proposed building materials and elevations. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: Categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15301, Class 1 of the California Environmental Quality Act. COASTAL STATUS: Exempt pursuant to Section 969 . 5.3 . 1 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the Community Development Department, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648, for inspection by the public. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit evidence for or against the application as outlined above. If there are any further questions please call Laura Phillips, Associate Planner at 536-5271. Connie Brockway City Clerk (7476d) 1 I,'4`VE TOR: TITLE COMPANY Prepared for : SL ACI.. I f F VELOt'i'all:NT equested by - 13013 CORONA Orange County Pip: * * T I P S C 0 V E R P A G E Search Type : PI) Print Report Type : Summary Search Key : P Irne1 Number Max Number of Records Requested : 500 Single/Model Property : Range of Properties : (Low ) 024 Ir._ n -I (High ) n 4..-. -1'; %.... ..1 r. SEARCH OPTIONS EL..ECTFI:) city Code Sale Date WY MW Use Cod's Sale Price $ Zoning Total Assessed $ Square Feet Price per S�� f t $ L.otsgft/Acre Percent Improved Year tau i I t Owner (Occupied=0, Absentee-A) Bedrooms Un i is Bathrooms Type of Parking Pool :' (Y or N) i l:t11FfTU/;'� T/ TLE ._ PAGE.Iv- FOR :OR : SF ACI_ I FF( VF_I._OPLt'11:Nl EQUESt-ED BY: .BOB CORONI A 03/14/90 Oran:e County � REP : --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- i tus : 519 WALNUT .AV 1`IUNT" I NG"TON BEACH 92648 Owner : ENERGY DE:V CX L..ega I : I A03.52 B 105 I.. 22 Mai! i I : ,' I::: ^i * 0 W N E R* EF SITUS ADDRESS Phone : Use : CO'+' --COMMERCIAL , Zone : Asd : $34 416 0% to I e Date : 03/ 17/S9 Sale Amt ., I_.oa-in Amt : Exempt : Oil : 10 I;Ii.is : 1:3d Bth rot Units : I...ot5gft : 117.50 1 " _........................................ _.....................................- _......... - ....... ...__.....-_. --_..... -.. - _..........._.....-_. -................................................._.....-_..............._.........._. A.Plea : 024- 15 fi ? itus : SITU PENDING HUNI- ING"TON REACH 92601 Owner : 1=:NERSY F)I:::V CX L ega I : T A0352 R 105 I... I.. Mai i 1 : N F W * 0 W N I:_ R*`-FF- SITUS ADDRF < Phone : Use : COM-"COIYi:'F::RCIAI... Zone : Asd : $301 000 Sale Date : 03/ 17/89 Sale AI"iil: : Loan Amt : Exempt : Bit : Rms : I d HtF1 lot Units : I..otsgft : 5850 `>qfl n,PN: 0 1 - 15 03 iTus : SITUS PENDING HL)1\1"I IN(;..FON L3I:: ACH 9 648 Owner : SOUTH COAST OIL CX F.ega I : I. A035 R .105 L_ 16. M a i l : N F:. `r! * 0 W N E h* F::I:: S I Tl_ S AI:)DRF:S`,i Phone : Use : COIv --CO`1'i€i'II::RCIAI.. Zone : Asd : $68 , 2 3 Imp : 0% Sale Date : I/ I s>, .. .. Sale Amt : Loan Amt : Exempt : Bit : Rms : l:3d F3th rot Units : Lotsgft : 2937 1 r L" t -- _ ..... - _......__._- "-_.....__............ -_- -..-_..._......_................_..... - _.....-__._. ..-._............ -_.........-_..-_. ._.._.....-—_..-_.-_._.-_........:._.._............_...... APN : 0 2.:1 - 152.. 01 S i l us : S I F"US PENDING L"flJ;v..1.. 1 , G_O BEACH 92648 Owner :r : RE:DF: I:::I.OP``EST AGFN L..c g :1I : T" A0352 F3 105 I... Use : 1;...f. M:,. .:Rr I zof1:' : Asd : ;270 i it it ImF, . O Sale Date : 01 / 4/9iI Sale Amt , Loan Amt : FXempt : Hit : Rms : Bd Blh of Units : I. otsgft : 5875 ,.Ift APN : it q. .l5 2....(-li:, i tus - 501 WALNUT AV L1L.1NTI NGTON BEACH .. . 4' Ow!1,, I_ . H( I �ITI \If�_FO BEACH Ii Legal : F. A0352 R ,I0�.. L.. 5 .. . a. ai I - N I:.. W * 0 W I,,1 F R*.:FI.:: S I _l..l.!''• n1: DRK`:•''. Phone - Sole .. .. ::-/_ 9- Sale L Loan 1 Amt : Exempt : , pit : 13 R ? ' I l 6 F " Tot Units : : L : I - f 5175 : t _ 3503 . .._.........- ._....-_.................._ -........................- _.._.._.........._.................- ..-.._.._. ._- -.... - _...__.....-_. -_.-... - ... -........._.........................-_..._.........._.-_......-_.._.........-.... APN : n q.- -15 10 i tII ' 509 OCEAN AV HIIN_1. 1NGFON BEACH 02648 Owner : CRACCH I OL_O FRANK M T R /NO L_ega I : T" A0352 f3 105 1_. /1 v':ai I : 19712 OUIE1_ BAY I. N*HlINTINGTON REACH , CA 9 648 Phone : (714 )qBO".."3900 1. COM COMER IAI_. ZorIe . Asd : $ ...'..Itz 73':;I lair : 7% Sale Date : 10/03/80 Sale Amt : $ 1 13 , 0OfiP Loan Amt : Exempt : : BIT : 33 Rm : Hd Rth Fit Units : 2 I..ot .;q t . 5500 of I : ......................... ........_..............._.. ... ......._.......-............ .......... - ._....................-........................_................ ................................_..._......._......._ .-...._._.... ...... ..................... ..._...-....._..... APN: 0 4...-. -152.... ..11 ; itI.Is : 506 OCEni,: A:j I, N""I-I ! F" I h,G I 0 N BEACH 92648 Owner : WOOD BLANCHE A /FA L..ega I : T A0352 R 105 I. 3 Mail : :_C? "I 5TH :=...1 *f l l.!N"T I h G F o 1, REACH , CA <;!:::•I_;q t? Phone : Use : COS'; C;C)'''i':'i I::R C I A L. Zone : Asd : $3 / , :_(:• 1" Imp : 1" ..._ Sale Dave : 03/01 /87 Sale Amt : I_.f):;n Amt : I..Xi'mpt : Bit : 66 Rms : Bd 1:3th Tot Units : I_.ot qft : 2750 Sgft : 528 - ---------- ------- -------- - -------- ---------------------- - ------ - ------------------ T"HE: INFORMATION PROVIDED IS DEEMED RELIABLE , BUT IS NO r GUARAIli..I..I::I::I:) COPYRIGHT ..I..RW 1986' a /�r - PREPARED FOR : SEACL | FF( �'YEL0pMENT ��� E0UESTED BY: BOB CORONA ,� 03/14/90 Orange County ` 8EP : ' -----------------------------------------------------_-----------------_-------�- APN : 024- 152- 12 Si1us : 504 OCEAN AY HUNT | NGT0N BEACH 92648 ' Owner : WOOD BLANCHE A /EA Loyn | : T A0352 B 105 L 1 Mail : 201 5TH ST*HUHT | hGTON BEACH, CA 93648 Phone : Use : COM-COMMERCIAL Zone : Asd : $45, 900 imp : 24% Sale Dale : 03/01/87 Sale Am ! : Loan Am1 : Exempt : 8 | t : 66 8ms : Bd Bih Tot Units : Lo1 ;qf1 : 4400 Sqft : -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- APN : 024- 152- 13 Situs : 518 OCEAN AV UUNT | NGT0N BEACH 02648 Owner : EYN0H TRFV0R L Legal : T A0352 8 185 i 6 Mail : 4 E W ^ O W N E A*SEE S | TUS ADDRESS Phone : Use : WHY WM011Y EXFNPT Zone : Asd : $ 137 , 206 Imp : 19% Su | o Date : 03/ 18/88 Sale Amt : Loan Amt : Exempt : 811 : Qmx : Bd Bth Tot Units : Lo1sqf1 : Sqf1 : --------- - ---- - -------------------------^------------------------------------- APN: 024- 152- 14 121 005TH S7 HUNT | NGTON BEACH owner : HUNT | MGT0N REACH AEOEYE/XX Legal : [ A0352 B 105 L 11 Mail : PMEMT AGENCY«2000 MAIN STxMUNT | NGT0H DEACH , CA 03648 Phone : Use : WHX-WHOLLY EXEMPT Zone : Asd : $ 1 ' 425, 000 Imp : 0�;:% Sale Date : Sale Amt - Loan Amt : Exempt : 8 | V : Qm5 : Gd D |h Tot Units : Lotsqft : Sqf | : - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THF INFORMATION PROVIDED IS DEEMED RELIABLE , BU[ IS NOT GUAAANT[ED C0PYX | GM1 TRW 1986 A»EW1/ OF REPORT** ` - - , T/ T L E COAWA rV S•' Pre aced for : I:::ACL.. I1= F VE:I.OPf�IE:h! { tequested by_ 130t3 -CORONA P ,::: Oranne County Rep: * * * T i P S C O 4- E R P A G E Search Type : PI) Print Report Type : Summary Search Key : Parcel Number Max Number of Records Requested : 500 Single/Model Property : Range of Properties : (Low) 024- 153 -01 (High ) fi 4- 15 _.. 0 SEARCH OPTIONS SELECTED City Code Sale Dale <Yl` MW Use Code Sale Price $ Zoning Total Assessed $ ;q ft $ Square Feet _ Price per i. Lotsgft/Acre Percent Improved Year Bu i I t Owner (Occupied=O, Abse nti:e=A ) Bedrooms Units - Bathrooms Type of Parking Pool ? (Y or N) `_' 7/ 7lE Ll%$PA PAGE 1 `. ` PREPARED FOR : SEACL \ F �EVEL0PKAENT \���EQUE�TED BY: BOBCORONA ' J_ _ ` 03/14/90 Orange County REP : � -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- APN: 024- 153-01 Situs : 411 WALNUT AV HUNT | NGTON BEACH 82648 Owner : REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 0F/XX Legal : T A0252 D 104 L 24 � Mail : CITY OF HUNT | NGT0N BEACH*2000 MAIN ST*MUKT | MGT0N 8EA Phone : ` Use : WHX-WHOLLY EXEMPT Zone : Asd : $336 , 600 Imp : 2% Sale Date : 02/05/88 Sale Amt : $630 ` 0OUP Loan Am1 : Exempt : B | | : 0m; : Bd B1h Tot Units : Loisqft : 8062 Sqft : -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- APN : 024- 153-02 Situs : 118 005TH ST HUNT | NGT0N BEACH 92648 Owner : REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 0F/XX Legal : T A0352 B 104 L 14 Mail : CITY OF HUNT | NGT0N BE#CU*2000 MAIN ST^HUNT ! N6TON 8EA Phone : Use : WHX-WHOLLY EXEMPT Zone : Asd : $372 , 300 Imp : 11% Sn | c Dnic : 02/05/83 Sale Amt : $630 , 0OOP Loan Am1 : Exempt : R | 1 : 48 Rms : Bd Bth Tot Units : Lo1sqf1 : 8062 Sqf1 : 3376 --- ----------------- --------------------- ----------------------------- --------- APM : 024- 153-03 Si1ur : 112 005TH ST UUNT | NGT0N BEACH 92648 0wnor : REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 0F/XX Legal : T A0352 B 104 L 1� Mail : CITY OF HUNT | NGT0N BEACH^ 2000 MAIN ST*HUNT | NGTON 8EA Phone : Use : WHX-WHOLLY EXEMPT Zone : Asd : $ 193 . 800 Imp : 20% Sale Date : 02/05/83 Sale Am1 : $630 ' UO0P Loan Amt : Exempt : D | t : 51 Qm/ : 8d Bth Tot Units : intsqft : 3762 Sqf | : 374S '----- - ----------------------------------------- ----------------------------- APN : 024- 153-04 SiIuS : 127 MAIN ST HUNT | NGTUN BEACH 02648 Owner : LANE JAMES A Legal : T A0352 B 104 L 2� ' Mail : N [ W * 0 W N E k*SEE S | TUS ADDRESS. Phone : Use : C0M-COMMERCIAL Zone : Asd : $68 , 014 Imp : 50% Sale Date : 11/21/88 Sale Am1 : Loan Amt : Exempt : BIT : 38 Rms : Bd Bih Tot Units : 1 Loisqft : 6025 S0ft : 267S ------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------ APH: 024- 153-05 Si \us : 123 MAIN ST HUNT | NGT0N BEACH 02648 Owner : MASE R0NAiD A Legal : T A0352 8 104 L 33 Mail : 123 MAIN ST*HUNT | NGT0N BEACH, CA- Q2G4S Phone : Use : COM-00MMERC | AL Zone : Asd : $ 115, 539 Imp : 37�� Sn | o Date : 01/19/89 Sale Amt : Loan Amt : $170 , 000 Exempt : 0 | t : 05 8ms : BU Bth Tot Units : Lotsqft : 2937 Sqf | : 1504 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- APN : 024- 153-07 Si1us : 117 MAIN ST HUNT | NGT0N BEACH 93848 Owner : HUNT | NGTON SAV Legal : T A0352 D 104 L 17 Mail : N E W * 0 W N E Q»SEE S | TUS ADDRESS Phone : Use : CON-COMMERCIAL Zone : Asd : $121 , 037 Imp : 80%. 58 | o Date : 12/39/88 Sale Amt : Loan Am1 : Exempt : B | 1 : 14 Qm; : 8d Bih Tot Units : Ln1sqf \ : 2937 Sqf1 : 5171 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- APN : 024- 153-08 Situ/ : 115 MAIN ST HUNT | NGT0N BEACH 02648 Owner : ABDELMUT | AHMAD H /MS Legal : T A0352 B 104 L 15 Mail : %JACK SURF-N-SP0RT»113 MAIN ST»HUNT | NGT0N REACH, CA Phone . Use : COM-00MMEAC | AL Zone : As U : $33 1 , 5O0 | mp : 43%% Sale Date : 00/25/87 Sale Amt : $325, 000F Loan Amt : $ 125 , 000 Exempt : BIT : 16 Rms : Bd nth Tot Units : 1 Lo | sqft : 2037 Sqft : 2926 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THE INFORMATION PQ0Y |nE0 IS DEEMED RELIABLE , BUT IS NOT GUARANTEED COPYRIGHT TRW 1086 - - / ' � 1 ib'3/._-5 i0A'5 T/ TL E CO.V PA�b�., P A G F ? PRE PAREDF=OR : SEACL I F VE1._OPMEEN'T EQUESTED BY: 13013 CORONA - 03/.14/9 I c, y REP : .��_� Orange f�C.F . . -_ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ APN: 024-- 153-- 10 S i tus : 420 OCEAN AV HUNT I NGTON BEACH 92648 Owner :: CITY OF HUNT I NG1 ON 13EAC/XX Legal : T A0352 13 104 L 9 Mail : P 0 BOX HUNT INC:TN 6CH, CAL_ 9264t; Phone : Use : WFIX--WHOL.L.Y E:.:EMPT Zone- Asd : $37, 266 Imp : 0% Sale Date : 07/05/77 Sale: Amt : Loan Amt : Exempt : Bit : Rms : Bd B1h Tot Units : Lotsgft : Sgft : _. ._ .....-................................._.._-..---....................................--............................... ..._...-.--.........-.._......._........._.........................:...........................-_......................._.--- APN : 024-- 1 53 - 1 1 i t u s : 400 OCEAN AV HUNT I NG LON BEACH 92640 Owner : 13AGS•TAD EL DON W /CP I_ ga I : T A0352 R 104 I... 7 Mai I : 901 C;.ATAL. INA AVF*SL.AL B ACH , CA 90740 Phone : ( 21:3 )43 .1 -332 Use; : C.Orn..-(:0MMF::RC; IA1... Zone . he1 . $56 , 186 Litp 301'/;; Ie Date : 0 // 1 :3/79 Sale Antt : Loan Amt : Exempt : I Rms : Bd Bill Tot Units : L..otsgft : '.:;':E; I 'f " fig �.. q c f l 300(1 .. -... -..........-......-..............--........-.-........ ..--__....--..- -..................... ............._.-.......................-..--.._......... --............-_.............._............-_-........... ................-- .....-........._......._ APN: i;i :•il.... .15 3- 12 i t u s : 408 OCEA;, AV F1L1 ,I..L I NGTO N REACH 92648 Owner :: HUN 11 NG EO N BEACH R /CO Legal : T A035:= 13 104 I.. %I Ma i I : N F W * O W N I:: I;*SI?F SITUS ADDRF :; Phone: : l • e : CC M I L Zone :: 1 . d . $84, 962 Imp : 0X. 5<a I c Dale : 04/18/89 `:.a I e Amt : Loan Afiit ' $1 , 035 ; 000 Exe'fri(:) L : 0 Rms : Bd 13th rot Units : 2 I...ot qft : ?:;,::-- -1ft. : 3306 _..........-_..-.......... ................_........ -........... -_..............-_...................... .............. -............................-_._......._......... ..._......._...--..................................-...-..-................................................ APN : 02.1 _ 153- 13 I tUs : 109 MAIN ST LIl.1N INGTON BEACH 92648 Owner : A13D1::L U L I AHMAD /MS Legal :: T A0:352 13 10 I_. '1 Ma i I : 113 MAIN `-i 1 *III INT I NG_I ON BEACH, CA 92648 Phone; : Use : COM--COiv'Mi:RC: I AL.. Zone : Asd : $ 18 404 39% Sale Date: : 05/09/86 Sale Aml : $ 170 , OOOF Loan Amt : $85, 000 Exempt : Bit : 21 Rms : Bd 13th Tot Units : 4 Lotsgfl : 1833 Sg4t : 10260 .................-_..........--............................-...........- ---..........-.......................... --... -........... -....................._.......................-......................................................................-....•..-... ...........-__......- .._ r+.., MAIN :; r F1UN..1 l NG.roN E3r:Acl-I 9264�� Owner : ABDI: L..MUl- I AHMAD HAMEED /NO Legal : "I- A0352 13 101 L. 1 Phone . . ia'.:a I I 113 MAIM I*F11.11�i I I i�i Ca I C)i�? BEACH, CA 92648 >h . Use : COM--COMMERCIAI.. Zone. : Asd : :$ 134 , 779 Imp: 0 Sale Date : 08/ ': /8`I Sale Am1 : $..I ..It; r 0Of L..eiar1 Amt : Exempt : Bi t : 2. 1 Rms : Bd 13th Tot Units : 2 L.o .t. sgft : 3600 qft : 7200 ....................... ................_........ - .......................-_.-..................................................... -........................................................-_............................................-.........................................._.................._ APN : 024 1 63-- 15 i i t"s : 404 PACIFIC COAST HY F11. NT I NGTON BEACH 92648 Owner : A13L)E:LMUT I AHMAD HA'fiI::D /NO Legal : -F A0352 E3 104 I... 3 Mail : 113 MAIN `:. I-*HUNT I NGTON BEACH, CA 92648 Phone : Use : COi+1-COMtNERCIAL.. Zone : Asd : $356 , 479 IniF? : 56 , Salo Data : 12115181 Sales Amt : $69 , OOOF= Loan Amt : Exempt : HIT : 2. 1 Rms : Bd 13th "Lot Units : 4 Lotscif : 4583 Sgft : ----------------------- ---------------------------------- ---------------- -- - - ------- APhl: 024-- 153 _ 16 SitUs : 122 00 .I..H S..1.. HUNTINGTON REACH 9 648 Owner : REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF=/XX L_ coal : 1- A0352 R 104 L- 20 (`J'a i I : CITY OF HUNT I NGTON REACH*2000 MAIN ::•-1 *HUNT I NGTON I3EA Phone : Use : WHX--WHOLLY I: XEMPf Zone : Asd : $ 198 , 900 Imp : 11 % Sale Date : 02/0 /88 Sale Amt : $630 , O(.II.IP Loan Amt : E xe'lltl.?t : Bit : 36 Rms : Bd Rth of Units : I. otsgf t. : 4.300 Sq l : 3264. THE INFORMATION PROV rDE D IS DEEMED RELIABLE , BUT IS NOT GUARANTEED COPYRIGHT TRW 1986) /;� Eti lOFtS TITLE COMPAi , PAGE 3 PREPARED FOR : SE=ACI I FF VEL.OPME N IQfJOUESTED BY; 13013_ COf301* 03/14/ )0 Orange County REP : APN: 0; 4. 153_ 17 S i f us : 121 MAIN S-! f.lUN f I NG-I0ICI SE:AC}_I 92648 Owner : DRAPER EL_EANOR J /Y' S Legal : T A0352 0 104 !... 21 Mail : 121 MAIN I *HUNl INGlN BCE1, CAL.. 92648 Phone : Use : COt'i v1I=--COhRC ! AL.. Zone :: ,1si.1 : $51 16 i.. ini!:. . r._�4';:, Sale Date , Bit : 20 Rms : Bd Bth Tot Units : Lotsdlt : 2937 qft : 5000 _..................... ......._..._.........._......... ......................._................._.........._.................. ._............._.........................................._............................._.........._................._..............._.._.__._.._......-.--- { 18 Si tus : 119 MAIN ST FIB NTIN .; i N BEACH 92648 Owner : AL.! OI' SO FRANK Legal : I A035 R 104 L. 0) M 'i i I : N F W * O W N F R*Sf E S I l US ADDRESS Phone : Use : COM--COMME::RCIAL Zone : Asc:l : $300 , 000 Imp : 17%. Sale D11c: : 11/08/88 Sale AmI- : $ 18 , 500P Loan Amt : Exempt : t : Bit : 20 Rms : Rd BTh Tot Units : `{ Lolsgfl : 2950 Scift : 1820 --- ---- -------- --------------- ------ --------- -------- --------- - ---- --------------- AP;V: 0 4-- 1 z:;;; 'I 9 i t 1.1 s : 113 MAIN ST HUN t 1 NGT.0N REACH 9 f;/l ,' Owner : ARDLL.MUT I ALIMAD HA; PI) /FA L.ega I : T A0352 B .104 I.. 1 'l Ivai I : °(:,.JACKS SURFBOARDS* 113 MAID ST*I,il1NTINGTON BEACH, CA ) Phoney : Use : COM- COL_':M R... IAI. Zone : Asd : $ 161 41 Imp : 4s?`'.=. Sale Dale : 11/08/84 is I e A;iit : Loan Amt : Exempt : 131t : Rms : Bd Bth Tot Units : L.otsgft : Sgft : . ........................... ..-............._.-_......... -_..........-_......... -._.-_.._.......................-........-_-..... ........_.- --.._.._..............._.................................................-_......._.........-_..................... — 0 S i t IJ s III MAIN c._I_ L I U!!T I N G I.O N BEACH :)2 6 0- Owner : ABDL::I_mu l AHMAD LIn:J'E:D / :_S Legal : T A0352 B 104 I... 13 Mail : ":JACKS SURFBOARD: * 1 'I MAIN ST*HUNTINGroN BEACH, CA 9 Phone : Use : CC)'Y`:..---00MMFRC I A.I_. Zone : As I : $1 '7 . 1 7 Imp : I Sale Date : Sale Amt : Loan Amt : Exempt : Hit : Rms : Bd B1h Tot Units : Lotsc:lft : ._If1 : _............ ... . ... ....._......_ ...._.-......... ...... .... .._...... ............ ... ............. ... .. .._........... .... ._._ ......._ _ ._ -. .... . ......... .. -.............. .. .... . ._......_ . . .... .. I Li E: INFORMATION PROVIDED 15 DEEMED RELIABLE , 13 t., r IS N O-r GUARANTEED COPYRIGHT TRw 198f. "E Ln OF REPORT" T I TL F COMPANY NY Prepar-ed for : - .�:f_ACI. IFF.. ( I:1 Lh,,.I z quested by 13013 C0136NX • V� : . OF'!r., : 0ra11f f, Co�.!nty Rep : - C 0 a,; E R1 P A C, E Search Type : 1'1? Pr i ni Repor t Type : :;LI III III ary SearC:h Key : II J,! c;I V!.!r I _ r M a Ni.imbeI- of Record: Re.qu e sted : ';nn SingIe/modeI Property : I:::AI;C::rI 0P..I I ON: :•I FC I F.Ii C i ty Cod --.a I r D.,.tt e <YY MM> U.:o Code Sa I e Pr i c:e $ Zoninq Total Asses %e-fj $ Squctr c.. Fe_et Price per sq f t $ LoIsgft/Acre Percent Improved Year 6u i I t Owner- (Occupied=O, Absentee—A) Bedrooms Units BathI--ooms Typc� O-( Park i m--1 Pool ? (Y or N) i T I TL E COVPAV PAGE' 7 PREPARED FOR : I.ACL. I E { ::_V[ {..<)hi�1i: iu 1 E=C�IJE=S l'E I� BY' 13013 COIOIVA . 0 3/ •14/90 Orange County REP --------------- ----------------------------------------------------------- APN: 0 i!.- 1 i1.-0"I Situs : 126 MAIN ST {..IlJN..I 1 NG-fON .13E::ACf-I 92648 Owner : REDEVELOPMENT AGEN I_.eg a I : T A0352 13 103 I... 213 Mis I I : N F W * 0 W N I::: R*_il::_l:: SITUS ADI:)RF'_; Phone : Use : CO '1--C:O"dlMEnCIAI. Zone : Asd : $ 0 Sills:• Dale : 05/01 /89 Sale Aml : Loan Aml : Exempt : Bit : 31 Rms : Bd 13th Tot Units : Ln1 ;(I11 : 5875 rift _ +::850 -............................................... _......................................_........._..............._....._....................._...-..._............._.._....._._.............._....-...._..._-.....................-......_......................................-. -----. APN : 0 4 - 1 +•;;.1.-O i t1.1s : 122 MAIN `.T Hl1I.IT I NC,TON BEACH 9,G,1.s: Owner : RE:DE::VI:::I-OPf': E:NT ACil::N Legal :: T A0:::5 R 103 I.. Mail : N F W * O W N I: R:r:",f::E SITUS AE)l:'hl:=;: : Phone: COM-COMMFRCIAI Zone : Asd : $34 , 991 Imp : Sale Date : 05/22/99 Sale Aml : Loan Amt : Exempt : 13 t . 10 R m : [;:.I 11111 Tot Units : ' I o f :: _; .I: l 5F75 ,. q 3550 ------ -- - - ...._ -- ........... - -_ -...._ -_..........._.-_.... ............. -__ .....-_ -_--_.. - ..._.... -_.........- _ .......-_......... - ... -................... --_. ---- A E 't' - i t ",'4 - -1 5 1-0 3 I l I.I ' 120 MAIN ST HUNTINGTON REACH 9._. . 'I 8 Owner : CAI_. RFsolorS L-IASFKO L. eg I : 1- A0 35 R 103 L_ 20 M ', i l : N 1_: W * O W N E:: R*SFE:: SITUS ADDRESS Phone : l ,e : COM....CO1'i!+ I::hC; IAI.. ?one : Asd : $42 , 669 Imp : �17 Sale Data : 04 /L1f:'�,/S 9 Sal Aml : $ 1 ;=00 ililOF Loan /gym i . Ex�ifl p t : , lilt - 08 R+iis : Bd Rth 1 :) t Units : 2 I._ol qft : 29:37 ; ft : 3393 _.........._....................._. ........._......7_..-_. -__---. - _ ..-...........-_. - ..............._.-_. ._.... -_............. -... -..-....._.....-_..._..............--_. _................ --_........................-.....-_.. APN : 0 ;L.... ..! 1.,;,1 .. 01 Situ : 116 AI .'1 ST HUNTINGTONBEACH 9260.3 ;;vaj I : h F W k 0 W N F R*'SE..L. II._ ADDRESS Phone : Sale Dale : j /i . ;9 q S. I . r'Imt _ 'fi1 . =00 i1.1i`il= I p;.'! Exempt : _......._. ..__..._......._........_......... ......_-.......... _..-.._....._.._........_....._..._ ...... - -_.....-_.....-_. - .......- - --.. ... -- ............ ._.....-_.....-__-_......._............ - _. .......- APN: 0 4... 154..-.ii5 I1u , 112 MAIN ,.T 1_Iii:' I Il'`G.. O�� E31.. i',CBEACH92648 I Owner : CA.!._ RESORTS f-IA`:•I::KO Legal : I.. A0 5 B 103 I_ "I i;'':::a i l : N [ W * O W N I:: R*SI:::E SITUS ADDRF Phone : Use : COM-COMMFRCIAI.. Zone : As & $294 , 000 ii% `.i::aIe Dale : 09 /08/88 Sale Aml : $ I , 100 , OOOP loan Am [ : $4 , =72 , 000 Exempt : Bit : RIns : 13d Rl1.1 Tot Units : LoI- q .It : 5875 cr f I. : 7348 ...._..._..................... ..._.._..............._.._.-..........-........__ ................._........................................ ........................................._..-.........-..._-.............._...................................._.............._.................................. I..HE INFORMATION PROVIDED IS DEEMED n I.. I A13L V . BUT IS NOT GUARANT1::1:::1.) COPYRIGHT ..E.RW 1986 I Jb --TUh'ti T I TL L= COMPA IVY -,- c Prepared for I:::ACI.. 11=F :: <•:~; vF:1 011h�1r:N,I eques ted by: 13013 CO1 0N.A- =` : .: 0rangC. C 0 u n I Rep: * * T I P C 0 v F R P A G F. Search fyf=e : I'll) print Rep Dr t Type : :=t,�riirii iry 15•earch Key : P iri:; I N1 u rn b e, r Max Number of Records Rcgt. ested : '-5-00 i nq I e-/Mode. I Proper I y : nc,l n ( pr ,;1;��r i:n1 . tCII:I-I. , i :) ty Coi-I0 Sale Dal <YY NiM> U:e Cc,rir= Sale; Price $ Loninq Total Assessed $ ,F r s f t $ squ are Feet price f L.otsgl t/Acre. llerce:--nt lmpro i� d Year Bt.t i I t Owner (0+:.,_.up i ed-0; Abse_niec.=.A) Bedrooms Units Bathrooms Type of 11ark i ng Pool ? (Y or N) i >'XV ti i 5 T/ TL E COXPA X PREPARED FOR : SEACL I E-I I. ul=iu"I 1=C�L.11:=STL.D 13Y: BOB C0130�!A 03/14/ 0 Orange County REP : - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- P I .Il_is : 102 MAIN ST HUNTINGION REACH 92648 Owner : CAL. RESORTS HA`if:=KO L.ega l : T A0352 B 103 L 9 1111a I I : ICI I:: W * 0 W ICI E::: R*SE:::E S I TUS ADDRI:S Phone : Use : COM -COMMERC. IAL_ Zone : A d $550 , 000 Imp : 0; Sale Date : 09 08 88 Sale Am t : $ 1 , 400 , OOOP Loan Amt : $4, 272 , 000 Exempt : BIt : Rms : Bd Lath Tot Units : Lotsgft : 5500 S,_7ft : ".""....." -..........................".....-."......."..."..............".................."....-................. ............................................"......."."............................................_.................-..............................._.....................-_..........._. 1 11 I Sit 300 OCI:_AN AV ►IUD; I- I NGT"ON BEACH :9264s3 Owner : CAL RESORTS HA EKO Legal : T A035 B 103 L_ 7 iti a i I : N F `J * O ;'J N F R*`;FF SITUS AL)L)hES Phone : - C Use OM _C'0,, ME:RC' IAi... Zone :- A`�.,C1 : $550 , 000 Imp : O''. ::•,:alp.; Date : 09/08/88 ._,ale r111if _ ,, I 100 - 1!iJl: Loan r`1fi11 $ 1 , 27;% - fiilii I::X!irri;at : Hit : Rms : E3d Blh Lot units : L. o sdit : 5500 raft : THE: INFORMATION PROVIDED IS DEEMED D RELIABLE , BUT IS NOT GUARAN..I..E::I::D COPYRIGHT TRW 1986 "END ND OF REPO T"a ' t/Vv6s�-Oris 7/71E {%lMvyA P�8E� PREPARED FOR : �E�CL | F E . YELOP�ENT (��3EQUESTED BY: B0B C0R0N� . 03/14/00 Orange County REP : ~= ---------------------7---------------------------------------------------------- APM: 024- 150- 16 S i 1us : S | TUS PEND |.NG MUNT | NGT0N BEACH 92648 owner : STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEP/XX Legal : T S0006 B 11 L 11 Mail : REAL ESTATE D | Y*650 H0WE AYE^SACAAMENT0 , CA 06825 Phone : Use : WMX-WHOLLY E=PT Zone - Asd ; $880 , 665 Imp : 7% � 5a | r Dale : Sale Amt . Loan Amt : Exempt : B | k Xms : Bd Bth Tot Units : Lotsqft : Sqft : ----------------------------------------------------------- --------------------- THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IS DEEMED RELIABLE , BUT IS NOT GUARANTEED COPYRIGHT TRW 1986 **ENV O/ REP(VYQ: - - � ` ' 1 WE S KOR ti ML E G'D fPA =PAGE �I _ PREPARED FOR : SI:=ACL_ I I It- L_ !E 1.OPmE:I�I'T I.QUE Sl I D 13Y 13013 C0130NA 03 'I4 Oran,)., (, .l.lnty.: --= -_ APill: 0 4 . 150....fir; i tus : SITUS PENDING HUik..I.. I NCiTOICI BEACH 02648 owner : tll. N l I hlGTON REACH C Legal : 'T A0354 Mail : LIUNLIi`, GTICI BCH, CAI_. 9 = Ph nc : Use : ';+FIX- ;I;IiOL.L..Y I: \E:=MP I Zone : Asd : $ 14, 3g0 I mp : 0;'•_-. Sale Date : 04/l)4/•.:.1 Sale Afii l _ L.. _. irl Am [ _ f:::X emp t Bl t : Rms : Bd Bth Tot Units : I...otsgft : qft : _..........._..._............... ............................................... ............_.......................-........._........_................................._............._..................._....._...._....._. L HE INFORMATION PROVIDED IS DEEMED RELIABLE , BUT IS NOT GUARANTEED COPYRIGHT .EhW `I9n6; **EN0 OF REPOR f** i l!1�L 5'lOft'ti T/.T/_F COMPANY C i E_ 7 PR[PARI:=1) FOR : ' � ;L.ou1._� 11: 13Y = o3i -I .I Or<<rtcle CC)tin 1 Y" RE .p .:.. ! 8 -1..- "1/I S. i I ..I-U ; I F::N I:) 1 N G, 0 w n e;r 13 F:=A C H C I I I (1 n(i R. 13 '1 '1 I_ 14 NI 1 i I CI I Y Ci F::RI<.* %it00 MAIN I NIGi f0N Fil.-ACH , CA 48 Phc+nF' il/. ili'. f?<1 ,;cl I 3 Anil I.. 'a 11 Aril I 1.3 1 1 : R rn 13 d 1:3 11-1 f o t U n i I L.Ci I cl 1 t : S(I f I ..............-_............................................._...................................._........................-............................ ......................................._........................... ........................._..............I......_...............................__.. 1111: INi!-0R141ATIO:1\I F'R0VII- F-1) 1 `s'. I:)1:: Ii1..1- 1A13LF RUI I N 0 f GUARANL1: 1. 1- C O P Y Fl 1 C:,!I I 1 1:1 AJ 'I i l APR��� 024 146 09 APR# 024 142 16 n WOOD' BLANCHE A ALI MIKE s,_, 201 5TH ST 19105—C BEACH CREST IN HUNTINGTON FCH CA 92648 ; -; HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92646 i`-:;� i i, r APR# 024 146 14 APR# 024 142 17 � i .: LU JAMES ''` _ � DIRY GEORGE 6071 MANORFIELD DR I PO BOX 1-t6 g2� HUNTINGTON BCH CA 92648 r -------- ,.,,. APR�� 024 147 03 1 � , ��tl If (° APR�� 024 142 18 RTTRRTC ner=7T� '�� CFERRARI SANDRA z 37� 1 l3 rr, cvi ' i �(o 706 W BALBOA BLVD 7TTTwTT INGTON R('T3 CA n7L/8 BALBOA CA 92661 iCr . - .. APR# 024 147 05 GALLEGOS WILLIAM G ' 210 5TH ST r: HUNTINGTON BCH CA 92648 APR# 024 147 09 APR# 024 143 10 _ n � � A HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY �C� �'G 2000 MAIN ST 10110 CRO ; ( HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 f `+ APR# 024 147 10 ncr,l3tn; ( APR# 024 143 11 Traf (^ CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH `11 2000 MAIN ST p f - HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 �9 t a-1 , APR# 024 147 11 t APR�1024 143 12 MULLIGAN GARY T KOLLER JAMES RIANER.BEN 2364 THIRD ST 16001 BALLANTINE LN SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94107 �.:. �. HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92647 APR# 024 147 14 (; APR# 024 144 12 � LANGEVIN DOUGLAS 8196 PAWTUCKET DR CHILCUTT WILLIAM ` ^ HUNTINGTON BCH CA 92646. r 1( gr.• "' nT(T?Ann 5�� Iv► n S� c_ V/e vi-hn-krct . r�T'omr Arrn r .nr n17F7 ' •TL V i 1]If.L\IJ V 1LLT2'IV L� VCl �'�v r APR# 024 147 15 APR# 024 144 13 WURZL THOMAS MC CALLEN MARCUS M 5199 E- PACIFIC COAST HWY SUITE 604 C/O SEBBO, VIRGINIA LONG BEACH CA 90804 22818 COSTA BELLA EL TORO, CA 92630 APR# 024 147 23 APR# 024 144 14 COOPER PAULINE M STUPIN ANDREW PO BOX 723 812 13 ST HUNTINGTON BCH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 APR# 024 147 25 t APR# 024 146 06 .'. ., = HARLOW RICHARD A BRIGGS, JAMES M 111 LOTH ST i 14312 WILLOW LN HUNTINGTON BCH CA 92648 f4 TUSTIN CA 92680 . _ F APR 4t 024 147 26 �.1 ! F ( - ( V L� .t -h r'-c IT -LS'1ffJ-t d 't• S-.'� '�f� l Z 't :s':_•k`.; .1,'M" '_- ,<_ K Jyy L Yr' S,w-.c...s•..r' 4, ,�Kj _.� - - CAVERLY THOMAS A - r 553 TEMPLE HILL DR r LAGUNA BCH CA 92651 001 - I -T-jl r. PR 024 153 05 AP R# 024 147 28 � MASE ANN DECKER MARJORITE T 123 MAIN ST I ` APT G-214 f' HUNTINGTON BCH CA 92648 I ; 8877 LAUDERDALE CT -HUNTINGTON BCH CA 92646 i �s APR# 024 154 01 APR# 024 148 12 ZEIDAN ADEL MUSTAFA i I ('_> it NICCOLE DENNIS 10220 BLACK RIVER 400 3RD ST FOUNTAIN VALLEY CA 92708 I(;. ! HUNTINGTON BCH CA 92648 APR# 024 154 02 I'..;. APR# 024 148 14 � SARRABERE CHARLES f I ' WOOD BLANCHE KOURY ROBERT 201 5TH ST REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF H.B. 2000 MAIN ST HUNTINGTON BCH CA 92648 HUNTINGTON BCH, CA 92648 APR# 024 154 M-0 CALIFORNIA RESORTS/k"03e ( APR# 024 147 35 f ASSOCIATES r TAYLOR FAMILY TRUST 220 VIA SAN REMO ` HUNTINGTON BCH CA 92648 (!. NEWPORT BEACH CA 92663Y AP it 02 154 8 AS TAN LEA UE 0 H.B. �` (__: APR�� 024 147 36 ": 301 LNUT ST ORANGE COAST SPECIALTIES PROJECT #2 HUNTIN ON H C 9264 C/O ROHM, JOHN H 636 E CHAPMAN AVE C�. ORANGE CA 92666 APR# 024 144 04 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA APR�i 024 147 37 E; POST OFFICE HATCH GARY OLIVE AVE C/O BEACH COMBERS LOCKERS ' 207 MAIN ST HUNTINGTON BCH CA 92648 ( HUNTINGTON BCH CA 92648 �``` 7jr APR# 2-4 14 38jFURMAN CA IN81-730 GHWAY 111 I INDIO 2201 bni d 'r o APR# 024 148 11 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CITY OF H.B. � C J al 2000 MAIN ST (9 PO BOX 190 HUNTINGTON BCH CA 92648 02 APR# 024 152 05 jr a SHUPE MARGARET C- �ajV1 5 C/O HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOP. AGENCY 'L Lo 49' 2000 MAIN ST HUNTINGTON BEACH, .CA 92648APR# 024 E S53 04 LAN JAM -3OGI� T-a �/� 637 FRANKFORT Ao HUNTINGTON BCH CA .92648 fr. eG)ar'ed for' : *SEARCH COMPLETE : Reqt.i`e3,tE'd_ -Uy : - _Yy RECORDS READ: Rep : j - r RECORDS RETURNED: 1 '4+ > COPYRIGHT TRW 1988 ******�Itic7t�Yic7t*it�t*******itir�k* F 'E J �a APP. # 024 142 17 DIRY GEORGE P .O. BOX. 821 Huntington Beach, Ca. ! ; . 92648 I A??R # 024 144 12 CHILCUTT WILLIAM 569 E .. Main St. Ventura, Ca. 93001 � l � APR # 024 147 03. STUPIN, ANDREW j 3701. Birch St. #210 Newport Beach, Ca. 92660 APR # 024 147 09 M_AZZOTTI , LENNY 41.4 Walnut Avenue Huntington Beach, Ca. 92647 APR # 024 147 10 TRAINER, BEN 2364 Third Street San Francisco, Ca. 94107 APR # 024 154 03 - CALIFORNIA RESORTS/HASF.KO ASSOCIATES 222 Fifth St. Huntington Bch, Ca. 9.2648 APR # 024 147 38 GARY HATCH 309 Tava Lane Palm Desert,_ Ca. 92260 RECEIVEp 4 CITY CLERK Date: November 5, 1990 HU'4TINGTCCITY OF I' -"LIF. Submitted To:�Honorable Mayor and City Council Members NOV Submitted By: Douglas M. Langevin, Owner,217 Main St. 10 pi' �fl Subject: Appeal-Conditional Use Permit No. 90-43 and Design Review Board Action STATEMENT OF ISSUE: R.C.A. transmitted to you for action as Item D-5 on your agenda tonight is incomplete. The historical standing of 217 Main Street, as recognized by previous councils and the Historic Resources Board, has been ignored along with previous communications to the Planning Commission and Council. The State Historical Building Code,for which this building qualifies, has been omitted from the R.C.A. ANALYSIS: Applicant: David M.Lautner/Douglas M. Langevin Appellant: Councilman MacAllister Location: 217 Main Street(west side, approx.125 feet south of Olive Ave.) ISSUES A. Background: 217 Main Street is located in the Historic Rehabilitation.Project Block. This building is a recognized Local Historical Landmark. It is cited in E.I.R. 89-4 as both architecturally and historically important(see attachment A). 217 Main Street is listed in the "Historical Resources Survey Report" approved and transmitted to the State Office of Historic Preservation for deposition by Council on November 16, 1987 (see attachment B 1 &B2) . It is one of the landmark structures cited on the list of high priority structures in Huntington Beach transmitted by the Historic Resources Board to Council on May 9, 1989 as part of the process to draft a landmark ordinance which has been held in limbo by staff(see attachment Q. 217 Main Street was cited in a letter to the Planning Commission on September 14, 1990 by the Historic Resources Board as a National Register quality structure (see attachment D). Staff has apparently forgotten to include this communication in the R.C.A. All of this makes 217 Main Street a qualified historical building or structure as cited in Sec. 18955 of the Health and Safety Code,Part 2.7, State Historical Building Code (See attachment E). The City has applied the State Historical Building Code to other structures that, while not strictly listed on an approved local inventory,were "locally recognized,on an informal basis" (see attachment F). The denial of 217 Main Street the use of the State Historic Building Code is contrary to equal access and a violation of Section 18959.(B)of the State Historic Building Code which mandates that all jurisdictions use the S.H.B.C. when dealing with qualified historical buildings or structures (see attachment E). Under the S.H.B.C. the applicant is required to use original architecture, materials, colors, and finishes. The applicant is enjoined from over-embellishment with additions of an architectural nature that previously did not exist or would change the nature of a building to reflect a different or false sense of historical development(see attachment G). B. DesianI The only downtown design guidelines that this project may violate are: 1. primary materials (wood--not stucco, smooth block, granite,or marble) 2. possibly roof materials (clay or concrete shingle,tile,copper, and painted metal) 3. possible use of an awning As the project now stands,it has multi-pane windows and transoms, a cornice treatment, entry doors that conform(vestibule or set-back type) and composition shingle type roof. (The Design Review Board required wood shingles in violation of the Downtown Design Guidelines and H.B. Fire Code. Composition shingles are as close as we can come to wood). Surely, this is close enough for a building that was originally built in 1904, and pre-dates the Downtown Design Guidelines by more than 80 years. The plans the applicant is using were drawn by Rengel&Co. in October, 1988 for the Redevelopment Agency to use as part of the Historic Rehabilitation Block Re-facade Grant Program, slightly modified to reflect historic accuracy. These plans were approved by Council on November 6, 1989, overturning an appeal of the project by Councilman MacAllister,dated October 16, 1989. In the appeal, Councilman MacAllister did not raise objections to the proposed building designs being inconsistent with the Downtown Design Guidelines (see attachment H). Subsequent to his 1989 appeal, many buildings have been processed under the program and again no objections have been raised. Applicant was told by Redevelopment staff that he was free to use the Redevelopment Agency commissioned plans if he decided not to participate in the Grant Program. The Redevelopment Agency was negotiating with the applicant as late as June 12, 1990 to use these plans as part of the Facade Grant Program (see attachment I). Further,the Design Review Board has denied the applicant the use of natural redwood board-and-batten for the side and rear of his building. The use of composition roofing was also denied. The reason cited was that it would be incompatible with surrounding buildings and any proposed or future construction. The Shank House on the corner of 5th and Walnut is being restored without being submitted to the Design Review Board. The newly replaced exterior of the Shank House is redwood shingles two stories high and composition roofing. The R.C.A. continues to site the support of staff for the Design Review Board but staff and the Design Review Board are essentially one and the same. The Design Review Board is dominated by staff(Adams and Smith)who make up 50% of the Board Members (one seat being vacant since February, 1990). One seat is held by a Chevron employee and one by Planning Commissioner Kirk Kirkland. No downtown merchants or residents are represented. C. Rehabilitation VS. Demolition: Staff s definition of demolition and rehabilitation represent the personal opinion of the director of planning and are not code. If the City had applied State Historic Building Code as mandated by law,this project would not be an issue. The issuance of Stop Work Orders, the wasting of applicants time (3 months) and money, and the many wasted hours of staff, the Planning Commission, and now the City Council would have been saved. D. Staff Procedural Errors: The applicants tenants applied for a meeting of the Design Review Board on July 19. The first meeting of the D.R.B. was held on July 26 without a legal quorum. The next two meetings were continued. The fourth meeting was held but no action taken at the request of staff. The fifth meeting was held on August 30; the project was denied. Division 9,Art. 9854,Design Review by applicant states " the Board shall act on all applications within thirty (30)days of submittal". The fifth meeting was held 42 days after submittal (see attachment J). The planning Commission meeting was held Sept. 18. The applicant's appeal was upheld 6-1. Councilman MacAllister appealed the decision on Sept. 20 by FAX to the City Clerk. To this date,the applicant has received no formal communication of either of these issues outside of a Stop Work Order served on Sept. 25. Yet,Division 9,Art. 9841.9 Notice of Decision states "Notice of the decision of the Planning Commission shall be mailed to the applicant within five working days..." (see attachment K). The hearing date for the appeal of CUP 90-43 and Design Review Board Action was set on October 22 with the City Clerk(see attachment L). The hearing has been scheduled for November 5. Division 9,Art. 9884,Action of Appeal states "said appeal shall be set for hearing within thirty (30) days, or longer,if requested by appellant,from the time the matter is received by the City Clerk,together with the necessary fees." (see attachment M) Division 9,Art. 9842.5 Notice of Time of Hearing states "any decision or requirement of the Planning Commission that is appealed to or challenged by the City Council or any member thereof, shall be set for public hearing before the City Council by the City Clerk. Said hearing shall be held at the earliest possible regular City Council meeting; with public notification pursuant to Article 987 of this code" (see attachment K). It is obvious from these articles that the intent is to set the hearing with the Clerk within 30 days and hold the hearing at the earliest possible date. The City Clerk affirms that this hearing was not set for 32 days and that there was no request for an extension (see attachment L). The first possible Council meeting was held October 1,the second meeting was held October 15, and the third will be November 5. In addition,during this time there were two special council meetings. SUMMARY The applicant feels that this appeal is an unauthorized act because of the untimely nature of the hearing and should be dropped with no further alterations to the Planning Commission decision of September 18. In addition,this locally recognized landmark should have had the State Historic Building Code applied to it from the very start of the process. The failure of the Director of Community Development to do so has cost this project at least three months and doubled the monitary costs. The applicant feels this process should be corrected so that future small business projects are not subjected to these unnecessary and punitive delays. ATTACHMENTS: ,tLhrough M Dougl . Langevin TrACOMEOUA T Environmental I mpact Repo rt - ir lop 894 <4 City of Huntington Beach ffA inc. Ad iaccnt Planned Land Uses The proposed project is consistent in nature with the planned land uses for the vicinity. The project, in accordance with the surrounding related projects, will incrementally contribute to the development of a downtown atmosphere as proposed in the Downtown Specific Plan. No impacts are anticipated to planned land uses. Surrounding Architectural Compatibility For new construction within the project area, elements of the Downtown Design Guidelines will be combined with historical architectural elements to help assure compatibility of new and rehabilitated buildings. A worst-case scenario in terms of architectural compatibility would result if only a portion of the structures located on the project block are rehabilitated. Under this scenario, incompatibility between the existing unchanged structures and renovated structures may result. A potential impact due to differing architectural themes and varying setbacks could result on the demonstration block if not all property owners choose to participate in the proposed project (Options 1 and 2). Presently property owners can rehabilitate the facades of their structures without entitlement from the City as long as they are not adding square footage. Because some property owners may choose to rehabilitate the existing facades and some may choose to leave their building facades in their existing state, the potential architectural incompatibility impacts would be similar with and without the project. This impact is not considered significant since it is an existing condition that could occur without implementation of proposed project which allows for the addition of square footage with or without demolition. Additionally, as part of the proposed project, owners who will participate in the rehabilitation program are required by City policy to have their building plans approved by the Design Review Board. The Design Review Board's intent is to examine proposed development and make recommendations for its compatibility with surrounding structures. By integrating existing historical elements with the design elements of the Downtown Design Guidelines, the architectural style of the proposed project will be compatible with future development proposed for the downtown core area. The City will also provide a common streetscape comprised of landscape materials and hardscape as part of the mitigation for this project. This integration and provision or'common streetscape/hardscape will help achieve architectural compatibility along both sides of Main Street. With the incorporation of City policy and mitigation, the architectural style of the proposed project will be compatible with the proposed related projects (Villa del Mar, Town Square, Main Pier Phase I and II, north pier parking structure and Pierside Village). All of these related projects are architecturally designed to conform with the intent of the Downtown Specific Plan. Additionally, after incorporation of City policy and mitigation, the proposed project will be compatible in design with the Heritage Square block 300 located northerly of the project. The integration of historical elements into the architectural style of windows, textures, and 35 4 roofing and lighting materials on the project block will assure compatibility with the historic architectural style existing and proposed for the Heritage Square block. Ar/}f� OI L`/ !�(QtAARC 1�15? , -� JN �llA�%Q$ l�S API -zC ./o6I?Y P&ICIE( ALB-R-QUEENTS 1 15 ou7'c� 17 a17J-,��S ELot.k A. The Design Review Board shall review and approve all proposed exterior modifications resulting from building alteration/addition, rehabilitation, or facade improvement prior to approval of building permits. B. The Design Review Board shall ensure that all architecture within the project incorporate elements of the Downtown Design Guidelines and also incorporate elements representative of the historic period of the structure under review prior to approval of building permits. MITIGATION MEASURES 1. A sign and landscape plan shall be submitted to the Design Review Board and or City Planning Department by each property owner prior to approval of building permits. The location and type of all signs shall conform to the provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code and be consistent with the standards listed on page 33 of the Downtown Design Guidelines. All lighting and landscaping materials shall also be consistent with the guidelines. 2. The City shall encourage and/or sponsor a planned sign program on both sides of Main Street. This program shall include possible sign amortization, City funded removal of existing signs, and City funded purchase and mounting of new signs. 3. The City shall implement consistency of similar hardscape and landscape on both sides of Main Street. LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE No impacts have been identified for the proposed project in the following areas: Land Use Element, Coastal Element, Downtown Specific Plan/Zoning, Local Coastal Program, and adjacent planned land uses. Impacts associated with onsite existing land uses are determined to be insignificant. Implementation of City policies and proposed mitigation will reduce potential impacts associated with the Downtown Design Guidelines to a level of insignificance. In the future, with the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures and City policies architectural compatibility will be achieved. 36 TABLE D HISTORIC STRUCTURES INDEX NATIONAL DATE OF HRSR' REGISTER ADDRESS STYLE CONSTRUCTION ALTERATIONS RATING RATING I 201/203 Main St. 20's Commercial 1905 Substantial C/O/I 3D/NC 205 Main Street Zigzag Moderne 1906 Minor . B/2 3D 207 Main. Street Early Theatre 1930 Moderate B/2 3D 209 Main Street 30's Commercial 1930 Moderate C/2 3D 211 Main Street 30's Commercial 1930 Moderate C/2/1 3D 213 Main Street 30's Commercial 1930 Moderate C/2 3D/NC 215 Main Street 20's Commercial 1920 Moderate. B/1 3D 217 Main Street Western Falsefront 1904 Moderate B/1** 3D 221 Main Street 20's Commercial 1920 Moderate C/1/I 3D 223 Main Street 20's Commercial 1920 Moderate C/1/I 3D 225 Main Street Vacant 0 _ 222/224 Fifth St. 60's Commercial 1964 0 NC 218/220 Fifth St. - 20's Commercial 1920 Moderate C-/3/I 4/3D 214 Fifth Street 20's Commercial 1925 Demolished 0 d 208/210 Fifth St. 20's Commercial 1924 Minor B/1/I 3D/NC (The Shed) 204 Fifth Street Vacant 0 206 Fifth Street Queen Anne Cottage 1900 Demolished 0 d 202 (204) Fifth St. Craftsman Bungalow 1908 Minor A/3 3/3D (Shank House) 412 Walnut Avenue 20's Commercial 1925 Minor B/2 3D 411 Olive Avenue Zigzag Modeme 1935 Moderate B/2 3D Source: City of Huntington Beach Historic Resources Survey Report, 1986 and Johnson Huemann Associates City of Huntington Beach Historic Resources Survey Evaluation, 1988. r City of Huntington Beach Historic Resources Survey Report Note: I - Requires seismic upgrade ** - Designated historically significant by the City of Huntington Beach Historic Resources Survey Report. RANKING SUMMARIES WINDSHIELD SURVEY ASSESSMENT RANKINGS The Windshield Survey Assessment rankings range from "A" through "D"; "A" equaling greatest historical significance, and "D" equaling least historical significance. A Ranking: Historically Significant/Candidate for National Register of Historic Places Listing B Ranking: Potentially Historically significant/Potential Candidate for National Register of Historic Places Listing C Ranking: Pre-1946 Buildings/Candidate for Contributor to a Historic District D Ranking: Pre-1946 Buildings/Not Historically Significant in Existing Condition RESEARCH ASSESSMENT RANKINGS The range of Research Assessment rankings include 3, 2, 1, 0 and R. These are summarized as follows: 3 Ranking: Possible National Register Listing 2 Ranking: Possible Contributor to a District 1 Ranking: Possible Contributor if Remodel is Reversed 0 Ranking: Not Historical/Very Altered R Ranking: Residence NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES RANKINGS PERTAINING TO THIS DOCUMENT 1 Ranking: Individually listed in the National Register of Historic Places. 3 Ranking: Appears eligible for individual listing. 3D Ranking: Appears_eligible for listing only as a contributor to a potential National Register District. 3D/NC Ranking: Within the boundaries of a potential National Register District, but does not contribute to its historic or architectural significance du_- to age, alterations, or character. 4 Ranking: May become eligible for listing when: a) More historic or architectural research is performed. b) The property is restored to an earlier appearance. c) More significant examples of the property's architectural style are demolished. d) The property becomes old enough to meet the Register's 50-year requirement. 5* Ranking: Is listed or is eligible for listing under a local preservation or landmark ordinance. 5 Ranking: Worthy of note as a relatively intact example of a representative style or type or as a contributor to a relatively intact cluster or grouping. . 6 Ranking: None of the above. d Ranking: Demolished Where a two-part designation is assigned (e.g. 3D/NC), the fast part indicates individual status and the second half notes the building's value to a potential district. 1 R Two pairs of 12-pane wood frame windows are symmetrically placed in the facade at the second story. These window are thought to have originally been double hung. The wide wooden multi-paned glass door at the entry may be original. The sides and back of the building reveal the structure's masonry construction. Four four-over-one double hung windows along the upper portion of the north wall are original as is a large arched brick opening at the rear on the first floor. Moderate alterations have occurred to the building. The original entry floor of hexagonal ceramic tile trimmed in a rust and white boarder has been replaced. Other features thought to have been added include multipaned wood framed display windows which flank the entrance, a recessed door at the west end of the facade, and an arched fan light above the entry door.. This building is significant for its association with the Huntington Beach oil boom of the 1920's. The Woods hotel was one of several small hotel-retail operators established during this time. The second floor room space was used as living quarters by oil workers. The first floor was used for retail purposes. Past ground floor tenants include Perhson's Bootery (1922), Frank Glockner Men's Shop (1926), Pinkley Flower Shop (1942), and Crosby Music Shop (1952). The Crosby Music Shop was owned by Everett Crosby, the cousin of actor Bing Crosby. Current use at the site includes a restaurant at street level, and Huntington Beach City offices on the second floor. 217 Main Street ©2 TAI_BU _11,E I , X-/Z MA-IU Fu I LAN N- I I fN ?F-K.- ` At'; jai �G' U:_�IJ( - The City of Huntington Beach Historic Resources Survey Report has given the a B/1** (see Table D) ranking. The building receives a 3D (see Table D) National Register Historic Places rating. This single-storied Western Falsefront building dates from 1904. Behind the stucco-clad falsefront facade is the original board and batten gable roofed building. The stuccoed facade parapet is unbroken. A recessed entry at the center of the storefront features diagonally placed plate glass windows leading to a single wood and glass door. Vertical-paned transoms run above the store windows and door. ffiia 'an ale`' `'"—'"'�=s Two large plate glass windows framed i ood flank the entry. The narrow bulkheads are clad in vertical paneling. A140l' Tt u s --71/4 y AP-9- The north side of the building borders an open unrelated patio area from which the board and batten siding is visible. Double hung windows, a paneled door, and a small shed appear at the back of the structure. Moderate alterations have occurred to the building. Among them is the remodeling of the facade during the City's slant oil drilling boom. 55 1 This structure was built by Talbert and Leatherman. The two men were partners in real estate. Mr. Talbert was significant political leader in Orange County. He served as a County Supervisor from 1910 until the 1920's. Mr. Leatherman was a contractor and builder who began building houses in Santa Ana in the early 1900's. In 1904 he formed a partnership with Mr. Talbert. The 217 Main street building is smekg- their first collaborations. Is T-t-irk Plumbing was installed by L.E. Worthy, a prominent business figure in Huntington Beach. Mr. Worthy was the City's first plumber. The building was originally a feed and fuel store providing oats, wood, and gasoline for automobiles. It was the location of the first gasoline pump in the City. In 1912 it housed the City's first Japanese grocery store, reflecting the ethnic diversity of the early City. Other occupants include the Huntington Beach Music Company (1920's), Ed's Restaurant (1927), B.T. Mollica Shoe store (1920's), and Bates Electric Shop (1920's). The building is significant for its association with Tom Talbert, a County leader, and for its affiliation with the early Japanese community of Huntington Beach. It is one of the earliest constructed in the City's downtown area. It is the oldest remaining building The building is currently a religious mading•meoat- 221 Main Street A ranking of C/l/I (see Table D) has been given to the Moomaw Furniture building. It receives a 3D (see Table D) rating according to National Register of Historic Places criteria. This stuccoed cast concrete Commercial building was constructed in circa 1920. The broken parapet of this one-story flat-roofed structure features one plain pilaster at the southern end of the facade and a raised section in the center above the entrance. A wide transom consisting of large vertical panes has been covered with stucco. A wood cornice runs along the top of the storefront windows and entry. Two large plate glass windows trimmed in wood with brass corners flank the center recessed entry. It is not known whether the existing crime prevention bars over one window are original. Originally, two smaller plate glass windows slanted diagonally toward a wide wood and glass entry door. One of these windows has been converted to a second entry. A coffered ceiling in the entry appears to be original. The southern side of the building which abuts the fountain patio area is stuccoed. The back of the building is also clad in stucco with a plain door in the center. Moderate alterations have occurred to the building. The original cast concrete exterior of the structure was stuccoed over in 1979. The original single store has been divided into two shops, with a second door entry added. 56 4 11 Register criteria for integrity of historic resources, would be lost with the removal of the project block: location, setting, feeling and association. The criteria is explained in Appendix B to this report. Without these factors, the integrity of the potential Main Street Historic District would likely be diminished to the extent that the designation of the area as a National Register District would not be possible. Removal of the historic and nonhistoric buildings on the project block would result in the loss of an old commercial area. The loss would result in a significant unavoidable impact to the sense of historical place in the downtown area, as well as diminish the historical context for remaining historic buildings within the surrounding downtown area. Project- specific impacts to historical context and sense of place cannot be mitigated to a level of insignificance. On a cumulative basis, implementation of the project in conjunction with the removal of historic structures due to past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects will have a significant unavoidable impact on the historical context and sense of place of the historic commercial core of downtown Huntington Beach. Physical Resources Several historic structures with significant links to the early history of Huntington Beach would be demolished with implementation of the proposed project, For the purposes of this discussion, physical resource are defined as structural characteristics or past uses associated with the buildings which are relevant to the history of the City. The importance of these buildings is associated with their integrity, as defined by National Register criteria. A discussion of integrity is provided in Appendix B to this report. Briefly, integrity is the authenticity of a property's historic identity evidenced by the survival of physical characteristics that existed during the property's historic period. Those buildings worthy of merit are discussed below. These buildings have been identified by the preparers of this report as valuable to the City based on information supplied by the Huntington Beach Historic Resources Board Historic Resources Inventory sheets. The sheets serve to identify the local significance of the structures under evaluation. 205 Main Street - This building was the home of the Huntington Beach News, the City's first newspaper, in 4-9ft - s 207 Main Street - This building is significant as it was the first theater built in Huntington Beach in the early-492OL - f 9/0 213 Main Street - The Huntington Beach Sheet Metal Company was located in this building. It's founder is known for developing an innovative corrugated metal manufacturing system here in the early 1900's. 64 217 Main Street - This building is . the oldest remaining structure in the -Eity-. Additionally it was the home of the City's first gasoline pump. It is also significant as the first Japanese grocery store in the City in 1912. 223 Main Street - The significance of this structure related to its potential affiliation with architect Irving Gill (please refer to previous discussion of 223 Main Street). 218/220 Fifth Street - The building is significant through its use as a public building. It was the third City Hall in Huntington Beach. Additionally, it was home to one of the City's first jails. 202 Fifth Street (Shank House) - The importance of this structure is its association with community leader Dr. G.A. Shank (please refer to previous discussion of 202 Fifth Street). The home is also significant for its association with the history of the City created when many houses were moved from the "town lot" area to enable further oil exploration. 412 Walnut Avenue (Mazzotis) - The significance of this building relates to Dr. and Mrs. Shank. It is believed to have been built concurrently with the City Hall and jail at 208 Fifth Street. It housed the municipal court of Huntington Beach during the 1920's and 1930's. 411 Olive Street - The structure is significant for its affiliation with Dr. Ralph E. Hawes. Dr. Hawes' office served as the prototype for quick-stop health clinics. He was one of the City's emergency medicine experts. Of the 15 buildings onsite nine are important physical resources to the City of Huntington Beach's history. The elimination of these buildings would result in a significant unavoidable project-specific impact to the basic stock of historic buildings in the proposed Main Street Historic District and the community as a whole. The loss of these buildings in conjunction with historic buildings removed due to past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects would diminish the stock of historic structures in Huntington Beach, and Orange County as a whole. This loss is considered an unavoidable cumulative impact. Architectural Resources The architectural styles of the structures on the project site reflect the changing architectural influences of the City's physical development. The National Register Criteria which apply to architecture are design materials, and workmanship. These criteria are explained in Appendix B to this document. The removal of structures from the project site will result in the elimination of four architecturally significant buildings. A brief architectural description of each is provided below: 65 205 Main Street - This structure is Zigzag Moderne in style. The buildings facade is marked by fluted pilasters caped with stepped crowns projecting slightly above the flat roofline. A row of Moderne trim along the top of the parapet consists of sections of vertical beading. Below this beading runs a wide band of zigzag trim. BUILT r� "mot ..: ', o►,�� $aaRo ti $t+ '�' 217 Main Street - This building is significant as an example of a Western Falsefront structure. Behind the falsefront facade is the original board and batten gable roofed building. 202 Fifth Street - This structure is significant for it's Craftsman architecture. It represents the skilled craftsmanship prevalent in the early history of the City. 411 Olive Avenue - This Zigzag Moderne building is marked by a parapet decorated with two stepped rows of horizontal trim border along the bottom with a plain band of sawtoothed ornamentation. Stepped pilasters span the facade, each decorated with two vertical fluted accents. Two pilasters framing the entry are bordered along the top with sawtooth trim. The demolition of these four structures would result in a project-specific unavoidable impact on the architectural diversity of the potential Main Street Historic District and the downtown commercial core. The two Zigzag Modeme structures identified above are among a limited number of their type remaining in the City. As a result, their loss is considered a significant project-specific impact. The loss of the other two structures is considered an unavoidable adverse impact as well. The demolition of the Zigzag Moderne buildings is also considered a significant unavoidable cumulative impact in relation to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects. There are only 12 buildings of that architectural style remaining in Huntington Beach. Of the 12, demolition is proposed for eight including the three Moderne buildings on the Pier that would be demolished should the Pier be demolished for reconstruction. With the demolition of these eight structures 67% of the City's Moderne buildings will be eliminated. The four remaining structures will be retained. The loss of the Zigzag Moderne, Craftsman and Western Falsefront buildings on the project site will have a cumulative unavoidable impact on the architectural stock of the City of Huntington Beach, and Orange .County as a whole. Proposed Downtown Historic Districts Main Street Historic District Impacts As previously discussed, the project site is located within the potential Main Street Historic District. The once identified Main Street Historic District may not currently be eligible for listing as a historic district. The reasoning for this current status is discussed previously under the Existing Conditions Main Street Historic District heading. Implementation of the proposed project would not allow the area to be designated as a historic district as the remaining integrity of the District would be significantly diminished. 66 ,#S}rlY'iv✓ Vim; M.•il u \ Yt�_Lt+j t __'7 1-upe"I,1 f t Y.•4 -1 .i, f k ( y--`;IA �. -R t F-l { i;l. , S} t. 1�.. %{ kit 'f4 •a r a z-- 6 .} ,11 �. # t 7 1 tF a.F htF >fFw� 1 4 1. S S` k Historic Resources Board = CITY; OF HUNTINGTON BEACH HUNTINGTON BEACH Post Office Box 190 Huntington Beach, California _92648 - May 14, , S98g .' Kelly Main, • Environmental Officer, Planning Division ;A City. of Huntington Beach Re: Environmental Impact Report on.- 200 block Main (-west) Dear' Kelly; We were disappointed that ..representatives from STA, Inc. were not ' at our meeting of May 10, 1989 as they were most welcome. We . : would have enjoyed discussing their efforts directly.. i; „Y. At our liasion' s suggestion, I am updating the survey information �. `= on the block from information.supplied at the meeting. ;. ' - Several buildings are outstanding and need careful consideration. ..:.,One, 207 Main, was an original vaudeville theater as well -as the a first moving picture theater.- '.It is restorable as a community . . theater, and that alternative should be considered. '`Another, 'Z17 - .: -Main St. , built in 1904, is `the lastexistant- structure from the Talbert Leatherman Realty Company, and because of its association ,Sf with Talbert should have landmark status on its own. A third, 223 #r - and 223 1/2 Main has an exceptionally well appointed apartment-on the second level. This structure merits considerable more study ' to locate its architect because it is a better design and building than many on the block. .On 51h St. , of course is the third, and only existing historical, :site of the city hall- and_ jail .at r -218-220 5 `Yr On several occassions, the State Office of Historic Preservation .has advised us that this is an historic block. - We believe that 5 efforts should be made to retain the character of this block. __'.:' . ! .. through historically accurate rehabilitation and/or sensitiv infill . . It is largely -intact, and presents an excellent opportu.- -nity for a commercial landmark district •which will .enhance the. at- tractiveness . of- the modern tourist area. We hope that the alter- natives you recommend will address the value of the intact block and stress-the responsibility of the Redevelopment Agency to assist in its retension. r: I ' am enclosing the- changes to the survey sheets--on---A separate page. These can be inserted on the individual sheets 'as time per- mits: r We are concerned about the f ate of this commercial block-. Please call on us for assistance. . Sincerely, Barbara Milkovi6li, Chairman cc: Doug LaBelle Katherine Gualtier i _ t y. st '•z' ` {r ! f e r - x x_--t q'r e.� � r -• t'' C fy,^ir ` r t �t. � ,< 7_ -'1 r�4;S- { - � , �r} .,r` { r -� i 'A• ,� r�a Yt r t,-cLL r,5�y�-. t.A a - _'} a•Ry_-. r r,` k,- r Jy -tr 1}: }t 'c' "^=rR r} r 't,'4'9)r'�,y-•w CHANGES- OR ADDITIONS TO -HUNTINGTON BEACH STRUCTURE SURVEY,. 200 BLOCK .MAIN ST. (WEST) May 10 , 1989 204 5th St. Believed .to be built at 1002 Ocean (PCH) in either i,N 1908 on spring, -1913 . - No record exists of a building permit. ' -. It was moved to its present location in April, 1927 , to avoid de- struction in the oil field. By council action this structure is being rehabilitated according to the Standards of the Secretary of the Interior. Dr. Shank was a leader in the community from his arrival about 1908 through the 1920s . .210 5th St. Owner is Willia : m Gallegos . Building believed to be post 1933 earthquake. It isreenforces with steel and has a 'half basement. In 1933, it was used as the Four Square Church meeting location. . 214 5th St. This was also a boxing ring during the 1920' s. Jim Jefferies refereed here, and Kid Mexico was the promoter. . The building has been reinforced with steel., probably after the 1933 earth quake. 218-220 5th This was the third city hall/jail location. The separate jail in the rear may be older. When the next City Hall was .built, -it was converted to a dry cleaners, the Crystal-_.Clean- ers. Mrs. Cora Vernon Shank built it and leased it to the City in 1916 . 201-203 Main. St. The original structure here was the Stewart Building, a two story clapp board structure. The north wall of 'the present structure appears to be wood for about 80 feet. - This FIR may be a reminent of the original building. The rest of the I ; present structure is brick and- cinder block and was constructed about 1950 . 205 Main St. The front portion 'is original wood behind the fa-- cade. The rear is pre 1933 cast concrete', and appears to have -:'. Rr been demolished to its present height and extensively remodelled, probably after the earth quake. Foundation 'markings indicate that. the structure continued across the alley originally. This is 'one of. a very few zig-zag moderne building facades left in the city. hF 207 Main St. Built by 1912 as a theater and remodel to a store front later-. The floor covers the original slanted floor of the theater.' 209 Main St. Also the Eader Bakery during the early 1940s. 211 Main St. Tovatt' s Hardware in the 1930s. Records show it was remodeled in February, 1929 . Present owner (1989) is Richard Harlow who wants to demolish it. 1i t 213. Main St-. This is sided with corrigated metal,.-.-,Date of con- struction about 1906 The Huntington Beach Sheet _Metal Company developed a new method of corrigate metal production here during the oi`l boom.. 215 Main St. This has been rehab' d recently for office and restaurant space. The wood. canopies have been removed. 217 Main St.. was. built on site in 1904 by Talbert/Leatherman. It was original a feed and fuel store providing oats.,. wood and gas for automobiles. By 1912Y it housed an ethnic Japanese grocery store. The plumbing was installed by L. E. Worthy, an important city figure. It is -significant because of it association with County leader Tom Talbert and with the early Japanese community. 221 Main St. This was stucco' d in 1979 over cast concrete. A 223 Main St. Built of reinforced cast concrete in April 1937, this is an exceptionally fine structure. . The fittings in the up- stairs apartment are high quality.- Need more investigation of ar- chitect and builder.. It may be related to Irving Gill or his stu- dio.. 411 Olive. This was Ralph E. Hawes medical office when built in the mid-1930s. It is important because of .its association with him and its zig-zag moderne styling. A historical report by 30th St. Architects indicates that it is nominatable to the National Register. It is being rehab' d as a temporary. site for the surf museum... 412-414 Walnut St.- . This is believed to have been built in 1916, also by Mrs. Shank, at the same time the city hall. offices were constructed..-' It housed the municipal. court during. the 1920s and 1930s on the second floor and a restaurant below. Stories tell that sentances were .given out upstairs, and the guilty hustled down the alley to jail at once. It is of cast concrete and has a front facade of brick. r � r M110- Xt!.: �W.1111tw1go Z 16 OR rMe at Y 5 k R iJUL .6 089ECE WEJ Kelly Main, Assistant Planner Q Department of Community Development JUL 0 7 1989 City of Huntington. Beach 2000 Main St. DEPARTMENT OF Huntington Beach, CA 92648 -COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING DIVISION Subject: NOP "Demonstration Block", EIR 89-4 4- Dear Ms. Main: a .... T. t ......... In response to your request for inpuregarding the preparation of drt f EIR 89-4, "Demonstration Block", a member of the Historical Commission has reviewed your NOP. On behalf of the Commission, I would like to comment on the cumulative effect of demolishing historical structures throughout the county...-_,,.," .-The loss of an entire block of historical buildings affects not .'only the A 1Y;1 immediate locality, but diminishes the countywide stock of historical resources. - We would also encourage you to include the option of using historic rehabilitation in your design review alternatives to enhance the historic 'nature of the block and maintain an aesthetic blending of architectural styles. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. If you have further questions regarding this, please contact.the Historical Commission office at (714) 834-5560. Very truly yours, Nancy ThatchIr Chair Nr SB:ds/mkHBO-522/9178 - 9062320285284 ?A go' 4 04 8 anta A as tahlonia rz 1A "2rm'�;lkTeAV4r,"j t'f'f ggg., -r>a .�' :,r3,�+•,t"7`+ d?' a �'• ',Y+ i,fit °' ,h+^ 'x!,t� 'T`'`J C"n, I 5q?N" ;ti.Q6j7 �WAR 7 ' PtO-,qj "-p M I's'All IWOM 7 P �- ,��x ( � zr .,a'�• ,ta` "� 6 !� t }T' �+�",•^ r '+ � f�.,sr,:Y", •,�r N'k.., «b "'R s<r..' t„IxE'u '+ [77$���5 &„ ;W-49 "M qw, 'a mg . gq. �lk!�v • WN �?V 44, - "'M Mm,1,IS sow ggg INN IR tF Ik! Ril, ••,w w,. ,+:• t f+�' s{;Sx-' ` �F rv'9;:;�''. �:-t ,:..+�. .t'+'.• ,fit :p 5,' t �y, d(.�'�(� ��y. �r � ^' -'s ftP'�S;-!•: ,:Cya;rp,, . ;33 tt, ��r� ,, " .�•*�;y e r ��� 4�� ,r.w .�''3. � '.� 4'4•n .��''.,�•, �� s�- �y� ,,ti, �„ 4L,." WoWe W 2, lAil I " v a e M -N A A;.,.. RTf9 TE IC RESOOEICESsaRYEY REPM MY OF NMM BEMM September 1986 Thirtieth Street Architects, Inc. 2821 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 APPENDIX B A AlD B PJM SII WJL WE DQiiINIIDw s=Y ARM (Lake Street to Coldmwest Street) CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH HISTORICAL SURVEY STREET STYLE ALTERATIONS DATE RATING 122 MAIN STREET EARLY COMMERCIAL MODERATE 1905 A 123 MAIN STREET EARLY COMMERCIAL SUBSTANTIAL 1923 B- 124 MAIN STREET MODERNE MODERATZ 1910 B 126 MAIN STREET ZIGZAG MODERNE MODERATE 1935 A 205 MAIN STREET ZIGZAG MODERNE MINOR 1930 B 207 MAIN STREET EARLY THEATRE MODERATE 1910 B 215 MAIN STREET 20'S COMMERCIAL MODERATE 1920 B 217 MAIN STREET WESTERN FALSEFRONT MODERATE 1904 B 222-222 1/2 MAIN STREET 20'S COMMERCIAL MODERATE 1920 B 224 MAIN STREET 20'S COMMERCIAL MODERATE 1925 B 226 MAIN STREET 20'S BRICK COMMER MINOR 1920 B 228 MAIN STREET 20'S BRICK COMMER MINOR 1920 A 410 MAIN STREET 20'S COMMERCIAL MODERATE 1920 B 424 MAIN STREET 20'S COMMERCIAL MINOR 1920 B 609 MAIN STREET COLONIAL REVIVAL MINOR 1903 B 627 MAIN STREET SPANISH COLONIAL MINOR 1930 B 717 MAIN STREET CRAFTSMAN BUNGALOW NONE 1910 B+ 726 MAIN STREET CRAFTSMAN BUNGALOW NONE 1910 B 731 MAIN STREET CRAFTSMAN BUNGALOW NONE 1910 B 735 MAIN STREET CRAFTSMAN BUNGALOW NONE 1910 B 738-740 MAIN STREET CRAFTSMAN BUNGALOW MINOR 1908 B+ 806 MAIN STREET COLONIAL REVIVAL NONE 1905 B 810 MAIN STREET SPANISH COLONIAL NONE 1925 B 814-816 MAIN STREET BUNGALOW COURT NONE 1910 B 815 MAIN STREET COLONIAL REVIVAL MINOR 1905 B 1905 MAIN STREET MEDITERRANEAN NONE 1926 A 316 OLIVE AVENUE MODERNE MODERATE 1935 A 411 OLIVE AVENUE MODERNE MODERATE 1935 B 1213 OLIVE AVENUE NEO-CLASSICAL MINOR 1900'S B 414 ORANGE AVENUE PRAIRIE STYLE APTS NONE 1915 B- 110 PACIFIC COAST CRAFTSMAN BUNGALOW MODERATE 1910 B 114 PACIFIC COAST CRAFTSMAN BUNGALOW MODERATE 1905 A 304 PACIFIC COAST SPANISH COLONIAL REV MODERATE 1930 A 306 PACIFIC COAST SPANISH COLONIAL REV MINOR 1929 A 319 PACIFIC COAST MODERNE MINOR 1930 B 520 PACIFIC COAST TRANSITIONAL MINOR 1910 B BAIT SHOP PACIFIC COAST ZIGZAG MODERNE NONE B CORNERSTONE PACIFIC COAST NONE 1914 B PIER ENTRAN PACIFIC COAST ZIGZAG MODERNE NONE 1930 B PIER SHOPS PACIFIC COAST ZIGZAG MODERNE NONE 1930 B 814 PALM AVENUE CRAFTSMAN BUNGALOW UNALTERED 1925 B 900 PALM AVENUE CRAFTSMAN BUNGALOW UNALTERED 1920 B 1502 PALM AVENUE ZIGZAG MODERNE UNALTERED 1933 A 1600 (b) PALM AVENUE NEO-CLASSICAL UNALTERED 1931 A 1817 PARK STREET SPANISH COLONIAL UNALTERED 1925 A 311 WALNUT AVENUE 20'S COMMERCIAL MINOR 1920 B 412-414 WALNUT AVENUE 20'S COMMERCIAL MINOR 1925 B 513-519 WALNUT AVENUE WESTERN FALSEFRONT NONE 1904 A 716-718 WALNUT AVENUE PERIOD REV. TRIPLEX UNALTERED 1925 B 300 YORKTOWN GREEK REVIVAL HOUSE MINIMUM 1875 A 333 YORKTOWN EARLY FARM HOUSE MINIMUM 1905 B Page 7 - Council/Agency Minutes - 11/16/87 Q by the Director of Public Works and the Secretary to the Plann Q on as being substantially in accordance with the tentative map as filed with, amended and approved by tiie Planning Commission. Acreage: 14.836; Lots: 7 riu'mbered lots, lettered Lots A-F (Total 13 tots) , Developer: Ferydoun j Ahadpour, Huntington Beach; adopted map subject to stipulations as follows: Deposit of fees for water, sewer, drainage, engineering and inspections; Certificate of Insurance; Subdivision Agreement; Payment of Park and ,RecC.ea,tion fees; Drainage for the subdivision shall be approved by the Department of' Public Works prior to the recordation of the final map; The Declaration of Covenants , Conditions and Restrictions shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Community Development and approved as to form by the City Attorney; and further accepted Monument Bond No. 1132586, Faithful Performance Bond No. 1132569, Labor and Material Bond No. 1132569 and approved and authorized execution of the Subdivision Agreement and further instructed the City Clerk that she shall not affix her signature to the map nor release such map for preliminary processing by the County or for recordation until the aforementioned conditions have been met. (City Council) HISTORICAL RESOURCES SURVEY REPORT The Deputy City Clerk presented a communication from the Deputy City Administrator/Community Development regarding the Historical Resources Survey Report. Following discussion, a motion was made by Green, seconded by Kelly, to approve the Historic Resources Survey and transmit it and accompanying documentation (Survey sheets identifying each structure ranked in the Survey) for deposition at the State Office of Historic Preservation. The motion - carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Kelly, Green, Finley, Erskine, Mays, Winchell , Bannister NOES: None ABSENT: None (City Council) HUNTINGTON CENTRAL PARK MASTER PLAN & FUNDING - STUDY SESSION SCHEDULED 12/7/87 The Deputy City Clerk presented a communication from the Community Services Director regarding the need to adopt a master plan and establish the method of _funding for the undeveloped area of Huntington Central Park. ``1he City Administrator suggested that consideration of the refuse fee in relation to funding for Huntington Central Park be withdrawn at this time. Following considerable discussion, a motion was made by Mays, seconded by Bannister to postpone consideration of the Huntington Central Park Master Plan and Funding to a Study Session and to hire a professional survey consultant firm. The motion failed by the following roll call vote: The foregoing instrument is a correct ,r AYES: Mays, Bannister = copy of the original on file in this office. NOES: Kelly, Green, Finley, Erskine, Wi nchel 1 ABSENT: None Attest — / _ noNNI_ City Clerk and Ex.Of -cio Clerk of the City Council of the'City of Huntington. Bfachi i Calif grnia. By._ - �lrt`14C� ME Wr j& Historic Resources Board G HCITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH HUNTINGTON BEACH Post Office Box 190 Huntington Beach, California 92648 May 9 , 1989 Mayor Wes Bannister and Council Members City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 SUBJECT: LANDMARK ORDINANCE AND LANDMARK STRUCTURES Dear Wes and Council Members : This board has been discussing elements of a landmark ordinance for some time and was pleased to make suggestions to our liaison, Ruth Lambert when she was directed to draft a Landmark Ordinance. I am enclosing our suggestions and additions for your consideration so that the drafting may go forward. We are all concerned that a protective ordinance be in place as soon as possible. As Ed Montford said at Planning Commission on May 2, we need to establish a program for preservation of our historic resources . This ordinance, in conjunction with historical surveys , will be invaluable to an ongoing program of preservation. Also, I• am enclosing a list of high priority structures in the City. The list, in no particular order, includes those structures which we believe should be considered for landmark status . Of these, several are already on the National Register of Historic Places . Others have been identified as landmarks by the Orange County Historical Commission. Still others have already been designated as local landmark structures by the City Council or have been recommended by the Resources Board for that designation. After you have reviewed the list, please make additional suggestions . We would likely draw from this list to make our first recommendations for landmark status under the new ordinance. Sincerely, Barbara Milkovich, Chairman Attachments cc: Council Members M. Adams D. La Belle BM:REL: lab ATrA-C,4MCAJ'r HI j& Historic Resources Board � CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH HUNTINGTON BEACH Post Office Box - 190 • Huntington Beach, California 92648 September 14, 1990 Geri Ortega Chair & Planning Commissioners 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, Ca . 92648 Re : Talbert/Letterman Structure 217 Main Street Dear Ms. Ortega , A request was recently made to the Historic Resources Board by the owner of the Talbert/Letterman structure located at 217 Main Street , to determine if any, the historical importance of this structure. The Historic Resources Board having reviewed the structure and the historical facts associated with it, has determined the historical importance based on the following: #1 . The structure was built in late 1903 by Tom Talbert, a pioneer real estate developer for Huntington Beach and •Fountain Valley for commercial useage. Mr Talbert ' s name is well known to both Huntington Beach and Fountain Valley, Talbert Avenue being named for his as well as Talbert Lake in Central Park. Mr Talbert also served many years as an Orange County Supervisor. #2 . From 1904-1909 the structure served as the Pioneer Feed and Fuel Company, which had the first gasoline dispensing service for the horseless carriages. From 1909 to 1916, it housed the first ethnic market catering to the Japanese trade. From 1916 to the present it has housed a variety of businesses from Huntington Beach Music in the 120' s to a Bible Study Center. #3. The structure appears on a list of high priorty structures and is listed in the Historic Resources Survey 9/86. #4. This structure is one of the earliest commercial structure still remaining from the Pacific City days. Its architecture is the Western Falsefront, a rare style to be found in our city. Based upon the facts outlined in items# 1-4 and information obtained from our files and using the National Register criteria the Historic Resources Board has determined that this structure meets the requirements as an important historical landmark structure and is eligible for inclusion into the National Register. b Historic Resources Board JR) V" CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH HUNTINGTON BEACH Post Office Box 190 . Huntington Beach, California 92648 A LIST OF HIGH PRIORITY STRUCTURES IN HUNTINGTON BEACH ADDRESS DESCRIPTION ENDANGERED *RATED 1 . 204 5th Street Shank House R/A 3/3D 2. 401 6th Street Church R/A 4 3. 303 3rd Street Young Building R/A 5*/3D 4. 310 3rd Street 1880's House R/A 5 5. 121 5th Street Surf Theatre R/A 3D 6. 218-220 5th Street Old City Hall & Jail R/A 4/3D 7. 311 5th Street Zigzag Modern R/A 5 8. 128 6th Street Worthy House R/A 1/3D (National Register listed) 9. 301 8th Street Church R/A 5* 10. - Near Los Patos/Orion Water Tower R/A N/R 11 . Warner/B Street Edison Substation -N/A N/R 12. 7360-7386 Warner Warner Baptist Church S/P N/R 13. 7622 Warner Japanese Church Buildings S/P N/R 14. 1600 Palm Gym & Pool N/A 3 15. 301 California Craftsman Home N/C N/R 16. 513-519 Walnut Helme Buildings R/A 1/3D (National Register listed) 17. 114 PCH Garner House S/P 3 18. 319 PCH Pier & Bronze Bust R/A 1 (National Register listed) 19. 126 Main Street Standard Market R/A 3D 20. 122 Main Street Pacific City City Hall R/A 3D 21 . 333 Yorktown Northam Home & Silo N/C 3 22. 1905 Main Street H.S. High School N/C 3 (City. Orange County Landmark) 23. 17162 Gothard Slater Home N/A N/R 24. 207 Main Princess Theatre R/A 3D 25. 217 Main Early Commercial R/A 3D 26. 505-505 112 Lake Higgins House R/A 5 If you have any further questions on this matter , please contact me through our Board Secretary Mr Michael Mudd at 536-5258. I Jerry Person, Chairman Historic Resources Board cc: Michael Adams, Michael Mudd c ATrhCWMeN AP TO THE GUIDEBOOK TO IDENTIFY AND MITIGATE SEISMIC HAZARDS IN BUILDINGS December 1987 State of California George Deukmejian, Governor Seismic Safety Commission 1900 K Street, Suite 100 Sacramento, California 95814 Telephone 916 322-4917 Report No. SSC 87-03 vvvuvrr r State Historical Building Code(Part 8) •I STATE OF CALIFORNIA—STATE AND CONSUMER SERVICES AGENCY GEORGE DEUKMEJIM.Governor DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES STATE HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE BOARD 400"V STREET.FIFTH FLOOR SACRAMENTO,CA 95814 Application of the State Historical Building Code It is mandatory that all jurisdictions use the State Historical Building Code (SHBC) when dealing with qualified historical buildings, structures, or sites. The SHBC consists of three important, basic, complementary parts: 1. The _statute, titled "Part 2.7 State Historical Building Code," consisting of Sections 18950 through 18961 (as modified by 1984 amendments by the Legislature) of the Health and Safety Code of the State of California. 2. The code, the State Historical Building Code Board's adopted regulations authorized by the Health and Safety Code published i in Part 8 of Title 24 of the California Administrative Code — i State Building Standards. The current adoption by the Board was made on April 20, 1988 to coordinate the Code with the current statute. When this adoption, as approved by the State Building ! Standards Commission, is published in Title 24, it will be in effect. 3. Board decisions relative to interpretations of the SHBC when acting as review body for all jurisdictions or an appeals board on any issue adversely affected by any local agency ` administering and enforcing the SHBC. The Board's written decisions constitute valuable case history that may be applicable to other similar cases as determined by the Board. The regulation of building construction and retrofitting by local governments is provided for in state law. Section 18954 of the Health and Safety Code (the law) provides that every city or county shall apply the SHBC in permitting work on qualified historical buildings or structures. Section 18950 of the law authorizes the State Historical Building Code Board (Board) to adopt standards, which are set forth in the SHBC. Once the SHBC is adopted by the Board and approved by the state Building Standards Commission,. it is published as Part 8 of Title 24. Legislation mandating the use of the SHBC has been signed into law, and the version of the SHBC that is reprinted on the following pages reflects the changes that the Board has adopted to make it conform to the law. The Board expects these changes to be incorporated into Title 24 in January 1989. The Board believes historical buildings should be able to resist earthquake forces without endangering the lives of occupants. The Code provides standards to meet this objective while protecting our historical resources. Very truceours, i I C ullimore, AIA Executive Director I State Historical Building Code(Part 8) 00 HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE PART 2.7 STATE HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE [Added by Stats 1975 ch 906 § 1.1 § 18950. Title § 18951. Purpose § 18952. Application § 18953. Intent § 18954. Repairs, alterations, and additions to historical buildings § 18955. Qualified historical building or structure. § 18956. Application of other laws § 18957. Construction I § 18958. Alternative rules,regulations,and standards; IAgencies with authority to adopt § 18959. Administration and enforcement § 18959.5 Adoption, amendment, and repeal of alternative rules and regulations I § 18960 State Historical Building Code Advisory Board i § 18961. Consideration of provisions by state agencies; j Consultation with Advisory Board j § 18950. Title This part shall be known and may be cited as the "State Historical Building Code." § 18951. Purpose It is the purpose of this part to provide alternative building regulations and building standards for the rehabilitation, preservation, restoration i (including related reconstruction), or relocation of buildings or 'i structures designated as historic buildings. Such alternative building standards and building regulations are intended to facilitate the restoration or change of occupancy so as to preserve their original or restored architectural elements and features, to encourage energy conservation and a cost-effect approach to preservation, and to provide for the safety of the building occupants. § 18952. Application This part shall apply to all qualified historical structures as defined in Section 18955. "Pendix Section 2 v...lv ...v.v..W- -W.1l443 IV VVl/V %I YNl V/ l t § 18953. Intent It is the intent of this part to provide means for the preservation of the historical value of designated buildings and, concurrently, toprovide reasonable safety from fire, seismic forces or other hazards for occupants of such buildings, and to provide reasonable availability to and usability by, the physically handicapped. § 18954. (First of two;operative until January 1,1991) Repairs, alternations,and additions to historical buildings. Repairs, alternations, and additions necessary for the preservation, restoration, rehabilitation,moving, or continued use of an historical building or structure may be made if they conform to this part. The building department of every city or county shall apply the provisions of alternative building standards and building regulations adopted pursuant to Section 18959.5 in permitting repairs, alterations,and additions necessary for the preservation,restoration,rehabilitating, moving,or continued use of historical building or structure. A state agency shall apply the alternative building regulations adopted pursuant to Section 18959.5 in permitting repairs, alternations, and additions necessary for the preservation,restoration,rehabilitation, moving, or continued use of an historical building or structure. The application of any alternative standards for the provision of access to the physically handicapped or exemption from access requirements shall be done on a case-by-case and item-by-item basis, and shall not be applied to an entire building or structure without individual consideration of each item, and shall not be applied to related sites or areas except on an item-by-item basis. This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 1991, and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted statute, which is encacted before such date, deletes or extends that date. If that date is not deleted or extended, then,on and after January 1, 1991, pursuant to Section 9611 of the Government Code, Section 18954 of the Health and Safety Code, as amended by Section 2 of Chapter 598 of the Statutes of 1981, shall have the same force and effect as if this temporary provision had not been enacted. § 18954. (Second of two;operative January 1,1991) Repairs,alterations, and additions to historical buildings Repairs, alterations, and additions necessary for the preservation, restoration, rehabilitation,moving, or continued use of an historical building or structure may be made if they conform to this part. The Section 2(Continued) State Historical Building Code(Part 8) building department of every city or county may apply the provisions of regular building standards and building regulations or of alternative building standards and building regulations adopted pursuant to Section 18958,or any combinations of regular and alternative building standards and building regulations),in permitting repairs,alterations and additions necessary for the preservation,restoration, rehabilitation,moving,or continued use of an historical building or structure. A state agency (may) apply the regular or alternative provisions of the State Building Standards Code or the regular building regulations or the alternative building regulations adopted pursuant to Section 18958,or any combination of regular and alternative_building code provisions),in permitting repairs,alterations,and additions necessary for the preservation,restoration,rehabilitation,moving,or continued use of an historical building or structure. The application-of any (appropriate) alternative standards for the provisions of access to the physically handicapped or exemption from access requirements shall be done on a case-by-case and item-by-item basis,and shall not be applied to an entire building or structure without individual consideration of each item, and shall not be applied to related sites or areas except on an item-by-item basis. § 18955. Qualified historical building or structure For the purposes of this part,a qualified historical building or structure is any structure,collection of structures,and their associated sites deemed of importance to the history,architecture,or culture of an area by an appropriate local or state governmental jurisdiction..This shall include structures on existing or future national,state or local historical registers or official inventories,such as the National Register of Historic Places,State Historical Landmarks,.State Points of Historical Interest,and city or county registers or inventories of historical or architecturally significant sites,places,historic districts,or landmarks. § 18956.Application of other laws - The application of the provisions of Part 5.5 (commencing with Section 19955) of Division 13 of this code,Chapter 7(commencing with Section 4450) of Division 5 of Title 1 of the Government Code, Division-15 (commencing with Section 25000) of the Public Resources Code, and of any other statute or regulation,as they may apply to qualified historical buildings or structures,shall be governed by this part. i §18957.-Construction Nothing in this part shall be constructed to prevent authorized APPendix Section 2 .r.o.Q ��ww�n.a� oanvnRJ uvv�irari v/ building or fire officials from the performance of their duties when in the process of protecting the public health,safety, and welfare. 318958. (First of two;operative until January 1,1991) Agencies with authority to adopt rules and regulations Except as provided in Section 18930, the following state agencies, in addition to the State Historical Building Code Board,shall have the authority to adopt rules and regulations pursuant to the State Historical Building Code governing the rehabilitation, preservation, restoration, related reconstruction,or relocation of qualified historical buildings and structures within their jurisdiction: (a) The Office of the State Architect. (b)The State Fire Marshal. (c)The State Building Standards Commission,but only with respect to approval of building standards. (d) The Department of Housing and Community Development. (e)The Department of Transportation. (f) Other state agencies that may be affected by this part. This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 1991,and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted statute,which is enacted before such date, deletes or extends that date. It that date is not deleted or extended, then, on and after.January 1, 1991,pursuant to Section I 9611 of the Government Code,Section 18958 of the Health and Safety Code, as amended by Section 3 of Chapter 598 of the Statutes of 1981, shall have the same force and effect as if this temporary provision had not been enacted. §18958. (Second of two;operative January 1,1991) Alternative rules, regulations,and standards;Agencies with authority to adopt Except as provided in Section 18930, the following state agencies shall have the authority to adopt alternative rules and regulations governing the rehabilitation,preservation,restoration, or relocation of qualified historical buildings and structures within their jurisdiction: (a) The Office of the State Architect. (b)The State Fire Marshal. (c) The State Building Standards Commission,but only with respect to building standards. (d)The Department of Housing and Community Development. (e)The State Office of Historic Preservation,which shall advise on historical criteria and officially registered historical structures. (f) Other state agencies that may be affected by this part. 7� Section 2 (Continued) State Historical Building Code(Part 8) § 18959. (First of two;operative until January 1,1991) Administration and enforcement (a) Except as otherwise provided in Part 2.5 (commencing with Section 18901), all the state agencies shall administer and enforce this part with respect to qualified historical buildings or structures under their respective jurisdiction. (b) Except as otherwise provided in Part 2.5 (commencing with Section 18901), all local building authorities shall administer and enforce this part with respect to qualified historical structures under their respective jurisdictions where applicable. (c) The State Historical Building Code Advisory Board shall coordinate and consult with the applicable state agencies affected by this apart and, except as provide in Section 18943, disseminate provisions adopted pursuant to this part to all local building authorities and state agencies at cost. (d) Regulations adopted by the State Fire Marshal pursuant to this part shall be enforced in the same manner as regulations are enforced under Sections 13145, 13146, and 13146.5. (e) Regular and alternative building standards published in the State Building Standards Code shall be enforced in the same manner by the same governmental entities as provided by law. (f) When administering and enforcing the provisions of this part, all local agencies may make changes or modifications in the requirements i contained in the State Historical Building Code, as described in Section 18944.7, as it determines are reasonably necessary because of local climatic geological, and topographical conditions. The local agency shall make an express finding that the modifications or changes are needed, and the finding shall be available as a public record. A copy of the finding and change or modification shall be filed with the State Historical Building Code Advisory Board. No modification or change shall become effective or operative for any purpose until the finding and modification or change have been filed with the department. i j This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 1991, and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted statute,which is enacted before such date, deletes or extends that date. If that date is not deleted or extended, then,on and after January 1, 1991,pursuant to Section 9611 of the Government Code, Section 18959 of the Health and Safety Code, as amended by Section 4 of Chapter 598 of the Statutes of 1981,. shall have the same force and effect as if this temporary provision had not been enacted. i i i APPendix Section 2 Section 2(Continued) State Historical Building Code(Part 8) f § 18959. (Second of two;operative January 1,1991) Administration and enforcement (a) Except as otherwise provided in part 2.5 (commencing with Section 18901), all the state agencies in Section 18958 may administer and enforce this part with respect to qualified historical buildings or structures under their respective jurisdiction. (b) Except as otherwise provided in Part 2.5 (commencing with Section 18901), all local building authorities may administer and enforce this part with respect to qualified historical structures under their respective jurisdictions where applicable. (c)The State Historical Building Code Advisory Board shall coordinate and consult with the other applicable state agencies affected by this part and,except as provided in Section 18943 disseminate provisions adopted pursuant to this part to all local building authorities and state agencies at cost. (d) Regulations adopted by the State Fire Marshal pursuant to this part shall be enforced in the same manner as regulations re enforced under Sections 13145, 13146, and 13146.5 of this code. (e) Regular and alternative building standards published in the State Building Standards Code shall be enforced in the same manner by the same governmental entities as provided by law. § 18959.5. (First of two;operative until January 1,1991) Adoption, amendment,and repeal of alternative rules and regulations Subject to the provisions of Part 2.5 (commencing with Section 18901) of this division, the State Historical Building code Board shall adopt and submit alternative building standards for approval pursuant to ` Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 18935) of Part 2.5 of this division and may adopt, amend, and repeal other alternative rules and regulations under this part which the board has recommended for adoption under subdivision (b)of Section 18960 by the State Architect or other applicable state agencies. This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 1991, and as of that date is repealed,unless a later enacted statute, which is enacted before such date, deletes or extends that date. If that date is not deleted or extended, then,on and after January 1, 1991,pursuant to Section 9611 of the Government Code,Section 18959.5 of the Health and Safety Code, as amended by Section 168 of Chapter 1152 of the Statutes of 1979, shall have the same force and effect as if this temporary provision had not been enacted. 1 I Section 2 (Continued) r State Historical Building Code(Part 8) 1 ' I §18959.5. (Second of two;operative January 1,1991) Adoption, amendment,and repeal of alternative rules and regulations Subject to the provisions of Part 2.5 (commencing with Section 18901) of this division, the State Historical Code Advisory Board may adopt and submit alternative building standards for approval pursuant to Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 18935)of Part 2.5 of this division and may adopt, amend , and repeal other alternative rules and regulations under this part which the board has recommended for j adoption under subdivision (b) of Section 18960 by the State Architect or other applicable state agencies. The alternative rules and regulations adopted by the board pursuant to this section may include all or any portion of rules and regulations adopted or proposed for adoption by state agencies pursuant to Section 18958 except for those rules and regulations within the jurisdiction of a state agency that the state agency has filed a written objection-upon with the State Building Standards Commission prior to approval by such commission pursuant to Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 18935) of Part 2.5 of this division. § 18960. (First of two;operative until January 1, 1991) State Historical Building Code Board;Appeals (a) A State Historical Building Code Board is hereby established within the Office of the State Architect which shall be composed of qualified experts in their respective fields who shall represent various state and local public agencies, professional design societies and building organizations. (b) This board shall act as a consultant to the State Architect and to the other applicable state agencies. The board shall recommend to the State Architect and the other applicable state agencies rules and regulations for adoption pursuant to this part. (c) The board shall also act as a review body to state and local agencies with respect to interpretations of this part as well as on matters of administration and enforcement of it. The board's decisions shall be ' reported in printed form. (1) Notwithstanding subdivision (b) of Section 18945,if any local agency administering and enforcing this part and any person adversely affected by any regulation, rule, omission, interpretation, decision, or practice of this agency representing a building standard wish to appeal the issue for resolution to the State Historical Building Code Board, these parties may appeal to the board. The board may accept the appeal only if it determines that issues involved in the appeal have statewide } significance. (2)The State Historical Building Code Board shall, upon making a APPendix Section 2 decision on an appeal pursuant to paragraph (1),send a copy to the State Building Standards Commission. (3) Requests for interpretation by local agencies of the provisions of this part may be accepted for review by the State Historical Building Code Board. A copy of an interpretation decision shall be sent to the State Building Standards Commission in the same manner as paragraph (2): (4)The State Historical Building code Board may charge a reasonable fee,not to exceed the cost of the service,for request for copies of their decisions and for requests for reviews by the board pursuant to paragraph(1)or (3). All funds collected pursuant to this paragraph shall be deposited in the State Historical Building Code Fund,which is hereby established. Notwithstanding Section 13340 of the Government Code, these funds shall.be continuously appropriated to the State Historical Building Code Board for the 1984-85 fiscal year to cover the costs imposed by the chapter of the Statutes of 1984 which amends this section. Thereafter, the State Historical Building Code Fund shall not be continuously appropriated and fees collected therefor shall be subject to annual appropriation in the budget Act. (5) Local agencies may also charge reasonable fees not to exceed the cost for making an appeal pursuant to paragraph (1) to persons adversely i affected as described in that appeal. (6) All other appeals involving building standards under this part shall be made as set forth in subdivision (a) of Section 18945. t (d) The board shall be composed of representative of state agencies and t public and professional building design organizations. Unless otherwise indicated,each named organization shall designate its own representative. Each of the following shall have one member on the board who shall serve without pay,but shall receive actual and necessary expenses incurred while serving on the board: (1) Office of the State Architect. (2)The State Fire Marshal. (3)The State Historical Resources Commission. (4) The California Occupational, Safety and Health Standards Board. (5) California Council,American Institute of Architects. F (6)Structural Engineers Association of California. x_ (7) A mechanical engineer,Consulting Engineers Association of California. (8)An electrical engineer,Consulting Engineers Association of California. i (9) California Council of Landscape Architects. (10)The Department of Housing and Community Development. (11) The Department of Parks and Recreation. (12) County Supervisors Association of California. S?ction 2(Continued) State Historical Building Code.(Part 8) s I � (13) League of California Cities. (14)The Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development. ► (15)The Department of Rehabilitation. (16) The California Chapter of the American Planning Association. The 16 members listed above shall select (1) a building contractor and (2) a member of the California building officials to serve as members of the board. Such members shall serve without pay,but shall receive actual and necessary expenses incurred while serving on the board. Each of the appointing authorities may appoint an alternate in addition to a member. The alternate member shall serve in place of the member at such meetings of the board as the member is unable to attend. The alternate shall have all of the authority that the member j would have when the alternate is attending in the place of the member. j (e)The term of membership on the board shall be for four years, with the State Architect's representative serving continually until replaced. Vacancies on the board shall be filled in the same manner as original appointments. The board shall annually select a chairperson from i among the members of the board. I j The section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 1991, and as of that date is repealed,unless a later enacted statute,which is enacted before such date, deletes or extends that date. If that date is not deleted or extended, then, on and after January 1, 1991, pursuant to Section 9611 of the Government Code,Section 18960 of the Health and Safety Code, as amended by Section 5 Chapter 598 of the Statutes of 1981, shall have the i same force and effect as if this temporary provision had not been enacted. § 18960. (Second of two;operative January 1,1991) State Historical Building Code Advisory Board (a) A State Historical Building Code Advisory Board is hereby established within the Office of the State Architect which shall be composed of qualified experts in their respective fields who shall represent various state and local public agencies, professional design societies and building organizations. j (b)This board shall act as a consultant to the State Architect and to the other applicable state agencies. The board shall recommend to the State Architect and the other applicable state agencies rules and regulations for adoption pursuant to this part. (c) The board shall also act as an advisory review body to state and local J APPendix Section 2 Stale Historical Building Code(Part 8) § 18961. (First of two;operative until January 1,1991) Consideration of provision by state agencies;Consultation with board All state agencies which,enforce and administer variances or appeals procedures affecting the preservation of the historical aspects of historical buildings shall use the alternative provisions of this part and shall consult with the State Historical Building Code Board to obtain its review prior to undertaking action or making decisions on variances or appeals which affect historical buildings. This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 1991, and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted statute, which is enacted before such date, deletes or extends that date. If that date is not deleted or extended, then,on and after January 1, 1991,pursuant to Section j 9611 of the Government Code, Section 18961 of the Health and Safety Code,as added by Section 3 of Chapter 1358 of the Statutes of 1982, shall have the same force and effect as if this temporary provision had not been enacted. § 18961. (Second of two;operative until January 1, 1991) Consideration of provisions by state agencies;Consultation with Advisory Board All state agencies which review,enforce, and administer variance or appeals procedures affecting the preservation of the historical aspects of historical buildings shall consider the alternative provisions of this part and shall consult with the State Historical Building Code Advisory ' Board to obtain its advisory review prior to undertaking action or making decisions on variances or appeals which affect historical buildings. i APPendix Section 2 Section 2(Continued) State Historical Building Code(Part 8) agencies and make recommendations on changes in and g � interpretations of this part as well as on matters of administration and enforcement of it. (d) The board shall be composed of representative of state agencies and public and professional building design organizations. Unless otherwise indicated,each named organization shall designate its own representative. Each of the following shall have one member on the board who shall serve without pay,but shall receive actual and necessary expenses incurred while serving on the board: (1)Office of the State Architect. (2)The State Fire Marshal. (3) The State Historical Resources Commission. (4) The California Occupational,Safety and Health Standards Board. (5)California Council, American Institute of Architects. (6) Structural Engineers Association of California (7) A mechanical engineer,Consulting Engineers Association of California. (8) An electrical engineer,Consulting Engineers Association of California. (9) California Council of Landscape Architects. (10)The Department of Housing and Community Development. (11)The Department of Parks and Recreation. (12) County Supervisors Association of California. (13) League of California Cities. (14)The Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development. (15) The Department of Rehabilitation. (16) The California Chapter of the American Planning Association. j The 16 members listed above shall select (1) a building contractor and (2) a member of the California building officials to serve as members of the board. Such members shall serve without pay,but shall receive actual and necessary expenses incurred while serving on the board. ! Each of the appointing authorities may appoint an alternate in addition to a member. The alternate member shall serve in place of the member at such meetings of the board as the member is unable to attend. The alternate shall have all of the authority that the member would have when the alternate is attending in the place of the member. (e) The term of membership on the board shall be for four years,with the State Architect's representative serving continually until replaced. Vacancies on the board shall be filled in the same manner as original appointments. The board shall annually select a chariperson from among the members of the board. I ArTrtx i MeN Id"J& CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEA H INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH To Dennis Krejci From Ruth Lambert Chief Building Official Assistant Planner Subject APPLICATION OF THE STATE Date May 29, 1990 HISTORIC BUILDING CODE TO THE SLATER HOUSE-17162 GOTHARD ST. Pursuant to our recent conversation, the following information supports the application of the State Historic Building Code (SHBC) to the Slater House located at 17162 Gothard Street. The State Health and Safety Code (Section 18954) states that. the SHBC should be applied to qualified historic structures. This section of the code states, "The building department of every city or county 'shall apply the provisions of alternative building standards and building regulations adopted by the SHBC Board pursuant to Section 18959 .5 in permitting repairs, alterations and additions necessary for the preservation, restoration, rehabilitation, moving or continued use of historical building or structure. " In order to use the SHBC, a structure must be qualified as a designated historical building or structure. A qualified structure is defined in the SHBC (Section 8-104) as, " . . . all qualified historical buildings or structures, which includes any structure, collection of structures and their associated sites deemed of importance to the history, architecture, or culture of an area by an appropriate local, or state governmental jurisdiction. This shall include structures on existing or future national, state, or local historical registers or official inventories, such as the National Register of Historic Places, State Historical Landmarks, State Points of Historical Interest, and city or county registers or inventories of historical or architecturally significant sites, places, historical districts, or landmarks . The Slater House is considered to be a qualified historical structure for the following reasons : A) On May 9, '.1a41)-, the Historic Resources Board forwarded a list of high priority historic structures to the Council formally identifying the Slater House as a structure of local historic significance ,(Attachment 1) . Although the structure is not located in an area where the City has surveyed and assessed historic structures, it has been locally recognized, on an informal basis, as historically significant by community members for several years. Slater House Page Two B) In addition to the local recognition of the importance of the building, an initial review of the information related to the structure indicates it may be eligible for listing on the National Register. • Initial evaluation of the structure using standardized National Register criteria indicates the building possesses integrity and has historical and architectural significance at the local level. This evaluation is based on the following: 1. The structure is associated with the events that made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of Huntington Beach' s history because the structure is directly related to the early agricultural activities surrounding and influencing early development in the City. 2. The structure is associated with the lives of the William F. Slater family, an early prominent farming family. Additional details are included in Attachment 2. 3 . The 1920s structure is an outstanding example of a variation of the Craftsman architectural style popular from 1900 to the 1920s . The Slater House is constructed with architectural details that are reminiscent of Japanese designs . These include the distinctive low roof lines and upturned roof eaves providing an Oriental appearance. It is the only known example of this architectural style in the City. In addition, the structure is well maintained and in its original form with no additions or modifications. The porte-cochere and original landscaping designs remain adding a contexual setting for the structure. REL:kjl Attachments : 1. Correspondence to Mayor Bannister and the City Council from the Historic Resources Board dated May 9, 1989 . 2 . Correspondence to staff from the Historic Resources Board dated May 28, 1990 . xc: Rick Jeffry, Beachfront Development Vderry Person, Chairman, Historic Resources Board Herb Fauland, Assistant Planner (5924d) P�*rrkc.4 M LON C - THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR'S STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION 1. A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment. 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other building, shall not be undertaken. a. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved. 6 . Deteriorated historic features snail be repaired ratt-hei: replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in .design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical or pictorial evidence. 7 . Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. 8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. Revised 2/26/90 J� i4 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BE CITY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH To From HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL Don MacAlliste MEMBERS and CITY CLERK Councilman Subject Date APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION October 16, 1989 DECISION ON CUP 89-1, CDP 89-1, EIR 89-4 =gym < rM ' ^m I hereby appeal the recent decision of the Planning commission as to CUP 89-1_. for the' following reasons: - c .. 1. As to the area of the site. 2. Height restrictions. 3. Definitions as to existing legal uses. 4. Decision of grandfathering of parking requirements as to bootlegs that have been added. I also wonder if there is a need for a public hearing because of downgrading to two—story. Please have this item placed on the agenda in November for council action and notify the :_. property owners affected. DMA:bb cc: City Administrator Rich Barnard .s 7TIFA C4 Mte 14 City of Huntington each 215'/2 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 HUNTINGTON BEACH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR June 12, 1990 Douglas M. Langevin 8196 Pawtucket Drive Huntington Beach, California 92646 Dear Doug, SUBJECT: Participation in the 2nd Block Grant Program On May 22, 1990, I received your letter dated May 18, regarding the terms on which you would reconsider participating in the 2nd Block Facade Rehabilitation/New construction Grant Program. In response to your letter, I am summarizing the events to date. On December 19, 1988, the Redevelopment Agency approved the Facade Grant Program for the demonstration block (bounded by Main & 5th Streets, Walnut & Olive Avenues) . This program design originally evolved from one that would provide financial assistance to property owners for the correction of seismic ordinance deficiencies, to a seismic and facade improvement loan program, to a facade (no seismic) grant program. This extensive evolvement of the program was a result of the Agency and staff working continually with the property owners to try to meet their needs, as well as, those of the Agency. After the Agency approved the Grant Program, staff drafted an Owner Participation Agreement (OPA) that went through extensive revisions. Once the Redevelopment Agency and staff were satisfied with the "draft," it was sent to the 2nd Block property owners for their review. On February 28, 1989, Marilyn Whisenand and I met with all property owners individually to discuss any concerns they had with the OPA as drafted. At that time, many of those concerns were incorporated into the final doc=L-nt being used today. Douglas M. Langevin June 12, 1990 Page Two At the meeting of February 28, when Marilyn and I met with you, you stated that the major obstacle for you at the time was that the OPA did allow for new residential uses if one chooses to take advantage of the grant program. You stated that you would not be participating because the conditions for participation were "too encumbering." As the Decenber 31, 1989, deadline for participation in the grant program approached, I mailed a letter on November 13, 1989, (attached) informing the property owners who weren't currently working with staff, of the pending deadli.^a. In an effort to give the remaining property owners more time to consider their desire to participate, the Agency extended the deadline to March 31, 1990, and, once again, to May 15, 1990. After careful review of your requested modifications to the Owner Participation Agreement, the Redevelopment Agency staff has concluded as follows: 1) ". . .Participant shall provide bins onsite for the storage of trash and refuse. Such area shall be enclosed on three sides by a six foot masonry wall and equipped with a six foot gate. . ." The Agency will soon be constructing the previously approved alley improvements, as well as pedestrian pass thrus on Main & 5th Streets. The large blue dumpsters sitting randomly in open view up and down the alley today are an eyesore and must be screened fran view as described above. Staff recommends that this provision remain as is. 2) ". . .2.5 and 4.0 feet easement dedications off of the alley and Main Street, respectively. . ." The execution of said easement dedications does not forfeit your property to the Agency, but provides an easement, allowing for the widening of the alley by 2.5 feet and a future widening of the sidewalk by 4.0 feet, should you ever tear down and build new. Staff recommends that this provision remain as is. 3) ". . .15-day written notice of improper maintenance. . ." This provision was extracted from the building code, and in all practicality, would never be implemented in this timeframe. Staff would, however, be receptive to changing this provision to thirty (30) days. Douglas M. langevin June 12, 1990 Page Three 4) ". . .Participant shall bring building up to Uniform Building Code requirements. .." Staff has no problem inserting ". . .and/or California State Historical Building code, Title 24, Building Standards" into this provision. 5) ". . .Participant shall cooperate with the formation of a Business Improvement District..." The wording "...to the extent that any costs associated with the program are deemed reasonable," was previously added to this provision to placate all interested participants. Staff reccnmends that this provision remain as is. 6) ". . .Participants and successors shall devote the property to the uses specified in the Redevelopment Plan..." The Redevelopment Plan's uses are outlined in the city's Downtown Specific Plan. This provision basically states that one's building use will not be that of a non-conforming use as it relates to the current zoning code. Staff would be willing to recarrnnend this provision be revised to 28 years the current term of the remaining for the existing Main-Pier Redevelopment Plan. 7) ". . .No new residential uses will be allowed. . ." Staff reccmmnends that this provision remain as is. To date, out of the existing twelve property owners (excluding the Agency) in this demonstration block, nine have executed OPAs without any of the revisions discussed above and one other is pending. We appreciate the opportunity to address your specific concerns. Should you decide to proceed as an owner participant on the terms stated above, we would be happy to work with you. If you have any questions, please call me at 969-2185. Sincerely, �UW,/-?Z Keith B. Bohr Project Manager KBB:lp xc: Pat Spencer, Director of Housing & Redevelopment Michael J. Gifford, Administrative Aide II ATAMMeAl'or 9850--9853 Article 985 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD (1525-10/69, 1571-4/70, 1589-7/70, 1956-1/75, 2381-7/79, 3017-12/89) Sections: 9850 Design Review Board Established 9851 Duties 9852 Appeals 9853 Members 9853. 1 Terms of Office 9853.2 Removal of Members 9853.3 Bylaws 9853.4 Secretary 9853.5 Advisors and Assistants to the Board 9854 Design Review by Application 9854. 1 Criteria for Approval 9854.2 Factors to be Considered in Applying Design Criteria 9850 Design Review Board Established. There is hereby created a Design Review Board for the City of Huntington Beach referred to herein as the "Board." (2381-7/79, 3017-12/89) 9851 Dpties. The duties of the Board shall include the following: (3017-12/89) a. Encourage, control , and maintain harmonious, compatible, attractive, and aesthetic development within special and unique areas of the city. (3017-12/89) b. Review and act on the design of any structure, facility, landscaping or architecture to be constructed, altered or modified in areas designated Civic Facilities, Civic Districts, Redevelopment Survey and Project Areas, and/or other areas so designated by the City Council . (3017-12/89) C. Approve, conditionally approve, or deny any design review application forwarded to them by the Director, Zoning Administrator, Planning Commission and/or City Council . (3017-12/89) d. Recommend to the Director, Zoning Administrator, Planning Commission and/or City Council either approval , conditional approval or denial of any design review application. (3017-12/89) 9852 Appeals. Any action of the Board may be appealed to the Planning Commission as provided in this code. (3017-12/89) 9853 Appointment of Membership. The Board shall be composed of five (5) members appointed by and responsible to the City Council . The membership shall consist of at least one (1) Planning Commissioner, two (2) City j residents, and two (2) staff members. (3017-12/89) 12/89 7 9853.1--9854.2(a) - 9853.1 Terms of Office. The terms of office of Board members shall be as follows: Two (2) citizen members shall be appointed initially for a four (4) year term, and Planning Commission and staff members shall be appointed initially for a two (2) year term except that after the expiration of these initial terms, all Board members shall be appointed for four (4) year terms. (3017-12/89) 9853.2 Bylaws. The Board may adopt bylaws and rules as it deems necessary for the selection of its officers, the time and place of its meetings and such other matters relative to its work and administration of its duties which are not otherwise provided for by statute, ordinance or resolution. (3017-12/89) 9853.3 Secretary. The Director of the Department of Community Development, or a person so designated by the Director, shall serve as secretary to the Design Review Board without the power to vote. (3017-12/89) �853.5 Advisors and Assistants to the Board. The Board may request attendance at its meetings of any officer or employee of the City to assist the Board. The Board may make investigations and employ persons, subject to approval of the City Administrator, as it may deem necessary to perform its duties and functions. (3017-12/89) 9854 Design Review by Application. Prior to the issuance of any permits a project within areas designated for design review must first submit an application to the Department of Community Development. The Board shall act on all applications within thirty (30) days of submittal . (3017-12/89) 9854.1 Criteria for Approval . The Board shall utilize the following criteria in the review of applications: (3017-12/89) (a) The architectural and landscape design of a project must integrate harmoniously with the existing or planned character of the immediate neighborhood. (3017-12/89) (b) The design must stabilize and protect civic facilities or civic district areas and be compatible in scale and aesthetic treatment. (3017-12/89) (c) The design must enhance the desirability and/or enjoyment of the immediate neighborhood. (3017-12/89) (d) The design must improve community appearances by preventing extremes of dissimilarity or monotony in new construction or alterations of facilities. (3017-12/89) 9854.2 Factors to be Considered in Apglying Design Criteria. The Board shall,. consider the following factors in applying criteria to a design being considered under this article: (3017-12/89) (a) Height, location, bulk, area, materials, type and variations in any structure, facility, landscaping or architectural feature so considered. (3017-12/89) 12/89 9854.2(b)--9854.2(g) - (b) Site layout, orientation and relationship to open areas, topography and existing or proposed structures in the surrounding neighborhood. (3017-12/89) (c) Sign design and its relation to the proposed use and surrounding neighborhood. (3017-12/89) (d) The probable useful life of other structures on the site and in the immediate area. (3017-12/89) (e) All applicable provisions of this code. (3017-12/89) (f) Relation of the proposed use to other existing and proposed facilities. (3017-12/89) (g) Any other factors which the City Council may deem relevant. (3017-12/89) 12/89 A TrAMMEN 9841.9--9842. 5 . 1 (!!..1k t!D 9841.9 Notice of Decision. Notice of the decision of the Planning Commission shall be mailed to the applicant within five (5) working days, excluding weekends and holidays, after such decision is rendered. 9841. 10 Effective Date of Approval. Conditional use permits shall not become effective for ten (10) days after being granted, and in the event an appeal is filed, or a challenge is issued by the City Council, said permit shall not become effective until a decision is made on such appeal . (1563, 1847-6/73) 9842 Appeal to or Challenge by the City Council. The applicant or any aggrieved party may appeal a decision or requirement of the Planning Commission to the City Council, and the City Council or any member thereof may request in writing a hearing before the City Council to consider any decision, determination or requirement of the Planning Commission. 9842.1 Time Limit. All appeals or challenges shall be made within ten (10) days following the decision of the Planning Commission. 9842.2 Form and Content. Any appeal or challenge shall be in writing, and shall specify, in detail, any grievance, error of decision, or requirement of the Planning Commission. 9842.3 Report. The City Clerk shall report the filing of such notice of appeal or challenge to the Planning Commission. 9842.4 Filing Fee. Accompanying any appeal shall be a filing fee set by resolution of the City Council . (2441-8/80) 9842.5 Notice of Time of Hearing. Any decision or requirement of the Planning Commission that is appealed to or challenged by the City Council or any member thereof, shall be set for public hearing before the City Council by the City Clerk. Said hearing shall be held at the earliest possible regular City Council meeting, with public notification pursuant to Article 987 of this code. 9842.5.1 Hearing Date Continuance. The City Council may continue the hearing from time to time, and the City Council may refer the matter back to the Planning staff of the city for further report, copy of which shall be made available without delay to the landowner or his representative, provided, however, the public hearing or hearings shall be concluded within sixty (60) days after the first public hearing. 11/87 I CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK October 26, 1990 Douglas M. Langevin 8196 Pawtucket Drive Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Pursuant to your request dated October 25, 1990 is a certified copy of the appeal filed by Councilman MacAllister to the Planning Commission action on Conditional Use Permit No. 90-43, time-stamped on September 20, 1990. Councilman MacAllister has filed no further communications other than the original (not faxed) appeal filed on September 21, 1990. The Community Development Department transmitted the legal notice to the Office of the City Clerk for the public hearing on October 22, 1990. Sincerely, Connie Brockway, CMC City Clerk CB:ln 899I cc: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Gail Hutton, City Attorney Councilman Don MacAllister (Telephone: 714-536-5227) 09/20/90 16: 17 EEEVID INC Ul "4 MAYOR City Of HX1.:nLt!1L-1gt0]a Beaell MAYOR PRO TE!VIPOH: Tnm May • P. O. 90X I90 • 200o MAIN STREET • CALIFORNIA 92646 COUNCILMEMBERS Jelin Erslcinr: Peter Groon Don MacAlhulur �im �71vn riICLWInChtll� 9/20/90 City of Huntington Beach ."=ter^ Attn: City Clerk Connie Brockway `t P.O. Box 190 2000 Main St. G Huntington Beach, CA 92648 SUBJECT: Appeal of Conditional Use Permit (CUP) *90--43/Appeal of Planning Commission's Design regarding Appeal of Design Review Board Action Dear City Clerk Brockway: I hereby appeal the Planning Commission's action to approve Conditional Use Permit (CUP) -190-43 and their decision to overturn the Design Review Board's action regarding the exterior building design of the commercial structure located at 217 Main St. The basis of my appeal is: 1. The need to clarify the kind of use proposed and the amount of area devoted to restaurant use versus the sale of alcoholic beverages; 2. The applicant's proposed building design is inconsistent with I Downtown Design Guidelines also, the amount of work being done to the exterior of this building reflects a reproduction of the existing building, not restoration; and 3. Approval of this request is a significant policy decision that should be made by the City Council. The foregoing instrument is a correct copy of the original on file in this office. YOlfxs-tI^ul.y, ��' Attest o2l0 ��f �r� 19�0 !' ' '!f _ -- CONNIE BRO(`MUAV cfficio Ctert; of the City Courieilman Don MacAllister Cu �cil �rthz �: :l of Hunting-ion Beach, .1 C�:I,i if ornia. DMA/pdn -y Deputy TF'LEFHONE ;71:.J 536-5553 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING APPEAL- . CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 90-43 (Request to permit a restaurant/pub , in an existing, rehabilitated structure, in conjunction with an appeal of the Planning Commission ' s action regarding the exterior of the building) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Huntington Beach City Council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chamber at the Huntington Beach Civic Center, 2000 Main Street , Huntington Beach, California, on the date and at the time indicated below to receive and consider the statements of all persons who wish to be heard relative to the application described below. DATE/TIME : Monday, November 5, 1990 , 7 : 00 PM APPLICATION NUMBER: Conditional Use Permit No . 90-43/Appeal of Design Review Board Action APPLICANT: David M. Lautner/Douglas M. Langevin APPELLANT: Councilman MacAllister LOCATION: 217 Main Street (west side, approximately 125 feet south of Olive Avenue) ZONE : Downtown Specific Plan District 5 (Mixed Use) REOUEST: Appeal of the Planning Commission' s approval of a request to permit a restaurant/pub in an existing , rehabilitated structure . The appeal also concerns the Planning Commission ' s action on the proposed building materials and elevations . ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS : Categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15301, Class 1 of the California Environmental Quality Act . COASTAL STATUS : Exempt pursuant to Section 969 . 5 . 3 . 1 of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code . ON FILE: A copy of the proposed request is on file in the Community Development Department, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648 , for inspection by the public. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS are invited -to attend said hearing and express opinions or submit evidence for or against the application as outlined above. If there are any further questions please call Laura Phillips, Associate Planner at 536-5271 . 1 Connie Brockway City Clerk (7476d) �) i c-� c y Vo fu el �J� 7 C a... AliA { T rn �LiAL, AL �.5~;,��; A- FI^�':i�l, A FJ I i 1 VJ''.f.(L r /'. I �• •,��'C' / _� /: C� t i ".'F�fnB-C/L� Il i� y 1YI y �� ��'yr, F r"'�!" `� (''' n. 71� ?Y �. r°" �C �' J F—,4KL F-P F n v !ti_ �L_i In tJ /j•Irt_' /�; L n �,� � C% � `r.'/k I )N;t AL31,n pJ/� tir^,ol1y 7 1' O���S OCoc _�2_y_�='; ._.....T ICE! A,ROE rjL �(r'� tl,,=� lr�//��•- ti/�/t �%...f � 1. I ��:•\� IF -7 1�0 �dl'17J 'iiJ: : �•:. ' ":IIINnH JO Ali;l 11�13l3 A113 Q3A1333a C� 9880--9883 Article 988 �PBBt+ Sections! 9880 Appeal By Applicant or Interested Parties . 9881 Challenge By City Council . 9882 Report. 9883 Notice. 9884 Action of Appeal . 9885 Issuance of Permits or Entitlements Prohibited. 9880 Appeal RX Applicant or Interested Parties. Appeal may be made to the City Council from any decision, determination or requirements of the Planning Commission by filing notice thereof in writing with the City Clerk within ten (10) days after such decision or determination or requirement is made. Such notice shall set forth in detail the action and grounds by and upon which the applicant or interested party deem himself aggrieved. (972) 9881 Challenge By City Council. The City Council or any member thereof may request in writing, within the ten (10) day period for appeal , a hearing before the City Council to consider any decision or requirement of the Planning Commission. Said appeal shall specify in detail the reasons for the appeal and the hearing on appeal shall be limited to such specified reasons . (1865-11/73) 9882 Report. The City Clerk shall report the filing of. such notice to the Planning Commission and a written report shall be submitted to the City Council by the Planning Commission or shall be represented at the hearing. The party whose decision, determination or requirement by the Planning Commission is upon appeal, may submit a written report to the city Council for consideration. (972) 9883 Notice. The City Clerk shall give notice of any such appeal to all property owners within 300 feet of any property on which an appeal to the City Council has been filed. To cover the expenses of such notice, a fee, set by resolution of the City Council, shall be paid by the applicant. This notice fee must be paid at the time notice of appeal is filed. Nothing in this section shall be construed to mean that a filing fee is necessary if the appeal is made by a member of the City Council . (2441-8/80) 11/87 l 9884- 9885 9884 Action of Appeal. Said appeal shall be set for hearing within thirty (30) days, or longer, if requested by appellant, from the time the matter is received by the City Clerk, together with the necessary fees . Upon the hearing of said appeal , the City Council may affirm, overrule or modify the decision appealed from the enter such order or orders as are in harmony with the spirit and purpose of applicable provisions of Division 9, with reasons stated. In cases of appeal of matters relating to conditional exceptions, the Council shall, prior to affirming the grant of or reversing the denial of a conditional exception, make findings of fact in support of and relevant to the hardship standard. Disposition of appeals by the City Council shall be final . (1230, 1656-7/71) 9885 Issuance of Permits or Entitlements Prohibited. No permit or entitlement shall be issued by any department of the city which permit or entitlement is issued pursuant to any administrative procedures or hearings for which an appeal period is provided by this code, pending the expiration of such appeal period or the final determination of any appeal filed pursuant to this code. (1830-7/73) r (Prior Law: 972, 1227, 1230, 1656-7/71, 1830-7/73, 2441-8/80 11/87